Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Bitcoin

India To Explore Prohibition of Unbacked Crypto in Its G20 Presidency 38

India said on Thursday that under its ongoing G20 presidency, it will prioritize the development of a framework for global regulation of unbacked crypto assets, stablecoins and decentralized finance and will explore the "possibility of [their] prohibition" in a potentially large setback for the nascent industry. From a report: India began its year-long presidency of the Group 20 early this month. The group, which comprises 19 nations across continents and the EU, represents 85% of the world's GDP. It also invites non-member countries including Singapore and Spain and international organizations such as World Bank and the IMF.

The Reserve Bank of India, the Indian central bank, said in a report today that crypto assets are highly volatile and exhibit high correlations with equities in ways that dispute the industry's narrative and claims around the virtual digital assets being an alternative source of value due to their supposed inflation-hedging benefits. The Indian central bank warned that policymakers across the globe are concerned that the crypto sector may become more interconnected with mainstream finance and "divert financing away from traditional finance with broader effect on the real economy."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

India To Explore Prohibition of Unbacked Crypto in Its G20 Presidency

Comments Filter:
  • Nothing is backed by anything other than a dependency of people wanting that particular thing. For example, if your currency is backed by gold. What's backing the gold? Nothing, other than people wanting gold. Isn't that the same for crypto itself? It might be more volatile for now, but ultimately it's backed by the fact that a large number of people desire it. Gold backed currency's value is banking on the fact that people won't wake up en masse one day after seeing a hit documentary on gold mining and say

    • Gold is used in manufacturing. Granted, the price isn't correlated with its industrial value, but it would have a greater value by weight than a stack of 100s even if it wasn't traded as a pseudo-currency. (That doesn't mean anyone should by gold, like I said, the price isn't correlated with its actual useful value).

      In theory crypto is just a currency that is controlled by a private entity (or group of entities) rather than a government or central bank. However, most people don't treat it as a currency beca
  • by greytree ( 7124971 ) on Friday December 30, 2022 @03:56AM (#63167522)
    What about my exclusive NFT collection of links to JPEGS of signed photos of all the G20 delegates?

    Surely that's got sound backing ypu can trust. The soundest.
    • That's about as valuable as my mint condition collector's plate collection of famous Star Wars characters that have this guaranteed chance of appreciation.

      • Wait. You really have one of those? Friend at the plate company?

        Nope, don't believe it.
        Noone with that kind of business acumen and sheer wealth wastes their valuable time posting pn slashdot.
    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      Should have bought into the former alleged president's NFTs. I cannot imagine a legion of right-wingnuts not wanting those.

  • said in a report today that crypto assets are highly volatile and exhibit high correlations with equities in ways that dispute the industry's narrative and claims around the virtual digital assets being an alternative source of value due to their supposed inflation-hedging benefits

    So, this whole crypto thing is a bullshit sandwich covered in bullshit sauce, but no one will believe that, because of all the bullshit, or...?

    • So, this whole crypto thing is a bullshit sandwich covered in bullshit sauce

      Of course. But that doesn't justify a ban.

      We don't need new laws every time politicians decide something is "bullshit."

      The people losing money on crypto are losing their own money. It is nobody else's business.

      I don't accept the "But they're wasting energy!!!" argument. Sure, they are wasting energy, but so is everyone who takes a road trip or flies to Europe for a vacation.

      • I don't accept the "But they're wasting energy!!!" argument. Sure, they are wasting energy, but so is everyone who takes a road trip or flies to Europe for a vacation.

        We should stop pretending those activities don't produce emissions, and tax them according to the actual cost of cleanup. There's no reason they should get a free pass. But then, nor should cryptocurrency miners.

      • The people losing money on crypto are losing their own money. It is nobody else's business.

        Just like all those people caught up in the subprime mortgages. It's nobody else's business, right? Even if they then cause the crash of the entire world economy.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        Just like all those people who get caught up in pyramid or Ponzi schemes that ultimately result in civil war. It's nobody else's business that they suddenly find themselves in a warzone through no fault of their own, right?

