Topic: Central Banks Intend To Fight CryptoCurrencies (Read 1137 times)
Central Bank always intend to fight cryptocurrencies, because of the potential growth happening with bitcoin and other few digital currencies. In the past few banks have provided statistical data that they have lost a big profit just because of bitcoin.
I would say the opposite, central banks are not fighting cryptocurrencies although at first glance it appears to be so. In fact I know that some central banks in Europe are testing cryptocurrencies and want to implement them in the daily functioning. Don't you think they haven't figure out this is the source of profit and that there is no use of fighting it?
I believe that the British government is looking into crytocurrencies so that they can develope there own blockchain currency. Will be interesting to see if they can do it. I think they have enough in there hands right now with brexit.
Even if they will be able to create something like that, they will not be able to compete with bitcoin. Any currency of the state is always controlled by the government, and this deters users. The state may only restrict the use of Fiat, but to compete with bitcoin, it can't.
There is nothing new about this type of news because central banks hate cryptocurrencies because most of them are just decentralized and that is threat for them because they might lose some opportunity in earning more money from the people in their country because they might use cryptocurrencies in their transactions which will result for a lose in revenue.
Everyone needs a negative spin on everything central banks do it seems. For me this is them embracing the crypto world and trying to adapt to it. Its not like they are trying in any way to ban or prevent the use of bitcoin.
Everything my central bank is evil. Those people from the so called "People's bank" that is what our central bank is called are wicked evil devil worshipers they print money and rob my people and give to insiders. How can anything they do be good when they pay the tyranical scum who rule my friends and family and pay political parties and war mongers and farmcy criminalnas and gmo's and every evil thing you can think of. What good does a "peoples bank" do? What good? Name me one and for that one i can name 10 bad wicked evil! Who gives them a right to forcethemselvs on me against my will?
OP, why is there a need for the central banks to create a national digital currency? The current "cashless" system that they have now and control is working fin for them. If you did not notice your debit card and, or credit card in your wallet as a "digital" version of paper money then you have not been paying attention to how the banks are manipulating is in becoming a "cashless" society.
Don't ask me. Ask The Deutsche Bank, ECB and all these guys.
This guy, Dr. Weidman isn't in favor of cryptocurrencies issued by central banks, he's against digitalization.
Quote
Digitalization has the potential to provide financial benefits to the economy, with the risk, however, of disintermediating central banks. As such, the ability of central banks to conduct monetary policy diminishes proportionally to the increase of digitalization.
Quote
Dr. Weidman dismisses the notion that privately issued digital currencies may eliminate central bank currencies, reasoning that “central banks are better able to deliver price stability than a rigid monetary rule or an algorithm.”
And according to him this is how central banks intend to fight cryptocurrencies.
Quote
My personal take on this is that central banks should strive to make existing payment systems more efficient and still faster than they already are – instant payment is the buzzword here. I am pretty confident that this will reduce most citizens’ interest in digital currencies.
Why is there a need for the central banks to create a national digital currency when the current cashless system is working for them? Maybe because they differ from Dr. Weidman's opinion, maybe they believe that digitalization or blockchain technology is the way to simplify payment process, more efficient, faster transactions, enhanced transparency, system resilience and it would cut the cost of long term record keeping.
I guess a government issued centralized cryptocurrency backed by private blockchain would have the same price stability as it's physical version since the centralized authorities could easily increase or decrease the monetary base.
Countries that are planning to come up with their own cryptocurrencies knows that they can't put a complete ban on bitcoin and apart from decentralization, the technology behind bitcoin has a distinct advantage over the current centralized "cashless" system. So they think that integrating blockchain technology into their financial system would give them an upper hand over bitcoin.
People who prefer using a decentralized currency would stick to bitcoin no matter how many countries launch their own cryptocurrencies.
Everyone needs a negative spin on everything central banks do it seems. For me this is them embracing the crypto world and trying to adapt to it. Its not like they are trying in any way to ban or prevent the use of bitcoin.
I believe that the British government is looking into crytocurrencies so that they can develope there own blockchain currency. Will be interesting to see if they can do it. I think they have enough in there hands right now with brexit.
OP, why is there a need for the central banks to create a national digital currency? The current "cashless" system that they have now and control is working fin for them. If you did not notice your debit card and, or credit card in your wallet as a "digital" version of paper money then you have not been paying attention to how the banks are manipulating is in becoming a "cashless" society.
