
Switzerland “Should Become the Crypto-Nation” Says Minister - svaja
http://www.trustnodes.com/2018/01/19/switzerland-become-crypto-nation-says-minister
======
relyio
Then replace the board of the Tezos Foundation and force Johann Gevers
(foundation board president) to release the audit report investigating the
self-dealing he is accused of.

FYI, Tezos (self-amending ledger, one of the largest commercial application of
OCaml) has raised ~250 million dollars in July. The funds were supposed to go
toward funding the ecosystem, development, and so on.

Unfortunately, the founders of the project made a terrible call early on and
selected a bad apple (JOHANN GEVERS) to become chairman of the foundation
holding the fundraiser/ICO proceedings. After some digging, frustrated
community members found out that this guy has a long track record of failed
ventures and what some would call very sketchy behavior. He's the self-
appointed "visionary" kind if you want know what I mean (not kidding that's
from his website).

The project is developed by an independent company owned by the founders so it
is still under development
([https://gitlab.com/tezos/tezos/activity](https://gitlab.com/tezos/tezos/activity))
despite that foundation issue.

The Tezos Foundation hasn't communicated in months. They are sitting on close
to a billion dollars of donations and broke their fiduciary duty to spend the
money on development.

Research this, it is completely nuts.

Some links to start:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/tezos/comments/7kzbm9/the_story_and...](https://www.reddit.com/r/tezos/comments/7kzbm9/the_story_and_voice_of_the_tezos_community/)

[https://www.reddit.com/r/tezos/comments/7qt548/the_true_hist...](https://www.reddit.com/r/tezos/comments/7qt548/the_true_history_of_johann_gevers/)

~~~
549362-30499
There's something pretty rich about asking the government to intervene in a
project described as:

 _Tezos is a new decentralized blockchain that governs itself by establishing
a true digital commonwealth._

Especially one that, according to your links at least, has been defrauded by
its radical libertarian and Ayn Rand acolyte leader. Is this not the free
market merely deciding that the people who donated have poor judgement?

~~~
hal9000xp
Sounds like your left-wing bias assumes that libertarians and Ayn Rand
supporters are inherently fraudulent and looking for any opportunity to steal
money.

Gevers is fake libertarian, he is con-man who just made fake organizations to
make visibility of high reputation. There is absolutely nothing from
libertarianism or Ayn Rand philosophy in his actions. In fact, Ayn Rand is
Atlas Shrugged specifically mention about fraudulent people.

I see your sarcasm about:

> Tezos is a new decentralized blockchain that governs itself by establishing
> a true digital commonwealth.

They didn't launch project yet. Once they launch project, it will be exactly
like that and it doesn't matter what's happen with foundation. But for now,
the foundation cut off any funding of the project in critical development
stage.

Yes, contributors are responsible to do their due diligence.

About asking government to intervene in order to remove Gevers. In some sense,
it's government (more precisely the swiss law) who protect Gevers position.

~~~
coldtea
> _Sounds like your left-wing bias assumes that libertarians and Ayn Rand
> supporters are inherently fraudulent and looking for any opportunity to
> steal money._

No, parent only assumes that libertarians/Ayn Rand supporters shouldn't go to
the government to cry.

> _Gevers is fake libertarian, he is con-man who just made fake organizations
> to make visibility of high reputation. There is absolutely nothing from
> libertarianism or Ayn Rand philosophy in his actions._

Seems to me like a good case of a self-made man who saw an opportunity and
took it, lesser mortals and common good be damned. What's more Ayn Randish?

~~~
roenxi
Ayn Rand was very much about following through with commitments. If Gevers has
a long track record of failed ventures because he aimed higher than he was
capable of achieving then he is indeed a self-made man who saw an opportunity
and took it in the fine Randian style.

If he is a con-man who said he is going to do something then took the money
and ran without putting in a serious effort, he isn't an example of her
philosophy.

