Tag Archives: #blockchain

Unprecedented Media Censorship Bills By Governments Leave Big Tech Nervous

Unprecedented Media Censorship Bills By Governments Leave Big Tech Nervous

The lack of trust in institutions continues to rise worldwide, prompting governments from various countries to up the ante on controlling the flow of information before their citizens lose complete confidence in them. Many governments have proposed regulations over the past two years that would lead to an unprecedented level of online censorship, and some countries have already passed their legislation. 

This article focuses on the online censorship bills in Canada, the United Kingdom, Europe, and the United States and what effects they may have on the internet, particularly legacy tech and its users. 

Canada – Online Streaming Act 

Canada’s online censorship bill titled Bill C11, also known as the Online Streaming Act, seems to be the most dystopian of all. Bill C11 was first proposed in November 2020 as Bill C10 but failed to pass due to its concerning contents.  Bill C10 was reintroduced in February 2022 as Bill C11 and was approved by the Canadian House of Commons, the first of a two-step process to becoming law. 

The first approval took many by surprise, including YouTube. YouTube’s concern over the bill compelled them to publish a blog post warning about the Online Streaming Act. As explained in the blog post, Bill C11 would effectively give the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC: A government regulator) the power to decide exactly what content Canadians can see on YouTube and other social media platforms. 

Image source: Youtube

This bill states that these regulations will apply to user-generated content. Besides controlling the amount and type of advertising appearing on YouTubers' videos, the CRTC would have the power to dictate what content they make as per CANCON requirements. They would also be able to label any YouTuber as a so-called broadcaster, which means complying with the CRTC’s criteria or risk being blocked in the country. 

Moreover, some broadcasters will also be required to contribute to the Canada Media Fund, which funds mainstream media in Canada. It appears this requirement will only be applied to streaming services and social media platforms, but it could also apply to content creators of other sources. This is significant as most Canadian media is funded directly or indirectly by the Canadian government via the Canada Media Fund. Mandatory contributions by broadcasters would expand the Canada Media Fund, further increasing government control of the media. 

Clearly, the Canadian government is desperate to ensure that it continues to control the narrative in the country. This makes sense, considering that trust in the government has been declining for years and exacerbated since the pandemic began. To put things into perspective, 40% of Canadians trusted their government at the beginning of the pandemic. Today this figure stands at 20%, a 50% drop in three years. 

The Canadian Senate will vote on Bill C11 in February 2023; if passed, it will go to the Canadian Parliament for debate. Although YouTube presented its case to the senate, it failed to convince the Senate to omit user-generated content from the bill. YouTube expressed that the legislation could set a harmful global precedent for other countries to follow suit. This makes it harder for creators to access international audiences and would impact millions of businesses and the livelihoods of entrepreneurial creators globally. 

Image source: Legal 60

The United Kingdom – The Online Safety Bill 

In contrast to Canada’s brazen title of Online Streaming Act, the UK politicians chose a more harmless title for their online censorship bill, the Online Safety Bill. The bill was introduced in May 2021 and has been slowly working toward approval since then. Similar to Canada's online streaming act, the UK Online safety Bill initially came under fire for wanting to regulate “legal but harmful content.” 

This provision would have been a concern because it would give the UK government the power to censor whatever it deems harmful. In the case of the UK, the regulator overseeing this provision's enforcement is the Office of Communications (Ofcom), which is comparable to Canada's CRTC. Fortunately, the requirement to police legal but harmful content was removed from the Online Safety Bill in November.

Unfortunately, there are other dubious provisions in the bill, which include various requirements that direct Ofcom to protect “content of democratic importance, protect news, publisher content, and protect journalistic content.” Presumably, it means the mainstream media. Moreover, Ofcom still has the power to police illegal content being distributed online and will issue fines to tech companies that fail to police unlawful content. Fines will start at £18 million or 10% of a tech company's annual total revenue, whichever is higher. 

The fines would specifically apply when illegal content is shown to children meaning tech companies will be encouraged to do age verification to avoid inadvertently displaying harmful content to minors and then getting fined. This means social media companies will be forced to require KYC from all their users, which isn’t bad relating to scammers and bots. But the trust issues with legacy media and governments weigh heavily in this instance. 

Besides, many would argue that it’s up to the parents to take responsibility for what their children see online, not a ruling government body. Furthermore, when you consider the woke society in which some authorities are condoning the content and topics minors are encouraged to see and even participate in is very questionable, to say the least. Also, what’s being taught in schools, specifically relating to gender identity and sexual orientation. We live in a highly polarized society, so who will really benefit from this legislation? 

On another note, an ambiguous provision in section 131 of the bill states that Ofcom will have the power to restrict so-called ancillary services, including “services which enable funds to be transferred.” The mind boggles at what this could mean, but hopefully, decentralized cryptocurrency will circumvent this overreach of power.

Trust in the UK government has also plummeted, particularly during the pandemic. With the recent chaos and resignations of four prime ministers in 3 years, one survey shows only 10% trust the government, with 61% polling an emphatic ‘untrustworthy.’ The primary motive for the UK's online censorship efforts appears to stem from a desire for more oversight rather than censorship per se. A significant reduction in government trust has occurred in other countries; however, the motivations for censorship vary.


Image source: Digital Strategy Europa

European Union – The Digital Market Act/Digital Services Act

The European Union (EU) consists of several countries. In contrast to Canada and the UK, European authorities separated their online censorship efforts into the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the Digital Services Act. (DSA) These are two of five bills known as the Digital Services Package, introduced in December 2020 and the second phase of the EU’s 2030 digital agenda. The EU's DMA and DSA were adopted in July and October 2022, respectively, with the new rules to be applied 6 -15 months after their entry into force. 

The EU’s Digital Governance Act (DGA) was passed in June 2022 and will fully apply in September 2023. They are also in the process of passing the Data Act (DA), and the takeaway here is the mandatory sharing of data with governments and corporations. The fifth Act is the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Regulation (AI Reg), which could enter into force in early 2023 in a transitional period, and late 2024 is the earliest time the regulation could become applicable. Note that all five bills are regulations, meaning they will override the national laws of EU countries.

The Digital Markets Act (DMA)

The Digital Markets Act has little to do with online censorship, and it could paradoxically make it possible to bypass many of the restrictions that the Digital Services Act seeks to introduce. That’s because the Digital Markets Act would impose massive fines on mega-tech or so-called gatekeepers who maintain their monopolies by giving preference to their products and services. The implications of this are profound and could do severe damage to big tech company profits. 

One example is that Apple has a monopoly on its apps for iPhone, meaning all apps must be downloaded from the Apple Store, and some apps can’t be uninstalled. Under the DMA, you can install apps from other stores and uninstall everything from your iPhone. The same would apply to other phones, computers, tablets, etc. 

Given that Apple and the like make a lot of money from mining your data with mandatory apps and making developers pay massive fees, the Digital Markets Act could deliver an enormous blow to their bottom line. Big tech companies are not happy and are expected to look for ways to diminish the impact of this Act through court proceedings. 

The motivation for the DMA is to increase Europe's competitiveness in the tech space. More importantly, the Digital Markets Act could be a precedent for all sorts of innovation in cryptocurrency in the EU because there would be an entirely new set of hardware available to crypto developers in the region. 

The downside of this bill is that it will also require all gatekeepers to provide detailed data about the individuals and institutions purchasing their products and using their services to the EU. This will be facilitated by the Data Governance Act and Data Act which mandate data sharing.

The Digital Services Act (DSA)

The DSA’s motivating force is to create its interpretation of a safer online environment for digital users and companies. In other words, it will establish a Ministry of Truth in every EU country, censoring certain information and pushing government propaganda. Each country will have the deceptive title “digital services coordinator,” which will function as a Ministry of Truth. Each digital services coordinator will appoint “trusted flaggers” to monitor and take down content. Trusted flaggers will be law enforcement, NGOs, and other unelected institutions.

Regarding the kind of content trusted flaggers would track and take down, the scope seems limited to Illegal content, as in the UK. However, the bill suggests disinformation could be on their radar as well. Now, this begs the question of who defines disinformation and the answer is probably the EU. Violators of the EU's upcoming regulations will face fines of up to 6% of their annual income per infraction, and repeat offenders will be banned. The Digital Services act also contains a provision that could impose KYC on social media platforms, in the name of child safety, like in the UK. 

The bill explicitly states that in a crisis, the European Board for Digital Services will instruct social media platforms to enhance content moderation, change their terms and conditions, work closely with trusted flaggers, and tweak the algorithm to “promote trusted information.” In other words, the next time there's a crisis, the government narrative will be promoted, and opposing ideas and positions will be down-ranked or deleted. 

Moreover, there's no limit on how long these emergency social media measures would last. As 'they' say, “never let a good crisis go to waste.” Not surprisingly, the World Economic Forum (WEF) is a big fan of the EU's Digital Services Act and claims it will be used as the standard for online censorship worldwide once other countries see its success. 

Also, not surprisingly, the WEF has criticized the UK for dropping its ‘legal but harmful speech’ regulation. This further supports the idea that the Digital Services Act will apply not just to explicitly illegal content. The WEF’s article suggests they will also include things like hate speech. It’s inherently a human trait to get emotional with certain occurrences, so if people are angry, why not address the cause rather than censor them; now there’s a thought! 

Trust in EU governments fell by almost 25% during the pandemic, and that's the average drop. Many EU countries saw even more significant declines in confidence. The Czech Republic leads the pack, with just 15% of Czechs now trusting their government. It’s evident the EU's totalitarian approach has failed so far.

Whereas the Digital Markets Act was created to make Europe's technology sector more competitive, the Digital Services Act was designed to control European citizens. The last thing the EU wants is for people to lose trust in it, but given the magnitude of these laws will only accelerate that process. 


Image Source: The Heritage Foundation

The United States – Kids Online Safety Act / Section 230

Similarly to the European Union, the United States has two significant documents related to online censorship. The first bill is titled the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), and the second is a Supreme Court case and pertains to the Section 230 bill. The Kids Online Safety Act was introduced in February last year and is still sitting in Congress but is expected to pass later this year because it has bipartisan support. 

However, outside Congress and from both sides of the political spectrum, dozens of civil society groups have criticized the bill. They warned the bill could actually pose further danger to kids by encouraging more data collection on minors in the form of a KYC protocol. It will ultimately force online service providers to collect KYC data to ensure they're not showing harmful content to children. 

The provision in the US bill does not explicitly require tech companies to do this, but the bill acknowledges it's the only real option. As in Canada and the UK, a US Government regulator will ultimately decide when kids have been made unsafe online, specifically by the Federal Trade Commission. (FTC) This has also been criticized because it should be the parent's responsibility to watch what their children consume instead of being used as an excuse to monitor and censor everyone else.

What’s more, it's not just the FTC that will be issuing fines. The Kids Online Safety Act will allow parents to sue tech companies if their children have been harmed online. It's assumed social media platforms will turn the censorship up to full throttle to ensure they don't get sued, even with KYC.

Section 230

The second bill relates to Section 230, in which the Supreme Court will hear two cases about central internet moderation in February 2023. For those unfamiliar, Section 230 is a US law passed in 1996, which allows social media platforms to moderate content to a limited extent without violating the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and the press in the United States. 

However, big tech has leaned on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to avoid being held responsible for some of the most controversial content on their platforms. The companies have invoked this federal law to dismiss potentially costly lawsuits in numerous cases. 

The Supreme Court case called Gonzalez v. Google alleges that Google supported terrorism with its algorithmic recommendations and contributed to the 2015 terror attacks in Paris, which killed an American student named Nohemi Gonzalez, among many others. It was picked up by the Supreme Court last October after being passed up by various courts of appeal. The same applied to another case called Twitter v. Taamneh, where a Jordanian was killed in a terror attack in Istanbul, and Twitter's algorithms allegedly contributed to the attack. 

So, what are the outcomes? If the Supreme Court sides with Gonzales, big tech will be hit with related lawsuits and have to engage in more online censorship to ensure no more cases occur. Notably, this is the outcome the Democrats are pushing for as US President Joe Biden filed a legal brief with the Supreme Court, asking them to increase the liability of social media companies under Section 230. The Department of Justice also filed a legal brief with the same request. 

On the other hand, six of the nine Supreme Court Justices were appointed by Republican presidents. Republicans have been calling for Section 230 to be thrown out altogether, arguing that there is too much censorship. Should the Supreme Court decide that Section 230 is unconstitutional, online censorship would instantly become illegal and also apply to algorithms. 

Google and Twitter have argued that stripping Section 230 protections for recommendation algorithms would have wide-ranging adverse effects on the internet. Some argue the internet won’t work very well without algorithms. This begs the question, would they be able to remedy the algorithm issues by allowing the user access, with the ability to shape it to their desires? It makes one wonder about the hidden agendas. 

Another outcome would be for the Supreme Court to rule in favor of Google and for Congress to amend Section 230. However, allowing Congress to change Section 230 would likely result in even more online censorship. Consider that trust in US institutions has been falling fast and recently hit record lows. Only 27% of Americans have confidence in 14 major American institutions on average, according to a poll conducted by Gallup, which found sharp declines in trust for the three branches of the federal government, the Supreme Court (25%), the presidency (23%) and Congress. (7%)


Image source: Ricochet.com

The Best Outcome

All is being revealed among centralized entities, governments, and the non-government organization cartels. They are literally turning on each other only to cripple themselves. The Divine end game has been actioned and is very positive for decentralized media platforms. Billionaires are flipping, and technology has made it possible to disseminate critical information that uncovers secrets and lies that have enslaved us, is now prolific. No centralized entity of a few can control the masses if we don’t let them. Free speech will find a way. 

And be mindful that in this world,

“The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture, and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink. For it is only by reconciling contradictions that power can be retained indefinitely. In no other way could the ancient cycle be broken. If human equality is to be forever averted—if the High, as we have called them, are to keep their places permanently—then the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity. — Part II, Chapter IX 1984



Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.





Tim Moseley

2023 Predictions For The Crypto Industry Is The Tide Turning?

2023 Predictions For The Crypto Industry. Is The Tide Turning?

Across the board, 2022 was a crazy year and devastating for most. In terms of the crypto market, it was arguably the most unsettling year since its inception. A series of unprecedented events, like prominent altcoins plummeting to almost zero, companies going bankrupt, and $billions being hacked, are just a few. 

So what’s in store for 2023? Will it be bullish or bearish for the crypto market? Although many pundits postulate the coming year in crypto, I have outlined ten predictions from a reputable source, Guy, the investigative presenter at Coinbureau.com, which explains why they're likely to occur and how they could affect the crypto market. I offer my 2 cents worth also.

#1. Crypto Market Begins To Recover

The first prediction tends to be positive, with Guy suggesting the crypto market will improve, albeit not a bull market as we know it. The worst of the bear market will be behind us by the end of this year. The primary reason the crypto bear market could bottom in Q1 is that the Federal Reserve is expected to stop raising interest rates. Notably, stopping interest rates is not the same as lowering them, but it will likely be enough to prevent crypto from crashing further. 
Likewise, the bottom for BTC will likely come in the first quarter and could be 10K or slightly lower, with the main reason being that the stock market has yet to find its bottom, and the crypto market is highly correlated to the stock market. The stock market is expected to drop by another 20 to 30%, translating to a 40 to 60% drop in BTC's price. 

It’s important to point out that BTC could flash crash lower than 10K due to a crypto-specific factor such as a Bitcoin mining ban due to energy shortages. Also, Mount Gox creditors could sell the BTC they were due to receive in Q1; however, more recent news states the Mt. Gox payouts have been postponed till September. 

#2. SEC Crack Down Seems Likely

The second crypto prediction for 2023 is that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) will crack down on another big crypto project or company. The presenter opines that another crackdown seems highly likely if Gary Gensler continues to be the chairman of the SEC. Gary's term will expire in 2026, so there's a lot of time for him to do damage, assuming he won't be expelled from the SEC for his close encounters with Sam Bankman Fried and FTX.

The criteria the SEC has been using to crack down on cryptocurrency have yet to be made clear. These opaque criteria can be summed up as a subjective interpretation of the fourth part of the Howey test. For context, the Howey test is used to assess whether an asset is a security, such as a stock in a company that requires additional regulation from the SEC. 

Image source: NickGrossman.xyz

The fourth part of the Howey test is the most relevant to crypto if an asset can identify a third party creating an expectation of profit for a coin or token” Gary Gensler has made it clear that no cryptocurrency is safe aside from BTC. He's even targeted stablecoins, which makes no sense. This could mean that every cryptocurrency besides BTC on an exchange is a potential target, particularly POS cryptos. 

However, the former director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, William Hinman, said cryptocurrencies must be "sufficiently decentralized" not to be deemed securities. Coin Center does not believe that the technological differences between POS and POW warrant any different treatment. And that it’s a misconception of policymakers that “staking” and “staking rewards” is some kind of security or interest-bearing lending activity that should be subject to regulation.

It will be interesting to see if Gary Gensler gets his way and if so, a first-quarter crackdown could be a catalyst for crypto lows. 

#3. Good And Bad Crypto Regulations 

Guy’s third prediction for 2023 is that there will be many crypto regulations, which suggests that most of these regulations will be good; however, a few will not. It’s also very likely that crypto regulations will vary from region to region, despite attempts to create global crypto rules. The European Union's Markets In Crypto Assets (MiCA) finalized its laws to be released in early 2023. Although they won't be coming into force for another one to two years after that, they will give institutional investors regulatory clarity for crypto. 

The absence of regulatory clarity is why institutions have been hesitant to invest in crypto, especially altcoins. Establishing regulatory clarity in the EU and elsewhere could result in lots of inflows and contribute to a Q1 recovery for crypto. More importantly, crypto regulations will effectively force crypto projects to decentralize. This is because the only way to avoid many of these regulations will be to be decentralized from top to bottom

Some crypto regulations are likely to be adverse concerning payments, DeFi, and privacy. That's because all of these niches are a threat to the traditional financial system. Fortunately, the crypto industry is likely to grow significantly with sound regulations. Furthermore, an increase in adoption and capital will likely make it possible for the crypto industry to lobby to remove the harmful rules. Keep in mind that powerful individuals and institutions want privacy the most. 

#4. DeFi To Go Mainstream

The fourth crypto prediction is that DeFi will go mainstream due to better front-ends, regulatory clarity resulting in increased liquidity, and proof of resiliency from some DeFi protocols. This will increase trust in DeFi and decrease confidence in centralized entities in the crypto industry. Guy also states that the caveat is that harmful crypto regulations could slow the adoption of DeFi. So far, however, DeFi has yet to be included in most crypto regulations providing the protocols are genuinely decentralized. 

Thankfully, most of the most significant DeFi protocols are, in fact, indeed decentralized, notably those on Ethereum. Most of the prominent DeFi protocols on Ethereum have also been tested by institutions in permissioned environments, namely Aave. It’s interesting to note that DeFi is technically a direct competitor to the traditional financial system, as it makes it possible to trade, borrow, lend and save. 

Guy expresses that institutional adoption of DeFi is inevitable because many institutions have acknowledged that the advent of new technologies, such as blockchain, means there will be a race to the bottom regarding transaction fees and settlement times. 

#5. Crypto Payments More Common

The fifth crypto prediction for 2023 relates to the third, and that's that crypto payments will become more common. This will again be due to a combination of better front-ends, regulatory clarity, increasing liquidity, and, most importantly, an increase in scalability that finally makes crypto payments feasible. Guy notes that his prediction comes from headlines about Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin saying how Layer-2 scaling on Ethereum will power crypto payments. 

Moreover, developers will reportedly implement Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP #4844) in March 2023. For those unfamiliar, EIP 4844 will increase the scalability of Layer 2s on Ethereum by between 10 and 100x. Given that most Layer 2s already process thousands of TPS, such an increase will put them on par with Visa. The author believes it’s very likely that Layer 2s on Ethereum will be ground zero for crypto payments once EIP 4844 is implemented. 

He also stipulated that other smart contract cryptocurrencies will play a role, but they'll likely have to find their own niches. The catch is that increasing crypto payments could lead to more regulatory scrutiny. His greatest fear is that regulators will eventually require you to complete KYC if you want to use stablecoins on a smart contract cryptocurrency like Ethereum, quoting, 

“This has been mentioned by a few regulators already. The scariest part about this possibility is that it would be easy to implement since the larger stablecoins are centrally controlled. 

The silver lining is that a KYC crackdown on payments would drive innovation in the decentralized stablecoin niche. And some DeFi protocols are ahead of the curve. So to speak.”


Image source: cryptoslate.com

#6. Crypto Holders To Increase 

Guy’s sixth crypto prediction for 2023 is the number of crypto holders will increase significantly. For context, crypto adoption currently stands at around 4% of the global population. It doesn’t sound like much, but the growth has been exponential, and there are many reasons why this trend will continue this year. 

A significant reason is that media platforms have been integrating crypto features, such as  Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, which have tested NFTs on multiple smart contract cryptocurrencies. Even Starbucks has been working on NFT loyalty and member programs on Polygon. Notably, free speech-focused social media platforms, like Telegram and Signal, have been integrating crypto features with TON coin and MobileCoin, respectively. 

Markethive has taken privacy, free speech, and sovereignty on one decentralized platform to a new level involving social media and inbound marketing, including email broadcasting, content creation, press releases, sponsored articles, and page-making systems. Also, a video channel and conference room facilities make it a complete entrepreneurial ecosystem underpinned by blockchain technology and its native currency, Hivecoin. 

All these companies have billions of users combined. Even just a tiny percentage of crypto adoption by their users would be significant. There are three reasons why people adopt crypto; 

  1. Speculation, in other words, profit.
  2. Out of necessity. 
  3. Just for fun. 

Given the current sideways climate, there isn't going to be too much speculative adoption in 2023. This leaves “out of necessity” and “just for fun.” While much of the crypto adoption this year will potentially be driven by “just for fun” factors such as those mentioned above with social media, there could be a surge in necessity-related crypto adoption. Many countries are on the brink of collapse due to economic, social, and political issues. 

We've already seen a few of them fall, such as in Sri Lanka. Cash and crypto will be the only options when financial systems fail, especially as foreign currencies fall against the US dollar. 

Hence, an ecosystem like Markethive catering to a cottage industry of entrepreneurs, business owners, and the rank and file worldwide needs a sovereign base to facilitate their operations with the opportunity to be involved in a crypto monetary system that pays the user. Markethive enables everyone to realize their potential regardless of what is happening.

#7. More Countries To Adopt BTC As A Legal Tender

The seventh crypto prediction ties into the fifth: at least one additional country will adopt BTC as legal tender. Tonga is top of the list since the island nation announced it would make BTC legal tender by Q2 and begin mining BTC with volcanoes by Q3 of 2023. The assertions for this move are a need for more financial infrastructure, reliance on remittance payments, and using a foreign currency whose monetary policy cannot be controlled, such as the US dollar. 

These are the same reasons El Salvador adopted BTC as legal tender in September 2021.  It's also why some Latin American countries are the most likely to follow suit. It's even why the Central African Republic adopted BTC as a legal currency in April 2022 and uses it alongside the Central African CFA Franc.

The countries adopting BTC as legal tender doesn't mean they will ditch their national currencies. It's more than likely they'll continue to use their national currencies alongside BTC, assuming there isn't a total collapse of the financial system. It's also possible that some countries will adopt cryptocurrency alongside a new central bank digital currency (CBDC). This seems unlikely, given that crypto and digital currencies are a blatant contradiction, but it has been hinted at in various reports, including one from Harvard University.

#8. Big Tech Companies Ramp Up Crypto Integrations

Guy’s eighth crypto prediction for 2023 ties into the previous two, and that's that big tech companies will continue to announce crypto Integrations. Like the countries that could espouse BTC, big tech giants are ultimately adopting crypto because they're losing money and are trying to find ways to plug the hole. 

Tech giants such as Apple and Amazon have been seeking to hire people for crypto-related positions over the last couple of years. Although there haven’t been any meaningful developments from them or the other big tech companies with similar job openings as yet, those could all come sometime this year. 

Although Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk is currently balancing free speech and censorship in the face of government scrutiny, he has clarified that he intends to integrate crypto features on the platform. It’s becoming clear that this is the direction big tech is moving. The crypto or NFT adoption by Facebook, Instagram, et al. mentioned above will almost certainly inspire the rest of big tech to do the same. 

He also posits that big tech adoption of crypto could be related to the Metaverse because very few are fans of the centralized Metaverse that Meta has created. They know that they're nothing more than a means of extracting even more data to be sold to advertisers and shared with governments obsessed with surveillance and censorship. 

Meta and others will eventually understand that the only way they can make money on this new technology is to integrate it with existing decentralized alternatives. Big tech’s role will likely involve providing hardware and access points that enhance user experience. 

#9. Wall Street To Acquire Blue Chip Crypto Company

The ninth crypto prediction is that the wolves on Wall Street will acquire at least one blue chip crypto company. Guy speculates this is highly likely given that Goldman Sachs and others are interested in buying up a few subsidiaries of FTX that remain solvent. Moreover, other crypto exchanges and platforms have gone bankrupt over the last year. Celsius, BlockFi, and Voyager Digital are easy examples, and some of their business assets may be acquired by a traditional financial institution looking to offer crypto services.

There's even speculation that a megabank could acquire Coinbase like JP Morgan, because the potential collapse of troubled crypto companies in the United States, like Digital Currency Group, Greyscale, and Genesis Trading, could have knock-on effects on Coinbase. Coinbase is also involved with USDC issuer Circle, which posted a surprisingly small profit in Q3 last year.  

If Coinbase stock goes low enough, there's a scenario wherein a takeover of some kind could occur. After all, Coinbase is the largest cryptocurrency exchange in the US, and the big banks on Wall Street have been watching billions of dollars flow from their accounts onto the exchange over the last two years. They've also seen how much money Coinbase can make and probably how much data it can gather. 


Image source: Forbes

#10. BTC To Be Used For International Trade

The tenth crypto prediction for 2023 is that BTC will start being used for international trade. Some countries have signaled their interest in using BTC for international trade, including those that face sanctions or scrutiny from the United States and its allies. The sanctioned list was once limited to a few so-called rogue actors, but it's quickly expanding as we enter a multipolar world. 

At one pole, we have the United States and its allies; at the other, we have the BRICS, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, plus their allies. As mentioned in this article, the BRICS are reportedly working on their reserve currency, a combination of their existing currencies. 

Iran has already officially approved the use of cryptocurrency for international trade, and Saudi Arabia has a renewed interest in crypto as its central bank has hired a crypto chief to boost digital ambitions. Hong Kong will also ease restrictions, and Russia appears to be working on crypto legislation. This apparent crypto adoption by the BRICS could see them add BTC to their reserve currency basket.

Once it becomes clear that BTC is a viable option, it won’t be just the so-called naughty or sanctioned nations adopting it. When that tipping point occurs, we'll see what Fidelity has called Bitcoin, a “very high stakes game theory” where countries will rapidly adopt BTC. 

My Thoughts

All things considered, as I am a "glass half full" kinda gal, this year could see a positive turn for crypto on various levels. Given the turmoil and backlash crypto has received for over a decade. All the predicaments the crypto industry has found itself in have inspired new technology to mitigate the bugs and growth in maturity. 

It takes decades of trial and error to implement a robust and sound financial system, and all it takes is a couple of years of onerous or corrupt leadership to bring the global economy to its knees. Although the crypto market is currently deemed low, compared to the historical highs, we see a more stabilized price action, and BTC and authentic altcoins will be considered less volatile going forward.  

In other words, crypto can and will be used as intended, not for speculation but as a comprehensive cross-border payment system and a store of value inherently deflationary given its limited money supply. It will find an equilibrium and be decentralized enough to withstand the failing traditional finance systems with its inflationary fiat currency. 




Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.




Tim Moseley

A Historical Shift In The Global Economy A World Polarized By Sanctions Where Are We Heading?

A Historical Shift In The Global Economy. A World Polarized By Sanctions. Where Are We Heading? 

Crypto And Gold Are Critical In These Erratic Times

I recently came across a research paper by a Ph.D. candidate in economics at Harvard University. The report headlined “Hedging Sanctions Risk: Cryptocurrency in Central Bank Reserves” argues that central banks, particularly in sanctioned countries, should start buying Bitcoin to protect themselves from sanctions. It seems viable when you consider Russia has announced its intentions to adopt crypto, and others, such as Iran, are reportedly already using it.    

Matthew Ferranti, the author of the highly detailed composition, discusses empirical and historical data on sanctions countries, devises complex economic model simulations, and projections of how sanctions could lead to the accumulation of BTC by central banks. He notes that it's the first research paper that analyzes the change in central bank reserves in response to sanctions. He also states he is not a Bitcoin maximalist, nor does he hold any BTC. 

Sanctions More Common But Less Effective

Matthew begins by giving examples of countries accumulating or using BTC. The list includes El Salvador and the Central African Republic, both of which made Bitcoin legal tender, and Ukraine received BTC donations following the inception of the Russia-Ukraine proxy war. He recounts how half of the Russian central bank's international reserves were frozen due to sanctions by certain western countries. 

He points out that this sent a warning to central banks worldwide that fiat currencies and cash equivalents like sovereign debt are not safe assets. He explains that sanctions have become more common as the financial system is more centralized. This centralization is due to digitization, which will only increase as central bank digital currencies  (CBDCs) are rolled out.

The details of US sanctions, specifically those from the US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), basically ban all US individuals and institutions from interacting directly or indirectly with any sanctioned entity. The paper reveals that the US has sanctioned almost 9,000 entities. To put things into perspective, the European Union has sanctioned around 2,000 entities, and the United Nations has sanctioned about 1,000. These figures indicate how money is used as a weapon and point to how trigger-happy the US has been. 

Not surprisingly, research suggests that sanctions have become significantly less effective over the last 30 years, with only 30% of sanctions policy objectives being achieved. These policy objectives typically involve human rights and democracy, a term synonymous with US imperialism to many. 

Regarding sanctions against central banks, Matthew notes that there are seven that are or have been sanctioned by the United States. These are the central banks of Russia, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Afghanistan, and Iraq, with no expiration date for sanctions. Because the sanctions against these central banks were introduced for various reasons, no central bank can be sure it won't suddenly find itself on the wrong end of US sanctions. This calls for accumulating truly safe haven assets to hedge against this risk. 


Gold And Cryptocurrency

Gold is one of the most popular non-currency assets on central bank balance sheets, and it's impossible for the US or its allies to seize physical gold being held at the central bank of a sanctioned country. Matthew speculates that is the primary reason why central banks continue to hold gold. He also suggests that another reason has to do with concerns with the financial system because central bank gold reserves have risen since the 2008 financial crisis, reaching 14.4% in 2020.

The paper accurately states that so long as a centralized entity doesn't control a cryptocurrency’s blockchain, there will always be a way to evade sanctions using its coin or token. The only way to censor transactions on proof-of-work Blockchains is to acquire and sustain 51% of the computing power, AKA hash rate. 

It’s noted that the only time a Bitcoin mining pool achieved more than 50% of Bitcoin’s hash rate was in 2014, which has not happened since. Matthew implies that executing a 51% attack on Bitcoin today is practically impossible due to how large the network has grown. However, he does note that there have been cases of individual Bitcoin miners complying with US sanctions in the past and gives Marathon Digital as an example. 

Marathon Digital temporarily stopped including transactions from sanctioned Bitcoin wallet addresses in May last year. The Bitcoin miner went back to business as usual one month later after all the backlash from the crypto Community. He also explains why stablecoins are not suitable for sanctions evasion. Essentially, it’s because they're centrally controlled, and their issuers have previously frozen token holdings. Notably, centralized stablecoins also back many decentralized stablecoins. 

Matthew also claims that Bitcoin mining is terrible for the environment because it uses 0.05% of the world’s total energy, which in my mind, is more proof that he’s not a Bitcoin maxi. According to Cambridge University, he says environmental and energy issues won't be of concern to countries evading sanctions. Anyone who knows the facts about BTC and energy usage knows it’s not a concern to anyone. 

Further into the paper, Matthew discusses how he calculates BTC’s future price. He makes mention of BTC's insane price action since its inception and correctly points out that BTC will provide diminishing returns in percentage terms as it becomes more mainstream. In other words, Bitcoin's halving event every four years induces less supply with a deflationary outcome. Increased adoption causes a rise in demand which in turn increases the price. 

Image source: Crypto Valley Journal 

This is the purpose of the Bitcoin economic model and has earned the title of “the flagship cryptocurrency.” Bitcoin is crypto’s store of value or digital gold, making it a stable asset class for institutional investors and fueling its long-term rise.

Matthew also accounts for the BTC in circulation, new BTC being created with each new Bitcoin block, BTC trading volume, economic growth, stock market growth, and even estimated yields on government debt in his BTC price model. To be honest, most of this analysis went entirely over my head, but you’re welcome to tackle his 64-page digest

The Economics Of Sanctioned Countries. 

Michael then makes a series of economic assumptions related to sanctions. These include assertions that sanctions don't affect a central bank's gold or cryptocurrency reserves and that the stocks of companies in a sanctioned country will fall significantly in response to sanctions. 

He starts by estimating how much BTC central banks will begin to hold in the future without any sanctions. His extraordinary complex modeling suggests 2-3% of Central Bank portfolios will be in BTC. Interestingly, his model suggests that central banks will reduce their gold holdings simultaneously. 

The second model suggests that central banks facing sanctions risks will hold at least 5% of their portfolios in BTC and apparently up to 50% in gold. He concedes that such a large gold allocation will be unrealistic for most central banks due to the difficulty of acquiring and securing large amounts of gold. 

As such, Michael presents a third model where sanctioned central banks prefer BTC over gold for these reasons. In this third model, BTC holdings of central banks could be as high as 40% of their portfolios when facing a very high risk of sanctions.

According to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), most central banks have already been moving away from the USD and other US dollar assets for years and loading up on alternatives which set the stage for some significant BTC adoption.

In the paper's final section, Michael reiterates that no central bank can be confident that the US, the EU, or some other entity won't sanction their country and seize its assets. He also stresses that, in truth, there is no safe asset when sanctions are indeed severe. Regardless, gold and cryptocurrency are the best assets for central banks to hold under such circumstances.

Michael admits that much more research is needed, especially in simulating how central bank portfolios will change over time with and without sanctions risks. He also believes some central banks may already hold BTC on their balance sheets but refuse to disclose them publicly. This could be because they want their Bitcoin wallet addresses to be private or fear public scrutiny.

Michael points to the opacity of some central banks about their fiat currency reserves as evidence of this. He also points out that central banks tend to underreport their gold holdings when the price of gold is falling as additional evidence.

Why Central Banks Are Likely To Accumulate BTC

What is the reason for central banks to start accumulating more BTC? In short, their fiat currencies are collapsing, and not all of them can develop their own CBDCs. Adopting cryptocurrency could very well be the only alternative for these central banks. 

For central banks capable of producing their own CBDCs, their interest in cryptocurrency might increase due to having to leverage similar technologies. Case in point, the Central Bank of Switzerland said earlier this year that it could hold BTC as part of its balance sheet in the future. 

As pointed out by the research paper, we've just been looking at the central banks that are most likely to accumulate BTC, and other cryptocurrencies are those in countries facing sanctions. The list of countries targeted by the US, EU, and other western powers is likely to grow as globalization breaks down and political poles emerge. 

Image source: Economist.com     

Although the analysis cited that the effectiveness of sanctions has been declining for decades, this begs the question of why the need to flee to safe-haven assets like BTC and gold. The answer may be because of economic cohesion. Consider a world where almost every central bank has its own CBDC; this digital centralization means that the risk of sanctions could be much higher, even if the effects are less severe due to financial fragmentation.

The standoff between central banks is probably in the context of international trade. They would constantly be skeptical of whether they can safely process payments using highly controlled foreign currencies. The bottom line is that central banks want an alternative currency they can trust. That would be the trustless decentralization of cryptocurrency. 

One of the most prominent asset managers in the world, Fidelity Investments, reports there is a very high-stakes game theory at play here. If bitcoin adoption increases, the countries that secure some bitcoin today will be better off competitively than their peers. They elaborate by saying, “Therefore, even if other countries do not believe in the investment thesis or adoption of bitcoin, they will be forced to acquire some as a form of insurance.”

Given central banks' opacity concerning their portfolios, a theoretical approach could mean a push for more privacy because central banks won't want to reveal their BTC holdings. Bitcoin’s recent Taproot upgrade could well be the solution. 

Bitcoin’s upgrade made all complex transactions look identical, increasing privacy for institutions or anyone using Bitcoin’s Lightning Network. Meanwhile, Litecoin has introduced a privacy-preserving side chain. Note that Litecoin has a history of introducing upgrades before bitcoin as its de facto test net. 

That concludes the overview of Matthew Ferranti’s research analysis; however, another situation is brewing.

BRICS Breaking Away From The US Global Reserve Currency

Are the BRICS countries the United States Nemesis? BRICS is a collective body composed of five countries; Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. It was initially an informal group of the leading emerging economies of the early 2000s. 

BRICS has since become more of an institution and is expanding in light of the geopolitical uncertainty polarized by sanctions as more countries have applied for membership. A historical event leading to a restructuring of global economic power may be on the rise. 

Recently, Egypt was accepted and officially part of the BRICS New Development Bank (NDB). Egypt initially joined the bank sector of BRICS and has now applied for full membership in the BRICS alliance. Turkey and Saudi Arabia are also expected to apply for full membership to move away from the US dollar as a reserve currency.

Part of the alliance is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), an eight-member Eurasian security and economic bloc, including Russia, China, India, and Pakistan. The SCO was founded in 2001 by Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. India and Pakistan became full members in 2017.

Moscow sees the increasing role of blocs like the SCO and BRICS as countermeasures against western sanctions imposed over the Ukraine conflict. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in July, 

“We are talking about countries that together account for 80% of the world’s population. Which is why it is clear to any unbiased person that there is no such thing as an isolation of Russia.” 

In November of this year, Lavrov confirmed that “more than a dozen” countries are eager to join BRICS, including Algeria, Argentina, and Iran.

Image source: rt.com

The five BRICS economies currently account for more than 40% of the world’s population and nearly a quarter of the world's GDP (31.5%), heading for 50% of global GDP by 2050. They are building their own reserve currency backed by gold and other commodities like uranium, graphite, and copper.

BRICS is also working on its own financial infrastructure, including a joint payment network. Some member states have already switched to trade in the local currency in order to reduce dependence on the US dollar and the Euro. 

The US dollar is also called the petrodollar. As its name suggests, the petrodollar is pegged to oil and was created through a deal between the US and Saudi Arabia in 1973. This was just two years after the Nixon Administration abandoned the gold standard resulting in the US dollar going into freefall as inflation soared. 

With oil standardized in terms of dollars, any country that purchased oil from Saudi Arabia would have to use dollars. This led many other oil-producing countries to standardize oil prices in US dollars – and the petrodollar system was born. 

The drawbacks of the petrodollar are the need for the US to run account deficits to maintain liquidity in a continuously expanding global economy. Stopping these deficits will slow down the global economy, but continuing the deficits may cause other countries to downgrade the dollar's value. This is already happening, along with the added dilemma of strained relationships with major oil producers like Russia, Iran, and China. 

The US dollar is built on debt and “the nothing.” What is “the nothing”? Just like the movie The Neverending Story,  it’s the “emptiness that’s left.” The nothing, in this case, is the failure of the western hegemony, which is built on a house of cards. It’s game on as these countries develop a separate currency backed by gold. 

Why is Saudi Arabia turning its back on the United States? It can be traced back to one single big event; the start of the war in Ukraine. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC Plus) and Saudi Arabia specifically warned the United States not to impose sanctions on Russia. 

The US didn’t heed the warning, neither did Europe, and they pigheadedly did the opposite, thinking its relationship with Saudi Arabia would continue unabated. Well, that wasn’t the case and is considered a failure of the Biden Administration of the highest order and set to hurt America’s ability to secure low-cost oil. 

The world is currently in a state of change as it shifts into a golden age eliminating the evil surrounding us. Ecosystems are being built; They are sanctuaries for all people who see the horrific deceit and are hurt by the powers that be and their egomaniacal decisions that have wrecked the global economy and societal culture.     

It’s good news regarding Bitcoin and all cryptocurrency adoption. Bitcoin is the store of value (like gold was) and is on its trajectory to becoming a crypto asset class with less risk for people and institutions with a long-term investment strategy. Utility-driven altcoins and platform tokens will benefit and thrive as the market begins to appreciate the value of blockchain ecosystems and services

All is as it should be, and God is watching over us as this all plays out. 



Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.






Also published @ BeforeIt’sNews.com; Substack; Steemit.com



Tim Moseley

The Fourth Industrial Revolution Business as Usual Moving Forward?


The Fourth Industrial Revolution, Business as Usual Moving Forward?

The world as we know it is going through a significant shift. In this article, I look at some key themes and what that means for the future of business.

It is challenging to think of 2020 and not think of Covid 19 and lockdowns due to the relentless media coverage of it and the political messages from leaders worldwide.  

The fallout is that massive change is deemed necessary by governments worldwide in the name of health, and now with a heavy emphasis on the environment.

With the passage of time and the pushback coming from protests, declassified documents, and civil lawsuits, more and more people are waking up to the possibility that things have not added up and maybe another agenda is at play.

A central figure during this period has been Klaus Schwab. For a long time before 2020, he has been talking about a much-needed Fourth Industrial Revolution. He wrote a book with that title published in 2016/17.

Image source: Flickr

What was he referring to, and how does it connect with everything that has played out so far? The philosophy revolves around how we live, work, and relate to each other; a central piece of this is technology.

We can now see the emergence of themes such as artificial intelligence, the internet of things, virtual reality, and the move to introduce programmable money called Central Bank Digital Currencies. The underpinning layer to this is a new world order where control is from a central base in a top-down, authoritarian approach.

The combination of a New World Order with CBDC as a core component would put a final nail in the coffin of democracy, even though the governmental systems of ‘rules for thee but not me’ have continually demonstrated that democracy has existed in theory for the most part.

In case you think that CBDC is a relatively new idea that has gathered speed in the wake of the last two years, you would be mistaken. 

Many who claimed that the last two years were all about an orchestrated effort to bring about vaccine passports, a social credit system based on the government’s version of a digital currency, were considered conspiracy theorists. Now it seems their call was accurate.

Look at the CBDC tracker in this diagram to see how far the groundwork has progressed. You can see how many countries are in the research, proof of concept, or pilot stage.

Currency Wars

It seems ironic and convenient that FTX recently collapsed in the way it did, followed by swift proclamations from all corners of the political sphere that more regulation is needed. 

Growing evidence of involvement in the FTX scandal from across the political spectrum has emerged, leaving many considering whether certain powers created this problem, so they could provide further false justification to usher in their solution.

Were SBF and FTX used in the war between centralization and decentralization to swing things in favor of the WEF agenda and remove cryptocurrency as a competitor?

James Murphy, an SEC attorney and securities lawyer, alluded to fraud and political entanglement at the very minimum in this Coindesk article, in which he lists questions that still need proper answers. He is also predicting an even greater cryptocurrency crash in the wake of recent events.

The domino effect is being felt with BlockFi, for example, recently filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy. Gemini and Genesis appear to be in trouble too. Certain coins are getting delisted from Coinbase due to low usage.

No sooner has the covid narrative started to fall apart than the emphasis has quickly shifted to emergency climate change, with carbon being the focus and reports of climate lockdowns emerging in certain areas, on top of airport travel disruptions. 

The intended fourth industrial revolution, directed by the globalists, emphasizes a technocracy designed to control the masses and crush businesses threatening their agenda. 

The farmers in the Netherlands are the latest example of being victimized and monopolized by government officials through asset stripping of their land. Asset stripping of this nature has nothing to do with restoring personal well-being and economic freedom.

The Future of Business

The populace is being ushered into a small zone of mobility. In that zone, working from home is more prevalent. More energy is given to the online world due to further digitalization in place of customer service. The line between the physical world and the virtual world is becoming blurred through Artificial Intelligence. Tracking devices are becoming an inherent part of everyday technology.

Consider the mind-boggling possibilities of today’s technology, particularly with Artificial Intelligence. It is one thing to be able to diagnose disease quicker, yet quite something else to find you have lost your job to a robot. 

I recall watching a clip on artificial intelligence applied to a picture of Barack Obama to create a video clip that looked and sounded like him but was not him. I could not tell the difference. I also recall watching a clip about voice-to-text speech in which an internet marketer had paid a lot of money to several individuals to use their photos in technology and change their appearance.

This documentary expands on Artificial Intelligence and its nature as a double-edged sword. The implications depend on who is wielding that sword and to what end.

You can also see how this could connect to a social credit score system, where you are penalized should you not comply with the establishment. Since CBDCs are controlled by the Central Banks, they can turn off your access to money with the click of a button.

There is also a difference between suggested changes and those imposed on you. People are looking at alternative payments, such as gold and bitcoin, to free themselves of this system. Looking at practical alternatives that support the decentralization of power is essential.

The key for entrepreneurs is maintaining integrity around core values where they are genuinely helping clients through their offerings. It is vital to return to or keep fundamental principles rather than to sell your soul and take the path of least resistance for business to survive and thrive. 

As Robert Kennedy junior says, "you cannot comply your way out of tyranny.’" One thing is for sure. It is not business as usual anymore, as the walls of globalization intrude further into business. The farmers in the Netherlands experienced this firsthand.

Three Considerations

Here are three things to encourage you to defer from participating in the dangerous game they are playing while adding strategies in your favor as you seek to serve your clients with dignity, honor, and respect.

Power vs. Force

It is essential to realize that using so-called status and related power to enforce a new world order where the few control the masses is not true power in the real sense. 

It is about force, based on manipulating information and people to suit an agenda rather than encouraging progress through discussion and democracy. Their version of the truth revolves around their say-so rather than education and transparency in a debate.

Those who rely on force and its weapon of fear and propaganda cover up a truly disempowered state based on separation and scarcity perspectives. They fear that people will awaken to their deceptive and manipulative agenda and bring it to an end through a cooperative way of being.

Therefore, it seems ironic that ‘we the people’ comply en masse out of fear arising from the abuse of status and referent power as if we are powerless. 

This short video expands on the theme of power. It follows the rise of Vaclav Havel, a blacklisted playwright in Czechoslovakia who became President in the 80s. He wrote an essay on what he learned about power.

Most importantly, he talks about what it means to operate outside a totalitarian system and live in truth and the practical ways people can realize this.

Another resource worth mentioning is a book called Power v Force by David Hawkins, which goes into more depth on this subject. When you grasp the distinction between force and power in your heart and not just your head, it may awaken you to rise above the fear with a greater appreciation of your power when used as a force for good. 

This is the way of empowerment. Be willing to rise above your fear and live in truth for the sake of humanity and future generations.

The Network Effect

Network Effects has a ‘bible’ dedicated to the network effect, which addresses the technical aspects of networks and the fundamental underpinning layer of people, value, and communication.

They conducted a sizable study in which they surveyed no less than 1000 unicorn companies and concluded that ‘Network Effects are still responsible for 70% of the total value in tech in 2022.’

Let that sink in. When a group gathers in community fashion around something they believe in, and the numbers increase to a critical mass, there is no turning back, a little like the 100th Monkey Effect.

The network effect of businesses creating communities of people who know, like, and trust them because their products and services embody the vision to serve their clients is a winner. Apply yourself diligently with a dedication to this principle.

The entrepreneur has an opportunity to take a stand and hold a mirror up to how businesses can serve and enable people to thrive and achieve economic prosperity.

Image source: pxhere 

Nature and Connection

Nature has inherent intelligence and is excellent for regeneration, clarity, and perspective because it aligns with the Natural Laws.

So, take time away from your computer to be in nature where and when you can. Now more than ever, the entrepreneur needs a clear and strong mind with a well-balanced perspective and creative spirit for present and future challenges. 

Connect with your true power and potential. Reinforce your basic principles for life and business through journaling. Reflect on what functional structures will give your business more independent operational freedom.

Connect with people of principle for encouragement and strength. In the British Isles, more communities of people assemble to support lives and businesses while developing international networks of friends.

Markethive is another example of a parallel business ecosystem and community built outside the walls of totalitarianism in politics. It has a community membership of at least 200 thousand. You are welcome to join us.

It creates the perfect storm, a safe harbor, and a platform where entrepreneurs can operate freely to build such communities. Empowerment and the community effect will rise above anything else. 

We have the opportunity to be proactive in shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution and restore humanity to its rightful state, where well-being and economic prosperity can reign once more. It is time for the entrepreneur to rise and deliver a new economic vision.



About: Anita Narayan. (United Kingdom) My life's work is about helping individuals to greater freedom through joy and purpose without self-sabotage, so that inspirational legacy can serve generations to come. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.





Tim Moseley

Crypto Adoption Increasing Regardless: Self-Custody Is Key: Markethive’s Next Move

Crypto Adoption Increasing Regardless: Self-Custody Is Key: Markethive’s Next Move: Checkmate. 

It’s been a disturbing year for the crypto community and institutional investors alike as we’ve witnessed the collapse of Celsius, BlockFi, and now FTX. Billions of dollars of client funds have been lost and, in the case of FTX, one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges, are quite possibly unrecoverable. It’s become increasingly clear that relying on centralized entities to hold your crypto is foolish and purported to be a rookie mistake. But it wasn’t only newbies or retail investors affected by FTX’s demise. Very few predicted the depravity and criminality of FTX cohorts led by Sam Bankman-Fried

Hedge funds, venture capitalists, investment managers, and high-net-worth individuals were all caught off guard. Who would’ve thought a company praised by politicians, regulators, VCs, and the mainstream media would collapse so quickly and spectacularly? Until you realize that fraud and ill-intent are rife in many so-called respected sectors. Some say FTX was worse than Mount Gox and Quadriga, and others say it’s worse than Enron. 

Image source: Cointelegraph

Crypto Adoption Increases

Contrary to the FUD about crypto acceptance diminishing due to recent events, crypto adoption is still increasing. As a store of value, Bitcoin is alive and well, and the decentralized public blockchain of Bitcoin remains as secure as ever. The confidence in the protocol is helping assert its role as a store of value and can reinforce its position as the gold standard of crypto. 

Bitcoin has proven to be an effective form of decentralized non-government money. TechCrunch reveals that consumers are utilizing BTC for international remittances for many reasons. Its ability to transcend the traditional financial system is valuable and, in some cases, critical to many potential users. The collapse of FTX or any token doesn't change that. 

Many are starting to see that FTX and the like are just stories based on misbehavior and lack of compliance, if not lining one’s pockets under the guise of effective altruism, turned moral vanity. There have been many failures in 2022, and the real losers are the ecosystem of centralized actors and cryptocurrency altcoins that have failed to deliver on their hype. 

Questionable Alt-coins

Although FTX and its FTT token are the latest to fail, others have fallen this year alone. The Celsius Network exposed the risk of "stablecoins" as the TerraUSD coin and LUNA token crashed. There was also the collapse of crypto lender Voyager Digital, which FTX subsequently purchased for a mere $51 million, down from a peak valuation of $1.5 billion. Hacks and marketing scams have also plagued the broader sector.

Considering there are over 13,000 cryptocurrencies, only a handful of altcoins have legitimacy and a place in the crypto ecosystem with well-defined utility or unique applications. Altcoins like Ethereum, Litecoin, Cardano, Elrond, and Solana have a reason for being, but there are many with questionable structures with no utility created for speculation purposes only. Some are just coin gimmicks with almost unlimited supply caps, which contradicts the supply and demand theory. 

The critical distinction is that these questionable alts are not related to Bitcoin or legitimate altcoins with purpose, especially benevolent ones, that are working towards an alternative future monetary system, just like Satoshi envisioned. There will always be nefarious actors in our midst, and with all that’s been happening, the crypto community is much more discerning. 

With Markethive about to appear on the global scene as the first blockchain-driven decentralized social media integrated with broadcasting and inbound marketing platforms and its sovereign monetary system using its native crypto, Hivecoin, security, and privacy are paramount. There are various ecosystems in the crypto space, and a parallel economy is on the rise. Markethive is creating an ecosystem for everyone with an entrepreneurial spirit looking for a sanctuary away from the escalating evil in the world. 

Security in centralized exchanges will always be a concern, as is the rollout of CBDCs and digital IDs that are making headlines. In a recent interview, Aman Jabbi, a computer scientist, says that if the population accepts these factors of control, it’ll be game over for humanity. He states the easiest way to push against the system is to “starve the beast” by refusing to use technologies that collect and share your data. Notably, in this case, the beast is AI and is used for evil against humanity, not for good. 

As with many other factions rejecting the global elite’s plans, Markethive is building an impenetrable fortress to protect its growing community. Cryptocurrency is the key to freedom and financial sovereignty, so how do we protect ourselves and keep control of our crypto? 

With the impending release of the Markethive internal wallet and its official listing of Hivecoin, you will need an external wallet connected to the blockchain for transactions. Unlike keeping your crypto on an exchange, there is only one way you can know for sure that your crypto is under your control: to self-custody your funds. 

What Is Self-Custody? 

Self-custody is when you hold the private keys to your cryptocurrency wallet, so you can only sign transactions from that wallet. Hence, you are the only person who effectively controls your crypto. There is a well-known phrase in the crypto world; not your keys, not your crypto. 

Conversely, when you place your funds on an exchange or any centralized platform, you use a wallet to which the platform has the private key, not you. It's a communal wallet; you have to hope and trust that the exchange won't lend or send those funds to anyone else. So what you essentially have from the exchange is an IOU, which is worth nothing if that exchange goes bust. It’s the same with a traditional bank account in that cash only exists as a database entry. 

It’s important to note that there is a distinct difference between self-custody and custody services. Companies like Coinbase, Gemini, Bitgo, and the like, operate custody services. Their primary modus operandi is to hold those coins and tokens for you in a supposedly safe manner. They're much safer than an exchange but are still not the gold standard when controlling your crypto. What you need is a self-hosted wallet. 

There are various self-hosted wallets, so the wallet you choose will depend on what you want to use it for and the coins and tokens you want to store. 

Image source: Exodus

Non-custodial Wallets

Desktop or software wallets are software programs that you install on your PC and to which you can send your crypto. The private keys themselves are stored on your device in an encrypted fashion, and whenever you want to send a transaction out, they are used to decrypt and sign that transaction.

A reputable wallet, and the one I use is the Exodus Wallet. Exodus has wide-ranging coin support and an intuitive, easy-to-use AI. It’s important to note that no exchange integration in any of the self-custody crypto wallets would ever allow an exchange to hold your private keys. 

Exodus also has a mobile wallet for smartphone users and a Web3 wallet that connects you to dApps, DeFi, and all of Web3. The Exodus Web3 Wallet is also a self-custody crypto wallet. It allows you to send, receive, and swap crypto and interact with NFTs on all supported networks.

Other multi-coin wallets to consider are the Atomic wallet or Jaxx wallet. Because of the Markethive and Solana Integration, as long as any of these wallets recognize Solana, they will accept Hivecoin going forward. 

Forewarned is Forearmed 

It’s also notable that Exodus has never been hacked. If you’ve heard of any reports about Exodus users getting hacked, it stems from where they downloaded the software. When downloading these desktop wallets, check that you download them from the official site. There are thousands of phishing sites that try to impersonate official wallet websites. 

Sometimes they'll have a dodgy domain that’s easily overlooked. There have been instances of phishing sites paying for Google ads to have their sites placed above those of the official sites. Once you go on these phishing sites, you may accidentally download a wallet jammed with malware that could be used to steal your private keys.

As with desktop wallets, ensure you download the correct mobile wallet app from the Apple or Google Play store. There have been examples where hackers have uploaded malicious apps and wallets with predictably unpleasant results. It’s also critical to keep your crypto wallet a secret, especially if you have any on your phone. The more people know about your holdings, the more of a target you are for the $5 wrench attack

It’s also essential to distinguish between crypto company mobile apps and mobile wallets. Smartphone apps like Coinbase, Binance, Nexo, and Crypto.com are just mobile versions of exchanges allowing you to access your crypto accounts. You don't hold the keys; the exchange does. 

Once you've downloaded and installed any of these wallets, you'll be asked to generate a collection of seed words. These words are the keys to your crypto kingdom, so be sure to keep them in a safe and secure place and make backups. Remember, anyone with the seed words can regenerate your wallet and exfiltrate your crypto. 

All the self-custody wallet solutions mentioned above are free to download and use. The next level option is hardware wallets, like Trezor or Ledger. They store your private keys in a cold environment, which means they are never exposed to the internet as they're always kept on the device itself.

Image source: Exodus

In terms of functionality, hardware wallets will be connected to your computer and operated with software that the device manufacturer has produced. Therefore from a simplicity perspective, they should be relatively easy to use as the software wallet. Furthermore, Exodus has a Trezor integration on its desktop wallet, which adds an advanced layer of security. 

Not only is your crypto much more secure with self-custody, but you also have complete control of what you do with that crypto. No permission is needed to withdraw, no limits, and no KYC. It's your wallet, keys, crypto, and your financial freedom. 

Moving Forward

2022 will arguably go down as one of the worst years in the crypto ecosystem; however, it is a turning point for the industry as we adapt to weed out bad actors. It'll also be the year where nearly everyone, from big money to average retail users, truly appreciates the importance of decentralization and having total control of their crypto assets.  

As we enter 2023 and witness the storm of catastrophic events worldwide and the unveiling of unscrupulous entities, the crypto industry is evolving, realizing and addressing issues borne from a nascent technology. 

Markethive is in the eye of the storm, where it’s calm and peaceful, diligently working to bring a blockchain-driven multi-media network to the crypto space. People worldwide who have suffered the tyranny of big tech and social media elite or been displaced or scammed by bad actors are being enlightened. 

We can consider all these adverse occurrences as blessings in disguise. The time is right for Markethive to distinguish itself and bring to light its purpose of delivering a broadcasting platform, marketing systems, and communication interface foundational to God’s law, the universal spiritual law where truth, freedom, and liberty are upheld for all of humanity. 

Come to our Sunday meetings at 10 am MST as we approach massive significant upgrades and the wallet launch. See and hear explanations, ask questions, and witness the ever-evolving technology and concepts of Markethive. The link to the meeting room is located in the Markethive Calendar



Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.





Tim Moseley

Social Media Censorship Increases Controlled By Fed Agencies

Social Media Censorship Increases Controlled  By Fed Agencies

Decentralized Media Platforms On The Rise

Two investigative journalists from The Intercept published a recent article about social media censorship that captivated the internet. The account referred to leaked and litigated documents that revealed the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is working in tandem with tech giants to monitor online information. More specifically, what they consider is disinformation. 

The article is quite eye-opening and detailed, so I’ll summarize the crucial points in this article. It will also be enlightening as to why we so desperately need a decentralized social media marketing platform like Markethive, and what we are building is the only solution to the oppressive censorship that the social media moguls and three-letter agencies are facilitating.  

Image source: The Intercept

The authors explain that all the information in the article is based on years of internal DHS memos, emails, documents obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, and public records. This information proves the US government is actively policing information online. Their influence became apparent to the average person when the DHS announced the infamous disinformation governance board, dubbed the Ministry of Truth, earlier this year. 

Interestingly, the disinformation governance board was announced right after Elon Musk announced he would acquire Twitter. The European Union also announced its censorship push with the Digital Services Act, which will set up a Ministry of Truth in every EU country.  Although the disinformation governance board was decommissioned, the DHS is actively exploring other initiatives to police social media now that its original mandate, “the war on terror,” nears its end. 

So, behind closed doors and through pressure on private social media platforms, the US government has used its power to shape online discourse. The authors point out the three forms of information they are targeting.  

  1. Misinformation: False information spread unintentionally.
  2. Disinformation: False information spread intentionally.
  3. Malinformation: Factual information shared, typically out of context, with harmful intent (that allegedly threatens U.S. interests.)

[Or perhaps it’s easier to combine these three explanations into one category: Anything the government doesn’t agree with or like.]

A formidable text message from a Microsoft executive (a former DHS official) to a DHS director expressing, “Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain.” Note that Microsoft owns LinkedIn and Skype. 

The authors also highlight a recent meeting that Laura Dehmlow, an FBI official, had with executives from Twitter and mega-bank JP Morgan Chase. The topic of discussion was distrust in the US government on social media, with Laura stating that “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.” 

It was also cited that a formalized process for intelligence agencies to flag content on Facebook or Instagram directly and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use. Not surprisingly,  both Facebook and the FBI declined to comment even though the portal was still live when the article was published.

When Did It All Start?

In the second part of the article, the authors pivot to discussing when all this social media censorship started happening. They identify that it began with the 2016 presidential election, which makes sense as this was around the time that fact-checking companies surfaced. 

Predictably, the pandemic exacerbated the DHS’s social media censorship. An ever-progressive number of people see through that many of the theories that the DHS and army of fact-checkers labeled conspiracies ended up being correct. And some are still in the throes of coming to light and proven as facts, not fiction akin to a horror movie. 

But the DHS’s narrative and censorship are not over. According to a DHS report obtained by the authors, its priorities for the coming year will be to fight “inaccurate information on a wide range of topics, including  “the origins of the covid-19 pandemic and the efficacy of medical procedures, racial injustice, US withdrawal from Afghanistan and the nature of US support to Ukraine.”

The authors point out that how the government defines disinformation needs to be clearly articulated, and the inherently subjective nature of what constitutes disinformation provides a broad opening for DHS officials to make politically motivated determinations about what constitutes dangerous speech. 
Whoever defines hate speech will have the power to censor whoever they want. This seems fine with the EU, which will police hate speech as part of the Digital Services Act mentioned above. Oddly enough, the DHS justifies its new quest by claiming that terrorism is “exacerbated by misinformation and disinformation spread online.” 

The authors accurately point out that this is just an excuse for political propaganda and point to half a dozen previous examples as proof. They admit that the extent to which the DHS affects the social media feeds of the average American is unclear; however, intelligence agencies flagged over 4,800 social media posts during the 2020 election, and 35% of them were subsequently suppressed or censored by social media. 

This statistic comes from the Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which along with the FBI, met with social media platforms every month before the 2020 election. The list includes Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, LinkedIn, and even Wikipedia. It revealed that these monthly meetings between social media platforms and intelligence agencies are still ongoing.

Image source: Industrial Cyber

These monthly meetings of the private-public partnership between social media platforms and intelligence agencies were cemented in 2018, creating a new wing of the DHS, including the CISA. This new wing focused on social media election-related disinformation and was highly active in policing disinformation during the 2020 election. 

Last year, under the Biden administration, the new wing, formally known as the Countering Foreign Influence Task Force and established for election-related disinformation, was replaced with the Misinformation Disinformation and Malinformation team or MDM. This broadens their scope from disinformation produced by foreign governments to include domestic versions and focus on general MDM. 

The MDM’s job is to “counter all types of disinformation.” In other words, a task force intended to combat election disinformation expanded its scope to include whatever information the government deems to be disinformation, regardless of whether it's related to an election. 

Jen easterly, the director of CISA, appointed by President Biden, sent a text to Microsoft Representative Matthew Masterson, saying she is “trying to get us in a place where Fed can work with platforms to better understand mis/dis trends so relevant agencies can try to prebunk/debunk as useful.”

The term “pre-bunk” is disturbing when you consider it means preventing information from getting out in the first place. In other words, pre-bunk means proactive censorship, so they’ll try to silence us before we say anything!

The authors revealed that the DHS advisory committee of CISA was concerned about information that undermines “key democratic institutions” such as the courts or other sectors such as the financial system or public health measures. The CISA advisory committee, which includes Twitter’s head of legal policy, trust, and safety, Vijaya Gadde, assisted in drafting a report to the CISA director calling for an expansive role for the agency in shaping the “information ecosystem.” 

The report called on the agency to closely monitor “social media platforms of all sizes, mainstream media, cable news, hyper-partisan media, talk radio, and other online resources.” Notably, Vijaya Gadde was terminated from her position on Twitter immediately following Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter. 

Image source: The Intercept

The DHS Censorship Scope Widens

Unfortunately, the authors reveal that the DHS’s censorship efforts have only expanded since the Ministry of Truth was disbanded. They talk about how sub-agencies like Customs and Border Protection are somehow responsible for determining whether information on social media is accurate. 

Meanwhile, sub-agencies like the Science and Technology directorate get the final say on whether you're a bot or a human. As expected, the DHS’s online efforts are becoming so significant that they are slowly starting to eclipse the agency's original purpose of fighting terrorism. This was revealed in an internal report.pdf  obtained by the authors, which includes “domestic violent extremists” as the DHS’s primary targets.

To accomplish its new goals, the DHS will work closely with NGOs to “build resilience to the impacts of false information." This begs the question of who is funding the NGOs that are getting ever more involved in the affairs of the average person. 

The authors also note “intelligence agencies backed new startups designed to monitor the vast flow of information across social networks to better understand emerging narratives and risks.” It makes one wonder how some blockchain analytics companies got their funding. The main takeaway is that the US government's suppression and censorship of information on social media have only continued to increase.  

Image source: Markethive.com

The Solution? Decentralization 

Regardless of what is being orchestrated by these agencies and NGOs, information is still being disseminated, and nefarious actors and corporations are being exposed for the world to see. Facebook has suffered and arguably is dying because of its involvement which has become more apparent in recent years. 

Even if the centralized legacy social media platforms survive, more and more people with a voice are migrating to alternative platforms. Creatives and critical thinkers who refuse to be surveilled and silenced need a decentralized, free-thinking platform to continue their quest without the concern of looming censorship or being de-platformed. 

The technology that is available today makes it possible for social media decentralization. For a decentralized social media platform to work, you need a blockchain, a smart contract, and a decentralized, scalable, and secure cryptocurrency. Distributed data centers and cloud systems that do not rely on centralized servers are essential to minimize the risk of being tracked or shut down by centralized agenda-driven entities. 

In markethive’s case, this technology is its foundation, and the steps taken to make it impenetrable are being implemented, starting with the Markethive wallet, which houses multiple mechanisms and is the comprehensive center for all your transactions and facilitations in this decentralized ecosystem.  

With the wallet on the cusp of being launched, Markethive’s five-channel newsfeed, which includes a general newsfeed, video channel, curation, blogging interface, and conference or live streaming channel, is next to be integrated.  It means we don’t have to rely on centralized streaming platforms or upload videos parked on a “woke” video platform. 

Markethive, the company, will not police content or censor members. The community will discern what they deem unacceptable content by simply blocking an offending user. Personal configuration of algorithms will also be an effective tool for choosing who and what you want to see on your feeds. This meritocratic culture understands that individuals can think and do for themselves and not be told what is “dis, mis, or mal information.” What the autocratic powers believe to be disinformation and deem illegal is questionable and the very least. 

Markethive incorporates all facets of social media marketing, including broadcasting to other platforms, as well as the infamous social media giants. We still need to get our message out to users on these platforms. So, regarding Markethive’s blogging and video channel, any video created on the Markethive video channel is broadcasted with AI-generated summaries to the woke social media platforms. In turn, the viewer is brought back to the Markethive site to view it in its entirety. 

With an opaque summary of the topic, their artificial intelligence surveillance can’t track the nature of the content if it happens to be controversial and against their narrative. If the oppressive platforms do delete your video, it will remain on Markethive’s distributed system. It’s important to understand that all feeds or channels will be secure and remain your property. This is the solution to get your message out to people who need the truth about what’s happening worldwide. 

Markethive has many members in Russia and other parts of the world that have been seriously impacted by the global elites and governments creating false narratives and particularly sanctioning the Russian Federation, all for their personal gain. Believe it or not, the people trying to enforce these sanctions and censorship standards are the most corrupt of all. 

Markethive is the answer for those who have fallen through the cracks in the chaos the powerful few continue to instigate. The direction Markethive is going is to create an ecosystem that does not depend on greedy leaders or the political climate. Its promise and vision of what it's all about are to give access to the platform to everyone worldwide. 



Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.





Also published @ BeforeIt’sNews.com; Steemit.com



Tim Moseley

The Markethive Wallet Phase Two Complete

The Markethive Wallet Phase Two Complete

Phase Two of the Markethive internal wallet is complete, a considerable milestone for the company and the Markethive community. The impending release of the wallet is a pivot point for Markethive to secure its future as a completely decentralized social media broadcasting and marketing platform the world so desperately needs for these significant times: The End Times.

About The Wallet – Phase Two

The Markethive wallet is not just an ordinary wallet: It’s a transactional interface that services and keeps track of all your accounting and transactions, including your loans to Markethive and interest paid by Markethive to you via the ILP. 

With Phase Two now in operation, you can access and set up your personal requirements and view your status in The Vault, Hive Rank, Staking, KYC Application, ILP Report, payments, and Markethive Credit threshold and balance. Plus, you can now transfer Markethive Credits to other members within Markethive. 

Note that full access to all of the Markethive systems requires complete KYC documentation and an Entrepreneur One membership. The Markethive platform, with its general newsfeed, is free to use; however, the marketing systems and aspects thereof within Markethive will be limited, including Hivecoin transactional activity and micropayments of MHV. 

Once the Markethive wallet is fully operational and launched, the Premium Upgrade will be introduced, which offers additional features and benefits to achieve a significant presence online for your marketing efforts and business growth, especially with the upcoming unique dashboard interface. It will be beyond anything else out there today. 

KYC Application (Know Your Customer)

KYC Application is now functional in your wallet. It is required for you to have access to the Hivecoin Wallet and use inbound marketing tools. You will need to be KYC verified to receive Markethive Tokens (MHV) via registration, tips, and bonuses and to activate the first-level micropayment earnings.  

The reason for this is for the community’s benefit by knowing who they are engaging with and not for governmental regulations. It assures Markethive members that you are a real person, dedicated to honest and transparent relationships in business and socially. The purpose is to have an active, very dynamic, and secure “hive of people,” unlike Twitter, which has been plagued with bots. Also note: Once KYC is approved, the documents uploaded to attain approval are all deleted. We do not keep these documents. 

Once you’re KYC verified, the documents you upload are transferred and kept in your wallet, not on the Markethive system. This ensures third parties or government authorities do not gather your information. There will be a small charge for the KYC process for the purpose of credit card information and verification. 

The Vault, Markethive Credits, And Staking

The vault is now operational in your wallet. This means you can buy Markethive Credits to set up or manually fund your subscriptions, transfer to other members, and activate your threshold and auto fund. Once you purchase Markethive Credits, they can be used to purchase services from Markethive and trade goods and services with other members. 

Markethive Credits are not cryptocurrency coins and cannot be used to purchase other cryptos from Markethive, including Hivecoin. MH Credits also cannot be transferred to a crypto wallet or exchange. Markethive Credits facilitate commerce for any business and can be built into a storefront for your marketing co-op campaigns. 

The vault funding threshold is the mechanism you use to maintain a viable Markethive Credit balance. Keeping a balance in the vault is like a bank account; you can accumulate interest on that balance. The higher the ratio, the more interest you earn, which is paid in credits. 

The terminology used for this is called Staking. Staking your MH Credits balance allows you to earn additional credits based on your number of credits and your level of activities within Markethive. These activities are reflected in your Hive Rank, also located in your Markethive wallet. Note that joining a Markethive loyalty program and even just logging in every day adds to your staking interest.

ILP Reports 

Thomas has updated the tracking of the ILPs acquired through Entrepreneur One by adding up all monies spent between January 1st, 2019 to December 1st, 2021. All ILPs acquired through the Entrepreneur One Program are now reflecting the true result of all monies spent. 

In December 2022, all E1s that have been active with their subscriptions for 12 consecutive months will receive the promised bonus of 0.5 ILP. Also, a little birdie told me that something big is planned for members who upgrade to E1 upon the announcement of the 30-day cut-off. Stay tuned.


Now that Phase Two is operational check it out and navigate around the wallet. It’s intuitive, comprehensively explained, and very easy to manage. It’s important to know that the mechanisms behind all the applications in the wallet are fully functional on Markethive’s development site, including a Solana wallet assets interface.

Our Markethive wallet also displays the wallets of four crypto coins, Hivecoin, Solana, Bitcoin, and Elrond. The coin price comparison reports powered by Coingecko are now active in the wallet (except Hivecoin), so we are close to Phase Three, the final stage before launching. The dynamic free market value will be operative when Hivecoin is listed on coin exchanges.  

When we announce that the full wallet release will be in 30 days, we will also have built an Entrepreneur One exchange for current active owners so that they can sell their E1s and others can buy them in an auction platform within Markethive. So to summarize, we are now preparing the four wallets (Hivecoin, Bitcoin, Solana, and Elrond) to be active with 2FA verification and required to send any of the coins from your wallet and the E1 exchange. When these are ready with 2FA in place, then the 30-day final launch of the wallet will be announced.

Once the 30-day period is over, anyone desiring an E1 subscription will only be able to acquire one through other E1 associates via the E1 Exchange. It is fundamentally an open market, and the seller will determine the acquisition price of the E1 subscription. Once purchased, it is required and in your interest to continue with the monthly payments. E1 upgrades will no longer be available through Markethive, the company. 

The E1 Advantage. The Incentivized Loan Program (ILP)

Apart from all the other benefits you receive as an E1 associate, you are essentially a shareholder as you acquire 1/10th of an ILP per year, providing you are current with your monthly subscription of US$100/month. 

The ILPs are essentially a loan to Markethive for a 20-year promissory note which you can recoup with a principal balloon payment at the end of 20 years. You also have the option to roll it over or reactivate it. This window of opportunity is precious as the ILP represents 20% of the net revenue of Markethive, so let’s crunch some numbers. 

The projection of a member base of 500 million will yield a monthly income of $5.6 billion. 20% equals $1.2 billion allocated for the ILPs, divided by the maximum of 1000 ILPs or shares, and returns a $1.2 million payment per ILP. 1/10th of that ILP, earned via the E1 upgrade per year, produces a monthly income of $120,000. 

Markethive is a grassroots project owned by the community, not wealthy venture capitalists. When committing to an Entrepreneur One membership or purchasing an ILP outright, you are effectively a virtual owner of Markethive; it's your company where you receive valuable tools and considerable returns from the ILP. 

The great news is that you can now purchase ILPs with the Markethive Token (MHV) in anticipation of the wallet's launch. Click on the rocket icon in the tray at the top of the home page and follow the prompts. If you have MHVs, now is an excellent time to invest in the next-generation social market network, as Markethive is now coming into its own. 

Once the wallet is complete, the next important step is to build a Markethive coin exchange. Unlike various exchanges currently operating, the Markethive exchange will have a community, enhancing the ability to become successful and profitable. 

Crypto projects and exchanges that have utilized their crypto coin, along with robust communities, tend to weather the storm, the bear markets, and the like. We see many prominent exchanges failing, particularly centralized ones, due to being affiliated with nefarious actors and agendas. 

Markethive’s mission is complete decentralization and distribution worldwide and the perfect armor to circumvent the chaos of these dark times. Markethive’s vision is to provide a sanctuary for the people and those hurt by the events, the evil and tyrannical pressure by the elites of big tech, NGOs, and governments. 

Markethive is building a system outside of the traditional elite economy. We are building an ecosystem that works regardless of what’s happening worldwide. Although Markethive will accept fiat payments with credit cards, the whole nature of how our system will work is based on Hivecoin and Markethive credits. As Markethive grows, it allows us to develop an even more powerful ecosystem. 

Be sure to attend the meetings on Sundays at 10 am Mountain Time. (MST). All updates and orchestrations are discussed at the Markethive meetings, with the latest news and developments of Markethive as they happen. To access the meeting room, go to the Calendar and click on the link provided. 

I will keep you updated with further articles on Markethive’s progress in its monumental project to deliver financial sovereignty, freedom, and liberty. The world needs what we are building. 



Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.






Tim Moseley

Chaos in the Cryptocurrency Market as the Top Bitcoin Exchange FTX Suffers Bankruptcy

Chaos in the Cryptocurrency Market as the Top Bitcoin Exchange FTX Suffers Bankruptcy

The cryptocurrency market fell to its lowest level in almost two years after a leading cryptocurrency exchange suffered a significant liquidity crisis. FTX has faced bankruptcy after suffering from an $8 billion cash crunch. 

Investors lost faith in the exchange because of the ongoing crisis. A bank run ensued, and FTX faced severe cash shortages as it could not pay all users trying to withdraw all their funds at once. So they turned to Binance, the largest centralized cryptocurrency exchange, which has agreed to bail them out.

Many pessimistic crypto insiders worry that crypto assets are starting a vicious downward spiral that will hurt individual investors and the industry for years to come. Many have compared FTX's collapse to that of Lehman Brothers in 2008, which sparked the global financial crisis. In fact, on Wednesday, Nov. 9, Bitcoin fell drastically below $16,000 for the first time since November 2020. While Ethereum lost nearly a third of its value from Monday, as the deal to rescue FTX appeared to have broken down.

"I think it's going to be really bad: it's going to spread to the max," said John Lo, digital asset management partner at investment firm Recharge Capital. "We're going to see crypto names, lenders, and family funds completely bankrupt. It's going to be confusing and tedious."

The Collapse of FTX

FTX's meteoric rise and the catastrophic crash came under the leadership of Sam Bankman-Fried, who founded the company in 2019. Within three years, it had become one of the fastest-growing currency exchanges in the world, trading billions of dollars in cryptocurrencies every day. But earlier this month, according to a CoinDesk report, FTX's sister company, Alameda Research, is stashing most of its reserves in FTX's own cryptographic token, FTT. If FTT falls, so will the value of trading and investing giant Alameda.

FTX failed to allay concerns about the report. On Nov. 6, Binance announced that it was planning to outsource $500 million worth of FTT. This sparked a bank run as FTX users traded cryptocurrencies on the platform in an attempt to withdraw their funds. Due to this insane pressure, FTX was unable to make all payments. After the agreement was announced, several reports began to circulate concerning the major issues with FTX's business relationship. 

Analysts claim that FTX holds far fewer reserve funds than it claims and that merging client funds with Alameda Research's funds is a very risky move as the exchange aims to continuously protect its clients' funds.

Regulators took notice immediately. According to Bloomberg, both the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have launched investigations into whether FTX mishandled customer funds. Meanwhile, the company was in turmoil as most of FTX's legal and compliance staff resigned late Tuesday, Semafor reported.

FTX consented to be acquired by Binance in order to repay their consumers. On the surface, the transaction appeared to be an exact replica of Bank of America's acquisition of Merrill Lynch during the financial crisis of 2008, which essentially saved it from bankruptcy. Customers would be able to recover their balances in full, according to Bankman-Fried.

Images Sourced @ Twitter 

The Outrageous Effect

FTX stopped withdrawing cryptocurrencies and fiat currencies from their platform, and many users of the platform began to wonder if they would ever get their money back. FTX's head of institutional sales, Zane Tackett, liked a tweet that claimed the firm "gambled with clients' money and lost. According to a Wall Street Journal report, the exchange's shortage is estimated to be $8 billion. According to Bloomberg News, Bankman-Fried informed investors that the company would probably declare bankruptcy if it did not obtain a capital infusion.

Experts are concerned that the overall crypto decline may worsen if FTX is not supported. Many significant firms, including BlackRock, Sequoia, and Temasek, have heavily backed FTX, which occupies the middle of the cryptocurrency market. (Stars like Tom Brady and Stephen Curry invested in FTX.) These organizations now face significant losses, which might impact funding for the entire crypto industry.

Several cryptocurrency businesses have filed for bankruptcy this year alone, leaving individual investors waiting to get their money back.

FTX and its sister company Alameda were significant investors in the crypto industry simultaneously. For example, they both contributed to last year's $300 million Solana blockchain ICO. Solana dropped by 50% on Nov. 9, and various parts of its ecosystem. Many of its users' objectives are to dethrone Ethereum, as the most popular blockchain seems far away at this point.

Several crypto-related firms also experienced spillover impacts at the same time. Because Bankman-Fried owns more than 7% of the company, Robinhood, its shares fell 13% on Wednesday. According to analysts, these losses will accumulate, and the efforts to integrate crypto into mainstream business will significantly slow down. One user tweeted, "it's that the long-term legitimacy of crypto as an industry is in real danger for the first time."

Image source: Coindesk

With the plummeting crypto values, the collapse of FTX is expected to have long-lasting effects. Bankman-Fried presented himself as the likable, morally upright leader of the neighbourhood. He frequently socialized with lawmakers and authorities to persuade them of the advantages of cryptocurrency. Now, Bankman Fried's advocacy may jeopardize a bipartisan law that would subject digital exchanges and brokerages to the mild regulation of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

According to Lo at Recharge Capital, regulators are much more likely to impose tougher sanctions. According to him, "this truly winds back a lot of the goodwill built up in the last two to three years from a regulatory viewpoint." It demonstrates the need for some regulation of centralized money and cryptocurrencies.



About: Prince Chinwendu. (Nigeria) Rapid and sustainable human growth is my passion, and getting a life-changing opportunity into the hands of people is my calling. Empowering entrepreneurs provides me with enormous gratification. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.







Tim Moseley

PCAs Are Coming What Are They? How Will They Impact Our Lives?


PCAs Are Coming!  What Are They? How Will They Impact Our Lives? 

Is This For Real, Or Is It Just One Big Elitist Sham? 

Now that we’re coming out the other side of the initial C19 pandemic with the mainstream narrative falling apart, climate change seems to be the hot topic. One strategy introduced to reduce carbon emissions is to issue Carbon Offset Credits to companies in a bid to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. More recently, during the World Economic Forum's Davos Summit, Alibaba President Michael Evans revealed that the elites are working on an individual carbon footprint tracker for consumers. That means you and me. 

As it turns out, many countries worldwide have been researching and developing an individual carbon credit system for over a decade, and it seems they're on the brink of being rolled out. Let’s find out what we need to know about this impending dystopian system and why it’s being implemented. We’ll start with when Personal Carbon Allowances (PCAs) became a concept and who’s behind it.

Image source: MyCarbon.co.uk

When Did It All Begin?

The history of individual carbon credit allowances began with the United Nations' first Earth Summit, held in Rio De Janeiro in 1992. The Summit was significant because it laid the groundwork for the collective climate action of the countries in the UN. Later that year, UN countries signed the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to reduce and eventually eliminate carbon emissions to fight climate change. As of 2020, 192 countries have signed up for the Kyoto Protocol, which is basically the entire world. 

Interestingly, the Kyoto Protocol laid the foundation for the issuance and trading of carbon credits. So when the concept of carbon credits was introduced, it was intended for institutions, not individuals. However, it didn't take long for the concept of carbon credits to be applied to individuals. The catalyst was British Petroleum or BP, the oil company that used the idea of an individual carbon footprint for its massive marketing campaign in the early 2000s; it even created an individual carbon footprint calculator. 

Obviously, these ongoing marketing campaign's purpose was to blame climate change on consumers, not corporations. After all, were it not for the demands of the consumer, then these corporations would not have to pollute as much as they do to provide the goods and services consumers desire. 

Image source: Twitter

United Nations First Experiment

The UN's first global governance experiment, or global control, was called the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which the Millennium Summit established in 2000. 191 UN member states and 22 international organizations agreed upon 8 Millennium Development Goals that were supposed to be achieved by 2015. These included eliminating poverty, combating deadly diseases, and environmental sustainability. 

It appears that BP’s concept of an individual carbon footprint was something that the countries looking to meet their environmental MDGs found interesting. As some countries thought creating an individual carbon credit score for their citizens would help them meet their MDGs, the first wave of academic research emerged in the mid to late 2000s. 

The British government created a legal framework for PCAs in 2008. To take it one step further, according to Wikipedia, “The Climate Change Act 2008 also grants powers allowing the UK government to introduce a personal carbon trading scheme without further primary legislation.”  And similar laws are likely in place in other countries.

