Bitcoin Forum

As far as I see, a lot of people here are very happy when they read news about this or that bank adopting bitcoin exchange, offering crypto related services or doing something related to crypto.

At some point I understand that people like it because they want to see crypto everywhere but the downside of this is that crypto gets more regulated and I think it losses the magic/spell that it had before. Personally, I think that more adoptions and regulations won't do any good for bitcoin, it will just become a little bit different digital version of fiat. I think as time goes, anonimity, decentralization and these words are fading away and they turn into myths like Greek gods.

Bitcoin is a currency and for it to function properly as one, it has to be adopted. The more adoption Bitcoin gets the more it moves closer to becoming a globally accepted means of exchange. The regulations will be for the service providers and not Bitcoin itself therefore it isn't doing much harm.

We'll always have decentralized alternative so that shouldn't be an issue. We can't achieve global adoption without regulations of the service providers and that's the sad true. We have to be ready to scarified some decentralized as we're already doing by undergoing KYC procedures on exchanges etc before we can make use of them. The adoption are good on a general scales as they help in creating more awareness about bitcoin.

We dont actually need this and the first question should be asked out is that "Would banks adopt Bitcoin?" Yes we might had able to see some of them had already considered it out but doesnt mean that majority

of them would do the same yet we know that banks are heavily centralized and regulated by the government and we know that government does really hate up decentralized things which

its really normal for us to think off that banks wouldnt easily considered out on adopting or integrating bitcoin or crypto as a whole.

Bitcoin adoption by banks - good or bad?

There's a bit of good, but overall I think it's bad for the network;
• Good, because with more adoption Bitcoin exposure reaches a wider audience getting it closer to going mainstream
• Bad, because it comes at a cost, these new users are exposed to a bank regulated version of Bitcoin, which doesn't function as the original version. A lot of people are already foregoing privacy and anonymity for ease and convenience using centralized exchanges, banks would exacerbate that situation and that could become the new normal.

Such a transition seems inevitable, with the large majority opting to use Bitcoin like fiat while a minority outliers would maintain the qualities that the network possesses, leading to different types of coins; the whitelisted ones which has been regulated by the banks and the darker ones which are still pseudo anonymous.

We want it to be globally adopted, but we don't want these big players to get involved?

Obviously, the adoption from the banks' side was inevitable to happen and will bring regulation, but hey, that's the cost. You couldn't except from the governments to hug bitcoin and its highly anarchic ideology warmly. It may be recognized as a better store of value asset, but I'm pretty sure they'll abuse their power on tracing us way too much.

As for your last words; anonymity is mostly gone since 1995 and decentralization isn't affected from banks' adoption.

If this is what it will take decentralization, then it would mean that Bitcoin was always a flawed project. We are powerless to stop banks or companies from using Bitcoin, and we are can't prevent other people from choosing to interact with Bitcoin through these centralized intermediaries.

But I don't believe that this is a cause for worry just yet, as long as the critical mass of Bitcoiners is devoted to decentralization, banks or any other groups won't be able to hijack Bitcoin so easily.

For some people this is much convenience so its not entirely bad. Imagine that you are telling someone that is over 50 years old to keep their private key safe and store their crypto in cold wallet lol, pretty sure that guy wont understand anything though and yeah people are so used to bank keeping 'their money safe' for them so the idea of keeping your own 'money' safe might sounds weird to some people

Private keys can be represented as a recovery phrase, and it's not to difficult to write down a couple of words and keep them in a secure location, if you do not trust yourself to keep that safe, you can store the backed up phrase or hardwallet in a bank vault.

No one is forced to change that, Bitcoin is an alternative, that was created for those who wanted some form of freedom in their finances. There's no need to use Bitcoin as fiat, when you already have fiat.

If the banks will offer their services and allow crypto users/investors to store their crypto at them, that it gains more clients and many will choose them than keep their cryptos on the exchanges or in the custodial wallets as they have the safety assurance in the banks.

And to see this happens globally, really has a huge impact on crypto adoption and it encourages more people to invest in crypto as well. This could somewhat change the nature of being anonymous as KYC is surely mandatory for them. But it seems not a big deal because the most important is we keep our funds more secure.

Depending on your perspective on bitcoin, I see both bad and good when banks accept bitcoin. On the positive side, I see BTC being accepted by banks as much as it is being accepted in real life and its practical application is obvious. However, it is also possible that acceptance as a control restricts its use and can be known as regular fiat.

Adoption by banks is good only until it is limited to allowing the sending money to crypto exchange and when we sell it then receiving the fiat into bank account. Above and over that if banks starts interfering in all the operations then its not good. Then it would be able to track us down, gain the KYC's, exchanges wont be secure/anonymous one in the future and thus no use of the same.

Already many banks are refusing to allow crypto related transactions and thus directly/indirectly we need work on the p2p systems and get the transfers done. However, in the later times you have to show case for what that transaction was made and thus making it difficult for us to use p2p also.

So yeah, bitcoin must be adopted by the banks but only with some limits.  :D

the bold type will happen.

and anonymity will shrink a lot.

Decentralization is gone ended years ago with big pools and asics.

I used to mine in-my garage with 22 gpus about 11gh the entire network was  22th

so 11000/22000000 is

11/22000 or 1/2000 of the entire network cost was 7kwatts an hour. about 91 cents an hour to mine 1/2000 of the network

simply should have mined a few blocks and held them. oh well

I'm quite confused with this. If I'm not mistaken, banks don't have the power to regulate it, just the transactions within their bank. So if some of their clients don't declare that it's crypto-related, I don't think they would be able to filter it in any way.

Adoption is good either way as long as people are getting in and being involved in the crypto space. I think it's always going to be a good thing from a marketing perspective.

I beg to disagree. Bitcoin adoption by banks is generally good for Bitcoin. That's more or less a stamp saying Bitcoin is legit. That means more and more people will trust Bitcoin because it has already been adopted by powerful mainstream institutions like banks.

Why does it have to be bad, by the way? After all, banks adopting Bitcoin does not in any way diminish Bitcoin. It does not take away the pseudo-anonymity, decentralization, transparency, and other characteristics of Bitcoin. It doesn't change Bitcoin in any way; it simply provides other people options in getting access or storing Bitcoin. But they still have the full freedom to be their own bank with Bitcoin or trust third party banks with their Bitcoin.

It all boils down to how an individual makes use or makes the most of Bitcoin.

Can't just say with one word if the adoption by the banks is good or bad because if you look at this case for the banks about the bitcoin adoption it is definitely good for them because staying bitcoin unadopted in this own place and fully decentralized, not asking anyone for legal documents can make borderless for people and more people will get into it and fewer people will pay attention to the other methods, but in the other hand, this adoption is necessary for bitcoin survival to stay alive, because I think the adoption is necessary in this case.

Saving bitcoins in a bank will only eliminate the function of bitcoin itself which has brought a full-featured replacement bank.

In some cases it may be fine, especially for those who are not interested in bitcoin but must engage in business with the people who use it. It's just a matter of principle, some people still prefer services that are regulated and under the control of the law because they will feel safe and secure. If banks adopt bitcoin, that means there is potential use there.

I'd reckon people are happy simply because it's a form of adoption, it's like at this point any adoption would probably make people happy. Still, though, those genuinely happy due to banks adopting it might be because the original process of Bitcoin transactions was tedious for them, and having it in banks, which is what they use most of the time adopting it, makes it much easier for their side. Though in the end, that just means that those people ignore what Bitcoin gives to users at its core, privacy, and anonymity.

The people who deposit thier BTC to banks and do not handle to secure thier BTC to themselves which by keeping private key will lose that "magic/spell."

Ifyou mean the FDIC news which they are allowing banks to own cryptocurrency, I guess it's for insurance, or BTC holders can take a loan leaving BTC as collateral. It's true that banks are adopting and they want to make use of how DEFI works.

Neither good nor bad, inevitable if we want mass adoption, I would say. As others have pointed out, it is the price to pay. If Bitcoin had stayed in the original idea of P2P electronic cash system, and everyone who used it did it taking 100% care of privacy, etc. it would not have the price it has. If you like the price to go up and keep going up, you are going to sacrifice privacy and centralization, not of the network itself, which is decentralized, but of how people access to buy Bitcoins.

Whether Bitcoin adoption by the banks is a good or bad thing is still too early to tell, if you ask me. But I don't see it as good or bad. I see it as another "Blockbuster" trying to desperately keep up with the new age because they know they will be left behind, otherwise.  :-*

So really, banks don't have much of a choice. If they want to make money in the future, they will need to accept blockchain and start praying to Satoshi.

Personally, I would rather see the bankers becoming more and more desperate as they understand what is happening. To their horror, bankers are becoming slowly but surely redundant as they struggle against the tide... I doubt we will even have bankers  in the future. :'( ;D

Crypto is going to be heavily regulated WITH OR WITHOUT adoption from the banks.
Actually the banks will be more willing to adopt cryptocurrencies,if the cryptocurrencies are more regulated and there's better legislation regarding the crypto industry.
The people,who are happy about cryptocurrencies being adopted by the banks are excited mostly about the possibility of the Bitcoin/altcoin prices going up due to the bullish news.They don't care about the increased level of convenience or anything else.
By the way,I don't think that many banks are becoming crypto friendly.Most of the banks worldwide are still pretty hostile or at least neutral towards the cryptocurrencies.  

Banks are trying to keep their customers by giving them exposure to Bitcoin.

I doubt they will allow withdrawals to your own wallets though.

A negative for Bitcoin would be that there's the possibility of more IOU Bitcoins than the real amount.

A positive for Bitcoin would be that more people are aware of it and want to buy more.

I also dont believe that banks will allow withdrawals or even a transfer between bank accounts. It will be like on PayPal. You can trade, but you can not move anywhere further than your account. With a system like that, banks will keep full control of crypto. It is a sort of a crippled adoption. On one hand it is good, because users will have an opportunity to earn (if they are good at trading) with crypto. On the other - the whole idea of being anonymous and uncontrolled is spoiled. However, this will make a positive vision of cryptocurrency, as users will feel safe (who does not trust its own bank?) and the chances of being scammed are as low as possible (banks will do all the research whether altcoin is scam or not, banks will be fully responsible for that).

You are right to be concerned, I am also concerned about it. Everyone would like to see Bitcoin adoption in all banks and all governments in the world, but this means strict regulations and a greater tendency towards centralization and control by banks and governments and this completely corrupts Bitcoin.
I have said this many times before: Banks and governments fail to ban Bitcoin and prevent people from using it so they will resort to a cunning way of adopting Bitcoin and trying to control and impose restrictions on it so that it eliminates the decentralization and privacy which are the main features of Bitcoin.

Good for the Bitcoin users but Bad for the banks themselves.
Why good for us? More users = more adoption. People will know Bitcoin and crypto more. People will be more curious thus, there will be new investors who might choose to invest into it.
Why bad for the Banks? Well, the main reason why Bitcoin is created is to eradicate the use of banks when we are transacting from Point A to Point B. Their business might get affected if they will put Bitcoin into their business.

Either way, I don't think that this will happen though that banks will adopt crypto. Well, there are some banks who are supporting it anyways like converting your crypto funds into fiat then putting into your bank account.

I think its good for crypto right now specially when this news means more adoption. Bank users would probably learn more about bitcoin and could possibly be interested to it. If bank offers buying and selling bitcoin to its costumers, I think confidentiality is a thing for it. I think its much safer than most crypto exchanges.

That is the correct word - power. The power over your Bitcoin will belong to banks. You and Bitcoin will be perfect feeder for banks and government. You gain profit from trading - share profit with government. You get profit from holding - share profit with government. You suffer losses - it is your problem. Banks and government will get a part from each of your success, giving to support in a case if failure.

I see you wear a signature and you are from Japan. Will you agree to get 5% less reward than other Sr.Member? But in case your signature fails to distribute, it is your problem and no one intends to help you somehow.

The adoption of bitcoin by the central organization has its pros and cons. As much as we want to retain the nature of bitcoin if ever it will be globally adopted, we really have to compromise. Like what they say, any good thing comes with a cost, most especially we are talking about money matters here. For sure though the government won't allow such adoption to happen without them benefiting out of it. We have to make sacrifices in order for us to thrive. Although I'm really thinking if do we really need such validation from them? Because bitcoin alone can stand on its own anyway. Without the regulations that would make an impact on its features.

