It's because it's more transparent and i suggest you to research first before asking silly question like what is bitcointalk? IT'S JUST A FORUM USING SMF FORUM
Hope this helps
Topic: Why would banks use a blockchain? - page 3. (Read 2834 times)
banks might be will not interested for cryptocurrency but i heard that they currently more interested how works blockchain technology system because they says if blockchain technology applied for banks system then the transactions will be more faster than now and Bank of Canada has trying these technology
Remember that banks will use blockchain technology and not bitcoin. If they will use bitcoin then transactions will be possibly open and can be viewed to the public. But its blockchain technology and not bitcoin that they are after and it means simply that they will use private transactions rather than public ledgers. The launching of banks using blockchain technology is a threat to bitcoin but we hope it will have no big and lasting effect to bitcoin and other altcoins.
As far as I know, bitcoin transactions and record keeping use an integrated form of cryptographic check summing which could be more difficult to hack than the system banks use.
Blockchain technology is also less expensive, more robust and reliable than the ACH system used by banks.
The systems bitcoin and banks use are difficult to compare.
Banks use firewalls and security features to keep transactions private.
Bitcoin transactions are public and don't need firewalls and other security apparatus which represents a completely different model.
Blockchain technology is also less expensive, more robust and reliable than the ACH system used by banks.
The systems bitcoin and banks use are difficult to compare.
Banks use firewalls and security features to keep transactions private.
Bitcoin transactions are public and don't need firewalls and other security apparatus which represents a completely different model.
Blockchain technology ease the way of getting interlinked to each and every users around the world. Also it reduces the risk of errors or mistakes occurring within transactions. Because in the open source if errors were found the confirmations won't take place.
Banks simply don't understand blockchain technology. Bitcoin really matters not blockchain 
Why do banks use blockchains? Because most people don't understand what it means, and it's great PR to show they are moving with the times. It also gives them a chance to dump the toxic debt that is associated with the current virtual fiat currencies.
It is entirely different from what you think it is,blockchain and virtual currencies are entirely different and banks are not using blockchain to build a currency of their own ,instead they will be having their transaction records in the blockchain and it will be a closed one without any doubt. Why do banks use blockchains? Because most people don't understand what it means, and it's great PR to show they are moving with the times. It also gives them a chance to dump the toxic debt that is associated with the current virtual fiat currencies.
It is entirely different from what you think it is,blockchain and virtual currencies are entirely different and banks are not using blockchain to build a currency of their own ,instead they will be having their transaction records in the blockchain and it will be a closed one without any doubt. 
Banks would probably not adopt a technology that considerably limits the control they have. It is possible that someday some banks will adopt Blockchain Technologies for real-world applications, but certainly the first thing they will try is to use some kind of centralized blockchain.
This may not be what you are looking for, as it is not purely from a monetary/transaction standpoint. Banks could use the blockchain to securely and proofably hold data. The company Tierion does this with health and other business data. https://tierion.com/
I think that's what they're trying to sell. It's cute that they show 2,700 records stored. According to ach/eft, the average consumer storage is roughly 63,000 individual records per year. That's all deposit, withdraw, pos terminal, check, auto pay, lookup, direct deposit, credit inquiry, consumer unknown credit pull and more. For a single country that's about 18,900,000,000,000 records per year. I think Tierion may be a little overwhelmed. LOL
This may not be what you are looking for, as it is not purely from a monetary/transaction standpoint. Banks could use the blockchain to securely and proofably hold data. The company Tierion does this with health and other business data. https://tierion.com/
To expand on this. Do transactions off-chain and simply store the hashed data containing the transactions on chain.
To expand on this. Do transactions off-chain and simply store the hashed data containing the transactions on chain.
Blockchains don't really offer anything a bank would need.
They have perfectly good ways of storing and processing transactions already. With Btc addresses and transactions are publicly visible. I don't want my bank account and details visible to the world. Unless you had unique, one shot payment addresses, it would be simple to create a wiki mapping addresses onto organisations and eventually people. Then there is processing. Btc only works as it pays miners to verify transactions. There is no way a bank would give over its processing to a third party that wasn't 100% legit. Would it run all its miners/verification in house? How do you explain the 51% threat to a bank?
