►
Description
Distributed ledger technologies can without doubt deliver on the mechanics of peer-to-peer transactions. The real issue is creating an ecosystem with a level of transparency and security that consumers, regulators and companies trust. The closer you move to central banks and fiat currencies, the higher the barriers to buy-in and deployment. This panel will cover current and future initiatives as well as the technology, business and regulatory requirements and challenges at play in the efforts to bring new payment and currency models to market on both the wholesale and retail level.
Robert Bench, Assistant Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
Rob Palatnick, Managing Director and Global Head of Technology Research and Innovation, DTCC
Matthieu Saint Olive, Codefi Payments Product Manager, CBDC Advisor, Consensys
Laura Shin, Crypto/Blockchain Journalist + Podcast Producer and Host of Unchained
----
Hyperledger – Open Source Blockchain Technologies
Hyperledger is an open source community focused on developing a suite of stable frameworks, tools and libraries for enterprise-grade blockchain deployments.
It serves as a neutral home for various distributed ledger frameworks including Hyperledger Besu, Fabric, Sawtooth, Indy, as well as tools like Hyperledger Avalon, Cactus and libraries like Hyperledger Aries, Ursa. Learn more about Hyperledger projects: https://www.hyperledger.org/use
Case Studies: https://www.hyperledger.org/learn/case-studies
Training & Certification: https://www.hyperledger.org/learn/training
Tutorials: https://www.hyperledger.org/use/tutorials
Webinars: https://www.hyperledger.org/learn/webinars
Events: https://www.hyperledger.org/events
Vendor Directory: https://www.hyperledger.org/use/vendor-directory
Subscribe to the Hyperledger Newsletter: https://www.hyperledger.org/newsletter
Follow-us on Twitter @Hyperledger
Learn about Hyperledger Membership: https://www.hyperledger.org/about/join
#Hyperledger #Blockchain
A
But
if
you
don't
have
a
community
around
it,
adding
to
it
building
upon
it,
pushing
it
forward
faster.
I
it's
kind
of
it's
not
doesn't
mean
much
right,
and
so
in
celebration
of
that
community
and
in
celebration
of
the
different
use
cases
out.
There,
we've
put
together
this
series
of
panels
to
help
people
understand
where
and
how
the
these
technologies
are
being
used.
A
I
will
also
mention
on
the
hyperledger
website,
at
the
five-year
anniversary
spot,
there
is
a
place
to
claim
a
free
t-shirt.
You
do
have
to
pay
for
shipping.
We
couldn't
sign
up
to
ship
all
around
the
world,
but
I,
if
you
can
cover
that
you
get
a
free
t-shirt
to
help
us
celebrate
the
fifth
anniversary.
A
So
with
that
I'd
like
to
introduce
the
moderator
for
the
panel
laura
shin
laura
is
a
crypto
and
blockchain
journalist
she's
covered
this
space
for
a
lot
of
different
major
publications,
she's,
also
the
host
of
the
unchained
podcast.
That
is
a
tremendous
amount
of
readership
and
has
been
going
for
quite
quite
some
time
now
and
with
that
I'd
like
to
turn
the
mic
over
to
laura
laura.
Take
it
away.
B
Hi
everyone
welcome
to
our
panel,
so
we
have
three
great
speakers
for
you.
One
is
bob
bench:
who's
the
assistant
vice
president
at
the
federal
reserve
bank
of
boston.
We
also
have
rob
palatnik
managing
director
of
global
head
of
technology,
research
and
innovation
at
the
dtcc
and
who
is
also
chairman
of
the
hyperledger
board
and
then
matthieu
st
olive
code,
phi
payments,
product
manager
and
cbdc
advisor
at
consensus.
B
B
C
I'm
sure
thank
you
very
much
laura
and
thanks
thanks
to
the
panelists
and
first,
as
as
chairman
of
of
the
hyperledger
board
of
governors,
I
would
like
to
congratulate
hyperledger
on
on
five
years.
I
think
the
accomplishments,
just
in
helping
push
software
push
the
ideas,
push
the
concepts
and
push
the
discussion
and
bring
together
the
community
in
sessions
like
this
has
been
phenomenal
and,
and
part
of
you
know
the
great
value
that
hyperledger
is
bringing
to
to
the
world
as
we
embark
on
this
journey.
C
So
I'm
I
run.
Research
and
innovation
for
dtcc
dtcc
is
depository.
Trusting
clearing
corporation
we're
a
one
of
the
premier
financial
industry,
post-trade
infrastructures
in
the
world
in
the
united
states,
where
the
primary
mechanism
for
clearing
and
settlement
of
equities
cash
trades
most
of
the
non-futures
and
non-option
markets
all
settle
through
dtcc.
C
D
B
D
D
The
audio
is
the
most
important
so
yep,
so
in
association
with
the
dci
at
mit,
we
are
working
on
a
general
purpose:
central
bank,
digital
currency
research
project.
The
main
idea
here,
as
opposed
to
rob's
organization,
which
handles
the
securities
markets.
We
are
trying
to
understand
what
are
the
trade-offs
in
trying
to
build
a
fiat
alternative
field,
alternative
digital
currency
and
we're
starting
at
the
core
layer.
