Can CBDC users lose control of their money?

[Iroh]

Even if we are mandated to use CBDC, there will still be cryptocurrency. If CEX is destroyed, there will still be DEX. Of course, things may become more complicated than they were in the early days of cryptocurrencies, but everything is surmountable if you approach the issue in the right way

Of course there would still be bitcoin and perhaps other alt coins as well. I think the government, seeing how bitcoin has and is still going on strong despite some strong measures that has been put in place in order to prevent its adoption and usage, decided to create these CBDCs perhaps to rival the dominance of bitcoin in the near and distant future.
If/when the era of printed money is nearing its end, then perhaps citizens would then be mandated and left with little choice than to adopt the use of these CBDCs for their financial transactions.

[1714765206]

1714765206

[1714765206]

1714765206

[1714765206]

1714765206

[1714765206]

1714765206

[1714765206]

1714765206

[Wind_FURY]

What's bad for the people's freedom to transact actually increases the need for financial assets that are built with censorship-resistance and permissionlessness in mind to help the individual become more ungovernable and self-sovereign. We can't just accept tyranny to rule over the world, no?

If only there was such an asset invented.

just a shame when such people as yourself then want to tell people to lock up that self sovereign currency. to then go play with another network of middlemen that is the sandbox network design of most CBDC(blockstream were not paid hundreds of millions of dollars out of donated generosity.. it was a sponsored investment by the institutions to want to get a prototype they can use(research hyperledger-blockstream.. hyperledger-CBDC))

ill give you a few years to ponder that in a shower.. but this time clean your head and really rinse your head of all the stuff thats been put into it .. dont use your favourite branded shampoo, (emphasis on the sham.. and emphasis on the poo)

 

There goes frankandbeans again, purposefully taking my posts out of context, and gaslighting the public into believing that I'm the villain and he's the "Anti-Hero" saving Bitcoin from the "Evil Core Developers".

Laughable.

Everyone just needs to look and read the comments in your trust rating to know what you actually are. You're a fiend who never actually cared for Bitcoin, what the community decided during the scaling debate, nor for the design decisions made by the Core Developers to maintain decentralization.

[beerlover]

Even today's young people don't seem to care too much about privacy. In fact, they prefer to share their private lives on social media. So of course they also won't care about a system that actually exposes their own financial privacy. Because from the beginning they did not care about financial privacy. And we also probably won't be able to avoid not using CBDC in the future. Because it is possible that physical fiat will become increasingly rare and one day it may even be withdrawn from circulation. But for now CBDC is just another option. So we can still avoid it. But with Bitcoin we can still store our assets safely without having to worry about our privacy.

I have to be honest, I remember back in 2004 and following years we started to use Facebook as well. Sure it wasn't like how it is today, today it's much more wider and a lot more people use it, but I remember clearly people around my age found out about it and they ended up doing something like facebook where they shared all their information from face pictures to where we went to what we think to our birthdate and everything else.

Think about it, people really didn't know what to do and that's the problem. I hope that people realize that it's not going to be that easy but should be important to see where it's going to lead and we didn't and this resulted with things go further and now we have the tiktok age where kids use that instead.

[franky1]

Everyone just needs to look and read the comments in your trust rating to know what you actually are. You're a fiend who never actually cared for Bitcoin, what the community decided during the scaling debate, nor for the design decisions made by the Core Developers to maintain decentralization.

"core devs maintaining" is not decentralisation.. even their brand name debunks your theory
CORE=CENTER

core(2014-18) was blockstream managed, whom received hundreds of millions of dollars. this money was not random generous donations from hoards of random individuals. its was a structured investment deal from corporations ..

also the community did not decide.. all user nodes did not need to upgrade to vote. the "backward" trick ensured the community didnt need to decide. but for the false vote of UASF, they did not even achieve a 20% vote

instead it was cores sponsors (NYA) that made the decisions and that also relied on a MANDATORY activation method.. dont play dumb now.. over many topics you have been shown the charts of the blockdata flags which reference what caused what. dont play ignorant or forgetful.. the blockchain is immutable it cant be edited to fit your silly narrative nor anyone else's.. the data is the data.. the best source there is.. use it

its better you use data of the immutable blockchain and code as a source, not your social drama buddy group to put gas into you and then fear someone else burning you when others enlighten you

again its time you do your research

have you even bothered looking at blockdata, code, the sponsors, hyperledger. if not then you are not great at seeking the connections and data.

learn something, escape the gas chamber then you wont get gaslit or burned.

