Over the past couple of weeks I've reached out to a few teams and individuals who are building what are - to me at least - some of the most interesting projects in crypto today.
As it stands, I'm supporting two projects, in the middle of an email exchange with a founder/developer, and waiting for a response from another project.
One project, CryptoCountries, actually reached out to me asking for support with audience engagement and translation work for the Korean market after finding my profile on Ethlance.com. That's pretty cool.
I am also on the small Korean translation team for OpenBazaar supporting the translation of their site for Korean users.
After reading about StakeTree in the Token Economy newsletter a few weeks ago, I reached out directly to Niel de la Rouviere, the 'Chief Catalyst' there. I congratulated him on the great initial interest and traction he has started to receive before offering my translation services and help with any other needs he may have. He is a one man show for now, but I'll keep checking in with him every couple of weeks.
Lastly, I am still waiting for a response from the Cent team. I am most excited about this project, so I really hope there is some aspect of the project that I can get involved with and support. As a gesture of good will I sent them Korean translations of their three Medium posts. We'll see what happens.
I am very bullish on the future of this space, and super excited to be a part of it any way I can.
2018년 2월 22일 목요일
2018년 2월 18일 일요일
Cent - Chapter 2 Centurions & CENT
*This is the second part in a fictional forward-looking series based on the site beta.cent.co - click here for Part 1*
The 'beer money' payout marked the first, and perhaps most important, viral hit for Cent.
And at the heart of that decisive change was the decision to anoint an exclusive class of users: the Centurions.
The debate amongst a few Centians and the two founders prior to the decision to introduce this separate user class was heated. The biggest worry was that existing users and potential new users would be turned off by what could be construed as a centralization. They were also afraid it was an unnecessary complication.
Those worries were quickly replaced by a major problem that erupted on the site. Due to the lack of any real mechanism to prevent users from signing up under multiple emails, a number of spam responses posted by single users with multiple accounts began siphoning off major portions of bounties.
Max and Cam tried to minimize the problem by sending these responses to the bottom of the response list by erasing the amount of the bounty they received, but that didn't address the root of the problem. And it didn't prevent those users from receiving those funds, since fund distribution was carried out automatically via a smart contract.
Therefore the founders finally acquiesced to the repeated pleadings of a few, passionate Centians who perceived the problem early on and created the exclusive Centurion class consisting of seven users: Max, Cam, Steven McKie, yours truly and three others
It seems obvious now, but the Centurions did more than simply establish a novel way to mitigate spam accounts and help reinforce the 'beer money' standard.
Through their consistent up/down voting of responses they helped curate the responses that bounty setters were seeking in the first place.
Centurions also made it possible to introduce the tagging system the site sorely needed to facilitate searches for past bounty topics. This allowed old bounties to be re-opened if updates were needed as one example. For each new tag a Centurion added, they were awarded 1% of the 7% of the bounty reserved for Centurions.
A major moment for Cent was when the big names started showing up. The Burniskes. The Navals. The Wilsons. The Centurions were behind this as well.
The Centurions brought a human touch for these new users. They brought them onboard, verified their sns accounts and broadcast their membership. In a time when automation was the singular focus, Cent combined the best of the human experience complimented by the convenience of automation.
Cent became a site for users, run by users. And Centurions were the first employees.
One of the most important contributions the Centurions made was an indirect one. Their introduction essentially laid the framework to launch Cent's native token, CENT.
Cent's token distribution came together almost overnight after the Centurions were introduced. Since the value of the network had been created in advance, there was no need to carry out an ICO. Instead the three classes of users (bounty setters, centurions, bounty responders) received CENT based on how much they contributed to Cent up until that point.
The amount of CENT bounty setters received was 1000x the amount of ETH they previously set as bounties on Cent. Centurions received 700x the amount of ETH they received for their support in CENT. Regular Centians received 300x what they earned in ETH by providing responses and up voting in CENT.