D
B
E
Hi
so
manchester
to
leave
I'm
leading
consensus
work
on
cbdc
globally.
So
briefly,
transcensis
is
a
software
company,
a
pioneer
in
blockchain,
our
founder
and
ceo,
joseph
rubin
co-created
italian
six
years
ago
and
then
created
consensus
to
build
a
community
around
ethereum
and
we
are
really
in
between
pube
blockchain
innovation
and
enterprise
and
strongly
believe
in
this.
The
convergence
of
the
two
and
cbdc
is
a
great
example
of
this.
E
We
have
contributed
to
apologer
with
hyperledger
bezou,
which
is
an
ethereum
client,
open
source
item
client,
which
was
submitted
almost
two
years
ago,
and
we
strongly
believe
that
hyperledger
brings
a
lot
of
value
by
having
this
by
being
this
greenhouse
with
15
projects
which
allows
for
collaboration
creation
of
standards,
and
all
of
this
is
really
critical
for
for
enterprise
adoption
and
then
more
specifically
on
cbdc.
So
we
are
really
committed
to
support
central
banks
on
cbdc.
E
We
are
working
with
six
different
central
banks
on
cbdc,
pilots,
world
sale,
retail
and
cross-border
pilots
and
yeah
right
now.
We
believe
that
central
banks
do
not
yet
plan
to
go,
live
with
cbdc,
they
need,
they
are
cautious
by
nature,
and
so
they
need
experimentation.
They
need
to
understand,
as
you
said,
bob,
what
are
the
tradeoffs?
What
are
the
capabilities
and
how
to
implement
it
very
concretely,
and
so
it's
a
really
exciting
time
for
us
to
to
see
this
technology
being
used
by
such
high
profile
institutions.
B
E
So
I
think
that
if
I
can
start
briefly,
I
think
there
are
three
main
problems
in
terms
of
which
are
world
sales,
retail
and
and
cross
border,
so
world
sale
there
are
already
existing
rpgs
systems
and
intervention
settlement
which
worked
pretty
well,
but
there
are
delays
and
costs
associated
to
this
and,
more
importantly,
there
is
lack
of
programmability
and
programmability
do
not
solve
the
problem
but
provide
additional
value
for
cross-border
payments.
Obviously
we
are
still
relying
on
our
correspondent
banking
infrastructure.
C
Yes,
so
from
from
a
wholesale
perspective
yeah,
I
guess
mateo
touched
on
on
two
aspects
to
the
digital
currency:
that,
if
realized
in
a
central
bank,
digital
currency,
would
be
of
tremendous
value.
One
is
that
they
would
be
digital
and
there
would
be
a
consistent
methodology
for
for
recording
those
payments
and
tracking
and
tracking
where,
where
the
money
is
moving
and
second,
that
their
program
they're
programmable.
C
So
those
two
things
in
combat
combination
is
what
really
brings
that
value
within
the
wholesale
ecosystem
of
the
financial
industry?
There
are
many
different
process
flows
that
are
really
unique
to
every
asset
class.
So
equities
has
a
particular
process
flow.
Various
fixed
income
transactions
have
process
flows,
money
markets
have
their
process
flow
and
all
of
these
have
their
own
settlement,
workflow
their
own
margin
models.
D
You
want
to
add
anything
sure
I
mean
I
think
you
know
we're
certainly
not
wanted
to
a
blockchain
architecture,
but
you
know.
Certainly
there
are
advantages
there,
resiliency
across
distributed
networks,
there's
benefits
there
again.
Our
research
is
primarily
around
trade-offs
right,
so
the
challenge
with
distributed
networks
is
they're
really
complex
and
complexity
adds
attack
surfaces
and
those
things
can
cause
challenge
to
one
of
our
most
important
goals,
which
is
security
but,
and
certainly
the
traceability
of
certain
blockchains
is
very
intriguing
from
an
aml
cft.
D
Standpoint
right,
the
ability
of
firms
like
chain
analysis
and
elliptic
to
track
funds
globally
fairly
instantly.
As
long
as
you
have
some
kyc
somewhere
along
along
that
trail
is,
is
really
unique
and
interesting
and
new
for
the
aml
cft
world.
So
again,
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
positive
aspects
and
we're
looking
at
those
and
and
what
trade-offs
exist.
What,
with
those
distributed
systems.
B
Yeah,
I
imagine
that
there's
a
segment
of
the
leadership
that
already
has
their
hackles
raised
about
what
you
just
said,
but
actually
before
we
get
to
that,
because
obviously
that
raises
privacy
issues.
I
do
want
to
just
ask
you
about
something
that
you
mentioned
in
the
beginning
about
how
you're
working
on
the
solution
and
you're
going
to
release
the
code
for
it
in
the
summer.
So
I'm
just
curious.
You
know.
D
D
One
is
and
to
be
sure,
our
our
division
will
be
evaluating
public
and
private
platforms
to
test
our
platform,
our
own
in-house,
build,
but
one
you
know,
I
think
it's
it's
really
interesting
to
build
something
from
the
ground
up.
You
learn
a
lot
about
your
platform.
If
you
build
it
yourself,
you
learn
a
lot
about
the
difficulties.
You
learn
a
lot
about
the
trade-offs
that
we
may
not
have
learned.
If
we
exclusively
use
a
provider,
I
think
that's
critically
important
two
is,
you
know
I
think
joining
with
mit.
D
We
are
really
building
on
some
of
the
better
brains
in
this
space.
Neha
narula,
who
runs
the
dci,
has
put
together
a
fantastic
team
from
the
top
cryptographers
and
developers
in
the
world
in
this
area,
and
we
want
to
see
what
they
can
do
with
the
very
unique
design
requirements
for
central
bank
digital
currency.
D
As
far
as
I
understand,
there
is
not
a
single
platform
that
has
exclusively
been
built
for
the
design
requirements
for
central
bank
digital
currency.
There's
been
a
lot
of
enterprise
chains
for
value
for
so
to
speak,
but
we
think
central
banks
have
unique
design
requirements
and
we're
going
to
try
to
build
for
that
purpose.
B
And
matthieu
you've
worked
with
a
number
of
different
governments,
or
consensus
is
working
or
has
worked
with
south
africa.
Singapore,
thailand,
hong
kong,
australia
and
I
just
wondered:
how
do
concerns
differ
across
countries
and
what
factors
tend
to
affect
their
concerns?
Is
it
like
the
size
of
the
country
or
are
there
cultural
factors
or
is
it
about
kind
of
the
existing
penetration
of
fintech
technology?
Or
you
know
how
are
different
governments
thinking
about
this.
E
Yes,
just
before
answering
the
question,
I
just
want
to
react
on
what
bob
said
about
open
source,
which
I
think
is
quite
important,
is
that
one
of
the
great
benefits
of
dlt
is
open
source
is
that
the
transfer
of
values
of
value
capability
is
embedded,
and
so
it's
much
different
from
any
other
technologies
like
database
or
whatever.
Here
you
have,
the
the
protocol
itself
allows
transfer
of
value
which,
and
then,
on
top
of
this
open
source
software
people
will
build
additional
proprietary
applications
and
make
a
business
out
of
it.
E
And
this
we
see
this
as
the
opportunity,
also
to
foster
digital
innovation
and
the
bank
of
england
has
fought
for
tested
a
boost
of
gdp
of
three
percent
with
the
general
purpose
cbdc,
which
I
think
is
quite
exciting,
then,
when
it
comes
to
in
in
our
discussion
with
central
banks,
there
are
several
things
so
so.
First
of
all,
this
technology
is
new
to
them.
E
When
we
look
at
the
at
the
technology
layers,
they
have
some
concerns
about
how
we
can
manage
privacy,
how
we
can
manage
transactions
throughput,
so
how
many
transactions
per
second
you
can
manage
so
and
and
how
will
it
be
interoperable
with
other
systems,
whether
it
is
legacy
systems
or
new
dlt
platforms
that
might
be
built
with
the
same
protocol
or
with
different
protocols?
So
they
have
this.
C
C
You
know
the
the
financial
industry
serves
a
purpose
that
that
benefits
that
benefits
everyone
so
being
able
to
move
assets
and
move
value
in
exchange
for
those
assets,
with
a
complete
confidence
in
the
integrity
of
the
markets
and
in
the
integrity
of
your
that
your
asset
is
accounted
for
or
your
money
is
accounted
for
is
critical
and
dtcc's.
Primary
focus
has
long
been
on
that
resiliency
on
the
safety
and
soundness
of
markets,
and
that
when
you
make
a
trade
of
an
of
a
security,
you
buy
a
stock.
You
sell
a
stock.
C
C
So
when
we
start
looking
at
so
all
of
that
is
kind
of
table
stakes,
that's
the
foundation.
You
know
when
something
goes
wrong
at
two
in
the
morning
today.
Everyone
knows
exactly
what
happened.
That's
the
point
in
time
where
we're
processing
variable
annuities,
or
you
know,
there's
something
in
the
process
that
already
is
going
on
there
that
we've
been
working
on
for
decades.
It's
been
instrumented,
it
comes
up
on
your
alert
screen.
C
You
know
exactly
how
to
respond,
as
we
start
moving
into
replacing
components
of
the
infrastructure
and
especially
the
payment
rails,
you're
going
to
have
to
have
that
same
degree
of
confidence
that
when
something
goes
wrong,
you
know
exactly
how
to
fix
it.
You
know
exactly
where
to
find
that
problem
and
that
the
system
itself
is
resilient
in
the
face
of
security
attacks
of
unexpected.
C
You
know
natural
disasters
of
of
any
kind
of
of
disruption
and
that
the
markets
can
keep
on
operating.
So
our
focus
in
the
wholesale
markets
has
long
been
making
sure
that
train
works
and
that
all
of
it
works
without
problem
without
fail,
and
that
we
can
test
failure.
Scenarios
that
we
can
try
things
out.
C
Payments
is
a
critical
part
of
how
dtcc
processes,
the
equity
markets
have
a
cycle
trading
occurs
on
exchanges.
Today's
cycle
is
at
the
end
of
the
day,
all
day
long.
Those
trades
are
submitted
into
a
organization,
central
securities,
clearing
corporations
and
depositories.
Then,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
traditionally,
we
have
various
netting
cycles.
Some
activities
settle
on
a
two-day
basis,
and
everyone
knows
that
in
two
days,
all
of
your
settlements,
net
down
and
you
have
to
settle.
C
You
either
have
to
send
a
security
or
receive
a
security,
and
then
you
have
to
either
send
a
payment
or
receive
a
payment
and
that
all
nets,
so
200
million
trades
net
down
to
one
million
payments.
So
in
this
world,
with
central
bank
digital
currency,
making
sure
that
that
payment
is
as
reliable
and
as
durable
and
has
integrity,
it's
non-refutable,
it
can't
be
duplicated.
B
So
we're
going
to
get
a
little
bit
more
into
kind
of
the
technical
details
around
how
to
structure
cbdc
on
the
back
end,
but
I
actually
want
to
draw
in
one
of
the
questions
that
came
in
through
q
a
from
jacques
and
hopefully
I'm
not
going
to
butcher
this
name
too
much
be
cone.
Do
it
looks
like
who
wrote
should
cbdc's
be
blockchain
based?
Why
or
why
not?
D
Again,
I
think
one
thing
that
we
try
to
reiterate
is
in
our
research.
We
find
that,
while
I
think
there
is
a
great
value
to
interoperability
among
cbdc's
to
solve
some
of
the
cross-border
issues,
every
country
needs
to
decide
for
themselves
to
design
requirements
right
like
any
good
product
manager.
E
Who
and
others
won't,
but
and-
and
we
also
strongly
believe
that
there
is
no
one-size-fits-all
solution-
it's
just
impossible.
Each
country,
each
jurisdiction,
have
their
specific
requirements,
whether
it's
in
terms
of
a
number
of
number
of
people
in
the
country
or
the
attachment
to
privacy,
and
so
each
approach
is,
will
be
quite
different.
E
But
we
believe
that
at
the
core,
the
core
layer
which
which
is
brought
with
dlt,
which
prevents
all
double
spending,
which
is
really
the
core
of
the
technology
to
preventable
spending
without
a
central
party
to
maintain
a
central
ledger,
is
absolutely
key.
So
this
is
one
of
the
key
benefits.
The
second
one
is
programmability.
E
So
when
we
imagine
programmability,
it's
already
possible
somehow
with
centralized
systems
where
one
one
centralized
party
will
say.
Okay,
if
you
do
this
action,
I
will
do
this
output.
What
is
again
quite
exciting
is
that
with
the
lte,
you
can
create
those
smart
contracts
which
can
execute
themselves
to
depending
on
an
input.
E
They
provide
an
output
and
all
of
this
without
any
central
party
and
with
a
significant
trust,
because
anyone
can
look
at
it
verify
that
it
does
what
it
say
does
and
that's
really
bring
a
lot
of
value
and
then
the
what's
even
more
exciting
is
the
next
step
is
when
we
start
to
have
an
ecosystem
such
an
open
ecosystem,
which
is
very
different
from
our
world
garden
systems.
We
have
today
when
we
have
this
open
ecosystem.
B
So
I
actually
want
to
ask
this
is
a
structure
question
and
this
kind
of
goes
to
what
is
perhaps,
at
least
to
my
mind,
an
inherent
tension
in
the
technology.
As
matthew
was
saying
for
a
distributed
ledger
system
to
work
well,
it
needs
to
be
distributed,
and
obviously
central
bank
digital
currencies
has
the
word
central
in
it,
and
normally
that
does
come
from.
You
know
what
we
think
of
as
a
centralized
institution,
so
for
essential
bank
digital
currency.
What
is
the
back
end
structure
in
terms
of
like
who's
running
nodes?
B
Is
it
all
like
a
permission
chain?
How
do
you
spread
that
out
to
make
it
secure
and
yet
also,
I'm
sure
you
know
the
more
spread
out,
as
we
all
know,
the
kind
of
greater
limitations
on
scaling,
at
least
as
far
as
I
understand?
So
how
are
you
guys
thinking
about
how
to
structure,
given
those
constraints.
D
But
again
and
again,
we
are
exclusively
focusing
on
the
retail
use
case
if
you're
going
to
have
throughput
that's
comparable
to
existing
retail
payment
methods,
you're
going
to
have
impact
there
and
so
understanding
how
you
can
maximize
resiliency,
but
also
throughput
and
settlement
finality,
for
the
retail
use
case
is
one
of
the
most
critical
trade-offs
and
so
again
we
think
less
about
centralization
and
more
about
malicious
actor
intent.
When
we
look
about
you
know,
centralized
distributed
systems.
B
But
can
you,
but
can
you
also
answer
what
I
was
asking
about
in
terms
of
like
who
would
be
running
nodes
and
and
how
do
you
resolve
that
issue
because
is
it?