[Wimex]

Banks only want to try to imitate cryptocurrencies, but with the distinction of being able to control these digital assets, and although this may seem appealing to people because they can use it legally, in the end, they will be exposed to not being able to manipulate them when they want or how they want. . The point here is that we cannot compare CBDCs with cryptocurrencies, especially bitcoin, just because they use blokchain, since they are totally different, their first distinction is that one is centralized and the other is not, therefore, even though they want to promote your project and deceive more than one, intelligent users who know that financial freedom without any intermediate is much better, will not use it. And for obvious reasons, if they could lose control of their digital money, nothing in the hands of the government or in the event of the banks, it is safe from being stolen overnight just because they want,  the security in  these system  not that good.

[Wind_FURY]

Everyone just needs to look and read the comments in your trust rating to know what you actually are. You're a fiend who never actually cared for Bitcoin, what the community decided during the scaling debate, nor for the design decisions made by the Core Developers to maintain decentralization.

"core devs maintaining" is not decentralisation.. even their brand name debunks your theory
CORE=CENTER

It's just a name/label.

But what do you propose, frankandbeans? That development should have no order, no organization? Are you proposing those developers from Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin ABC, and BCash should be given authority to commit code to the main repository? To the same people who tried to co-opt Bitcoin and fork it away from the Core Developers? That's a very funny joke, ser.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

Banks only want to try to imitate cryptocurrencies, but with the distinction of being able to control these digital assets

If they are deceiving us then we also refused to be deceived because we know what we want, CBDC is not bitcoin or cryptocurrency, one can only call it along to be a digital currency but this time, CBDC is a digital fiat while bitcoin a digital decentralized currency in cryptocurrency, government controlled currency cannot be as volatile as cryptocurrency, that controls and authority government has over the use of fiat is what led to people seeking for alternative means with bitcoin in cryptocurrency so they can control their own currency.

[jaberwock]

"core devs maintaining" is not decentralisation.. even their brand name debunks your theory
CORE=CENTER

It's just a name/label.

But what do you propose, frankandbeans? That development should have no order, no organization? Are you proposing those developers from Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin ABC, and BCash should be given authority to commit code to the main repository? To the same people who tried to co-opt Bitcoin and fork it away from the Core Developers? That's a very funny joke, ser.

I feel like bitcoin and all the other coins should not have developers at all, that's it. I know that there is a need for development and improvement from people, but we could always do that as an offer, not as a payment reason. Look at altcoins right now, there are million altcoins with devs at the top getting all the money and people are losing money, do we want bitcoin to become like that one day?

Of course not, which means that we could get rid of all the "pay me to build you something better" mindset and we could do something that is much better on the long run. I hope that it can be done differently and it could be improved upon but if you keep doing something that would be even wilder and better and seems reasonable.

[pawel7777]

I feel like bitcoin and all the other coins should not have developers at all, that's it. I know that there is a need for development and improvement from people, but we could always do that as an offer, not as a payment reason. Look at altcoins right now, there are million altcoins with devs at the top getting all the money and people are losing money, do we want bitcoin to become like that one day?

Of course not, which means that we could get rid of all the "pay me to build you something better" mindset and we could do something that is much better on the long run. I hope that it can be done differently and it could be improved upon but if you keep doing something that would be even wilder and better and seems reasonable.

Lol, what are you even talking about?