I guess they want to sound like they're supproting new fintech, so that they don't get criticized for being too conservative... Obviously, having a crypto without decentralization does not help.
"Cryptocurrencies" without decentralization is not real crypto. They are no better than fiat tokens implemented using a rewritable database. Again why is there a need for this? If they can control the flow of money more with it then the more it would give incentive for Bitcoin use. They do not realize the direct effects of their actions.
Are central banks invested in crypto?
This article seems to indicate they could have some involvement with ethereum.
It could explain why eth's chart over the past few months looks like a bubble and why ICO's lack the reliability someone might expect them to have.
This article seems to indicate they could have some involvement with ethereum.
It could explain why eth's chart over the past few months looks like a bubble and why ICO's lack the reliability someone might expect them to have.
Quote
Big Business Giants From Microsoft to J.P. Morgan Are Getting Behind Ethereum
Thirty big banks, tech giants, and other organizations—including J.P. Morgan Chase, Microsoft, and Intel—are uniting to build business-ready versions of the software behind Ethereum, a decentralized computing network based on digital currency.
The group, called the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, is set to debut at a summit in Brooklyn, New York on Tuesday, during which members J.P. Morgan Chase (JPM, +0.44%) and Banco Santander (SAN, +1.08%) are scheduled to demonstrate a pilot of the financial technology as it exists today. The pair plan to show off a "spot trade" on the foreign exchange market for global currencies using an adaptation of Ethereum as the settlement layer.
Ethereum uses a blockchain, often referred to as a distributed ledger, to record and execute transactions without the need of a middleman. Instead of a centrally managed database, copies of the cryptographic balance book are spread across the network and automatically updated as any payment takes place.
The Ethereum alliance arrives as a challenger to several other extant blockchain ventures. The R3 consortium, for example, counts scores of partnering banks among its members, despite recent high-profile departures by Goldman Sachs, Santander, and Morgan Stanley. It has created "Corda," its own take on a blockchain.
IBM (IBM, +0.73%), meanwhile, has spearheaded another initiative known as the Hyperledger Project, part of the non-profit Linux Foundation. That group maintains the "fabric" blockchain codebase, which as been used in supply chain trials with Wal-Mart (WMT, +0.88%).
Much of the interest to date from traditional financial firms involves "private" blockchains, meaning permission from an authority is required before a party can join the network. The original versions of Bitcoin and Ethereum have public networks that anyone can join. (At press time, the market caps of their cryptocurrencies were approximately $19 billion and $1.4 billion, respectively.)
Alex Batlin, blockchain lead at Bank of New York Mellon, said that while the Ethereum alliance will focus on the development of private blockchains, the hope is that these will one day link up with the public Ethereum blockchain, which is open to all.
"That interconnection of public and private chains actually creates a very strong network," Batlin said on a call with Fortune. "Each chain strengthens the other at an exponential level."
In the view of its proponents, Ethereum's public and private networks will become analogous to intranets versus internets; they will share standard protocols, but have different configurations for privacy and security, depending on each organization's needs.
Members of the Ethereum alliance include Accenture, BBVA, BNY Mellon, BNP Paribas, BP, Cisco, Credit Suisse, ING, Thomson Reuters, and UBS. Also joining is IC3, or the Initiative for Cryptocurrencies and Contracts, an academic group consisting of researchers from universities such as Cornell University, UC Berkeley, and Israel's Technion.
Several representatives from alliance firms cited the energy surrounding Devcon2, Ethereum's fall developer conference in Shanghai, as the focal point that led to their collaboration on this effort. Despite multiple hacks on Ethereum-based applications and a controversial splitting of the Ethereum network, enthusiasm in the network has apparently not diminished.
J.P. Morgan is responsible for developing the basis of the blockchain tech for the alliance. Called "Quorum," the bank's code has been designed to add privacy protections into the mix, among other tweaks.
The partners will help each other develop the foundations for different use cases, such as post-trade settlement, payments between banks, and supply chain tracking, while competing on applications and services built atop the networks. The top priorities for the alliance now include ensuring scalability and security.The other founding members of the alliance are BlockApps, Nuco, AMIS, Andui, CME Group, ConsenSys, Fubon Financial, brainbot technologies, Chronicled, Cryptape, The Institutes, Monax, String Labs, Telindus, Tendermint, VidRoll, and Wipro.
http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/ethereum-jpmorgan-microsoft-alliance/
Thirty big banks, tech giants, and other organizations—including J.P. Morgan Chase, Microsoft, and Intel—are uniting to build business-ready versions of the software behind Ethereum, a decentralized computing network based on digital currency.