The openness of block chains isn't really relevant to huge organisations.
[/b]They have perfectly good ways of storing and processing transactions already. With Btc addresses and transactions are publicly visible. I don't want my bank account and details visible to the world. Unless you had unique, one shot payment addresses, it would be simple to create a wiki mapping addresses onto organisations and eventually people. Then there is processing. Btc only works as it pays miners to verify transactions. There is no way a bank would give over its processing to a third party that wasn't 100% legit. Would it run all its miners/verification in house? How do you explain the 51% threat to a bank?
The openness of block chains isn't really relevant to huge organisations.
I have to disagree. Banks are interested because of the openness of blockchains. Instead of having complex and long-winded digital records, they can have all this information easily accessible. I think it also greatly reduces the problems resulting from money transfers between different banks.
Banks need to maintain huge volume of data whereas blackchain efficiently manages huge volume of data in distributed mode. One simple advantage of this would be reversing or faking will be prohibited with the case of using blockchain technology, for example.
Reversing or faking is prevented in bitcoin through the use of mining which is how one can maintain a current "truth" in the blockchain in a trustless system. Blockchain technology by banks have no need for working with a trustless system with their own data in house. Blockchain provides a way to have a current state across many nodes, but for in house data there is no need for such protection against reversing or faking, and there is no mechanism to do so either. Blockchains don't really offer anything a bank would need.
They have perfectly good ways of storing and processing transactions already. With Btc addresses and transactions are publicly visible. I don't want my bank account and details visible to the world. Unless you had unique, one shot payment addresses, it would be simple to create a wiki mapping addresses onto organisations and eventually people. Then there is processing. Btc only works as it pays miners to verify transactions. There is no way a bank would give over its processing to a third party that wasn't 100% legit. Would it run all its miners/verification in house? How do you explain the 51% threat to a bank?
The openness of block chains isn't really relevant to huge organisations.
They are not going to use bitcoin blockchain, they are interested in creating their own private blockchain that will not be accessible to the general public. They have perfectly good ways of storing and processing transactions already. With Btc addresses and transactions are publicly visible. I don't want my bank account and details visible to the world. Unless you had unique, one shot payment addresses, it would be simple to create a wiki mapping addresses onto organisations and eventually people. Then there is processing. Btc only works as it pays miners to verify transactions. There is no way a bank would give over its processing to a third party that wasn't 100% legit. Would it run all its miners/verification in house? How do you explain the 51% threat to a bank?
The openness of block chains isn't really relevant to huge organisations.
Blockchains don't really offer anything a bank would need.
How you are saying that banks are not in need of the benefits of using blockchain. Banks need to maintain huge volume of data whereas blackchain efficiently manages huge volume of data in distributed mode. One simple advantage of this would be reversing or faking will be prohibited with the case of using blockchain technology, for example.
In my understanding banks need blockchain in technology to ease their current operations but definitely do not need any private altcoins.
Bitcoin's best feature is the database. A banks business is mainly a huge database that keeps track of customer records. The ach/eft system is an enormous database that keeps records of customer transfers between banks and businesses. As banks continue to accumulate massive amounts of data, with no end in sight, the industry must find new ways to store it.
The key requirements of big data storage are that it can handle very large amounts of data and keep scaling to keep up with growth, and that it can provide the IOPS necessary to deliver data to analytics tools. The analytics tools lookup account records, determine balances, screen for fraud, track deposits/withdrawals/automatic payments, rout direct deposits and a multitude of other functions. Bitcoin is sorely insufficient for the needs of a major bank with a constantly accessed major data set. It's too slow and too clumsy to be useful. However, banks have one other database that Bitcoin might be useful for and that's data warehousing.
A data warehouse is housed typically on an enterprise mainframe server or in the cloud. Data from various online transaction processing applications and other sources is selectively and only periodically, extracted for use by analytical applications and user queries (like asking your bank for a copy of last years transactions for an IRS audit). These warehouses have no need to be super fast or stored locally. Something as clumsy and slow as Bitcoin would be well suited to data warehousing. The problem is the volume of data that only one bank stores makes the Bitcoin full node blockchain look like a Nikon camera SD card. Banks would only be interested in using the blockchain streamlining and data redundancy features to link all of their warehouse mainframes worldwide.