The problem with altcoins' "devs" scamming people is that they're usually the ones creating tokens and allocating a huge portion to themselves as dev funds. Then they try to hype up their projects, and when there's a market with enough liquidity, they start dumping on "investors" and often disappear afterward. This is known as a "rug pull".
This is simply not the case with Bitcoin. There are no bitcoins sitting there in the development fund. Devs are either doing their work for free, getting paid by donations, or earning money from Bitcoin-related businesses, so they have vested interest in the Bitcoin network working well.

I think you may have a wrong idea of what the word "developer" means, otherwise you wouldn't be proposing not having them at all.

[gunhell16]

As the title said, there is a high possibility that it is true, it seems that cbdc is no different from fiat that is controlled by the country's government, it just became digital. So for me that cbdc is just a joke to be honest. Although, it somehow helps in the adoption of cryptocurrency, that's all, of course, it's still under centralization.

This is where the cbdc will really fall in the regulation, I just don't know if there is anyone else here who has the same understanding as I think about that matter. Of course the government will take advantage of that happening.

[franky1]

It's just a name/label.

But what do you propose, frankandbeans? That development should have no order, no organization? Are you proposing those developers from Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin ABC, and BCash should be given authority to commit code to the main repository? To the same people who tried to co-opt Bitcoin and fork it away from the Core Developers? That's a very funny joke, ser.

windfury.. you have never said anything at all in this entire forum that was not first instructed to be said by your mentor or his forum wife.. so please try to for once get a mind of your own so you could possibly come up with idea's, and also where you can learn from the community instead of your forum daddy and mom admirers

secondly. if you continue thinking the only teams are core vs bitcoin unlimited/ABC then you really have been indoctrinated into dumbness.. there are hundreds of thousands of dev in thousands of teams some are not even in teams.. LEARN the words independence. diversity. decentralisation. zero points of failure

thirdly you dont need a monarchy/tyrannical style of organisation.. which core has made for itself..
instead individuals can be individual and have the ability to individually propose stuff without a centralised sanitised moderated system of mandated control. instead idea's should flourish and have levels of progression when they get recognition whereby for instance instead of one node brand owning the network. there would be multiple brans and even individual options. and they all have a pathway to propose upgrades to the network. where by those proposals are shared with other brands/individuals. and develop in both progress and compromise into something all brands like and enjoy and all offer..
thus achieving a majority acceptance to then activate

you think the only option(well your mentor taught you to think) the only option is core and anything else is a rival.. as your quote portrays your ill-conceived notion that its core vs enemy notion
..
you are so deluded about bitcoin history, bitcoins ability and the path bitcoin could go and the path bitcoin went, that you are not even seeing who is behind the decisions. because if you did know you would see the corporate puppetry which you then cry about in this topic

as for this topic. you have even less clue about CBDC again you seem to be getting your info from an idiot source and not from any real research. you lack even the basic understanding of how any of the current CBDC prototypes in existence function.

its time you spend less times sounding like your mentors echo and spend some time actually learning how things work and how things progress and make some decisions for yourself without your mentor informing you of an opinion you should follow.

if you really want to learn about CBDC then go to the sources, the BIS with their M-bridge and prototype connecting CBDC's and the hyperledger project

and ill give you a tip
even a central bank of current fiat and new CBDC fiat do not have politicians or central bank CEO sat at a computer watching everyone..
in old and new fiats they all support delegating that task to partnered(licenced) commercial banks. where is the commercial banks that monitor their own customers and only report the bad ones to the higher levels

learn this stuff

then learn how bitcoins controlled development went a certain direction in 2017 and the causes and who paid for the sponsorship of that direction.. and the tip is.. it was not "the community"

[someone703]

but the government still has the right to access and manage the currency, regardless of whether it is fiat or CBDC. They are responsible for managing and disposing of the property of the people in certain cases. So the possibility that the government controls people's money could be to pool it in the national treasury and use it for projects that improve people's lives. As for how they will be used, it is impossible to know, that is managed by the government to use it for their specific purposes.

[franky1]

but the government still has the right to access and manage the currency, regardless of whether it is fiat or CBDC. They are responsible for managing and disposing of the property of the people in certain cases. So the possibility that the government controls people's money could be to pool it in the national treasury and use it for projects that improve people's lives. As for how they will be used, it is impossible to know, that is managed by the government to use it for their specific purposes.

most CBDC have national reserves in a multisig style. between the central bank and commercial bank. this is the distributed ledger controlled and distributed between the central bank and commercial bank, where its less of a blockchain and just a chain of UTXO updating the last state.. which this distributed ledger of an updated multisig  is where they invent new money and control total supply
below that is a separate network of the commercial banks having "payment channels" re-organising the IOU of the reserves between each other
and below that is the communication channels between customer and commercial banks that then have customers request their bank to route the balance through the commercial bank channels to other banks and thus other customers(destination)

both in law and in practice(if people researched CBDC and FIAT) central bank does not just shut down a citizen/user
in both old fiat and CBDC the commercial bank(middlemen) monitor its customers.. report those bad customers up the level and then if a court order tells them to freeze and seize a customers balance then they will

no bank just steal funds for no reason. a commercial bank can have its own policy to stop servicing a customer but has to give the option for the customer to remove funds and go elsewhere. again only if reported for suspicious activity and then receiving a court order allowing the courts to seize the funds would a customer be at a loss..

do not confuse this with situations where unregulated boiler room scammy services that just shut down or steal funds..

its also worth noting even china's CBDC is not where the chinese PBOC has control of citizens funds nor watches them all. instead then china has a list of a dozen commercial banks that have the commercial banks managing their customers and only reporting the suspicious customers. chinas CBDC even has accounts that dont need KYC, achieved by having a set limit on the im bound(balance) for a customer, thus people can still transact between different people and services without thinking its just one bank controls all

its worth people actually looking into this stuff to find the real flaws of real prototypes rather then sounding like idiots making up false fears of false problems thus by unhelpful in actually raising the real points of issues and functions

[Wind_FURY]

It's just a name/label.

But what do you propose, frankandbeans? That development should have no order, no organization? Are you proposing those developers from Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin ABC, and BCash should be given authority to commit code to the main repository? To the same people who tried to co-opt Bitcoin and fork it away from the Core Developers? That's a very funny joke, ser.

windfury.. you have never said anything at all in this entire forum that was not first instructed to be said by your mentor or his forum wife.. so please try to for once get a mind of your own so you could possibly come up with idea's, and also where you can learn from the community instead of your forum daddy and mom admirers

 

And you have never made one honest post in the forum. It was my mistake to say that you're one of the people to learn from. Maybe one to learn from THE HARD WAY because everything you teach is WRONG.

Everyone should go to your trust page and read what gmaxwell and achow101 wrote, and ask themselves why they wrote them and who to trust.

but the government still has the right to access and manage the currency, regardless of whether it is fiat or CBDC. They are responsible for managing and disposing of the property of the people in certain cases. So the possibility that the government controls people's money could be to pool it in the national treasury and use it for projects that improve people's lives. As for how they will be used, it is impossible to know, that is managed by the government to use it for their specific purposes.

Do they? Really? I believe not, or should not. The government doesn't have 24/7 access to your cash, they can't monitor all your transactions with it, and it's fungible and private. A CBDC removes all that.

[DooMAD]

Was heading down the M1 (a major motorway for those not from the UK), and saw some graffiti painted onto a bridge saying "Say no to CBDCs".  I didn't get time to snap a photo.  A few people have mentioned it on twitter and there's also an FT article (but it's behind a paywall).  Looks like there are people out there hoping to spread the message.

[pawel7777]

Was heading down the M1 (a major motorway for those not from the UK), and saw some graffiti painted onto a bridge saying "Say no to CBDCs".  I didn't get time to snap a photo.  A few people have mentioned it on twitter and there's also an FT article (but it's behind a paywall).  Looks like there are people out there hoping to spread the message.

