The Norman Blockchain.

From a mechanism for deferred payment, to a store of value and then a medium of exchange. Stablecoins? We’ve been here before, as I explained to our guests at Money20/20 in Amsterdam this year.

A ledger technology, a means for recording transactions, needs to be fit for purpose. It needs to be cost-effective, convenient, appropriate for its users, immutable (of course), long lasting and so on. We’ve been here before, by the way, with the tally sticks. To begin at the beginning, then, what are tally sticks? Well, here is an article I wrote about them for the Financial Times Virtual Finance Report almost three decades ago (FTVFR, Vol. III, No. 5, May 1998)…

Tally Ho!

Tally sticks came into use in England after the notorious war criminal William the Bastard’s illegal invasion and regime change of 1066. Tax assessments were made for areas of the country and the relevant sheriff was required to collect the taxes and remit them to the crown. To ensure that both the sheriff and the king knew where they stood, the tax assessment was recorded by cutting notches in a wooden twig and then splitting the twig in two, so that each of them had a durable record of the assessment. When it was time to pay up, the sheriff would show up with the cash and his half of the tally to be reckoned against the King’s half. As the system evolved, the taxes were paid in two stages: half paid up front at Easter and the rest paid later in the year at Michaelmas when the “tallying up” took place.

Medieval English split tally stick (front and reverse view). The stick is notched and inscribed to record a debt owed to the rural dean of Preston Candover, Hampshire, of a tithe of 20d each on 32 sheep, amounting to a total sum of £2 13s. 4d.

The technology worked well. The tally sticks were small and long–lasting (after all, they still exist, you can go and see some in the British Museum), were easy to store and transport, and easily understood by those who couldn’t read (which was almost everyone).

As a new technology, however, they soon began to exhibit some unforeseen (in the context of their record–keeping function) characteristics. During the extended period of use of any technology, creative people come along and find new ways to use the technology in different times, in different cultural contexts. Tally sticks were a form of distributed ledger to record debt, and were soon being used as money.

From Deferred Payment to Store of Value

By the reign of Henry II (who died in France in 1189), the Exchequer was already a sophisticated and organised department of the king’s court with an elaborate staff of officers. The use of tallies to enable this operation had an interesting consequence. Since the king (as is generally the case) couldn’t be bothered to wait until taxes fell due, and could not borrow money at interest, he would sell the tallies at a discount. The holder of the tally could then cash it in when the taxes fell due, making it (in effect) a fixed–term government bond. Since paying interest was forbidden by the church, selling tallies at a discount became a key means for the Crown to borrow money without God noticing what was going on.

The discount on the tallies, being equivalent to the interest rate for government debt, varied just as one would expect. As economic circumstances changed, so did the discount rate. Adam Smith noted that in the time of King William the discount reached 60% when the Bank of England suspended transactions during a debasement of the coinage. Clearly, then, the tally system could be (and was) abused by the Exchequer selling tallies which they would not redeem, but the Crown soon learned not to renege on tallies, since the discount on future tallies would be increased and the Exchequer would be hit hard.

To summarise: by middle of the twelfth century, there was a functional market in government debt centred on London. No wonder the London money markets are so sophisticated. I often fall into the trap of thinking that there’s never been a revolution in monetary technology before, so I forget how rapidly previous significant developments were co–opted by the financial ‘establishment’ and taken for granted or just how old some aspects of the apparently modern financial infrastructure are.

From Store of Value to Means of Exchange

The market for tallies evolved quickly. Someone in (say) Bristol who was holding a tally for taxes due in (say) York would either have to travel to collect their due payment or find someone else who would, for an appropriate discount, buy the tally. Thus, a market for tallies grew, arbitrating various temporal and spatial preferences by price. It is known from recorded instances that officials working in the Exchequer helped this market to operate smoothly. The distributed ledger technology of the tally had been used to convert a means for deferred payment into a store of value and then into a means of exchange, and the sticks remained in widespread use or hundreds of years.

The Bank of England, being a sensible and conservative institution naturally suspicious of new technologies, continued to use wooden tally sticks until 1826: some 500 years after the invention of double–entry bookkeeping and 400 years after Johann Gutenburg’s invention of printing. At this time, the Bank came up with a wonderful British compromise: they would switch to paper, but would keep the tallies as a backup (who knew whether the whole “printing” thing would work out, after all) until the last person who knew how to use them had died!

