You know, some of them aren't really the sharpest tool in the shed. Just search up on their Google hearing LOL. Putting the most incompetent people on subjects that they're not sure about.

If you're giving up your control to the government, just use fiat. Don't bother with cryptos, really. That is not what most cryptos aim to do. Good luck trying to block any transactions on Bitcoin though. I use fiat, am I complicit with money laundering

I wouldn't care about it being implemented if there aren't any people that will use it for sinister or malicious purposes but given that it's not the case, I don't think that it is a good idea even if they try to put a lot of positives to outweigh the negatives.

What some governments have not yet realized is that they should be complaint with the world and what people want not the other way around. Bitcoin and decentralization is what they want and these governments can not change that so they better catch up or be left behind from the rest of the world.

And here comes the way the state and government gives a shit on peoples presumption of innocence.
These rednecks ruling the countries already see us guilty until proven innocent, just because we noticed that their printed paper is not as good as they want us to believe.

Centralization...this is what the government wants. When the government will control BTC it's all over. They will control you also. If the governments will do what they want with your BTC then BTC will become a joke and will be no better than fiat. I see no difference.

Some people seated in the government should really ask themselves if they are a fit for this job. Seriously, most of them just blurts out random nonsense on topics they know nothing about, and thinks that they have uttered something that is completely logical and understandable to all parties involved. Perhaps next time people should elect officials that know what they should do in their respective offices.

Then again you can't expect most people to know this. We are still in the age wherein people elect celebrities and entertainment personas with the expectation that they'd do an awesome job on their position.

Also, the government always wants direct access to anything cryptocurrency-related, especially on things that will certainly compromise the security of the crypto in question. I guess they just can't keep their hands to themselves and let people use whatever they want on transactions and whatnot.

This will never happen as long as there is decentralized mining. I don't think governments can do anything about it.

They could build a separate application within a global blockchain network if they want the transactions of their citizens and others reversed. If reversing transactions within a global network is going to be possible, it's must be done in decentralized manner through public consensus. It's not a lawless network.

By the way, I wonder what national government this is coming from. Nations have to deal with this individually to avoid lumping others countries together in ones country's internal affairs. And their decision can only apply to centralized financial system within their jurisdiction.

Well, we regularly participate in anonymous transactios with physical currencies in real world , i don't see why it should be different in crypto world. It shouldn't be a problem if transacting peers prefer to keep their identify private even though they may have had their identities verified, encrypted and stored within the network for their eyes alone. The identity can only be de-anonimized by authorized persons when necessary.  This can be an additional feature within a decentralized cryptocurrency network and it should be made in such a way that every participants has full control over his/her identify and data. ..no one else can for security and legal/moral reasons.


Anonimity feature is important feature in decentralized crypto and can't be taken away else you expose participants to lots of risk as true crpto is transparent and public. People will probably begin to demand that the transparency be taken away to help them feel private/anonymous in a dangerous cyberspace.  
Besides, alot of people will need strong privacy and Anonimity when things become really bad in the world that no one can be trusted anymore.

It definitely was not easy,,, and it caused a big rift, and even it took people like me years to "trust" it. I know that was very big circumstance at the time but it somehow proved also that sometimes they were benefits (and of course a big negative for decentralization). I know they will probably never do it again!

Anyway, we should expect government crypto to still be controlled and permissioned. Anyone who thinks they will do different is deluded:)

The current legacy banking system we have could already be used for that. Plus I believe it shouldn’t be called A “cryptocurrency”, or even considered to be a “version” of one. “Cryptocurrency” has a cypherpunk origin to it, and from what we learned from Bitcoin, what you are talking about is merely like “database rewards” from a technological standpoint.