According to a report co-written by Santander, adopting this digital ledger could save companies up to $20 billion dollars.
Garbage. This canard really has to go: there's no way that a blockchain system could be more efficient than centralised non-crypto ledgers, it simply defies logic. Having multiple parties do cryptographic checksums ADDS to the processing burden for banks, it simply cannot subtract.
Furthermore, this cryptographically secure public ledger makes the process highly transparent, making it impossible for third parties to fiddle the numbers. This can only be a good thing for customers as blockchain technology makes transactions more efficient and secure.
More nonsense; third parties can't "fiddle the numbers" within the present banking system, only first parties can, i.e. employees at the bank. Sure, individual users of the banking system can get their funds stolen by thrid parties, but that manipualtion takes place at the level of the victim's computer and/or the internet connection they use to connect to the bank, not within the actual banking system itself.
So, cryptographic proofs securing the bank's network cannot make user transactions more secure, the user is just as responsible for that part of the operation as they ever were (and the same is true of using Bitcoin, of course).
Yet testing and implementing blockchain technology remains in its infancy. While the majority of major banks and financial institutions understand the advantages of leveraging the technology, it is held back by challenges including security, regulation and scalability.
Nope, the Bitcoin network is well established and reaching technological maturity. The banks have only just started working on this, apparently. Security and regulation are now well ensconced, and major scalability upgrades are launching within months.
tl;dr: the usual "blockchain" fail-fest
