Crypto Paycheck
Photo by Mario Gogh on UnsplashEmployees will receive their paycheck in the period as a reward for their work. However, the employer wants to pay less to employees so that they can have maximum profits. The tension between working and anti-working has increased ever since. TL;DR Nobody wants to work unless they can pay fairly. Fiat payment may not be sustainable to satisfy what workers can contribute if the employer continues paying less and gaining more from profits. Employees will want thei...
Defi Review #4: AAVE The Defi Lending Services
AAVE is a decentralized finance lending service before decentralized finance even existed. It is an innovation lending service in crypto and one of the first kind. However, the lending service may only restrict to the crypto community and it may expand into the traditional financial field later. TL;DR AAVE is a crypto lending financial service which to provides lending services to the crypto community. They focus on security and smart contract lending may be the future of financial services. ...

Stablecoin Crisis
Stablecoin is in the crisis mode. The most reputable stablecoin USDC is depegged. It is all triggered by the traditional bank collapse - Silicon Valley Bank or SVB collapse. Why traditional bank collapse impacts crypto stablecoin? Let's sort this out and reveal how stablecoin operates. First, why SVB collapse? The short answer is overleveraged. SVB is one of the 20 largest commercial banking in the United States. Some even estimate the bank owned half of startup assets. Bank operated in ...
Crypto Paycheck
Photo by Mario Gogh on UnsplashEmployees will receive their paycheck in the period as a reward for their work. However, the employer wants to pay less to employees so that they can have maximum profits. The tension between working and anti-working has increased ever since. TL;DR Nobody wants to work unless they can pay fairly. Fiat payment may not be sustainable to satisfy what workers can contribute if the employer continues paying less and gaining more from profits. Employees will want thei...
Defi Review #4: AAVE The Defi Lending Services
AAVE is a decentralized finance lending service before decentralized finance even existed. It is an innovation lending service in crypto and one of the first kind. However, the lending service may only restrict to the crypto community and it may expand into the traditional financial field later. TL;DR AAVE is a crypto lending financial service which to provides lending services to the crypto community. They focus on security and smart contract lending may be the future of financial services. ...

Stablecoin Crisis
Stablecoin is in the crisis mode. The most reputable stablecoin USDC is depegged. It is all triggered by the traditional bank collapse - Silicon Valley Bank or SVB collapse. Why traditional bank collapse impacts crypto stablecoin? Let's sort this out and reveal how stablecoin operates. First, why SVB collapse? The short answer is overleveraged. SVB is one of the 20 largest commercial banking in the United States. Some even estimate the bank owned half of startup assets. Bank operated in ...

Subscribe to xuanling11

Subscribe to xuanling11
Share Dialog
Share Dialog


<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
The debate on privacy goes beyond what we can imagine. As a matter of fact, the privacy we have is almost zero in the digital age.
Technology has been invasive since they were used. They improved our life but gave us more trouble than they actually offered.
The internet is a marketplace to freely share privacy in the public domain under private company scrutiny.
Not until cryptocurrency was invented to protect your privacy did the technology become privacy protection that is possible for internet participants.
https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1567977070734745600
Then the government enters to punish Tornado Cash developers and sanction the technology that potentially can develop to protect individual privacy further.
Office of Foreign Assets Control or OFAC argued that the smart contract mixer a.k.a Tornado Cash has helped to launder more than $7 billion worth of cryptocurrency since its reaction in 2019 including over $455 million from North Korean-linked hackers.
This was the same argument that the government launched a crypto war in the 90s to prohibit developers from accessing cryptographic technology in the first place to prevent jeopardizing national security. However, the government could have an alternative solution rather than banning the technology as a whole and preventing technological progress. The benefit of developing of such technology and advancement has been out win the benefit of banning of using such technology after all.
The same argument applies in Tornado Cash, that the government oversteps its authority to ban the technology, hurting the privacy technology in the long term.
It discouraged privacy and security advancement while may not prevent hacking completely.
If the smart contract mixer can protect users' privacy, that can outweigh the benefits to society more than banning to prevent hackers utilizing to avoid economic sanctions, then such banning is completely outreached beyond what the government should do to protect their own citizens.
Not to mention to locking up developers who write open-source code that wasn't illegal at the time of creation is another overreaching act from the government to punish no harm individuals who utilized for unlawful purposes but the creators who promoted the innovation of the technology.
I think the government is far outreaching its authority to protect citizens from harming technology but lacks the ability to find alternative solutions to protect the innovative technology that is supposed to protect individual privacy and discourage such technology from moving forward so they can reach their authority to become a surveillance state.
At this pace, we are not far from what Novel 1984 suggested.
The debate on privacy goes beyond what we can imagine. As a matter of fact, the privacy we have is almost zero in the digital age.
Technology has been invasive since they were used. They improved our life but gave us more trouble than they actually offered.
The internet is a marketplace to freely share privacy in the public domain under private company scrutiny.
Not until cryptocurrency was invented to protect your privacy did the technology become privacy protection that is possible for internet participants.
https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1567977070734745600
Then the government enters to punish Tornado Cash developers and sanction the technology that potentially can develop to protect individual privacy further.
Office of Foreign Assets Control or OFAC argued that the smart contract mixer a.k.a Tornado Cash has helped to launder more than $7 billion worth of cryptocurrency since its reaction in 2019 including over $455 million from North Korean-linked hackers.
This was the same argument that the government launched a crypto war in the 90s to prohibit developers from accessing cryptographic technology in the first place to prevent jeopardizing national security. However, the government could have an alternative solution rather than banning the technology as a whole and preventing technological progress. The benefit of developing of such technology and advancement has been out win the benefit of banning of using such technology after all.
The same argument applies in Tornado Cash, that the government oversteps its authority to ban the technology, hurting the privacy technology in the long term.
It discouraged privacy and security advancement while may not prevent hacking completely.
If the smart contract mixer can protect users' privacy, that can outweigh the benefits to society more than banning to prevent hackers utilizing to avoid economic sanctions, then such banning is completely outreached beyond what the government should do to protect their own citizens.
Not to mention to locking up developers who write open-source code that wasn't illegal at the time of creation is another overreaching act from the government to punish no harm individuals who utilized for unlawful purposes but the creators who promoted the innovation of the technology.
I think the government is far outreaching its authority to protect citizens from harming technology but lacks the ability to find alternative solutions to protect the innovative technology that is supposed to protect individual privacy and discourage such technology from moving forward so they can reach their authority to become a surveillance state.
At this pace, we are not far from what Novel 1984 suggested.
No activity yet