sry
Topic: Will the Banking Industry kill Bitcoin and keep the Blockchain? - page 8. (Read 8859 times)
October 13, 2015, 04:24:57 AM
October 13, 2015, 03:44:50 AM
Every financial and every Bank seem to have their eyes set on the bitcoin and bitcoin these days... But being Bitcoin as a currency the main competitor to banks and the traditional financial system, won't it be possible to see Banks trying to stifle bitcoin while investing in the Blockchain?
If we still this kind of dumb thread i'm afraid we're far from being mainstream.
LOL at investing in "the Blockchain"
Time to educate yourself OP, we're sick of spoonfeeding.
i would not be that rude but i have to agree
October 13, 2015, 02:37:55 AM
Banking industry won't kill bitcoin, even they use blockchain technology.
Bank's blockchain is centralized & controlled by bank, you can't see it's blockchain. It looks like fail altcoin for me
I'm sure most bitcoiner won't choose over bank coins over bitcoin
Bank's blockchain is centralized & controlled by bank, you can't see it's blockchain. It looks like fail altcoin for me
I'm sure most bitcoiner won't choose over bank coins over bitcoin
October 13, 2015, 03:31:25 AM
Oh, please, not this again.
Let me copy/paste my reply from this article:
The whole idea of a blockchain is a ledger that belongs to nobody, and is used, maintained and verified by everybody.
So when someone introduces "their own" blockchain, it means in-house, trust-required, centralized, and owner-dependent, thus essentially stripping it of Bitcoin's innovative advantages.
We already have centralized ledgers and they work quite efficiently - at the cost of putting society at the bank's mercy. Let's not make the same mistake again.
But trustless and immutability contradicts with belonging to someone, and being maintained and administered by a single party or authority (such as a bank consortium).
A blockchain operated by a handful of banks is not trustless at all. It fully depends on our trust in them. It's not immutable either: if and when they decide they wish to rollback certain changes or transactions, absolutely nothing stops them from doing so.
It's not necessarily free or open or transparent either (which are other advantages of the Bitcoin blockchain), it would be their blockchain and they control what goes in, at what cost, and how much they reveal about it.
Bitcoin solves all this, a custom bank-owned in-house blockchain does not (but of course from their perspective this isn't a problem in the first place).
Actually, from a bank's perspective, having their own blockchain might appear to be a more efficient, cost reducing way of processing their proprietary closed payment data. But for us, the mass audience, the general public or society, exactly what would be the difference?
By the way, I fully agree that trustlessness and immutability are very useful innovations, that don't require Bitcoin. But it would require something else that backs the blockchain, in a decentralized, verifiable, tamper-proof fashion, to provide its trustworthiness, independence and immutability.
Currently there is no such thing. Absolutely nothing compares even remotely to the existing Bitcoin network in terms of the trustless security it delivers, and banks certainly won't provide it.
If you were to set up a secondary network, comparable in size and speed and computing power to Bitcoin's, then sure, you could run a blockchain that is just as secure and trustless and immutable as Bitcoin. I don't see it happening any time soon though.
Let me copy/paste my reply from this article:
The whole idea of a blockchain is a ledger that belongs to nobody, and is used, maintained and verified by everybody.
So when someone introduces "their own" blockchain, it means in-house, trust-required, centralized, and owner-dependent, thus essentially stripping it of Bitcoin's innovative advantages.
We already have centralized ledgers and they work quite efficiently - at the cost of putting society at the bank's mercy. Let's not make the same mistake again.
Quote
(Author replying that the great innovation of blockchain is about being trustless and imutable, which doesn't require Bitcoin)
But trustless and immutability contradicts with belonging to someone, and being maintained and administered by a single party or authority (such as a bank consortium).
A blockchain operated by a handful of banks is not trustless at all. It fully depends on our trust in them. It's not immutable either: if and when they decide they wish to rollback certain changes or transactions, absolutely nothing stops them from doing so.
It's not necessarily free or open or transparent either (which are other advantages of the Bitcoin blockchain), it would be their blockchain and they control what goes in, at what cost, and how much they reveal about it.
Bitcoin solves all this, a custom bank-owned in-house blockchain does not (but of course from their perspective this isn't a problem in the first place).
Actually, from a bank's perspective, having their own blockchain might appear to be a more efficient, cost reducing way of processing their proprietary closed payment data. But for us, the mass audience, the general public or society, exactly what would be the difference?
By the way, I fully agree that trustlessness and immutability are very useful innovations, that don't require Bitcoin. But it would require something else that backs the blockchain, in a decentralized, verifiable, tamper-proof fashion, to provide its trustworthiness, independence and immutability.
Currently there is no such thing. Absolutely nothing compares even remotely to the existing Bitcoin network in terms of the trustless security it delivers, and banks certainly won't provide it.
If you were to set up a secondary network, comparable in size and speed and computing power to Bitcoin's, then sure, you could run a blockchain that is just as secure and trustless and immutable as Bitcoin. I don't see it happening any time soon though.
October 13, 2015, 03:16:57 AM
So Bitshares wants to bring a end to the volatility for fiat based coins? Do I understand the reasoning behind that service correctly?
