Topic: Banks are changing ..... Bitcoin should wake up and innovate more! (Read 1073 times)

Banks certainly have good resources to always transform, but banks must also be subject to government regulations, when banks try to use blockchain technology and the government does not allow the bank to obey the government, and this is for the good and security of customers.

Bank is a great economic power, we cannot compare marketcap Bitcoin vs Banks, even many banks are a place for money laundering so they keep transactions, they see that bitcoin is not a threat because the many countries that are banned and users are very easily feared because prices can drop significantly because prices can drop significantly because prices can drop significant.

Banks are actually not that afraid of the presence of Bitcoin in society because Bitcoin is not an asset or currency that anyone who knows it very well needs to be afraid of. Because the Bank itself can also buy and own Bitcoin as is done by people in general, but in terms of using Bitcoin there are more and more at this time.

The thing that the Bank is most afraid of is the loss of old Bank customers and the lack of interest in saving at the Bank for new customers, so that the Bank has no income from its own customers unless the Bank can create its own money before distributing it to the public.

The unique Bitcoin concept makes Bank worried that the number of users continues to increase, and is proven that at this time the Bitcoin Marketcap continues to increase and many countries have legalized Bitcoin so I'm sure the next 10 years the user will be easier for Bitcoin transactions directly.

I've always been trying to find some kind of logical way out of what's going on. And with certainty that people will not stop doing this in a world that controls all its joints by central powers, they will always need a trustworthy party to keep their money, so I advised them that they can to some extent trust some of these services if you live in a system that legalizes the use of crypto And it gives you the right to litigation in the event of any unexpected problems. As for those who work in secret, away from the eyes of the authorities, they are forced to take responsibility for keeping their money.

Yes... hacking is a new business that has been around before bitcoin, and has been becoming increasingly popular and innovative - even though sometimes the hackers do end up getting caught, too.

Regarding your point about bitcoin being "the first application" upon bitcoin (though you used that dumbass term, blockchain), yes, bitcoin is the first application upon bitcoin, but blockchain is largely a nonsensical term, except if we are considering various ways to scam people.. so yes.. I suppose in that way you are correct to suggest that the mere use and conceptualization regarding what is happening around bitcoin to be "blockchain" is a kind of social hack that is likely to be lucrative for generations to come (what is a generation ?  maybe 20 years?).. so yeah.. probably blockchain is going to continue to serve as a lucrative social hack for at least a couple more generations, until people realize that they should be building upon bitcoin.. rather than risking being socially hacked and/or rug pulled.. whether deliberately, or through negligence, greed, dumbness or otherwise..

Bitcoin itself is a technological innovation. Bitcoin is the first application of the underlying technology of the blockchain. It is not too much to say that robbers need to understand hacking techniques in the future.

Changing according to the need of the people is a must that needs to be followed. Banks are in its transformation phase. Some even tried to make advancement using blockchain technology. In different ways the change is happening around. Banks have experienced the highest growth over the years. We don't know whether this is out of the changes or happening out of the market situation. At some point soon we can expect majority of the banks to function together with bitcoin.

Many banks have realized that the analog era of banking is getting off that is why there are many online banks now that do not have physical branches and they are operating well spending lesser funds to pay staffs and workers.
 Since we are in the cashless policy so we are going to be experiencing digital transactions throughout just like taking some cryptocurrency transactions.

I just came across this thread, and as I was reading through the various comments, I was considering whether I should respond and/or from what angle to attack the issue - because I have some difficulties with a framework that this is an "inevitability of digital" issue or that "bitcoin is not innovating fast enough" issue or a "decentralized is preferred" issue or even a "crypto currency revolution" issue.

So, in some sense, I don't even know how I want to frame the matter of to attack the matter except to restate some of the obvious in regards to bitcoin having had created a paradigm shifting invention in which people, institutions and goverments can choose to build on it or try to compete with it or can just try to take some detached stance, and bitcoin gives no shits.  

Sure, since 2008/2009 (and maybe even before that) there are already people who are already choosing to build on bitcoin and get involved in bitcoin, and surely the earliest days of bitcoin's being announced in 2008 or going active in early 2009, there were some people who already had been working in various related fields and felt that they could fairly easily identify with it (including the fact that they were in circles in which they actually heard about it and it resonated with them)... there are degrees of resonation for sure, and some people, institutions and governments find ways to work with bitcoin more than others at an earlier time than others, and it seems to me that the more that these actors get involved with bitcoin then the more than they are likely to advantage from such involvement.  

