Best Crypto and Blockchain Marketing agencies

Meetup ''Blockchain economics'' with Jason Desimone, Eryka Gemma and me. Discussed Fundraising tools, blockchain application and future for the digital monetary system

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUQDqGOxAXk&feature=youtu.be

Links

Start at the most obvious place – “how many quality links did the piece get? How many links on smaller sites?” Make sure that you’re happy with how they appear – where they are and what anchor text is used. Links hidden in footers and at the side of content aren’t worth nearly as much as those that appear in the middle of the content.

It’s brilliant when journalists place your content but if the link is missing or sends value to the wrong place it’s no good. Don’t be afraid to chase sites until they get it right – after all, you’re helping populate their site with free, valuable content.

Brand awareness

This is harder to measure. Brandwatch can tell you how many people are talking about your brand online – allowing you to measure brand awareness over time. This will be largely dependent on …

Social shares

Tools like Buzzsumo tell you how many times a piece of content has been shared.

Traffic

Head to Google Analytics to find out whether the release of your content coincided with a spike in traffic.

ROI

How you measure ROI is entirely dependent on your business and campaign objectives. Goals could include:

Visibility

Engagement

Content

Brand sentiment

Website traffic

Revenue

Revenue

Revenue is the big one We all want to know what the bottom line is: how many pounds did we earn as a direct result of this campaign and how does it compare to how many pounds we invested in the content?

Sales

Was there a spike in sales during the campaign? Digital PR won’t always give an instant boost to sales, but when executed well it should generate significant sales over time. Keep an eye on sales metrics related to locations and demographics, these could help you better target your campaigns in the future.

Google Analytics

Analytics is one of the most powerful tools we have at our disposal when it comes to measuring ROI. Setting an “Event” goal you can track customers who visited your site via another site.

The benefits and payoffs that come with a strong digital PR campaign are not to be sniffed at. All of these following benefits work together to help you grow your business and extend the reach of your brand online:

Generates relevant links from credible sources and sites

When respected sites reference you as a source, people come to see you as a credible source of valuable information – and so does Google.

Improves search ranking score

We know that Google penalizes sites that gain backlinks in shady ways and rewards those that gain them naturally. While it is the prerogative of our search overlord to change its rules and algorithms at any time, one thing you can count on is that it will always favour sites that it recognises as publishers of valuable, quality information.

Creates links that are earned – not paid

Helping Google, audiences and potential customers identify your brand as an industry player and thought leader, rather than a newbie or amateur willing to pay for eyeballs. This in turn …

Boosts your brand reputation and identity

In the same way that any good content marketing does. Audiences appreciate that you are prepared to invest in research and good storytelling.

Increases traffic

As other sources with their high domain authority and huge audiences link back to your content, you’ll receive a greater number of visitors to your site.

Generates social shares

Good stories prompt people to share on social media. This boosts the online profile of your brand, prompting even more traffic to flow your way.

Influences purchases

This isn’t the aim of a digital PR campaign, but it can be a welcome side-effect. Some content naturally conveys key messages and USPs to potential customers – just make sure it isn’t the focus. Journalists won’t touch anything salesy with a bargepole.

Inspires brand loyalty

By helping brands build good relationships with consumers through content.

Provides a tangible way to measure success

Digital marketing allows you to track almost every aspect of interaction success. This can help you identify what works, helping you craft better campaigns in the future. Tools like Google Analytics help you keep track of how your campaign is performing.

Is a cost-effective strategy

A campaign doesn’t have to cost the earth to be a success. Get it right and the thing will pay for itself in web traffic and conversions.

Whatever the nature of your campaign, you will find that an effective strategy usually requires the following steps.

Identify content goals

As with any strategy, it’s best to start with your objectives. In digital PR, this means looking at your content/ campaign objectives and how they fit in with your company objectives and business plan as a whole.

Some examples of digital PR or content objectives:

Boost traffic to homepage

Boost traffic to a particular product page

Raise overall brand awareness

Boost social following

Spotlight on new products

Highlight USP

Create a schedule

Who needs to sign off what and when? The schedule will vary from business to business and from campaign to campaign. Put milestones in place and make sure there is accountability. Everyone knows what their role is and when they need to act.

Create personas

Who are you going to be targeting with your content? What kind of journalists or bloggers? What kind of audience niches? More on this below.

Ideation

This is undoubtedly the hard bit. We’ll discuss this a bit more in section 4 – but the key is to be prepared to invest a generous portion of your time and budget in coming up with the goods. The internet is saturated with content – to shine you’ll need something beautiful, useful, interesting or with a bit of an edge.

Research

Once you have the seed of a good idea, it’s time for some desk research. Research can help you see which of your ideas has most ‘legs’. You might find that someone else has already covered your idea, in which case you might need to change the angle. You might find that the data needed for the content simply doesn’t exist, in which case you might want to commission a bespoke survey. If the idea is good, your research should be exhaustive. You don’t want to spend weeks working on a campaign only to find that someone else got there first (and possibly did it better).

Content creation

Self-explanatory – just sharpen that angle wherever possible and remember your target audience every step of the way.

Outreach

This is the other hard bit. Unlike the other steps in the process, you will be battling forces beyond your control. Necessary tools = patience, persistence and a thick skin.

Meetup ''Blockchain economics'' with Jason Desimone, Eryka Gemma and me. Discussed Fundraising tools, blockchain application and future for the digital monetary system

Behind every successful media plan is a carefully thought out and well-planned media strategy. Before moving forward with selecting the channels or tactics to execute, a media strategy needs to be developed that identifies the campaign’s objectives, goals and target audiences.

Having a concrete media strategy in place will help to achieve the campaign goals much more efficiently and effectively and will make the media plan more successful! We’ve listed out the key components below that should always be involved in the development of a Media Strategy.

1. Set Measurable Goals and Objectives

This is the first and most important step that should be taken while developing a media strategy. Here is where you determine exactly what you want your media plan to achieve. Are you looking to increase awareness in a certain market or are you looking to increase sales by X percentage points? Establishing key objectives and goals will help to influence and determine the best tactics that need to be implemented in order to achieve these goals. It also helps to influence the messaging points, and creative executions, that will need to be communicated through the media plan to motivate your target audience to take the desired action.

It is also important to make sure that the goals you set are measurable and specific. We recommend defining SMART goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-based. Set KPIs here as well so that you can measure the success and performance of your media campaign and the tactics included.

2. Identify and Research Your Target Audience

Identifying your target audience is essential in developing an effective media strategy. In addition to understanding your audience’s key demographic traits, really dive deep to try to get to know and understand your target audience. Ask yourself these questions:

Where and how do they spend most of their time?

What does a typical day look like for them?

What are their interests?

What media channels do they use?

Create custom personas of your target audience so that you can better understand who they are, what their wants and needs are as well as their motivations. Understanding who they are and their motivations will help you to determine the best channels/tactics to use in your media plan to hit your target audience at various stages throughout the funnel.

3. Determine Your Media Budget

Having a media budget in mind will help to determine the expectations of the media plan as a whole. Go back to your media/marketing objectives and determine if they can be realistically achieved with the budget you have in mind for the media campaign. If the objectives and goals seem a bit out of reach, you may need to rework the budget or the goals/objectives to set realistic expectations.

A predetermined budget will also help provide direction for the tactics that can be included in the plan and cost allocations among each. You will know what tactics you can realistically afford and the tactics that are best tailored for your budget to reach your target audience.

4. Establish the Main & Key Messaging Points

Knowing the key messages you want to convey to your target audience will also play a role in the media strategy development by informing and providing direction for the media tactic selection. For example, if you are hoping to drive conversions among a specific target audience, you may not want to reach your audience on a platform that is better suited for broad awareness campaigns.

You will most likely need to craft several messages either tailored to each target audience or to target various stages of the funnel. Make sure your messaging contains a direct call to action that is able to be clearly communicated through your media campaign. When a user comes across your ad, they should instantly know the direct action you are encouraging them to take whether that be to download a report or buy your product.

Once you’ve addressed these four key fundamental components, you will be well on your way to developing a thorough and comprehensive media strategy. Always remember, building an intentional and solid media strategy is essential to developing a successful media plan. Once your media plan has launched, tracking and capturing your data will help you check back to #1 to ensure you are achieving your goals and objectives!

Many of experts and public service officers are not absolutely happy or impressed with the blockchain technology appearance in modern world. It has many opponents and skeptics, including financial regulators, who are not inclined to rush things faster as possible. However, widespread commercial use of blockchain is already visible on the horizon, if the main challenges and claims of regulators will be corrected and eliminated, which we will consider some of them below.

When it comes to blockchain, it is usually presented as a technology that will rebuild, or better to say, conceptually revise whole sectors of the world global economy. In principle, this is a revolutionary approach, because the blockchain can remember and record identity, financial transactions and all sorts of legal and not only transactions. Nevertheless, the technology and its application are still subject to study and remains at the initial stage of formation and development, especially in the banking and financial sector, where the regulatory public authorities and bodies are charged with coordinating and guaranteeing the stability of their industry. Hence, each regulator, endowed with certain powers of monitoring, control, analysis and recommendations, makes its own conclusions and references concerning the blockchain trend. Some of them are negative in their statements, others are neutral, but attentive to the trend, others are loyal.

But at the same time, it is possible to stress out the general apprehensions that are typical for the statements and press releases of regulators and other regulatory experts recently in the whole world. Namely:

The legal basis for the adoption of blockchain as a chain of immutable and protected from unauthorized access nodes that ensure the reliability of the information contained in them. Before to use the blockchain as a unique and reliable source of identification, a legal framework is needed, this is not yet available. Before this becomes possible, standardized regulation is necessary to protect data and authenticate the identity of legal entities. Although there is a broad consensus among the IT community about the practical immutability of the information blocks in a well-defined network of blockchains, or because it is technically impossible to modify the blocks in the system or better say in the “try test” modes or other types of control related to consensus- mechanisms, there still has no legal fact of recognizing this aspect of the blockchain, and therefore it cannot be used as a legal argument in a court as well.

The legal basis of the characteristics of the blockchains and distributed registers (DLT). This includes issues of territoriality (issues of jurisdiction and applicable law) and who will take responsibility if something goes wrong. By definition, shared distributed registers (or DLTs) do not have a specific location. With regard to jurisdiction and applicable law, territoriality is a problem, because each node of the blockchain network can be subject to various legislative requirements, and there is no “central set of administration” responsible for each allocated register whose citizenship (possible administration office) could act in as a starting point, in terms of regulation issues. Following these same considerations, the concept of “responsibility” also represents claim concern by regulators, since there can be no party that ultimately has legal responsibility for the operation of the distributed registers and the information contained therein.

Fear of regulating the interpretation of the “right to be forgotten”. Since the protected from unauthorized access characteristics of the blockchain collide with this right granted in accordance with European law to protect personal data, a potential conflict is created. The fact that the block is unchanged can pose a problem, as it may conflict with other rights recognized by governments and regulators. One example is the “right to be forgotten” granted to every citizen in accordance with European law, which allows any European citizen to store information stored in external databases, either on paper or in electronic format, if they so wish. The only solution that allows combining such rights with the very nature and essence of the blockchain may be the replacement of the right to “delete information” with the right to “prohibit the use” of personal information by third parties. This can be reached out by the combination of automatic data encryption under certain conditions (which may mean the use of intellectual contracts) or some alternative solutions to prevent access to specified information point when a person decides to realize his right. At this stage, the blockchain cannot yet technically guarantee even the right to “prohibit the use.”