This use is meaningless to Bitcoin or it's adoption rate.
The key requirements of big data storage are that it can handle very large amounts of data and keep scaling to keep up with growth, and that it can provide the IOPS necessary to deliver data to analytics tools. The analytics tools lookup account records, determine balances, screen for fraud, track deposits/withdrawals/automatic payments, rout direct deposits and a multitude of other functions. Bitcoin is sorely insufficient for the needs of a major bank with a constantly accessed major data set. It's too slow and too clumsy to be useful. However, banks have one other database that Bitcoin might be useful for and that's data warehousing.
A data warehouse is housed typically on an enterprise mainframe server or in the cloud. Data from various online transaction processing applications and other sources is selectively and only periodically, extracted for use by analytical applications and user queries (like asking your bank for a copy of last years transactions for an IRS audit). These warehouses have no need to be super fast or stored locally. Something as clumsy and slow as Bitcoin would be well suited to data warehousing. The problem is the volume of data that only one bank stores makes the Bitcoin full node blockchain look like a Nikon camera SD card. Banks would only be interested in using the blockchain streamlining and data redundancy features to link all of their warehouse mainframes worldwide.
This use is meaningless to Bitcoin or it's adoption rate.
The banks will use "Private" Blockchains that would only be accessible to them. Bitcoin is PUBLIC. One of the main reasons banks would be
interested in "Private" Blockchains, would be for security. A decentralized network, cannot easily be taken down, like a centralized ledger. They can
also bypass services like SWIFT, if they want to transfer money between different banks.
{Making it cheaper, and more profit for them} 
Like all the banks would use the same sort of compatible blockchain. interested in "Private" Blockchains, would be for security. A decentralized network, cannot easily be taken down, like a centralized ledger. They can
also bypass services like SWIFT, if they want to transfer money between different banks.
{Making it cheaper, and more profit for them} 
I'm sure they already have their data replicated around the world for security reasons, but you could have a node in each country. sometime soon they will have a standard blockchain for every bank. then they can all work together.
Don't forget as well that the blockchain technology also offers potential use cases for insurers that include innovating insurance products and services
The banks will use "Private" Blockchains that would only be accessible to them. Bitcoin is PUBLIC. One of the main reasons banks would be
interested in "Private" Blockchains, would be for security. A decentralized network, cannot easily be taken down, like a centralized ledger. They can
also bypass services like SWIFT, if they want to transfer money between different banks. {Making it cheaper, and more profit for them}
Like all the banks would use the same sort of compatible blockchain. interested in "Private" Blockchains, would be for security. A decentralized network, cannot easily be taken down, like a centralized ledger. They can
also bypass services like SWIFT, if they want to transfer money between different banks.
{Making it cheaper, and more profit for them} I'm sure they already have their data replicated around the world for security reasons, but you could have a node in each country. sometime soon they will have a standard blockchain for every bank. then they can all work together.
The banks will use "Private" Blockchains that would only be accessible to them. Bitcoin is PUBLIC. One of the main reasons banks would be
interested in "Private" Blockchains, would be for security. A decentralized network, cannot easily be taken down, like a centralized ledger. They can
also bypass services like SWIFT, if they want to transfer money between different banks. {Making it cheaper, and more profit for them}
Like all the banks would use the same sort of compatible blockchain. interested in "Private" Blockchains, would be for security. A decentralized network, cannot easily be taken down, like a centralized ledger. They can
also bypass services like SWIFT, if they want to transfer money between different banks.
{Making it cheaper, and more profit for them} I'm sure they already have their data replicated around the world for security reasons, but you could have a node in each country. 
Why do banks use blockchains? Because most people don't understand what it means, and it's great PR to show they are moving with the times. It also gives them a chance to dump the toxic debt that is associated with the current virtual fiat currencies.
Jump to: