Whether or not these companies mean bitcoin when they say blockchain is a good question. If they are just creating their own alt-coin then I think they are in for a big disappointment. First they are going to find out that no one is going to spend money on electricity to run their network. Next they will find themselves in direct competition with bitcoin. The consumer then has the choice of a coin that is controlled by a bank, distributed by a bank, priced by a bank, and only works at the bank. Or one could have universal money that works the world over for pennies and can not be controlled by a bank. Which would you choose?
They won't need anyone else to run their network, just pick a custom algorithm and put it on some servers and keep it closed, who else would be able to attack it without knowing the algorithm or why would they care except for malicious purposes.
Absolutely true. However the budget just went up significantly with the need for data centers and all that hardware. Guess who is going to pay for all that? So now I'm paying more for a closed system that does God knows what with my identity. Not a selling point for me.
Well believe it or not, they will sell this crap to most of their users out there. They will even advertise it as technology as good as Bitcoin, but without bad stuff from Bitcoin, you'll see. And in the short term period, this will work, but in the long run, all of this crap will fall apart, since this is a centralized, closed system. Just like their banks and current financial system will fall apart, their centralized Bitcoin will follow the same path.
Then, when this happens and when they have thought all the people how to use crypto, the real, decentralized Bitcoin will just take over.