Legal framework concerning the validity of financial instruments issued in the network of blockchain. When the blockchain is used as a platform for determining financial instruments, such as bonds or derivatives, recognition of the legal force of these financial instruments by regulators and supervisors is required for sure. It is obvious that money is one of the key financial instruments that can be issued within the framework of the blockchain. Their money, issued in the blockchain, can have serious consequences for monetary policy and macroeconomics and require a deeper defined analysis. Many regulators today have already engaged in this analysis.

The legal framework concerning the legality of documents held in blockchain as evidence of use or existence. Like the recognition of the blockchain as a unique, indisputable source of authenticity, a second new level of recognition is required before blockchain can be used in certain types of entrepreneurial activity. This concerns not only the recognition that information cannot be changed, but also the recognition that the inclusion in the blockchain of an act declaring ownership or the availability of an asset is a genuine proof of ownership or the actual existence of the named asset. However, assuming that the verification process regarding the existence of the property before the document is included in the block is sufficiently substantiated, and we are confident in the effectiveness of the cryptographic mechanisms used in the blockchain technology, then recognizing the blockchain as a true source of trust implies that the documents located in the blocks, can indeed be used as evidence of existence or property. However, it is another matter whether the courts of each particular country can accept this. Again, for us there is no jurisprudence at this stage of the formation of the blockchain.

Legal basis for smart contracts. Issues relating to territoriality and liability are also applicable to smart contracts, but require a number of additional interpretations. As for jurisdictional problems, there is not only the question of whether the distributed register (DLT) itself has a specific place, but also the issue of signing a contract subject to various laws in accordance with their jurisdictions. As for obligations, many parties are participating in smart contracts: not only the parties to the contract, but also a kind of encoder and custodian of the contract. If it is probable that one of the contracting parties will break the contract, there is a threat that the smart contract itself may be corrupted, either because of encoding errors, or because of design errors. So, when a smart contract does not work properly, which side is responsible?

Regulation of use of the blockchain as an effective regulatory register for the Internet of things. The blockchain can be useful for the Internet of things. On the Internet of things all connected devices have identification. Therefore, it would be really useful to create a common distributed registry that stores “identification” and information about each related thing (gadget), allowing them to conduct transactions among themselves, including payments M2M (machine-to-machine). The idea of ​​having one or more “common distributed registers” for the Internet of Things seems to be gaining popularity and will require in the future a legal framework that recognizes distributed registers (DLTs) as valid registries. All of the above problems related to the territoriality, responsibility and applicability of smart contracts, of course, are also appropriate for any blockage related to the functioning of the Internet of things.

So far, at the moment, the regulators have not come to a common opinion, or to a single global interpretation of the blockchain, since they do not yet have a specific legal answer to the questions posed above. Their fears in this case are fully justified.

Sergey Golubev

Join the chat — https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAE84vCXg5PK-VpHADg

The right to be forgotten, that is set out in the new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union (EU), mainly in article 17 and that already have come into force on 28th May 2017, nowadays empowers any person to correct or even delete his personal data and information that affects him (person) and stop being treated if this personal data are no longer necessary for the purposes collected or if person have not withdrawn his consent. This right can conflict with Blockchain, as the one of the ways to use it is the storage of documents, information and its strong immutability and rightful inalterability. So the main feature of this new IT technology deeply can collide with the fundamental principles of the right to be forgotten. It has to be taken into account that when a data or information is registered in blockchain it becomes unique, unrepeatable and even indelible. This quality of information entry and storage is the basis of the reliability of this technology, since an any attempt to change it completely or partially is simply impossible within the framework of cryptographic capabilities. This unique feature is a problem and an advantage on the same time, on the one hand guarantees information’s security and allows the system to be able to defend itself against any illegal or duplicate transactions but in the other hand prevents the possibility of deleting it. In addition, the inabilities to correct false data can continuously causing solid harm to every user.

What it comes if someone decides to use their right to be forgotten and delete or correct their personal information from Blockchain? The answer is that can be an almost impossible task. In existing systems on which the blockchain procedure is based, if the data is deleted, there will be a record in the system that will lead to bifurcation of information, that is, while there is no data in the new block, the previous one will continue to exist in the old block, that is, the actual symptoms of the data and information bifurcation to existing and non-existing. An alternative to the data destruction, which we have seen is realy impossible, is removing Blockchains credentials and access so the information and data contained is inaccessible to anyone at the same time. However, these blockchain credentials can recovered by different methods, as “bruce forcé” included (cryptographic procedure to retrieve a password by testing all possible combinations). The most realistic option in this way as recommended by IT professionals is creating a new accounting system, as editable Blockchain, that allows one or more designated administrators to rewrite or change data blocks, if the right to be forgotten will be claimed by the any user. What is emphasized that lawmakers should interpret the possibilities of the Right to be forgotten in the view of certain technical restrictions, but at the same time, present in the legislative field a peculiar balance between protecting the privacy of citizens and understanding the consequences of using blockchain and how it evolves. In this sense, European Union regulation should limit the scope of the right to be forgotten in blockchain systems, accepting an indefinite locking of data as compliance rather than forcing it to be abolished. However, to a greater risk for the development of blockchain technology, Directive (EU) 2016/679, these facts does not take into account, it is easier to say, that this problem with the blockchain is simply out of sight. The content of this directive is a threat to the blockchain, or rather the threat to its technical advantages.

