Anyone who knows anything about government, in general, knows that it likes to grow. This was true before Alexis de Tocqueville identified that principle in his massive masterpiece Democracy in America and it is no less true now. The only thing that really changes is what direction it’s trying to grow in.
One direction you can always count on government growing is towards anything that is currently outside of its reach. One of those areas right now is blockchain. Blockchain is a decentralized system of currency and information exchange not tied to any one government or its currency. Which of course means that it is not regulated by any government and that in turn means that the government doesn’t much like it.
A while ago, we talked about a lawsuit that the SEC brought against the digital payment processor Ripple. That lawsuit was considered by many to be an attack on the entire cryptocurrency world. Now, there are signs that the SEC will be making further moves to try and regulate, or at least contain cryptocurrency to minimize its effect on the US and other economies.
We see this in the recent appointment of Gary Gensler to the head of the SEC. Gensler comes with an impressive resume. He has served as chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and at the moment is a professor at MIT. MIT may or may not be something you would immediately associate with blockchain but his focus is on teaching blockchain and digital assets. As such, he will be the first head of the SEC with extensive knowledge of cryptocurrency. However, is that going to be a net gain or net loss for those like TARTLE who push for decentralization? The signals are mixed.
On one hand, Gensler has openly praised both bitcoin and blockchain technology, remarking on its potential to be a ‘catalyst for change’. However, he’s also talked about crypto and problems with fraud and manipulation. While we would never say there haven’t been at least some scams and manipulation in the crypto world, it’s dwarfed by issues with the stock market.
Just look at all the insanity created by the Gamestop situation. A bunch of hedge fund managers were betting against the company’s stocks and shorted them, which of course drove the price down. Then a small army of independent investors, some of them amateurs getting into the market for the first time, disagreed and started buying up the troubled store’s stocks, driving them not just up, but through the roof. The result has been a small panic on Wall Street as some hedge funds teetered on the edge of collapse and of course an ongoing roller coaster ride as Gamestop stock rises and falls in ways that have nothing to do with the company’s performance.
What this has done has exposed just how easy it is to manipulate the stock market if you have enough money to do so, or enough people getting together with a small amount of money each and acting together. Point being, the SEC might want to look into securing the Dow Jones before it goes adventuring into cryptocurrencies. Sadly, that is not the way things typically work. Despite the fact, blockchain is much more difficult to manipulate and commit fraud with than the traditional market you can count on the SEC to start poking around and trying to figure out how to manipulate the crypto market for its own ends.
How to prevent that? One way is to decentralize yourself from the system. Start educating yourself on cryptocurrencies and getting a little yourself. How to get some crypto, you ask? You can sign up with TARTLE and share your data. Payments are made with Bitcoin so just by sharing your data you are contributing to making the crypto world stronger and helping to decentralize your finances at the same time.
What’s your data worth? Sign up and join the TARTLE Marketplace with this link here.
If you are coming here to TARTLE you probably have at least a basic knowledge of blockchain. On the off chance you are new here, blockchain is most commonly associated with Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. It is a means of recording information that relies on unique lines of code that are copied on nodes around the world rather than on a centralized server. This makes it secure since the information exists in many copies at once and every transaction is recorded. Every time that your favorite crypto changes hands a record of that translation is made and copied. That means every blockchain node in the world contains a record of every owner going all the way back to its origin. If you think about it that is pretty cool. It’s like being able to take a dollar bill out of your wallet and instantly being able to see everywhere it’s been and everyone who has ever had it in their own wallet. As cool as this is, is it possible to use this same technology elsewhere?
The answer is a resounding ‘yes’. We’ve actually seen an example of what that looks like in pop culture just recently. There is a scene in The Mandalorian in which Boba Fett, after getting his armor back from Mando, shows him a chain code, showing everyone who has owned the armor from Boba back to the first one. That is literally an example of blockchain being applied to a material object in a mainstream science fiction show. Again, that’s pretty cool. It shows knowledge of blockchain is getting out in front of the regular population.
