The scope of this article is to examine the positive (bright) and negative (dark) aspects of virtual currencies by critically assessing the relevant literature. In addition, the findings from the bright and dark side are the groundwork for the discussion of how crime prevention units and financial supervisors addressed to specific issues with virtual money. On the bright side, virtual currencies can provide a reasonable level of privacy but are not fully anonymous. Second, the academic discussion about the price stability of Bitcoins is split into two opposing groups. Critics find that the decentralised feature of virtual currencies is a significant disadvantage of the technology because it seriously reduces the flexibility to respond to economic shocks. In contrast, supporters argue that centralised operations by monetary authorities are actually inducting financial instability. Third, virtual currencies charge in overall less fees for payments and achieve similar processing speed compared to electronic payment systems. On the dark side, virtual currencies mainly operate outside the banking system and do not endanger the global financial stability at this stage of development. Second, technical improvements in the technology could increase consumer protection similar to established payment services. Finally, the lack of physical contact provides more options for money laundering and tax evasion than traditional ways do. In conclusion, the global legislation is still hesitant to implement a robust regulatory framework. As such, the effect of the recent legislation by crime prevention units and financial supervisors remains toothless.
To cite this article: Milenko Josavac (2017) ‘The Bright and the Dark Side of Virtual Currencies. Recent Development in Regulatory Framework’ International Journal of Community Currency Research 2017 Volume 21 (Summer) 1-18 <www.ijccr.net> ISSN 1325-9547. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.15133/j.ijccr.2017.005
A cryptocurrency market based on the blockchain technology is characterized by the coexistence of a steady-state supply and a volatile e-money’s demand. In this study a cointegration test establishes a long-run relationship between the internal demand of Bitcoins and prices. From this result, we propose to restrain the intrinsic volatility of any cryptocurrency based on the Blockchain technology by introducing a sidechain pegged to the parent chain.
Sidechain, Community currencies, Blockchain, Bitcoin, Demurrage, cryptocurrencies
This paper concerns the open source software project Bitcoin, which is often described as virtual cash. The paper investigates what ‘virtual’ signifies when applied to ‘cash’ and in turn what ‘virtual cash’ says about Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the latest cryptographic effort to create digital cash-like tokens, where Bitcoin’s designer Nakamoto argues that users now no longer have to trust a third party, traditionally the bank. Paradoxically, for Bitcoin it is key that nodes in the network agree on the status of the shared block chain database. Trust remains to be established, albeit in a different manner. Power is not destroyed, but transferred from banks to Bitcoin’s protocol. The paper concludes that ‘virtual’ refers to Bitcoin’s model of how cash appears to function in everyday exchange, allowing user privacy. Bitcoin does not model another aspect of cash, its function as a credential referring to debt. Bitcoin discontinues the concept of debt.
To cite this article: Jansen, M. (2013) ‘Bitcoin: The Political ‘Virtual’ of an Intangible Material Currency’ International Journal of Community Currency Research 17 (A) 8-18 <www.ijccr.net> ISSN 1325-9547 http://dx.doi.org/10.15133/j.ijccr.2013.002