But I also must say that gone were the days whereas decentralization and anonymity were valued by the users because lately crypto has been regulated in different levels in different countries. There are platforms where the local government regulates and mandates KYC. Almost every platform actually has a connection with investing and trading. I guess the world is really dynamically changing. For good or bad, that depends on how we view it and on what situation we are currently in. Because everything has its two sides of the coin. We just have to weigh and choose what would be more relevant and beneficial to its longevity and function overall.

I think this adoption is positive because it ensures more safety to investors when holding bitcoins, also incentivizing the increasement of the number of bitcoin adopters. It's true more regulations are created this way, but nobody is forced to deal with banks if they don't wish it and I suppose there is always going to be some decentralized exchanges that can be used together with personal physical wallets by those who feel unconfortable in centralized platforms. Banks adopting bitcoin is mainly great for generating interest from your holdings in a relatively safe way.

Even if the banks or the government will regulate crypto, people are still free to select when they want to save their money and save their money in crypto. They use the banks to help them convert their crypto into fiat if, in their country, a few merchants accept crypto as payment.

People can use the banks to buy crypto and save it in that banks if the banks offer them to save their crypto. People will feel safe from scams that can happen in the exchanges or other places while using their own wallets to save the other amount for their long-term investment.

Bitcoin adoption by banks has a positive and negative effect to all of us that used bitcoin. It's good if bitcoin is regulated because it will help to increase bitcoin awareness and trust but on the other hand the decentralization of bitcoin will be lessen.

Well, at least with the openness from the bank, we will no longer worry when the black markets will disappear, these are the trading areas for converting from bitcoin to cash that rely only on intermediaries and trust over the network, although quite a few exchanges have opened up conversion services but the user's sense and caution still need to be very vigilant, the bank's entry will offer a more reliable service. However, in the face of a reliable service, much disclosure and disclosure of earnings and holdings may very well be mandatory, the government will happily raise taxes and that's really sad for us

I don't think you can see crypto truly being adopted without paying the bigger price 'which is regulation' can you even picture crypto being accepted all over the world without banks and government involved! The world is intertwined in the sense that crypto can not exist without the presence of other elements that makes it whole, it is inevitable, as much as we hate it, it is bound to happen sooner or later.

If the banks do not make weird laws about regulating the whole industry, then I do understand that they would be fine with cryptocurrencies but at the same time the idea of them dominating the whole market is always there which makes it harder for the general public to appreciate the efforts that they might be putting into.

Banks integrating with cryptocurrencies might be a good thing for the holders since they would allow the bank customers and the crypto holders to trade efficiently without much efforts at the same time other banks might wanna do it as well because of the competition do that open doors for mass adoption, but how would it go? Since after that the government might wanna make stricter rules and regulations.

Then the countries would go in that as well and this way we can see crypto being accepted all around the world therefore it can both be a +/- thing.

Depending on how they take it.

Totally contradicting eh?

Dont know on why people are really that in a hurry when it comes to this yet they do know that regulation is something in return or needed
if  they are really asking into a certain extent of adoption which totally opposes on the essence of decentralization of crypto.

Banks might create their own stuff and  might only consider those CBDC's.If ever they would really handle out crypto deposits
then i dont see for those depositors on minding about the true meaning of decentralized.

I'm afraid there is no sort of regulations/sanctions by the government and their banks that can bring Bitcoin to this level, it can't be compared to fiat or be a distinct version of it, mind you that no matter what, the government can't print/create Bitcoin, they can't control it, neither can they make it scarce, etc, they can only try and set their regulations and make it somewhat difficult for Bitcoin users to use the network and also seek a way to track them through centralized exchanges.

Having said that, I think in a few years to come, governments/banks will only have CBDC's as their major concern, the government only focuses on what they can control, and since they can't control Bitcoin, I'm not looking forward to a period were governments will be wholly into Bitcoin.

As with everything, the answer is somewhere in the middle, and it depends. If we want mass adoption, then it doesn't matter if it's good or bad, it's necessary. I'm guessing the crypto community but also the major financial institutions will have to adapt to the new situation. So it's not a question of it being good or bad, rather it being necessary or not depending on the goal.

Good, all adoption is good for Hodlers. It really depends for the rest of people. If you trade, you may not want too many professional traders hanging around as it may become a fiery competition. If you believe in decentralisation and being your own bank, you probably want them out. Else, you probably are happy about it and about being able to get your stuff in a bank.

It doesn't affect the decentralization of Bitcoin if banks want to buy Bitcoin since we are always our own bank if you have the private keys with you then they have nothing to do with your BTC. I think it's not bad if there's an adoption of Bitcoin to most banks, it's just that not every banks would do the same but as far as the time goes by they will eventually adopt to Bitcoin.

It will help us all in the Bitcoin community since we all needed the adoption as much as we want in order to expand the knowledge of having a crypto especially in Bitcoin. Exchanges doing it somehow makes the other banks aware of the existence of Bitcoin so it's a good thing.

I think in general, bitcoin adoption is good. It's good for all of us as it gets more usage rather than simply as an investment alone. And to think that the main goal of crypto is to become a global currency, then it will certainly happen soon no matter what.  The process might be hard and tough for bitcoin to be fully adopted in the whole world, but i think once we got there, there will be more benefits we can gain from having crypto compared to fiat so definitely it we be all worth it. The country's economy will progress, and there will be financial independence not just for our individual's economy but rather for the whole world. But for sure, bitcoin will be more regulated by that time.

It would be good or bad depending on the way they would be handling bitcoins. More likely bad. If banks starts to offer crypto currency services like buying, selling, storing and saving, more people would trust them and start using their services. More people trusting banks to hold their coins mean more power to the banks. They will be holding most probably a lot of coins that can have impacts on the market. Again, decentralization would be lost. Why do we need banks when bitcoin was already invented so we be our own bank? Wasn't one of the main goals of bitcoin was to avoid any third party to control your finances?