Given the concept of a personal carbon allowance has been around for a decade or more, it begs the question of why it’s only surfacing now. The answer seems to be that the UN's MDGs experiment fell short. In 2015, the MDGs were unmet, as environmental issues, deadly diseases, and poverty were still plaguing the planet. 

There are many reasons why the MDGs were limited. Still, the main three factors were a lack of funding and coordination and the 2008 financial crisis, which threw many countries into chaos in the following years. So the UN did what every institution does when it fails, rebrand and try again.

Image source: United Nations

The Second Experiment – Rebranded

In 2015, the UN announced its second experiment in global control called the sustainable development goals or SDGs, which superseded the MDGs as per the UN's website. Note this transition didn’t happen overnight. In 2012, the UN set up the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, or SDSN, to figure out what went wrong with the 8 MDGs and ensure that the SDGs, which were increased to 17, were implemented. 

Whereas the 8 MDGs were supposed to be met by 2015, the 17 SDGs are supposed to be completed by 2030. The SDGs are the same as the MDGs, just with more extreme and vague language, probably to allow for interpretations with serious outcomes. You can sum up the SDGs as being the MDGs on steroids because the SDGs are backed by both the public and private sectors. 

The MDGs were backed almost entirely by the public sector, which is a big part of why there needed to be more funding and coordination. Global corporations have no shortage of capital, and they're able to coordinate because their operations transcend borders. More importantly, they can ensure compliance with SDGs without governments having to pass any laws. 

The Plot Thickens

The 17 SDGs are also part of a bigger plot by the UN called Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset, which includes lots more controversial stuff like the Tri-State City in the Netherlands. This involves removing the Dutch farmers from their land and livelihoods under the guise of climate protection. Notably, the SDGs are based on the Environmental, Social, and Governance criteria (ESG) that the world's largest institutions use to guide their investments and operations. 

In theory, the primary benefit of pushing SDGs through ESG is that it makes it possible for these global corporations to crush small competitors and acquire their assets. This is because it won't be possible for small businesses to comply with ESG criteria, and it is arguably the entire purpose of ESG. However, there is a limit to how lucrative this would be for global corporations because they will eventually succeed in acquiring all the resources and customers that exist. 

When that happens, these elites will be confronted with an economic reality that most are aware of, a demographic decline in developed countries. Each year there are fewer and fewer consumers with the kind of capital these global corporations need to continue growing. If you read this article about why you will own nothing and be happy, you'll know that demographic decline is why these Global corporations are slowly trying to make us rent everything instead of owning it.

This makes products more accessible on a global scale and creates a constant stream of cash flow. However, even this Hardware as a Service scheme would only last so long. Eventually, these global corporations will run out of people to rent their products to, and they'll again face the economic reality of demographic decline. 

This would suggest the primary benefit of pushing SDGs through ESG is temporary and short-lived or is it? So what would make it possible for these global corporations to create an economy where they continue to grow regardless of demographic decline? The answer is their Carbon Credits System.

Image source: Global Asset Management 

Carbon Credit System For Companies

As it stands, each carbon credit represents one ton of carbon dioxide emissions that were removed or were never emitted. So, when a company does something that removes or prevents future carbon emissions, such as planting trees or installing solar panels at their business, they are given carbon credits by a governmental authority. 

These carbon credits are then sold to other companies that want to emit more carbon without penalty. This kind of carbon credits issuance, trading, and redemption is done because of environmental regulations and is called the Compliance Carbon Market. Compliance carbon markets in California, Europe, and China account for 99% of all carbon credit trading. 

Image source: S&P Global

The remaining 1% of carbon credit trading happens in the Voluntary Carbon Market. This is where companies looking to emit more carbon voluntarily purchase carbon credits from companies who are voluntarily looking to emit less. This is, of course, done to increase their ESG scores.

Spoiler Alert! As I mentioned earlier, carbon credits are supposed to represent one ton of carbon dioxide emissions that were either removed or never emitted. Well, it's estimated that around 85% of all carbon credits are not reducing carbon, and research suggests they actually increase emissions

United Nations Global Carbon Credits Market

During the UN's COP26 climate Summit in Glasgow last year, 200 countries adopted Article 6 of the 2015 Paris agreement. The main takeaway is that it will create a single global carbon credits market that an upcoming UN agency will regulate. 

This “supervisory agency” will also issue “UN-recognized carbon credits to eligible institutions.” It also appears that under Article 6, trades on the UN's global carbon credits market will be tax-free, meaning the global corporations will not only reap the benefit but thoroughly clean up. 

As the goal of carbon credits is to reduce carbon emissions, it’s interesting to note that it will be achieved by slowly reducing the number of carbon credits issued to companies each year. The EU Carbon Market is the largest, and the European Union has a carbon credit reduction schedule on its website, stating, “to increase the pace of emissions cuts, the overall number of emission allowances will decline at an annual rate of 2.2% from 2021 onwards compared to 1.74% currently”.  

As we know, when the supply of something gradually declines, and the demand for it stays the same or increases, prices eventually rise. This is precisely what's been happening to the cost of carbon credits, especially those in the compliance markets. 

And that, folks, is how global corporations can ensure continued growth in the face of a demographic decline. All it takes is a few billion carbon credits issued to them by their friends in government or the United Nations and a bit of supply and demand manipulation through regulation. 

Case in point, according to this article, Tesla earns most of its money by selling carbon credits. Considering Tesla is one of the largest companies in the world, it's more than likely other big brand names will follow suit with this economic phenomenon.  

Image source: Twitter

Individual Carbon Credit System

Now let’s see how we will measure up in the carbon credit equation and what they have in store for us. As I mentioned at the start of this article Alibaba's President and former Goldman Sachs banker, Michael Evans, revealed that [they] meaning other so-called stakeholders on the panel and in the audience at the WEF’s Davos Summit are working on an individual carbon footprint tracker. 

Because Alibaba is a Chinese company, Michael’s comments went viral as people interpreted his remarks to mean they were developing an individual carbon credit system akin to China's social credit system. While it’s true that some corporations are developing ESG scores comparable to China's social credit score, the individual carbon footprint tracker Michael and other wealthy elites are obsessed with is entirely new. In many ways, it's much worse. That’s because almost all the countries at the UN are planning to create an individual carbon credit market practically identical to the one that institutions have today. 

How Will it Work?

Each year, you will be allocated carbon credits that allow you to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide. The possibility of how much carbon you’re issued will depend on your ESG score may be speculation at this stage, however, note that everything stated here has been researched by governments for years and is probably in development in most developed countries.

If you use up your annual carbon allowance before the year is over, for example, by eating too much meat or traveling too much, you will no longer be able to do carbon-intensive things. That is unless you purchase more carbon credits from individuals who have yet to use up their annual allocation. 

If you're wondering how the government will prevent you from purchasing carbon-intensive things, the answer is a central bank digital currency. (CBDC) CBDCs are necessary for an individual carbon credit system to work, as are government-issued digital IDs, which are also prerequisites for CBDCs.

As with the issuance of institutional carbon credits, allocating individual carbon credits will incentivize individuals to minimize their carbon emissions. At first glance, this seems fine, but upon closer inspection, it's easy to see why a carbon credit score is much worse than a social credit score. In a simple social credit score system, you can still get ahead by being a good citizen. In a carbon credit score system, however, the only way we’ll be able to live a good life, or even the life we’ve been accustomed to, is to purchase the carbon credits we need to do things a good life entails. 

This includes going where you want, eating what you want, and living in something that's not a pod. For some, a good life will involve having children. Chances are you'll need a lot of individual carbon credits to do all of the above. The main reason is the Scope 3 Emissions Cap that only currently applies to institutions, which I mention in this article and how it impacts companies. 

And it looks like individual citizens will be next. That's because Michael pointed out that Ali Baba and the other WEF stakeholders are working on a “Scope 3 Emissions Plus,” which will indeed apply to individuals. This means that in an individual carbon credit system, you will probably have to provide enough carbon credits to cover the carbon emissions of your friend traveling to see you. It could be that you have to provide enough carbon credits to cover the future carbon emissions of your children. 

By now, you’ve probably realized that this will make the rich richer and the poor poorer. The poor will live in pods and eat bugs, so they can save up their carbon credits to sell to the rich for food and shelter. In turn, the rich will use these carbon credits to continue living as normal. Furthermore, given that the purpose of carbon credits is to reduce carbon emissions, there’s a great likelihood we’ll see the same decreasing issuance for individuals as they’ve proposed for institutions. In turn, this will increase the price of individual carbon credits and make it more challenging to afford the credits to “live a good life.”

Image Source: Southern Cross University 

When Is This Insane System Coming?

It’s already in play on Norfolk Island, a small island off the coast of Australia. With a population of 6000, it seems that was a perfect place to trial this form of control, and it has had an individual carbon credit System since 2011.

Also, the second region, the European microstate of San Marino, is using Ve Chain to set up its own individual carbon credit system to become the first country to comply with the UN's SDGs. It has a population of around 34,000.  

We can assume that individual carbon credit systems will be rolled out in smaller countries first. This makes sense given that, so far, most of the research and development of personal carbon credit systems has been theoretical, so more actual testing is needed. Beyond that, we will likely see individual carbon credit systems introduced in the next couple of years.

The ‘ESG-induced energy crisis’ will present the perfect opportunity to do this, as governments can use the allocation of limited energy as justification for the rollout. However, PCAs will only be effective once they implement Digital IDs and CBDCs, and given that governments have been openly testing Digital IDs during the pandemic, they will come first. Notably, a recent article about an individual carbon allowance by the WEF blatantly states that the pandemic was a quote test for what's coming and how the elites are amazed at how easily we submitted. 

To add insult to injury, at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP27), Michael Sheren, Former Bank of England Senior Advisor, stated that carbon will be very close to a currency; tokenizing nature is next. 

Will the UN and its cohorts succeed in rolling out its sinister global carbon credit scheme? That depends on if it can get all its ducks in a row by 2030, as this is the deadline for SDGs to be achieved. 

History suggests it's unlikely to happen as the UN is in a similar position today as it was with the fallout from the 2008 financial crisis, which was the main reason why the UN's MDGs failed. We are now facing another financial crisis that has only just begun. This means that the full extent of the fallout has yet to come, and we already see cracks form on the international stage. 

Moreover, for the UN’s SDGs to succeed, it needs just about every country to be on board. This is becoming increasingly less likely by the day as conflicts arise between countries and nationalists candidates turn a cold shoulder to globalist organizations. The UN must get every country on board because if people see other countries overseas or even other states within a country that are not abiding by the SDGs, they might compare and contrast their quality of life. 

It happened during the pandemic, with some countries implementing severe restrictions while others did not. More recently, Sri Lanka collapsed under its own weight after it achieved one of the highest ESG scores the institutions’ could offer. It just shows that energy is the economy, and some emissions are required for the world to function.

Image Source: Markethive.com

How Can We Prepare? 

How can we prepare for such a system if it's successfully rolled out? The most intuitive is to hold and use cryptocurrency or any other money outside this dystopian system so we can continue to transact without restrictions or carbon credit tracking. 

The centralized control of carbon credits means the UN and others could limit how many carbon credits you can hold. If they're tokenized, it would be effortless to set these limits. It is also easy to block transactions through CBDCs. This is why using a genuinely decentralized cryptocurrency as a hedge might be a better strategy. 

There are ecosystems that are purpose-built to counter the totalitarian initiatives they’re trying to impose. The crypto and blockchain projects that uphold the interests and fundamental freedom of the people provide the foundation for truth, not propaganda, applying critical thinking and seeing through the shams the self-interested elites are propagating. It’s becoming increasingly clear that there is no climate emergency that warrants these dystopian measures. It's just all about money and control. 




Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.






Tim Moseley

Could This Company And Its Cohorts Overshadow Cryptocurrency? Look What’s Coming

Could This Company And Its Cohorts Overshadow Cryptocurrency? Look What's Coming

Wall Street titans such as BlackRock and Goldman Sachs have backed a crypto company that has received more funding than almost every prevalent crypto project. In addition, this firm has funded the federal government's spending and has close connections to the Federal Reserve. It's anticipated that its stock will be listed on exchanges later this year. 

The company is Circle, the issuer of the USDC stablecoin, and it seems to be setting its sights on slowly dominating the crypto industry. It’s one company we must be mindful of if we value our financial freedom. 

Circle’s History

Interestingly, Circle didn’t start out as a stablecoin project; its history is rooted in the crypto industry and runs very deep. Circle Internet Financial Inc., or Circle, was founded in 2013 by Jeremiah Allaire and Sean Neville. Jeremy and Sean have been working together for decades to build and then sell or IPO cutting-edge technology companies, notably the Allaire Corporation and Brightcove.

One of Jeremy's oldest videos on YouTube is a presentation he did shortly before leaving Brightcove to create Circle. In this video, Jeremy explains how the final step of building a successful technology company is to exit. In other words, to sell to a more prominent company or list it on a stock exchange. Jeremy Allaire has also been involved with the World Economic Forum for many years and has videos on the WEF’s YouTube channel and a profile on the WEF’s website

Circle’s Vision

Jeremy has served as the chairman and CEO of Circle since it was founded, and Sean served as the president of Circle until late 2019, when he stepped down to join Circle’s board of directors. In the beginning, Circle’s focus was Bitcoin payments, similar to other payment companies like Visa and Mastercard, with a vision for bitcoin to become the base layer for a new financial system. However, the concept envisioned was not open and decentralized but closed and centralized. 

To set things in motion, Circle effectively tried to force Bitcoin to fit their vision by pushing for all the altcoin innovations, such as tokenization and smart contracts to the Bitcoin ecosystem. They also urged Bitcoin to increase its block size for scalability purposes, along with the founder of the Bitcoin Foundation, Gavin Andresen, and 60 other corporations. 

The efforts of these entities to increase Bitcoins block size hit their pinnacle in 2017 with the so-called New York Agreement. Furthermore, Digital Currency Group (DCG) reportedly oversaw the New York Agreement.  The DCG conglomerate owns Grayscale and CoinDesk and holds stakes in top crypto projects, including Coinbase and Circle. It’s not surprising that Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong also wanted to increase Bitcoin's block size. In short, 60 corporations tried and failed to convince the Bitcoin Community to increase Bitcoin’s block size. In short, 60 corporations tried and failed to convince the Bitcoin Community to increase Bitcoin’s block size.