The same is true with banks, and some of them will try to figure out ways to incorporate bitcoin into their business or build upon bitcoin (without overdoing it), and so yeah with Gresham's law value is going to continue to flow into bitcoin, and there are going to be some players (institutions such as bank and otherwise) who are well positioned 4-10 years down the road and some who might be just getting started 40-50 years down the road.. or maybe they dabbled earlier (and somehow still were able to survived) but 40 years later figured out that they need to innovate.. or maybe they got involved with a variety of shitcoins, and realized later that they were not really building on value .. but engaged in serial gambling and somehow (perhaps by miracle) had not totally reckt themselves over the years.

So yeah. there will be degrees of how connected folks incorporate bitcoin into their lives in terms of finances, time and psychology, including the extent to which some participants in this thread sound like they are a wee bit distracted in their keeping on saying "crypto" in their framing of how they believe that banks should consider incorporating bitcoin into their banking services.. as if some members here do not seem to know the difference between bitcoin and shitcoins, and the same is going to continue to be true with the public at large including institutions (such as banks) and governments, and seems to me that those folks who engage in "crypto thinking" are less likely to "make it" or to be focused, but surely some of those shitcoiners (or variants of shitcoiners) will still survive through their gambling and lack of focus, and some of those shitcoiners who fail refuse to build on bitcoin will still be able to make it in some kind of way that they might believe works for them and/or their situation, and some of them will likely try to be overly creative rather than figuring out ways to be prudent and reasonable by focusing and building on bitcoin ... Some will get recked and some will still survive whether they discover bitcoin or not and whether they build on bitcoin or not.  

There are likely going to continue to exist a lot of value systems in the world in which people, institutions and governments are going to be able to build upon, and likely Gresham's law will continue to gravitate the built value upon the soundest of systems and the soundest of foundational monies, which many of us (some of us more than others) already recognize and appreciate to be bitcoin.

It seems to me that there are going to be some people who are more ready, willing and able to take care of larger portions of financial aspects of their lives, and some of the apps are likely to become more and more user-friendly with the passage of time (but there still will likely be ongoing confusion about a lot of these matters), and there are still going to be business that want to provide services to people and I doubt that banks are going to completely disappear in terms of the need to offer various kinds of financial services - whether or not the dollar disappears which surely does seem likely that the dollar will disappear sooner or later, even if that disappearance of the dollar could happen in 5-10 years from now, but it could possibly take 50-100 years for the dollar to disappear.. .

It is not easy to know these kinds of dynamics in regards to the future because even with bitcoin there are human interaction and human preferences at play..

Bitcoin is not completely decentralized and turing complete.. would we even want that?  Are we all bots?  

There are likely going to continue to be human interactions and human preferences that motivate bitcoin's direction, even if bitcoin might be the most decentralized of secure value transmission and storage systems that have existed to date... but even the ongoing security and other features of bitcoin likely require some degree of human interaction and even acceptance of human preferences... even if a decent amount of bitcoin's value seems to come from the difficulties in changing aspects of bitcoin.. but I would think that we would want to be able to change bitcoin if it were clearly and unambiguously determined that bitcoin had started to eat babies, for example (just a hypothetical.. I don't have evil thoughts)... but yeah, some people will try to make things up in regards to what bitcoin is doing that is not true.. so we are likely going to continue to have some of those kinds of value judgments that could end up coopting bitcoin if aspects of bitcoin are able to be changed due to hard and cold facts... or just that people come to believe certain matters to justify changes to bitcoin (I am not even trying to imply that bitcoin is easy to change, but that it can be changed if there were some kind of human preference need rather than just having a robot (ie bitcoin) to tell us what we can do)


I think so too.. I think that there will likely ongoingly be needs for some handholding at various stages in the ways that people interact with financial systems, and whether we call them banks or we call them something else, it is likely that people will be willing to pay for such hand-holding services in regards to some aspects of their financial management.. and surely some people will need more handholding than others at various stages in their lives and also possibly depending on what kinds of financial considerations they might be juggling or be needing to consider (whether they know it or not).

Yeah, I think we call them pop up banks or something like that over here. Banks like Monzo, and Starling have started to take over really. Those are solely online, and with an app that has to be downloaded onto your phone, which isn't the best of ideas in my opinion. Call me old fashion, but anything that you access online, and has a decent amount of wealth in it, is a terrible idea.

That's why Bitcoin is so popular. You have the option to manage it however you'd like. Whereas when the older fashioned banks catch on to these new banks, they'll likely move to an entirely online platform too. The digital money era is pretty much on us now.

Banks are not passive players which will just wait until they are replaced by bitcoin and other projects, they also have the ability to change and they will do it if they feel they have the need to do so, right now despite the growth of bitcoin they are not feeling that pressured because most people still use their services, but you can be sure that if at some point in time they begin to fell the pressure then they will change incredibly fast to adapt to the changing conditions.

Without a doubt banks will find a way, we must not forget there was a time in which gold was used as the main currency all around the world, and yet the banks found a way to deceive people into using useless pieces of paper they can create as necessary, so they can always do something similar to bitcoin and deceive people again, they cannot deceive us but we cannot say the same about all the people that have not adopted bitcoin yet and which will do it in the future.

People will always assume the very best for bitcoin but the reality is that we shouldn't be really worried about banks, they will always find a way to get involved. If push comes to shove, they will build their own exchanges, all those big banks that love to get your money do things with it? They will find a way to be like a wallet and an exchange at the same time so that you would store your crypto with them as well. What will they do with it?

I do not know but I am sure that they will find a way and not left behind. People put too much emphasis on how decentralized bitcoin is, and forget that we are not decentralized as humans, so we could just give our money to them if they offer good rates and security, which will be risky.

Banks can do this because at heart they are a monopoly, maybe the name of the banks change and the hands that at the end receive the money are different, but make no mistake they are a monopoly, so they can do whatever they want and until recently the only thing that their clients could do was to take it, but now that bitcoin exist and they have competition they are worried, which is why they are moving all their strings so governments around the world ban or at least heavy regulate this market.

Thats correct and no doubt that current market is more focused on the Generation Z. However, in case of bitcoin it was already futuristic innovation when it came into existence. The only obstruction it ever got is government and their way of functioning. If they some how accepts it and let us run the blockchain without any further restricted environment then bitcoin will go brrrr in every ATM after that! Its already advance tech based asset, it has the properties of future money and it's control is in the hands of sole individual (whoever hodls key). Definitely banks are changing the way they work. I dont even know when I last time reached out my bank physically. Even if I want to deposit the cash then I would go to nearby ATM and CDM's and deposit my cash without any human contact or cash slips etc. That's already advance leap for the banks. Soon this will alter it would be simplest instrument to play.

The monthly fees I receive on bank statements alone are one of the reasons I have never been friendly with banks, they charge you on anything even while you're sleeping with the ridiculous justification that they're helping me protect my money. Banks cannot and will never match the innovation of Bitcoin.

Banks in my country have never been friendly, they charge you for interbank transactions, whereas bitcoin is the same, only varies with the input and output and the type of wallets address and doesn't charge you for other fees, such as SMS alert, ATM use fees, email alert fees, they charge you ₦50 when you receive more than a particular threshold (≥ ₦ 10,000) and they lock your account if they notice you are making large transactions. Now, I want to ask you: If Bitcoin did what these banks do, would it get to where it is today? The government is pleased to see that banks are large organizations that leach on the masses and they are always happy to watch because they are the owners.

No, the thing is they are not worried.... they have loads of money to hire the best Crypto currency developers in the world to develop new centralized digital currencies for them.

Take for instance a former Bitcoin developer like Mike Hearn that was a senior software engineer at Google... he left Bitcoin and started to work for a enterprise blockchain builder ...R3. (Corda) ....a platform that was developed specifically to be used by Banks and other centralized financial services. 

Unfortunately for them bitcoin was specifically designed to be exceptionally resistant to any kind of censorship, I will not deny that if bitcoin was banned all over the world its price will go down and the rate of adoption will drop at an amazing speed, but even with all of that I still think the popularity bitcoin will keep growing because it is becoming more and more difficult to hide the fact that the fiat system that is currently in place is showing signals of failure already, and people will do what they can in order to protect themselves, even if at some point that means disobeying the law.

Banks must immediately improve and adapt to changes, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies users are increasingly active, a bank system that has too many rules will go bankrupt if it cannot accept bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, I believe the impact of cryptocurrencies will be felt and hit banks in 10 years.