Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 20006. (Read 26610669 times)

Well, yeah.

Except that every significant financial institution is looking at 'the blockchain', trying to figure out how they're gonna use it. Which, by the way, was the topic of this sidebar to begin with.

For 'permissioned' cases, I would agree with you.

However, if your use case is a trustless public ledger, it is absolutely the best data structure of which mankind is aware. Efficiency is only meaningful in relative terms when comparing alternatives. Accordingly, for the trustless public ledger use case, it is the most efficient  available.

Coin



Explanation

banks are confused as fuck.

there is no point to what they are doing with blockchain, as Jorge points out the structure of Bitcoin is inefficient. the only reason its cool is because its the only way to get trustless TX verification.
there is no point to use a blockchain type database if your going to only allow registered trusted users to play with it.
they were told blockchain tech was the future, but they didn't understand why.

now they are building a system thats records things like "trust me, I debited account #1444 10000$ and credited #5559 10000$ on my closed source system "

as if irrefutable proof that BankA told BankB about a TX it supposedly did, means anything.


next thing you know  going to be like " what do you mean there's no physical gold in vault, its record on our blockchain!  blockchain tech is flawed!"

Keep an eye on USAA. They will be one of the banks at the forefront.

The tone and substance of your comments come off as skeptical, but far from academic...

You appear to be way too emotionally attach to a goal of denigrating bitcoin that you fail and/or refuse to recognize benefits of peer to peer validations of transactions and accordingly you present your argument(s) in a very non convincing manner.

Even though you may be correct that in the beginning banks will likely hesitate to entrust their transactions to the bitcoin blockchain, with the passage of time, the smarter "banking" players are likely going to come to realize that bitcoin's blockchain can be utilized to their benefit for a much smaller cost and with better security than their own centrally controlled and likely half-baked and likely much more costly "blockchain" imitation alternatives.

They have no use for bitcoin or any other cryptocurrencies. If they had, they would use some closed centralized "currency" like Ripple.

The bitcoin blockchain is a lousy and terribly inefficient data structure.  It is used in bitcoin because it was the only structure that Satoshi could think of that prevented double-spend and could be reliably maintained by a distributed swarm of uncoordinated anonymous volunteer miners.  The bitcoin system uses the bitcoin currency to motivate those volunteers, through fees and block rewards, because it has no other way of rewarding them.  However, the banks will hardly want to use uncoordinated anonymous volunteers to process their billion-dollar transactions. So they will not need bitcoin to reward them. So, after the hype deflates, they will realize that there are better data structures and protocols for their problems -- and that they are already using them.

Coin



Explanation

I was hoping for that joke! Yeah, I was wondering how you would prevent 3rd party mining interaction/manipulation/attacks. I guess they could have some sort of proprietary asics and only these registered device are permitted to secure their blockchain but we've seen how quickly code and devices have been adapted for mining... I'm not sure if they could ensure a closed network without it really just being a database? 


http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-the-blockchain-can-change-well-everything-2015-12?r=UK&IR=T

Boroujerdi says: "Bitcoin was just the opening act, with the Blockchain ready to take center stage."

Despite Boroujerdi's seeming runaway optimism, he does note that there are some drawbacks. One worry is the potential cost of developing and maintaining the network. Another is the lack of a regulatory framework. And a third is concerns over the capacity of the blockchain.

I guess the real question is how much hash power they would have to throw at SETLcoin to avoid, prevent, mitigate, a possible 51% attack and how that compares to being cost effective to just using BTC or a different altcoin.

I think ultimately, the banks will steal/co-opt/centralize bitcoin, make it their own, force the price up, and push the cypherpunks/anarchists to alt coins and I think the miners and hodlers will let this happen because $ /shrug.   I just have issues seeing how you can have a blockchain function without a token or maintenance device; maybe something along the lines of peercoin & nubits, but it didn't sound like it based on referencing asics and fpgs

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Still hovering around $360. That should change soon... or not.

Glad I'm not paying margin interest while we wait. There are no fees for holding.

Y U OPST OLD NEWRS

UKRAINE'S LARGEST BANK HELPS INTEGRATE BITCOIN AS A PAYMENT

BITCOIN MERCHANTS, BITCOIN PROGRESS, BITCOIN REGULATION, NEWS04/12/2015BY SAMBURAJ DAS

Coin



Explanation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIHH-TqFzXU

imagine the W. twins had "stamped" a document which described their facebook idea.

this is very cool shit.

i should stamp my separation agreement

Scaling HK conference tomorrow.

Price primed for movement out of mini-pennant within mega-pennant.

Buckle up. 

Coin



Explanation

indeed, whale will wait for shorter to make a more dramatic pump 

With so many posters promising a price drop, I am considering preparing my space suit... or at least catching the train to the rocket platform.   

Because it's the right thing to do...

I sold at 380$ and have been accumulating on all the dips!

The price is perfectly fluctuating in the past few weeks for traders, if it keeps up like this we could be on a very strong and positive incline for BTC.