1/ This is an interesting thesis but I think what this misses is that the actual enforcement of ownership for these “tokenized” physical assets will depend on central authorities, and therefore, they are censorable assets.https://twitter.com/TusharJain_/status/989653842257154048 …
-
Show this thread
-
2/ Example: a farmer in Vietnam can own a fraction of a Manhattan building via “tokens”. But who will enforce this ownership? What happens if the issuer deems the poor farmer’s tokens no longer valid? The poor farmer can see his digital "wealth" becoming worthless overnight.
3 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @hugohanoi
And not to mention when you accidentally lose that asset-based tokens.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Yes, this is a great point. Unlike BTC loss of these tokens doesn’t mean loss of the real physical assets, which means there’s a strong temptation to replace them when they’re “lost”. But once you have this process you open yourself up to possibility of fraud/corruption.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