What set CENT apart from ICOs or token distributions that came before it was the distinct utility it gave users right away:
Centurions and CENT were pivotal in the development and growth of Cent. They have proven invaluable to the growth and development of Cent not to mention the additional features and uses of the CENT token were built out later.
The 'beer money' payout marked the first, and perhaps most important, viral hit for Cent.
And at the heart of that decisive change was the decision to anoint an exclusive class of users: the Centurions.
The debate amongst a few Centians and the two founders prior to the decision to introduce this separate user class was heated. The biggest worry was that existing users and potential new users would be turned off by what could be construed as a centralization. They were also afraid it was an unnecessary complication.
Those worries were quickly replaced by a major problem that erupted on the site. Due to the lack of any real mechanism to prevent users from signing up under multiple emails, a number of spam responses posted by single users with multiple accounts began siphoning off major portions of bounties.
Max and Cam tried to minimize the problem by sending these responses to the bottom of the response list by erasing the amount of the bounty they received, but that didn't address the root of the problem. And it didn't prevent those users from receiving those funds, since fund distribution was carried out automatically via a smart contract.
Therefore the founders finally acquiesced to the repeated pleadings of a few, passionate Centians who perceived the problem early on and created the exclusive Centurion class consisting of seven users: Max, Cam, Steven McKie, yours truly and three others
It seems obvious now, but the Centurions did more than simply establish a novel way to mitigate spam accounts and help reinforce the 'beer money' standard.
Through their consistent up/down voting of responses they helped curate the responses that bounty setters were seeking in the first place.
Centurions also made it possible to introduce the tagging system the site sorely needed to facilitate searches for past bounty topics. This allowed old bounties to be re-opened if updates were needed as one example. For each new tag a Centurion added, they were awarded 1% of the 7% of the bounty reserved for Centurions.
A major moment for Cent was when the big names started showing up. The Burniskes. The Navals. The Wilsons. The Centurions were behind this as well.
The Centurions brought a human touch for these new users. They brought them onboard, verified their sns accounts and broadcast their membership. In a time when automation was the singular focus, Cent combined the best of the human experience complimented by the convenience of automation.
Cent became a site for users, run by users. And Centurions were the first employees.
One of the most important contributions the Centurions made was an indirect one. Their introduction essentially laid the framework to launch Cent's native token, CENT.
Cent's token distribution came together almost overnight after the Centurions were introduced. Since the value of the network had been created in advance, there was no need to carry out an ICO. Instead the three classes of users (bounty setters, centurions, bounty responders) received CENT based on how much they contributed to Cent up until that point.
The amount of CENT bounty setters received was 1000x the amount of ETH they previously set as bounties on Cent. Centurions received 700x the amount of ETH they received for their support in CENT. Regular Centians received 300x what they earned in ETH by providing responses and up voting in CENT.
What set CENT apart from ICOs or token distributions that came before it was the distinct utility it gave users right away:
- It allowed bounty setters to feature their bounties on the main Cent feed (the number of CENT they attached to their bounty was clearly displayed on active bounties)
- Centians could attach CENT to their responses to ensure it featured at the top of all responses whilst the bounty was active. (Note: that CENT was distributed across all responses (including theirs) that received net positive up votes for that bounty proportional to the total number of up votes received)
- Centians could attach CENT to other responses that, when combined with up votes would ensure that response was featured higher in the responses and go directly to the responder after the bounty ended; if the response was down voted the response was displayed towards the bottom of the responses and distributed to responses that receives net positive up votes when the bounty expired
- Whilst the number of Centurions was initially fixed at seven, after CENT was introduced, each Centurion was required to stake a minimum amount of CENT. After that, anyone could become a Centurion if they staked an amount of CENT equal to 100% more than the most recent amount of CENT staked by the newest Centurion. (E.g. if the last Centurion staked 1000 CENT, the next centurion would have to stake 2000, the next 4000, the next 8000 etc...).
Centurions and CENT were pivotal in the development and growth of Cent. They have proven invaluable to the growth and development of Cent not to mention the additional features and uses of the CENT token were built out later.