The group, called the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, is set to debut at a summit in Brooklyn, New York on Tuesday, during which members J.P. Morgan Chase (JPM, +0.44%) and Banco Santander (SAN, +1.08%) are scheduled to demonstrate a pilot of the financial technology as it exists today. The pair plan to show off a "spot trade" on the foreign exchange market for global currencies using an adaptation of Ethereum as the settlement layer.
Ethereum uses a blockchain, often referred to as a distributed ledger, to record and execute transactions without the need of a middleman. Instead of a centrally managed database, copies of the cryptographic balance book are spread across the network and automatically updated as any payment takes place.
The Ethereum alliance arrives as a challenger to several other extant blockchain ventures. The R3 consortium, for example, counts scores of partnering banks among its members, despite recent high-profile departures by Goldman Sachs, Santander, and Morgan Stanley. It has created "Corda," its own take on a blockchain.
IBM (IBM, +0.73%), meanwhile, has spearheaded another initiative known as the Hyperledger Project, part of the non-profit Linux Foundation. That group maintains the "fabric" blockchain codebase, which as been used in supply chain trials with Wal-Mart (WMT, +0.88%).
Much of the interest to date from traditional financial firms involves "private" blockchains, meaning permission from an authority is required before a party can join the network. The original versions of Bitcoin and Ethereum have public networks that anyone can join. (At press time, the market caps of their cryptocurrencies were approximately $19 billion and $1.4 billion, respectively.)
Alex Batlin, blockchain lead at Bank of New York Mellon, said that while the Ethereum alliance will focus on the development of private blockchains, the hope is that these will one day link up with the public Ethereum blockchain, which is open to all.
"That interconnection of public and private chains actually creates a very strong network," Batlin said on a call with Fortune. "Each chain strengthens the other at an exponential level."
In the view of its proponents, Ethereum's public and private networks will become analogous to intranets versus internets; they will share standard protocols, but have different configurations for privacy and security, depending on each organization's needs.
Members of the Ethereum alliance include Accenture, BBVA, BNY Mellon, BNP Paribas, BP, Cisco, Credit Suisse, ING, Thomson Reuters, and UBS. Also joining is IC3, or the Initiative for Cryptocurrencies and Contracts, an academic group consisting of researchers from universities such as Cornell University, UC Berkeley, and Israel's Technion.
Several representatives from alliance firms cited the energy surrounding Devcon2, Ethereum's fall developer conference in Shanghai, as the focal point that led to their collaboration on this effort. Despite multiple hacks on Ethereum-based applications and a controversial splitting of the Ethereum network, enthusiasm in the network has apparently not diminished.
J.P. Morgan is responsible for developing the basis of the blockchain tech for the alliance. Called "Quorum," the bank's code has been designed to add privacy protections into the mix, among other tweaks.
The partners will help each other develop the foundations for different use cases, such as post-trade settlement, payments between banks, and supply chain tracking, while competing on applications and services built atop the networks. The top priorities for the alliance now include ensuring scalability and security.The other founding members of the alliance are BlockApps, Nuco, AMIS, Andui, CME Group, ConsenSys, Fubon Financial, brainbot technologies, Chronicled, Cryptape, The Institutes, Monax, String Labs, Telindus, Tendermint, VidRoll, and Wipro.
http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/ethereum-jpmorgan-microsoft-alliance/
They have been quite reluctant to join the competition but seeing how fast the cryptocurrency sector has grown and got popular they have been left with no choice but join the competition. The million dollar question is will they honestly run a decentralized currency at the expense of giving up control? Not a chance! And for a crypto coin to grow it needs demand, will they manage to make this happen to push their coins to the top ...only time will tell.
What will happen is that they are going to make their own crypto, but it's definitely not gonig to be decentralized.
Now my question is - why not just use bitcoin? IT's already here, you don't need to copy paste the code and rename the whole thing whatever it is that you want to name it, and make it centralized as well.
Obviously, they wouldn't want to give up their tight control over the economy. Issuing their own token that they can manage is probably what they are going to do. So it's basically going to be online banking.
OP, why is there a need for the central banks to create a national digital currency? The current "cashless" system that they have now and control is working fin for them. If you did not notice your debit card and, or credit card in your wallet as a "digital" version of paper money then you have not been paying attention to how the banks are manipulating is in becoming a "cashless" society.
I guess they want to sound like they're supproting new fintech, so that they don't get criticized for being too conservative... Obviously, having a crypto without decentralization does not help.
OP, why is there a need for the central banks to create a national digital currency? The current "cashless" system that they have now and control is working fin for them. If you did not notice your debit card and, or credit card in your wallet as a "digital" version of paper money then you have not been paying attention to how the banks are manipulating is in becoming a "cashless" society.
Don't ask me. Ask The Deutsche Bank, ECB and all these guys.
OP, why is there a need for the central banks to create a national digital currency? The current "cashless" system that they have now and control is working fin for them. If you did not notice your debit card and, or credit card in your wallet as a "digital" version of paper money then you have not been paying attention to how the banks are manipulating is in becoming a "cashless" society.
They have been quite reluctant to join the competition but seeing how fast the cryptocurrency sector has grown and got popular they have been left with no choice but join the competition. The million dollar question is will they honestly run a decentralized currency at the expense of giving up control? Not a chance! And for a crypto coin to grow it needs demand, will they manage to make this happen to push their coins to the top ...only time will tell.
Lol, talk about crypto-rubles.
It is really an insult to crypto's name... It is obviously going to be centralized, as Russia obviously does not want to let go of their tight control on capital within the country. Why would they change the strategy now? Crypto-rubles or w/e it's going to be called in russian is going to be just a centralized shitcoin that will only serve as an immutable database for central bankers - nothing else.
It's funny how countries like China and Russia say that they will develop their own blockchain product but restrict access all altcoin and bitcoin trading platforms. Russia even said that they will track all bitcoin transactions by 2020. Strange...
It is really an insult to crypto's name... It is obviously going to be centralized, as Russia obviously does not want to let go of their tight control on capital within the country. Why would they change the strategy now? Crypto-rubles or w/e it's going to be called in russian is going to be just a centralized shitcoin that will only serve as an immutable database for central bankers - nothing else.
It's funny how countries like China and Russia say that they will develop their own blockchain product but restrict access all altcoin and bitcoin trading platforms. Russia even said that they will track all bitcoin transactions by 2020. Strange...
It wouldn't be surprising at all if central banks decided to fight against cryptos in general. Using crytpo basically means that someone has the freedom of managing their own finances instead of having to use the currency that the government creates.
For example, china was quite loose on AML until recently when bitcoin started to soar. It was evident that they wanted to regulate bitcoin markets as fast and as strictly as possible, to stop the influx of people going into bitcoin.
But i think that the more regulations and bans governments put on bitcoin, the more popular bitcoin will be. Only when something gets banned by the central bank, you know that something is wrong with the banking system in general, and the banned item is the solution.
For example, china was quite loose on AML until recently when bitcoin started to soar. It was evident that they wanted to regulate bitcoin markets as fast and as strictly as possible, to stop the influx of people going into bitcoin.
But i think that the more regulations and bans governments put on bitcoin, the more popular bitcoin will be. Only when something gets banned by the central bank, you know that something is wrong with the banking system in general, and the banned item is the solution.
Banks, as a consumer business have a limited life span. Most of their services are covered by another business outside of them at this point. The best thing for them to do would to be get into the crypto world and embrace that and provide background services. We would deny them because this is a decentralized world and they would provide too much of a central connection, but they could try.
It may be that they are going to become a more business oriented service structure, who knows, but their time as they have been is coming to an end. Direct deposit bought them several years, as many people felt that they needed a bank account to get paid, the prepaid debit cards killed that and the services that banks are needed for are becoming very limited.
They won't fight it, they will make their own, like China is doing
Banks, as a consumer business have a limited life span. Most of their services are covered by another business outside of them at this point. The best thing for them to do would to be get into the crypto world and embrace that and provide background services. We would deny them because this is a decentralized world and they would provide too much of a central connection, but they could try.
In the EU we get free, instant and irreversible payments if we want them with our bank accounts. Weirdly enough the service levels aren't really the underlying appeal of crypto vs banks.
If they really want to keep people inside their system then they could start by firing themselves and installing some people with some concern for the well being of the majority.
If they really want to keep people inside their system then they could start by firing themselves and installing some people with some concern for the well being of the majority.
Jump to: