Banks were supposed to be frightened of Bitcoin

[RodeoX]

My theory is that banks are really afraid of not getting all the money they could from us. Now that they see why bitcoin is not going away and can't be killed, it is logical to try joining in and trying to leverage their money in the bitcoin economy. It makes sense too me.  

[Falconer]

If banks really adopt blockchain technology in their system, their customers (non bitcoin user) would think that the technology is really helpful for them. Well actually I'm not really sure if the blockchain technology can working for bank or not, but seems it will attract people and they will think that bitcoin adopt blockchain from banks, since they have no idea about bitcoin before.

[Slark]

Banks are not affraid of bitcoin; instead they are trying to understand it and very soon will start to integrate it.

They are trying to investigate this because it is the future. Everyone knows that, if banks miss this moment of time and cling to old ways of processing money they could be in serious problems in the future.
Similar to Nokia fail - Nokia - the biggest cellphone manufacturer in the world missed smartphone revolution - and now they are shadow of company and exists only because Microsoft bought them.
If banks miss blockchain revolution tomorrow they could be gone.

[thebenjamincode]

That is exactly what banks are supposed to do, they need innovations as the population who used bitcoins grow. Usually most banks, Big Banks specifically, fear bitcoins because for them it's a business. Banks needs people money to run, but when people decided to used their money from their bank savings to buy or invest in bitcoin the bank has less money on it's books. In this way they fear bitcoin and sooner or later they will need to have an innovation to compensate.

[commandrix]

Maybe we're starting to see a case of, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." The banks that find Blockchain tech useful will adopt it. But keep using cryptocurrencies that have nothing to do with banks, guys, because that's how we're really going to push it through their dense heads that now the concept that we don't really need banks or governments to have a viable medium of exchange has gone digital.

[spazzdla]

They are scared hence the "blockchain good ,bitcoin bad" nonsense they are trying to spin.

[pereira4]

If banks really adopt blockchain technology in their system, their customers (non bitcoin user) would think that the technology is really helpful for them. Well actually I'm not really sure if the blockchain technology can working for bank or not, but seems it will attract people and they will think that bitcoin adopt blockchain from banks, since they have no idea about bitcoin before.

Yes the technology can work in a centralized way where only banks have a say on what goes there and who sees the ledger, but once people realize using the real thing (Bitcoin) is better, they will disregard those "bank blockchains" and use the global Bitcoin blockchain which is infinite times more secure.

[Snorek]

If banks really adopt blockchain technology in their system, their customers (non bitcoin user) would think that the technology is really helpful for them. Well actually I'm not really sure if the blockchain technology can working for bank or not, but seems it will attract people and they will think that bitcoin adopt blockchain from banks, since they have no idea about bitcoin before.

Yes the technology can work in a centralized way where only banks have a say on what goes there and who sees the ledger, but once people realize using the real thing (Bitcoin) is better, they will disregard those "bank blockchains" and use the global Bitcoin blockchain which is infinite times more secure.

Using 'real thing' has its problems, there is possibility of corruption or block alternation in open network. Also possibility of double spending because confirmation times can't be lowered due to security problems.
In closed environment these problems will be gone and system could be working even faster.

[harrymmmm]

If banks really adopt blockchain technology in their system, their customers (non bitcoin user) would think that the technology is really helpful for them. Well actually I'm not really sure if the blockchain technology can working for bank or not, but seems it will attract people and they will think that bitcoin adopt blockchain from banks, since they have no idea about bitcoin before.

Yes the technology can work in a centralized way where only banks have a say on what goes there and who sees the ledger, but once people realize using the real thing (Bitcoin) is better, they will disregard those "bank blockchains" and use the global Bitcoin blockchain which is infinite times more secure.

Using 'real thing' has its problems, there is possibility of corruption or block alternation in open network. Also possibility of double spending because confirmation times can't be lowered due to security problems.
In closed environment these problems will be gone and system could be working even faster.

Wut?
I guess my only response to that is 'Hero member + signature' != 'Hero member'.

[neurotypical]

If banks really adopt blockchain technology in their system, their customers (non bitcoin user) would think that the technology is really helpful for them. Well actually I'm not really sure if the blockchain technology can working for bank or not, but seems it will attract people and they will think that bitcoin adopt blockchain from banks, since they have no idea about bitcoin before.

Yes the technology can work in a centralized way where only banks have a say on what goes there and who sees the ledger, but once people realize using the real thing (Bitcoin) is better, they will disregard those "bank blockchains" and use the global Bitcoin blockchain which is infinite times more secure.

Using 'real thing' has its problems, there is possibility of corruption or block alternation in open network. Also possibility of double spending because confirmation times can't be lowered due to security problems.
In closed environment these problems will be gone and system could be working even faster.

Lol, what do you mean with corruption? How many transactions have been corrupted since Bitcoin started? I can't think of a single transaction that ever got stuck corrupted in the blockchain. Eventually all transactions end up being confirmed and processed, they have to by design... double spending hasn't been a problem for ages.

[Kakmakr]

This is what I think... When Satoshi wrote that six years ago, he never thought that he would need to hide, and basically abandon his creation. Now his Blockchain technology is going to be used against Bitcoin.

These bankers saw it as a threat, then they saw a loophole <Nobody can claim it's intellectual property rights> and now they are going to change it a little bit and use it to crush Bitcoin with the help from the governments. As soon as their newly developed blockchain technology is released, they would work with the governments to regulate Bitcoin use, and to make their technology the de facto technology. <Because it adheres to the governments regulations>  

Omg.
Satoshi knew from the first that he would have to hide. It's no coincidence he chose a pseudonym.

The rest of your post has some credibility, but then again bitcoin was designed from the start to be immune. I'm sure bad PR, bankcoin alternative, etc. will guide many users to that, but it won't change the inevitable rise of bitcoin.

Do you really think his intention was to hide or was his intention just to stay private, because this technology was so disruptive? He was active until talks with the agencies was established, and then he disappeared. The shelf life of Bitcoin will be gone, when the first regulated <BankCoins> comes into circulation. Take my word for it, it's just a question of time, who will win the race. Ripple has a clear start.   

[S4VV4S]

How can the underlying technology behind Bitcoin, the Block Chain be that good, yet Bitcoin itself be bad?
Does not make sense, does it?

they were scared briefly, I think.  They made some derogatory comments about btc, and Jamie Dimon was dead set against btc.

But now, being in league with the surveillance obsessed us gvt/nsa, they see that the blockchain technology can be used to further track people and their spending.

Nobody can argue with that I think.

Banks are not affraid of bitcoin; instead they are trying to understand it and very soon will start to integrate it.

No, they will create their own coin.
It's much less hassle for them and total control over it

Do you really think his intention was to hide or was his intention just to stay private, because this technology was so disruptive? He was active until talks with the agencies was established, and then he disappeared. The shelf life of Bitcoin will be gone, when the first regulated <BankCoins> comes into circulation. Take my word for it, it's just a question of time, who will win the race. Ripple has a clear start.   

What would be the difference of using these "Bankcoins" over using a credit card?
There are no benefits that I can think of for a person to use these Bankcoins over credit cards (let alone Bitcoin).

[Lagartijo]

It is clear that people don't flock to whatever makes more sense, and never have done.

Banks and firms can tinker with blockchains as much as they want, but ultimately it's governments/politics that decides what will be used as money because they are the greatest network, which is what money needs. Everything else that can be done with blockchain, like contracts and whatnot, depends on adoption too. The case has been made pretty solidly here: http://moraluniversal.com/en/why-bitcoin-cannot-win/

[BIT-Sharon]

 As long as a part of people believe this, bitcoin could survive, however, the releasing limt of 21000000 is the vital defect of bitcoin for becoming main currency.

[Falconer]

If banks really adopt blockchain technology in their system, their customers (non bitcoin user) would think that the technology is really helpful for them. Well actually I'm not really sure if the blockchain technology can working for bank or not, but seems it will attract people and they will think that bitcoin adopt blockchain from banks, since they have no idea about bitcoin before.

Yes the technology can work in a centralized way where only banks have a say on what goes there and who sees the ledger, but once people realize using the real thing (Bitcoin) is better, they will disregard those "bank blockchains" and use the global Bitcoin blockchain which is infinite times more secure.

Using 'real thing' has its problems, there is possibility of corruption or block alternation in open network. Also possibility of double spending because confirmation times can't be lowered due to security problems.
In closed environment these problems will be gone and system could be working even faster.

I dont think the problem is corruption, how can it will be happened? For double spending or confirmation times, I think it will be solved by banks, since they will take high fee for every transaction. So they will improve or add new features on its technology imo.

[zeraTunerse]

Banks are not affraid of bitcoin; instead they are trying to understand it and very soon will start to integrate it.

Yes and there are very least chances that bitcoin will affect the banking system, as there are many people who still have faith in the banks and would surely invest their money into the banks and not in the bitcoins and banks will never shut down due to bitcoins.

[harrymmmm]

This is what I think... When Satoshi wrote that six years ago, he never thought that he would need to hide, and basically abandon his creation. Now his Blockchain technology is going to be used against Bitcoin.

These bankers saw it as a threat, then they saw a loophole <Nobody can claim it's intellectual property rights> and now they are going to change it a little bit and use it to crush Bitcoin with the help from the governments. As soon as their newly developed blockchain technology is released, they would work with the governments to regulate Bitcoin use, and to make their technology the de facto technology. <Because it adheres to the governments regulations>  

Omg.
Satoshi knew from the first that he would have to hide. It's no coincidence he chose a pseudonym.

The rest of your post has some credibility, but then again bitcoin was designed from the start to be immune. I'm sure bad PR, bankcoin alternative, etc. will guide many users to that, but it won't change the inevitable rise of bitcoin.

Do you really think his intention was to hide or was his intention just to stay private, because this technology was so disruptive? He was active until talks with the agencies was established, and then he disappeared. The shelf life of Bitcoin will be gone, when the first regulated <BankCoins> comes into circulation. Take my word for it, it's just a question of time, who will win the race. Ripple has a clear start.   

You had to live thru the times of the digital money startups I guess.
They all were squashed by governments, and founders ended up behind bars for the most part.  Certainly the creators were a central point of 'coercion'.

So yes, he meant to hide. Take my word for it.

[harrymmmm]

As long as a part of people believe this, bitcoin could survive, however, the releasing limt of 21000000 is the vital defect of bitcoin for becoming main currency.

So you think 2100000000000000 units of currency is not enough? Why not? you want a separate transaction for every particle in the universe?
Jeez.

[harrymmmm]

Banks are not affraid of bitcoin; instead they are trying to understand it and very soon will start to integrate it.

Yes and there are very least chances that bitcoin will affect the banking system, as there are many people who still have faith in the banks and would surely invest their money into the banks and not in the bitcoins and banks will never shut down due to bitcoins.

I would say bitcoin has already affected the banking system. They are becoming more competitive. It's noticeable.
Whether a majority of people use a bankcoin is dependent on how well the banks do their PR, and how much lipstick they slap on that pig, but bitcoin will still be there ready to grab a bit more market share every time they slip up. This is a good thing.
Also remember bitcoin is global, and most people don't have banking.

[Aggressor66]

It is more likely that Central bank will one day issue digital currency of their own, based on the fact that metal coins are expensive to manufacture (often costing more than their face value).