Rand accepted people being selfish because in practice selfishness has been
proven no barrier to creating prosperity for everyone. She didn't accept
dishonesty.

~~~
EGreg
I never understood this argument from objectivists.

If you use cold hard logic and take Ayn Rand at her word, then someone can
totally screw others over as long as they were sure wouldn't personally get in
trouble for it.

After all, the "as befits a rational being" is the only qualifier and that's
so vague as to be a "no true scotsman" argument making her whole praise of
selfishness moot. If selfishness is an amazing thing except when she doesn't
like it, then her whole philosophy isn't objectivism at all, but back to the
"subjective whims" and pronouncements of "mystics" she so derides.

You can't have it both ways. If altruism is criticized and selfishness is
praised, then it can be perfectly rational for a person to screw others over
as long as they know they won't personally get in trouble. I never got a good
response from Objectivists about this.

~~~
roenxi
If it helps; I agree with your assessment that someone could totally screw
others over as long as they were sure wouldn't personally get in trouble for
it. That is pretty much at the core of the argument.

I recall a case in Australia where someone mailed seniors saying 'you own
shares valued at $X. I will buy them off you for half that. Please respond'
and made a substantial profit from the scheme. Objectivism accepts that as a
moral situation.

I can't see any elements of the No True Scotsman fallacy here however hard I
look - the philosophy is that when someone is truthful and follows through
with what they say they will do then they are being moral. There isn't even an
objection to people being altruistic; the only objection is forced altruism.

It isn't a friendly philosophy but it is quite clear as far as moralities go.
Nothing escapes from shades of grey.

~~~
EGreg
Okay cool. So no matter who the mark is (an elderly person, or a child) you
can just take them for a ride if you're honest and she finds that moral. Btw
in your example, in order to make a profit the shares must have been worth
more than $2X in reality so the person lied and they didn't check the lie.

But what part of her philosophy says you must be honest in everything?
Selfishness may entail lying, especially in sales (if you don't at the least
creatively omit things, someone else who does will eat your lunch).

In addition, if you didn't promise anything, you can go ahead an just steal or
screw everyone as long as you don't get caught. Check out example #1 and #2
and tell me where Ayn Rand's theory says you can't do that:

[https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=I%20Got%20Mi...](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=I%20Got%20Mine%20Theory)

~~~
roenxi
I'll just remind you I'm not an objectivist, I'm just trying to explain how I
see it working. It does seem pretty reasonable to me personally though so I'm
happy to advocate for it.

> in order to make a profit the shares must have been worth more than $2X in
> reality so the person lied and they didn't check the lie.

No, you misunderstand, he told them the market price then offered them half
the market price. He basically straight up told them they could sell them on
the market for twice what he was offering.

I don't know the details of why they accepted, I think they didn't understand
how to sell stock. They guy was scrupulously honest, he just offered them a
jaw-droppingly bad and unfair deal.

> Okay cool. So no matter who the mark is (an elderly person, or a child)

I see an implicit question there. Yes, the elderly and children have no
special protection under Objectivism. The objectivist treatment of how that
could be acceptable is:

* For children, their parents have rational incentive to protect and nurture them (otherwise why have them? They cost a fortune). If something happens to the parents, there are individuals who will rationally adopt to (or maybe just want to).

* For the elderly, they have to make provisions for their ageing while they are younger. Much like what self-funded retirees try to do.

The objectivist argument is that children and the elderly aren’t protected
very well by other standards of morality, which have not proven robust when
tested. Stories of child suffering and taking advantage of the aged are not
rare. Even extremely moral institutions (such as churches [1]) have committed
atrocities. Objectivism doesn’t promise better outcomes for the weak, but
objectivists don’t expect the situation to get worse for them.

> tell me where Ayn Rand's theory says you can't do that

#2 seems straightforward, workers have a supervisor who is paid to make sure
they don’t do that. He sacks them if they are uncooperative.

The worker isn't particularly immoral, just stupid. He will be out of work.

#1 is really a question of how enforcing property rights fit into an
objectivist society. My understanding is that:

1) People agree rationally that they need an enforcement entity to protect
property rights and personal freedoms.

2) This is either organised collectively through a government or individually
through some sort of insurance-like mechanism.

3) Theft is dealt with.

There are some interesting subtleties here:

\- Yes, if old mate unionist can get away with it then in a sense maybe he
gets away with it on the moral scale too. To some degree, it falls to property
owners to enforce property rights.