Digital Currency Group 

A Rough Start For Circle

In the bull run of 2017, Circle had already raised around $27 million from Goldman Sachs and others. It used this capital to create a suite of crypto services, including an OTC trading desk, and purchased the Poleniex Exchange. Around the same time, Jeremy joined the International Monetary Fund as part of the IMF’s high-level Advisory Group on Fintech. 

For context, the purpose of the IMF is to ensure that the current US-centric financial system continues without interference from cryptocurrencies and other such technologies. Curiously, Circle and other Wall Street-funded crypto companies also held a closed-door meeting with the IMF in 2017, much to the scrutiny of the crypto community, and it seems there have been many meetings since. 

By this time, Circle realized Bitcoin was not the future of payments, although Jeremy still believes BTC is digital gold and could serve as the world’s next reserve currency and has stated he holds mostly BTC and cash. Central banks also hold alternative currencies as part of their balance sheets, with the US dollar declining.  

Since the conclusion that Bitcoin couldn’t be the payment platform, Circle and others turned to Ethereum, the next-best cryptocurrency. Ethereum grew significantly during the previous bull market cycle and established ETH as the second-largest crypto by market cap. They settled on the decision the build a US dollar stablecoin in 2017, and in 2018, Circle raised $110 million from Chinese crypto mining company Bitmain and others to build its stablecoin. 
That same year Coinbase and Circle founded the Centre Consortium to set standards for stablecoins issued on public blockchains and to govern the issuance and redemption of the USDC stablecoin. It’s important to note that any entity part of the Centre Consortium can mint and redeem stablecoins. 

The USDC stablecoin had a rough start when it launched in September 2018 because it was in the middle of a crypto bear market by then. So there wasn’t much demand for stablecoins, and USDC's market cap remained flat primarily during this period. 

Subsequently, Circle sold its suite of products and services to focus on its stablecoin in 2019. The buyers included Kraken’s purchase of Circle’s OTC trading desk and Tron founder Justin Sun, who reportedly purchased Poloniex from Circle.

The WEF, FED, and Synthetic CBDCs

In early 2020, Jeremy attended the WEF’s annual conference in Davos, where he preached about the power of programmable money. He also discussed the importance of a partnership between the public and private sectors to “support the development of global stablecoins backed by central bank money.” Circle also published a stablecoin white paper [pdf] for the WEF.

Image source: Circle Blog

In previous interviews, Jeremy stated that the assets backing USDC would inevitably be held at the FED. As a matter of interest, most stablecoins are backed by US government debt. So, when you buy a stablecoin, you are essentially subsidizing the US government spending. That is a bit of a worry, considering many use stablecoins for safety. 

According to Grant Thornton of the Centre Consortium, the USDC in circulation is backed by the following assets: 61% cash and cash equivalents, 13% Yankee certificates of deposit or CDs, 12% US treasuries, 9% commercial paper, 5% corporate bonds, and less than 1% in municipal bonds.

Almost all of the assets backing the largest stablecoins are some form of debt, i.e., money that’s been lent out. If you’re wondering why all these stablecoin companies hold so much debt, the answer is Interest. The companies behind these stablecoins can make money on their clients’ money by lending it. This makes it possible for Circle to make billions of dollars in passive income.

What’s important to understand is that Jeremy’s repeated prediction that the FED will hold USDC reserves relates to a Synthetic Central Bank Digital Currency. (sCBDC). Synthetic CBDCs involve a partnership between a private company, in this case, Circle, and the central bank of a country, the Federal Reserve, to issue a de facto CBDC, in this case, a de facto digital dollar. 

Unsurprisingly, the IMF and the WEF are particularly interested in this synthetic CBDC setup. The question is, which Blockchain will they agree on to power a synthetic CBDC? Will it be a private and permissioned blockchain created by a big bank or a cryptocurrency? Jeremy has consistently posited the prospect of a global stablecoin that will be modeled on the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights or SDR. The SDR consists of multiple national currencies, and Jeremy believes it will eventually include BTC. 

Image source: Coingecko

A Parabolic Shift For USDC

In mid-2020, the USDC’s market cap was on the move parabolically and continued to grow as  USDC expanded to new exchanges and smart contract cryptocurrencies. Algorand was one blockchain that USDC expanded to and seemed to have a very close relationship with both Circle and the Federal Reserve. Interestingly, Circle is based in Boston, Massachusetts, and in the same proximity as MIT, where Algorand founder Silvio Micali is based. 

CBDC reports by the FED note that the Central Bank partnered with MIT to develop its digital dollar and that the FED would begin testing quantum resistance on its would-be blockchain this year. As it so happens, Algorand recently achieved Quantum resistance by introducing State proofs.

Shortly after Circle announced its multi-chain framework, Wall Street veteran and former CLS Bank CEO David Puth was appointed the CEO of the Centre Consortium. You may not have heard of the CLS Bank; however, according to Jeremy, the CLS Bank is the “biggest bank that nobody knows” and, apparently, settles more than $2 trillion of transactions per day between the 70 largest banks on the planet. 

As per the Centre’s blog post, David's job is to ensure “the most significant transformation of the international monetary system since the formation of the Bretton Woods system.” Oddly enough, David recently stepped down from the Centre Consortium to become a senior advisor to Circle, possibly because of Circle's exponential growth, which began in 2021 as Circle raised a staggering $440 million from various crypto VCs, including DCG and FTX. 

During this time, Circle offered high-yield USDC accounts to institutional investors that were returning 8% – 11% yearly, according to an interview with Jeremy from February 2021. This eventually led to allegations by skeptical journalists that Circle was engaging in extremely high-risk, DeFi activities behind the scenes to earn this high yield. Note that this is the same stuff that crypto platforms like Celsius and Voyager Digital did before they went bankrupt. 

Stablecoins Scrutinized Over Collateral Quality

Following the collapse of the crypto market and the appointment of SEC chairman Gary Gensler, stablecoins began to experience a lot of scrutiny, including USDC. The backlash prompted stablecoin issuers to publish details about the assets backing all their billions of tokens in circulation. Paxos came out as the winner for collateral quality, and Circle has since changed the composition of the assets backing USDC to match those of Paxos’s BUSD. As it stands, the USDC in circulation is currently backed by around 80% short-term US Government debt, and 20% is backed by cash. 

Image source: Cointelegraph

Assuming short-term US Government debt means 2-year treasuries, it implies that Circle is earning a yield of around 4% on almost $40 billion of reserves. If you crunch those numbers, that equals over $100 million in pure passive income every month. This incredible potential for passive profit is probably why Circle managed to secure a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) deal for its stock to list on US exchanges.

Towards the end of 2021, Circle started to call for reasonable crypto regulations and seems to have lobbied to that end. The company also continued to expand USDC to other blockchains and started looking into stablecoins for other fiat currencies, notably the Japanese Yen and the New Zealand dollar. 

Also, in late 2021, Terra’s algorithmic UST stablecoin began to gain serious ground in DeFi protocols, where USDC had reigned supreme for almost two years. According to Decrypt, decentralized stablecoins try to avoid governance issues by maintaining their pegs through algorithms instead of through vast reserves of cash and debt. It also means their creation and destruction are done via voluntary free market arbitrage, and nobody can freeze or confiscate these tokens.

Note that all centralized stablecoin issuers have frozen tokens in the past. This occasional freezing of tokens is just the tip of the iceberg because, in a 2020 interview, Jeremy confirmed that Circle has the power to freeze all its stablecoins in circulation. This prospect is disturbing when you remember that Circle has uncomfortably close ties to Wall Street, the IMF, and the WEF. It's also disconcerting to consider that supposedly decentralized stablecoins, like MakerDAO’s DAI, are backed mainly by USDC. MakerDAO’s founder actually called for DAI to drop its peg to get off of USDC after Circle froze a bunch of tokens related to Tornado Cash. 

Digital IDs And BlackRock Emerge On The Scene

In February 2022, Circle announced the release of the Verite platform, which is instrumental in the rollout of digital identities in cryptocurrencies. Two months later, Circle announced that it had received another $400 million of funding in a round led by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager. BlackRock and circle also entered a “strategic partnership,” which would see BlackRock manage Circle’s cash reserves. 

Image source: Decrypt

BlackRock's buy-in bought Circle’s total funding to well over $1 billion, and Crunchbase suggests that this figure is much higher, though the details of all these investments were apparently not disclosed. In any case, the market cap of Circle’s USDC hit an all-time high of over $55 billion in the aftermath of the collapse of Terras UST and the concerns around Tether’s USDT that arose during the chaos. 

Incidentally, in previous interviews, Jeremy had admitted that both stablecoins were competitors to USDC. As expected, Terra's collapse and the temporary de-pegging of USDT led to renewed calls for stablecoin regulation worldwide. It appears Circle has been involved in influencing the regulations relating to the EU’s final draft of the MiCA Bill. According to CoinBureau, this could be very favorable for Circle, in Europe anyway, and opines that it could also be the catalyst for the next bull run. 

Competition Is Rife

It’s nothing new if Circle is leveraging regulations, as incumbents have often used regulation to prevent competition. Even the Goldman Sachs CEO admitted that “burdensome regulation protects our business from startups” shortly after the bank invested in Circle in 2015. What’s interesting is that  XRP is a top competitor to the global system that Circle and the Centre Consortium are trying to create.

And it’s not just regulations these stablecoin issuers are competing with; Cryptocurrency exchange Binance recently announced it would end support for USDC and has since de-listed Circle’s prominent stablecoin. USDC's market cap has been slipping, but it took a plunge when Binance dropped USDC in September 2022. 

This means that Circle has to sell assets behind the scenes to ensure that the supply of USDC is in line with the lower level of demand for USDC following its de facto delisting. It's well within Binance’s right to make this move, and it just goes to show that crypto is hyper-competitive, and every crypto project and company has its way of cementing itself in the industry. 

In Circle’s case, this involves working with questionable global organizations and expanding on-chain, including issuing stablecoins denominated in currencies besides the USD to appease foreign governments and regulators. At this rate, it's more than likely that every national currency will have its own stablecoin issued by the Centre Consortium, a perfect synthetic CBCD. 

As with USDC, all these synthetic CBDCs will be backed by the government debt of their respective regions. It means we’ll all be subsidizing our government’s spending along with lower interest rates for institutions when the “powers that be” inevitably phase out cash. 

But Wait…There’s More

Image source: Coindesk

More recently, Circle announced that it would expand to five additional smart contract cryptocurrencies and introduce a cross-chain interoperability protocol for its stablecoins. It also announced that it had partnered with Jack Dorsey’s Block to bring USDC to Bitcoin and to think Jack Dorsey is a Bitcoin maximalist! 

Circle is also quickly taking over every smart contract cryptocurrency. With its stablecoin reserves being held by the FED, Circle could potentially have access to unlimited liquidity, aka the money printer. With the money printer in its grip, Circle will have the power to control every proof of stake smart contract cryptocurrency. Case in point, Ethereum creator Vitalik Buterin recently admitted that Circle would have the power to decide the future of forks on Ethereum due to its stablecoin liquidity. 

For what it's worth, it looks like Bitcoin’s BTC and physical cash will offer protection from the upcoming dystopia that Circle and its affiliates are not so subtly rushing to roll out. Which begs the question, why else would Jeremy hold most of his wealth in cash and BTC? Maybe, he knows what's coming? 

To Jeremy's credit, he wants stablecoins to be as cash-like as possible, meaning transaction privacy and no KYC. The problem is that the regulators will probably never allow this. As we already know, the institutions' that Circle has aligned itself with explicitly want to take control of every transaction we make forever. 

As mentioned earlier, Circle’s co-founders have a history of building up and then exiting cutting-edge tech companies. This raises the question of whether Jeremy and Sean will do the same with Circle once its stock has IPO’d via the SPAC. Circle could become the most valuable company on the planet if it succeeds in its mission of literally recalibrating the global financial system around stablecoins. 

The only issue with this analysis is that fiat currencies are failing, and stablecoins probably won't help much. Jeremy seems to be highly aware of this, and that is ostensibly why he's so bullish on BTC. As such, it's probably wise to watch whether he leaves Circle after its IPO. If he does, it probably means he knows that Circle will inevitably fail. 

On another note, if you’re wondering which blockchain Jeremy believes will support all of Circle stablecoins, the short answer is all of them. The Circle team seems to be genuinely blockchain agnostic, and Jeremy thinks each smart contract cryptocurrency will have a piece of the financial puzzle. In sum, Circle will probably become the most influential company in cryptocurrency, maybe even the entire world, but it will arguably fail because it's fundamentally leveraging failing fiat currencies.

Image Source: Markethive

The Optimistic Approach

A redeeming feature is that Circle’s domination will make the average person comfortable with cryptocurrency. With special thanks to Guy at CoinBureau for his insights and his take on the final objective, he postulates,

“If I had my tinfoil hat on, I’d tell you that was the end game all along. Partner with all international organizations and the financial system, convince them to adopt stablecoins, sneak BTC in through the back door with an IMF SDR stablecoin and turn BTC into the world's next Reserve currency.” 

That is an outcome we would all love to see because the alternative will see us perpetually enslaved by these technocrats. We must also remember that decentralized cryptocurrency is vastly different from a centralized digital currency and extremely difficult for so-called authorities to over-regulate. I doubt they even know what they’re dealing with to the full extent. 

We have committed and robust communities that are creating ecosystems with crypto utility, built on supply and demand with a free market principle, and will always have a place in society, even if it’s in a Parallel Economy. This is where entrepreneurs rise, reclaim their sovereignty and freedom, and thwart the misaligned, agenda-driven elite. I’ll follow up with an article where we’ll discover what the individuals in power are planning about a new kind of social credit score. It’s wise to be aware. 




Editor and Chief Markethive: Deb Williams. (Australia) I thrive on progress and champion freedom of speech. I embrace "Change" with a passion, and my purpose in life is to enlighten people to accept and move forward with enthusiasm. Find me at my Markethive Profile Page | My Twitter Account | and my LinkedIn Profile.






Tim Moseley