        Stop being a fucking tunnel-vision fauxtistic nerd for once and understand that there

        • by clovis ( 4684 )

          The subprime crisis of 2007 etc is a good point of comparison.
          What really drove the worldwide crash wasn't that subprime loans were being made, but rather that the ratings agencies (Moody's, S&P, etc) gave top ratings to the CDO's based on packages of those subprime loans protected by CDS (credit default swaps) when there is absolutely no way those CDS could be paid when a market reversal occurred. That, and the 80-120 trillion ( nobody knows) of naked CDS outstanding at the time. Oh yeah, and the City

    • Sure. But if we outlaw bullshitting people out of their money, a lot of churches would have a really, really hard time.

  • Backing hilarious (Score:1, Insightful)

    by MM-tng ( 585125 )

    Fiat currency of central banks is not backed by anything. The only reason to ban crypto is control, but that is a harder sell :). At least blockchains are transparent.

    • How's your FTX?
    • *sigh*

      Fiat currency is not backed by anything... yeah, the mantra of the dolts that don't know how international finance works. It is backed by something. Effectively even by the whole industrial output of the planet because that's what the whole financial system ends in. Currencies are not arbitrarily valued, there's a reason why a USD is worth this many EURs and that many GBPs, and why you can get this many goods and services for it.

      • by MM-tng ( 585125 )

        And then they invented quantitative easing. Poof gone was your money. Not your keys not your coins.

        • by gtall ( 79522 )

          Not really, the main drivers were the rebound in spending from Covid lockdowns which amped up the economy, China's slowdown due to Covid which decreased supply, the Great Putini deciding Russia wasn't big enough for his small penis roiling the energy markets, our dear friends the Saudis deciding now was the correct time to cut back on oil supplies, the supply chain snarls, etc.

          Notice the price of gas dropping like a stone? No? Well, it is and that's because of decreased demand. Now go back to Econ 101 and p

      • Yes thay are backed by nation states, with armies and guns, and therir respect I've versions of the IRS that demands payments in their respective local fiat. Also crypto currencies trend to be much more volatile, and hence not that useful as currencies. Actually the only problem I have with crypto currencies is that they calim to be currencies while ( due to volatility) not really being well suited for that porpouse. If theit "inventors" had called the crypto speculation tokens I would have 0 issues with
  • by presidenteloco ( 659168 ) on Friday December 30, 2022 @05:01AM (#63167570)
    and its authoritarian bullshit, then.
    • Found the person still not giving up on finding the bigger fool.

      • Random mistakes in early finance innovations during the infancy of this kind of technology, and all the bad press they engender, don't negate the general principle that there are valid ways of doing decentralized, permissionless, computerized money and finance, and that this general trend will become more and more important as the technology improves and operating experience increases.

        Be rational not emotional.
        • These are neither random nor are they mistakes. However, let's go with something indisputable, power consumption: https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index [ccaf.io]
          This is significant enough of an issue to ban proof-of-work cryptocurrency.

          don't negate the general principle that there are valid ways of doing decentralized, permissionless, computerized money and finance, and that this general trend will become more and more important as the technology improves and operating experience increases.

          Paper money is decentralized and "permissionless", so go with that. Computerized money is slated on come online in July via FedNow. Blockchain is really only needed to support illegal operations while the rest is merely speculative trading which is mere gambling.

          • 1. The power consumption problem is not inherent to this tech. Only to first-gen, proof of work blockchains. So complaining about it is rapidly becoming outdated, which doesn't make such complaining any less popular among those with a chip on their shoulder about the anarchistic aspects of this tech.

            2. Re: The United States of America Federal Reserve trying to control electronic money and then get the other versions banned. One of the positive features of the tech is its bucking of the trend of increasing n
            • 1. The power consumption problem is not inherent to this tech. Only to first-gen, proof of work blockchains.

