Telegram's currency issuance event has attracted more than 200 million users and a huge financing of over US$1.7 billion.

Telegram Open Network (TON) is the achievement of the Telegram team in the blockchain field. Telegram's instant messaging tool with more than 200 million users will be the first DAPP on the TON network, and it may even be the largest and the first DAPP.

The public has the same expectations for Libra issued by Facebook. Of course, this is only an expectation in the blockchain field. People outside the blockchain field may be indifferent to this, and even regulators outside the field hope that Can kill Libra in the womb.

The blockchain is called the Internet of Value by many people, precisely because value can circulate freely on the blockchain, and it is difficult to be stopped, and there must be some value transfers that are difficult to be accepted by regulators, such as some illegal things.

soso

The blockchain must be regulated, otherwise it will be extremely difficult to be accepted and popularized on a large scale, and the influence of the government on the public must not be underestimated.

Since Telegram can be blocked by Russia, it can also be blocked by other countries. It is not blocked because it has not been threatened to those countries, or the degree of impact is relatively small.

Therefore, after the SEC launched a lawsuit against TON, Telegram or the TON team, which is known for opposing supervision, did not mean not to cooperate with the supervision, but expressed their willingness to comply very eagerly.

This is a rather severe lawsuit. It is not just a matter of paying money like before against EOS and others, but instead requires the prohibition of its issuance of tokens. Of course, this may also be related to the fact that its tokens have not flowed into the market on a large scale.

3. Obstacles from multiple countries

From the strong regulatory pressure facing Facebook and the ban on Telegram, we can clearly perceive that projects with a huge user base want to issue coins, and the regulatory pressure they face may be unprecedented.

Chris Dixon, a partner at A16Z, suggested that Libra abandon the concept of a basket of currencies, only anchor the US dollar, and only focus on payment to reduce regulatory pressure.

Libra is now anchored to a basket of currencies, the proportions are 50% of the US dollar, 18% of the euro, 14% of the Japanese yen, 11% of the British pound and 7% of the Singapore dollar. If only the US dollar is anchored, it may reduce the regulatory pressure on the US side , thereby advancing faster.

But in fact, the principle is the same. Only anchoring the US dollar solves only the domestic regulatory pressure in the United States. Even if it can be implemented smoothly in the United States, other countries still face obstacles. Except for Venezuela, a country that has given up currency sovereignty, there is no one. A country with monetary sovereignty will be willing to allow another currency to circulate freely in its own country, but it is difficult to monitor or stop it.

Therefore, even if it is only anchored to the US dollar, it is still difficult to change the resistance it faces, and Germany, the European Union, etc. will still not change their negative attitudes towards Libra.

And when French President Macron presided over the annual diplomatic envoy meeting at the end of August, he emphasized that the EU should reshape its sovereignty. Regarding economic and financial sovereignty, he emphasized:

I'm not saying we have to fight the dollar, but we need to create a real "euro sovereignty".

Moreover, Europe also needs to rethink the establishment of digital currency sovereignty, because digital currency will also affect future economic sovereignty.

It can be seen from this that the European Union, at least France, wants to reshape currency sovereignty, and emphatically mentioned digital currency sovereignty, believing that digital currency will also affect future economic sovereignty.

Blockchain projects generally have international characteristics, which also means that they face multiple regulatory pressures from different countries.

4. Possible windows of opportunity

For Facebook, Telegram and other giants with a large number of users to issue coins, the blockchain industry is of course warmly welcomed, but for regulators, it may be a very headache.

As an emerging industry, blockchain has imperfect regulatory measures, and its legal system is close to zero, and it naturally has the characteristics of anti-regulation. Is the organization really getting it?

Looking backwards from the present to the past, we can find that no organization with a large number of users has realized Tokenization. Maybe no large organization had such an idea in the past, but now some large organizations want to do this, but supervision may also hinder it. Do.

In the absence of suitable regulatory conditions, it is difficult for regulators to allow such emerging economies with great uncertainty to emerge, because the characteristics of the blockchain itself are not regulatory-friendly.

As for why regulators in other countries did not speak out.

On the one hand, it may be that many countries have a lot of mess to deal with, and they can’t take care of such unrelated things, but if the correlation is relatively high, they will also be banned. For example, in the Libra incident, the supervision of major countries has clearly carried out Negative statement.

On the other hand, the SEC is indeed more active in this regard, and has a strong energy, and it is difficult for most large-scale projects to bypass the United States, unless Americans are completely prohibited from participating.

There is basically no regulatory system at this stage. Many countries are still in the wild stage, and the regulatory force is weak. Once the regulatory system is improved, blockchain projects are bound to face more compliance costs and regulatory resistance.

With the improvement of the regulatory system, the cost of compliance will inevitably become higher and higher. This may be very severe for institutions with a large number of users, and may need to do compliance work in many countries. Therefore, at this stage, for large institutions It may be a good window period.

We look forward to the moment when the blockchain industry can usher in a breakthrough as soon as possible, just like Bitcoin's I rely on time, ushering in the blockchain I rely on time.

-END-

Disclaimer: This article is the author's independent point of view, and does not represent the position of the Blockchain Institute (public account), nor does it constitute any investment opinion or suggestion. The picture comes from the Internet.