kapoorsudartha
So I've read the article and quickly got myself up to speed on Libra.

I am horrified.

I don't think there can be any article on Libra which doesn't acknowledge the existence of MakerDAO which already provides a permisionless basket of reserve assets to back it's stable coin.

In fact I feel the wires article actually needs to mention MakerDAO and how it actually renders Facebooks Libra investment token strategy redundant by providing a truly decentralised, permisionless backing reserve mechanism for an already fully decentralised stablecoin (DAI).

Libra is utterly nightmare stuff.
I think I would start a piece talking about RoboCop; my own fear is they are basically creating a centralised banking reserve that aims to function independently of governments or government oversight. This could easily become the defacto global reserve currency if left unchecked and my worry is that this would be entirely privately owned or backed by private assets i.e the backing authority would not be a government but private finance firms.

We've already seen how private companies can malign incentives when it comes to public good via lobbying, union destruction, automation, low wages, exploitative work practices and drives towards share price rises for the sake of share price rises even if that means costing fundamental productivity and human rights/decency in business.

Hence talking about robocop
I'm not sure where to begin because Libra as a stablecoin cryptocurrency backed by the Libra investment token is already redundant when you consider MakerDAO has done the same thing for over 1.5 years and is already fully permisionless, decentralised and uses ETH as a backing collateral reserve.
Governments are valued and defined by their currencies. If the global reserve currency becomes Facebook Libra then global geopolitical interests will be dictated by facebook.

This is much like how the USD is already the global reserve currency against which others are valued; current global interests are US led; rather than shift to a truly decentralised entity like Bitcoin or another decentralised cryptocurrency this would instead shift to FB and the backing companies.

Again Facebook are misleading the public by saying working scalable alternatives do not already exist. The fact they are doing this should be seen as a global power grab by a private entity.
It is understandable the US are concerned.
Also dPOS is not even really dPOS if the validator nodes are privately held, permissioned and privacy is not guaranteed.

Facebook have said in their vision that the libra Blockchain will not be private in the sense they want to allow third party transaction tracking.

As for banking 1.7 billion people; to what end. By doing so they make those people's native currencies redundant which in turn makes those governments redundant.
Because those currencies pay those taxes which support those governments.
So what then? A bunch of third world countries lose their governments as corpratocracies take over. We already know how sweatshop labour works so this can't end well.
Today
kapoorsudartha
...

If Facebook really did their research they would be creating a stablecoin using a mechanism similar to makerDAO which would allow their backing collateral and issuance to be permisionless off the bat.

The fact is they are creating a permissions, centrally & corporately controlled stablecoin where the majority of profits and incentives go to the Investors and where privacy is sacrificed from the get go to a chain where various corporations might start microanalysing all your transactions to find out more about you than they ever could via traditional social media networks.

Blockchains are not transparent in by design in the sense that the transaction flows look obscure to the casual observer but every wallet has a unique address and the Libra Blockchain is designed to make sure that every transaction flow can be monitored and identified.

I.e Libra as a currency and Blockchain offers no actual independent guarantee of transaction privacy whatsoever and any claim of privacy by facebook is built on the trust of those administering it (Facebook and its partners) that neither they nor a third party will build tools to analyze the transaction flows or abuse their position of power.

We know historically this is not the case with Facebook and their own vision document highlights how they intend to develop and encourage development of tools to analyse transaction flow on their Libra currency I.e be able to see exactly who you are buying from and who you are selling to in exquisite detail.
kapoorsudartha
Anyway a few fun facts: DAI stablecoin which is backed by ETH held 1:1 value with USD despite a 98% drop in the backing value of ETH collateral.

So what happens when Libra investment tokens backing assets crash; does Libra stablecoin have the same resilience?

kapoorsudartha
The answer is NO. Libra have not actually answered or outline how they protect against such an event apart from stating their intention to be diversified in low risk backing assets. As history has shown; there is truly no such thing.

In contrast the MakerDAO collateral system has a clear mechanism outlined for guaranteeing how the DAI stablecoin maintains 1:1 USD peg despite any variations in the value of its backing collateral ETH + already has capability to expand its backing assets to be a basket of currencies (e.g. could include BTC, DGD or digitised fiat currencies in its collateral reserve).

The very fact that makerDAO exists proves that Libra is already redundant, unnecessary and either represents willful ignorance on behalf of Facebook as they push their corporate interests and ignore such technologies or genuine ignorance.

I am doubtful a company as big and thorough as FB is genuinely ignorant about MakerDAO though.

...

Finally if we are getting featured in Wired mag I would incidentally mention that networks like Particl are fully permisionless, private and allow people to buy/sell goods and transmit money on a Blockchain without giving up any personal details and that such networks are designed to fully obscure third party view of any individuals transaction history.

Because otherwise we're really doing an advert for Libra.
...

I've read the wired article btw; I feel it should include at least some of the things I've said if not all of them (well not anything after "fun facts" is necessary even though it's true).

kapoorsudartha
Some mention of the Bretton woods agreement and how the US Petro dollar was originally supposed to be the Indian Petro rupee would provide an educational and historic context for the relevance of Libra to the USD.
People don't realise that it was an Indian fuckup that lead to the USD being the dominant global currency and geopolitical force.