For me it's mostly the lack of regulation,
why do you want someone else to decide what you can and cant do?
poorly implemented solutions,
such as?
lack of testing of products
Bitcoin uptime since conception is currently 99.98%. It has not gone down in over a decade.
and no recourse when things on wrong.
insurance protocols are available for smart contracts, and guardrails such as social recovery etc are available for use to prevent user error.
Which I assume CBDC will fix this and have backing to compensate customers when it does.
Thats a hell of an assumption! And back by what exactly?
We'll lose privacy in what we buy, but we have much privacy now will anything not bought in cash.
You are really not getting the scale of the threat here. Thats actually quite terrifying, people are going to sleepwalk into this.
Oh and the massive environmental fuckery that Bitcoin especially produces.
The petro dollar has wrecked our entire planet to the point where human survival is hanging by a thread.
It’s an incredibly anti-society perspective, in which there is no attempt to build social trust, no creation of institutional governance, no systemic protection of the vulnerable, no societal interaction, frankly. It’s an anti-human vision of the future.
Have you heard of DAOs?
No doubt that various governments will want a piece of the action if blockchain goes anywhere worthwhile. I very much doubt it will become the norm, since various entities public, private and corporate will still have plenty of legitimate reasons for keeping closed ledgers. I also doubt that many people are going to be receptive to the idea that their personal finances should be scrutinised and controlled to the degree that you're concerned about.
Oh absolutely, but when they launch the CDBC, they arent going to do it with caveat and warnings, they are going to do a lovely airdrop where people get free money and are very happy about this lovely new CDBC that is going to pay their lekky bill. People like
StakerOne and I are screeching from the rooftops about the dangers of this, but people seems to think that that this nice Tory government wouldnt do anything nasty without telling people exactly what the risks are
I took a look at the pages about CBDCs on the Bank of England's website. It seems that they are currently looking at the idea, but have no plans to implement it. Curiously I see no mention of blockchain technology, perhaps they didn't get the memo about that being the only secure way. They're taking consultations as of now so maybe you could drop them a line? I don't give a shit myself, I'll be among those who don't see the point.
They dont
necessarily have to be based on blockchain, but blockchain has significant advantages in security scaling and the core skills involved in developing a CDBC are pretty much the same as blockchain developers.
However, further reading uncovered this
February 2023 Consultation Paper (PDF link) concerning the digital pound. One detail that did catch my eye was that this idea is at least partly motivated by a desire to maintain confidence in sterling and thus ensure economic stability. This would necessarily have to include a widespread public belief that one's money in the form of digital pounds remains private and accessible. A belief which would be viciously murdered in full public view if the government started pulling the kind of Social Credit-style antics that have got you so wound up.
Only until the transition.
Its likely that cdbc rollouts will be coordinated, particularly given the turmoil in the banking system which isnt going away any time soon.
I don't think that will be the reason why it won't happen. The Bank of England clearly expect that it will be possible to find the required technical expertise to build such a system, and I don't think they would be wrong in that assessment.
Yeah? The thing is that in order to have the technical knowhow to work on a CDBC, you are sufficiently technical to understand bitcoin/web3.
I know load of people that have made the jump from tradfi and web2 to bitcoin and web3, I cant think of any that have gone in the other direction, and these are exactly the skills required.
More likely it will fail to get off the ground because businesses and the public fail to find a concrete use-case for such a thing. According to the consultation paper the digital pound is intended to function as a form of electronic cash, money which is held directly by the spender instead of being mediated through a bank or some other service like Apple Pay or what have you. If banks and payment services continue to be as reliable if not more so as they have been as the digitisation of the economy proceeds, then it seems obvious to me that there will be little reason to use digital pounds, and the seeds of the idea will fall on rocky ground.
Oh you sweet summer child.
You're still making grandiose claims without substance. Discrimination is something done by people and institutions, not all of which are going to be significantly altered by the introduction of blockchain into the picture. You seem to have an incredibly reductive view of society, not everything that happens within it can be described on a blockchain.
You cant discriminate against people unless you know the characteristics of the type of person you want to discriminate against.
