is bitcoin getting rebranded as the blockchain?

[futureofbitcoin]

Read the OP's posts, guys.

No, bitcoin is not going to get rebranded into blockchain packets or whatever. The simple reason is, which sounds more catchy?

The thing is, the first delusional ultra libertarians who worship bitcoin for decentralization of currency or whatever is only a very very small percentage of the world. The rest of the world doesn't care about that.

What the rest of the world is looking for, is REAL technology that can improve lives, and that is enabled by the blockchain. So they talk about that. In the end though, a bitcoin is still a bitcoin, the name won't be changed.

[1715064646]

1715064646

[1715064646]

1715064646

[mrhelpful]

they want to adapt the blockchain yet, how are they going to use it? with what coin?

unless they assume theres other ways of using it. I doubt they would want to re-create the name already have so many people looking on google, itd be a dumb move.

the keyword bitcoin is high search volume compared to blockchain.

[pleaseexplain]

yes I think it is but i think that is "natural' in the sense that as time goes on for various reasons things get name changes - people used to say they were about to go on the internet. now they would say I am about to go on facebook or google or whatever. A use is often a good descripton for something.

i think it can only be positive for bitcoin especially since it has had a chequered past in some eyes.

also people do not care about what TV remote they use they just want access to the TV image. So they will not care if bitcoin is doing the work of the remote in things using the blockchain.

agree with others that bitcoin is what will be used - it works well doing what it does so there is no need for people to start up their own coins/tokens. that being said some people will - in part to scam others or because they think they are a "big' enough corporation they could sustain their own token

[coinableS]

So, to be abundantly and perhaps pedantically clear, Nasdaq’s platform will trade shares by trading bitcoins. This is not blockchain-technology standing alone, this is Bitcoin being used by Wall Street. It is technically impossible to use Bitcoin’s blockchain without holding and transacting in bitcoins. In this case, Nasdaq is using Bitcoin’s blockchain.”

What is the minimum size transaction accepted by the network right now? 5,430 satoshi or something?

Let's say when wallstreet starts trading using bitcoin they name 5,430 satoshi a blockchain packet or a blockchain share?
I'm saying could it be possible that wallstreet might do this so they can use and transact in bitcoin without having to say the word bitcoin? There's a reason you see these articles where they only mention blockchain technology and not bitcoin, and I'm assuming that's due to the negative association that comes with the word bitcoin.

[photon_coin]

no......

[Paashaas]

How many Satoshi's will Nasdaq need for (all) there stocks?

If they move a share with a cost of 1 Satoshi, they will have enough with 1000 coins 

[neurotypical]

Once their blockchain experiments fail they will understand why Bitcoin is the next huge thing and work under the Bitcoin wings and not against it. Lol at not using the most powerful computing network in the motherfucking planet for free! ridiculous.

[necrita]

I don't see any point for a corporation to require a blockchain. They can use excel or some database if they need a triple entry accounting system.
The whole use case of a blockchain is to build a system based on decentralized trust.

[gentlemand]

Once national currencies have incorporated blockchain tech into their fiat system (even if only nominally) then they can criminalize bitcoin and all non-governmental alctoins as illegal currencies. Of course the corporations don't have any real use for blockchain technology, which is fundamentally contrary to their entire system. That's why they're scared shitless of it and want to squash it.

Is there a single case where a technological happening was completely outlawed after it had been initially welcomed/ tolerated? I can't really think of one.

It's no different in essence than Tor or Bittorrent and they're both perfectly legal.

It's far more acceptable and straightforward to just make it irrelevant by offering more tempting alternatives that are easier to use. The population will go where the gains and convenience reside.

[pumawolf]

blockchain tech will be the king, and btc is the prince.  overall it will be a game of what else the blockchain can do. btc got the currency part covered.  whats next for the sub category of the blockchain. voting maybe?

[Shiver]

Block Chain Technology:  BCT rather than BTC?

[coinableS]

Block Chain Technology:  BCT rather than BTC?

Or BTC (blockchain transfer credits)

[necrita]

Whenever you hear the corporate media talking about the "blockchain," that is not about re-branding bitcoin. Quite the contrary it's about displacing bitcoin and indroducing their own corporate blockchains. The banks and corporations are all investing in "blockchain research," it's about co-opting blockchain technology for their own centralized purposes. Once they've set up their own blockchains that's when they'll order their lackey governments to start moving against bitcoins and criminalizing it just like they did with drugs. Then shit will get real 

The blockchain is expensive.  It is expensive to store, expensive to process, and expensive to secure.   That cost is the cost of decentralization.   It is the cost of a payment system with no trusted authority.  The 100x the annual bitcoin transaction volume could be processed by a single server with central authority.  There is absolutely no point to a centralized, decentralized currency.   You take all of the cost of decentralization and pile it on top of all the problems of a centralized currency. 

[gentlemand]

I can think of one: BITCOIN

You got me there, but I was referring more to places like the US and Europe.

There are no shortage of odd little regimes that have probably outlawed stuff we use every single day elsewhere without blinking. I could probably find someone somewhere who outlawed having a nice shit.

