Topic: [ANN][NOTE]DNotes - Celebrating DNotes 3rd Birthday - Forum Now Open - page 44. (Read 814545 times)

Very good question and great discussion topic. I think we can pull from the DNotes philosophy to answer that question. Make sure you are fully informed on the issue is a great place to start. Help promote positive and constructive discussion. Help people to realize that taking action in the best interest of everyone as a whole will ultimately benefit everyone.

What do you think is the most important thing average Bitcoin users can contribute to our industry? Sitting around idly waiting for the price to go up and for others to put in the work is a recipe for disaster. There must be some way even the inexperienced can contribute to success, and be left with a sense of accomplishment.

It is an interesting proposal. One thing is clear, if people don't act quickly, the network will continue to grow and the problems we are seeing today will be compounded very quickly. The arguments for and against specific changes become irrelevant if the benefits of using bitcoin start to fade away. Once people begin to bail out, it will be very difficult to convince them to come back. Like merchants who can't process reliable transactions in a reasonable time frame. Will bitcoin have to go to the brink of destruction before everyone realizes it's all on the line? Will everyone be able to work together for what is good for bitcoin as a whole?

Maybe it's time the voting capabilities of blockchain were put to the test to start electing representatives and establishing a chain of command/leadership hierarchy. It's become quite clear that innovation and engineering will not solve all of the industry's problems unless people can be on the same page.

My suggestion would be "weighted voting" based on the amount of hashing power you have, because a large mining operation has an arguably greater vested interest in the industry's future as opposed to bagholders who can sell their stake at any time to recover most of their capital investment. In the future when basic governance is established, switching to a system where every user gets a say would be more possible.


Edit: I also think it's incredibly important to have a plethora of power checks in place, to ensure leadership can't abuse their power.

That is indeed a tough nut to crack, we need Bitcoin to continue being successful and continue to solve industry problems for the time being.

"The industry is doing everything to prove him (Hearn) right while saying he was wrong." That, unfortunately is a very good point. However, we can always be hopeful, but no one seem to have sufficient motivation to step in as a strong leader to clearly represent the industry than their own self interest.

Actually, not so much the leaving of Hearn but the infighting and inability to come to a consensus since he stepped away. The industry is doing everything to prove him right while saying he was wrong. This needs to stop. We need a strong leader to step forward and put all this crap to bed before people get desensitized and move on to new things. You only have the public's attention for so long and it needs to be good attention in order to grow and thrive.

Sorry but, the biggest risk to the banking industry is the banking industry...

http://dcebrief.com/op-ed-bitcoin-survives-its-latest-storm-hurricane-hearn/

There are plenty of opportunities for innovative banks to participate in digital currency but it will take years for them to be comfortable and regulatory requirements to be more accommodating.

Thank you for doing your best to support DNotes at Cryptopia. Hopefully, I will find a little time to check in one day.

Post 567 here: http://cryptomoms.com/forum/index.php?topic=537.msg6375#msg6375

and I am gleefully puddling along, providing a little volume on Cryptopia.

Mark

Yep, let's talk about it. I struggle with it because I can only assume what costs banks actually have and where their income comes from. I assume most people will want an entity like a bank, even if we are majorly on digital currency, for insurance and potentially ease of use among other services a bank provides. I mean, even here, how many people would run there own wallet over using coinbase? DNotesVault is another good example, I'm sure the majority prefer to store their coins at DNotesVault. Banking won't really go away.

I think we start by reducing cost as part of the profit model.
Banks have a cost to pay in order process transactions. There are servers, storage, databases, security, software, maintenance, compliance, & employees to keep it all running. Most of these functions are not necessary when transacting in digital currency because it is built in. On top of this, they can batch transaction to reduce blockchain fees.
Banks also have to cover things like fraud and security breaches, that they pay hefty premiums for in insurance. If done correctly, there could be much less fraud and security risks when using digital currency. Especially where each transaction doesn't require personal information.

So even if fees were lower for the consumer, I assume the banks will make more money than previously (on fees).

What banks won't be able to do with digital currency is lend out and only keep 20% in reserves, or whatever that ratio is, and then charge the consumer interest on borrowed money (rinse and repeat the same money). Seems to me this is where all the money is made and where the problem for banks comes into play. In order to survive they will have to become much much leaner.

Great title on this article, but it came up short on the proof. It sounds like they are saying the reduced fees of using Bitcoin in cross border transfers will result in greater profits for banks. These outrageous fees are how the banks have remained profitable for so long, so I can't imagine they are in any hurry to get rid of them. In order to stay competitive, they would have to eventually pass any savings on to customers (or the consumer will turn to Bitcoin themselves).

It would have been interesting to have some sound arguments and / or better explanation of how banks could profit.


Cashing in on Bitcoin: How banks can turn a profit on the cryptocurrency

http://www.cbronline.com/news/verticals/finance/cashing-in-on-bitcoin-how-banks-can-turn-a-profit-on-the-cryptocurrency-4831672?

It was a great article, and I agree kanus. Though I tend to believe FinTech will be taking on a larger role in providing banking services in the future.

Good job Thomas, though I believe the banks will benefit from digital currency and they should be looking at how they can be involved. It may be disruptive to existing models, and I understand they don't want to change... People will still need services whether they use digital currency or not. Smart banks will be looking at new profit models, new ways to meet customer needs, and new services they can provide, while reducing their costs and better serving the customers.

http://dcebrief.com/is-digital-currency-a-risk-to-the-banking-industry/

Will Bitcoin face extinction without core development competition? Personally, I do not think so. But it will not benefit from its full potential unless, at a minimum, it has managed rules for competition. Competing fairly is a good thing. Competing destructively is chaotic and will retard mass acceptance of Bitcoin.

“Successful businesses compete for winning technology standards all the time.
In most of these battles, one standard eventually emerges victorious. The winning standard succeeds because it becomes best option after a hard-fought battle.
Having a backlog of transactions kills the ability for bitcoin to be useful as a transactional tool and forces additional costs on businesses.

Creating a task force
When it comes to the Internet, its technology is mature and thus debate is normal. Imagine if there were no task forces developing standards governing the internet.
We would be dealing with an internet that was not capable of scaling and rife with technical problems. Instead, proper bodies shape the internet. It has created one of the largest wealth generators of our time.”

Bitcoin Faces Extinction Without Core Development Competition

Daniel Cawrey (@danielcawrey) | Published on March 7, 2016 at 18:45 GMT


The former COO of bitcoin social network ZapChain, Dan Cawrey is a Silicon Valley-based writer specializing in emerging technologies such as bitcoin and virtual reality.
Here, Cawrey argues that the bitcoin ecosystem should embrace competition, but create a standards body so that such competition can be properly encouraged and managed.

Read More:
http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-extinction-core-development-competition/

Looks cool. But is it practical and would there be legal and compliance issues? Additionally, trust will remain a huge issue for larger amount.

Ahh, that makes sense. So in that regard, it's more like those digital coins and such (a paper wallet), it just looks like a bill.