2018년 2월 6일 화요일
Risk as a Function of Perception
I am just about to wrap up Brad Stone's "The Everything Store," his book on Jeff Bezos and the inception, initial rise followed by hard times, and ultimate success of Amazon.
Usually biographies humanize their subjects, but in this case, Bezos has essentially become a god in my eyes. An angry god to be sure, and one that knows the devil is in the details.
Beyond Bezos though, what really struck and stuck with me, was how the book perfectly captured the anxiety and fear that permeated the markets during the bear cycle and ultimate dot.com bubble pop back in 2000.
At that time Amazon's stock fell to less than $10, losing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and employees. And they were getting *trashed* in the media.
Amazon's then treasurer summed up the fear and anxiety perfectly: "The most anxiety-inducing thing about [the Wall Street bears and negative media] was that the risk [of going to zero] was a function of perception and not the reality."
The real danger was that the negative media might turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. And that strain of bearish thinking actually took hold for awhile. Large numbers of people illogically thought the Internet revolution and all its invention would just disappear.
It feels like this history is rhyming again today as the crypto sector has just lost hundreds of billions off its network value virtually overnight.
The bears and perma-critics are smugly declaring defeat for cryptocurrencies. Many retail investors probably didn't know anything about the underlying tech so they probably think crypto dead too.
But just as Amazon and its cohort of other dot.com bubble survivors have shown, these sorts of revolutions have a way of upending short-term criticism over the long run. As the internet continues to prove, it has had an extremely powerful non-linear impact on every single other sector.
Amazon used the power of the internet to provide customers - end users - with a level of instant, personalized satisfaction that was impossible before it. That in turn has helped it become a real contender to become the everything store for the whole freaking world.
The seeds carried by the sudden deluge of blockchain and cryptocurrency speculation have just been laid. Already flowers are starting to appear giving a preview of what may be possible soon for end users. It's amazing how quickly they have taken root, and I am sure that there will be an Amazon (or ten or hundred) that'll bloom and grow atop this new technology soon.
Usually biographies humanize their subjects, but in this case, Bezos has essentially become a god in my eyes. An angry god to be sure, and one that knows the devil is in the details.
Beyond Bezos though, what really struck and stuck with me, was how the book perfectly captured the anxiety and fear that permeated the markets during the bear cycle and ultimate dot.com bubble pop back in 2000.
At that time Amazon's stock fell to less than $10, losing hundreds of millions of dollars for shareholders and employees. And they were getting *trashed* in the media.
Amazon's then treasurer summed up the fear and anxiety perfectly: "The most anxiety-inducing thing about [the Wall Street bears and negative media] was that the risk [of going to zero] was a function of perception and not the reality."
The real danger was that the negative media might turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. And that strain of bearish thinking actually took hold for awhile. Large numbers of people illogically thought the Internet revolution and all its invention would just disappear.
It feels like this history is rhyming again today as the crypto sector has just lost hundreds of billions off its network value virtually overnight.
The bears and perma-critics are smugly declaring defeat for cryptocurrencies. Many retail investors probably didn't know anything about the underlying tech so they probably think crypto dead too.
But just as Amazon and its cohort of other dot.com bubble survivors have shown, these sorts of revolutions have a way of upending short-term criticism over the long run. As the internet continues to prove, it has had an extremely powerful non-linear impact on every single other sector.
Amazon used the power of the internet to provide customers - end users - with a level of instant, personalized satisfaction that was impossible before it. That in turn has helped it become a real contender to become the everything store for the whole freaking world.
The seeds carried by the sudden deluge of blockchain and cryptocurrency speculation have just been laid. Already flowers are starting to appear giving a preview of what may be possible soon for end users. It's amazing how quickly they have taken root, and I am sure that there will be an Amazon (or ten or hundred) that'll bloom and grow atop this new technology soon.
2018년 2월 4일 일요일
Organization Isn't Centralization
Organization helps to strengthen linkages between independent actors
Linkages in decentralized entities are longer and naturally weaker than in centralized organizations.
Organization, when carried out well, can help to make linkages in decentralized entities more robust, elastic, and egalitarian, whilst good organization in centralized entities can help enhance efficencies between linkages.
Poor organization will negatively affect both decentralized and centralized entities.
Linkages in decentralized entities are longer and naturally weaker than in centralized organizations.
Organization, when carried out well, can help to make linkages in decentralized entities more robust, elastic, and egalitarian, whilst good organization in centralized entities can help enhance efficencies between linkages.
Poor organization will negatively affect both decentralized and centralized entities.
2018년 2월 2일 금요일
BTFD & BUIDL
For anyone that's been active in cryptoland for more than a minute has most definitely ridden the coaster of dips. Probaby more than a few times too.
Over the past few days that coaster has really been doing work. I'm sure a lot of coiners have lost their expensive lunches. And you probably still feel sick.
But for more experienced coiners, the dips barely register as a tickle in their tummy. As Chris Burniske said, living through these types of market panics become badges of honor in cryptoland.
On top of that, though, they are amazing buying opportunities. You can help offset losses by buying the dips before they tick up again. They tend to be the most valuable investments in the long run.
That said, you need to pick the coins that best represent solid tech and future development. Of course there is Bitcoin Core, but the Ethereum community is really putting in work buidling [sic] the future out with DEXs, StakeTree, Cipher mobile browser, Cent, Cryptokitties and several other projects that you can use today.
'Buy what you know' was the dominant investment adage back in the '80s and it is my contention that it should be the basis of most investments in crypto today.
So BTFD (buy the fucking dip) and develop an investment bias for teams that BUIDL.
Over the past few days that coaster has really been doing work. I'm sure a lot of coiners have lost their expensive lunches. And you probably still feel sick.
But for more experienced coiners, the dips barely register as a tickle in their tummy. As Chris Burniske said, living through these types of market panics become badges of honor in cryptoland.
On top of that, though, they are amazing buying opportunities. You can help offset losses by buying the dips before they tick up again. They tend to be the most valuable investments in the long run.
That said, you need to pick the coins that best represent solid tech and future development. Of course there is Bitcoin Core, but the Ethereum community is really putting in work buidling [sic] the future out with DEXs, StakeTree, Cipher mobile browser, Cent, Cryptokitties and several other projects that you can use today.
'Buy what you know' was the dominant investment adage back in the '80s and it is my contention that it should be the basis of most investments in crypto today.
So BTFD (buy the fucking dip) and develop an investment bias for teams that BUIDL.
2018년 2월 1일 목요일
Elements of a Bounty
I have been thinking a lot about bounties these days.
What has been most surprising - although in hindsight it shouldn't have been - is how many people active in the crypto and blockchain space hear one thing when they hear or think of a bounty.
They think of a bug bounty - a specific task that has one winning response.
And then they code for that.
Why that is surprising in a regrettable sense is simple: they are coding the corresponding smart contract too tight. In other words, they should code for a wider array of potential use cases.
This is what Max Brody and Cameron have done with Cent. They have really re-imagined the bounty, and the use cases of their more widely thought bounty contract have grown into the double digits.
I can fully appreciate that now.
But that doesn't mean I can't learn anything from thinkers still stuck in an old paradigm.
On the contrary, I was able to learn the proper taxonomy of a bounty yesterday reading a series of articles. There are four (4) elements of a bounty:
What has been most surprising - although in hindsight it shouldn't have been - is how many people active in the crypto and blockchain space hear one thing when they hear or think of a bounty.
They think of a bug bounty - a specific task that has one winning response.
And then they code for that.
Why that is surprising in a regrettable sense is simple: they are coding the corresponding smart contract too tight. In other words, they should code for a wider array of potential use cases.
This is what Max Brody and Cameron have done with Cent. They have really re-imagined the bounty, and the use cases of their more widely thought bounty contract have grown into the double digits.
I can fully appreciate that now.
But that doesn't mean I can't learn anything from thinkers still stuck in an old paradigm.
On the contrary, I was able to learn the proper taxonomy of a bounty yesterday reading a series of articles. There are four (4) elements of a bounty:
- Issuance
- Fulfillment
- Acceptance
- Payment
- Invitation to Bid (ITB)
- Bids
- Ranking
- Rank-based payment
In construction, ITBs are essentially invitations made to contractors to design a new piece of infrastructure. Often, to compensate each bidder for the time and resources required to put together a proper bid, a trivial sum will be provided to those who issue bids that are not initially disqualified.
Each question on Cent is an ITB. Users that submit bids that provide value either to the original poster or any other user can be rewarded with a portion of the bounty by being up-voted. Less effort is wasted (i.e. uncompensated) and more value is created, for multiple parties.
Such an incentive structure, as basic and simple as it is, can be used for all types of cases outside of trying to identify bugs in some code.
Cent still has a long way to go, but it is important to highlight that it has made possible something that really wasn't possible prior to it's creation. And that is probably why I can't stop thinking about it.
Each question on Cent is an ITB. Users that submit bids that provide value either to the original poster or any other user can be rewarded with a portion of the bounty by being up-voted. Less effort is wasted (i.e. uncompensated) and more value is created, for multiple parties.
Such an incentive structure, as basic and simple as it is, can be used for all types of cases outside of trying to identify bugs in some code.
Cent still has a long way to go, but it is important to highlight that it has made possible something that really wasn't possible prior to it's creation. And that is probably why I can't stop thinking about it.
2018년 1월 29일 월요일
Dogfooding
So just after writing about 'dogfooding' yesterday, I discovered an amazing example running live on the Ethereum mainnet right now. It's called StakeTree and it is pretty special.
It fell into my lap as soon as I opened one of my favorite Monday morning email newsletters: Token Economy.
I am subscribed to about six email newsletters that I can't live without:
It fell into my lap as soon as I opened one of my favorite Monday morning email newsletters: Token Economy.
I am subscribed to about six email newsletters that I can't live without:
- Stratechery
- Hotpod
- Token Economy
- 스타트업위클리 (Startup Weekly)
- Exponential View
- Benedict Evan's Newsletter
Up until today the first two newsletters were the only ones that let users pay them. And of course the only way to pay was with a credit card.
Credit cards are sorta kinda convenient for users, but they are terrible for anyone that accepts them, since they have to eat multiple non-trivial charges for *every* transaction they receive. Not only is there a roughly $0.30 fixed fee, but there is an additional fee of anywhere from 1.5% to 3.5% of the total amount charged!
Now the two gentlemen behind Token Economy (@stefanobernardi and @yanroux) have finally decided not only to give readers a way to pay them, but they made the bold move to eschew traditional credit card payments for ETH payments instead. StakeTree is a new Business-as-a-Tool (BaaT) that, simply put, is a smart contract-powered Kickstarter Drip on Ethereum.
Those who want to support Token Economy, for example, need only open the Token Economy Drip fund page on StakeTree using their Cipher browser on mobile or metamask enabled chrome browser on desktop, enter their desired ETH suppprt level and click send. That's it. The StakeTree Drip smart contract then trustlessly ensures 10% of your payment is distributed to Token Economy each week for the next 10 weeks. The amount distributed and the drip period are also variable I believe.
As I mentioned yesterday, the BaaT value is something I really see as taking hold in the short-term. @nieldr, the creator of StakeTree, is using StakeTree to crowdsource support for further development. That's dogfooding at its finest and he's already received over 6 ETH. Token Economy has received 5.69 ETH or almost USD 7,000 in under 24 hours! I really think that the StakeTree BaaT will be hitting a lot of home runs for a lot of people in the near future.
The rate of development in the Ethereum ecosystem is quite amazing. Really useful, decentralized, trustless tools like StakeTree are starting to come to market now that are proving *We* will gladly pay gas to power the underlying network that enables these trustless dapps, but that *We* don't need intermediaries and middle-men taking large percentages of our money anymore.
I cannot wait to *use* the many new BaaTs that are about to hit the market. If everything goes right, I think we will see an innovative blogging BaaT in the near future that will incorporate a very simple, but powerful cryptoeconomic incentive design atop a few dead simple smart contracts. It will be a perfect compliment (I think at least) to what the boys behind Cent have been doing.
In the meantime, stay sluggin'.
2018년 1월 24일 수요일
Human Proof of Work (PoW)
I saw a tweet the other day that - for some reason or other - I didn't 'heart' or re-tweet so I couldn't find it to reference, but has still nonetheless stuck with me.
The basic gist of the tweet was this: Graduating and receiving a diploma from university is the human equivalent of Proof of Work. It signals to others that you were able to literally put the time and effort into something and can be trusted in some way now that, before receipt of that document, would have been perceived as higher risk or not even considered at all.
Although the poster was drawing a direct link with the consensus mechanism for Bitcoin, I was reminded of my late Great Uncle John. The last summer before heading off to college I was visiting his beach house down in Rehobeth, Delaware.
He and I were chatting when he asked me if the rumors were true that I was heading to Pittsburgh in the autumn to study. I replied yes, and then he put his hand on my shoulder, looked at me with a serious expression (which was out of character for a man who was *always* laughing) and he just said: "A degree is just a piece of paper to prove to others you are willing to put some hard work in and stick around for a little, so make sure you get one."
It was a simple comment, but so many people stil believe that which I guess makes it profound. I can appreciate that profundity, but like many these days, I just can't help but feel that such an expensive and time consuming PoW model is no longer necessary anymore - there are far cheaper, much quicker and more varied ways to verify the same thing.
Anyways after seeing that tweet and thinking about Uncle John, I started to think of some other human PoW examples besides 'graduating from a 4 year college' and I came up with this list:
These are all things that people can do that, whilst difficult and time consuming, tend to result in regular, consistent recognition if not outright admiration from others.
So then I got to thinking, which PoW examples could be changed to a human equivalent of Proof of Stake? How different would those examples look after switching to PoS? How many more people would benefit if it was not only much easier to accomplish something, but if that accomplishment would also provide an equal if not better reward or response from others?
There are many daily activities in many peoples lives that could be accomplished with a fraction of the effort and time, but still provide a similar if not better result as the traditional PoW activity. And this is where I think a lot of Dapps are going to find extremely broad adoption by allowing an easy but powerful way for anyone to stake their reputation, wealth or confidence in order to quickly and efficiently do work that gets them the results they need. I have a few ideas cooking myself that I hope to share soon.
If you are curious about this stream of thought, I recommend you check out the article by @twobitidiot on Medium entitled “Skin-in-the-Game Coins” and pay particular attention to the section on 'Token Curated Registries' which is essentially a human PoS consensus design architecture.
Source: https://medium.com/@twobitidiot/skin-in-the-game-coins-da0afdfdc650
The basic gist of the tweet was this: Graduating and receiving a diploma from university is the human equivalent of Proof of Work. It signals to others that you were able to literally put the time and effort into something and can be trusted in some way now that, before receipt of that document, would have been perceived as higher risk or not even considered at all.
Although the poster was drawing a direct link with the consensus mechanism for Bitcoin, I was reminded of my late Great Uncle John. The last summer before heading off to college I was visiting his beach house down in Rehobeth, Delaware.
He and I were chatting when he asked me if the rumors were true that I was heading to Pittsburgh in the autumn to study. I replied yes, and then he put his hand on my shoulder, looked at me with a serious expression (which was out of character for a man who was *always* laughing) and he just said: "A degree is just a piece of paper to prove to others you are willing to put some hard work in and stick around for a little, so make sure you get one."
It was a simple comment, but so many people stil believe that which I guess makes it profound. I can appreciate that profundity, but like many these days, I just can't help but feel that such an expensive and time consuming PoW model is no longer necessary anymore - there are far cheaper, much quicker and more varied ways to verify the same thing.