Because a lot of people are still trusting banks to hold their finances. We can't ignore such fact. So even if they can be their own banks, they want someone to hold their funds. They feel security if the banks are holding their finances. There are pros and cons in this situation. But as we want more adoption, the participation of banks is necessary. But the anonymity feature will be compromised. Now, if you are a crypto user, you have the option to use banks or not. At the end of the day, you can find other options that will keep your anonymity, if you want to preserve it. It is not obligatory that you will deal with banks, unless the only option left to convert your crypto to fiat is via bank services.

Of course this is good, bitcoin is decentralized with a marketcap of more than $1 trillion and it is almost impossible for anyone to control bitcoin, especially banks have strong legalities so that if adopted it will make bitcoin users increase drastically.

"A lot" of people do, but the percentage is dropping every single year. If you check the % of how many people are using banks, it is not as much as it used to be but at the same time more people are using it. Meaning, the population is rising, so even though the % is dropping the number is increasing. 90% of 100 people would be 90, 50% of 1 million people would be 500k, as you can see the % dropped but the number increased.

It is not this drastic, but that is exactly what is going on right now in the world. I assume that we are going to be doing fine in the future with banks, they will not be gone but we are going to have a lot less people who are interested in banking as it is. This will result with banks changing some stuff and becoming something that is more robust and modern and innovative. Otherwise, the current banking system can't survive for too long.

The thing is there is nothing we can do about it, banks will eventually get into this market as banks move only because of one reason and that is money, banks are not moved by ideologies, if their owners think they can make money with bitcoin then they will adopt it and offer it to their clients and eventually offer custodial services as well.

This is nothing unexpected, or did anyone thought they would refuse to adopt bitcoin despite the profits they could get and they would watch while bitcoin takes over their traditional services? They will adopt it and will try to mold it to their needs, but as long as we can transact our coins without them being in the middle of the transactions they are not really affecting the fundamental way in which the bitcoin network works.

Sooner or later, we just have to accept the fact that bitcoin will be adopted by banks and all financial institutions. As bitcoin continues to be part of big companies, then it will also likely to happen that in the near future, banks too will also adopt bitcoin and integrate crypto related activities in their transactions. For now, its not yet happening but as bitcoin gets mainstream and continue to receive positive feedbacks, then for sure the government will allow banks to accept bitcoin or crypto in the long run. The process might be tough only in the start and will be smooth sailing as the time goes.

What remains if bitcoin gets a massive adoption including the banks is the volatility. The banks and governments can't control the volatility of bitcoin.
What do I see with bitcoin being adopted by the banks is that they can educate their clients about bitcoin and it's now up to the client if he wants to learn more about decentralization and volatility for which what bitcoin is portraying.

I will call it as good acceptance to happen since knowing we will not get restricted to buy some bitcoins by using our own debit card or credit card anytime we want although there will be possible taxes will taken out but this acceptance could strengthen the bitcoin mass adoption knowing banks have huge influence to the economy. But I doubt it will happen sooner so maybe its good to have more adoption on the merchant before we can see this to happen.

Bitcoin is growing rapidly, consumers will leave it if banks don't adopt bitcoin soon and this is what makes me believe that slowly bitcoin will become a global currency and will become the most profitable asset.

Either way, many experts agree that Bitcoin is on a path to completely knock out fiat currencies within the next 30 years. :)


Banks seem to be preparing for a “Bitcoin world” where digital currencies, whether central bank money, private market issuance, cryptocurrencies will become ubiquitous.

More adopting bitcoin certainly makes bitcoin users continue to increase, it might be too late but this is better than continuing to fight bitcoin, I believe if the influence of bitcoin gets stronger and people leave the bank so immediately adopting bitcoin is the best thing to survive.

Banks will also have a good function for bitcoin and once they start adopting bitcoin and create crypto transactions in the banks, then it will be a good assurance that bitcoin is heading to a greater function, as a global currency. With banks and governments supporting bitcoin, the users and consumers too will also feel more security and feel at ease knowing bitcoin is now legal and is accepted in all parts of the world. With this, global adoption will be much easier, regardless of the fact that bitcoin will be more regulated and lessen its decentralization factor because the government has already an access to it.

There are advantages and disadvantages, and it may undermine the decentralization of Bitcoin. Will record our privacy in the bank. The original intention of Bitcoin is different. I hope that we will pay Bitcoin freely in the future, and there is no concern about privacy leakage.

This is good in any case, since it will help increase people's confidence in cryptocurrency if the banking system uses cryptocurrency at least for converting to fiat and vice versa. This will be evidence that governments are serious about cryptocurrency and that this is not a scam or a pyramid scheme, as banks previously argued.
On the other hand, cryptocurrency needs to occupy its own niche in the global financial system and it does not make sense for it to conflict with financial structures and fiat. It will be much better if cryptocurrency and fiat work together.

Even though bitcoin is adopted by banks but I'm sure they will not be dominant so they can't control the stock and demand of bitcoin, banks certainly have limited funds and resources because bitcoin users are global so decentralization will continue to be effective without anyone being able to control it.

Of course it is a good step and in any case I do not think that it is too late because for me personally it is never too late for a step forward,
and talking about leaving the bank doesn't seem like it's going to happen,
there's no harm in adopting both and it's a good thing

Maybe it was a good step for everyone of us since it will boost the confidence of the people who are towards cryptocurrency. It was good but maybe disadvantages and advantages are always been there if changes might happen. But still, it will depend on how bank will handle bitcoin.

Yes the trust level for crypto will increase if that adoption by bank will happen, knowing skeptical people want to have or see a solid foundation which they can rely on since we can't deny that there are people tagging bitcoin as scam and the presence of the bank will really help them determine that bitcoin is really a good crypto, and maybe this adoption made by legal institution can help bitcoin market itself from people who doesn't know about it yet.

A bank is a business of trust, so it's automatic that people will trust bitcoin if banks will integrate it as part of their payment system. Actually, what the bank would do here is just act as a 3rd party to convert bitcoin to fiat and vice versa, for deposits, it's not necessary anymore as we are the bank of our own and in fact, we can do banking even without a bank.