[jaredboice]

Corporate Blockchains can only survive if they can convince everyone that the coin supporting it will continue to have value.  It needs a currency backing it in order for people to maintain the blockchain. If corporations try to proprietize and centralize their blockchain, it will eventually fail.  Bitcoin has leaps and bounds ahead of every altcoin blockchain in that regard.  It would take a massive change to disrupt that and all the venture capital currently supporting Bitcoin

[gentlemand]

bitcoin could be a yellow-star sort of thing that they're leaving out there to identify everyone they want to herd into those FEMA camps they've already built across the country..

Riiight.

[BillyBobZorton]

Trying to outlaw Bitcoin will only bring more attention towards it, thats why intelligent countries are threatening it as neutral foreign currency and stupid low IQ countries are being negative towards it.

[thejaytiesto]

I think branding Bitcoin as "The Blockchain" is actually a positive move for the short term.

As an example, my company, Vector Interactive Group (www.vectorinteractive.net), just recently produced the following 4k video for iNation (please don't troll our client!). 

https://youtu.be/EG5iEhyNuq0

I chose to use the Bitcoin symbol in the video while using the term, "Blockchain" in the voice over.  My reasoning?  When trying to reach a mainstream audience, one has to remember that they have been bombarded with negative sentiment (and sometimes flat out lies) about Bitcoin in the mainstream press.  "Bitcoin has crashed," "Bitcoin is used by Criminals to Buy Drugs," "The CEO of Bitcoin died," "Bitcoin is a ponzi scheme," etc.  In effect, these people have been primed to ignore Bitcoin. So if you come out and say, "Bitcoin," your promotion will probably fall on deaf ears.

So in order to turn the tables around you have to be sneaky and give them a reason to do their own research.  Self discovery is very powerful and can undo the negative sentiment.  If they already understand the power of the blockchain, chances are they already did their research and understand the merits of Bitcoin. If they don't know what the blockchain is, they will be primed to do their own research and inevitably reach the same conclusions as those in the Bitcoin community. 

The more people start trusting the blockchain, the more people will start trusting bitcoin.

That's my two bits

That's a nice train of thought, but the mass is usually too sheep type to do their own research, otherwise they would have found out that Bitcoin is amazing and they would all be posting here. Let's keep positive tho, hopefully it eventually happens one way or another.

[manselr]

At the end of the day it doesn't matter. Take for example, the NASDAQ news. This does not mean that NASDAQ will use Bitcoins as a currency but to dip into its technology the important contribution of the currency to the world of finance is recognized. This is the first time in history in which a trading system does not require a third party intermediary. While this may not seem new, within the banking sector is revolutionary.
What this means is, even if you don't mention Bitcoin, it's Bitcoin.

[Adrian-x]

Lately I've been noticing that people love the blockchain but not bitcoin. Nasdaq wants to use the bitcoin blockchain but not bitcoin... will the term bitcoin get left behind? Will the new term for unspent outputs on the blockchain be renamed to bllockchain shares or blockchain packets? If so domain speculators should get. Buyblockchains.com or similar

its quite simple really,
Either Bitcoin adapts to the financial interest of the world, (the economic majority)
or the financial interests (the economic majority) of the world adapt to Bitcoin.

I am invested in the latter. if you want Bitcoin you need to put value into the system, or F*%# off. Developers working to change the incentive structure in the Bitcoin prototypical that secures Bitcoin are opening up a gateway for "block chain technology  " and providing ways to leverage Bitcoin - move transactions off the dominant value ledger, and create new value ledgers, call them sidechains or whatever. They will leave the incentive structure that protects and makes Bitcoin vulnerable, the blockchain technology that will grow the biggest value network is the one chosen by the economic majority.  The risk is the economic majority don't value the fundamental economic principals embodied in Bitcoin, they prefer the Keynesian view of exponential growth they may choose something more favorable a blockchain tecnology that fits their own view than choose Bitcoin given an option.
  

Bitcoin is the Blockchain, bitcoins are the unit we use to describe the % of the blockchain we command,  if we can keep Bitcoin, prevent it from being co opted and changed, the economic majority will have no choice but to move into Bitcoin. in my view, this down trend, is a strong reflection that the certainty of that happening is diminishing.  


That said, Bitcoin needs to scale, and the scaling mechanics need to remain true to the incentives in the core protocol otherwise it will be co opted much like our existing financial system. Many of the treats presented are FUD, centralization for eg. promotes FUD, we want specialization, but we don't want 1 specialist - the FED is 1 specialist with few interest groups, Bitcoin by comparison is 100% decentralized, the fact that nodes may be shrinking in quantity is more a reflection on specialization than it is a move towards a centralization or a 1 specialist type system. but we still need to be mindful, because it's a real threat.  

The biggest threat to Bitcoin in my mind are the developers, they are the keepers of the protocol, they are programers developers, they make engineering decisions to solve practical real world problems in Bitcoin. the caveat is most of them are young, and don't have 30 or 40 years of economic experiences to draw on, so some value the clever and innovative technological engendering above the economic engineering that makes Bitcoin Bitcoin. to participate you need to understand both the economics and the engendering, unfortunately only one person has proved himself thus far, and his name was Satoshi. There are lots of more competent developers involved, but not all of them have convinced me they are competent macro economic Actuaries.