The Dilemma of half-blockchain cryptocurrency Klay
There’s an ongoing conflict on the listing of the cryptocurrency KLAY by Klaytn. Even the true nature of blockchain is being discussed. This is because KLAY is blockchain but only with half of blockchain’s characteristics. Kakao’s subsidiary blockchain technology company GroundX’s Klaytn is blockchain, but without the fully distributed database like Bitcoin. It is being controlled by Governance Council, which has all decision making power of Klaytn. No one outside of Governance Council can manage Klaytn; and it’s the reason why Klaytn is being critized as “half blockchain.” The main focus of this listing-conflict is that the coin is not based on the fully distributed blockchain database. From Klaytn’s point of a view, important issues such as listing of coin would have been an essential part of discussion since it is centralized. However, people who are pursuing values of traditional blockchain have had valid reasons to misunderstand that Klaytn considered KLAY with the same rights as other cryptocurrencies. Normally, crytocurrency listing is thoroughly discussed within the projects. On the other hand, it’s not so unusual to skip the discussion. Consider Bitcoin or Ethereum that did not require any discussion to be listed. This was possible because it is ‘blockchain.’ Blockchain is not centralized; there’s no ‘owner’ of the system. Therefore, anyone can look into it and participate. This is the true core value of blockchain, and the reason why Satoshi Nakamoto introduced Bitcoin to the world. Exchange companies’ opinions on the listing of cryptocurrencies based on blockchain are clearly revealed in the comments of representatives surrounding the case. GDAC’s CEO HanSeong Hwan stated on Facebook that “exchanges should serve as independent verification agency, and does not have rights to delegate final decisions on whether to list or abolish listings,” and that “it’s great the exchanges are willing to communicate and collaborate with projects, however, the final decision should be made by GDAC.” Coinone’s CEO Mr. Cha also voiced his opinion on the matter on Facebook: “we’ve got cryptocurrencies that anyone can buy or sell, and we’ve also got the market for it. What’s the issue here?” and that “I don’t understand what is the problem here, but if we wanted to control everything, it should have been private blockchain or something similar to T-money.” Projects are helpless when it comes to unauthorized listings. Since the blockchain’s core value lies within its de-centralization, there’s nothing to be done. All it can do is to let the authorized exchanges known to public and no action can be taken on the exchanges. Klaytn may be only half a blockchain, but it’s still blockchain. If there’s a talk of dismissing partnership due to lack of discussion on the matters that were usually skipped for blockchain projects anyways, there’s also a question of how to turn Klaytn into a completely public blockchain. The stance of exchanges is unfortunate. It is understandable that that the overall attitude in regards to blockchain based coins is carefree. However, it should have considered the reasons as to why the project has been hesitating and should have been willing to discuss in full details. Why ruin a good project just because of a simple matter of ‘listing?’ https://www.blockmedia.co.kr/archives/140263 ※This article is published with the permission of Blockmedia.