Since today, as the blockchain is being used in an ever-growing list of applications, at the same time, European privacy laws are becoming everyday more sophisticated and complex, based on a liberal legislative framework and traditions that prioritizing the unlimited human rights and the right to defend one’s own honor and dignity. In this endeavor one can see an attempt by lawmakers to play some kind of catch-up with technological developments, and, accordingly, to try to protect a person or better to say the EU citizen from such kind of modern technologies. Key attractions of blockchain are, for sure, it permanency, sustainability and transparency, as the data storing is added to and it is very difficult to take away or delete. However, since new EU rules will essentially give individuals a right to no longer have their data processed — basically the right to be forgotten, as it is pointed out in regulations, important difficulties and conflicts arise of which users and developers of blockchain should be aware of.

We remind you that the blockchain itself fixes a series of transactions in blocks and can include data and information of any kind, including “personal data” as defined in the EU directives (ie data related to a living person) and in a number of national EU legislation. As a fact, any record that can be stored electronically and recognized by a computer can be stored on a blockchain with the potential to be used by a wide range of users. For example, it was recently reported that a number of EU national governments are exploring the possibilities to use blockchain technology for storing data about benefits claimants and applicants, as the creation of a special state register with the help of blockchain. In blockchain the data and information are only added to and are maintained by a peer network of nodes in which each node has a copy of the blockchain and has an equal authority to add to it. This is a main attraction of blockchain as once some data is embedded, it cannot be altered without that any amendment being approved by other nodes in the network. But in cases, where personal data is concerned, however, this inability to remove data can lead to problems, particularly in light of the new laws coming down from EU legislation. In particular, mentioned above the new EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which was approved earlier in 2016 following over four years of negotiations and replaces a law which is more than 20 years old (Directive (EU) 95/46), introduces, amongst other things, a right to be forgotten. Generally speaking, it means that if an individual no longer wishes for his data to be processed, and that there are no legitimate reasons for retaining it, this individual could ask the person controlling his data and information to erase it from the blockchain. Since the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will apply to all those processing data in the EU or those who process data relating to EU data subjects, it is easy to understand how this be able to extend to those within a peer network storing data, such that someone could now technically ask those within the network to erase data they hold in system. So it is technically not realistic to fulfill such requirements for the Right to be forgotten. And since the Directive (EU) 2016/679 is already everywhere becoming a law in the spring of 2018 in the EU, including Great Britain, despite of Brexit, this gives preconditions to all persons involved in the blockchain operations and to whom the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is applied, to solve in time certain tasks that would be able to minimize the risks of the application of the right to be forgotten in the EU.

Conflict: technology against the law

Since blockchain can be used for a wide range of tasks, for example, from recording visits to health practitioners to ascertaining the owner of an asset, it is easy to imagine these moments when an individual may wish that data be no longer held about him in the way it was entered to blockchain, or when an individual may request that data relating to him be deleted immediately. Nevertheless, in order to delete all data and information, various nodes would have to work together to rebuild the blockchain from the beginning that data was added, which is useless. At the same time, there are some steps which can, and should, be considered to reduce the risk of a court order compelling data to be removed, or worse, nodes to be shut down because of a failure to recognize this right to be forgotten and satisfy it reclamations. In particular, one should pay great attention to the quality and structure of information when constructing the contents of the blockchain and network, which supports them from the very beginning, while reducing the risks. One of the key ways to minimize this risk can be simply using blockchain to provide a timestamp for information stored elsewhere — for example, on a website — if the content needs to be removed, so the realization of the right to be forgotten will be much less cumbersome and awkward. Similarly, when designing transactions, consider that they cannot be used to add comments or information that could include personal data. All this would help, at least in terms of compliance with the primary principles of the compliancy of the privacy policy. Other solutions may include controlling process that becomes public within a peer-to-peer network of trusted nodes, therefore, hiding data in the blockchain that should not be shared in the first place, or encrypting data within the blockchain, although such problems may of course arise if the decryption keys were ever made public or lost. As the right to be forgotten is treated in the context of the blockchain technology, of course, remains to be seen. For example, could it be argued that there is a legitimate reason for retaining transaction blocks and in which way EU regulators/courts would implement this right in the terms of jurisdictional hurdles. These are just a few key questions that arise when considering this problem. Nevertheless, for all users of the blockchain, the advice is that this change in the legal landscape requires careful planning and reviewing of its activities.

As I mentioned earlier, every day we constantly hear about how all brand new software products appear on the technology of blockchain. A cryptographically secure technology (secured by means of member consensus) is turning out to be the solution for many problems and exterminating inefficiencies in the world around us. And this isn’t just about technological improvements or the reconstruction of business models: different blockchain use cases and examples will leave a permanent mark on the economy, society and, perhaps, also on politics. Blockchain, especially public ones such as bitcoin or ethereum, breaks many paradigms, including legal ones. Thus we are entering an interesting transition period when successive applications of this technology will encounter legal norms that not always can be adapted to the new reality. One of the most interesting and intriguing examples for analysis is the protection of personal data. And this is clearly understood from the problem under discussion. Legal regulations protecting personal data are of great importance in many areas where blockchain already exist: finance, healthcare, electronic identification systems, and so on.

Problems and advantages of blockchain

First of all, why are blockchain networks a challenge for the protection of personal data? There are three main eventual reasons:

· Blockchain networks are decentralized and distributed. It is virtually impossible to identify the subject responsible for what is happening on the blockchain and for the processing of personal data.

