OK...
So after some time of "much secrecy," Facebook has now announced that they have created/are creating their own cryptocurrency. Or "Digital Cash," as it were.
It appears the currency is called "Libra,"or at least it is tied to Facebook's Libra blockchain, and you can read all about it on the Calibra web site .
Red salvia in bloom
On the upside, I think we can now say — with a great degree of certainty — that cryptocurrencies are here to stay. And that's a good thing.
If the world's most prominent social/cultural icon is creating one, there's no number of grumpy Warren Buffett's or Jamie Dimon's that can take the concept off the table.
Cryptocurrency 1, Skeptics 0.
I haven't checked this out a great deal as of yet, but it looks like it's set to become "a thing" sometime in 2020.
Yes, it's on a blockchain; yes it makes mention of being global and (according to the web site):
"is designed to help bring people everywhere equal access to financial services."
Deep blue columbines
So far, so good. It is also a "stablecoin," which may actually be a good thing because now there will be billions of people introduced to (a) cryptocurrency and (b) cryptocurrency as a functional way to use money, NOT as a wildly fluctuating investment. In other words, I see the potential for this to somewhat mitigate the high-rolling "scammy" elements associated with the cryptocurrency field.
Now, around these parts, the freedom loving folks who support ideas like decentralization and freedom and systems that can't be controlled by a central governing body, will probably point to this and declare bullshit.
Absolutely, this is a "centralized" project.
I very much doubt we'll have a bunch of independently voted "Facebook witnesses" running this circus.
On the other hand, I'm not sure it was ever carved in stone anywhere that "all blockchains and cryptocurrencies MUST be decentralized."
It sort of makes me think back to the early growth of the Internet, where many ideologues held forth that the web would "always be FREE and non-commercial." We all know how that worked out...
In a sense, similar dilemmas are playing out with blockchains and cryptos.
California Poppies
We give lip service to the idea of wanting mass adoption for cryptos... but the only way to truly get mass adoption is to present the concept in "packaging" that has mass appeal. And... with all due respect... the lenses of perception of a tiny minority of anarcho-freedom blockchainiacs does not have mass appeal. Pure and simple.
And so, that leaves us to carve our our respective — and relevant — niches on what's really a much larger stage. And it IS a very large stage... just like the financial markets, where some people invest in super stable government T-Bills, and some people invest in purely speculative cryptocurrencies.
Here's the thing: If you do have a potentially game changing and revolutionary idea for the world, it's not realistic to expect that it's just going to stay in the hands of a small group of idealistic purists.
Welcome to "mass adoption," as it really happens....
Thanks for reading!
What do YOU think? Is Facebook getting into the cryptosphere a good, bad or indifferent thing? A necessary evil, perhaps? Comments, feedback and other interaction is invited and welcomed! Because — after all — SOCIAL content is about interacting, right? Leave a comment-- share your experiences-- be part of the conversation!
(As usual, all text and images by the author, unless otherwise credited. This is original content, created expressly for this platform.)
Created at 190618 12:10 PST
1048
