Fintech ?? Food - 13th Feb 2022
Hey everyone???, thanks for coming back to Brainfood, where I take the week's biggest events and try to get under the skin of what's happening in Fintech. If you're reading this and haven't signed up, join the 11,243 others by clicking below, and to the regular readers, thank you.???
?? gm Fintech frens. It seems two things are true at the same time. Everyone is concerned about Crypto regulation, and everyone is trying to build their Web 3 strategy. We're caught in between it will never be, and it always was, which is such an exciting time.
There's such a huge opportunity for us to remake broken things by tinkering with incentives. That theme runs throughout this entire Brainfood. It's time to build.
PS. I'm in the bay area week of 21st Feb if you want to say hi (with a fairly full schedule but first come, first served) ??
Click here if your email client clips this email.
Weekly Rant ??
In Web 3, you can see the whole Elephant.
One of the central criticisms of Web 3 and Crypto has been its "anonymity" or pseudonyms. Critics argue that you can't prevent crime or hold individuals and businesses to account if the networks are anonymous. This is one of the most frustrating misconceptions about Web 3 and is a classic example of people applying the wrong logic for the right reasons.
The legacy financial system is incompatible with anonymity.
In finance, we bake in the idea that we always have to "Know your Customer." Meaning a person has to reveal their legal, government-issued identity to interact with the world of financial services. This is the primary way the industry prevents, detects, and reports any wrongdoing. If someone does a bad thing, the financial institution that KYC'd that person shares the identity with law enforcement, who will arrest the wrongdoer?for all of their wrongdoing.?
Except it doesn't work in practice.
As I've ranted before, Anti Money-Laundering (AML) policy and rules are wildly ineffective at preventing, detecting, and later prosecuting financial crime. The best?research?into the topic suggests it is 99% ineffective.?
Imagine having a car that didn't work 99% of the time.
Sometimes useless things are quite funny. Glass nails, stripey paint, GDPR, etc. But AML is important. AML processes and rules are the primary way to prevent horrible things like human trafficking, modern slavery, terrorist financing, illegal arms dealing, or illicit drug dealing. If you care about preventing children from being sold into sex slavery,?you should care that AML is broken.?
Quite rightly, then, governments and financial institutions take AML very seriously because this stuff matters. For governments, the answer to the question "how do we prevent terrorist financing" is "we enforce strict AML rules." So the idea that new anonymous technology, group, or person is accumulating wealth in ways that don't fit AML is scary (e.g., Crypto). It would be logical if your only defense were the existing AML processes you would implement those processes.?
Politicians just accept this as if it's our best option,?but what if it's not?
In the process, every individual has to hand over personally identifiable information (PII) to every Fintech company and FI they interact with.?
As consumers, we have our identity held by countless organizations, which risk being hacked. When Equifax was hacked, 143 million people had their data exposed.?
So let's recap, the existing process is
The way we KYC, a person relies on a central actor (e.g., your bank or Neobank) to take your documents and store them if something goes wrong. Each bank or Neobank only sees its customers and their transactions. Each bank or Neobank has to report its transactions to the regulator (especially the suspicious ones), so in theory, the regulator or law enforcement should follow up with wrongdoing.?
But the problem is these records represent one view of the world and often don't always match. Each organization has its ledger, records, and way of identifying customers. So the regulator and law enforcement may receive reports, but the trail quickly runs cold because they lack data, or transactions vanish into the black hold of records that don't match or are of poor quality.?
I'm reminded of the parable of the?blind men and the Elephant. The blind men have never come across an elephant before, discovering it by touching various parts. One man touches the tusk and thinks it's a snake; another touches a leg and believes the object is a tree; a third feels the tail and believes it's a rope. This is how we see the financial system today; it's a black hole that we all see bits of.?
New Fintech tools?really really help?here. Comply Advantage, Sardine AI, Unit 21, Hummingbird et al. bring much better visibility and control into the existing system and ruleset. Reducing fraud and AML at the source with better data is something Fintech has done an incredible job at. But ultimately, the weakness in the system is not the entrepreneurs; it's the assumptions baked into the rules we live by.?We also see Fintech companies and incumbents work together to coordinate responses to industry trends and attacks
But can we do better?
Web 3 brings pseudonymity and transparency.