Since the majority of what we need in this world can be bought by fiat only, there's no way bitcoin will take over and people will use bitcoin for everything. Bank will produce money and people will use bank even bitcoin will become more popular, so it's fiat (bank), then bitcoin as an alternative.

here there is a level of trust that is the basis for the development of bitcoin. it will have a positive impact if banks can accept bitcoin as a third party, that means we don't need an exchange to convert it to fiat. but the problem here is of course we will see the government's new policy to allow banks to access bitcoin, and of course this will have a big impact on the price of btc if the government does it

Even we can be our own bank, most part of the people in tier 2 and tier 3 countries are not able to make use of bitcoins like they cannot buy and sell cryptocurrencies in secured environment which is the reason when bank will be adopting bitcoin might be helping them even banks are not necessarily needed. As of now we do not need to go for the discussion of bank adoption of bitcoin is needed or not but it is already started happening in some part of world hence we need to look for what are the advantages and disadvantages if that will be happening in more intensive.

After getting into to a payment wallet in your mobile phone then you will not be bothering anymore it will be a fiat or bitcoin when you are able to spend bitcoin everywhere (same applies to merchants). This way I am not ready to agree with you that most of the things can be bought only with fiats. In near future, we can buy anything for bitcoin payment in most part of this world.

I have always had this thought on what would happen when all these banks  have finished taking control over most of the crypto currency exchanges. The government are trying as much as they could to have  a strong grasp on the cryptocurrency market: they want to be able to control the market and make the decisions on what happens and what doesn’t and we have also seen the news where they talked about How the government is going to start regulating the market very soon by making sure that every transaction is registered with KYC and they are able to know who is receiving the cryptocurrency and who is sending it out.

It is good for banks as they can benefit from it. It could also help some people to use their bank to receive the money when you decided to sell your crypto to fiat. In my country, there is an exchange wallet where it is regulated by the bank and so far I don't have any problem with it. I was able to received bitcoin, sell and buy then I can withdraw it on the ATM or could use it to pay electricity bill, water bill using the same exchange wallet.

Banks always on the good side, adopting crypto will bring them money aside from regulations that they needed
to comply, banks also understand the volatility nature of this market, they can adjust and makes that they have
the right system to avoid losses when big dumped takes place, the problem is the sense of decentralization will
be voided, banks works with the government and in order to use the services of the bank you also need to comply.

To adopt crypto is what they suppose to do now since this could really have a positive comeback on their side knowing that the demand is high but because of the risk accompanied to this, it made some banks owners become doubtful and unwilling to offer such services. I know their worries about losing but I guess they should have to adopt the new development or else they will be left behind and still it was a losing end on their side.

Maybe, this could change their insights if they know that the government is supporting crypto and much more if they had announced its legality.

actually, in fact a bitcoin to network is decentralized and it will remain a trustworthy system so the mediator are not required for a peer to peer transfer to two addresses for the bitcoin blockchain, therefor the Bank’s network is not allowed to provide for crypto  currency.

Even so, the result will be the same as it is now.
Even if adoption is possible, it doesn't mean they can create a monopoly on this.
they can only slightly take advantage of taxes and others but for transactions it will still be very difficult to control because crypto will still be in a decentralized system so it will be difficult to do that.

To my mind the cons of adoption outweighs the pros of bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. When something gets typical and usual, it loses the spell. Personally, I don't want bitcoin that will be massively used but will be regulated like a fiat. Then, what will be the difference between bitcoin and fiat? Only the blockchain system? I think bitcoin lost it's value as a currency, it turned into an investment option. Almost everyone that I know looks bitcoin as an investment option nowadays while at past I have seen some people who were enthusiastic on it as an innovative payment method but now, I really haven't heard from anyone new into it saying that bitcoin is innovative payment method. It's sad how crypto world become a puppet of some people.
Rich businessmen kill everything good for their wealth and fame!

I agree, and this where i think we have moved away from the original concept of using bitcoin an crypto in the first place, on the one hand bitcoin becomes widely accepted and approved by governments and banks, but on the other hand we lose the privacy and anonymity that came with it that it was built upon, decentralized crypto is the future and they know that and since they can't control the currency they can control how is using it, meaning that all your transactions will be know so there will be no difference between using it and the fiat, i personally won't use any crypto bank related stuff because i care about the privacy part of the crypto.

Well, to be honest, it's either we lose the specialty of Bitcoin which is being decentralized or we just let Bitcoin on the ground, I think banks and governments adopting Bitcoin is a good idea, though sacrifices will have to be made, of course we won't have that much anonymity anymore but privacy definitely comes in firs.

When banks adopt Bitcoin it is a sign for crypto investors that crypto is valuable and can be trusted. Bank crypto services enable more people to invest as this way more people become aware of crypto industry and banks help newbies to start their journey to the crypto world. You are right that if big companies have a lot of Bitcoin on their accounts, Bitcoin loses its decentralisation and it is sad. :(

The more companies and even banks that adopt bitcoin then this will make the use of bitcoins will continue to increase, banks certainly have a lot of considerations to make bitcoin as their product and this of course is good for making bitcoin last longer and of course more useful for all humans .

I am personally looking forward for a worldwide adoption of bitcoin and this includes the adoption of banks in bitcoin or cryptocurrency because for sure this will be a great development to the crypto platform. However, even though currently bitcoin adoption is not practice in a bank transaction activity here in my country but people still uses their bank accounts in their crypto transactions with the use of a P2P process, if ever bitcoin adoption by banks will be practiced this will become a more convenient way to every crypto users.

yeah, regulation will make thing struggle more and more. and the follower will take many effect, can be positive, or negative. and people always have different perspective about regulation.
bank have own weapon and reason, why they take this way, when some people have bad rate at this situation.
im not sure but hoping if this make good move, so people know more about crypto. and regulation always walk behind the scene

Is that a form of your concern about bitcoin adoption?

Bitcoin is a currency, so adoption should increase. I may agree with bank and government adopting bitcoin and regulating it because one of the successes of bitcoin as a currency is its acceptance by government regulation.

I don't think government regulation of bitcoin will eliminate anonymity and decentralization on the ground that bitcoin users can still make transaction anytime and anywhere without having to get government approval. Transaction are made between users, so even though bitcoin will be regulated by the government, users can still do so anonymously.