However, that’s still fiction. How might that work in the real world? Think about those guys who are selling knock off versions of high end things like Rolex watches or Gucci bags or maybe the real thing but heavily discounted. So discounted that maybe you go home and wonder if you just bought something that was stolen. How would you prove it? And even if you could, how could you make sure that it got back to whomever the rightful owner is?
If the manufacturer was making use of blockchain technology, it would be simple. There would be a code on the device, or even a chip within it that could transmit the code so anyone with a receiver could check it out. That code would then be checked against a blockchain registry demonstrating authorized chains of custody. If the person you bought that killer watch from isn’t on the registry, then yeah, you bought something stolen.
This can also be used for detecting inefficiencies in a supply chain. If a given shipment has been out of scanning range for longer than expected, it would send up a warning flag that either the system isn’t working the way that it is supposed to or that someone is trying to do something nefarious.
We’ve also made mention of how blockchain could be used to keep secure track of things like property titles, without the need for middle men like banks and title companies.
With blockchain already firmly established as the means through which cryptocurrencies are traded, it is only a matter of time before it starts breaking more into the mainstream. Given that many companies now accept various cryptos as valid means of payment, that crypto is regularly discussed on national news programs, and it has even begun to penetrate pop culture, this time is not far away. In just a few years, it is highly likely that you’ll be purchasing a new car, home, wedding ring, and a host of other things with a blockchain based chain of ownership.
This is the way.
You know what is inefficient? The US census. In the modern age, why are we trying to print out a form for everyone in the United States to fill out, put it in an envelope, slap a stamp on it and then send it to every single address? And then, as a backup measure, send someone driving around door to door to make sure people fill out the form (often carrying another copy with them), only to have huge numbers of people still not participate? Why on earth would we spend so many resources in paper, people, time, gas, and money when this kind of thing could be done in other ways?
What’s more, the data quality is remarkably low. How low? So low that the Census Bureau felt it necessary to point out that there is “little” evidence of falsified data in the census. They say only about 0.4% of respondents likely falsified data. One wonders how that gets verified or what is meant by falsified data. The word “falsified” implies intent. Yet, how does that account for unintentional inaccuracies? Or people filling out their forms either just before or after they moved?
Regardless, the Census Bureau was concerned enough about data inaccuracy that they did follow up interviews with over 300,000 households. That’s a pretty big response requiring yet more resources, all in the hopes of achieving greater accuracy.
Why does accuracy in the census matter so much? The biggest reason is that it directly affects representation in the state and federal legislatures. The amount of seats in the House of Representatives is directly affected by population. Population numbers, demographics and other data are also important to the distribution of 1.5 trillion dollars in federal funds as well. Or to put it another way, how your tax dollars are distributed and who makes those decisions are directly affected by the accuracy of the census data. Needless to say, it’s important to find the best, most accurate methods of gathering that data possible.
So, what reasons do we have to assume that the data is inaccurate beyond mere accusations? We know that they will sometimes rely on data from landlords, friends and family members if some people don’t respond directly. Some census agents have even been directed to make guesses based on the number of cars and bikes out in the driveway, or even by looking through people’s windows. There are so many problems with that, it’s hard to even know where to begin. A family could be on vacation so no one is around for a while, or they could have friends over for dinner, meaning there are extra cars parked out front. And are we seriously okay with the idea of government employees lurking around our yards peeking into the kitchen windows. It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to figure out all sorts of ways that could go wrong.
Sadly, this is often the case with data gathering overall. The census is just the archaic dinosaur version of data skimming, cookies, and selling your data to third parties without your consent. There are inaccuracies, falsifications, guesses and deceptions everywhere that some motive other than accurately representing people is present. Whether those other motives are profit or getting your manager off your back, it all leads to poor data quality.
What if the Census Bureau took a different approach? Rather than spending all sorts of money and effort to get people to take the time to fill out a form and send it back when there is no immediate reward for doing so they worked with TARTLE? They could offer a financial incentive to people to respond to all the same questions from their phone and get a financial reward in the process? It would be faster, more efficient, and almost certainly more accurate, especially if people could choose to send pre-existing data packets that already reflect exactly the kind of information the Census Bureau is after. By making use of the TARTLE data marketplace, the government would get a better understanding of the population and better represent it in Congress and in funding.
What’s your data worth?