Services like Etherscan or Dune Analytics provide real-time feeds and dashboards to what's happening in these networks. In Crypto, you have eyes and can see the Elephant; but you might not know its name.
Crypto (at the network level) turns the subject of AML on its head completely. In every Crypto network, every transaction is published and is a public record. Every NFT purchase, stablecoin transaction, or trade is published and searchable in real-time. Crypto forensics companies like Chainlysis and Elliptic use this publicly available data to follow activity and transactions across entire networks.
As an example, Chainalysis recently published a report that shows the vast majority of criminal activity in Crypto comes from?a tiny number of actors?(totaling $8.6bn in 2021, compared to the estimated $2trn in the global financial system). There is absolutely no way to know this in the existing financial system.?
Transparency is a double-edged sword.
But the problem with this transparency is it can be hazardous to individuals and undesirable for businesses if your transactions are connected to you. Think about your last three transactions, the last coffee you bought, the item you paid for on Amazon, car refuel, or groceries purchase. If each of those transactions were a public record, it would be effortless to harass you with spam, ads, or worse, attempt to steal from you or threaten your family.?
This is why not attaching identities to transactions in Crypto is a feature, not a bug. Individuals who have amassed millions become targets for criminals.?
If Crypto was truly anonymous, then we should see unlimited criminality. But because we have a global, transparent, and consistent record, the data speaks for itself. Yes, there are scams, wash trading, and things to be concerned about, but Crypto is an upgrade to financial services, especially if we're thoughtful about implementing new rules.
Pseudonymity isn't anonymity.
The DoJ just announced they seized $3.6bn in stolen Bitcoin, which had been moved through more than 25,000 transactions on different exchanges, mixers and darknet markets to evade law enforcement. But in following the trail of transactions, law enforcement found the Crypto exchanges at which the criminals withdrew their stolen funds, and were able to identify the criminals.
With Crypto, you can watch bad things happening in real-time. You might not know who's doing it, but you can "follow the money." Imagine having a GPS tracking a herd of elephants; you still don't know who they are until they interact with something close enough to tell what's going on. The Elephant might come into a reserve and be identified. In Crypto, the criminal will try and use their illicit funds to do something, like buy a house a car, or move it into a centralized exchange.?
This is how Crypto is regulated today; any centralized actor must identify individuals transacting with them. And that's how the law enforcement folks were able to catch the darknet market operators by watching for interactions with the existing system.?
In Crypto, you're not anonymous; you're pseudonymous. But there's a push for that to end publicly and with regulation.
Why can't we have nice things?
What triggered this rant was Buzzfeed journalists?unmasking?the founders of the NFT project Bored Ape Yacht Club. The journalists claimed this was in the public interest, arguing that these founders are wealthy, wealth is power, so what they did was like publishing the Forbes rich list. The journalists pointed out that all of the information they published was publicly available, so there was no invasion of privacy.
I think two things can be true at the same time.
But the journalists and several media outlets acknowledge there has been no evidence of wrongdoing by the BAYC founders.?
The thing I can't get past is if there has been no wrongdoing, why do this? While the project's founders are not artists themselves, they have built a brand that has become widely known and spurred a wave of innovation in branding. "unknown founders" mystique adds value to the project, its investors, and the wider community.?
For me, this is a sad case of doing it for the clicks. Those clicks and ad-revenue fund a journalist's salary that are nowhere near what the NFT project founders could make. Those journalists could also potentially make more themselves as an independent writer. (So there's a question about incentives here that has two sides to it. Some will mourn the passing of journalism as a profession, others, the rise of journalism for clicks).
What has any of this got to do with Fintech or AML?
Now we have regulation coming for Web 3 that's taking away nice things.
Nobody can see your transactions in Crypto unless you're registered with a centralized exchange or Fintech who's helping you access that network. If you use a software wallet (like Metamask or Rainbow) that is non-custodial, those transactions are yours. They're genuinely private, like cash in a leather wallet until you take them to the bank. If you wanted to take that cash to the bank, the bank would first want to identify you to make sure the cash isn’t stolen, etc.
But in the US and Europe, regulators want non-custodial wallets to perform KYC too. The logic being if Crypto becomes mainstream and displaces the existing system, we need a way to identify wrongdoers. It reminds me of asking a leather wallet manufacturer to identify everyone who uses the wallet and where they go. Not only is it impractical, but it also destroys a lot of the value of Crypto and creates a privacy and data nightmare.?How is KYC’ing every Crypto wallet even compatible with Europe’s right to be forgotten? ??♂?
Crypto presents us with a global rail for commerce that's interoperable across countries, regulators, companies, and people. Each country and jurisdiction will want to impose its rules on Crypto,?and it can, but the right starting point isn't what we always did. The right starting point is to lean into what's new.
领英推荐
What would be better?
Old laws never die. But we get to be thoughtful about new laws. We need to regulate the activity, not the rail or the software.
We need to do two things
The on-off ramp is critical. Companies that operate with a leg in Crypto and a leg in the "real world" are essential to manage and prevent risk. But these companies can't individually take responsibility for the entirety of Crypto (as the EU is?currently proposing). Imagine every internet service provider taking responsibility for the entire internet? But Crypto on-off ramps know who?their?customers are and can make sure those customers' source of funds look as clean as possible before off-ramping into Fiat or spending those funds.
1. The more sophisticated on-off ramp.
TradFi and DeFi are like parallel universes. Each one has its own risks that need to be understood and managed.
I imagine the two worlds side by side, TradFi with all of its risks and DeFi with its risks. Not only does every company now need to understand both of these worlds, but they also have to manage the fraudsters who arbitrage and find gaps between TradFi and DeFi.
As every Fintech becomes a Crypto company, the ability to manage risk in these two parallel universes is something everyone will face.?
TradFi and DeFi risk universes look something like this
(Yes, as you can tell, I’m an artiste)
If you’re used to TradFi there’s a whole new skill set to rapidly learn to move into Crypto. Also if you’re straddling DeFi and Crypto, now you need to understand how attackers arbitrage those two worlds.
The learning Fintech companies who want to step into Web 3 have to do is significant. This new world is coming fast, but there are solutions; people understand both worlds and how they interact (e.g., Sardine AI, who just raised their Series A led by a16z ??).
2. Managing Web 3 Wallets elegantly.
Web 3 wallets that are non-custodial, like your leather wallet, present a different challenge. But perhaps we can do more too. We can end in a world where it's possible to know and identify a Web 3 wallet without exposing that person as they transact in Crypto. What if we could store a non-transferable NFT in a wallet that tells any regulated actor that this wallet has been KYC'd (and who by) but didn't reveal the identity? That's what Burrata is building, and I love the simplicity of it.
If a wallet has an NFT, each jurisdiction could see what rules are followed by the issuer of that NFT and, therefore, feel comfortable interacting with that wallet. They could see every transaction ever connected to that wallet and risk score the likely source of funds.
Maybe we can have nice things.
With a sophisticated on-off ramp, and elegant backward compatibility with TradFi we don't break the potential for a future global, inclusive, efficient, and fair financial system.
We might also have a more private world that prevents hacks?and allows us to see the whole Elephant.
And that would be a nice thing.
ST.
4 Fintech Companies ??
1.?Gelt?- Web 3 DeFi savings for normies
2.?Silvr?- Revenue-based Finance in Europe
3.?Infina?- Robinhood for Vietnam
4.?Pluto?- Ramp for the Middle East?
Things to know ??
Good Reads ??
Tweets of the week ??
Find more on substack
That's all, folks. ??
Remember, if you're enjoying this content, please do tell all your fintech friends to check it out and hit the subscribe button :)
Ecosystem solutions, Integrated strategies, Communications, Consultant,
3 年Simon, thank you as ever for your weekly fintech digest emails - as great a treasure as the late Alastair Cook's Letter(s) From America!
Building the Verifiable Web with Chainlink
3 年As per usual, a great read! One question: does the issuer of the non-transferable KYC'd NFTs know all digital asset wallets (across blockchains) of its users and hence all their activity ... ??? Every time a user wants to spin up a new wallet, do they have to get issued such NFT?
CEO @ ANNA.Money Australia, Founder & CEO @ Cape (acquired by ANNA)
3 年Great read and overview on the web2 vs web3 AML & KYC opportunity Simon, thoroughly enjoyed 'the blind men and the ??' analogy ??
Delivering Global ID Verification Partnerships for Fintechs, RegTechs, Finance & Compliance platforms
3 年Thanks Simon Taylor Really insightful on the potential of the ‘new world’.