As long as this kind of adoption would be beneficial to Bitcoin especially to users, I think it wouldn't have too much bad effect. We all know that for us to encash or change crypto into fiat, we will still be needing banks so I still see it as a good thing. We need more adoptions so we shouldn't fear if banks would also adopt crypto.

There is no doubt that the influence of bitcoin will be stronger in the future, this can be seen from the many global companies that invest in bitcoin, and now there are bank plans to adopt bitcoin, this is a good step so that banks do not lose their customers because cryptocurrencies are increasingly making people move money from banks to cryptocurrencies especially bitcoin.

Bitcoin can be considered already a bank of our own and there is really no need for the presence of banks.  But if we want to make it more legal, then its also a good thing that banks will come to adopt bitcoin and all its crypto related services to make it easier for all bitcoin enthusiasts and to make it more legal to the eyes of the people since having banks means its always backed by government. And its a good start too for all people who wants more options than fiat so they can start using bitcoin without much pressure that the government might strictly prohibit it from using. In this way, it makes more easier and faster for global adoption to be realized.

Very well said , then because of that we have a time to share legally the importance of using cryptocurrencies to other. Banks adoption in cryptocurrencies is important because its make cryptocurrencies popularized to the people in and also they trust this too without afraid to invest just because of the banks.Lastly its makes us easily to use because of this like as your said.

We dont actually need banks because with crypto then we are ourselves to be considered as banks and its the primary reason on why its been existing which is totally opposing centralization.
Although acceptance or considerations out of these heavily regulated institution would be a plus but expect that they will still be abiding centralization which you could say that it is likely to
follow up that system which you might find it not to really be that appealing with your eyes and would soon realize that it isnt something right like this.
We've seen banks had already accepting CBDC's instead.

People do not understand the word "alternative". Like for example you could have crypto and do as anonymously as you could ever want to and that would be fine, nobody really needs to actually do something that is illegal but you could stay as secret as you want with certain coins and you could just not deposit fiat into crypto and earn it instead, and you would spend it instead of withdrawing and won't have to give anyone your KYC or any information. Meanwhile it would be regulated and you would have something that people could look for from the government.

Governments could do all the regulations and laws about it and that would be fine and there is really nothing that you should be worried about since it is a preference and you won't have to do it, since you are not forced then you would be fine about it and we all could pick whatever we want.

For me, I would say that banks don’t really have any business with cryptocurrency. There is a reason why we have exchanges, and it's for a purpose like this and not a work that is meant for banks to carry out. So, you saying that banks should take over a job like this Is not really going to work, ‘cause they’re only meant to focus on Fiat.

At the same time in my opinion, bank's adoption of cryptocurrencies must be helping people who are unable to find good exchange services for buying and selling cryptocurrencies.

Having banks to adopt bitcoin doesnt mean that it is legal or backed by the goverment or all that kind of stuff. Its simply that banks are providing 'services' for their customer to reap some amount for those 'services'.


Pretty sure that it doesnt work this way because banks are probably only going to offer the option to buy bitcoin through banks and keeping it safe for the customer. Having the ability to use crypto for the daily transaction will depend on the regulation of each country though. So basically banks only want a piece of the pie by 'adopting' crypto

Another thing I would like to say is that a bank is centralized, and the idea of having Bitcoin is for decentralization. So, why would a centralized platform be allowed to handle cryptocurrency? And it’s not just centralized,it is also a platform that is controlled by the government. Having the banks be in charge of cryptocurrency means that the government is now in control of the cryptocurrency community and market. So, you see that there is not really a good idea. It’s best that we leave this for cryptocurrency exchanges and not for banks.

It will void the anonymity but not the decentralization that is the good thing so as far as the money spend for the legal transactions it is okay and this is the only way to convince the people that bitcoin is not scam anymore.

And also it will change the current banking system, probably the central bank will lose their printing power so the inflation will be no more which has its own good and bad things but still we have to look at the evolution of CBDC!

“If you can’t beat them, join them.”

It’s pretty simple. Banks can’t beat or take down crypto for good. No matter if they choose to ban it, Bitcoin and the crypto world won’t stop and continues to dominate. Not even China’s intense crackdown could stop Bitcoin from rising.

Most banks are still anti-crypto thinking that it’s a threat to their financial system. However, they will be the ones who are going to be left behind later on. They have no choice but to embrace cryptocurrency later on. Massive adoption won’t stop.

Are we 100% sure that Banks can't crypto if they wanted to? I mean there is no person behind crypto, it is a decentralized project that nobody could lead. Whereas banks do have board of directors, CEO's and many other people at the top. What I fear is that if Banks ever wanted to "end" crypto, they could simply just bribe their government and they could do this globally as well, China is already against it and if you do it in major European nations and USA and Canada, then you are nearly finishing.

Imagine a world where 10 of the biggest European nations + USA/Canada all bans usage of crypto, even ownership of it, how much the price would fall? It would fall to very low prices and it would be the end of it. Sure it would still survive a in a vacuum but it won't be as big as it is right now. Only reason why Banks are interested in crypto is that they could actually profit from it. So, they do not see it as a thing that they need to be against, they see it as a thing that they could profit from.

That's actually the reason why some banks are now starting to accept crypto in their system because they are seeing that with the current rate of adoption, some of their clients will really go into crypto. So instead of losing them, why not offer some crypto services in their system? Though it is against some of their principles, they need to adapt the emerging trend in the market, else they will be left behind. And as they can see, even a giant country like China can't topple the crypto market, bitcoin in particular.

Bitcoin adoption by banks have both good and bad. It all depends on the way it's been considered.

Good

• It helps with reaching the people with ease through the service platform that is already in a well established state
• Even the users who aren't technically skilled to own bitcoin can have it in their wallet
• Generates trust among the common people who find bitcoin something new

Bad

• It loss its importance, because it is innovated to give financial freedom to the people
• Security issues, even a small mistake will make the user loss a big amount
• The network might turn to be centralized

There's a bit good, but overall I think it's bad for the network. It is good in a way that if bitcoin adopts bank it will reach people with ease. Bad, because it comes with a cost. It will also loss it's importance because it is innovated to give financial freedom to the people. And, for the security issues, even a small mistakes will make the user loss a big amount of their money. Bitcoin can be considered already a bank of our own and there is really no need for the presence of banks.

Of course this is a good thing, the more bitcoin adoption it will make the bitcoin circulation more active and this will make demand high and prices rise, banks certainly have a lot of strict regulations if they accept bitcoin then this will make both of them get big profits.

Good for most people but for those maximalist, they would still prefer anonymity offered by some dex or cex compared to this. Bitcoin adoption by banks could potentially be a stepping stone to further enhancements of banking industry. The integration of cryptocurrency to a bank means having more option than the typical fiat only transaction. These days where blockchain technology is far more advance than typical fiat system, many people would surely have a transaction in blockchain. But nonetheless, this move contradicts the vision of Satoshi of having a permission less, decentralised digital currency that needed no intermediary or central bank.

If bitcoin aims to be globally accepted in the near future, then it will surely pay the cost. No thing can be globally accepted that has not been legalized and adopted by banks and other legal institutions. For me, bitcoin adoption by banks may create more opportunities for bitcoin to be more utilized as a currency rather than being a sole investment. People will have more chances to use bitcoin more than fiat, and since bitcoin has its blockchain technology that goes along with this digital age, then most of the people will go for it particularly for those who are tech savvy. Although it may lessen its being decentralized, but i think it will also widen its scope knowing its already backed by banks.

Until now the majority of people still trust banks more than Bitcoin, so if it's true that eventually banks adopt Bitcoin, this could trigger a massive
adoption of Bitcoin. If banks could accept Bitcoin, moreover, people who trust banks will definitely adopt Bitcoin too. So I think Bitcoin adoption
by banks is a good thing and is expected by the crypto enthusiast. But as you explained, banks have a lot of rules, so it will definitely not be easy
for banks to adopt Bitcoin. Even if the bank decides to adopt Bitcoin it is unlikely to happen in the near future, so we must be patient waiting for it
to become a reality.

Precise line for such condition because even if they do tend to fight nor trying to get rid of crypto but still they would really failed on that part and its been proven out yet we've seen on how far this crypto market had able to reach out.

Bitcoin adoption is all we need and if banks would tend out to join the bandwagon and end up on having an option towards their services that do attached with crypto then its a good option but actually we dont really need it.

At least we do have some choices whether we do like to touch up with those centralized services or would completely go to the opposite side.

Of course, we have to look at this from two sides.
on the one hand it is quite good to see bitcoin will be adopted by banks because with this the main purpose of bitcoin, which is indeed a legal tender, is gradually experiencing a bright spot and this will add something good to bitcoin itself.
on the other hand this will be something that is not good for bitcoin holders, because even though bitcoin will not be able to be regulated with a system that is indeed decentralized, but on the other hand the government and banks will definitely use other ways to control this.

but indeed there are several points of view about this depending on whether we think this is good or not.
I myself feel it will be very worth it for them to be adopted, especially by the government or banks because this will indirectly push bitcoin to a clearer direction in regulation.

The adoption of Bitcoin by banks means the legalization of bitcoin, and more people will trust and use it.

But Bitcoin's supervision by banks will reduce its decentralization.

I don't know exactly what bank are trying to adopt from bitcoin and how they will do it. Last February I read on the news that US bank also wanted to do something about bitcoin regardless of whether it was opening an exchange service or getting involved in bitcoin investing. If bank are interested in opening exchange service then they will only add to the list of centralized exchange for bitcoin users where KYC will be the main thing as a condition to fulfill their service. It doesn't matter if that's what they want because so far we have many centralized exchange that work with the government, both international and local exchange.

That's not a bad thing to hear because I don't think bitcoin decentralization will go away just because the government wants to maximize the opportunities for profit. We can choose a centralized or decentralized exchange to trade on, so it's not a big deal for me. Something positive that will probably increase is people's awareness about bitcoin and investment whether they agree with centralization or not. We still have a choice which one is best for us.


The same applies to other exchange that have partnered with the government so you have to go through KYC to use this service. If surveillance is a major issue then you can also use P2P service which will keep your transaction anonymous. Governments only have control, but they cannot prohibit users from remaining anonymous with their bitcoin.

Banks will not use Bitcoin everywhere. Banks represent the government. The government may issue its own digital currency, but it will not circulate Bitcoin as its main currency, and Bitcoin is decentralized. Supervision is not in line with Bitcoin's original intention. Bitcoin's anonymity will also be broken.

The easiest thing is to make bitcoin a product of banks, this will make customers able to deposit and withdraw instantly, banks should immediately adopt bitcoin because bitcoin users are increasing, if not adopting bitcoin it will make customers continue to decrease because they prefer to save their money to bitcoins.

Bank will exist and will not be replaced by cryptocurrency. Facebook and Twitter have the same social interaction but the feature and environment are two different things and the two are operating independently. The same goes for cryptocurrency and banks, in fact to enter crypto you will have fund your bank account before you can be able to purchase any of your desire coins.

Banks is an independent body though some believe they rely on central bank and government while Bitcoin depends on its people.

so you mean the bank must accept a deposit in the form of bitcoin? I think most people would prefer to keep bitcoins in their own wallets. if banks don't adopt bitcoin customers will continue to decrease, I think this is a bit of an overstatement. I think customers will keep coming to the bank because they want to keep their fiat money safe, those who store money in bitcoin of course their goal is to invest not keep money safe.

If your bank provides security guarantees and good interest rates for the bitcoins you deposit, why not? But this is not the main problem. If someone or several people agree in this way, why not because I think it will be mutually beneficial for both.

Bitcoin users basically want to manage their money without a central authority where they can make transaction anywhere and anytime they want without being controlled by the authorities. If a bank offers such a service then obviously they have created a centralized service for bitcoin users but not for bitcoin as they don't have the ability to regulate bitcoin but can only do it for users.

