GS2 Flashcards
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance. Important characteristics of Bitcoin?
Bitcoin’s design allows for
- irreversible transactions,
- a prescribed path of money creation over time,
- a public transaction history
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
What are the design principles?
• Scarcity of a money supply;
• Lacks a centralised authority to distribute coins or to track who holds which coins;
• Issues new currency to private parties at a controlled pace in order to provide an incentive to
maintain bookkeeping system, including verifying the validity of transactions.
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
The “block chain”?
Mining?
1) Data structure that verifies all past Bitcoin activity.
2) the Bitcoin system periodically awards newly minted bitcoins to the user who solves a
mathematical puzzle that is based on the pre-existing contents of the block (the solution must be verified by other users, which can cause a delay).
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
Two fundamental technologies?
- Public-private key cryptography (to store and spend money).
- Cryptographic validation of transactions (an instruction to transfer money is encrypted using the sender’s private key,
confirming for everyone that the instruction in fact came from the sender).
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
What are the intermediaries - Centralisation?
- Currency Exchanges: designated institutions that convert traditional currencies into bitcoins.
Need online infrastructure capable of withstanding attacks including hacking and denial-of-service attacks. - Digital Wallet Services: applications for managing a user’s account in a more convenient way (less space, more mobility, better interface), but prone to hackers.
- Mixers: to preserve privacy against this tactic, mixers let users pool sets of transactions
in unpredictable combinations, thus preventing tracking across transactions (however, timing can still yield a clue). - Mining Pools: more difficult puzzles and lumpy rewards. In response, mining pools now combine resources from numerous
miners. Miners work independently, but share earnings with others in the pool. Threaten the decentralisation that underpins Bitcoin’s trustworthiness (manipulation risk).
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
Users of Bitcoin?
Gambling services, retailers (and consumers), buy & hold for price appreciation
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
Risks in Bitcoin
- Market risk: the value of bitcoins is highly volatile (fluctuations in the exchange rate between bitcoin and other currencies)
- Shallow market problem (liquidity risk): a person seeking to trade a large amount of bitcoins typically cannot do so quickly without affecting the market price
- Counterparty risk: currency exchanges may cease operations (45%) without reimbursing their consumers (46%), while digital wallet services are lucrative targets for cybercriminals
- Transaction risk: (irreversible transactions), possibility to cancel the payment (by the majority/collusion), blacklisting.
- Operational risk: Threats to security of the private key, Miner “51 percent attack”, Denial-of-service attack
- Privacy risk
- Legal and regulatory risk
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
Fighting Crime - types of crime?
- 1 Bitcoin-specific crime (attacks on currency exchanges and infrastructure, e.g. bitcoin theft, attacks on mining pools, and denial-of-service attacks on exchanges to manipulate exchange rates)
- 2 Money laundering (through mixers)
- 3 Bitcoin-facilitated crime: payment for unlawful services delivered (or purportedly delivered) offline, like the illegal goods and services sold on Silk Road and payment of funds in extortion
Bitcoin: Economics, Technology, and Governance.
Future concerns?
- Bitcoin as a Financial Asset —> diversification benefits and arbitrage
- Incentive-compatibility in Bitcoin Protocols
- Privacy and Anonymity —> transaction patterns
- Monetary Policy —> “k-percent rule” – fixing the annual growth rate of the money supply
- Will it replace other forms of payments completely (low cost, privacy, decentralisation)?
- Numerous competing virtual currencies that are waiting to achieve confidence in their values and adoption
Prone to Fail: The Pre-Crisis Financial System.
The key sources of fragility?
- Weakly supervised balance sheets of the largest banks and investment banks - “By relying on these sources of funding, dealers were much more vulnerable to runs than was generally appreciated.”
- The run-prone designs.
- Weak regulation of the markets for securities financing and over-the-counter derivatives.
- The undue reliance of regulators on “market discipline” & too-big-to-fail.
Prone to Fail: The Pre-Crisis Financial System.
Why did regulators fail to safeguard Financial Stability?
Inappropriate goals - protect the customers of financial firms, no focus on financial stability.
Too difficult for regulators to detect the excessive buildup of risk and flight-prone shortrun debt and derivatives.
The historical US emphasis on a decentralised banking system
Irrationally low probabilities to disaster outcomes.
The SEC had not supervised the investment banks (or their subsidiaries) adequately from the viewpoint of solvency.
Prone to Fail: The Pre-Crisis Financial System.
Core Meltdown Risks?
Credit provision dependent on capital markets ->
Largest dealers financed enormous quantities of
inventoried securities with very short-term debt
—> Risks: (1) creditor runs and (2) fire-sale losses
…up to $2.8 trillion in intra-day financing was provided to the dealers every day by the two tri-party
agent banks —> systemic risk (on top of the two agents being large creditors)…
an alternative short-term funding - “commercial paper” (that is, unsecured debt typically issued for up to six or nine months), either directly or indirectly
through off-balance-sheet “structured investment vehicles” (SIVs) created by banks -> liquidity risk
Prone to Fail: The Pre-Crisis Financial System.
Regulatory response since the crisis (financial system)?
- The elimination of intra-day credit provision by tri-party agent banks.
- The securities inventories themselves are also much smaller —> the need for financing has been reduced
- Because of the declining presumption by bank
creditors of “too big to fail,” dealer financing costs have gone up substantially, so the incentive to hold giant inventories is much reduced. - The dependence of dealers on flight-prone financing from money market mutual funds has been lowered by a tightening of the regulation of those money funds.
- Bank capital requirements now apply to all large dealers at the holding company level.
- The two surviving investment banks became regulated as banks; substantial new bank liquidity
coverage regulations have been introduced, forcing runnable short-term financing to be covered by a stock of high-quality liquid and unencumbered assets
Prone to Fail: The Pre-Crisis Financial System.
Why did the over-the-counter derivatives market contribute to the crisis?
- no regulations of the minimum margin, central clearing, and trade reporting
- unobservable counter-party exposures and the degree of their protection by collateral
- as asset prices related to subprime mortgages fell sharply and concern about counterparty creditworthiness grew,
margin calls on derivatives acted as a stress amplifier (AIG’s sudden and heavy cash margin calls on
credit-default-swap protection)
Prone to Fail: The Pre-Crisis Financial System.
Regulatory response since the crisis (OTC)?
- increased use of central clearing
—> improves the transparency of derivatives positions
—> enforces uniform collateral practices that are more easily supervised by regulators
—> all swap transactions must be reported publicly - new regulatory capital requirements
—> all inter-dealer swaps have minimum margin requirements
—> the largest dealers are now subject to markedly higher capital requirements on their OTC derivatives exposures - Compression trading —> fintech approach that helps to eliminate redundant sequences of derivative positions