4 min read
|
Saved February 14, 2026
|
Copied!
Do you care about this?
The article critiques the outdated infrastructure of traditional finance, highlighting how systems still operate under analog principles, causing inefficiencies like delayed settlements. It contrasts this with the rising influence of cryptocurrency and the evolving attitudes towards regulation in the sector.
If you do, here's more
Financial markets and banks maintain their closing hours due to outdated systems rooted in their analogue past. For instance, the T+2 settlement period for certain transactions is a remnant of this antiquated architecture. It's ironic that while many aspects of the economy have evolved—like same-day delivery for furniture—money transfer systems lag significantly behind. Traditional finance proponents point to advancements like SWIFT GPI and FedNow as progress, but these are minor improvements, akin to upgrading fax machines rather than a complete overhaul.
The conversation around cryptocurrency is shifting as regulators begin to engage with the sector. Critics who once labeled crypto as dangerous due to a lack of regulation now warn that regulation might increase risks. This change mirrors the narrative around Bitcoin, where earlier criticisms about mining locations have morphed into concerns about regulatory controls. The reality is that China's approach to crypto isn't about outright bans; it's about exerting state control over the industry.
Moreover, the limitations of the Lightning Network (LN) in Bitcoin transactions reveal the challenges ahead. While LN offers a way to route payments through various channels, its design can lead to capital constraints, as users must pre-fund channels. Concerns also extend to Bitcoin’s role as an inflation hedge. Critics often cite its poor performance in 2022 during high inflation, but this perspective overlooks the complexity of what constitutes a good hedge. The dollar itself was the best hedge against dollar inflation that year.
Central banking practices also come under scrutiny, particularly regarding the Federal Reserve's response to the banking crisis. After increasing deposits during the pandemic, the Fed's rapid rate hikes led to instability, prompting calls for new interventions, such as total deposit guarantees or a regional TARP. The Fed's historical response to crises often involves expanding its powers, which raises questions about the long-term implications of such actions.
Questions about this article
No questions yet.