· Blockchain networks are public and transparent. As a rule, all information on a blockchain, which may include personal data, is accessible to everyone.

· Blockchain is non-editable. It is impossible to change or delete information contained on a blockchain (personal data). Transactions are irreversible.

Why blockchain can be considered as an opportunity to protect personal data at the same time? Strangely enough, the same problems are turning out to be advantages. Here, in this paradox, is the legislative complexity of regulating the blockchain technology:

· Blockchain networks are decentralized and distributed. Currently, various trusted third parties process our personal data. These entities are centralized and, therefore, often constitute single points of possible failure. Leaks of unimaginable amounts of data as a result of cybercrime often occur in the form of an attack on a single entity, such as a hospital, email service provider, and so on.

· Blockchains are public and transparent. We do not currently have any effective control over who processes our personal data and how. In fact, the data subject is in control of their personal data only to a restricted degree. Upon a transfer of that data, the subject loses control over how it is subsequently used.

· Blockchain networks are very safe. Through the using of cryptography (digital signatures, encryption, time-stamping) and systemically embedded economic incentives for network maintaining entities, blockchain provides a fairly secure way of storing and managing information, including personal data.

What kind of the legislative problems facing the blockchain today in EU?

The legislation that most closely regulates the protection of personal data in the European Union is the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Although the GDPR is said to have been designed to be technologically neutral and adapted to processing personal data in different contexts, structures and manners, in the case of blockchain technology, many questions are raised. The answers will be different for different types of blockchains, but here are some issues that need to be discussed:

· Who is the controller of personal data on a blockchain networks?

The controller determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data. Does such an entity exist at all in the context of a distributed net of blockchain? We can potentially treat transaction-confirming miners as the controllers (in the case of the proof-of-work consensus) that is something that in the case of large public blockchains will be unreal in practice.

· What kind of laws should be applied to blockchain technology?

In situations where it is not possible to identify the personal data processing entity and the place where the data is processed (there are probably as many of these entities and places as there are network nodes), it is difficult to underline the jurisdiction which will be appropriate and accurate for the legal assessment of data processing — in other words, the applicable national law.

· What is the personal data in the context of blockchain?

The understanding of personal data is becoming more and more wide broad in the modern life. So can we treat public open keys as personal data? After all, they do not have the features of anonymous data and they are often associated with specific natural persons, although their characteristics are similar to pseudonymized data.

· Does the blockchain limit the purpose of collecting and processing data and its minimization?

According to the GDPR, the specific purposes for which personal data is processed should be specified, explicit and legitimate (purpose limitation). The personal data should be adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed (data minimisation). These are just examples of principles set out by the GDPR. Meanwhile, in a public blockchain, data is maintained on every node of the network and is publicly accessible to anyone, regardless of the original purpose of their collection and processing, which clearly contradicts the concept of the GDPR

· Are blockchains compatible with the personal data protection system by design and by default a priori?

· How to realize the right to be forgotten?

Blockchain networks are practically non-editable and data held therein is often impossible to update, delete, change or correct.

· Who is liable for violations of the above requirements and obligations, since it is not possible to indicate the data controller?

What other threats are possible from GDPR in addition to Article 17 for blockchain?

Right to Access

Article 15 of the GDPR stipulates that an individual has the right to understand who has access to their personal data, what data has been made available and how that data is being used or processed. In addition, the individual must be able to obtain, on demand and with no charge, a copy of the digital information undergoing processing.

Right to Consent

While not new to GDPR, the regulation continues to stipulate, specifically in Article 7, that an individual must consent to data being used and, moreover, has the right to rescind that consent at any time.

Right to Portability

The right to portability outlines that an individual has the right to receive the personal data provided to a controller in a digital format and may transmit that data as desired. Effectively, an individual should be able to obtain, move and provide access to their digital data as they see fit.

Right to Data Minimization

In article 25 of GDPR, the processor is mandated to use “… only personal data which are necessary for each specific purpose of the processing are processed. That obligation applies to the amount of personal data collected, the extent of their processing, the period of their storage and their accessibility.” Meaning that only the minimum amount of personal data needed should be granted.

A look at blockchains through the prism of data protection laws — especially laws as ambitious as the GDPR — is an interesting exercise, since it is not just a question of concluding that the application of this technology will generate legal problems. This is only one side of the problem. Blockchains may also become essential components of future institutions, systems and mechanisms developed to cope with data protection regulations.

For maximum efficiency, blockchain elements will likely combine with traditional solutions. The advantages of this technology can be used to build a truly effective framework for the protection of personal data, where the data subject will have actual power to control how their data is used. Therefore, we are facing today quite a challenge. We should interpret the laws, and design and build blockchain applications, in a manner that maximizes their synergy. Otherwise we will be stuck in a situation where the law will hold back the development of technology and innovation, while personal data will be protected less and less effectively. Together, the GDPR and blockchain advocates point to the same thing — the need to fundamentally change the way in which personal data is managed.

Join the chat — https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAE84vCXg5PK-VpHADg

Sergey Golubev

Crynet Marketing Solutions, EU structural funds, ICO projects, NGO & investment projects, project management, comprehensive support for business

The idea of universal income minimum guaranteed by the government is dating us back to the 16th century: it occurs in the “Utopia” of Thomas More. For the first time in the new history, the idea of universal income was expounded at the end of the 18th century in the works of Thomas Paine and the Marquis de Condorcet. The concept of social dividends and equity has received wide support also in the UK. During the crisis and unemployment of the 1930s, the idea grew up into a national political movements that participated in elections in many countries. However, all these ideas remained as unfinished projects.

In some countries a guaranteed universal income have been tried and canceled (as in some cities in Canada and the USA), or is now being used (as in Finland), or is going to be implemented (as in France). Finland became the first EU country to start monitoring this social experiment. The goal of the project is to track how the behavior of the unemployed will affect the receipt by the state of monthly payments without any conditions to them. In this case, will they continue to search the job? Now, after the global financial crisis of 2008, many people see in universal basic income the best way to reform social security systems, which in the current form are no longer able to cope with the burden, as well as the response to the serious economic difficulties faced by the most countries in the world. The famous economists of the 20th century as Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek believed that a guaranteed universal income in one way or another is the only best way to overcome poverty. In the face of growing financial and political pressure on the social security systems, some people believe that the implementation of universal basic income will be a logical solution to the problem. It can be indeed a more economical solution than existing social security mechanisms, mainly due to the fact that it is cheaper to provide and control. However, the main reason why many people returning to the concept of universal basic income today is that it sees a way to protect ordinary citizens from global economic shocks.

And such shocks are coming! The reason for them will not be in the next financial global crisis, but in the results of the industrial revolution 4.0. Better to say that the results of such a technological revolution will be in the form of mass unemployment and in the absence of the need for the economy in many professions and, accordingly, in the workplaces. The fourth industrial revolution is changing the labor market right now, right today. Many professions (drivers, guards, office workers, industrial workers, agricultural workers who are engaged in routine work) will be replaced by automated systems and robots. For people who lose their jobs will not be easy at all, because of acquiring a completely new qualification is not always possible in adulthood, well, it’s not even always economically feasible. Most likely, they have to realize themselves differently, by expanding the services, including the maximum possibilities of the creative economy, culture and art, by identifying those spheres of economic and social activity where robots and the digital economy will not be competitive in comparison with human capabilities. Nowadays, for example, even the IT labor market is in danger of mass reduction of personnel, since the existing technical capabilities and automation already completely replace programmers, web designers and other technical specialties. Such reductions this year were confirmed by the following IT giants like Infosys, Wipro and Cognizant. And here the universal base income is very important. A person who has lost his job will somehow have to survive. Such instrument will not only help to stay alive, but will provide a decent standard of living. However, there are different opinions both for and against the concept of universal basic income. The attention should be paid, since they basically do not take into account the factors of the new coming industrial revolution.

The arguments of supporters are refereeing to the following statements: it can solve the problem of poverty, the problem of technological unemployment, the problem of economic inequality. There are arguments that this instrument will reduce the administrative costs of social programs, allow people to do what they want, and not what the market requires. Among the supporters of the universal basic income implementation we can meet people of any ideology. Basically they are opponents of a complex system of social benefits and believe that the universal basic income will get rid of the welfare trap — payments will not depend on any circumstances. In addition, all benefits would be combined into one, which would reduce administrative costs at all.

At the same time, the arguments of the opponents are referring to other factors, since the criticism of the concept of universal basic income is based on economic and legal issues. However, the macroeconomic facts “against” have not yet taken into account the consequences of the fourth industrial revolution. In the context of globalization and development, it is difficult to implement in the current political situation on a global scale, the system requires large expenditures, will cause a massive influx of migrants. Also, some experts say that universal basic income significantly reduces the stimulus to work (encourages dependency), which diminish the productivity of labor in society. This idea is still doomed to failure in less prosperous countries with less developed social protection system, like in Switzerland or in Finland. And since the implementation of universal basic income implies a radical reforming of the existing system of social protection, many activists in the fight against poverty do not like it.

But at the same time, there are many actions that invite society to participate in the discussion about universal basic income. This problem has already pointed out some popularity, as long as the civic leaders of the free liberal business, such as Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, the founders of the Facebook and Tesla, thinking and disputing about general revenues of the universal basic income. According to their opinion and taking into account the transition of the world economy to a new stage level in which automation and robotics play an increasing role, the idea of an universal basic income is expected to be extended in the next few years. Therefore, this issue of social importance cannot bypass the legislative field. We ought to pay attention to the study of two monographs by Daniel Häni and Philip Kovce, who tried to give a legal justification to the initiative of the universal basic income and to argue the importance of resolving the problem of the impending transformation of society, the labor market, and social and economic development. We are talking about “Was würdest du arbeiten, wenn für dein Einkommen gesorgt wäre?” Manifest zum Grundeinkommen (“Who would you like to work in conditions of guaranteed income? The Manifesto of the supporters of the “universal basic income”in 2017 and about the “Was fehlt, wenn alles da ist? Warum das Grundeinkommen die richtigen Fragen stellt” (“What is missing if everything is there​​” Universal income” ask us the right questions? “2015.

Supporters of the concept are forming a very strange group. Today, it includes the left, who view it as a step towards social justice, and some libertarians who see this ideology as the least dangerous way of redistributing income. But it is obvious that the time of universal basic income has come, but it needs to be implemented correctly. A few more years, and the reason for the mass distribution of such institution will not be left-wing liberal slogans about equality in the redistribution of income, but the phenomenon of involuntary unemployment. There come times that will completely change the usual ideas about professions, specialties and management positions. Some cautions about technological unemployment periodically appear from the time of the first steam engines and until now none of them has come true. However, the current situation is really unique. When the first cars appeared, even without the gift of clairvoyance, it was possible to understand that the coachmen, if taken as a whole, are retrained into drivers, and the stablemen — in auto mechanics. This time it takes a much more imagination to introduce new working professions, to which people who have lost their jobs due to cars without drivers can pretend. Achievements in the field of 3D printing and “Contour Crafting” will put millions of people engaged in production and construction in front of the threat of unemployment. If desired, this list can continued more — it will even have millions of managerial positions, which unemployment has not traditionally threatened. Artificial Intelligence and its mass promotion in the economic, managerial and production spheres are very real today. The merger of artificial intelligence and robotics will put an end to the era of mass employment. Analyst centers like Pew and large investment banks like Merrill Lynch are openly speaking about this. Robots and Artificial Intelligence become an integral part of our daily activities, performing various tasks and goals, providing reliability, security, mobility, convenience and entertainment. By 2025, responsible for 45% of production (today it is only 10%) will be robots. Those who do not monitor closely the development of science and technology, it is sometimes difficult to appreciate the pace of development of technologies that were born at the junction of robotics and artificial intelligence. And today there are a lot of reasons for anxiety.

Society is likely very soon to be divided into those who will own Artificial Intelligence Power and, accordingly, all the rest. That is, a human being will be divided into two categories: “gods” and “everything else”. “The everything else” will have to survive, that will cause a massive planetary social explosion. That’s right here, and the high time comes for universal basic income, as an instrument for restraining inequality and dulling the impoverishment of the population. Here just the “gods” can create a world of full imaginary abundance, in which all work will be done by robots, and the “everything else” will only have to play games. It sounds scary and not comfortable. For this reason, technological progress is often blamed for aggravating social inequality. But on the other hand, if the redistribution of universal basic income is fair, then such income gives people freedom of action for self-development and self-realization, at least for those who will strive for it. Then the universal basic income will become the policy of the future — as the payment for ensuring that people live peacefully and regularly consume the goods created by the technology.

One more question: who will finance such income? One of sources may be taxes, compulsory contributions of individuals and businesses that are receiving more than profits when using the results of the fourth industrial revolution and the synthesis of artificial intelligence and robotics. Naturally, the size of such taxes will be increased. The business possessing such technologies must consciously understand how much social tranquility and well-being cost, and the governments, should already today anticipate the advent of such conditions and at the strategic level not for tomorrow, but already today think about the legal and socio-economic levers of regulating the issue of universal basic income. As tomorrow there will be no time to think about it and take the measures.

Join the chat — https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAE84vCXg5PK-VpHADg

Sergey Golubev

EU structural funds, ICO projects, NGO & investment projects, project management, comprehensive support for business

Observing today the results of the human civilization development some certain conclusions can be suggested. They are purely subjective. This does not mean that they are correct, but at the same time, I have the right to express my opinion and my point of view. Strict criticism and low efficiency of capitalism, the rejection of financial speculation through the absence of sense, the collapse of materialism and simplified understanding of the world, increased attention to the alternative economy, to the need for civilization in a single planetary harmony of development. Here are the main theses that are constantly rotated in society in recent times. The need for a philosophical perception of the world is growing, as the world is in danger and salvation is possible in changing of the outlook on it. In any case, the concept of “full world” in this situation of the American philosopher and economist Herman Daly falls into place. Human civilization was formed in the conditions of “empty world” — a world of unexplored territories and an abundance of resources. The prevailing religions, political ideologies, social institutions, habits of thinking are still rooted in it. In reality, humanity has entered a “full world”, filled up to the brim with very vague prospects of further possibility of expanding the borders. If we continue to live by the rules of the “empty world”, the collapse will not take us long to wait. If, however, humanity can soon begin to expand in space and invade it, then it has the right further to use the ideology and rules of the “empty world”. And if it cannot?? However, in this case, can you disagree with the opinion of Herman Daly?

What we can see now? The current situation is not encouraging, as the planet civilization degrades; authoritarianism and fundamentalism are on the rise, speculative capital triumphs above all. Today’s crisis is not cyclical. It is not limited by nature around us, but includes a social, political, cultural, moral crisis, a crisis of democracy, ideologies and the capitalist system as a whole. We are witnessing today a number of global problems that intensify the trend of degradation, to wit:

· The crisis of capitalism, however it sounds odious

· Negative human activities affecting the environment, however it sounds trivial and banal

· Excessive social consumption along with a global food disruption

· The risk for the digital economy to become a weapon of uncontrolled and unethical use of innovative technologies

And now more about the degradation causes. In the eighties of the last century, capitalism started to degenerate when the main source of profits was just the financial speculation. This was one of the main reasons for the global financial crisis in 2008–2009, but the bankers not only retained their positions, but also emerged victorious from this problem. Almost 100% of financial transactions are now speculative. Up to 35 trillion dollars are hidden in offshore areas. There is an overabundance of capital in fictitious, but profitable sectors of economy, as they guarantee short-term profits, while the directions and sectors of economy on which the future of the planet depends are in short supply, because there the possible profits are hidden behind long-term plans. Scientists-economists are not able to see the problem, because they are still inclining to evaluate ecological, financial and industrial capital as equivalents: “as long as financial capital increases — everything is fine”. Such self-deception leads to economic collapse.

Evolution led us into the anthropogenic era, where the mankind activities became the determining factor for the future of the planet. Still, global warming remains a major planetary problem. The problem of such influence can be solved only through a rapid and fundamental transformation of production and consumption. Such transformation is long-term, and therefore is not interesting to financial capital.

The existence of a nuclear arsenal remains a huge threat. Even a local conflict between nuclear states can lead to disaster globally. Today it is worth to comprehend that the policy and strategy of guaranteed mutual destruction, the strategy of nuclear deterrence, can no longer serve as an excuse for preserving nuclear arsenals, since the factor of irresponsibility of politicians for decision making around the world is growing very rapidly. Mutual threats can lead to trouble, because sooner or later someone can give up their nerves.

There is a global failure in the food distribution. A billion people continue to starve, while two billion are overweighed. But the question is not just how to produce enough food for the growing population, but how not to ruin the planet in this process. The future of mankind depends on cities. 200 years ago there was one millionaire city — London, now there are three hundred, including twenty-two with a population of more than ten million. By moving to the city people begin to consume four times more resources. Territorially, the ecological footprint of cities far exceeds the area occupied by them. How to deal with this?

In turn, the digital economy under the exponential development can create a new world cult of techno utopia. There is a real danger of uncontrolled development and unethical use of technology and it is not yet clear how to avoid it. In addition, the promises of techno utopians are demotivating people to work and develop themselves: if technology solves all problems, there is no need to search for complex, integrated solutions that require a lifestyle changes. If there is no need to search or to study, then the evolution of mankind is in question. What is the danger of techno utopia? In fact, today begins the implementation of the segregation policy of people to ‘’Elite and unnecessary people’’. The access to new technologies, perhaps, will become an instrument for such segregation. And such access is possible only through the opportunity to pay for these technologies. Mankind through a couple of generations of such segregation can be divided into two biological types. Some will look like cyborgs that can live much longer, better, thanks to access to the results of the technological revolution. At the same time, they will not need the rest, even as servants or slaves. Such a sad forecast was made by philosopher Yuval Noah Harari. And it is impossible not to agree with him. If the masses in the future lose their importance for the economy, the defense capacity, the state, then at least it will be no need to invest in their health, education and well-being. And you cannot say that people do not feel this now. Undoubtedly, the global economy is playing a significant role in these processes. But the situation here is much more complicated and confusing. While the elite consume the delights of the global world, and undoubtedly will take its results to the maximum, the poor people are not unique and welcome. They are just strangers in this life celebration. And most likely, they will be strangers in the dark future for them. In the context of rapid progress in biotechnology and bioengineering, we can for the first time in history come to the opportunity to turn economic inequality into a biological one.

There is an opinion that globalization only aggravates the existing income inequality: the richer countries demonstrated higher growth rates from 1980 up today than the poorer countries. The rich countries became even richer; it followed up that international exchange, outsourcing, foreign direct investments and other components of globalization are nothing more than the tools by which developed countries strengthen their economic hegemony. However, if we analyze the situation of people, not countries, we can catch one frightening tendency: poor people in the poor and rich countries became victims of globalization; they began to live even worse. They lost the most. The number of unemployed is growing, but at the same time the number of working poor is growing, and employment does not guarantee a decent life at all. Employment is not a salvation from poverty. Salaries do not increase, and prices — on the contrary, the quality of life deteriorates, guarantees and stability are not sensitive. And people feel disappointed. This frustration turns into annoyance when they hear the daily assurances that things have gone better, the economy is growing, swelling and getting richer. Political leaders are telling about economic growth. This agenda is confirmed by the heads of corporations and economic commentators. The media is talking about new opportunities and prospects. And people see that the things have become worse. Inequality increases instability in society. Under the threat is not only social justice, but democracy at all. Do not be surprised if desperate poor people will look for ways out in radical cures. Nowadays, capitalism faces a threat to its own existence. Apocalypse today has a face of social inequality. Now mankind is facing another technological leap of the “fourth industrial revolution”. The development of biotechnology, the emergence of artificial intelligence, the ability to remove a huge number of workers from the production conveyor belt — perhaps, will threat not only the victims of globalization in rich countries, but also a large number of people in the poor countries who trying to live better. In the modern era, equality has become a dominant value in human societies almost everywhere. Partly, this was due to the growth of new ideologies, such as humanism, liberalism and socialism. But this was also due to the industrial revolution, which made the masses more important than ever before. Industrial economy relied on the masses of ordinary workers, as the army relied on the masses of ordinary soldiers. Governments, both under democracy and under the dictatorship, invested in health, education and the welfare of the masses, because they needed millions of healthy workers to work in factories and millions of loyal soldiers to serve in the army. But now we are entering a post-industrial world in which the masses are left out of work. You do not need them. Robotization of the economy is not only technically beautiful and scientifically progressive, but also socially scary. It will take less cheap conveyor labor. Work duties that machines cannot do better than a human will be very, very little. Millions of vacancies will disappear. Many good old professions will also disappear.

The apocalypse is inevitable? Probably yes. But then, how to mitigate its blow, how can society be prepared for it? And here we come to a key point — to the idea of a fundamental transformation of thinking, where the result is a holistic worldview. Humanistic, free from anthropocentrism, open to development, but appreciative to stability and taking care of the future. There are several areas in which it is necessary to achieve a balance:

· In the relationship between mankind and nature — sustainable development, ecological consciousness

· Between short-term and long-term prospects

· Between speed and stability — changes and progress should not be perceived as a self-worth

· Between individual and collective, recognizing the importance of personal autonomy — one for the most important gains of the European Enlightenment. Here we need a balance and consideration of the common good; in the economy it means that the state (society) ought to establish rules for the markets, and not vice versa

· Between equality and fair remuneration — the state is required to provide mechanisms that guarantee social justice

· Between the state and freedom of private opinion

To achieve such a global balance is possible, most likely, only through the emergence of global rules that are mandatory for all countries. Some states do not have the right to do whatever they want, especially when it comes to the consequences that affecting the whole planet and civilization. For a better world to become a reality, the economy can and should function differently. With all the differences in details, the overall picture resumes to the fact that the economy of the future should strive for sustainability, not growth, and increase the overall good, rather than maximizing private benefits.

Join the chat — https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAE84vCXg5PK-VpHADg

Sergey Golubev

EU structural funds, ICO projects, NGO & investment projects, project management, comprehensive support for business