ICPUSDT
ICP / Tether USD
crypto Composite

ICP has their chain fusion/chain key features. ICP is pretty much decentralized cloud infra, so instead of functions (smart contracts) you have full applications (canisters) running on a decentralized network/cloud. You can deploy your own canisters but there are also internal canisters that regulate the ICP network/ecosystem. So chain fusion is basically internal canisters running code to read and write directly to different blockchains like Bitcoin, Eth, Solana, doge etc.
So right now I can send BTC directly to another BTC wallet associate with my ICP wallet that's controlled/monitored by one of those internal canisters. On the ICP network, it's then represented as ckBTC. I can then swap this to ckETH with no gas fee and then send that to my normal Eth wallet. Canisters can send http requests to get info during runtime, so it just fetches latest price data to determine exchange rate. Since this is all automated by internal canisters, it only includes gas prices that happen outside of the ICP network.

I don’t think you understood my observations so permit me to rephrase with two rhetorical questions:
1) Why would a privacy tool, in and of itself, now enable a corporation to use ICP in a GDPR compliant if the use case did not involve storing personal information on the blockchain to begin with?
2) Conversely, if a corporation is using ICP to store personal information on the blockchain, how is the datastore both immutable / tamper resistant as well as capable to “delete data” to be GDPR compliant?
In either case, it is arguable that data privacy was not, and still is not, the core GDPR compliance question for the enterprise. Therefore it strikes me as odd to claim that a new privacy tool now makes it possible for a corporation to use ICP for customer data in a GDPR compliant manner.

If they hit a capacity problem ICP would just rent on Public Cloud. The head honcho basically said it already. Which is a counter narrative for the past 5 years..

ICP has their chain fusion/chain key features. ICP is pretty much decentralized cloud infra, so instead of functions (smart contracts) you have full applications (canisters) running on a decentralized network/cloud. You can deploy your own canisters but there are also internal canisters that regulate the ICP network/ecosystem. So chain fusion is basically internal canisters running code to read and write directly to different blockchains like Bitcoin, Eth, Solana, doge etc.
So right now I can send BTC directly to another BTC wallet associate with my ICP wallet that's controlled/monitored by one of those internal canisters. On the ICP network, it's then represented as ckBTC. I can then swap this to ckETH with no gas fee and then send that to my normal Eth wallet. Canisters can send http requests to get info during runtime, so it just fetches latest price data to determine exchange rate. Since this is all automated by internal canisters, it only includes gas prices that happen outside of the ICP network.

I don’t think you understood my observations so permit me to rephrase with two rhetorical questions:
1) Why would a privacy tool, in and of itself, now enable a corporation to use ICP in a GDPR compliant if the use case did not involve storing personal information on the blockchain to begin with?
2) Conversely, if a corporation is using ICP to store personal information on the blockchain, how is the datastore both immutable / tamper resistant as well as capable to “delete data” to be GDPR compliant?
In either case, it is arguable that data privacy was not, and still is not, the core GDPR compliance question for the enterprise. Therefore it strikes me as odd to claim that a new privacy tool now makes it possible for a corporation to use ICP for customer data in a GDPR compliant manner.

If they hit a capacity problem ICP would just rent on Public Cloud. The head honcho basically said it already. Which is a counter narrative for the past 5 years..