Anyways after seeing that tweet and thinking about Uncle John, I started to think of some other human PoW examples besides 'graduating from a 4 year college' and I came up with this list:
- Growing Twitter followers organically
- Climbing the corporate ladder
- Building up Reddit reputation
- Earning regular avc.com upvotes
- Attending church regularly
- Creating a successsful newsletter
- Having a baby with your spouse
- (Feel free to add more)
These are all things that people can do that, whilst difficult and time consuming, tend to result in regular, consistent recognition if not outright admiration from others.
So then I got to thinking, which PoW examples could be changed to a human equivalent of Proof of Stake? How different would those examples look after switching to PoS? How many more people would benefit if it was not only much easier to accomplish something, but if that accomplishment would also provide an equal if not better reward or response from others?
There are many daily activities in many peoples lives that could be accomplished with a fraction of the effort and time, but still provide a similar if not better result as the traditional PoW activity. And this is where I think a lot of Dapps are going to find extremely broad adoption by allowing an easy but powerful way for anyone to stake their reputation, wealth or confidence in order to quickly and efficiently do work that gets them the results they need. I have a few ideas cooking myself that I hope to share soon.
If you are curious about this stream of thought, I recommend you check out the article by @twobitidiot on Medium entitled “Skin-in-the-Game Coins” and pay particular attention to the section on 'Token Curated Registries' which is essentially a human PoS consensus design architecture.
Source: https://medium.com/@twobitidiot/skin-in-the-game-coins-da0afdfdc650
2018년 1월 22일 월요일
Insight into the Korean Crypto Ban on Foreigners
So yesterday I published a little #tweetstorm over on Twitter (@bread_krumbs) about why, seemingly all of a sudden, several exchanges have issued statements saying soon they will prohibit *all* foreigners from making fiat deposits into their exchange accounts.
It has been well received over on Twitter so I thought I'd re-post it here as well.
Check it out below, and feel free to follow me for more Korea-related musings.
0/ I'd bet money that Korbit will claw back their prohibition on fiat deposits from *all* foreigners that was announced over the weekend. The same goes for any other exchange that issued/plans to issue a similar ban.
I'll explain.
1/ According to Korbit, their announcement was issued in order to comply with government guidelines. No mention of which one though, since various pieces of the government have made several announcements over the past month or so.
2/ So I did a little homework. Luckily the government has a useful site (정부24) that lets you search official government announcements and reports.
I ran searches for: 가상통화, 가상화폐, 디지털 화폐, and 디지털머니 (both spaced and unspaced variants).
3/ The searches returned a little over 50 unique releases dating back to 14 July 2014.
Only about 8 releases or documents attached to releases contained the words 외국인(foreigner) and/or 비거주자(non-resident).
The first release to include those words dates to 13 December 2017.
4/ That report contained the first public guidelines to regulate crypto in Korea. On the foreigner issue it said:
"...measures should be taken to ban non-resident(foreigners) [비거주자(외국인)] from transacting [on Korean exchanges]..."
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1273333
5/ A summary of that meeting report was released the same day and contained identical phrasing: "...measures will be taken to prevent non-resident(foreigners) [비거주자(외국인)] from opening new accounts and trading..."
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1273342
6/ On 28 December 2017 three releases included mention of a ban related to foreigners:
1. [보도자료] 가상통화 관련 관게차관회의
2. [보도참고] 가상통화 관련 금융권 점검회의
3. 가상통화 거래 실명제 실시...거래소 폐쇄 특별법도 검토
Only 비거주자 are subject to the ban in 1 & 2 (외국인 was omitted even), but the third is less clear...
7/ Article 3 included the promise that new speculative demand (e.g. from foreigners(외국인) generally) would be blocked by introducing identity verification systems to exchanges.
This detail doesn't alter, but adds to Releases 1 & 2.