Thus, tally sticks were then taken out of circulation and stored in the Houses of Parliament until 1834, when the authorities decided that the tallies were no longer required and that they should be burned. As it happened, they were burned rather too enthusiastically and in the resulting conflagration the Houses of Parliament were razed to the ground, which is why they are now a Victorian gothic pile rather than a medieval palace, in an incident so loaded with symbolism about the long–term impact of innovations in the technology of money that had it occurred in a novel no–one would believe it.

The Burning of the Houses of Lords and Commons is the title of two oil on canvas paintings by J. M. W. Turner, depicting the fire that broke out at the Houses of Parliament on the evening of 16 October 1834. Turner himself witnessed the burning of Parliament from the south bank of the River Thames, opposite Westminster.

Stable

The tally sticks, just like USDC, were backed by government debt. Just as USDC is backed by US Treasury Bills, so the tally sticks were backed by the tax-raising power of the monarch. Nothing much has happened in a thousand years, has it!

Driving the Future of Fintech

Insights from Money20/20 USA 2024 and Consult Hyperion’s Legacy

The fintech landscape has undergone remarkable transformations over the past decade, with Money20/20 USA serving as a pivotal platform for showcasing industry innovations and setting trends. Each year, this premier conference gathers leaders, innovators, and thinkers to discuss the future of financial services. Reflecting on past themes such as cloud computing and blockchain, the 2024 event embraced Artificial Intelligence (AI) as the defining technology of the year.

A Look Back: Cloud, Blockchain, and Consult Hyperion’s Journey at Money20/20

Over the years, Money20/20 has highlighted significant trends that have shaped financial services. Cloud computing allowed institutions to scale operations, enhance customer experiences, and improve efficiency. Blockchain soon followed, presenting decentralized ledger systems that promised more transparency, security, and trust in financial transactions.

For Consult Hyperion, these advancements provided a natural landscape to showcase our expertise. Since our first year at Money20/20, we’ve been committed to the industry’s growth, contributing thought leadership and insights on technological evolution. Our journey at Money20/20 has been one of active participation, attendance and thought leadership. Year after year, we’ve witnessed—and contributed to—the shift in how technology redefines our industry.

2024: The AI-Driven Future of Fintech

This year, AI emerged as the main theme, emphasizing the next evolution in payments technology. Money20/20 USA 2024 was all about exploring AI’s current and future impact. From machine learning to natural language processing, the event demonstrated AI’s ability to drive personalized financial products, enhance security, and transform customer engagement.

Key highlights from this year’s conference included:

  • AI-Powered Customer Engagement: Many exhibitors showcased AI-driven chatbots and virtual assistants designed to streamline customer support and provide tailored advice. This shift towards personalized experiences is already making a significant impact, with AI enabling real-time, intelligent responses.
  • Enhanced Fraud Detection: Fraud prevention was another focal point, with sessions exploring how AI-driven models are detecting and mitigating fraud more effectively than ever. These solutions promise a safer environment for both financial institutions and consumers.
  • Personalized Financial Services: As AI grows more sophisticated, it allows for finely-tuned, data-driven offerings that meet individual needs. Financial products are now being tailored with unprecedented accuracy, improving customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Consult Hyperion’s Continued Commitment to Innovation

Consult Hyperion’s ongoing involvement at Money20/20 reflects our commitment to staying at the forefront of fintech. This year, we’re particularly excited about the potential AI brings to financial services and how it intersects with our expertise in secure payments and identity. As a key player in bridging technology with strategy, Consult Hyperion remains dedicated to guiding the industry through its next stages of digital transformation.

Dave Birch’s Panels on AI, Digital Identity, and Payments

Consult Hyperion’s own Dave Birch, known globally for his thought leadership in secure payment and identity systems, moderated two thought-provoking panels. Each session, focused on AI’s transformative potential in finance, illustrated how we can expect profound changes in secure identity, payments, and customer engagement.