              So you would be OK with banning proof-of-work cryptocurrency?

              One of the positive features of the tech is its bucking of the trend of increasing nationalism and xenophobia.

              I've seen nothing that indicates this, especially when the political identity most associated with cryptocurrency votes for Republicans.

              In its pure form it is undeniably globalist. I for one encourage ways we can organize ourselves that are beyond the reach of individual nation-state governments.

              So long as it doesn't needlessly waste electricity, I don't really care.

              • Maybe eventually ok to ban POW crypto, with maybe a 3 year warning period to allow redesign and reimplementation of bitcoin.

                More reasonable to ban POW crypto that doesn't arrange to get all its power from NEW clean renewable power source (excluding hydro power - new dams too damaging, and excluding biofuel (most of it e.g. wood fibre pellets, corn is fake green - ecosystem damaging and not sustainable)).

                Idea being that the crypto won't take away from existing power grid, and in particular, can't use power
                • Maybe eventually ok to ban POW crypto, with maybe a 3 year warning period to allow redesign and reimplementation of bitcoin.

                  No because there are already cryptocurrencies that don't use POW. Just give everyone 90 days to cash out or trade for another cryptocurrency.

                  More reasonable to ban POW crypto that doesn't arrange to get all its power from NEW clean renewable power source (excluding hydro power

                  The problem with this is that bitcoin consumes pollution-free sources which should be displacing polluting sources. The net result is increased pollution.

                  I'm a little leary of government determination then banning of "wasted" electricity.

                  The problem is that electricity is heavily subsidized by externalizing the cost of pollution clean up. If we take away the subsidies then I have no problem with people using as much as they want for doing nothing (

  • No control? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gnasher719 ( 869701 ) on Friday December 30, 2022 @05:31AM (#63167586)
    One suggestion would be: No control whatsoever. You buy crypto, youâ(TM)re on your own. If you lose money, through bad luck, misreading the market, incompetence or fraud, tough for you. Friedman-something gets released and keeps all the money he stole.

    On the other hand, in the Uk we donâ(TM)t let people starve. So my tax payers money might pay to support people who lost their shirt with crypto. And we donâ(TM)t like fraud as a society. The idea that someone lazy and unscrupulous can take the money of someone who is hard working and gullible. Since crypto has zero redeeming features, Iâ(TM)d be fine with a complete ban.
    • One suggestion would be: No control whatsoever. You buy crypto, youâ(TM)re on your own. If you lose money, through bad luck, misreading the market, incompetence or fraud, tough for you. Friedman-something gets released and keeps all the money he stole.

      On the other hand, in the Uk we donâ(TM)t let people starve. So my tax payers money might pay to support people who lost their shirt with crypto. And we donâ(TM)t like fraud as a society. The idea that someone lazy and unscrupulous can take the money of someone who is hard working and gullible. Since crypto has zero redeeming features, Iâ(TM)d be fine with a complete ban.

      What percent of your population are hard working and gullible and not just gullible? If they are in fact, hard working, I'm sure you could put them to work so that the rest of your taxpayers don't have to support them. Considering that you can use crypto, when it has value, to purchase goods and services, I would say that it does have a redeeming feaure.

    • The only rational and consistent policies (with regard to existing law) would be either to ban it, or to place exactly the same kind of controls on it as money.

      As you say, simply throwing up your hands and pretending it's not causing problems is harmful not just to fools, but the people around them, so doing nothing is not an option.

  • Backed should mean something substantive, not just propping up one crypto garbage coin with another crypto garbage coin where it turns out to be a ponzi. Some tangible asset that is recognized as a security - e.g. Government bonds, precious metals, or actual currency should be the stake. And it should require auditing and certification by a recognised authority to exist, to be held in escrow and correspond to the value of the crypto coin. And ban proof of work, and require proof of stake.

We are experiencing system trouble -- do not adjust your terminal.

Working...