U.S. Housing Agency Considers Launching Crypto Experiment
U.S. Housing Agency Considers Launching Crypto Experiment
The Department of Housing and Urban Development, which oversees billions in aid and insures more than a trillion dollars in mortgages, is pondering using the blockchain and a stablecoin. One HUD official derided it as “Monopoly money.”
introducing speculative assets into the housing market has caused some problems before.
it's for corrupt purposes, of course:
The blockchain idea is being pushed, a HUD official told colleagues, by Irving Dennis. Dennis, the agency’s new principal deputy chief financial officer, is a former partner at the global consulting giant EY, also commonly known by its original name, Ernst & Young. EY itself is involved in the proposal as well: An executive of the firm discussed the idea with HUD officials last month.
a followup story: https://www.propublica.org/article/hud-cryptocurrency-blockchain-democrats-maxine-waters
You're viewing a single thread.
If done right(it won't be), it could replace cash.
But you know it won't be. They'll control the backend of it entirely and it will never be any sort of open standard that isn't endlessly mintable or manipulated by their whims and wishes.
At this point, I wouldn't be surprised to find the US lying about what it prints to curb inflation. Could you even imagine that with zero oversight?
If done right(it won't be), it could replace cash.
how are you people still doing this. every other cryptonut on the planet finally moved on from this talking point in 2022 when it was very clear that beenz.com was and is not the backbone of any kind of stable anything
and, for the love of god, having the economy slightly inflationary, physical, fiat, not public, and manipulatable by an administration according to changes in market demand -- is a goddamn feature of the system, not a bug. it's actually both good and critically important that the US is capable of changing things like interest rates to maintain an economy
Why is everything as free and open as it can be but the second someone suggests doing it to cash, you all have a universal meltdown?
Double standards, much? I hate the crypto market but I saw the potential in the technology. It could have a use but goddamn forbid, right?
Oh pray tell, what is the potential you saw in the technology? Was it the part where every transaction costs immense amounts of power and time and resource usage grows superlinearly with respect to usage? Or the part where the monetary system can be controlled by a few oligarchs with the most computing power or market cap of the currency instead of full nation states? Or the part where making payments comes with a built in fee, a bit like a tax without the upside of funding anything?
Or maybe you just like the part where governments can't print money to enact keynesian new deal style spending because boo hoo muh inflation. Maybe you think money should be made of magic yellow metal so that you can't invent more of it when needed? If you want to try what it's like when the state can't arbitrarily mint more cash, try living in the Eurozone. Some of us are fine, but many sure think they could use that moolah printer. Somehow not getting to conjure up new Euros at the drop of a hat has not brought in the triumph of the People's Economics.
Money without a state is not a better money, it's just nonsense. Money is always a tool of vertical power structures. A state government is just about the least worst entity to have control over money. Don't privatize money, consider abolishing it instead.
Excuse me, you seem to be lost. This is buttcoin. The sidebar reminds you that our purpose is "hurling ordure at cryptocurrency/blockchain dweebs of all sorts." And yet you are somehow so lacking in comprehension that you think we have "double standards" because we're not falling over ourselves to act like your lame-ass pretense that crypto has unexplored potential is a novel idea we've never heard of before? LOL. ROFL. LMFAO.
So that's a yes?
I'm not even attempting to unwind your preschool insult slinging. Whatever man.
you should check if you can get a refund on your schoolyears - they don't seem to have taught you to read very well
Feel bigger yet? Keep going. You'll get there.
Look at me, I'm a libertarian! I think fiat currency is scary because I don't understand what social constructs are! No step on snek, unless the snek consents of course, which it should be able to do at any age!
go be an ass somewhere else, kthx
oh wow I haven't seen this vain and unmodern lazy coiner defense since probably 2015! retro
but simply that. merely retro. lacking in style and substance, and comprehensively having missed the interceding decade
like a reunion album but everyone's tonedeaf
shock and awe at my argument
mocks it
The arguing with a Facebook conservative experience live on Lemmy lmao.
oh fuck off
I’m not saying it’s always infosec.pub, but
This is infosex.change and bourneshell.itjustworks.justworks erasure.
In what world is crypto free and open? Never mind the fact that the public ledger is undercut by the difficulty of tying a wallet (or wallets) to specific people, which is possible enough to make transactions traceable for the average person while letting sufficiently motivated bad actors hide their behavior from observation in a way physical cash doesn't, the entire infrastructure is controlled by either whoever happens to have the biggest share of the crypto token or whoever has the most real money to buy server hardware and electricity.
Unless you want to talk about actual private block chains like they seem to be suggesting here, in which case you're literally dealing with a wildly inefficient but otherwise unremarkable database. If you think that replicating the ledger across multiple servers at different HUD locations is somehow more secure or open then I've got bad news for you about how modern IT infrastructure is already set up.