Is
it
just
a
permission
chain
or
would
there
be
any
way
to
kind
of
open
it
up
to
other
people,
or
is
that
you
know
one
of
the
potential
attack
vectors
for
like
some
kind
of
yeah
unfriendly
actor
on
the
network.
D
E
Yeah,
so
from
our
perspective,
so
today,
central
banks
are
really
focused
on
permissioned
blockchain,
where
the
central
bank
and
the
regulated
financial
institutions,
like
banks
and
payment
service
providers.
We
sorry
we'll
run
nodes
and
this
consensus
will
emerge
through
those
regulated
financial
institutions
and
the
fact
that
the
central
bench
is,
as
you
say,
central.
But
the
fact
is,
there's
the
only
entity
allowed
to
issue
the
cbdc
and
that's
fine
and
that's
again.
E
So
yeah,
really
they
focus
on
this
and
then
this
those
regulated
financial
institutions
for
general
purpose
will
be
responsible
to
distribute
it
to
the
end
users,
but
still
in
this
open
ecosystem,
where
there
is
trust
and
where
the
the
transfers
are
so
simple
between
one
psp
and
the
other,
and
this
is
this
would
be
seamless.
But
we
also
believe
that
and
I'll
finish
with
this,
so
so
is
that
we
also.
We
still
believe
that
central
banks
will,
in
a
couple
of
years,
be
actually
quite
open
to
public
blockchains.
E
We
always
do
this
comparison
with
internet
people
initially
when
they
see
a
new
technology.
They
do
not
understand
it.
They
see
the
problems,
and
indeed
there
are
some
limitations
at
the
beginning
and
and
they
do
not
trust
this
technology,
but
as
it
is
being
implemented
as
it
is
being
used
initially
as
a
niche
and
then
by
more
and
more
companies-
and
we
already
see
large
bench
last
financial
institution
using
public
blockchain.
C
E
C
Add
I'd
like
to
add
a
little
just
just
I
guess,
from
a
hyperledger
perspective
and
and
then
you
know,
I've
been
around
the
industry
over
40
years
and
and
the
the
pace
of
technology
and
the
way
technology
moves
is
not
in
a
straight
line
and,
and
everyone
kind
of
wants,
the
answer
immediately
when
an
idea
came
out,
but
it's
like
finding
a
piece
of
metal
and
imagining
an
iphone.
I
mean
it
just
the
gap
between
those
two
is
a
whole
lot
of
development
exercises.
So
I
think
you
know
the
it's.
C
It's
a
tribute
to
the
consensus
mateo
and
his
company
and
and
joe
lubin
who's,
a
a
colleague
of
mine
on
the
on
the
board
of
hyperledger
that
that
the
ethereum
community
started
out
is
very
public,
focused
and
and
public
chain,
but
with
bezu
and
their
contributions
to
the
community.
They've
made
this
tremendous
investment
in
in
private
enterprise
models
as
well.
C
It's
a
tribute
to
to
bob
bob
bench
and
neha
and
the
work
they're
doing
on
evaluating
new
security
models,
because
security
and
threat
vectors
are
are
ever
present
never
increasing,
and
the
the
role
of
hyper
ledger
with
its
greenhouse
and
its
many
projects
is
to
bring
together
lots
of
different
dimensions.
It's
not
the
game,
isn't
over.
C
It's
like
you
know
when
the
book
on
computers
was
written
50
years
ago
and
saying
all
right,
that's
going
to
be
the
model
and
it
will
have
vacuum
tubes,
and
you
flip
these
switches,
where
the
first
book
on
relational
databases
was
written
and,
and
then
that
was
that
was
the
end
of
it.
It's
a
progression
and
we're
all
learning
from
each
other.
The
fact
that
we
have
these
conversations
and
dtcc
apparently,
is
the
only
one
on
on
this
panel.
That
is
not
writing
its
own
blockchain
software,
but
we're
investing
through
our.
C
We
have
a
couple
of
of
prototype
projects,
project
ion
that's
doing.
Clearing
and
settlement
on
dlt
is
a
fully
functional
prototype
and
we
have
this
project
whitney,
which
is
a
a
private
markets.
Securities
issuance
and
we've
been
able
to
write
those
on
multiple
blockchains,
both
public
and
private,
to
understand
them
to
see
just
the
way
bob
was
explaining
to
see
what
their
scale
dimensions
are,
what
it
means
to
put
out
different
nodes,
what
it
means
from
a
resiliency
perspective
and
we're
all
sharing
and
we're
all
learning
from
each
other.
B
And
something
else
that
I
was
curious
about
before
we
dive
into
what
I
think
is
probably
going
to
be
a
somewhat
meaty
topic,
which
is
the
privacy
issues
that
came
up
earlier.
I
was
just
wondering
you
know,
for
normal
public
blockchains
transactions
are
typically
paid
for
with
a
fee.
Would
that
also
be
part
of
a
central
bank,
digital
currency,
blockchain.
D
D
There
may
be
other
central
banks
that
may
model
it
differently,
but
I
think
questions
about
fee
and
I
guess
the
later
question
privacy
are
really
important
when
you
think
about
things
like
spam
on
network
and
ddos
attacks,
that's
something
that
isn't
really
talked
about
in
cbdc
conversations.
