The blockchain and thus also cryptocurrencies are relatively young. This creates a lot of room for new developments and concepts, but also harbors a number of weaknesses and problems. These problems are partly to be solved with the RHT.
The basic intention behind the creation of the blockchain was to create an alternative financial system. The bitcoin was developed, a payment token that as an idea has now gained wide acceptance and recognition. However, the consequence of the desire to create something new, which could function completely detached from the traditional currency market, also resulted in the side effect and the notorious characteristic that crypto assets are volatile. This volatility leads to a number of problems, some of which are also causally related:
An actual value of a token cannot be reliably quantified. A token is assigned a theoretical value based solely on supply and demand. If people trust a token or the project behind it, the value increases. However, this value is not real, but results from pure speculation. If large amounts of liquidity are suddenly withdrawn from the pool, investors panic; the bubble bursts. Within a very short time, a massive redistribution of money takes place, from many people to a few who benefit. With the current token systems, no alternative financial system can be justified that could serve people in the long term.
The RHT breaks through the system of volatility and appears on the market as a new type of token. In contrast to conventional ERC-20 tokens, the RHT is 100% backed by BUSD, which itself is backed 1:1 with US dollars. Nevertheless, the RHT has the property of increasing in value due to the use of SmartContract technology. The result for consumers is a high level of security when planning their investments. Investing in cryptocurrency is no longer purely speculative, with sometimes devastating consequences for individuals, but can be calculated.
Regulators worldwide are responding to this volatility in crypto assets to protect consumers and investors, and more recently to protect the traditional financial system. This includes not only the continent of Europe, which adopted its latest MiCa regulation as a proposal for a new regulation, but also, for example, the city-state of Singapore, which is actually considered crypto-friendly, wants to draw conclusions from the last collapse. In other countries, the reputation of cryptocurrencies is not necessarily much better, if you ignore individual states such as El Salvador.
This need for regulation affects the entire crypto community. Depending on national law, companies often have to go through a bureaucratic and costly legitimacy process before they are even allowed to issue a token. This is followed by a series of obligations, the implementation of which has the effect of slowing down innovation, but in any case costs valuable time and financial reserves. On the one hand, these regulatory efforts may lead to fewer risks for investors because the companies behind the currencies are now controlled, but this also means that the freedom for creativity and progress in the crypto ecosystem is massively restricted - or a project is at best in the gray area of the legitimate. Small projects with potential and individual developers are thus denied any chance to further develop the blockchain and the ideas behind it. The intention was to create an alternative system through decentralization that regulates itself. However, decentralization and regulation are opposites.
However, supervisory authorities can only hold the company behind it responsible. There is no company behind the RHT that is driving its development and there is no company that even emits the token. Each individual token is minted by the investor by depositing BUSD and can also be redeemed for BUSD. This minting process takes place solely via the SmartContract and is therefore 100% autonomous and independent of third parties. I have set up the RHT in such a way that it can also work completely detached from any project based on its own properties. The SmartContract behind the RHT was deployed once on the blockchain, growth and stagnation are solely in the hands of the people.
The latter advantages of the RHT lead directly to the next problem: the lack of independence from cryptocurrencies. Investors often judge cryptocurrencies by the project behind the token, if one exists. This approach is absolutely justified, but leads to a serious dependency: If the project falls, the token falls, or the token falls, the project often falls. The mutual dependency of token and project leads to an increased risk for all parties involved. Combined with the volatility of cryptocurrencies and the associated danger of dumping, every success and failure of a project is not only susceptible to manipulation, but also has the pressure to show a permanent positive price development. The market situation does not always give such a possibility.
The RHT should certainly be linked to other projects in order to guarantee these projects stability and security and, conversely, to benefit from the movements generated as a result and from further benefits. However, the RHT does not need these projects and their successes due to its own characteristics. This makes the RHT "superior" to every other token, which often justifies its utility on a single project, but the respective token itself is only an empty shell. This is a key difference between the RHT and any conventional token. If we refer to the utilities of the RHT in the course of the white paper, we will therefore only emphasize our own token benefits.