Does it rhyme? I guess we'll see, in time.
One of these days I'll find my way back to more satire... the world needs more of it.
But, when things change, grow, and adapt so quickly, it fills me with far too much opinionated banter to step down from a good point to be made!
Towards the end of last year, the more that a person paid attention, the more they saw very much, a repeat of a time in our history that the crypto community, of ALL people on the planet, should be the most aware. When the federal reserve was formed, it had been planned far ahead of time, and was the result of a few years of calculated steps to make the logic for its organization around private banking entities a 'protective measure' to make things more sound for us. That took place between Christmas Eve and Christmas while only the right players knew to be present for the final vote. That one move changed our economic path for the entire globe, and was done without any real public scrutiny, leaving many powerless to have their voices inserted into the annals of history.
Last year, the exact same thing took place among multiple U.S. agencies, and it had the finger-prints of a global governance all over them. This article is not about going into every specific, but if a person does a search to see what kind of cases, reports, probes, laws or policies were enacted last year, mostly in December, just on top of PayPal opening the world of crypto to 300 Million potential customers, it would boggle the crypto-minded.
This year, the story that has taken the most interest has been Ripple's suit with the SEC, claiming unregistered securities fund-raising. There is a list of hypocrisy and a trail of disgruntled early investors to peck away at the lunacy of the risk that comes with taking your financial choices into your hands. I imagine what it would look like if every anonymous crypto investor suddenly felt the need to come out of the shadows to sue every crap coin they unwittingly bought at the top. It would discourage predatory p&d ICO's and IEO's, but it would also kill the desire to innovate. No risk, no reward.
We need to recognize that the same SEC has hinted that the FED's aren't finished with 'looking into' Tether USDT either, and that should be a bigger concern for the entire crypto community. Here I go again... but love it or hate it, Tether is one of the most absolute key elements to liquidity for all top coins. If you like your maxi coin, you do not want to see something happen to Tether. Don't believe me? Have you looked at the volume of USDC, TUSD, PAX and others? How about actual fiat on exchanges? If you don't like KYC, you probably don't use fiat to trade crypto. Sure, it would be 'possible' for people to simply shift from Tether to another preferred coin with better regulatory compliance, but that is exactly my point... what should the government's role be? I firmly... errr... Gordon firmly believes (I hadn't pulled a Bob Dole yet in this post hehe) in voting with dollars, and I cannot imagine a more suitable place for people to do so. You have every option of other stables to use, and the world resoundingly hates, mistrusts Tether, and yet the wrapped AND ERC20 versions both outpace every single other option. Why is that? Read enough of me, and you are getting sick of the real estate analogy, and by the way, I am not an agent- lol! Buyers are liars. They are morally opposed to Tether, but use it daily, and that is the truth.
River... in... Egypt.
What SHOULD the government's role be? I've seen the Winklevi 'vie' for the move towards heavy, yet appropriate regulation, and sure they may be right about it. They are in the U.S. where the most deplorable form of government over-reach is taking place, which says a lot considering how heavily the Chinese government manipulates markets to their advantage. Communism is always about control, but so is fascism. There's a fine line painted around the insults to a free market, but if we are to be freedom-loving cryptonian idealists, then we need to believe there is a place in the world for independence. It means shouldering risk and responsibility in trade for the rights of free internet citizens. Are we willing to take the risk? I am.
I believe that a little bit of good regulation is okay, but I also believe it is unrealistic. The reality is that KYC/AML hurts everyone who deserves an easier path to trading and anonymity, and it does nothing to catch those it is designed to block, and does even less to protect the rest of us from them. The truth is that every piece of regulation comes with a string attached that absolutely 100% calls for another slippery slope regulation. Think covid passports. Think that's where it ends?
Think of a simple example; phishing scams. Do you want to have to get approved from some agency with your photo, address, I.D. smart phone time stamped facial recog picture and proof of location with recent pay stub every time you want to make a new email address or sign up for a free newsletter from a new site? Think this doesn't head that direction? It's the only way for there to be a higher level of protection from phishing scams. But, at the sacrifice of what? Right now, the solution offered to us has been occasional information campaigns and warnings upon sign-up for services, to watch for fake emails. That should be plenty. If you want to enjoy the internet on your own terms, you should value your privacy enough to accept the risk that comes with being left alone.
I personally believe that strong online communities are the proper regulatory response to protect us in trading and investing. When an exchange scams people, they are often in a state of fear when it first happens. Nothing is better than a full-on campaign of mass reputation destruction to raise awareness and provoke fear of thieves. Then and only then, do I think an investigation from legal agencies is both helpful and appropriate. In that respect, they should take all of the attention and resources going into predatory cases against well-known entities and apply them towards actually protecting people that get scammed! Hacks, dox attacks and theft need to be the focus of government agencies, but should focus solely on events that actually occur. I believe the real slippery slope is preventative protective measures, like Minority Report for instance.
If the aim is to protect people from the risks out there, a simple disclaimer, which I see on every exchange by the way, should be enough. When we need your investigative assistance, we expect you to leap in fast, help fast, call on the white-hat hacker community to help and get our funds back. Otherwise, bug off wouldja?
Others are coming to a belief, often through brainwashing from the very agencies that are looking to pull a fast one, that universal minimums and never-ending stimulus checks are going to fix these problems, and I promise you the only ruse underlying is a push for more control. We lose every time there is a short-sighted solution to our financial woes. If you want to be the next cryptobillionaire, it is not going to happen because of government assistance... not financially and not because they are here to help you. Believe the illusions or don't, we are in it alone. It is up to us to have one another's backs. That should be what we do with Twitter, Discord, Facebook and Telegram. Call out the bad players. Apply pressure to bad exchange policies. Encourage small projects until they don't deserve our support. We make a much better governance than any government agency.
Why is democratization being programmed into coins? Because people believe in the wisdom of the crowd. They may be giving too much credit there... lol, but one of the biggest complaints about the traditional world for which crypto is held in high regard, is the destruction of centralization. The idea that centralized authoritarian entities should be the ones to regulate decentralization is lunacy. Keep that one in mind.
And, on that note, Crypto Gordon Freeman, anonymously fighting for the un-KYC'd, the AML'd, the warrior of regulatory bogging down... out.