Banked vs Unbanked (Day 505)
DeFi has been heralded as a knight in shiny armor for the unbanked. There is a strong belief system from people in DeFi to insist on being permission-less, and/or anonymous, or unregulated.
That would be a nice option to have. But why should we exclude the "banked" people--those who went through the identity check and are cleared of any associated money laundering or terrorists and usually are not familiar with managing their own private keys for crypto?
DeFi started as a "proof-of-concept," with many projects still prominently display the warning "use at your own risk". But it has attracted a lot of risk-takers anyways for earning higher yields.
Why should the "banked" be excluded from these products? Why can't we use the DeFi technology and create a platform where all participants are compliant?
Molecule Protocol is trying to do exactly that. To me, DeFi is a technology, and it's been demonstrated on a permission-less ecosystem. However, a compliant ecosystem can also take advantage of this technology.
The yields in the legacy financial system are just pathetic--below inflation--while the middleman is taking all the profits. So, like web 2.0 liberated information, web 3.0 is here to democratize the financial systems.
In the United States, it is widespread to pay by check. When you buy or sell something or provide paid services, the buyer or customer writes a review to the seller or service provider. In turn, the recipient of the bill can cash it. The scheme is as follows. The owner of an account in an American bank can order a checkbook, which can be used for cashless payments. The checkbook contains required information: account number, bank code, holder's name, and personal information. In essence, a checkbook, like a bank card, is tied to a specific bank account. That's why it's now essential to choose banks at https://www.creditdonkey.com/best-national-bank.html