I understand your point and I think that if a bank adopted BTC it would do so to never lose, that is, they would seek the option of not losing when BTC grows, what it could do is that the debt for some increases, because for a bank it would be easy to make or design a credit policy where loans based on btc are made, and an amount is established in BTC or BTC terms, where they place if the price of BTC falls, the same amount of BTC already established is still paid, and If it increases in price based on the amount of dollars to pay at the time of paying the debt either each month including interest, this would clearly bring much more debt for the client or people, because a bank would never lose, then it would be to give much more power to the banks would be a double-edged sword.

Perhaps another mode of payment could be used? I agree that it would be extremely difficult if they only accepted bitcoin deposits because the majority of us use fiat currency. Also, I believe that I would prefer to keep my bitcoin in my own wallet rather than in a bank or with anyone else for the sake of security and also to reduce the amount of hassle in the event that the price of bitcoin increases. For example, imagine that a large number of people deposit a large amount of bitcoin in a bank and then the price of bitcoin increases by a factor of ten. I believe that is the time when a large number of people will be queuing up at banks in order to obtain their bitcoins.

Good in general at the moment. I think it becomes bad when they overstep their bounds and try to create the system now but only with crypto. That would be antithetical to the reason why we got started here and would be supremely sad to see that happen.

If banks will provide any services in cryptocurrency, this is good in any case. A lot of people still don’t know much about cryptocurrencies and therefore, for them to have more trust in cryptocurrencies, it will be better if they see the same trust in it from government agencies. But banks won't get too carried away with cryptocurrencies. Don't even hope for it. But on the other hand, if they provide services in cryptocurrency, this will not have a significant regulatory impact on the cryptocurrency.

of course the bank will get an order from the government to include bitcoin in bank products. and this kind of thing will be ambiguous because it has not yet had a clear status by the government. unless there are separate regulations that provide space for bitcoin in the bank, of course it will have a greater advantage to be known by the public in order to face the future

It is a way they'll take their chance to adopt the change and new technology otherwise they got left behind from the development. We are seeing the growing number of crypto users and establishments accepting this and that supposed they need to catch up as these people will surely use and need their services. Only the thing they need is to ask for support from the government. May regulations applied on their own as to prevent illegal activities but I think this would have a positive output.

Government would be always have the final say when it comes to regulations and every sector and institution enclosed to it would really be following on whats mandated.

They wouldnt really be having other options but to deal and abide with those rules or else then you would really be finding some problems.Adoption by banks?
I cant say much since they would really be still following government rules and regulations which would be still remains as centralized as it can.

In my opinion, blockchain will be able to provide good benefits if banks start to adopt it in their system, but the absence of regulation from the government certainly prevents the central bank from implementing it today, sooner or later of course the government will realize how the benefits of cryptocurrencies will make every transaction easier.
However, regardless of the problem between crypto and the government, whatever the reason the government cannot stop progress in financial technology, so that in the end the government cannot ignore the development of crypto or digital currency in every modern society's life.

I don't know when this arguments will ever end. I hate banks for there trustworthiness, they mismanaged documents that are supposed to be confidentials, more reasons why I don't l like kyc.
Banks aid deposit of fiats and enable more users expose to cryptocurrency but there are some people who will never buy the idea of banks and their transaction.
Personally, I do banks when necessary, not really with cryptocurrency especially fiat to fiat.

On a more serious note, how will crypto gain mass adoption without the inclusion of these systems? There is not much choice left for crypto if adoption must be achieved, I don't think it is possible to boycott all the regulatory bodies to gain adoption, however distasteful it appears, it is inevitable, otherwise crypto won't go very far in the quest for real adoption.
They are like the necessary evil which we must embrace to reach that goal.

Surely the Bank will not be careless to enter Bitcoin into the Bank,
to be honest if we look at the current time it seems quite impossible for banks to adopt Bitcoin,
The most important thing is to just follow the progress and see what happens next

Sacrificing a little bit of decentralization for the sake of adoption is, I think does not hurt that much and it can be beneficial for cryptocurrencies or for us. More adoption in cryptos means more price increase and it will now be easier for us to buy and cash out the profits that we get from cryptos by using a bank.

Let's admit it that there are lots of people in here that still uses a bank despite of getting involved in cryptos. In the end it's still impossible for decentralized cryptos to be totally controlled by banks so there is nothing to worry about. Banks will try their best to stay on the top of the competition over cryptocurrencies.

This is the maximum place that I can see crypto in. It will be amazing when it actually happens. If I can hold many cryptos in my bank account just like I do with fiat, then we are going to actually have a great increase in crypto adoption. I can't imagine living with purely crypto without ever touching fiat.

I mean sure there will be some cash stuff left, like paying a taxi is still mainly cash, but at the end of the day we are talking about something profitable in 1000x amounts, seriously and I am not even joking. Not right away of course, but it will get there one day after we can use it in banks because people would not have a need to sell anymore, only traders would sell.

For their bitcoins people also need the safety. They will need banks to keep safe their bitcoin too because many people often lose their bitcoin because of issues of hacking. If banks will involve then they will have the support of government and their security will be high from hackers. They may also guarantee the bitcoin of their customers just like binance is doing, like when a small exchange is hacked then all customers lose their coins while when binance got hack they pay the customers from their own wallet.

We as Bitcoin supporters really expect banks to adopt Bitcoin, but as we know banks need government approval to be able to adopt Bitcoin.
The problem is the government considers Bitcoin a threat to the existence of fiat, and also Bitcoin is considered by the government to be widely
used for illegal activities. Even though the government's accusations are not true, and to me that's just an excuse the government uses to limit
the use of Bitcoin. So it's impossible for banks to adopt Bitcoin right now. But don't know what will happen in the future, there is a chance
the government will change its mind and allow banks to adopt Bitcoin. Although the possibility is very small to be true.

Banks do not expect decentralization in their financial systems, but we can expect them to provide services that support users to buy (deposit) and withdraw profits from trading to fiat through their services. So don't expect them to adopt bitcoin.

As we know, banks were established with the government's permission to carry out their services to assist the community in meeting their daily financial needs. It is natural for them to comply with government regulations if they want to continue to run their services. But if the government has given the green light for bitcoin, then we can expect something good for bitcoin adoption in the future.

The only hope to get the government to change the regulation is for western countries to start adopting bitcoin as a legal tender or currency. But as long as western countries don't do it, then there is little possibility of legality.