When the idea of digital assets first surfaced back in 2009, a major point of reference towards it possibly replacing the present monetary system was that it was decentralized and transparent. Bitcoin [BTC] led the digital assets’ charge, gaining significant popularity over the years.
In the wake of the recent collective surge exhibited by Bitcoin and other crypto-assets, Tim Draper, a major Bitcoin Bull, took the opportunity to further appreciate the presence of Bitcoin in the financial market. He said,
“It is a better currency. It’s decentralized, open, it’s transparent. Everybody knows what happens on the blockchain.”
However, the thought shared by Draper was not entirely agreed to by many in the crypto-community.
Giacomo Zucco, CEO at BlockchainLabit, made waves after he suggested that the assumption wrapped around Bitcoin and its aspect of transparency, was far-fetched and “retarded beyond belief.”
Zucco opined that any kind of “hard” money would not work in general, if it could not be used as “dark money” for alleged “illegal” activities.
“If the state wants to tax via inflation, it will ban “hard” alternative, just as with physical gold & e-gold. Bitcoin can be “hard” because it’s “dark”. If it wasn’t, it would be useless. Sentences like “cash fiat will be banned to protect negative interest rates, so you will not be able to buy bitcoin with cash”, overlook the fact that the SAME political agenda will push to ban bitcoin to protect negative interest rates.”
He further added that the potential of Bitcoin being used as “protection from inflation” arises only if the virtual asset withstands any legal bans.
“It’s ok to imagine that using Bitcoin anonymously “enough” (nothing is ever “perfect” in this regard) is too hard to be feasible,