Topic: do you think blockchain of bitcoins is worth for finance institutions make money (Read 777 times)

Banks and other financial institutions are exploring blockchain technology for a long time now. They have realized that this blockchain could be aplicable in their business, but with accepting blockchain it will not mean that they will accept Bitcoin too. And of course they are doing this for gaining the profit, not loses.

I think didn't read the title, i will make it bold hopelly it is clear do you think blockchain of bitcoins is worth for finance institutions make money.
It is mean i made question and not just copy-paste, and my source is not from there, it is come from my email notification and asking about it because of not complete the data.

Actually financial institutions and banks are just behind the blockchain technology to power distributed database which can be controlled by central authority.

They are researching on development of virtual currency on distributed ledger all around the world (no transparency of transaction) and distribution controlled by banks/governments and they can also easily control supply and demand of those coins just like fiat cash.

That is why i said they were still learning about blockchains technology and there is problem with bitcoins core about the block size and the Segwit still not be actived because it is be rejected by miners.

Since the entire OP is just copypasta'd from an article with no commentary, here's the original source.  It's not even remotely interesting or innovative that companies are finding a way to take a revolutionary technology, strip out all the parts that make it great, turning it into a walled garden like companies tried in the early days of the internet.  In the long run, that wasn't a profitable venture.  They'll figure that out soon enough.

No, the effectiveness and efficiency of block-chain technology on maintaining records with tracks will definitely help any institution to make/save money. But this does not mean they are going to use bitcoins but they are intending to use only the core technology of bitcoin ecosystem.

The finance institution will not make money in it, because mostly of them still are learning about this technology of blockchain include the government, and i hope it is not bad news for the future of bitcoin.
http://www.coindesk.com/illinois-blockchain-initiative-policy-regulation-bitcoin-blockchain/

first of all.. imagine it this way.
no more 900 servers in one building.. but 900 servers scattered over 900 locations.. infact due to distribution it will be 95000 systems. so hardware manufacturers wont lose out. intel/IBM are actually loving it.

secondly less staff is a good thing for banks. they dont care about people. they would be happy to sack people

as for banking experts. they hir developers. and the developers understand it.
the term blockchain is very loose, but does offer many things. bitcoin is 10+ layers deep above blockchain. bankers so far are 4 layers. but compared to their old systems they do see benefits not just about the distribution but the programming ability it opens up that DMS didnt offer and RDMS was limited of.

just dont b surprised on how much they will screw customers into smart contracts in the future

That's not a bad idea for anyone who doesn't have holdings in some datacenter, but if there is anyone who has some sort of vested interest in something like that then you're going to be hard pressed to egt them to give up that investment and go look at something else.

Banking datacenters are both a huge money-maker (for the right people) and a money drain, so something like that is taking away a fair amount of jobs and also takes away from expenditures of the bank.

While it might not be a bad idea, I don't think a lot of them have weighed the pros and cons.

Banking experts seem to lack the understanding that a blockchain is essentially just a decentralized database, but I could be wrong with this assumption. based on what I hear from a lot of people though, they think it is some miracle technology that changes everything. It really doesn't.

but they are saving money by distributing their ledger. imagine it. each bank branch has its own sidechain. thus less or no need of a skyscraper with servers and hundreds of staff monitoring it for security. due to the decentralised nature securing each bank branch.
yes its not 100% public..

plus the smart contract ability due to changing to programmable databases (in laymens) allows them to do smart contracts. that are programmatically determined. rather than a simply photocopy of old contracts that are human determined.

though i dont like what banks do. i can understand why they are doing it. and it seems it will surprise you too. so dont down play what banks have in mind as a 'head in sand' attempt to think bitcoin is going to kill fiat.

No, financial institutions won't make money developing new blockchains. In simplified terms, what they are doing is creating bloated altcoins. Indeed, they don't know what they are doing, because if they were competent they would know that blockchains are not suitable for the use case they imagine.

For all centralized use cases, the most efficient solution is a centralized database. The only reason why Bitcoin has a blockchain is to make a decentralized currency possible. If you're removing decentralization as a core feature, using a blockchain makes no sense anymore.

But, of course, they are free to waste money on it.

forget all delusions of banks using bitcoin.

they are going for hyperledger.
as for the utility of hyperledger.

its much like going from Database Management Systems DMS (decades old) to Relational Database Management Systems RDMS (still pre millenium but newer) where they were able to do more with their data.
blockchain is just a new layer ontop of RDBMS... lets call it BRDBMS.

where not only can they play with the data within the database tables that had relationship ties (quasi-blocks) like they did before. but now they can play around with the database itself by not having it locked in a central server needing a master key.

they can distribute it, lay out the tables (blocks) in different order and or location. change how its secured.

bitcoin does have atleast 10 different secure/feature mechanisms ontop of the old RDMS and its thought hyper ledger has just 4 extra ontop of RDMS, so more secure then older systems, but still not as secure/brilliant as bitcoin.

but because the bankers dont need it as a fully public accessible system and they cannot fully own bitcoin outright or 'efficiently' do the extra secure stuff bitcoin does (PoW to name one) they will just make their own. which they have been doing.

as for how/why/what
thats the big bank secret question about (smart)contracts of: money creation, notaries, equities, collateral, asset creation, etc

Finance institutions are flocking into the new technology that powers the virtual currency bitcoin and is able to support a “distributed database” that runs on many computers and needs no central authority.
But the technology is so new that many finance industry executives cannot explain what exactly it is or what it actually does.
mental-block-on-blockchain
Even at an early stage in blockchain development, professionals are clamoring for training in the new technology. Banks, stock exchanges, insurers and government bureaus want to know how blockchain may benefit them and don’t want to be left behind.

Financial institutions do suffer some anxiety, amid talk that blockchain is a potentially “disruptive” force that could reduce the role of banks and other intermediaries, and change the way trading in financial instruments is cleared and settled. In reality, it seems that blockchain offers “transparent, indelible and tamper-proof” technology that can eliminate false disclosures.