banks can do it in a way that when you register an account with them you need to leave your pc 24/7 which will work as a full node, this mean that anyone can be his own ledger
every movements of his money would be seen in his account and in this way the ledger would be fully transparent
cost would be less for them especially for fees, they can remove all those useless fee for withdrawal deposit, maintanace ecc..and the same for transaction time
as i see it would be like having your own circuit and removing the need to use visa and mastercard or whatever....
Topic: How would banks take advantage from the blockchain technology? - page 2. (Read 1092 times)
Nobody has any idea???
I refer to this news just as an example:
http://cointelegraph.com/news/114954/bnp-paribas-to-add-bitcoin-to-currency-fund-within-weeks
I would like to know how exactly a bank can take advantage in a distributed ledger based on the blockchain.
Let's hypothesize that a bank makes its own blockchain.
The bank itself will have to set up nodes for its blockchain?
Because why I, a private citizen, would want to set up a node for the bank?
For money? But if I work for the bank, I can tamper the ledger at their command, or let somebody do it.
So it's legitimate to think that their ledger will be private: only bank computers will be able to access it.
But for what?
I can't understand this.
Banks ALREADY have their infrastructure to transmit money.
They ALREADY have their IT infrastructure to keep track of how much money a person/company holds by them.
If they build a blockchain, this doesn't mean anybody will value their "coin" in any way.
They will still have to change the currency from country to country.
They will still charge the user for operations (they want to earn money), which is more expensive than Bitcoin, that charges nearly nothing.
The only thing they will have will be a PRIVATE registry, and because it's private, they could change it any time they want, so it won't have any OFFICIAL value at all.
I won't trust that ledger, because it can be reversed and tampered because the bank owns ALL the nodes.
Even when there would be some volunteers to hold a node for bank XXX, they would be suspect.
They could be corruptible, they could take money to tamper the ledger.
It's the fact itself that private banks want to make private ledgers that makes no sense to me.
And as for PUBLIC LEDGERS... we don't need a bank to do that for us: if a thing is useful, people will hold up nodes for it.
So, please, somebody tell me a GOOD SERVICE that a bank can have from a blockchain that will not be supported by the public at all, because I can't find anything of use for them.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/114954/bnp-paribas-to-add-bitcoin-to-currency-fund-within-weeks
I would like to know how exactly a bank can take advantage in a distributed ledger based on the blockchain.
Let's hypothesize that a bank makes its own blockchain.
The bank itself will have to set up nodes for its blockchain?
Because why I, a private citizen, would want to set up a node for the bank?
For money? But if I work for the bank, I can tamper the ledger at their command, or let somebody do it.
So it's legitimate to think that their ledger will be private: only bank computers will be able to access it.
But for what?
I can't understand this.
Banks ALREADY have their infrastructure to transmit money.
They ALREADY have their IT infrastructure to keep track of how much money a person/company holds by them.
If they build a blockchain, this doesn't mean anybody will value their "coin" in any way.
They will still have to change the currency from country to country.
They will still charge the user for operations (they want to earn money), which is more expensive than Bitcoin, that charges nearly nothing.
The only thing they will have will be a PRIVATE registry, and because it's private, they could change it any time they want, so it won't have any OFFICIAL value at all.
I won't trust that ledger, because it can be reversed and tampered because the bank owns ALL the nodes.
Even when there would be some volunteers to hold a node for bank XXX, they would be suspect.
They could be corruptible, they could take money to tamper the ledger.
It's the fact itself that private banks want to make private ledgers that makes no sense to me.
And as for PUBLIC LEDGERS... we don't need a bank to do that for us: if a thing is useful, people will hold up nodes for it.
So, please, somebody tell me a GOOD SERVICE that a bank can have from a blockchain that will not be supported by the public at all, because I can't find anything of use for them.
Jump to: