Crypto Updates: Two Countries and One City

2 years ago(edited)

I just want to make your content consumption easier by giving you my summary and reflection on the three articles I read yesterday from cointelegraph.com. You can just click the sources given below if you want to check the accuracy of my reading.

Coinbase Operation in Japan

In the first article, Ezra Reguerra reports that Coinbase will follow other crypto exchanges such as Huobi, and Bybit in reducing the number of its employees by 20%. The crypto trading platform made such a decision to survive the extended crypto winter. Consequently, nearly all of its operations will be shut down in Japan.

Reading such news caused me to think about the nature of Coinbase’s operation in Japan. Does it have an office in the country? Or does Coinbase’s operation simply supported in Japan like the other 16 countries in Asia?

An announcement like this reminds me of a strong stance a month ago made by the Japanese government against foreign stablecoins, a position that the nation changed later.

Who is the bigger loser now that it was Coinbase itself stopping most of its operations in the country?

Source

El Salvador’s Volcano Bond

The next two articles are like a competition between El Salvador and Abu Dhabi in terms of investment in crypto-related projects. The comparison is superficial on two grounds. The first one is a country and the other is the capital city of UAE. And besides, the entity that sets aside funds for crypto-related projects in Abu Dhabi is just a partnership between two firms.

Still, another distinction is that El Salvador’s investment is primarily focused on Bitcoin whereas Abu Dhabi’s attention is on Web3, blockchain, and cryptocurrency in general.

In the case of El Salvador, Luke Huigsloot reports about a breakthrough crypto bill that passed yesterday to provide the legal framework for “Volcano Bond,” a Bitcoin-backed bond, which fund will be used to achieve threefold purposes:

to ease sovereign debt
to construct the planned “Bitcoin City,” and
to “create Bitcoin mining infrastructure”

The proposed Bitcoin city would function like “a special economic zone,” where there will be tax advantages and regulations that are crypto-friendly. Half of the aimed $1B that will be raised from the bond will go to the construction of the city.

Source

Abu Dhabi

If El Salvador has its Bitcoin-backed bond aiming to raise $1B, the joint venture between Venom Foundation and Iceberg Capital is also allocating the same amount to invest in Web3, blockchain, and cryptocurrency.

A few of the key services that will be covered in this project include “payment systems, central bank digital currencies (CBDC), stablecoins, and remittance.” Micropayment solutions were also mentioned to achieve “financial inclusion.” I understand the last phrase referring to developing countries.

Finally, if Israel has over 150 companies exposed to digital assets, the UAE has over 1,500 businesses and organizations involved in Web3 projects.

Source

Reading the update on El Salvador, made me wonder if there is such a thing as “crypto-friendly regulations.” In my eyes, the kind of crypto I prefer is something that cannot be regulated. If it can be regulated, I don’t want to do anything with it. For believers of decentralization, that’s what made Hive more attractive, the claim that regulators cannot touch it.

Shifting to the Abu Dhabi article, I cannot avoid but be skeptical about that $1B project due to the inclusion of CBDC in the services. The participation of “developing countries” in such a project and the goal of “financial inclusion” look like empty promises to me. These phrases are popular cliché right now used to attract investors’ attention.

So far, that’s my reading for today!

Thanks for your time and attention.