This one?:

credit to r/BitcoinUK

It's always nice when people take actions but we need some proper, informational actions of the dangers of implementing CBDCs, otherwise masses will be quick to dismiss any warnings as tin-foil hat conspiracy theory.

[DooMAD]

Was heading down the M1 (a major motorway for those not from the UK), and saw some graffiti painted onto a bridge saying "Say no to CBDCs".  I didn't get time to snap a photo.  A few people have mentioned it on twitter and there's also an FT article (but it's behind a paywall).  Looks like there are people out there hoping to spread the message.

This one?:

credit to r/BitcoinUK

It's always nice when people take actions but we need some proper, informational actions of the dangers of implementing CBDCs, otherwise masses will be quick to dismiss any warnings as tin-foil hat conspiracy theory.

Yeah, that's the one.  Pretty sure I was the only person in the car who knew what it meant, but it's a start.  Even if the majority of passing motorists are currently just wondering "WTF does that mean?", it's better to plant the seed early so that when discussion about CBDCs becomes more common, everyone will know that there is resistance to the concept.

[m2017]

~snip
It's always nice when people take actions but we need some proper, informational actions of the dangers of implementing CBDCs, otherwise masses will be quick to dismiss any warnings as tin-foil hat conspiracy theory.

Sure, it's an overly peculiar way to warn people about the threat of CBDC, but it's certainly better than doing nothing and complaining about the inevitable CBDC while complaining in a bar over a glass of beer. Also, you are absolutely right that information about CBDC must be communicated to people in an appropriate way so as not to cause rejection in them, as another senseless protest.

Well, what better way to communicate about CBDC to others could you suggest? It’s impossible to talk about this in a nutshell, and ordinary inhabitants who rode under this bridge with an inscription will not read detailed long reads with all the evidence. The question is how to bring information to those who are not interested in finance at all until the day of their salary and going to the store.

~snip
Yeah, that's the one.  Pretty sure I was the only person in the car who knew what it meant, but it's a start.  Even if the majority of passing motorists are currently just wondering "WTF does that mean?", it's better to plant the seed early so that when discussion about CBDCs becomes more common, everyone will know that there is resistance to the concept.

I am sure that it was so, that you are the only one who is in the subject and understands what is written.

They will think about question "WTF does that mean?" for exactly 10 seconds, and then they will "switch" the TV brain channel. In order to sow a seed of doubt and have it germinate, the soil must be fertile and able to germinate this seed. Seed "WTF does that mean?" will not germinate in everyone.

[pawel7777]

Well, what better way to communicate about CBDC to others could you suggest? It’s impossible to talk about this in a nutshell, and ordinary inhabitants who rode under this bridge with an inscription will not read detailed long reads with all the evidence. The question is how to bring information to those who are not interested in finance at all until the day of their salary and going to the store.

I think nice and clean infographics with condensed information tend to work best, i.e. bullet-point-style information summarising all the potential threats that CBDCs can bring with links to sources or more detailed information in the footer. Something you can easily post/re-post on social media even as an image.
Plus, of course, watching and sharing any content of influencers (I hate that word) that comment on the subject, to get algorithms to boost it up.

Even if the majority of passing motorists are currently just wondering "WTF does that mean?", it's better to plant the seed early so that when discussion about CBDCs becomes more common, everyone will know that there is resistance to the concept.

Exactly, it'll click later on. Bitesize info is still more effective than walls of text attempting to explain everything in one go.

[DooMAD]

Another important point the wider public should be made aware of (I'm assuming a lot of people here on this forum would already know), is that in terms of "losing control of your money", it doesn't even require CBDCs for that to occur.  It has already happened.  What most people don't realise is, that from a legal standpoint, the moment you deposit funds to a bank, the ownership of that money changes from you to them.  You are a creditor of the bank.  They owe you that money, but it's not yours anymore.

The main reason CBDCs are an issue is because it will eventually eliminate the use of cash and carries serious privacy concerns if every single financial transaction can be recorded, tracked and audited, with all of your personally identifiable and financially sensitive information attached.

Cash = Privacy