Bitcoin 政策研究所解释为什么 CBDC 与美国不匹配

By Bitcoinist - 1 年前 - 阅读时间：4 分钟
28 年 2022 月 8 日，星期三 34:XNUMX AM

Bitcoin 政策研究所解释为什么 CBDC 与美国不匹配

最新的 report by The Bitcoin 策略 Institute goes for the lowest hanging fruit. It tries to convince US politicians that “CBDCs will erode the distinction between America and authoritarianism,” which is true. To accomplish that, The Bitcoin Policy Institute appeals to the cheapest trick in the book: comparing the US to China. The move is so crazy that it just might work. 

The controversy doesn’t end there, The Bitcoin Policy Institute’s main proposal is that “The value of natively digital currencies for individual users can be fully realized with a combination of bitcoin and privately issued stablecoins.” That statement will not sit well with bitcoin purists. Is the whitepaper able to convince the reader that this “combination of bitcoin and privately issued stablecoins” is a good idea?

在判断之前，让我们阅读组织的推理。

Let’s not beat around the bush, CBDCs are surveillance technology. Programmable money comes with potential problems and gives too much power to the issuer. To convey that idea, The Bitcoin Policy Institute paints a picture of current-day China:

“然而，也许中国国家权力最引人注目的例证是其监视制度的迅速发展。 在 2013 年就任国家主席的习近平主席领导下，中国已成为全球领先的监控技术市场。”

然后，白皮书描述了对中国 CBDC 项目的了解。 它与他们在西方所做的工作相似还是完全不同？

“中国人民银行，中国的中央银行，自 2014 年以来一直在研究和开发 CBDC——数字人民币，或 e-CNY。数字人民币使用国营的私有区块链网络发行数字现金，即中国央行的直接责任。 该网络记录了使用其原生数字资产进行的所有交易。”

惊喜！ 它几乎与什么相同 澳大利亚中央银行正在测试 在他们的 CBDC 试点项目中。 它还证实了澳大利亚报告所说的：“全球中央银行正在积极探索 CBDC 的潜在作用、收益、风险和其他影响。”

After that, The Bitcoin Policy Institute describes the mainstream media and “some American lawmakers” narrative around the issue. This is a commonly held opinion on the situation:

“对某些人来说，从“全球竞争力”的角度来看待美国政府权力的加速可能很诱人。 例如，中国引入 CBDC 引起了一些美国立法者的担忧，即美国在技术上“落后”。 

不，这不对。 除非你承认自己是一个专制政权，否则这项技术毫无意义。 就这么简单。

Full KYC is basically a given in high-level CBDC discussions, but to have official confirmation is more convincing. To set the stage for this act, The Bitcoin Policy Institute quotes “a January 2022 white paper” in which “the Federal Reserve stated that a U.S. CBDC would need to be fully identity-verified.”

“美国的金融机构受到旨在打击洗钱和资助恐怖主义的强有力规则的约束。 需要设计 CBDC 以遵守这些规则。 在实践中，这意味着 CBDC 中介需要验证访问 CBDC 的人的身份，就像银行和其他金融机构目前验证其客户的身份一样。”

事实是，“CBDC 为政府提供了直接访问世界任何地方任何个人以该货币进行的每一笔交易的机会。” 即使它没有在原始版本中做广告甚至考虑。 

“那些呼吁推出 CBDC 的人天真地认为，无需为所有金融交易建立集中监控系统就可以做到这一点。 很简单，即使 V1 系统设计中不包括这种监视，在后期添加它也是微不足道的。 一旦打开监视的门，就几乎不可能关闭。”

简而言之，CBDC“代表了这种国家对经济生活的控制的延伸。”

从 bitcoiner’s point of view, the idea that the world needs “a combination of bitcoin and privately issued stablecoins” is near sacrilegious. Let’s read The Bitcoin Policy Institute’s case for it:

“两个都 bitcoin and private stablecoins will enable instant, low-cost digital transacting both domestically and across borders. Digital dollars and stablecoins will continue to be subject to AML/KYC compliance by the platforms that facilitate transacting with them. In this currency ecosystem–which is with us already–the creation of CBDCs is, quite simply, unnecessary.”

That might not convince the bitcoiner, but it paints a clear picture for US politicians. And those are the document’s target audience.

To close the whitepaper off, The Bitcoin Policy Institute is not afraid to go here:

“随着世界在 21 世纪走中国的道路，美国应该代表一些不同的东西：它应该代表自由。 出于这个原因，美国应该拒绝央行数字货币。”

Cheesiness aside, The Bitcoin Policy Institute is 100% right on this one. CBDCs are a menace to society. Privacy is a human right and financial privacy is already limited as it is.

原始来源： Bitcoin是