  1. “Have My AI Call Your AI and Let’s Do Lunch” This forward-looking session explored the transformative potential of AI-driven B2B interactions within finance. Birch and his panelists, including Sophia Bantazidis from Citi, discussed how autonomous, AI-driven systems could negotiate and streamline transactions between organizations. Panelists noted that as AI continues to advance, it presents opportunities for improving efficiency in business interactions. However, the potential for AI-to-AI interactions also brings the need for a secure, reliable framework, particularly in digital identity, to ensure all parties’ integrity and security. Bantazidis highlighted the importance of ethical AI in finance and the role of digital identity frameworks to support responsible, trustworthy AI interactions. The discussion underscored that digital identity isn’t just a safeguard but a necessity for enabling safe, efficient AI-driven financial communications, allowing AI systems to engage securely in a trust-based environment.
  2. “The Real Disruption in Retail Financial Services: Customers Getting AI” Hosted on the exclusive “Off The Record” stage, which featured Chatham House rules and a locked-phone policy to encourage open dialogue, this session delved into a critical, often under-discussed topic: the growing role of AI in empowering consumers rather than just enhancing banks’ internal efficiencies. Birch set the stage for a candid conversation, highlighting that while it’s intriguing to explore how banks might use AI to streamline call centers or make marginally better credit decisions, the real disruption lies in customers having direct access to AI tools themselves. This shift represents a fundamental threat to the traditional retail banking model, with the increased intelligence of customers challenging financial institutions to adapt. Joining Birch in this conversation were Matt Harris from Bain Capital and Kirsty Rutter from Lloyds Banking Group, both bringing deep insights into how AI is empowering consumers with data and control previously inaccessible in the standard banking setup. Harris discussed how consumer-facing AI tools are pushing banks to refine their approach to customer engagement, while Rutter highlighted the role of secure, personalized digital identity in offering these AI-driven experiences safely and effectively. Together, the panelists concluded that financial institutions must develop robust strategies to stay relevant and competitive in the face of this new AI-enabled consumer intelligence.

Howard Hall’s Podcast with Lou Carlozo: A Legacy of Leadership in Payments and Digital Identity

In addition to these panel discussions, Consult Hyperion’s Howard Hall, was featured in a podcast with respected financial journalist Lou Carlozo. Hall shared how Consult Hyperion has been pioneering secure digital identity and payment solutions for decades, dating back to projects like the groundbreaking Hong Kong ID card. Hall discussed how this legacy of innovation continues to drive the company’s work in secure digital payments and identity, underscoring our commitment to building resilient infrastructures that adapt to changing regulatory landscapes and technology demands. Hall’s conversation with Carlozo highlighted that Consult Hyperion’s expertise in secure payments and identity frameworks isn’t simply a reaction to industry shifts; it’s a proactive approach that has evolved alongside the fintech ecosystem.

Charting the Path Forward

Money20/20 USA 2024 was a testament to the ongoing evolution within fintech, with AI taking center stage. As the industry advances, Consult Hyperion remains dedicated to contributing expertise in payments, secure digital identity, and emerging technologies that will shape the future. Our commitment to innovation and the fintech community continues, with a focus on building a safer, smarter, and more inclusive financial ecosystem.

Digital Mobility with Mobile Driver’s Licenses

Most people reading this will already know what an mDL is (a Mobile Driver’s License of course). That’s because it isn’t a new idea; it has been in development for roughly eight years now. What is new this year however is the development of the existing mDL standard to include remote presentation, an add-on functionality which could do to plastic identity cards what plastic bank cards did to cash.

Along with 1.5 million participants in the state of California, I’m fortunate to be eligible to join the free pilot program offered by the CA DMV to secure myself an mDL. All I have to do is download the “CA DMV Wallet” app on my iPhone and take a front and back picture of my Real ID – it’s that simple. To demonstrate just how easy it is to use, I thought my colleague here at CHYP, Hayden Evans, could share his experience of using an mDL in an airport on the opposite coast:

“From my experience, the overall process of using the mDL provided by Georgia was very simple. There was no need to download any additional applications. All that was required was to follow the instructions laid out in my Apple Wallet. After submitting the required info to and receiving the corresponding approval back from the DDS (Department of Driver Services), I was ready to try it out at my earliest convenience.  At Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, tapping my mDL was very reminiscent of tapping to pay for transit rides with OMNY in New York (minus the Express Transit settings). The only potential confusion was the option for flyers to use what’s referred to as their ‘digital ID’, which showed up as an option on my Delta boarding pass (top-left corner above the QR code). This involved the TSA agent taking my photo and presumably verifying it against some stored credential. To the average flyer having a Digital ID vs. an mDL may be confusing or unclear.”

So it may not be completely frictionless yet, but few digital experiences are, and this is only the beginning. There are currently over 25  participating airports accepting mDL’s all over the country, including three here in California. While the DMV makes it clear that this is not a full replacement of the Real ID, it can now be used in stores and restaurants for proof of age. In Utah for example, your mDL can be used in a variety of use cases with Credit Unions, Liquor Stores and Health Centres all accepting your digital identity as an officially recognized ID. Utah isn’t alone; there are dozens of other states already issuing mDLs or following closely behind them in the development stage.

