For reference, the content of the presentation I’ve made has been included in this blog post (in the link just below), but what was really fascinating were my thoughts following my interactions during the conference, specifically thoughts on the impact of trustless eCommerce platforms like Particl on regulations in the cryptocurrency sector, specific business opportunities, areas of research, development, potential profit for remittance companies and researchers looking to make the most advantage of these upcoming networks.

So coming off the RemTech conference a few thoughts on regulations and

remittances in struck my mind.

If Particl is to become a successful and potential de facto network for the buying and selling of goods online without requiring submission of personal information, then whilst a lot of value is likely going to enter the system that is the Particl network, that value held as PART tokens will still need to eventually exit out.

This is simply to pay bills and/or buy and sell goods and services where PART isn’t accepted. We are going to need services for this. Currently, those services are cryptocurrency exchanges for conversion to BTC, then fiat, but then really we need cryptocurrency exchanges that convert PART to fiat, banks that accept PART as a recognized currency, and remittance services that accept PART and convert it directly to the desired fiat or cryptocurrency desired by the sender or the receiver.

Yes, Particl supports atomic swaps and DEX integration so a number of services can be built into the Particl network directly to exchange/swap currencies without a need for a third-party cryptocurrency exchange or remittance system. But these are cryptocurrency exchange services, so until fiat currencies are tokenised to their own equivalent state sanctioned cryptocurrencies using a common technological standard, a basic problem for money transmission in and out of the Particl network still exists.

This creates an opportunity for remittance services. Particl offers an eCommerce platform and network that allows customers to buy and sell goods online without providing any personal detail (except for the shipping address required by the vendor to ship products) and which uses no

intermediary or third party. It is private by default.

This is great for privacy enthusiasts, data security specialists, R&D firms,

manufacturers and free market entrepreneurs, but it creates basic KYC/AML problems for those looking to convert PART to other cryptocurrencies and then fiat.

I suspect that, in the future, regulatory focus will shift towards tighter KYC compliance on cryptocurrency and currency exchanges (I suspect both will merge in due course) as well as greater KYC compliance and tighter, stricter KYC controls demanding more information and more knowledge on clients who use currency exchanges and remittance services that interact with the Particl network and other networks like it.

I also suspect the onus on regulation will move towards much greater tightening and control of goods movement and imports/exports given the enhanced level of privacy to transactions that networks like Particl will offer. After all, they essentially do away with the concept of KYC for eCommerce altogether.

This cannot be imposed onto the network either otherwise clones of the network will appear that have their own currency token — this is purely because much of the code for the Particl network has already been released in open-source fashion.

Regulation and enforcement of such networks might slow them down but they will not wipe them out as the need and demand for privacy, at the level Particl (and networks like it) offers, is so great that I believe the enabling and interacting with payment infrastructures for eCommerce solutions like Particl will evolve to provide support anyway regardless of the regulatory risks involved or imposed.

This leads us to business opportunities in remittance and banking provided as a result of the Particl eCommerce network.

But like I said, because of its nature, the Particl network offers an opportunity for remittance businesses to make money by building solutions for the network that help onramp and offramp customers off of the Particl network from its native PART token (its token of settlement, a native cryptocurrency) into native fiat currencies directly.

Banks may also see the benefit of directly accepting PART for fiat, for a fee, as their regulations and infrastructure is heavily geared towards optimizing KYC compliance. Governments are advised from my perspective to encourage this as it means users of the Particl network who interface with banks can be monitored more closely.

Similar opportunities also exist for liquidity providers and market makers to help support the growth of that network and build liquidity if they choose to through a combination of speculative trading and network fees obtained from using their computing resources to validate transactions on the network (research staking and Proof-of-Stake).

Additionally, business opportunities are provided as a result of the Particl escrow system.

The Particl escrow system does away with intermediaries by reducing the interactions between the buyer and the seller only. The buyer must place a deposit equivalent to the value of the item purchased and the seller must place a deposit equivalent to the value of the item being sold. Both the buyer and the seller must agree that the transaction was successful in order for each party to receive their deposits back.

The buyer is happy because they get their goods as well as their deposit back, without any fee, and the seller is happy because they get their deposit back, again, at no fee, plus the payment from the buyer. Neither buyer or seller had to rely on any intermediary and neither needed to know anything about each other apart from the shipping address of the buyer to ship the product.

If either the buyer or the seller disagrees that the transaction went through, then the buyer loses their deposit plus the amount they paid for the item and, assuming goods were sent honestly, the seller loses the goods + 100% value of goods as deposit.

Both buyer and seller are penalized in this scenario; if the seller is dishonest, their net profit is zero. If the buyer is dishonest they have paid double the listed price of goods.

In this sense, both buyer and seller are incentivized to act honestly to ensure trades are successful as even the mere attemp of being dishonest can result in a net loss of capital. This applies even if they do not know or trust each other.

The immediate problem with this type of escrow is liquidity — both buyer and seller need to be able to afford the cost of the escrow’s security deposits, meaning each side effectively has to put up 200% collateral on each end to participate in a trade of goods using it. Buyers may not have sufficient collateral on their end to afford the escrow deposit and the same might apply to sellers.

I believe a solution for this could arise if private companies, like insurance companies for example, were willing to put up escrow collateral (for a fee) on behalf of buyers and ,likewise, offer the same for vendors on networks which use escrow mechanisms like Particl does.

To this end, an insurance service, network of insurance and/or third-party reputation providers could offer services on eCommerce networks like Particl, essentially dealing directly with vendors to offer them a stamp of approval (social recognition, social validation).

This could apply to marketplaces on the network with specific addresses or, less problematically, to specific wallets and transaction addresses owned by vendors. Such a process would require vendors to apply for such approval, effectively giving their transacting recipient address to the third-party who

also requests and verifies other KYC information, for a fee.

This verifying company supplying approval can maintain vendor privacy by not publicly disclosing the vendor details, thus allowing interactions between buyer and seller on the Particl network to remain private, while at the same time reassuring buyers that the vendor they are buying from has been vetted by an approved (or trusted) body in some way.

This also means that verifying companies for vendors can have profile data and KYC on vendors that can be submitted to relevant authorities if they suspect the vendors are engaged in illicit oactivity. Administrative and other types of fee could also be charged for providing such services to authorities, providing such companies with an additional revenue stream.