Usually I would just put a comment about an article like this on a shitpost to twitter, or a small form type of blog. This happened to turn into a rant thought, because I think some of the people using crypto have no clue what the fuck the are doing... In case you didn't notice, I will enlighten you.
A recent note from Bank of America analysts said that a CBDC would differ from digital currencies currently available because it would be the liability of the Federal Reserve, not a commercial bank.
This summary alone would explain, to anyone aware of the intentions of the satoshi nakamoto white paper, the issues that are coming our way. The Federal Reserve, CRA here in Canada, is a fallacious organization and the out of control conflicts of interest along with ethics issues are what lead to the original mistrust of the federal (centralized) reserve banking system. They are salivating at the thought of regulating our free market with their shit hole socialist ethics that never end up benefiting the general public and in the hands of special interest groups if it does reach the public.
Hence forth the mediation of the decentralized middleman, the miners, and latter to be the stokers in Proof of Stake consensus algorithms. Satoshi has dawned on us a new way of conducting online money transfer, independent of the need for a centralized middleman like a bank or government.
I have my bones to pick with the witnesses and node operators pertaining the attack vectors presented by their own human nature in a network. That said I still think this technology is interesting and doesnt have out of control ethics issues, they can be fixed with dedication and focus.
What this article has suggested is that all the effort we have put into a consensus on a blockchain will be supersede by a middleman chosen by the central banking system.
Central banking IS NOT DECENTRALIZED.
CBDC is not true to Satoshis white paper.
Banks are out of control criminal organizations with conflicts of interest and ethics violations so out of control they are not even worth discussing trusting until major changes on a systemic level have occured.
a Jan. 20 report titled “Money and Payments: The U.S. Dollar in the Age of Digital Transformation” from the Federal Reserve Bank (FRB) weighed up the benefits and disadvantages of the U.S. potentially adopting a CBDC.
This sounds logical entirely for the banks involved, but the confusing part is the perspective the author of the article took on these centralized ledgers.
However, a CBDC would be different in this respect because it would be the liability of a central bank such as the Federal Reserve, wrote the FRB in a statement about the report.
In layman's terms that means it would loose any intrinsic value it held as a decentralized currency and be subjected to the low quality ethics, conflicts of interest and policy of the central banking system.
Its taking 1 step backward and 0 steps forward...
Source Article: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bank-of-america-says-stablecoin-adoption-and-cbdc-is-inevitable
References for Further Study
This is the real reason low IQ policy makers are interested in CBDC. The yare slaves to their god the FED. Washed up financial boomers whose system failed everyone born after the year 1989, and was already failing everyone before that since the 1913 banking secrecy act. Fuck these fucking goofs.
McAfee didn't kill himself. If he did, it was because of these sick minded socialists who want to tax him and his sovereignty.
James Corbett describes the CBDC smokescreen very well
https://www.corbettreport.com/the-bitcoin-psyop/
I didnt expect Anton in there, thanks for that, I actually missed this anton speech back then. I liked his analogy of the tide going down and the shitcoins all not having a bathing suit on lol
Decentralized trustless escrow or gtfo.