Identity 3.0: The ego in the Bitcoin evolution

We embark on a journey to personality: What does identity mean? How do we move from analogue to digital identity? On the way there, we illuminate historical concepts of identity until we arrive at the topic of digital identity and blockchain – and can ask ourselves: Who and how will we be? Today: Identity 3.0: The ego in the digital mirror.

After great historical leaps, we suddenly find ourselves in the near past and almost in the present. After we have clarified that identity is no longer seen as something identical, but rather as something fragmented, the search for traces of this intangible construct continues. So let us venture into the infinite vastness of the net and search there for the shreds of identity.

Particularly with regard to the decentralization explained in Part 2, the Internet offers many possibilities for Bitcoin evolution fragmentation. Not only between the different online identities, but also between the online and offline identities. But one after the other.

The Bitcoin evolution stage

For a better understanding of the Bitcoin evolution, a (admittedly very simplified) assumption from psychology is explained here. In the middle of the 20th century, the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan developed an explanatory approach to the emergence of human consciousness, which he called the mirror stage.

He assumed that toddlers, who see themselves for the first time in the mirror, develop an awareness of their existence. They recognize themselves in the mirror and identify themselves with it – the self-image develops. Meanwhile, according to Lacan, a split develops: the (inner) ego separates from the “non-ego”, i.e. the image it has of itself. The image that the child develops from itself “slips” to the outside and is in the realm of the imaginary. According to Lacan, the toddler experiences great joy in this first identification with himself and forms the basic framework of what is later called (self-)consciousness.

The Internet as a mirror

If one takes this assumption of the mirror stage with all its controversy and (necessary) simplification as a basis, it can be found in the depths of the World Wide Web in all conceivable variations. The profiles we create there do not only serve as mirrors. Furthermore, this mirror can (almost) be shaped and updated at will – you can change it according to your wishes, no matter how much it is connected to the reality you live in.

Duckface: Very important for self-image
Let us remember the social roles from Part 2: We behave differently depending on the context. Whether in the vicinity of our family, with friends or at work – in every environment we play a different theater.

In the end, it’s the same on the net. The majority of people probably still use Facebook to inform their generously defined circle of friends about their opinions, holiday photos or the latest separation without being asked. For fast news one uses Snapchat, WhatsApp or Telegram, for the visual “claim” one provides on Instagram. If one wants to push its ICO effectively, one presents oneself as seriously as possible on LinkedIn, while one looks on Tinder for the love of its life.

You design your respective profile as appropriate as possible to the respective context – without (necessarily) paying attention to whether everything is real. You design your digital self-image. At will.

US Congress: Expert promotes end of capital gains tax for Bitcoin evolution

There is disagreement among the members of the American legislative body on how to counter crypto currencies. In particular, one member of parliament positions himself radically and calls for a ban on mining and crypto trade. However, one of the invited experts opposes this and puts forward a number of good arguments to Congress.

There had been some controversy in the US Congress Finance Committee on Wednesday. On the agenda of the meeting was the topic “The future of money: digital currencies”. While it is gratifying that American lawmakers are increasingly dealing with crypto currencies, the meeting also shows that there is still a long way to go before we understand crypto currencies.

Brad Sherman: Bitcoin evolution trading and Bitcoin mining banned in the USA

The democratic representative from the state of California, in particular, raved against Bitcoin evolution. He even went so far as to ban US citizens from buying or mining crypto currencies like in this review about the Bitcoin evolution. “Mining alone consumes electricity, which is taken away from other purposes and increases the country’s CO2 footprint. As a means of exchange, the Bitcoin evolution does nothing but facilitate drug trafficking, terrorism and tax evasion.” said Sherman’s devastating verdict.

Instead, the deputy is acting as an advocate for national state currencies, which he wants to protect from competition from the Bitcoin:

“The blockchain is a good technology, but it can also be used in conjunction with state currencies. Crypto currencies cannot do anything that state currencies cannot do. The US dollar is decisive for the strength of the US in the world. Without the US dollar, we could never have forced Iran to the negotiating table.”

The expert speaks: Good reasons for Bitcoin evolution

In contrast, Norbert Michel, director of the Centre for Data Analysis of the conservative American think tank Heritage Foundation, makes a statement about the Bitcoin evolution. He was part of a team of invited guests who were supposed to bring expertise to the round of deputies. Michel is in favour of promoting Bitcoin evolution technology and its applications rather than slowing them down.

“Yes, it is true that criminals used Bitcoin. But criminals have also used airplanes, computers and cars. We should not criminalise any of these instruments just because criminals use them”,

Michel commented on the accusations against Bitcoin.

Competition on the currency market could also stimulate business. The government should therefore treat all currencies equally and leave it to citizens to decide how they would like to pay their bills.

“This means that no particular form of money should be given a legal advantage and that all legal obstacles to the use of alternative forms of money should be removed. The abolition of capital gains taxes on purchases with alternative currencies, including crypto currencies and foreign currencies, would be an important step”.

Central bank coin not a good idea
Norbert Michel is also opposed to the idea of a crypto currency issued by a central bank. The big advantage of crypto currencies is their decentralization. This would be lost through dependence on a state-controlled central bank. This would give the state back its complete monopoly over the currency market – at the expense of the economic freedom of the individual.

The eternal debate: How much Ripple is in XRP?

For many crypto investors and interested parties, the terms ripple and XRP are used synonymously. The company Ripple Labs, however, insists on considering both terms separately. In addition to ideological correctness, there is also a pragmatic reason behind this – the SEC threatens regulation.

Ripple wants to make the differences clear

“The ripple price is rising rapidly”, “A ripple currently costs just under 0.50 US dollars” or “More and more investors are betting on ripples” – these kinds of statements can be heard again and again in cryptospace. But how accurate is such a designation?

If you ask those responsible at Ripple themselves, then statements like the ones mentioned above are simply inadmissible. For some time now, the slogan “XRP is not Ripple” has been used, which primarily means “XRP is not ONLY Ripple”. Ripple is rather a company that offers global payment services for financial institutions. The token naturally plays an important role in the Ripple ecosystem, but it is just a gear in the transmission. XRP is the fuel that keeps the functions in the Ripple network – primarily xRapid – alive.

Ripple further elaborates on this distinction on its website

The company Ripple is currently making every effort to highlight the differences between Ripple and XRP. Recently, the company posted a graphic on its Twitter account. It contrasted the two terms and separated the company from the coin. In it, XRP is not even described as an essential element of the Ripple ecosystem, but as an “independent digital asset” based on open source.

It says that the XRP Ledger cannot be owned by a single person or institution, but exists independently. Accordingly, despite the high proportion of XRP held by the company, Ripple does not control the crypto currency. The success or failure of the XRP token is rather the responsibility of the community of investors and users of the tokens. Another point highlighted by the Ripple makers is that an investment in the Ripple company is not to be equated with an investment in the XRP crypto currency.

In the course of the rebranding of the XRP token, the icon of the crypto currency was also changed. Previously, the three circles connected in the middle, which represent the company’s logo, had also been used for the token. In the future, X, which is cut horizontally in the middle, will emphasize the independence of the token. Thus, the equation of company and crypto currency is to be made visually more difficult from now on.