“Facebook is dangerous.” That was the tone of democratic senator Ted Brown, the ranking member of the senate banking committee. Libra is not official fiat currency. So far, no government of any country or region will allow or agree.
Libra fights parliament for the second time, presenting evidence against Alipay and WeChat payment.
From a competitive point of view, the e-currency Facebook is issuing is not the same thing as WeChat and Alipay. WeChat payments and Alipay are not electronic currency, but electronic payment means of currency. It is a bank teller between your bank and you. Libra is different. Facebook is the teller, while Libra is another kind of commodity. This commodity appears in the form of currency and is used as token. It does become a tool for money laundering.
The dollar will be Libra’s main asset — more than half. Other sovereign currencies that may be reserve assets other than the dolla. It did not mention the RMB.
It is impossible to have more than two general equivalents in a government jurisdiction. Hong Kong dollar and RMB are used at the same time, but they are not [two kinds of common equivalents]. Instead, one kind of currency is converted to the other, and it is free from exchange under the agreement of both parties. In other words, the Hong Kong dollar and RMB are not issued by the Hong Kong government at the same time.
Libra means that two institutions in the United States issue different currencies — the federal reserve and Internet firms.
Libra isn’t decentralized
In the process of moving towards decentralization, Libra faces two insurmountable problems:
Many assets are hard to decentralise by themselves. Therefore, constrained by asset issuers and managers, Libra is difficult to achieve decentralization.
Libra is an issue that anchors an asset. So we’re going to have a deeper understanding of assets, which can be divided into atomic assets, bit assets, compound assets. And when we trade, we trade equity, not assets. Therefore, there are two aspects to be guaranteed, one is to ensure the one-to-one correspondence between property rights and things, and the other is to ensure that property rights can completely control the goods.
Based on this principle, we can come to the conclusion that for atomic assets, there is no way to achieve complete decentralization, but to rely on centralized institutions.
An important point in determining whether an asset can be completely decentralized is to see if the user has to be in the network to get its full value. Bitcoin is a special case. If a bitcoin is copied from the blockchain network, it is just a number that cannot be consumed. Therefore, bitcoin can be completely de-localized. If it’s not available online, then it can’t be completely decentralized, and it has to rely on centralized institutions to do the monitoring, just like patents and copyrights.
Why are most association founders American members?
Libra sets up very democratic voting systems, but its first 27 founders are now almost a third American. Many non-us corporate organizations say that even if they join Libra, voting rights are monopolized, and it is difficult to achieve the voting value in the real sense, which is only the form of democracy.
So can a country’s control of no more than 30 per cent of the vote be limited before moving to an unlicensed network? Libra’s values are best matched by this.
Facebook’s move is a stab at the blood and a moth to the fire, because the fed and Wall Street will not be reconciled.
