bitcoin, blockchains, and “Crypto”
This remains the area on which I still receive the most questions, so I’ve created a page specifically to answer those questions.
I’ve been involved with Bitcoin since 2013, initially as a hobby, before working more and more with enterprises and startups through 2014 until it became formalized as my full time role mid 2015. I served as the Blockchain Strategy Leader for Financial Services at EY from that time until my departure in August 2018 after 10 years at the firm. In that role I led a global team, overseeing the development and execution of services to financial institutions and startups in the blockchain and cryptocurrency industries.
In that role and since, I have advised financial institutions, large enterprises, startups, regulators and policy makers on blockchains and cryptocurrency, assisting on custody, regulatory, control and security implications.
A few examples include:
Risk and controls assessment of the first institutional bitcoin custody platform established by a major financial institution
The development of a bitcoin strategy for the first major payments company to release a bitcoin product
Anti-money laundering assessment of one of the first bitcoin derivatives platforms
Advising multiple regulators and policymakers including the White House and the Prime Minister of Australia on Bitcoin and related technologies
I’ve also contributed to and led industry initiatives around digital identity and decentralised reputation systems, producing industry leading research for industry organisations.
While initially pro- everything blockchain as you would see in my earlier press, after a year of co-investing with clients I began to question my assumptions. Quite simply, I started asking the question: what if I built this product without a so-called blockchain? In the end, I found that everything could be built without a blockchain using other technologies: everything, that is, with the exception of censor-resistant money. That’s the problem Bitcoin sought to solve.
Consequently, I spoke of the potential for bitcoin and its increasing relevancy in the press, conferences, with clients, and several Bloomberg appearances while other blockchain leaders were still promoting “blockchain not Bitcoin”.
Ultimately one of the reasons I left my leadership role at EY was a disconnect between what the market was asking for - and thus, what a large corporate must provide - and these technical fundamentals. An overwhelming demand for private blockchains from clients, and a total resistance from the same clients to accept that said private blockchains provided them with no value, meant that I could either compromise my principles, or leave the role. I chose the latter.
On leaving, I was able to be more vocal about my views, which led to pieces in Barron’s, Bloomberg, and CoinDesk, amongst others.
Unfortunately however, we have moved from “blockchain not Bitcoin” to “crypto not Bitcoin”, and making all the same similar mistakes: starting with the assumption that crypto is de facto “the future” and therefore good, and not actually looking at what problems we’re trying to solve, and whether a particular technology is the best way. Let alone ever actually defining “crypto”, which has now lost all meaning, having become little more than a marketing term.
With every industry boom cycle new entrants come into the market and make the same mistakes as previous cycles: but regardless of how much price may go up in the short term, in the end, like with the Dotcom boom and crash, you ultimately need to solve a problem people have.