momentum to have a look at a longterm perspective
Call for thought how to frame Grin
Im thinking about to propose a new governance topic in the coming weeks about what Grin’s take is on the future of privacy and it’s position. Especially with the upcoming FATF mandate.
Which comes down at: privacy coins will be illegal in most of the developed countries.
Does Grin need a long term ‘point of view’ to strengthen Grins position for the upcoming resistance? How can Grin surf this wave?
I know there will be many opinions about this topic. Where the first thought will be: we go for the anarchy way! But the time when Bitcoin became mature it was a time you could grow up without being constantly looked at. This changed now Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are becoming a thread to the global monetary system.
From my point of view Grin is currently one of the better contenders to become the major private cryptocurrency. When it start growing it will be on the radar from the policy makers and will be used for public psychology warfare to ensure that privacy will not be open for the public.
Thoughts that cross my mind: Am I prepared for this? Is it a good idea to have regular talks about Grin public relations (PR) and the mass psychology behind it? Doesn’t Grin need this approach because the one with perseverance always wins? Against who does Grin compete? Does Grin need a collective view on this matter? What would be the best point of view with all the upcoming uncertainty? Does it matter? Does it even need attention? Cypherpunks write code, but i’m not a cyperphunk? What does it take from me?
Food for thought right?
Example of the upcoming anti-privacy wave
Let me give a short overview about the upcoming anti-privacy wave created by the nation states.
Since we entered a new ‘society’ after the Twin Towers in '01 the demand for more privacy started to grow after governments began to try to shutdown the private friendly ways to transfer value and people. And they are on the right path to succeed this goal. With most of the banking system now acquires KYC, AMLD5 etc, human traffic is to date almost impossible without ‘idendity’, Public transportation changed in only identified ‘users’ allowed and many other forms.
A few months ago I did a video recorded conversation (Dutch) with Simon Lelieveldt a well respected finance and banking expert from Netherlands. A former Head of Department on Financial Markets at the Dutch Association of Banks*('07-'11) and Senior E-money Analyst at the Dutch National Bank*('95-'01). He made the instruction paper for the Dutch Association of Banks how to implement the previous rule. In this conversation Simon speaks out his conceirns about the from June this year new FATF-rules
The red line in the conversation about the military precise operation to make sure that almost all the blockchain companies in the specific countries provide an on purpose created data leak from their ledgers to give a permanent stream of information about identity.
The Financial Action Task Force is an intergovernmental organization founded in 1989 on the initiative of the G7 to develop policies to combat money laundering. In 2001 its mandate expanded to include terrorism financing. The FATF Secretariat is housed at the OECD headquarters in Paris.
Excellent thread by Simon about upcoming FATF
By signing the agreement it now mandatory for the ministers of finance to ensure that everyone in their country follows the rules they signed for.
Mandatory: to have a backdoor in your system which send all the data to the Observing Organizations of the FATF.
For what I know I can say that this is just not possible for Grin which means that Grin will be forbidden in the countries who signed the mandate (almost all the financial ministers from the member countries signed)
Let the smaller FATF wave thought go
Please let the short overview about the upcoming anti-privacy wave go. And take a look with me to the bigger picture I want to create here.
What will the future for Grin be, and what is Grin’s standpoint in this.
Carolien Kaiser wrote an excellent report on Privacy and Identity Issues in Financial Transactions
I would like to ask you to read the academic paper from Carolien. And with the food for thought in mind to think the coming weeks about your perspective towards to what will be good for Grin. Again, exchanges are delisting privacy coins and this will just be the start of the anti privacy wave that is heading towards Grin.
Can we find a shared voice to form a force?
AND/OR is it not necassery, because code
Grin Fundaments
From my point of view as most of the people who are let’s say better known with Grin know that it stands for: fair, open and transparent.
Grin is electronic transactions for all. Without censorship or restrictions.
Grin empowers anyone to transact or save modern money without the fear of external control or oppression.
Grin relies on donations. Therefore, Grin does not have an official team, but a group of like-minded people work hard for the projects they love.
Respected developers who develop Grin can join a technical committee responsible for governance. But the final decision is still in the hands of the community.
Grin is designed for the decades to come, not just tomorrow. Grin wants to be usable by everyone, regardless of borders, culture, skills or access.
Optional thoughts
Go with the flow of energy and prepare to be as antifragile as possible?
Work together with institutions where the new generation studies or works?
Rough times are heading, build and wait for the perfect storm, bitcoin Trojan Horse?
again, Thoughts that cross my mind: Am I prepared for this? The one with perseverance always wins? Against who does Grin compete? Does Grin need a collective view on this matter? What would be the best point of view with all the upcoming uncertainty? Does it matter? Does it even need attention? Cypherpunks write code, but i’m not a cyperphunk? What does it take from me?
I just leave this here
I will just leave this post here and will watch how it resonates.
This post is written at saturday evening 21 september 2019. I’m not sure it was more a philosophical thought, or a serious interest in how the future can be shaped with a shared perspective.