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

What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 148 posts

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#91

Post by charcircuit »

geraldbauer wrote: post #47
anm89 wrote: post #14

Important note: central bank digital currencies are not crypto currrencies. They are not block chains. They are not decentralized. They are not permissionless. I cannot find a record of any CBDC which clearly states that it want's to use any of these technologies. I'd be interested to be proven wrong. Central bank digital currencies are essentially a new hybrid monetary/fiscal policy tool. Historically the Federal re…

Important note: bitcoin is a ponzi [1] and not digital gold. Learn how the investment fraud works. [1] https://github.com/openblockchains/bitcoin-ponzi

By that definition literally all investments are ponzis. You buy something hoping that someone else will be willing to buy it from you at a higher price. Oops the cryptocurrency bubble popped. Oops the company went bankrupt and your stocks are worthless. Oops a natural disaster happened and the house and land lose a lot of value. Oops pokemon is no longer popular and all the TCG cards you have become worthless. Oops the government is no more and your treasury bonds are worthless.

Realize that there is always a bubble and take advantage of the bubble while it lasts.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#92

Post by dinglefairy »

i can't read the entire article, but i can read the comments. it doesn't look like anyone is talking about the real reason for CBDCs. which is to create more liquidity. in other words, to get money out of escrow while international cross border payments are settled.

when a large transaction [billions] is made between two countries, there must be that much of each currency in either institutions account. it is there for days or weeks at a time. so that money isn't being put to work, it's just sitting there. a CBDC would settle these transactions within seconds. this is why something like xrp is interesting to many people.

specifically, CBDCs are interesting where the IMF is involved. they issue to countries something called special drawing rights, SDRs. these are a basket of currencies used to 'balance' the international monetary system between the developed world and the developing world. [the world bank is where the g7-20 do their banking]. a 'one world currency' might look something like a CBDC SDR. since currency transactions can be immediately settled anywhere in the world, a [diversified package of] SDR would essentially serve as a 'world dollar'.

as an aside, the economic reset being promoted, coincidentally by the world economic forum, i think, is an attempt at a peaceful transition away from the US dollar as the worlds reserve currency. and while it might be china's Yuan or reminbi that replaces it, i think it might be something more like an SDR. or, in other words, a basket of currencies lumped into one digital currency; a one world digital currency.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#93

Post by SuoDuanDao »

jmnicolas wrote: post #3

Digital currencies allow for full tracking of every transactions and are a privacy nightmare. They allow applying negative interest rate on everybody and they would facilitate neverending hyperinflation (no need to print new bills at great expense). Hence they can't coexist with cash so say goodbye to cash. I don't like where we're going.

I take a more optimistic view. Digital currencies seem to be perfectly suited to transactions where corruption is rampant. Take the construction industry. There is poor chain-of-custody and a lot of counterparty trust involved, so things disappear and the mafia gets richer. I don't want the construction industry to have great privacy standards, I want it to be transparent. So digital currency can absolutely be bad for privacy and a boon in certain spaces, specifically ones where trust is commonly abused.

Cash can still exist in industries where we want trust to exist between different parties, those kinds of spaces are small enough that I doubt they'd be worth the effort to eradicate anyway.

Not to say that I like where all of this is going myself, but blockchain for large and official transactions + metal currency for local informal transactions is one direction I wouldn't mind at all.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#94

Post by [deleted] »

surfsvammel wrote: post #35
anm89 wrote: post #14

Important note: central bank digital currencies are not crypto currrencies. They are not block chains. They are not decentralized. They are not permissionless. I cannot find a record of any CBDC which clearly states that it want's to use any of these technologies. I'd be interested to be proven wrong. Central bank digital currencies are essentially a new hybrid monetary/fiscal policy tool. Historically the Federal re…

Central bank digital currencies can be blockchain based, they can be decentralised etc. In fact, he central banks that I have spoken to would rather have a decentralised currency, because it would mean less work for them. The motivation of a central bank is easy; make sure the currency is liquid, make sure they can use the currency to affect inflation and so forth. Whatever setup gives them the best ability to meet t…

[deleted]

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#96

Post by qeternity »

jmnicolas wrote: post #3

Digital currencies allow for full tracking of every transactions and are a privacy nightmare. They allow applying negative interest rate on everybody and they would facilitate neverending hyperinflation (no need to print new bills at great expense). Hence they can't coexist with cash so say goodbye to cash. I don't like where we're going.

> (no need to print new bills at great expense)

This is not how modern money supply works. The M2 has increased massively, and the number of new bills in circulation will not change materially.

Currency is already digital. And sometimes we use physical paper to represent it.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#97

Post by danialtz »

ryukafalz wrote: post #87

Here's what I'm most interested in here: right now, if I'm using an alternative mobile OS (besides iOS or Android), it's basically impossible for me to implement digital payments through existing payment networks. On the other hand, because cryptocurrencies are FOSS and very well-standardized, it's very possible to implement a cryptocurrency wallet. If central-bank digital currencies are closer to cryptocurrencies in…

This is actually one of the main USPs to have payment at public layer. Even USA is pushing for an open API and SDKs, one day maybe an open source protocol.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#98

Post by gruez »

judge2020 wrote: post #5
jmnicolas wrote: post #3

Digital currencies allow for full tracking of every transactions and are a privacy nightmare. They allow applying negative interest rate on everybody and they would facilitate neverending hyperinflation (no need to print new bills at great expense). Hence they can't coexist with cash so say goodbye to cash. I don't like where we're going.

Sure, BTC and other popular ones work this way, but monero is completely anonymous (as long as senders don’t collude), so it’s not an inherit trait of crypto.

>but monero is completely anonymous (as long as senders don’t collude).

Not exactly. The decoy inputs/outputs provide anonymity if you look at a transaction in isolation, but doesn't when you look at repeated transactions. This is a problem that any cryptocurrency with a transaction graph will have. There are cryptocurrencies that don't have transaction graphs, but those have other issues (ie. not being able to detect counterfeiting)

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#99

Post by Tijdreiziger »

zadler wrote: post #90
ryukafalz wrote: post #87

Here's what I'm most interested in here: right now, if I'm using an alternative mobile OS (besides iOS or Android), it's basically impossible for me to implement digital payments through existing payment networks. On the other hand, because cryptocurrencies are FOSS and very well-standardized, it's very possible to implement a cryptocurrency wallet. If central-bank digital currencies are closer to cryptocurrencies in…

I’d wager that only very progressive and liberal countries would have this degree of openness. Think Switzerland and Holland. Most countries will distribute their own apps (which may also spy on you) and/or use preferred technology partners.

Point of order: the name of the country is The Netherlands, not Holland.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#100

Post by aero- »

I think the notion that BTC or Ethereum are actually decentralized digital currencies is the biggest farce of the last 5 years. A small concentration of miners (mostly based in china) control the vast majority transactions and will continue to so based on the increased difficulity that only large economies of scale will profit from. Middlemen(brokers and exchanges) charge fees just like banks do to transact and store. The transaction fees on the chains are equivalent to that of just sending a bank wire, and your wallet is no more secure than a bank account (can still be hacked) and not FDIC insured. Where is the benefit now?
Post reply on HN