The banks are looking for "private" Blockchains that will solve their problems, not ours. They are profit driven and have to adhere to strict government regulations. Bitcoin is not under their control, and it's also not
protected. {Nobody can claim intellectual property, without exposing Satoshi} They can rip Bitcoin apart and add features to it, like any other Alt coin out there, and call it a BankCoin.
We {Bitcoin} just need to offer people the features they want from a currency or a investment vehicle and be transparent and decentralized and the customers will support that, like they do with other
technologies in the same shoes.
The banks are looking for "private" Blockchains that will solve their problems, not ours. They are profit driven and have to adhere to strict government regulations. Bitcoin is not under their control, and it's also not
protected. {Nobody can claim intellectual property, without exposing Satoshi} They can rip Bitcoin apart and add features to it, like any other Alt coin out there, and call it a BankCoin.
We {Bitcoin} just need to offer people the features they want from a currency or a investment vehicle and be transparent and decentralized and the customers will support that, like they do with other
technologies in the same shoes.
October 13, 2015, 02:04:55 AM
The lack of enthusiasm for Bitcoin is rather worrying. But i don't think it will kill bitcoin. There is still plenty of opportunity for bitcoin to evolve, and the people involved with Bitcoin aren't going to let it slide just like that.
October 13, 2015, 01:48:20 AM
They can certainly try and they already have (e.g. telling public to stay away from it or that it is dangerous). For those people that got on board for the right reasons this should not be a problem.
October 13, 2015, 01:46:30 AM
bitcoin will kill banks no doubt
Not without your help.
There is a big convention in China this week with billions of investment dollars at stake wondering if they should invest in Bitcoin (public blockchains) or Bankchains like Chase's Blythe MasterCoin.
This USA crypto company president is asking for your help presenting his arguement. Here is his potential Power Point presentation for public review. If he wins, then the $Billions will invest in Bitcoin. But if he loses, then Chase bank gets that money.
Here, proof read his pitch and offer any insight. He is but one man but together we are an army!!
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18881.msg243106.html#msg243106
Interesting!!
But how will it be invest? Are they just gonna buy bitcoins or are they gonna buy miningfarms. That's a big difference. In the first case the price would rise, in the second case it won't have that much influence at the price. Hope Bitcoin will win it from Bankchains. That would definitely be some positive news.
October 13, 2015, 01:35:15 AM
bitcoin will kill banks no doubt
October 13, 2015, 01:21:21 AM
Bitcoin has grown too big and it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to kill.
October 13, 2015, 12:40:59 AM
private blockchains are completely different than public blockchains
do you understand the difference between private property and public property?
well then let me teach you
How long would you let the general public park in your yard, sleep in your house, and use your private toilet before you got pissed?
Now tell me that the utter existance of your private land, house, and toilet negates the need for public parking lots, campgrounds, and toilets (because both you and the general public are more than happy utilizing your shit for everyone's parking, sleeping, and shitting needs)
Do you see the utter folly in this strawman yet. The banks are trying to tear down the public toilet and install their pay per poo stall on top of the same sewer! Here's a rule to live by: follow the money: Anybody who thinks that this is a good idea or is propagating this propaganda or tries to scare bitcoiners to dump their coins is working for the bank or getting paid by them.
TLDR- anybody bringing up this topic as an actual arguement that the existance of private toilets negates the need for public restrooms is either evil or stoopid
do you understand the difference between private property and public property?
well then let me teach you
How long would you let the general public park in your yard, sleep in your house, and use your private toilet before you got pissed?
Now tell me that the utter existance of your private land, house, and toilet negates the need for public parking lots, campgrounds, and toilets (because both you and the general public are more than happy utilizing your shit for everyone's parking, sleeping, and shitting needs)
Do you see the utter folly in this strawman yet. The banks are trying to tear down the public toilet and install their pay per poo stall on top of the same sewer! Here's a rule to live by: follow the money: Anybody who thinks that this is a good idea or is propagating this propaganda or tries to scare bitcoiners to dump their coins is working for the bank or getting paid by them.
TLDR- anybody bringing up this topic as an actual arguement that the existance of private toilets negates the need for public restrooms is either evil or stoopid
October 13, 2015, 01:01:26 AM
if it will kill it will kill both else the thing that does not kill bitcoin will make it stronger
October 13, 2015, 12:26:47 AM
i dont think there is anyway that banks could be sued or blamed for using a bitcoin type block chain, but even if that does cause bitcoin to die down, other coins will just take the lead with innovations
October 12, 2015, 09:25:30 PM
Every financial and every Bank seem to have their eyes set on the bitcoin and bitcoin these days... But being Bitcoin as a currency the main competitor to banks and the traditional financial system, won't it be possible to see Banks trying to stifle bitcoin while investing in the Blockchain?
If we still this kind of dumb thread i'm afraid we're far from being mainstream.
LOL at investing in "the Blockchain"
Time to educate yourself OP, we're sick of spoonfeeding.
October 12, 2015, 09:19:41 PM
Every financial institution and every Bank seem to have their eyes set on the bitcoin and bitcoin these days... But being Bitcoin as a currency the main competitor to banks and the traditional financial system, won't it be possible to see Banks trying to stifle bitcoin while investing in the Blockchain?
Jump to: