Topic: Do you think bankers will destroy block chain tech, decentralization, bitcoin? - page 2. (Read 4062 times)

Banks are moving against bitcoin there is no doubt about it and the fact that other altcoins are also backed by bankers is bad for us  there does not seems to be much that the average user of bitcoin can do against this on the other hand banks of researching blockchain technology and they seem to like it but they don't like bitcoin to be connected to it.

The blockchain was offering some advantages for them and that's why the banker was trying for doing any research about the block chain. They won't destroying the blockchain system and how they can do that?

Any valid proof? 

Banks and bankers will definitely be an obstacle and they will definitely try to maintain all the power that they can while they have the time, and as such they are likely going to start an offensive against Bitcoin once it begins to start being a bigger target and threatens their power more.

I'm surprised that they don't care more about it right now to be honest.

Your first thought was right, except they need segwit to activate and then Lightening Network, and then they take over the blockchain.
Good News however is the Chinese Miners are going to block segwit and the bankers from taking over. 


 

Some times ago I thought that bankers will was to destroy blockchain tech and whole bitcoin system but it seems I was wrong. Let's observe the fact that bankers are offering us bitcoin exchange and withdrawal, bitcoin cards and etc, many banks offer bitcoin services. It seems that they aren't going to destroy blockchain and bitcoin system but to take in control most part of transactions.

They already have because Bitcoin is already centralized.

Using the banker time tested exchange model.

You just all don't see it because you are waiting for the Bitcoin moon.

i don't really know what you are talking about.
but your last statement has nothing to do with bitcoin. those coins you named have started this way so banks had deeply invested in these coins and were/are controlling most of the supply and the price and this is something nobody can do with bitcoin.

I don't think bankers would do that ,much more good if they adopt bitcoins on their forms especially sending of money saving which is more convienient to the users and surely they will add a tax on it but if its small enough its good for the society.

And the price of those coin is rising up until now.
So if I not wrong, we're going to centralized the coin.
I just want to know, if banker can get profit with eth, xrp, or anythings, who can get profit with bitcoin? who's work for bitcoin?

I fully agree. Bankers are currently at the stage the Bitcoin sphere was years ago, when the first altcoin (premine) scams were launched. However in contrast to the real altcoin freaks, their technical and conceptual understanding is basically zero.

Not only are bankers incompetent due to their lack of technological and theoretical knowledge, they also suffer from severe cognitive dissonance: Admitting that Bitcoin, not private "blockchain technology" is the real solution means admitting that they have become obsolete. They simply can't cope with this and are therefore denying reality by pretending to be still in charge...

That's sad for them, but it's well deserved.

ya.ya.yo!

If they are being regulated, they have the eyes and ears of the government with them. So they can actually lobby to have legislation which hinders bitcoin's growth. That is the only impediment they can impose in the path of Bitcoin.

Hackers will not destroy it because they can benefit from it.
You are right about the government of each country controlling the banks. They regulate them with their own set of rules that put the banking system in their pockets and that is just the way they like it

bankers wont waste cash trying to dump the bitcoin price because even spending $10bill would just be some temporary price drama.

but contracting devs to do certain things to get a tranche of funding has already shown to have manipulated many devs of core into doing things against bitcoins old ethos. by this im talking about core/blockstream

bankers funding the main implementations.
R3 which core hates, actually funds core devs too.

all you need to do is look at who is on the board of hyperledger (Digital Asset Holdings and R3)*, who have invested in both classic and core.

Dah is the link of the national banks for a few countries
R3 is the link of many commercial banks

but shhh the first rule of blockstream is we must not talk about their funding.

i know many will say that only 12-20 devs are funded by banks and core has another 90 'voluntary contributors' but those other 90 are mostly reviewers and spellcheckers. and have little to no impact on the direction bitcoin goes as they are just the woolly sheep to hide the wolves in the field.

we should not rely on 1-2 implementations as thats the route to centralization and dictatorship.

the dev-groups need to follow the same game theory of mining. (avoid 51% dominance of nodes running the same codebase)
we need more diversity of nodes. because even 16000 nodes running core is just as manipulative as having 1 core node.
there should be atleast 3-20 codebases of full nodes by different teams not all paid by banks.

the only thing more nodes of one codebase (16,000 core nodes for instance) can prevent is ddos, viruses and power cuts of strategic locations. but it cant stop the manipulation of funded devs who want to move bitcoin users to a sidechain via increased tx fee's..
yep even core are adding tx fee rules into every node to prevent it transmitting transactions unless they pay a fee. (reinforcing a fee war) before it even gets to mining pools to allow pools to decide what is acceptable.

but hey, the sheep love core and love the centralized nature of having a dominant king dictating the path of bitcoin

no bankers can't destroy blockchain technology as it is not owned by any person or by a group. it is flooded world wide and to stop all the nodes, blocked as a whole the bitcoin network it is not possible for them. even if they ban people would secretly use bitcoin that no body would know.

I don't think the banking industry will destroy itself for they are being regulated by the governing body of a country. And they are going to see bitcoin as a threat because it is going to kill the fiat system of a country. But I don't think bank will able to destroy the block chain tech as it is a very strong technology even jammers and hackers won't do.

Banks might be trying hard to either control or destroy Bitcoin, but most of them banksters didn't even understand the main concept of Bitcoin.
Regular people were able to mine a big amount of these Bitcoins with their PC's long before Banks have found out about it.
Now they think, that one can simply take the "Blockchain technology" and create their own blockchain, which in the end is nothing more than just another Altcoin, with a VERY SMALL network compared to the "real one" we love. This Altcoin probably will get hacked in a minute or so and will be forgotten a minute later.

  Sure. What I have seen over the years is a concern that a large bank will try crushing the bitcoin network to avoid competing with it. That makes sense and there are a lot of examples of banks leveraging their power against competition. Generally the argument is based on the banks...

1. Buying a huge amount of BTC then selling them cheap to crash the price.
2. Buying and sending large numbers of coins to a dead address (actual destruction).
3. Taking over the network by starting mega-mines used for a 51% attack.
4. Pressuring lawmakers to make bitcoin illegal.

However only the last option is logical. Buying the coins would cost huge amounts of money and raise the price. If they were then sold at a loss it would be the banks loss and likely would only have a very temporary effect. What would be gained? Buying and "destroying" coins would also cost a fortune and only reduce supply thus raising the value of bitcoin. Dominating mining would be the most expensive technique of all and users could simply ignore the "bank fork". That would leave the bank with hundreds of millions of dollars in worthless hardware and nothing to show except perhaps temporary chaos in the market. 
Pressure to legislate against bitcoin could be a concern. But it would cost a lot and would likely be unsuccessful.  What if people keep using it anyway? What about the overwhelming percentage of people on Earth who are not subject to any one nations laws?  I only see a path to a minor effect if you are willing to incur major losses. Banks act logically and profitably, not vindictively. In fact trying such a stunt could easily lead to a costly lawsuit by bank investors as it could be considered a breach of the banks fiduciary obligation.
Until I see a logical, rational, way by which the banks could take over or destroy the bitcoin network I remain unconcerned.

I don't see banks as a threat for bitcoin.
I think that bitcoin is simply too unimportant for them to even care.
As far as I know they are happy for every person that pulls their funds off the bank account.
With the technology of the blockchain it can be different. But I don't see that as concerning as well.
I don't mind if every bank has their own blockchain, that's why I am not taking any measures.

The banking industry will destroy itself. Just look at all the job losses they have had with it being automated and almost all the things done there can be done online now.
Eventually it will happen if it has not happened already.