FRANCE, SWITZERLAND, SINGAPORE TEST CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCY
This story was shared by one of our regular readers who wishes to remain completely anonymous, so our thanks go out to "X" for spotting and sharing it.
As the blog headline notes, it concerns the test of a central bank digital currency across international borders, which is a significant enough event to blog about in and of itself. What the headline is not telling you is that the Bank of International Sleaze Settlements was involved in the test.
But while reading this article, it occurred to me that there might be another story lurking in between the lines, and perhaps even in the whole drive to "go cashless", and that constitutes my high octane speculation of the day. Indeed, my high octane speculation is so high octane it may me completely absurd, in which case we can all have a laugh at my stupidity, and move along. Anyway, here's the article:
France Tests CBDC Cross-Border Payments with Singapore and Switzerland
Now, before we get into this article a bit, let's remember all the hype about "crypto-currencies" that accompanied their emergence along with the blockchain "distributed ledgers" that supposedly make the whole thing work, and that hype was all about how the whole phenomenon was going to do an "end run" around central banks and their currency monopolies, and a bright but not really gold-backed future awaited us all because of the genius of that Japanese guy who allegedly came up with all of this. They added that business about some sort of bullion backing to the narrative a little later to make the whole scheme seem even better.
But here we are, watching the central banks of France, Switzerland, and Singapore doing a digital currency test run across international border, with the Bank of International Sleaze Settlements hovering on the periphery, plotting whatever it is plotting, and rest assured, it's plotting something, because... well, did I mention that Hjalmar Schacht was one of its founders? Yea, you remember him, Hjalmar Schacht, Hitler's Reichsbank president, and a fellow who seems to pop up in every wacky post-war context involving Nazis.
Well anyway, here's the article's main points:
Project Mariana, a collaborative effort involving the Banque de France, the Monetary Authority of Singapore, and the Swiss National Bank, in coordination with the BIS (Bank for International Settlements), has conducted experiments. These experiments revolved around testing the cross-border trading and settlement of hypothetical CBDCs denominated in euros, Singapore dollars, and Swiss francs. Besides, these simulations involved financial institutions and leveraged decentralized finance (DeFi) technology concepts on a public blockchain.
The innovative concept relies on a standardized token format on a public blockchain, and bridge mechanisms to facilitate seamless CBDC transfers across different networks. It also has a specific type of decentralized exchange for the automated execution of spot foreign exchange transactions.
A little later we read this:
Earlier this month, SWIFT, the widely-used bank messaging platform that links more than 11,500 financial institutions globally, has disclosed that three banks are now part of the beta phase for its CBDC interoperability initiative.
Now you'll have noticed a careful omission here... actually, two omissions, and the latter one bears directly upon my wild wacky so-far-out-there-it's-in-orbit speculation of the day. The first omission has to do with that all important issue of convertibility: once the digital blips have crossed the virtual borders between France, Singapore, and Switzerland, can those blips be exchanged for the actual physical local currency? Without that, then the system is, as I've averred so many times, is nothing but a ticket to direct and immediate feudalism and serfdom. No if's, and's, or but's about it. With convertibility, the system as the article is outlining it appears to be something very different. The one currency not being mentioned is, of course, the American dollar. Now imagine the following scenario: imagine a financial clearing system that is able to deal internationally and do so in several currencies, and imagine this system is a distributed system, and not routing transactions through the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Transfer in Brussels (SWIFT). Imagine the Bank of France being able to dial up the Singapore Monetary Authority and transfer fund directly. As regular readers here are aware, the SWIFT system is one of the mechanisms of American global financial and economic hegemony, because "economic sanctions", such as against Russia for example, are put into practical effect by denying access to the SWIFT system of international clearing.
The bottom line - and I've pointed this out in previous blogs over the years - is that the entire system really seems to be about a geopolitical aim as much as a financial (and feudal) one: it's about bypassing the dollar reserve currency status, and its international financial clearing system represented by SWIFT.
But the bottom line here is, even if this is the goal, the system still has a weakness, especially if the ultimate objective is to go "completely cashless," and that is, what if some catastrophic event wipes out all those digital tokens (along with the electronic system trading and clearing them)? That, folks, is the financial meltdown of all financial meltdowns, for at a stroke, everyone would be rendered penniless (or if you prefer, kopek-less), even more so if all other types of financial records have gone "digital". The convertibility into an actual physical medium of exchange which can still be used in transactions is still the essential component of the system. Don't tell me you own x shares of stock of Acme International Widgets, Gadgets, and Flibberteegibbets and then tell me the shares on on your broker's computer in his office; show me the actual stock certificate.
Put in this geopolitical context, it begins to make sense why various banks around the world - including America's Federal Reserve system - are in a race to introduce central bank digital currencies, because whoever gets there first will either become, or preserve, reserve currency status. The all important question of convertibility, however, remains the sore point they don't want to talk about. Until they do, my opinion hasn't changed: it's all been a scam. I'm glad you made lots of money off your digital currency speculations, but it's still a scam.
The choice is clear, you can either use cash as much as possible, or be a serf...
See you on the flip side...
No Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
I think, that the biblical reset model has to be adapted, so, that debt, between nations, is automatically reset, by seven years interval.
Transaction, and currency exchange, will automatically adapt, to such a loop of debt easing, and prevent overaccumulation of debt.
Security in transaction can be guaranteed, by a local unit of account, that is adjusted, by seven years interval, which is a political matter of fair trade.
Sun and moon have different trajectories, and the calendar is the adjustment.
