Home / Crypto Currency / Op-Ed: Do Blockchains Need a Native Currency?

Op-Ed: Do Blockchains Need a Native Currency?



Get exclusive fiat and cryptocurrency analysis on Hacked.com for just $39 per month. Click here now!

Like most administrators in top banks and other financial institutions across the globe, the governor of the Bank of Spain, Luis María Linde lent his voice towards the criticism of cryptocurrencies despite showing support for the underlying technology, blockchain.

Linde believes that the risks associated with cryptocurrencies outweighs the benefits therein by a lot but believes that blockchain technology has the potential to improve efficiency and reduce operational cost.

He said:

“In my opinion, their current use (of cryptocurrencies) presents more risks than benefits: they have low acceptance as a means of payment, suffer extreme volatility, present multiple operational vulnerability and have been related to fraudulent and illicit activities in many cases.”

Blockchain vs Cryptocurrency

Acknowledging the benefits that blockchain technology offers, especially in the areas of financial solutions, is an idea that is growing in popularity. Several top banks and financial institutions are already testing and implementing blockchain solutions. Recently, it was reported on CCN about the several blockchain patents acquired by the Bank of America, among other top companies.

Despite these acquisitions and implementations, these traditional institutions do not hesitate to criticize the associated elements that fuel the technology, cryptocurrencies. This resuscitates the question – how far can blockchain go without cryptocurrencies?

This debate has continued over the years and across institutions and organizations. However, in order to determine how implementable any of these opinions are, depending on which side of the divide anyone belongs, there has to be a proper definition of what each entity represents.

Blockchain Variations

In its simplest form, blockchain is defined as a digital ledger in which transactions made in bitcoin or another cryptocurrency are recorded chronologically and publicly. A more general term that can be used to describe bitcoin and cryptocurrencies is “tokens.” Hence, blockchains are fundamentally powered by underlying tokens that may eventually become cryptocurrencies depending on their liquidity and ability to be exchanged with other cryptocurrencies or fiat currencies.

Down the road, we have been confronted with organizations that insist on blockchains that are restricted in their own rights. These category of blockchains are referred to as private blockchains.

The main dissimilarity between a private and public blockchain relates to who can participate in the network, make transactions, maintain the ledger and see the records. Public blockchain networks are open to anyone and even have mechanisms meant to encourage more people to join the network, similar to bitcoin and other digital currencies. On the other hand, private blockchains offer limited access to authorized members only.

A Matter of Control

bitcoin price
Source: Shutterstock

Most cryptocurrency enthusiasts and propagators of public blockchains insist that main reason why traditional institutions remain critical of cryptocurrencies is because of the control that they cherish so much rather than for purposes of objective regulation. Even though the technology is still in its emerging stages, blockchain so far is generally perceived as a decentralized, democratic and self regulatory technology.

Considering the democratic nature of blockchains and noting the fact that the network sustenance involves individual computers that need to be motivated, cryptocurrencies remain relevant incentives and also the medium of transaction. For this reason, truly decentralized blockchains depend on cryptocurrencies to stay alive. Hence, running a private blockchain simply implies maintaining an enclosed network while deliberately neglecting any economic value that its tokens may offer. Give or take, someone must bear the cost of maintenance.

Apparently, when top executives like Linde express their criticism of cryptocurrencies, it can be interpreted as a show of concern towards how such elements of value can be regulated in the future — not a denial of the existence of a functional value for blockchain tokens.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are solely that of the author and do not represent those of, nor should they be attributed to CCN.

Images from Shutterstock

Follow us on Telegram.
Read more

Check Also

FBI: “Call of Duty” Players Remotely Stole $3.3 Million in Cryptocurrencies

A group of “Call of Duty” players from Indiana are accused of stealing more than $3 million in cryptocurrencies after coercing an Illinois man to aid them in remotely hacking unsecured crypto wallets on more than 100 cell phones. Man Coerced Into Hack After SWATing Incident The episode began in Bloomington, Illinois, where a local man told the FBI he met the members of the would-be group of cybercriminals online playing Call of Duty. In the simulated warfare game, players are able to communicate with each other in real-time and with relative privacy. The group, based out of Dolton, Indiana, allegedly coerced the man from Bloomington into working for them using an intimidation tactic called “SWATing,” a nefarious, illegal, and dangerous phenomenon that has become increasingly popular in online gaming communities. SWATing is when police are called with a false report of a violent crime at someone’s home, which prompts a response from a SWAT team — oftentimes leading to door breaches, gunfire, and even the accidental deaths of unknowing victims. It’s often used as a decidedly dark method of payback, or, as in this case, to intimidate or threaten an individual. Afraid of further retaliation the man succumbed to the hacker’s requests, to which they handed over names, phone numbers, and other information that permitted him to remotely access the cell phones of their victims. According to the FBI affidavit, the man admitted to taking over the cell phones of more than 100 people. Once the group took over a phone, they were able to hack into a victim’s cryptocurrency account and drain their funds. The group is suspected of stealing at least $3.3 million in various cryptocurrency, including about $805,000 in Augur’s Reputation Tokens, according to the FBI. The suspects then allegedly moved stolen tokens through cryptocurrency networks, such as Ether or Bitcoin, to their own digital wallets. As of yet, the Chicago Sun-Times isn’t naming the suspects identified in the affidavit because they don’t appear to have been charged with any crimes. In an online interview the Bloomington man proclaimed his innocence — even going as far as to say that considers himself a victim: “I have done nothing but cooperate with Augur and the FBI,” he said. “I have never once profited from anyone [by] crypto-hacking, ever.” Crypto Thefts in First Half of 2018 Total Over $1.1 Billion According to recent study from cybersecurity firm Carbon Black, the total amount of cryptocurrency that has been stolen through cybercrime this year alone is over $1.1 billion — primarily through ransomware and exchange hacks. The firm’s report claims that many criminals are using the dark web to appropriate cryptocurrency from their victims, estimating that there are over 12,000 marketplaces with almost three times that number of crypto theft listings between them. Rick McElroy, security strategist at Carbon Black, spoke on the trend, noting how easy it is for cybercriminals to operate these days: “It’s surprising just how easy it is without any tech skill to commit cybercrimes like ransomware… It’s not always these large nefarious groups, it’s in anybody’s hands.” Part of the reason for this is the accessibility and user-friendliness of the tools of the trade. McElroy said that certain pieces of malware even come with customer service to aid would-be cybercriminals, adding that the malicious software costs an average of $224 but can be picked up for as little as $1.04. Many of the attacks against crypto users, companies, and exchanges originate from an organized group of criminals like those out of Indiana, however, McElroy says, they’re just as likely to be the product of a trained engineer who is out of work: “You have nations that are teaching coding, but there’s no jobs… It could just be two people in Romania needing to pay rent.” Image from Shutterstock The post FBI: “Call of Duty” Players Remotely Stole $3.3 Million in Cryptocurrencies appeared first on NewsBTC.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Disclaimer: Trading in bitcoins or other digital currencies carries a high level of risk and can result in the total loss of the invested capital. theonlinetech.org does not provide investment advice, but only reflects its own opinion. Please ensure that if you trade or invest in bitcoins or other digital currencies (for example, investing in cloud mining services) you fully understand the risks involved! Please also note that some external links are affiliate links.