In October of last year I was fortunate to attend the 37th Bi-Annual Internet Identity Workshop in Mountain View CA. This was my third time attending and in one of the very first sessions we received an update on the progress of the ISO/IEC 18013-5 mDL standard; originally conceived in 2016 by NIST but published in 2021. The standard specifically focuses on secure Local Presentation, including via QR Code, NFC and BLE mechanisms.

However, ISO/IEC 18013-7 as I mentioned earlier outlines specifications for the remote presentation of mDLs. Despite there being various transportation methods for credentials, the formatting of those credentials remains quite consistent amongst them. The standard proposes utilizing a Rest API to initiate a request for the mDL credential, prompting the application to respond with either a redacted or complete credential (thereby incorporating selective disclosure capabilities). Selective disclosure is the mechanism by which users can ‘hide’ certain elements of the credential that were disclosed This is privacy-by-design in action.

The plan is to use the OpenID4VP   standard for presentation of the credential, and at the end of 2023 SpruceID announced impressive success rates for the first fully remote interoperability tests for mDL implementations. Expected to be published in full later this year, the standard aims to address a current technological gap: not all web pages have the capability to request a credential from a user-chosen wallet. In short, the standard addresses the complexities of specifically remote mDL presentation and will enable users to have a truly portable digital identity.

Issues like standardization still remain; and it will be interesting to see how the big players approach the issues of interoperability between wallets. Android and Apple both now support the ISO 18013-5 standard in the JetPack suite and iOS 15 respectively. If widespread acceptance of the mDL is the goal, we’ll need to see continued co-operation between wallet issuers, regulators and digital credential providers. Kantara’s “Privacy & Identity Protection in mDL ecosystems Discussion Group” is a great example of the kind of collaboration needed to support mDL adoption.

Changing consumer behaviour takes time. There are those in California who aren’t fans of the DMV’s pilot program, but still believe “that’s where we’re going with technology.” I’m willing to bet that underneath this skepticism is a person who was also hesitant about using contactless payments in shops and having their face scanned at ePassport gates at airports – until they became mainstream. They might have doubts at first, but in the case of mDLs and selective disclosure, I believe that people will soon appreciate being given more control over their digital identity. And all at the press of a button on their phone.

In our experience, people always prefer convenience. Privacy and Security therefore need to be convenient as well.


How do we regulate and ensure AI Machines pay fairly?

Robot putting a coin into a vending machine

I was extremely fortunate to be invited to the recent BIS Securing The Future Monetary System conference in Basel.  This was a terrific event, bringing together some of the cleverest people in security from the worlds of banking; academia and industry to discuss the issues faced in securing our future CBDC based monetary systems.

I was there to speak about the technical considerations in Offline CBDCs, however I was also fortunate enough to take part in a roundtable on CBDCs and machine-to-machine payments, which was utterly fascinating, and produced some great insight and thinking that I thought I’d share, within the bounds of the Chatham House Rules. First, some background.

The call for Machine-to-Machine CBDCs

The GBIC model of three distinct types of CBDC is one that has always appealed to me. The GBIC is the voice of the main German banking associations: the National Association of German Cooperative Banks (BVR), the Association of German Banks (BdB), the Association of German Public Banks (VÖB), the German Savings Banks Association (DSGV), and the Association of German Pfandbrief Banks (vdp).  It was fascinating to have such a conservative organisation discussing not two but three kinds of digital currency in their digital euro policy paper. They call for a digital currency ecosystem encompassing:

  • A Wholesale CBDC, issued by the central bank but for use in capital markets and interbank transfers. The GBIC’s experts are calling for this form of the digital euro partly because, by adopting this approach, the ECB would be able to include further digitalisation of central bank accounts in its project. The ultimate aim is to achieve improvements which can benefit consumers, enterprises and also the banking sector.
  • A Retail CBDC, again issued by the central bank to be used by private individuals in the euro area in the same way as cash for everyday payments, e.g. to retailers or government agencies. It should be possible to use the digital euro like cash, anonymously and offline. They assume that credit institutions will provide consumers in Europe with the necessary smart wallets.
  • An Industry CBDC. What the GBIC call “tokenised commercial bank money” which will be made available by commercial banks to meet a corporate demand arising from Industry 4.0 and the Internet of Things. Tokenised commercial bank money could facilitate transactions based on “smart” – i.e. automated – contracts and thus increase process efficiency.

In other words, in addition to wholesale CBDC for institutions and retail CBDC for people, they want industrial CBDC designed for Machine-to-Machine payments to satisfy the demand that will arise from the Internet of Things (IoT). Therefore a roundtable session considering Machine-to-Machine CBDCs was going to be interesting. The round table had a great flow, considering three aspects of Machine-to-Machine CBDCs starting with:

What do we mean by CBDC M2M Payments?

Do we mean human induced CBDC Machine-to-Machine payments, or do we mean a fully autonomous exchange of assets? i.e. me pressing a button on my car user interface to allow it to pay the fuel dispenser for my electricity / diesel / petrol or a machine doing it’s own thing, buying and selling as it goes. Of course we went for the second one, much more interesting. As an example, the group considered a set of solar cells generating and putting electricity into the network, and an electric vehicle consuming that energy and paying for it.  Where is the human here? Are they explicitly involved in the payment process, well no, so do we have humans at the edge, disintermediated by the system, only involved at set up? Just what are the implications here?

We then consider whether these payments are open loop or closed loop CBDC payments. For Machine-to-Machine, a closed loop CBDC ecosystem could bring benefits, where micro-payments can take place between machines, predominantly offline, only going online occasionally, effectively enabling the machines to cash in and cash out. What if we go further and consider a fully autonomous AI machine, providing services, consuming resources, making and receiving payments as it goes, can this legally be the case, or is there always liability with humans accountable? Something that needs serious consideration.

How does regulation fit in?

How do we regulate for machine-to-machine CBDC payments? Indeed is regulation required? Of course it is, but not we cannot wait for this to appear retrospectively, too often in payments the regulator is playing catch up. For machine-to-machine CBDC payments, visionary regulation is required.

Regulators need to work together with the industry in order to understand machine-to-machine use cases, liabilities and put regulation in place ahead of machine-to-machine CBDC payments taking place. It was the view of the table that proactive, visionary regulation won’t be perfect, but principals-based regulation is needed in order to provide standards and trust. The table postulated that this could be implemented by smart contracts, with regulation at the edge where it can make use of the standard / regulation in place at that time, allowing change to quickly propagate. For example, we can imagine a tax compliant CBDC system for machine-to-machine CBDCs, updating to the latest tax regime. This may bring us to a place where technology, regulation and governance are intertwined, boundaries are not clear, where we have rails and assets. Good, well considered, clear regulation is essential to manage this.

What can we learn from the systems we have in play today?

Today we have bad actors in the system, using their own AI engines to feed their rules into the system.  So how do we apply the brakes? If / when things do go wrong where is the liability at the end of the chain? Is it even possible to find who is responsible in such an autonomous AI system with many interactions and components?

We concluded that to does this effectively we need to build the system with ethics embedded in the system, and perhaps for visionary regulation for machine-to-machine, or robot to robot, CBDC payments Asimov’s laws are not a bad place to start.

It was a fascinating event, with great conversations on all aspects of CBDC solution security. If you want to know more about CBDCs then please get in touch.

Open Payments – A Big Hit in the Big Apple

People entering turnstiles at a train station

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) has taken a giant leap forward in modernizing the way New Yorkers and visitors pay for their daily commutes with the introduction of OMNY (One Metro New York). OMNY, a contactless fare payment system, is not just another technological upgrade; it’s a game-changer that promises to revolutionize the way people travel in the Big Apple. OMNY was officially launched in May 2019, starting with a limited pilot program of the Open Payments system to accept physical bank cards and bank cards on mobile Pays on select subway lines and buses. The system’s initial introduction was met with anticipation and excitement, as commuters eagerly embraced the prospect of a more convenient and efficient payment method. Since then, the adoption of Open Payments has been nothing short of impressive.

The system had been deployed on all subway lines and buses in New York City. Commuters across the five boroughs now have easy access to the OMNY readers, ensuring a seamless travel experience, and the MTA has been working on expanding the reach of OMNY as it has started to distribute its closed-loop OMNY cards in retail locations. Just last month, the Roosevelt Island Tramway joined the tap-and-go system and became the first non-MTA operated entity to participate in OMNY. AirTrain JFK will start accepting OMNY’s contactless payments starting 10 October.

The MTA recently reported that approximately 67% of full-fare riders have made the switch from MetroCard to OMNY. Considering the delay in rolling out the OMNY Vending Machines, this figure appears to indicate that overall, the Open Payments system is a big hit. Evidence of this can be seen in OMNY reaching its 1-billion-tap milestone this summer. This is even more impressive considering they reached this milestone five months quicker than the TfL did (in spite of the ridership impacts brought on by the pandemic).

Why is Open Payments so successful for the MTA? Is it just because of the Wall Street executives who ride MTA? Or is it because the agency made a choice to offer Open Payments as the first phase of their new fare payment system, have been marketing it on every bus, subway car and vending machine and have been enhancing the offering with features like fare capping?

If you’re attending the APTA TRANSform conference in Orlando, find Lawrence and Simon who both worked on the OMNY project, and ask us for our thoughts. We would love to chat with you about it!

Cover art: Marc A. Hermann / MTA

Supporting the CDBC dialogue

The way that central bank digital currencies will work is a matter of great importance and there needs be informed discussion and debate about the requirements, goals and constraints of practical population-scale fiat electronic cash. But the fact is that CBDC is a complicated, emotive and (frankly) poorly-understood subject that needs collaboration across public and private sectors to deliver benefits to all stakeholders. With the interest the subject growing from all directions, Mastercard’s announcement of a new CBDC Partner Program to foster collaboration with key players in the space is very welcome.

Their inaugural set of partners includes the remittance platform Ripple, blockchain and Web3 software company Consensys, multi-CBDC and tokenized assets solution provider Fluency, digital identity technology provider Idemia, security technology group Giesecke+Devrient, digital asset operations platform Fireblocks and, of course, Consult Hyperion. We were delighted to be asked to join the program and, given our considerable experience in the design and development of mass-market electronic alternatives to cash – for clients ranging central banks, through commercial banks, to telecommunications operators and mass transit schemes – around the world, we will work with the partners to tackle key questions and advance the state of the art.

One of the key questions is, of course, the fundamental need for CBDC at all. Here, we are far from global consensus. Writing in the Financial Times earlier this year, a senior advisor to the Bank of England said that as CBDC is the digital equivalent of cash and that since we already have electronic commercial bank money, we don’t really need it. Similarly, in the Wall Street Journal, a technology writer said that a retail CBDC isn’t any different from the electronic money in bank accounts today—it’s just a digital dollar. But they are both wrong: there is a fundamental difference between electronic money that lives in bank accounts and electronic cash that lives… well, anywhere. In phones, USB sticks, laptops, smart cards, cars or wherever else we can put a microchip capable of secure processing.

Why does this matter? Well, when I sent my sister the money that I owed her recently, it went from my bank account through the banking system to her bank account. But in the future, I will send her electronic cash from the wallet in my laptop to the wallet in her phone and it will never go anywhere near banks or the banking system. There won’t be any clearing or settlement, which is why the existence of instant payment networks has nothing to do with the need for CBDC.

The modern economy needs both electronic money and CBDC. We need a safe and sound banking system but we also need safe and sound money that can move around outside that banking system to provide not only resilience in the infrastructue but, most importantly in my opinion, a platform for new products and services. This is where the real excitement should be. If there is going to be a digital dollar, it should be in a form that is a platform for open innovation. Electronic cash, like cash, is a pre-paid product with no credit risk. Anyone should be able to use a digital dollar API to create not mere emulations of the payment services that we have now, but new ways of transacting: micropayments, smart payments, conditional payments, whatever.

Jesse McWaters, who leads global regulatory advocacy at Mastercard, says that there are questions about the role of the private sector in CBDC issuance, security, privacy and interoperability. He is right, and Mastercard is looking to help answer some of these questions by fostering industry collaboration to draw on (for example) Fluency’s work to build interoperability among different CBDCs, Consult Hyperion’s work with central banks and payment processors to define their CBDC requirements and Ripple’s launch of an inaugural government-issued national stablecoin in collaboration with the Republic of Palau. Mastercard are to be applauded for their initiative to bring these questions forward for serious discussion and informed debate.

ABT – the opportunities of transitioning

Osmodal Group’s Mick Spiers and Consult Hyperion’s Lawrence Sutton consider the benefits of Card-Based to Account Based ticketing (ABT) and determine factors to consider with transition

Subscribe to our newsletter

You have successfully subscribed to the newsletter

There was an error while trying to send your request. Please try again.

By accepting the Terms, you consent to Consult Hyperion communicating with you regarding our events, reports and services through our regular newsletter. You can unsubscribe anytime through our newsletters or by emailing us.