\- Objectivists can actually work collectively if everyone is contributing
voluntarily. The idea would be that anyone who doesn’t contribute to the
policing service wouldn’t get protection but also wouldn’t be prejudiced
against.

\- Yes, in practice I can’t see this working in a philosophically pure way.
This isn’t actually a problem for an objectivist any more than for anyone else
who notices that their government doesn’t always represent their own moral
preference. If the world were run by objectivists, you’d get a very basic
service where it is easier to see that people are receiving assistance in
proportion to their contributions. Americans, for example, believe in a fairly
radical freedom of speech but still prohibit some very specific restrictions.

\- Objectivists can indeed form armies. Old-school Athenian Greek democracy is
probably a template for how they would like o see that sort of thing run.

[1] [https://theconversation.com/royal-commission-recommends-
swee...](https://theconversation.com/royal-commission-recommends-sweeping-
reforms-for-catholic-church-to-end-child-abuse-89141)

------
malthaus
Switzerland has been searching for a new USP in finance since the end of
banking secrecy, which, together with digital and regulatory change, will
marginalize our private banking market position that was so incredibly
profitable in the past.

So politicians look to either Fintechs (which are as weak as our startup
culture in general) or the hype around the ‚Crypto Valley‘ in Zug which wasn’t
homegrown and is primarely driven by a scam-friendly environment provided by
government & regulator in combination with path-dependency.

Unfortunately, this will likely end even worse reputationally than being the
token (ha!) money hiding place. See the Tezos debacle which is only a glimpse
into what will happen when the cryptocurrency house of cards falls apart. Id
rather have them be a bit more cautious now as is Swiss tradition and be ready
for the more serious ‚rebirth’ afterwards.

~~~
jstanley
I don't think being a safe place to store money is reputationally harmful.

~~~
ethbro
It is when you get caught with (2017 USD$ adjusted) around $6B in stolen Nazi
gold.

~~~
soziawa
You're implying that Switzerland has stolen gold from Germany. Is that true?

~~~
ethbro
I'm pretty sure no one thought that's what I was implying.

~~~
jstanley
If you're trying to be a safe and trustworthy place to store money, your
morality shouldn't have any effect on your customers.

If they can store stolen gold for Nazis without running away with it or
telling anybody about it, then I'm sure they can safely store money for me as
well.

~~~
ethbro
This may be true for your individual reputational valuing of Swiss banks, but
isn't for a worldwide one.

And worldwide reputation matter because functional finance, like networking,
requires peering at some point.

Major countries have a lot of leverage they can bring when the public is on
their side. Viz Swiss secrecy / tax evasion laws being forceably cracked by
"terror money" pressure.

------
s3nnyy
To be honest, Zug as "crypto-valley" is more a thing they show to foreigners.
Most crypto-events and meetups happen in Zurich.

Also fresh startups rather open an office in Zurich other than Zug to have
access to talent from ETH and an actual city to attract more people.

Since years I know the crypto community rather well and people are indeed very
passionate about making the world a better place. I know people in Zurich, who
are invested both with money and time in Bitcoin since it exists because they
believe in it.

>"Switzerland's strong support for crypto is seemingly in direct contrast to
France’s apparent distaste for this space with the French Minister stating
regarding bitcoin: “I don’t like it."

This is a great example how Switzerland is different. Contrary to the rest of
Europe, the Swiss choose to be pragmatic about almost all important topics:
Taxes, healthcare, education system take somewhat the best parts from
socialist Rest-of-Europe and more cut-troat/capitalist America and leave out
the bad parts.

If you want to know more about Switzerland, here a blogpost I wrote 4 years
ago and which is still valid today: "Eight reasons why I moved to Switzerland
to work in tech" [https://medium.com/@iwaninzurich/eight-reasons-why-i-
moved-t...](https://medium.com/@iwaninzurich/eight-reasons-why-i-moved-to-
switzerland-to-work-in-it-c7ac18af4f90) (disclaimer: I am a recruiter hunting
for tech talent all over Europe to join Swiss companies. If you look for a
tech job e-mail me at iwan@coderfit.com.)

~~~
wslh
> This is a great example how Switzerland is different. Contrary to the rest
> of Europe, the Swiss choose to be pragmatic about almost all important
> topics: Taxes, healthcare, education system take somewhat the best parts
> from socialist Rest-of-Europe and more cut-troat/capitalist America and
> leave out the bad parts.

Very interested in what is happening in Zug but I don't know how far are you
going with the pragmatism. Just thinking about all the money that went there,
including Nazi money.

------
jshaqaw
Yay. Now that the bank money laundering game is drying up due to international
regulation, Switzerland can find a new parasitic way to earn money helping
corrupt oligarchs hide their stash.

