Blockchain and its need for a new regulatory system


It is an indubitable fact that the internet is in another transformation season.

The era of “cloud” which gave a great service to both industries and consumers, slowly gives in to the era of “localization.” Or you can choose to say the era where the owners of personal computers wouldn’t necessarily only be able to manage and control their hardware in a localized way but should be able to handle and control their data in a decentralized manner.

There is a new technology called DLT, and it will be responsible for this transition.

It’s not a child or a full-blown adult; you can say this software is a teenager who is already showing strong potentials. And just like it happens with all teenagers, it will Just be needing a very well structured framework, and a boost to the confidence, and a sense of direction when necessary.

If it is in the issue of technology, then the role is accorded to the hopefuls and enthusiasts that adopt it and those who reject it too. But this resistance is not a bad thing. History lessons have made it known that at some point; every rejected technology is not a bad thing because, in this phase of rejection, it gives time for the advancement of the technology.

In the issue of DLTs, it is promising, but then we can undoubtedly see the resistance raising its head already from the local players and business type models.

The potentials in all sectors are evident for the users; we can see it, both in its capability to be a consumer or a citizen also. I will not start repeating the pros and benefits of DLTs here. The market already has exposed plenty of them, and as you can rightly guess, many are yet to come.

More so, it is good we note that this emerging business scheme gives opinion polls, cut transaction fees, increases the dissemination of resources and risks, and increases significantly the quality of the services that we receive in the guise of citizens and customers.

We, the frontiers and preachers of blockchain spoil our faith and vibe, while beginners all around the globe steadily produce fantastic white papers, while more government bodies join hands in reacting to the constant emerging problems and challenges; sometimes they come with strong motivation, the other times they just relapse.

Level Field of play

In the brief outing, the EU (European Union) has kept a positive vibe approach.

I am humbled to have the job of being the record keeper of the first ever blockchain resolve by the EU parliament, and my primary proposition is to present a body framework of set down rules which in turn serve as a go-to regulatory book in the European union locale.

Switching roles, from an ordinary believer to a regulator is somewhat challenging. And this is filled with a challenge because all of a sudden, my job is no longer telling people about the benefits of blockchain but now making sure I find a way to get us there with all necessary skills and with the least grating and abrasion.

Getting to the needed space firstly, requires me to generate a functioning level ground for the DLT firms and customers which satisfy legal and institutional binding.

Without a definite certainty, we can’t have the requirement to create a precise working scale for the tech. More so, a legal assurance, at the EU level, has to be in syncretism.

If not, friction in the regulations will cause uproar, and this can kill off smaller firms. For this single reason above is why there is the need for abiding standards and a fluid policy of the European Union passport for block chain’s services.

Solid Foundation

Left for me, blockchain and its fullness don’t just breathe technology alone; it embodies an infrastructure. So you see, that standardization is not only a borderline of set rules, but it is critical to the infrastructures growth.

There are a ton of other platforms a consumer can choose from, and there is no exact count of how many DLT alternatives there are. The question everyone is asking is how this arrangement of DLT ecosystems will function together?

When it comes to standardization it could be a simple task, or it could also be complicated, but all in all, I do have a rational attitude towards this matter. We cannot regulate the technology behind all these but then at the least, the level of standardization should be comparable to the principle behind the innovation. In other words, we can’t regulate a technology that is still in its evolving stage; instead we wait for it to complete the cycle then we restrict.

A proved principle that guarantees a positive outcome is for the regulation to be on a neutral ground towards technology. In essence, a cryptocurrency is and should be seen as a method of payment and not as a means of exchange only.

No stereotyping

If we say standardization, the next viable question to ask is what are we standardizing.

It is evident that the principles mentioned above of regulation and approach expose the preference the regulator has in introducing a body framework with impact. To this effect, it is paramount you go a bit further than just a “simple touch” distance. If we need anything, it is a brilliant regulation, and it doesn’t seem necessary me a regulation that embodies new kind of thoughts and ideas but still packaged in old boxes.

It is only then that we can see the real effect that this technology has on the markets and the society and world at large.

In conclusion, European Union bodies have made a positive movement, and on every level, it is a multi-level approach.

Different sections of the European Commission have different worries. Other ones have their concerns on the dimension of the DLTs infrastructure, some again with the impact it has financially and the structure of its market. The rest worry about its social implications for employing the masses and also the quality of freedom it promises.

For the European Legislature, I will see to it that I remove every friction or fracture and make available a “worldwide view” on the issue for the EU.

When we talk about blockchain, it is a profound political matter, not just economical. And this time not about the speculators from the sideline making money, but about changing the way the people trust especially in this times when the world most needs trust more than anything to coordinate and increase social unity.

This blockchain issue requires our adequate care, and its existence depends mainly on trust, and it’s not a careless one. In all modesty, it can make the world a better place.