[2019-07-01]From 'Ponzi' to 'We're Working on It’ — BIS Chief Reverses Stance on

[Vladdirescu87]

From 'Ponzi' to 'We're Working on It’ — BIS Chief Reverses Stance on Crypto

The head of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) has appeared to U-turn on issuing digital currencies after a fresh interview with the Financial Times on June 30.

Speaking to the publication, BIS chief Augustin Carstens actively endorsed the creation and issuance of digital versions of national fiat currencies.

“Many central banks are working on it; we are working on it, supporting them,” he said.

“And it might be that it is sooner than we think that there is a market and we need to be able to provide central bank digital currencies.”

The comments struck a curious note with many, coming just months after Carstens emphatically advised against issuing such digital currencies. In a speech in March, he listed various risks for banks considering doing so, arguing innovation should not come too fast.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/from-ponzi-to-were-working-on-it-bis-chief-reverses-stance-on-crypto

[1714151094]

1714151094

[1714151094]

1714151094

[1714151094]

1714151094

[1714151094]

1714151094

[1714151094]

1714151094

[ABCbits]

Because they realize permissioned blockchain is exist where all power they had (on current centralized system) could be remained.
They're not interested to support Cryptocurrency which offer privacy & freedom (full control over money).

[milewilda]

Because they realize permissioned blockchain is exist where all power they had (on current centralized system) could be remained.
They're not interested to support Cryptocurrency which offer privacy & freedom (full control over money).

Exactly! They are fully aware that these two different world would really not collaborate no matter which angle we are trying to see.
Government cant control everything and things that opposes their likes would remain a threat or a non-interesting thing on their part.So a non surprising thing.

[LeGaulois]

The title is misleading. BIS Chief Reverses Stance on cryptos where?

This person says: "the creation and issuance of digital versions of national fiat currencies"
He didn't say "the creation & issuance of cryptos"
In the same way, he also said "we need to be able to provide central bank digital currencies."
Not "...to provide central banks cryptocurrencies"

I don't know if the article didn't get it (or me?), is confused, or intentionally looking for something to write no matter how accurate it is.

[Kemarit]

The title is misleading. BIS Chief Reverses Stance on cryptos where?

This person says: "the creation and issuance of digital versions of national fiat currencies"
He didn't say "the creation & issuance of cryptos"
In the same way, he also said "we need to be able to provide central bank digital currencies."
Not "...to provide central banks cryptocurrencies"

I don't know if the article didn't get it (or me?), is confused, or intentionally looking for something to write no matter how accurate it is.

Misleading and totally click-bait article. This has been the "norm" of crypto journalism, most of them just copy and paste without verifying the source. They just trying to look to be very positive on crypto because we all know that its gaining some steam again so they need to write to fit the current narratives.

So with that said, I don't think there is a U-turn here. Central banks will still have their qualms against crypto and they only want the technology behind, - Blockchain, and take it to their advantage.

[gentlemand]

Um, isn't 97-99% of fiat already a digital currency anyway? It's just an entry on a ledger and much of it appears from nowhere like magic. What else do they need to add that they don't already have?

[hatshepsut93]

Um, isn't 97-99% of fiat already a digital currency anyway? It's just an entry on a ledger and much of it appears from nowhere like magic. What else do they need to add that they don't already have?

Maybe they want to create payment networks for fiat currencies that are in hands of governments instead of companies like Visa and Mastercard and PayPal - that would give more power to central banks and governments overall, and make them less dependent on private companies. The talks about electronic currencies aren't new, governments were discussing it even before Bitcoin.

Misleading and totally click-bait article. This has been the "norm" of crypto journalism, most of them just copy and paste without verifying the source. They just trying to look to be very positive on crypto because we all know that its gaining some steam again so they need to write to fit the current narratives.

When the market is bullish, bullish news are in high demand, so it's no wonder that journalists write article that generate the most clicks. It's good to see that people can be skeptical, even if the news are supposedly positive for Bitcoin.

[LeGaulois]

...

It's not really a matter to verify the source but rather to understand what they publish themselves. They're talking about 2 different things. The title speaks about cryptos but the content has nothing related to cryptos. Perhaps the word 'cryptos' isn't even mentioned in. It's like publishing an article with "What are the best Android Apps?" and the text is telling to people how to repair a car

...

There are countries like Sweden where payments are almost all digitalized (90%) and others like Germany that have a strong attachment to banknotes. But back to the article, this is only a confirmation of their economic policy to move towards a cashless society

[gentlemand]

There are countries like Sweden where payments are almost all digitalized (90%) and others like Germany that have a strong attachment to banknotes. But back to the article, this is only a confirmation of their economic policy to move towards a cashless society

People spending notes is a microscopic aspect of money. Even if the whole population is using cash it's nothing compared to what's swilling around between banks electronically.

[timerland]

“Many central banks are working on it; we are working on it, supporting them,” he said.

“And it might be that it is sooner than we think that there is a market and we need to be able to provide central bank digital currencies.”

The comments struck a curious note with many, coming just months after Carstens emphatically advised against issuing such digital currencies. In a speech in March, he listed various risks for banks considering doing so, arguing innovation should not come too fast.

I think that the BIS's vision is entirely different from what this article is trying to suggest.

Their stance is probably still quite anti-decentralization, given their obvious affiliations with the world's central banks all over. Which means that what they are probably focusing on are blockchain projects (presumably, ones on a national scale) that utilize blockchain technology to facilitate faster international settlement, which is one of their primary functions.

I don't necessarily think that their stance has shifted significantly on currencies like bitcoin. While the article makes it seem like that they are eyeing BTC as potentially a reserve currency in the future, they are likely referring to some central bank issued digital currency. I.e., reserve accounts, except cryptographically secured.