Yeah it sounds very good because slowly Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency will be saver. What the Bank of America Patent Hints plans hopefully can be a secure means for storing private wallets or accounts keys and it is expected to reduce the risk that most people are worrying and scaring about a Cryptucurrency secure.
Topic: Banks are maintaining dependence (Read 429 times)
Well this is a good notion of banks to accept cryptocurrency. Probably, it will be less likely to hack and steal their crypto holdings for banks know what digital wallet they should using that will be less likely to be hacked. I bet cold storage will do like hardware wallet for bitcoin. This is most of the options that banks will going to do on keeping safe your bitcoin to them.
right now the bank learns about the bitcoin and blockchain network, why many people want to makes bitcoin and blockchain as their main system in the world, are the blockchain is the best system? or blockchain just a gimmick?
banks are sneaky. they won't show any interest now and then suddenly you will see they are in. you may find some news here and there but nothing serious until someday you see they have adopted bitcoin.
The day they truly adopt bitcoin is the day when the term banks will be taken out of financial dictionaries. Banks and Bitcoins two separate things, the adoption of each other just means destroying the underlying concepts and vision. Banks will adopt a centralised blockchain but not bitcoin. 
banks are sneaky. they won't show any interest now and then suddenly you will see they are in. you may find some news here and there but nothing serious until someday you see they have adopted bitcoin.
Would this make banks responsible for uncontrollable losses? This will be great for adoption and hints at a future where banks essentially regulate smooth digital transactions and keep them secure.
Of course they will be responsible if they chooses to offer this kind of service to crypto enthusiast. But the question is, do we really need them to handle our private key? Everyone is here because "we're our own banks" so I don't think this is a viable options for us.
Banks are only interested in Blockchain Technology, maybe this is just their way to look good and doesn't sound like anti-crypto. But this is useless in my opinion. And I don't think that this kind of move will be great specially for mass adoption.
I think that the Bank will not be responsible for losses if all customer funds are hacked Although it can't be stolen surely with a very large amount,is better to keep the private key itself cause crypto is created to advance the economy of that person.I also saw many people who thought the same as me. 
slowly but surely everyone is getting involved in their own ways. mostly they are only adopting the technology so this news may be hinting at creation of some bank-created-token based on blockchain technology. which means they need to develop the infrastructure first here!
*Their centralized ways - to be specific. Why banks don't understand the simple concept? We don't want banks. We want open source protocols and not a bunch of cocky human beings who look at my face before accepting my transaction.but like always i also believe that the banks will eventually adopt bitcoin and start adapting their services (loans, cards, savings account,...) to bitcoin so they will need something like this in place.
granted that would still be a silly thing in a decentralized world where bitcoin was created so that we no longer need banks but many newcomers still don't understand that and would want a bank-like service, example: the large usage of coinbase!
I doubt we will ever meet the bitcoin's full potential that way. Coinbase is another centralized bank which is run online. The only difference is, they deal with cryptos and not fiat. granted that would still be a silly thing in a decentralized world where bitcoin was created so that we no longer need banks but many newcomers still don't understand that and would want a bank-like service, example: the large usage of coinbase!
yes, banks and cryptocurrencies have different systems, but in the future the bank will create a platform to accept crypto transactions, the bank will realize, the bank will be responsible.
Would this make banks responsible for uncontrollable losses? This will be great for adoption and hints at a future where banks essentially regulate smooth digital transactions and keep them secure.
The article is just about a patent to store private keys safely. I don't think it makes anyone responsible in case the keys are lost. Moreover, patents are usually made not only for the name of the company to be acknowledged, but also to profit from any applications of this technology. It leads me to thinking that this bank will charge a fee for private keys storage. Moreover, for now it's not clear to me what's the idea behind this thing, but it seems unsafe to me to store keys on some platform rather than on a piece of paper or something. Even if the tech is good, we should understand that this service will become an aim for many hackers because where else could one find private keys so easily. Anything that compromise Bitcoin principles of decentralization is not good for Bitcoin users. We do not want to be depended on any centralized service, including Banks for our private keys/passwords.
I also do not store any Private keys in Safe deposit boxes at a Bank for the same reason. Recently a lot of Safe deposit boxes were raided by Banks and also thieves in some countries and the Banks is washing their hands.
You simply cannot trust Banks with sensitive information like this.
I also do not store any Private keys in Safe deposit boxes at a Bank for the same reason. Recently a lot of Safe deposit boxes were raided by Banks and also thieves in some countries and the Banks is washing their hands.
You simply cannot trust Banks with sensitive information like this.
Bitcoin is preferred by its users because of its security and unmanaged nature. That everyone must admit. But when we do not want to be controlled by the state or the bank. Then what about the criminals?
How can you control the offense? How to fight money launders across borders?
With me. Bitcoin is really good. But to be applied and recognized by governments, it must be controlled.
So what do you think? Let me know your opinion on this and about my thoughts
https://www.coindesk.com/new-bank-of-america-patent-hints-at-plan-to-store-cryptocurrency-keys/
"Bank of America was awarded a patent for a device that stores cryptographic keys and the document's details hint at applications for cryptocurrencies.
In a patent awarded Tuesday by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the bank outlines a "hardened storage device" for storing private keys – such as those used for blockchain platforms – explaining that, at present, most keys are stored locally protected by nothing more than a password."
Would this make banks responsible for uncontrollable losses? This will be great for adoption and hints at a future where banks essentially regulate smooth digital transactions and keep them secure.
"Bank of America was awarded a patent for a device that stores cryptographic keys and the document's details hint at applications for cryptocurrencies.
In a patent awarded Tuesday by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the bank outlines a "hardened storage device" for storing private keys – such as those used for blockchain platforms – explaining that, at present, most keys are stored locally protected by nothing more than a password."
Would this make banks responsible for uncontrollable losses? This will be great for adoption and hints at a future where banks essentially regulate smooth digital transactions and keep them secure.
A really good question is whether banks will be responsible for losses, provided that the encryption key is stored only by them and the user. For example, if the user intentionally gives the key to someone else, the person will be able to withdraw money in another country, and the user-the owner will say that the Bank could not implement the proper security and will require payment. This point will need to be resolved as soon as possible.
This will be great for adoption and hints at a future where banks essentially regulate smooth digital transactions and keep them secure.
I disagree. we don't need centralization to enter this decentralized ecosystem for it to be adopted more. they will only introduce more restrictions and a lot of different fees on their customers who are using their services. and we are talking about services that we no longer need because of bitcoin!
you must have heard the phase saying "be your own bank with bitcoin". that means you don't need a bank anymore so their attempts now are only in order to stay relevant and not be pushed aside entirely in the near future as the "adoption" is happening with or without them.
or get involved in our crypto, it will only introduce more regulation.
We also gave to remember banks are in the business of making profit which means more
from its customers using its services.
The idea is not bad only if it is completely out of control of banks or any other authority. Because we don't need banks for storing our cryptocurrencies nor for storing our private keys and passwords. Any decentralization is in conflict with the purpose of cryptocurrencies.
In this case, it is just a storage of any digital keys, ciphers, and so on, and not only from cryptocurrency wallets. In our digital world, digital codes will be used in many cases. Perhaps there are people who will use such banking services. I do not see anything in it that threatens the decentralized cryptocurrency. These services are voluntary.
Anything that compromise Bitcoin principles of decentralization is not good for Bitcoin users. We do not want to be depended on any centralized service, including Banks for our private keys/passwords.
I also do not store any Private keys in Safe deposit boxes at a Bank for the same reason. Recently a lot of Safe deposit boxes were raided by Banks and also thieves in some countries and the Banks is washing their hands.
You simply cannot trust Banks with sensitive information like this.
I also do not store any Private keys in Safe deposit boxes at a Bank for the same reason. Recently a lot of Safe deposit boxes were raided by Banks and also thieves in some countries and the Banks is washing their hands.
You simply cannot trust Banks with sensitive information like this.
https://www.coindesk.com/new-bank-of-america-patent-hints-at-plan-to-store-cryptocurrency-keys/
"Bank of America was awarded a patent for a device that stores cryptographic keys and the document's details hint at applications for cryptocurrencies.
In a patent awarded Tuesday by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the bank outlines a "hardened storage device" for storing private keys – such as those used for blockchain platforms – explaining that, at present, most keys are stored locally protected by nothing more than a password."
Would this make banks responsible for uncontrollable losses? This will be great for adoption and hints at a future where banks essentially regulate smooth digital transactions and keep them secure.
"Bank of America was awarded a patent for a device that stores cryptographic keys and the document's details hint at applications for cryptocurrencies.
In a patent awarded Tuesday by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the bank outlines a "hardened storage device" for storing private keys – such as those used for blockchain platforms – explaining that, at present, most keys are stored locally protected by nothing more than a password."
Would this make banks responsible for uncontrollable losses? This will be great for adoption and hints at a future where banks essentially regulate smooth digital transactions and keep them secure.
That would be great because for the mean time people doesn't know about crypto but I know that someday people will eventually use crypto and will find a way to store them and it would probably banks.
Aren't banks suppose to cover the losses of their users and peers should a hack or loss within their vaults occur? Anyway though, it seems that more and more institutions are getting their hands on blockchain and crypto tech. Most banks relied on obscure security practices back then, and I think it's about time that they do something innovative on the way they handle other people's money.
Yep, they also have insurance to cover losses. What I was saying is that this should extend unto any custodial services they might be planning on the future. This way, there would be a legitimate advantage in storing cryptos in bank over a personal wallet. It kind of doesn't make sense for them to keep keys and not touch the money though, unless it's a paid service.
But yeah, it's just a patent at the moment, which really isn't anything more than exclusive rights to an idea.
The idea is not bad only if it is completely out of control of banks or any other authority. Because we don't need banks for storing our cryptocurrencies nor for storing our private keys and passwords. Any decentralization is in conflict with the purpose of cryptocurrencies.
Banks are dependent on the money values and bitcoin is the crypto which is decentralized form of currency so banks fear this for it’s price irregularities and in these days the stability in the price is the panic situation for the speculators and I love to use crypto when the price is stable because at that time we understand the true value of bitcoin and crypto.
That's it, the future of cryptos will be about patents, development, and commercial wars, and only the big ones will win. It's up to people to wake up if they really want cryptos to be free from banks (and even to be able to use for some countries...)
that will only be a "part" of the future not the future of cryptocurrencies!
the technology has been open source and will remain that way, and because of it you can't change much about the innovations and the real development that takes place in this technology. what they patent is only a small part of it which we can live without.
Jump to: