re: Is Blockchain really changing the world at all? VIEW POST

re: I was intrigued about Libra so I researched the subject more and have found this: nytimes.com/2019/06/19/opinion/fac... Longer version here: openm...

Well, those companies have been pushed out by politicians, too. But anyway - since Libra directly affects (threatens) the main business of each of these companies, one could have asked why they wanted to be part of Libra in the first place. Maybe they thought better be part of the competitor that supersedes your business than being pushed out by him.

Libra is dangerous and has flaws, yes. Should we forbid it? Maybe. But what are the alternatives? I mean the technology is here, it's open source, everybody can use it. At least Facebook wants to work together with regulators all over the world to make Libra compliant. If we forbid Libra, there will be a next effort by someone else - and then the initiator might just ignore regulators and governments.

Can we just all agree that a global currency is toxic and should not be introduced? No. There is no global agreement. I mean after the invention of atomic bombs there was no global consensus to just not build them, because they are too dangerous. Of course they have been built. So why should there be a global agreement to not start another effort of introducing a global currency despite all its benefits?

Few things can inflict as much massive pain and suffering to whole countries than a flawed currency.

So to be clear, yes, I hope that Libra will either failed or be forbidden.

To answer to your later point, I think that monetary policies should stay firmly under the control of democratically controlled national institutions.

War is too important to be left to the generals (Clemenceau)

Money is too important to be left to tech companies.

code of conduct - report abuse