A
lot
is
the
simple
question
of
spam,
but
stopping
spam
is
really
important
and
fees
is
one
way
to
do
it
and
having
really
robust
identity
structures
is
one
way
to
do
it.
E
B
Okay
yeah.
So
now,
let's
talk
about
what
bob
mentioned
near
the
beginning,
which
I
think
is
going
to
be
of
interest
to
a
lot
of
people.
He
talked
about
how
cbdc's
have
the
potential
to
have
built-in
kyc,
which
is
know
your
customer
and
aml
anti-money
laundering
processes
built
into
them,
and
I
think
that,
obviously
you
know
people
have
a
lot
of
privacy
concerns
about
cbdc's,
particularly
maybe
because
one
of
the
first
or
the
first
to
really
be
rolled
out
is
the
dc
ep
in
china,
which
you
know
there's.
B
D
D
What
you
know
when
we
started
our
project.
Our
main
focus
was:
how
can
we
make
something
useful
for
retail
purposes,
primarily
meaning
extremely
secure
with
throughput
and
finality
equivalent
to
leading
retail
payment
systems,
but
one
of
our
learnings
has
been
that
you
need
to
start
thinking
about
privacy
early
in
the
stack.
D
One
thing
that
we've
been
educated
by
the
mit
folks
is
that
the
later
you
add
privacy
to
a
system,
the
less
private
it
becomes,
and
so
that's
something
that
we
are
thinking
a
lot
about,
and
certainly
we
are
not
a
policy
team.
We're
exclusively
a
technology
team,
but
understanding
where
a
policy
needs
to
enter
into
the
platform
is
something
is
absolutely
critical
and
are,
I
think,
more
advanced
discussions
need
to
happen
to
get
a
better
understanding
of
sentiments
around
privacy
with
regards
to
payments,
because
I
think
it's
still
largely
undefined.
B
D
We're
not
like
going
directly
into
say,
z,
cash
from
narrow.
We
have
cryptographers
that
have
worked
on
both
platforms.
Deeply
that
understand
those
methods
very
very,
very
well,
but
that's
not
like
we're,
not
modeling
any
of
our
systems
to
date
off
of
zcash
or
monero
or
any
platform
that,
like
that,
you
know
without
question.
The
state
will
have
to
perform
its
financial
intelligence
functions.
I
think
any
institution,
whether
it's
us,
whether
it's
dtcc
a
large
banking
entity.
D
E
What's
more
important
is
the
decision
of
the
central
bank
of
how
they
want
to
design
it.
But
when
we
look
at
the
wall
cell
layer
so
between
the
central
bank
and
the
financial
institution,
I
think
it
is
commonly
agreed
that
the
central
bank,
the
the
bands,
do
not
want
other
bands
in
the
network
to
see
their
transactions
the
value,
the
the
quantity
of
activity.
E
So
I
think
that's
that's
one
point
and
then
for
retail
application
there
will.
There
are
different
approaches,
as
you
say,
as
as
far
as
I
know,
in
china
it
will
be
quite
open.
So,
even
if
the
identity
of
the
users
are
not
directly
visible
on
the
cbdc
platform
and
the
cdc
ledger
there,
you
will
see
all
the
transactions,
you
will
see
history
of
transaction,
and
so
you
could
deduce
some
of
the
identities.
E
So
this
is
one
option
and
then
there
are
honestly
a
lot
of
technical,
technical
options
to
to
to
abstract
or
to
create
additional
layers
of
privacy,
just
to
mention
it.
They
are
the
most
adopted
ones:
ideas
around
implementation,
leveraging
their
own
knowledge,
proof
or
privacy
groups.
So
they
are
basically
different
approaches
which
yeah
we
will
depend
on
the
use
case
and
the
jurisdiction
and
the
objectives.
B
B
So
in
general,
how
are
a
lot
of
cbds
sorry,
how
are
a
lot
of
central
banks
thinking
about
how
to
get
cbdc's
adopted
in
terms
of
you
know
whether
or
not
they'll
use
commercial
banks,
the
way
that
they're
used
now
or
whether
they'll
have
their
own
retail
accounts?
Or
you
know
just
what
are
they
thinking.
D
Yeah
sure
I'll
start
that
that's
starting
with
the
banking
intermediation,
that's
a
critical
question
right.
There's
really
really
important
policy
implications
to
changing
the
current
intermediary
model.
Some
some
countries,
such
as
china,
have
are
going
with
a
two-tier
model.
There
are
certainly
advocates
for
continuing
the
two-tier
model
here
in
the
united
states.
That's
something
that
has
like
we
said
trade-offs,
there's
costs
and
benefits
to
that.
Certainly,
a
direct
model
to
a
central
bank
requires
a
material
operational
uptick
by
the
central
bank's
activities.
Doing
retail
compliance
retail
servicing
is
hard.
D
It's
a
lot
of
work,
it's
very
different
than
wholesale,
and
I
think
that's
something
central
banks
would
be
fairly
new
to
most
central
banks.
I
think
there's
a
world.
Some
central
banks
are
looking
at
payment
service
providers
and
technology.