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1286463
8/ However, a shoddy article in the Segye Ilbo (2 January 2018) claimed the Korean gov hadn't defined foreigner(외국인) nor when restrictions should be carried out causing confusion amongst exchanges that led some to ban foreigner trading.
http://m.segye.com/view/20180102004847
9/ On 3 January 2018, in a release addressing numerous errors in the Segye Ilbo article, the gov stated:
"Once the scope of the restriction on foreigners is set it will be implemented since banks are already able to determine if a foreigner is residing in Korea or abroad."
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1292917
10/ WTF.
Between 12~28 December 2018 the government was clear that trading restrictions for foreigners will be limited to non-residents.
So Korbit's proposed prohibition on deposits from *all* foreigners seems to be due to the confused 3 January 2018 release.
11/ As this proposed prohibition seems to stem from a single release written by a confused and/or tired public official, I feel it'll only end up applying to non-resident foreigners.
But one can't discount Klownism - the funny way logic seems not to apply here sometimes...
It has been well received over on Twitter so I thought I'd re-post it here as well.
Check it out below, and feel free to follow me for more Korea-related musings.
0/ I'd bet money that Korbit will claw back their prohibition on fiat deposits from *all* foreigners that was announced over the weekend. The same goes for any other exchange that issued/plans to issue a similar ban.
I'll explain.
1/ According to Korbit, their announcement was issued in order to comply with government guidelines. No mention of which one though, since various pieces of the government have made several announcements over the past month or so.
2/ So I did a little homework. Luckily the government has a useful site (정부24) that lets you search official government announcements and reports.
I ran searches for: 가상통화, 가상화폐, 디지털 화폐, and 디지털머니 (both spaced and unspaced variants).
3/ The searches returned a little over 50 unique releases dating back to 14 July 2014.
Only about 8 releases or documents attached to releases contained the words 외국인(foreigner) and/or 비거주자(non-resident).
The first release to include those words dates to 13 December 2017.
4/ That report contained the first public guidelines to regulate crypto in Korea. On the foreigner issue it said:
"...measures should be taken to ban non-resident(foreigners) [비거주자(외국인)] from transacting [on Korean exchanges]..."
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1273333
5/ A summary of that meeting report was released the same day and contained identical phrasing: "...measures will be taken to prevent non-resident(foreigners) [비거주자(외국인)] from opening new accounts and trading..."
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1273342
6/ On 28 December 2017 three releases included mention of a ban related to foreigners:
1. [보도자료] 가상통화 관련 관게차관회의
2. [보도참고] 가상통화 관련 금융권 점검회의
3. 가상통화 거래 실명제 실시...거래소 폐쇄 특별법도 검토
Only 비거주자 are subject to the ban in 1 & 2 (외국인 was omitted even), but the third is less clear...
7/ Article 3 included the promise that new speculative demand (e.g. from foreigners(외국인) generally) would be blocked by introducing identity verification systems to exchanges.
This detail doesn't alter, but adds to Releases 1 & 2.
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1286463
8/ However, a shoddy article in the Segye Ilbo (2 January 2018) claimed the Korean gov hadn't defined foreigner(외국인) nor when restrictions should be carried out causing confusion amongst exchanges that led some to ban foreigner trading.
http://m.segye.com/view/20180102004847
9/ On 3 January 2018, in a release addressing numerous errors in the Segye Ilbo article, the gov stated:
"Once the scope of the restriction on foreigners is set it will be implemented since banks are already able to determine if a foreigner is residing in Korea or abroad."
https://www.gov.kr/portal/ntnadmNews/1292917
10/ WTF.
Between 12~28 December 2018 the government was clear that trading restrictions for foreigners will be limited to non-residents.
So Korbit's proposed prohibition on deposits from *all* foreigners seems to be due to the confused 3 January 2018 release.
11/ As this proposed prohibition seems to stem from a single release written by a confused and/or tired public official, I feel it'll only end up applying to non-resident foreigners.
But one can't discount Klownism - the funny way logic seems not to apply here sometimes...
피드 구독하기:
글 (Atom)