Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Libra White Paper

libra.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 138 posts

Re: Libra White Paper

#41

Post by Phemist »

dchest wrote: post #28
m1el wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would also like to add that FB is going to tie wallets to accounts so FB will know information about every transation. "Pseudonymous" wallets aren't going to be anonymous to Facebook.

Their "customer commitment" document claims otherwise https://scontent-frt3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.2365-6/65083631_3...

I think the devil is in the details. The claim `Calibra will not share account information or financial data with Facebook, Inc. or any third party` is followed by `without customer consent.`. From reading through the document you linked, the infrastructure will definitely be there to support the sharing of any and all data. Considering Facebook's history with getting "consent", I am willing to bet that they will take every chance they can get to manipulate users into giving such "consent".

Re: Libra White Paper

#42

Post by t0m4 »

m1el wrote: post #16
jasode wrote: post #12

>Libra’s mission is to enable a simple global currency and financial infrastructure [...] This document outlines our plans for a new decentralized blockchain, The "decentralized" can be parsed different ways. Facebook Libra is decentralizing the transactions but it does not decentralize the currency creation . (This partial decentralization happens because Facebook wants to peg Libra to stable asset reserves.) This i…

I would also like to add that FB is going to tie wallets to accounts so FB will know information about every transation. "Pseudonymous" wallets aren't going to be anonymous to Facebook.

https://dud.inf.tu-dresden.de/literatur/Anon_Terminology_v0....

Re: Libra White Paper

#43

Post by fiala__ »

bitxbit wrote: post #5

It is sad that Zuckerberg chose to squander all that capital on frivolous endeavors at Facebook. He could have done so much. This is what gets me the most: "We believe that a global currency and financial infrastructure should be designed and governed as a public good." It's very rich coming from Facebook who could have made itself a public good a decade ago.

Yeah, that bit is bonkers. A huge privately-owned tech corporation talking about 'public good'. We truly are entering the era of global corporate despotism.

Re: Libra White Paper

#44

Post by _eLRIC »

Sounds to me like Facebook is trying to become the Wechat of the West ... (as per an article 2 days ago explaining how Wechat could be central to every payment in a daily life )

Re: Libra White Paper

#45

Post by t0m4 »

Phemist wrote: post #41
dchest wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their "customer commitment" document claims otherwise https://scontent-frt3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.2365-6/65083631_3...

I think the devil is in the details. The claim `Calibra will not share account information or financial data with Facebook, Inc. or any third party` is followed by `without customer consent.`. From reading through the document you linked, the infrastructure will definitely be there to support the sharing of any and all data. Considering Facebook's history with getting "consent", I am willing to bet that they will tak…

"We will implement cold wallets and multisig wallets that allow Libra users and association members to add extra security for their Libra coin and Libra Investment Token holdings."

Re: Libra White Paper

#46

Post by mihaifm »

CodiePetersen wrote: post #22
2T1Qka0rEiPr wrote: post #4

As someone somewhat out of the crypto-loop, would someone be able to explain/posit/cite why Facebook are entering this market, and why traditional payment providers are also getting involved? On the face of it, this suggests it aims to essentially reduce transaction costs (which would be to the detriment of the status-quo)?

It's not really a crypto coin. It's a stable coin. The value is backed by hard cash in a vault somewhere. And not anyone can mine it, only the 10 million buy in organizations can process transactions on their nodes. But essentially it's pay pal labeled as a crypto coin. So they can get away with skirting some laws because "it's not actually money man". Just a sleezeball move in my opinion to capitalise on the hard wo…

On top of that it's likely that they'll run a fractional reserve scheme, meaning that only a small portion of the coins will be backed by real currency at any given time. I haven't found any reference to this in their paper, I wonder if they'll provide transparency on this topic.

Re: Libra White Paper

#47

Post by dreit1 »

So we’ve from government issued inflationary currencies to multinational scrip backed by government currencies. Sounds like bitcoin is a better hedge than ever against today’s economic environment.

Re: Libra White Paper

#49

Post by bufferoverflow »

CodiePetersen wrote: post #11

I think this coin is a really bad idea. Its just centralizing a crypto coin and then removing the laws around money because now a dollar has a libra coin wrapper on it so it's obviously totally different than a dollar. It feels like a federal reserve moment where a bunch of rich folk get together and again dictate the future of currency. Crypto was supposed to change that trend. Unfortunately the want of convenience…

It's not pegged to a dollar. It's pegged to a blend of currencies and assets. So it's not a dollar wrapped like Tether or USDC.

I don't understand how they plan to make it work across jurisdictions. There are so many laws and rules when it comes to transmitting and storing money or derivatives.

Like I can transfer a billion dollars worth of BTC, no problem. But if I try to wire even $100K between two of my accounts in US and EU, all kinds of red flags go off and phone calls need to happen.

Re: Libra White Paper

#50

Post by csomar »

2T1Qka0rEiPr wrote: post #4

As someone somewhat out of the crypto-loop, would someone be able to explain/posit/cite why Facebook are entering this market, and why traditional payment providers are also getting involved? On the face of it, this suggests it aims to essentially reduce transaction costs (which would be to the detriment of the status-quo)?

Because people (especially here) have been underestimating crypto by (maybe) a Trillion Dollar margin.

There are many legitimate uses for a cross-border currency that has a strong backer. There is a ton of services (like Skrill) that try to bridge the gap for a big portion of the world un-banked.

I say "legitimate" because the uses are fine within the US/EU (holding a "hard" currency like the USD). But many countries around the world prohibit that. If Facebook currency ignores that (given their size), they can access these markets.

This is, maybe, a trillion dollar market.

People here have been ignoring crypto because they don't understand the effects on closed economies. Small online-banks have failed because of difficult regulations and name recognition. Facebook might make it because they have a strong brand, big audience and can battle whole countries.

Post reply on HN