The
technology
community
has
gotten
very
good
at
directly
handling
retail
customers.
That's
something
that
we
need
to
learn
from
as
a
central
bank
of
how
they
do
it
and
and
what
makes
them
so
good
at
it.
But
again
I
think
that's
something.
That
is
what
we
call
phase
two
question.
D
We
don't
think
the
core
code
base
really
changes
much
if
you
go
through
a
two-tier
model
or
a
direct
model
or
a
payment
service
provider
model.
But
I
think
what's
critical
is
institutions
like
the
federal
reserve
understand
the
impacts
of
any
change
to
the
model
right?
So
what
does
that
mean
for
small
and
community
banks
if
their
deposit
base
erodes
to
some
extent
because
of
cbdc's?
D
D
I
think
there
certainly
could
be
right.
I
I
think
there's
so
with
the
fdic.
Does
a
really
great
research
every
year
on
the
unbanked
and
the
underbanked.
That
is
something
that
is
a
really
thorny
question
and
has
been
really
hard
to
fix.
What
we
do
know
from
the
fdic
study
is
that
certain
people
are
unbanked
because
they
choose
not
to
enter
into
relationships
with
banks.
D
An
open
question
is:
would
they
enter
a
direct
relationship
with
a
central
bank?
Maybe
maybe
not?
We
don't
know
that
answer,
but
that
is
something
that
is
seen
at
least
by
some
researchers.
A
positive
is:
are
there
the?
Are
there
certain
unbanked
persons
who
would
rather
work
directly
with
the
government?
C
Yeah,
I
mean,
I
think,
one
of
one
of
the
the
general
first
laws
that
that
we
all
adhere
to
is
do
no
harm.
So
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
different
ways
of
looking
at
the
the
alternatives
that
technology
can
bring.
But
there
are,
there
are
definitely
some
capabilities,
like
the
comments
we've
all
made
about
resiliency
and
and
security
that
have
been
quite
durable
over
over
many
decades,
and
we
don't
want
to
lose
a
lot
of
those
those
values.
C
B
Well,
rob
I
actually
wanted
to
ask
you
a
question
about
what
you
said
about
how
you
know
you're
not
trying
to
do
too
much
damage
with
whatever
changes
you
make
or
do
no
harm.
But
you
know
this
technology
obviously
could
bring
a
lot
of
benefits
if
it
were
to
to
do
more
than
simply
just
keep
the
existing
processes
in
place.
So
in
that
regard
like
how
do
you
kind
of
work
with
the
different
stakeholders
to
talk
about
what
different
benefits
you
could
get
if
you
were
to
embrace
more
disruption.
C
I
completely
agree
with
you,
so
let
me
just
make
make
that
clear
and
I
think
most
of
us
that
are
in
certainly
in
this
in
this
conversation,
but
in
this
ecosystem
and
that
are
trying
to
push
the
technology
agree
with
that
idea
as
well.
I
just,
I
think,
we've
got
this
tool
and
we're
a
little
bit
afraid
of
the
power
of
this
tool.
C
It's
like
a
lightsaber
in
the
hand
of
a
three-year-old
and-
and
there
there's
a
bit
of
you,
know
to
some
of
the
questions
that
are
on
the
q
and
a
and
the
earlier
question
before.
Do
we
need
dlt,
distributed
ledger
to
answer
central
bank,
digital
currency
or
even
advan
increasing
or
improving
the
efficiency
of
of
equity
settlement
or
or
any
asset
settlement?
C
The
fact
that
the
entire
world
is
is
basically
spending
a
tremendous
amount
of
energy
on
reconciliation
of
information,
constantly
that
everyone
on
this
call
has
a
different
view
of
what
a
ledger
is
of
of
how
much
money
or
how
many
assets
they
have
on
the
ledger.
And
then
we
have
to
go
through
a
variety
of
different
protocols
to
to
reconcile
what
we
all
should
know.
As
a
central
truth
is
something
this
technology
can
answer,
does
it
need
to
answer
it
in
a
broad
public?
C
Either
proof
of
work
proof
of
stake
model
is.
Is
it
able
to
trust
certain
entities
like
federal
banks
like
governments,
like
certain
institutions
that
were
created
specifically
for
trust?
How
do
you
trust
them?
In
the
you
know,
event
of
of
security
and
malware
onslaughts
and
and
various
actors
looking
to
subvert
that
these
are
all
questions
that
need
to
be
answered,
but
the
basic
premise
that
this
technology
can
enable
much
more
efficient
interactions,
much
more
efficient
tracking
of
of
sources
of
truth.
B
C
I
think
that's
more
towards
bob
and
and
the
fed
I
mean,
I
think,
the
the
the
aspect
of
stable
coins
right
now
is
a
way
of
creating
equivalence
with
with
the
the
crypto
ecosystem
and
what
that
evolves
into
once.
There's
additional
once
there's
viable
fiat
currencies
issued
by
governments
and
viable
other
types
of
currencies
issued
by
organizations
like
facebook
and
and
consortium
that
that
support
that
how
that
balances
out
with
the
the
values
underneath
cryptocurrencies
will
be
an
interesting
thing.
We're
all
interested
in
seeing.
E
E
So
I
think,
there's
two
two
different
themes
with
cbdc
and
stable
joins
one,
and
it's
about
the
aspect
of
money.
It's
either
it's.
It
is
a
store
value
and
a
means
of
payment,
and
I
believe
that
it's
unlikely
that
stablecoins
will
become
widely
adopted
as
a
store
value,
for
instance,
even
library
as
a
facebook
project.
E
People
will
pay
with
this,
but
you
will
not
keep
your
earnings
and
your
salary
and
in
your
in
your
whatsapp,
it
just
doesn't
make
sense,
and
so
what
the
the
way
we
derive
this
is
that
we
believe
that
some
stable
coins
or
cbdc
will
be
more
appropriate
to
specific
use
cases.
And
so,
for
instance,
we
see
on
the
pubic
blockchain
meter
thereo,
which
is
a
stable
coin,
which
worked
very
well
but
and
the
the
way
it
is
built
and
organized
is
fully
decentralized.
E
It's
done
by
a
community,
and
it
will
probably
not
make
sense
for
dtcc
to
use
it.
The
ttuc
will
very
likely
prefer
a
cbdc
issued
by
the
fed,
but
it
would
make
sense
for
a
number
of
projects
that
happen
in
the
web3.0
and
and
and
similarly,
we
believe
that
some
stablecoin
will
be
preferred
for
niche
use
cases
and
will
basically
coexist
with
cbdc.
D
Yeah,
so
with
regards
to
stable
coins,
you
know
we
think
about
this.
A
lot
I
spent
my
prior
career
helping
build
one
of
the
larger
stable
coins
out
there,
usgc
yeah
circle,
yep
and,
I
think
most
stable
coins
right
now,
aside
from
dye,
are
commercial
bank
deposits
on
a
new
rail.
It's
it's
commercial
bank
money
and,
I
think,
that's
fundamentally
different
than
central
bank
money,
and
I
think
that
you
know
for
the
countries
that
bring
out
cbdc's.
I
think
that
they'll
they'll
continue
to
coexist
with
stable
coins.
D
I
think
the
stablecoin
use
case
will
continue
and
I
think
that
they
will
co-exist.
I
think
there
is
a
use
case
for
direct
central
bank
money
in
a
digital
form
for
retail
persons,
whether
or
not
the
united
states
chooses
to
do
so.
It's
a
major
policy
decision
above
my
pay
grade,
but
I
think
certainly
countries
will
certain
countries
are
going
to
go
forth
with
retail
cpcs
and
enable
retail
persons
to
have
central
bank
money.
D
But
I
think
stable
coins
will
continue
to
exist
with
through
the
commercial
banking
system,
moving
commercial
bank
money
on
new
payment
rails
and
are
going
to
achieve
significant
innovation
through
that
way.
Certainly
there's
brilliant
women
and
men
working
on
the
problems
that
can
be
solved
with
commercial
bank
money
on
these
rails,
and
certainly
our
team
looks
to
learn
from
them.
But
I
think
there
are
fundamental
diff,
fundamentally
different
use
cases
for
commercial
bank
money
on
these
rails
and
central
bank
money
on
these
rails.
C
I'll
I'll
start
so
we're
we're
actually
building
a
fully
functional
prototype.
We
call
project
ion
working
with
the
our
financial
industry,
clients
to
simulate
clearing
and
settlement
on
a
distributed
ledger
in
a
accelerated
settlement
type
model.
Where
you
can
optionally
say
I
want
to
settle
this
trade
immediately.
I
want
to
settle
this
trade
in
a
hourly
net.
C
I
want
to
settle
this
trade
in
two
days,
so
some
something
that
combines
the
the
current
ecosystem
and
a
digital
asset
ecosystem
we're
expecting
to
implement
a
cash
token
as
part
of
implement
of
part
of
that
prototype
build.
But
we've
been
talking
to
the
digital
dollar
project,
about
making
this
an
eligible
pilot
for
central
bank
digital
currency
in
the
wholesale
markets.
C
E
Great-
and
I
said
I
think
we
are
kind
of
at
a
turning
point
where,
in
in
the
last
couple
of
years,
central
banks
have
been
testing
the
technology
to
understand
whether
or
not
it's
technically
possible
to
create
a
cbdc,
and
I
think
when
you
look
at
all
the
reports,
all
conclude
that
it
is
possible.
There
are
some
scenes
where
the
technology
has
to
be
pushed
further.
But
basically
it's
possible.
D
D
I
think
that's
really
compelling,
because
you
don't
have
the
thorny
issue
of
privacy
and
identity,
and
I
think
there
could
be
compelling
compelling
developments
in
that
front
if
you
get
the
right
stakeholders
in
the
room,
but
I
think
you
know
policymakers
are
going
to
start
catching
up
with
technologists
in
this
area
and
I
think
that's
going
to
be
really
really
helpful.
Folks,
like
the
digital
dollar
project,
consensus,
hyperledger,
educating,
policymakers
and
getting
them
up
to
speed
is
really
going
to
enable
this
technology.