The real selling point is the partnership with major payment services, CC companies etc. If it succeeds you might be able to pay with libra at every POS terminal and that would be huge. If the base layer is as permissionless as advertised that could even be used to build proxies that allow Bitcoin payments at every POS terminal.
The second interesting idea is the monetary basket backing it. That would take some control out of government's hands and would discourage overly reckless money printing since people would have a damn easy way of both detecting it (e.g. looking at the Libra/€ price) and opting out (buying Libra). If all big fiat currencies aren't stable enough even gold or BTC could be chosen as a backing asset.
If OpenLibra can't replicate this they have a totally worthless project, not much different from all the other altcoins out there.
Well, about that:
PayPal pulls out of Facebook's Libra cryptocurrency: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/oct/07/paypal-pu...
Visa, Mastercard, Others Reconsider Involvement in Facebook's Libra Network: https://www.wsj.com/articles/visa-mastercard-others-reconsid...
I suspect the reason other financial companies are withdrawing is that they´ve looked at the practical implications.
What do you mean? That's essentially how index-fund ETFs work. Is there a reason you think it's not suitable for a currency?
But that's affected mostly by factors other than money supply?
> all big fiat currencies aren't stable enough even gold or BTC
BTC does not provide price stability. Hardly anyone quotes long term fixed prices in BTC, they quote them in USD/BTC spot converted prices. You can see this in how BTC has tracked up and down against the dollar across a huge range.
That's a good point. I think the "mostly" is highly dependent on the rate of "money printing" and where exactly this money goes. But the Libra/Fiat rate might not be necessary anymore as an indicator once it becomes a useful indicator because of rising consumer good prices.
> BTC does not provide price stability.
If bitcoin gets adopted more widely and has a bigger market cap the volatility should go down. The supply shocks every ~4y due to the block reward halving are getting smaller too. But sure, a free market money will never be as stable as a currency with central bank interference. For me that's not a bug but a feature, it doesn't shield market participants from economic realities, so they can actually adapt.
Btw, free market currencies can be much more stable than central bank currencies. See eg https://www.alt-m.org/2015/07/29/there-was-no-place-like-can...
Imo async BFT algos are much more interesting since they can actually fit the attacker model of an open network like the internet. Nobody can give you any guarantees (in an absolute sense) about message delivery times and hops can arbitrarily delay your messages.
It's like selling hamburgers and fries at OpenMcDonalds. How is that not super confusing to the public?
Even I have zero sympathy for Facebook, their credibility on building tech is incomparable to this sort of opportunist movements.
-  https://twitter.com/lrettig/status/1181771915557367808
-  https://twitter.com/santisiri/status/1181771115749728256
> Imagine how good this would be if Lucas hadn’t already exitscammed from his previous project in 2018?
Can somebody shed some light on that?
My friends and I invested $1M in Lucas’ @wirelineio
ICO in 2018
I haven’t heard from Lucas Geiger in months
Lots of false promises made by their advisor @zaoyang
- such as @JUN_Omise
would lead their marketing, @ethereumecf
would be their investor
1. they promised this would be ethereum community fund's first ever investment
2. they promised q2 2018 token release guidance
3. they promised jun hasegawa would mentor Lucas Geiger to lead a huge marketing campaign
4. they promised other investors were in the round: golem, augur, matt mullenweg, wendell davis, david lee (refactor), dhvc, hashed, qtum and others are investors. i never confirmed if they really were all invested, but this is what was marketed to me
however, they did falsely market the investment to me and that is something i do feel is illegal and not okay
absolutely they're under the jurisdiction of the SEC as they took money from US citizens
yes, almost all safts are depreciating if not totally worthless assets
Looming at the repo this is implemented in Rust, along with Libra itself. Nice to see Rust being used on a big oroject like this.
It seems to be just repeating something from the comment it's a reply to (though it is worded unusually, so I may have misunderstood in the opposite direction).
It's not possible to do Libra (or any other pegged currency) without really, really deep pockets. This will be DOA if it gets any traction at all.
I did a bit of research just to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering
> Libra would operate as a stablecoin. That means its value would be pegged to a basket of specific currencies and backed by assets denominated in those currencies. 
I'm sure FB has good employees, but so did the Bank of England.  I just don't understand decisions like this.
What's the connection to the GBP supposed to show? You can uphold a peg given the right setup, the pound just didn't have that. (And in this case, the British economy was better off with a cheaper pound.)
Eg balances in my bank account are very successfully pegged to cash. Similar the HKD has been pegged to the USD without much issue for a few decades now.
It would need some centralization to ensure gamers don't double dip and get 2x benefits from the dole.
There have been a gazillion discussions on how to ensure single identity in a coin that has basic income baked into it, and as far as I can tell nobody has a good solution, some web of trust protocols are promising but still way early in being useful.
I think the only way GBI will ever work though is via some sort of crypto, waiting for the governments to enact anything will probably fail, and crypto being electronic it drives cost down even more (no printing of checks required - all automated).
Proof-of-work has a bunch of issues surrounding electricity usage, transaction scalability, and latency. It's not acceptable for a commonly-used currency to take 11 minutes to confirm transactions, nor is it acceptable for it to use more electricity than Ireland to do so. There's a bunch of research on fixing this, from various proof-of-stake systems to new consensus protocols to Nano's precomputed proof-of-work to Iota's tangle. But none of them have the track record that Bitcoin does, nor do we know if they're secure under concerted attack, nor do we know whether they'll lead to eventual centralization of power and the ability of a few actors to rewrite the ledger. I'd like to see more experimentation in this space and some actual usage with special-purpose applications before it gets rolled out by fiat across the world.
The other thing I'd really like to see is automated central banking. I don't buy the "you never need a central bank; let's just have a deflationary currency!" arguments, but at the same time central banks have a lot of problems with measurement, fairness, and incentives. I'd love to see the whole institution replaced by a computer that automatically maintains stable prices by giving money to everyone to expand the money supply and sucking it out (taxation?) to contract it, which was Milton Friedman's original idea when he came up with monetarism. To my knowledge nobody's really building this, though, and it requires solving some thorny problems in how exactly you measure price levels.
I think this could work, if all are taxed then all will feel more equal, the system could maybe funnel a little more $$ at the lower echelons of society than the upper's -- maybe have it simply raise networth's to some arbitrary minimum... make sure everyone has at least 1k in the bank at all times for instance to cover rent regardless of socio-economic factors.
We'd need to do away w/ cash though, or people could game the system by just withdrawing it all to appear 'poor'.
If you want to pay people a basic income, then lets pay people a basic income. No need to sneak than in via the money we are using.
And why force shops to accept any currency? If anything, legal tender laws should be abolished.
(Though in practice, they don't have much bite most of the time, because the shop can just set the official dollar price for a banana at 1 Million USD, and give you a 'discount' if you pay in their preferred currency, be that Euro or Cowrie shells etc.)
FDIC was also a mistake, but let's not get there just now.
The most outstanding thing about Etherium was the owner jumping the ship with the millions of real paper dollars. Him and the light coin guy. Now that was really impressive.
If they won't then it doesn't really compete with what Libra aspires to be.
Reading between the lines here: the real message seems to be that a bunch of opportunist nobodies decided to get together to exploit Libras public image for their own benefit. It's the same pattern I've seen done many times over the years. "Hey, these people are really evil for being so wealthy. We of course secretly want to be wealthy too but we're totally different to they are." Then when you reach your goal you become the new "villain" for someone else and the cycle repeats.
Blockchain companies love to paint themselves as the hero. Completely outside the reach of regular politics or capitalistic desires. It's even been a popular launch tactic for a while now. Dark wallet did it to great effect; And every iteration of dark web market has done it since; You can even see it in the 'us' vs 'them' mentality inherent in most "decentralized" system design. Only, here the architects are the main influences and not the regulators... But lets be honest here: this group shouldn't be trusted any more than a normal, profit-seeking company. And I see no reason to believe this team could deliver a more secure or scalable cryptocurrency than any that already exists.
Tl; dr, gimme money and prestige plz.
> Our core team and community
I mean, how can anyone take this serious? The core team could easily be just 1 person in the list. And the 'community', are that some far relatives who said "yeah good idea!"?
The website is made within an hour or so, writing the text has taken longer for sure. This is a scam. Just some smart guys trying to launch and cash in on an alt coin that is a made up solution for FB's libra coin.
Maybe not. It could also be idealistic college kids who are underestimating the difficulty in launching a successful currency and don't understand that FB's reach and partnership with established processors is the primary reason anyone takes Libra seriously.