~~~
lumberjack
Not to disagree with you, but aren't cryptocurrencies also working towards
this same goal? I mean, what do you think would happen when you have a secret
way to hide your wealth in such a way that nobody can tie it to your name? In
fact, isn't that the point of cryptocurrencies?

I'm just trying to figure out, what you think cryptocurrencies are for, if
not, for individuals to have a means of cash (and/or wealth storage) decoupled
from the state.

~~~
n1231231231234
not all cryptos are about that. many others put decentralisation first and are
OK with transparency. but the latter, of course, clashes with the idea of a
nation state trying to become _the_ crypto nation.

------
kaycebasques
Tangential, not really important comment: As someone not immersed in the world
of cryptocurrency, this article read very strangely to me. Like reading a
cyberpunk’s journal.

~~~
icebraining
That's why I have a soft spot for Bitcoin/Blockchain, despite all the
nonsense; it's one of the few things that gives me the felling of living in
the future.

------
zyztem
Switzerland Cryptostory worth remembering:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_AG#Compromised_machines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_AG#Compromised_machines)

------
rootsudo
I think Estonia is closer to being a Cryptonation.

------
loup-vaillant
I had to wait the third paragraph to read "blockchain", and the fifth to read
"cryptocurrency".

And here I thought it was about the uses of cryptography, with possible
mentions of ProtonMail (which is based in Switzerland).

------
willvarfar
The title made me think of another kind of crypto - the Swiss company Crypto
AG is infamous for selling backdoored-by-the-NSA cipher machines to many
governments around the world.

------
baby
More interestingly, real world crypto one of the most important crypto
conference in the world was held there a week ago. It's not always there, I
believe they rotate between palo alto and new york. All the talks are
available on youtube.

------
retox
The goal is to do away with physical cash to better monitor the flow of
capital, with absolute control and oversight into every penny spent. Fight
against digital only currencies at every vote.

------
krutzger
I might be wrong, but wasn't something like this in an early William Gibson
book?

------
HenryBemis
Erm hard no on them (again) becoming the world's vault with no accountability.

------
adamnemecek
I'm pumped to see the whac-a-mole govt's will try to do with crypto.

------
foepys
I really hate that crypto currency enthusiasts are tring to hijack the word
"crypto" for their ventures when they are actually only operating in a _very_
narrow field of cryptography.

Don't let this speak infest HN, please.

~~~
beaner
It's not a hijack, it's just how trends and language work.

If you want "crypto" to be used for something else, you have to make that
something else. Crypto communication, crypto news, etc. If "crypto currency"
is the only common term to start with "crypto" that most people know about,
it's going to be shortened, and represent that one thing.

Crypto currency is more top-of-mind to the population at large, than
cryptography as a general category. If there are more specific implementations
of useful crypto that average people use as a product (like currency, not,
say, SSL), then crypto will be detached from the concepts and come to
represent all of them (cryptography) again.

~~~
loup-vaillant
> _If there are more specific implementations of useful crypto that average
> people use as a product_

Except that encryption is rarely used explicitly. We see this greed padlock,
maybe. But encryption is rarely a product. It's _part_ of other products (web
browsers, messengers…).

I doubt cryptography will become more visible through that venue. People need
some level of education to even _notice_ they're using encryption, signatures,
and certificates pretty much all the time.

------
cendana
And what cryuptocurrency is Swiss going to adopt? One of the 1000s listed here
at [https://www.coingecko.com/en](https://www.coingecko.com/en)

Or we talking bout private chain cryptocurrency

~~~
tehlike
I don't know why anybody needs any country to hide their stash at this point.
Monero, Zcash already can do this.

~~~
mythrwy
You can stash the stash but can you cash the stash and spend the cash?