You’re an exceptionally smart man, Dr. Farrell. However, reading your blogs has made it clear to me that you lack understanding of what bitcoin is and how it operates. Notice I said “bitcoin” not “cryptocurrency” as the two are strikingly different. The vast majority of cryptos are indeed scams (mostly pump-and-dump marketing schemes set up to benefit insiders and VCs) with no actual utility. Bitcoin not so. Due diligence is needed.
The rule is, that whoever holds the majority (51%) of good nodes, in the network, decides, what version of the blockchain is “real”.
Between blockchain updates, there is a window, where overthrow of good nodes can take place, by synchronising a specific change.
Even though a program code appears clean, it still has to run, inside an operating system, that could be compromised, by backdoor or virus.
To tamper with the blockchain, the majority of the good nodes (51%) would have work, in lockstep, for the mafia.
https://www.coindesk.com/learn/what-is-a-51-attack/
I’m not sure if you’re a bot (seems likely) or a real person, but you have no clue what you’re talking about. A 51% attack may occur when a bad actor controls more than 50% of the hash rate of the network, i.e., the mining power of the network. It has nothing to do with the nodes. Nodes are separate from miners (one of the genius aspects of bitcoin) and each perform different tasks. Realistically, a 51% attack isn’t even a threat as embarking on such an endeavor would incur gigantic costs that would disincentivize such an attack to begin with. The bitcoin hash rate is currently at all time highs, making it the most robust, secure computing network the world has ever seen (not an exaggeration). That article you cited is very poor and comes from a source that covers and supports scamcoins.
(I tinker in Linux, and manipulate graphics, by imagemagick and ffmpeg, through terminal, via tmux. No expert though.)
It is true, that one would need an enormous machine park, to achieve a 51% attack, unless one uses backdoors, and converts unwitting participants, into an army of attack slaves, to achieve 51%.
The operating system is the weak spot, because from there, all subprocesses can be manipulated, and deliberate backdoors are inherent in some, and can be achieved in others, by hacking.
Of course a “node” can mean many things, because it is just a word. The idea of a “good node”, would be an uncorrupted version of the blockchain, that is unaltered by an attack.
“Nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will” is a phrase found in Satoshi Nakamoto’s White Paper.
I think you’re misguided regarding this point. You’re suggesting some centralized authority could hack into enough bitcoin miners to achieve a 51% attack, but that is rather unrealistic for a number of reasons. While large mining companies do make up a significant portion of the hash rate, most of it is still small operations and home miners. Trying to execute the same hack simultaneously across a decentralized network of miners all over the world, all running their own proprietary mining software is just crazy. Even if one could accomplish such a feat, how long could you keep it up before miners notice and lock you out or turn off their ASICs? At which point the attack is over and everyone continues to build on the correct chain.
In bitcoin, miners refer to those who assemble transactions into blocks and then use proof of work to “mine” said blocks. Nodes refer to those computers running the bitcoin core software, whose job it is to verify transactions, maintain a copy of the blockchain, and ensure that all blocks mined abide by the consensus rules of the network.
I don’t see much difference between a CBDC and getting my 1s and 0s from the federal government as I do already….
As long as I can take it out of the bank in CASH whenever I see fit.
How they push their little packets of digital money doesn’t matter to me one bit, as long as i can get CASH when I need it
to stuff in my mattress for a rainy day, or just to be sure that Big Brother isn’t looking over my shoulder all the time.
When we have no more access to “currency” or (god forbid) REAL MONEY, we are totally screwed.
Do not let them take away your access to cash, whatever happens!
You are confusing serfdom with slavery and thraldom Joseph in feudalism in theory the lord owes the serf something in return in slavery and thraldom the master owes nothing in return. Going cashless is swindling on a planetary scale.
Ten little Indians went out to dine
all with their new CBDC’s…
Agatha’s Christie’s original title has been deep sixed.
Too yesterday, when violence ruled – according to their times.
The violence is now changing to address,
new times; according to new leaders, and new rules…
Unfortunately, the puppet masters – are still the same.
I have to wonder what is really happening with the industry of noble metals and gems that might be driving this push for ‘digital’ currency. The Banksters have been cooking the books whatever way they see fit for a long time, but at least that was based upon the dragons hoarding a stash of substances that are very difficult to degrade, and even more difficult to manufacture. There’s more to this than just the ease of orchestrating an EMP catastrophe that could wipe out everyone’s material stability Someone wants to transmutate electronic (light) blips into currency, plus have control over those blips and the process, with a more opportunistic and likely nefarious objective. Tracking commercial activity is just one facet of it. Consider the Sampo legend. That is likely a technology of High Antiquity, being portrayed as a salt mill. Coincidentally salts are part Halogen.
Interestingly I stumbled upon these 2 articles. Maybe Somebody is looking to turn Antarctica into a giant salt battery.
https://futurism.com/molten-salt-make-24-hour-solar-energy-possible
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343440658_Atmospheric_sea-salt_and_halogen_cycles_in_the_Antarctic
On a humorous note, it would be interesting to see an economy backed by molten salt.
Technology based upon superconductors would be more feasible in Antarctica. I wonder what kind of marvels a secret 15 minute underground or glacier techno-city might run on and be capable of producing with all the theoretical possibilities mastering superconductivity might unlock? Imagine weapons, defense systems and experimental portal jumping tech requiring impossible amounts of power suddenly being made feasible. Imagine if you could harness the power of the solar system without actually having to build a solar system sized infrastructure to do so?