‘Official’ Blockchain Standards for 2019
The succinct statement details pending official government definitions of blockchain regulations. Publicly announced justifications may seem comparatively innocuous or, indeed, prudent; however, such official justifications are an obvious attempt to restrict, rather than develop, decentralized technologies. Even preliminary and rudimentary investigation of the statements highlights what can generously be labeled contentious logic.
“China is set to publish official standards on blockchain technology next year, with an official telling Xinhua that it will “give the industry some guidance” on the technology.
Li Ming, director of the Blockchain Research Bureau of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), told Xinhua Economic Information Daily that work had already started on the formation of the standards. Li, however, made it clear that while the standards would provide some guidance to blockchain developers, authorities did not expect the official guidelines to “fast-forward the development” of the industry. Despite efforts to clamp down on the financial risks associated with cryptocurrencies and initial coin offerings, the Chinese government has sought to show support for blockchain development. China was the world’s largest source of blockchain patents in 2017, while a blockchain research center was launched last September by the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology, a research institution. dependent on MIIT.
New standards being drawn up by the Blockchain Research Bureau will include guidelines for blockchain application in terms of business, security and information reliability, Li told Xinhua. Despite the exciting potential surrounding blockchain, the technology remains in an infancy stage. Without clear regulations, security issues have caused nearly $2.9 billion worth of losses worldwide between 2011 and 2018, according to the Baimaohui Security Research Center, an online security specialist that has worked with Alibaba and Huawei. .
In the last two years alone, US$1.9 billion has been lost due to blockchain security issues, according to Baimaohui. Not only are major tech companies and banks in China applying for blockchain patents and researching how the technology can improve services and increase public trust in supply chains, but China’s Ministry of Public Security is also studying how to implement the blockchain. technology in terms of data storage. Earlier this week, data from the China Intellectual Property Office showed that the Ministry of Public Security had filed a patent application for a blockchain system that would securely and transparently store unalterable data in the cloud. Police across the country could use and share such a system, allowing data to be shared rapidly between multiple agencies. (CGTN)”
To begin with, let’s not forget the differentiation of decentralized capabilities versus centralized services. A regionally authorized service naturally adheres to the geographically specific applicable legislation. For example, an international fast-food chain may, in some European countries, sell alcoholic beverages without a prescription, while the same operator may not normally do so in North America. This variation is possible because the use of the service is localized. To have ‘official’ guidelines for decentralized capacities would be to imagine the access and/or use of decentralized services being regional, or under the same legislation. Maybe not. It is decentralized.
Second, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) has calculated that the 2008 financial crises cost $12.8 trillion. This further omits subsequent bailouts, unemployment and the wide-ranging detrimental consequences suffered by millions.
The causes of the 2008 financial crises have been largely attributed to deregulation, securitization (double dipping and pooling), subprime mortgage sales, and Federal Reserve rate hikes for subprime borrowers. . In short, actions carried out by the government, banking and financial industries.
By contrast, for a set of activities to lose less than $3 billion over seven years is very small. Regardless of political stance, decentralized technologies offer the capacity for personal choice independent of the individual. Personal loss resulting from poor decision making, such as investing in ICOs, is contained. In addition, it is a conscious participation in which any individual can only invest or access a certain amount, which is under their immediate control. Contrast this ceiling with unilateral extensions achievable by governments and corporations.
Incorporating decentralized technology into the operational guidelines of a regional government can result in nothing more than redundant double counting methods. Used by individuals who collectively may not be under the control of a single government, decentralized technological capacity at the same time must equally be discovered.