To regulate or not to regulate, that is the dilemma! By Karupanocitizen

With the growing increase in popularity and interest in De Fi, NFT, and now NFT Games, the issue of the need for greater regulations for blockchain projects returns with greater force, governments cry out for blood and investors, especially security. those who know little or nothing about the crypto world.

This time we will be talking precisely about the article, United Kingdom: "Regulating cryptocurrencies could cause a 'halo effect' on their legitimacy", published by the news portal Cointelegraph.com, this September 6, under the authorship of Marie Huille. In it, some elements are touched that can give us clarity about the true effect of regulations, within the operation of blockchain projects and the feeling of security that people who enter this world need.

Don't create a false expectation

On the occasion of the Cambridge International Symposium on Economic Crime, Charles Randell, president of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), a body that regulates financial services companies (both wholesale and retail) in the United Kingdom, expressed in his speech:

… That there is currently a real problem with consumers entering the crypto sphere without due awareness of the risks.

In addition to the above, the president of the FCA pointed out:

Why should we regulate purely speculative digital tokens? And if we regulate these tokens, will it make people think they are bona fide investments? In other words, will the participation of the FCA give them a 'halo effect' that creates unrealistic expectations of consumer protection? "

Without anticipating observations that we will make later, the fear expressed by this authority concerning the regulatory role, which the FCA may exercise to blockchain projects, is that investors or users want this body to assume responsibility for any fraud or deception of those who may be victims, even if they may be generated by ignorance.

Is the problem with the system or with the user?

On one occasion I participated in a meeting to review the advantages of the application of new administrative software in a company for which I worked, many of the participants, used to the old system, did not agree with the implementation of a new system, although it offered many more advantages. The irony is that those who disagreed hadn't even bothered to review the advantages and disadvantages of it, so in the middle of the meeting I got some disapproving looks for stating that the problem was not the system, but the problems. users who criticized it without first reviewing it.

The same happens many times within the blockchain environment, many users and speculative investors lose money by relying on digital marketing campaigns, as well as the opinion of "influencers" who often support a project without even knowing it, which encourages the appearance of the "fear of missing out" (FOMO), pump-and-dump or scams with crypto assets, all this by following a vital rule when investing: knowing what is being invested.

Act for the right reasons

In my opinion, within the blockchain environment there are two types of investors: those who want to obtain quick dividends, invest in high-risk investments that offer very high profitability, and those who prefer to be part of medium and long-term projects that generate income constant, a little higher than those obtained by centralized means, but which generate a great sense of security to their capital. This behavior conforms to the famous economic law on "risk and return."

Now, when investing, it is illogical to think that you can have both advantages, that is, expect "stratospheric" returns in solid projects that offer real guarantees, many in the construction phase or the total guarantee of the capital invested in "very risky" projects. "You don't turn $ 100 into $ 1,000 without having to take a great risk in between. Neither in the blockchain nor the "real" world, money is given away, there is no "magic" or the "generation of instant wealth", if it is too good to be real, it is very possible that it is not and the responsibility to invest or not is yours, only you are the owner of your actions.

We cannot go for the blockchain acting greedily, looking for easy profits, investing very little, but expecting an exaggerated high return, we must invest not only based on logic but also knowing what we are getting into when investing.

Will regulations protect us from ignorance?

For Randell, one of the main objectives of regulatory standards should be focused on ensuring that blockchain companies are solvent and transparent, especially those that offer “stable coins”. Likewise, ensure that misleading promotions of crypto assets are not generated, promoted by companies or people who have a sufficient reputation to be able to influence people's decisions (in the end, nobody forces anyone).

I think governments should spend less time trying to “slow down” the advancement of blockchain, which I highly doubt they will achieve, and focus more on educating citizens regarding the crypto environment, sponsoring serious projects focused on social development, apply sanctions to those who comment on fraud and understand that, instead of fighting against a very powerful tool, which has many more virtues than defects, it is much more positive to take advantage of all the advantages it offers.

We keep reading!