In this post here, Taskmaster highlighted how the government has made a subtle but silent acknowledgement of the blockchain as the next big thing in our era. At the very least, there is an admittance of the importance the space provides and an admittance that seeking to kill it would not only be futile, but counter productive in the long run.

Yes crypto is here to stay, and those fully immersed in the technology have been singing this song for far too long. On the path of policy makers however, the onuse has shifted from an attack with intent to kill, to one meant to control the space. Regulators recognize the extended liberties a truly decentralized space provides and seek to nip it in other to maintain their influence. The 'war' is still ongoing, but the strategies have changed.

One major consideration of the apparent need for control is the fundamental question of what interests they serve. People having greater economic liberties at an individual level where certain decisions can be made in privacy without fear of government influence or policy affecting your immediate livelihood and essentially getting a better deal out of the next level monetary system.

Yet for some reason, these factors are downplayed when policy makers highlight the need for interventions in the space. There is one possible explanation to this, which is that the best scenario isn't entirely what interests regulators. Blockchain Decentralization is as much a political power tussle as it is a financial or tecnhological one. No Government will willingly cede total control to the people, even if we are made to believe so.

What the blockchain does rather is giving us a leveraging tool in other to properly negotiate the terms of individual liberties. Some people may disagree with me when I say negotiate, and I don't blame them because we have a really powerful leveraging tool. However, wishing regulators simply fold under the carpet will be futile, so this revolution allows for some big changes in a 'negotiable' manner where regulators are forced to see the superiority of doing things a certain way.

Certainly there are legitimate concerns for why we may need greater controls such as the use of the blockchain by some unscrupulous elements to operate particularly relating to areas such as cybercrime, money laundering and financing terrorism. This does make a good argument, but the counter-argument is that this things have permeated the system way before the blockchain was born with relative success. It isn't an excuse to shut down the technology as it would be to shut down the internet.

Furthermore, with us being in the infancy stages of development, it is safe to assume a lot more improvements at projects, innovations and services on the blockchain that tackle these vices and enhance security with consequences far beyond the space.

Conclusion

Regulators won't be giving it a rest for sure. The hammering is still on, but nails may have been switched. However, the quest for steeper controls will further accelerate even greater innovation in the chain and more subtle admittance of futility. These are interesting times indeed.

Posted Using LeoFinance ^Beta