While presiding over the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee Political Bureau’s meeting on Oct. 24, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) said that blockchain technology would play a key role in the next phase of China’s technological development, and the nation must be at the forefront of theory and innovation in the industry, building an advantage.
Looking at Xi’s plans, Taiwanese might believe that the next big trend will be blockchain technology, and express disappointment that Taiwan lags behind in this field.
However, it is more important to consider the contradiction between the fundamental nature and spirit of blockchain technology on the one hand and Chinese governance mechanisms on the other. The discrepancy is so obvious that it makes Chinese policymakers appear a bit muddle-headed.
Blockchain technology emphasizes decentralization, as each user can add new content to a chain and is responsible for verifying the accuracy of past data.
In a totalitarian nation like China, the government clings to all the power. If everyone is participating in blockchain technology, how could the government retain centralized control of speech and expression, or disseminate party doctrine and manage online activity? This is the first contradiction.
Blockchain technology is valuable because data on a blockchain cannot be easily falsified and it confirms the integrity of the blocks.
As the data and records cannot be changed, how would the provincial governments forge their economic data, and how would the government remove unfavorable online content or block search results containing certain keywords?
Clearly, blockchain technology is inconvenient for a totalitarian government. This is the second contradiction.
A characteristic of blockchain technology is the anonymity it provides. This is one reason the cryptocurrency bitcoin is almost untraceable, making it a popular tool for money laundering.
However, in China, people have to scan their faces just to be able to log on to the Internet, and all online activity is done under the user’s real name.
How can Beijing possibly tolerate the existence of a technology that protects people’s privacy and their anonymity? This is the third contradiction.
The Chinese government and blockchain technology are clearly incompatible. That being so, what does Xi have up his sleeve?
Perhaps what he really wants to push for is “blockchain with Chinese characteristics.”
For example, when it comes to changing blockchain data, perhaps Beijing would be the only user permitted to do so, allowing it to remain anonymous and untraceable when monitoring other Internet users. Meanwhile all other Internet users would need to fully disclose their identities online and so on.
We need to be cautious with any blockchain applications that the Chinese government might push for.
Beijing would never do anything that diminishes its grip on power.
Chao Shih-wei is an employee of an intellectual property law firm.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS