What's all this talk about copying the blockchain technology?

[semaforo]

   I have seen a number of references in the .edit lately to big banks talking about how the blockchain represents a real innovation but how bitcoin itself is useless. This sounds to me like an attempt to adopt some of the advantages of bitcoin for the established banking system without giving up any of their centralized power. It seems silly to me because a large part of the appeal and value of bitcoin is its decentralized nature.

 So my question is is there anything to this talk of the blockchain being the real value of bitcoin, or is this just hogwash from the big banks? Or maybe someone can link to a thread where this is discussed in detail.

[TheGr33k]

In my opinions it's all hot-air in an attempt to scare people out of using bitcoin, but promote the use of their own "blockchain" based technology in the future.
I don't have any references or links, but if I had to guess it's probably even alt-coins trying to give BTC negative press

[franky1]

  I have seen a number of references in the .edit lately to big banks talking about how the blockchain represents a real innovation but how bitcoin itself is useless. This sounds to me like an attempt to adopt some of the advantages of bitcoin for the established banking system without giving up any of their centralized power. It seems silly to me because a large part of the appeal and value of bitcoin is its decentralized nature.

 So my question is is there anything to this talk of the blockchain being the real value of bitcoin, or is this just hogwash from the big banks? Or maybe someone can link to a thread where this is discussed in detail.

firstly.. your title
.info refers to a website.. not the actual blockchain technology, just a viewer.

secondly
bitcoin is decentralised, and people want to keep it that way. banks however want their own systems secure, they want to control the money creation and flow and as such they want to make their own altcoin to premine and then hand out as tokens of credit to those customers wanting their system.

to me the banks having their own altcoin is a good thing.. as although they can code their alt to premine 20 trillion coins, its alot better then just adding numbers to a database without question.(in the long run)
also by allowing banks to use blockchain technology means that blockchain technology cannot be outright banned.

and lastly. just because a bank has an altcoin, doesnt mean bitcoin loses any interest or value. after all banks already have sql databases of trillions of value and yet bitcoin still has success, so it doesnt matter what back-end a bank uses, from the customers point of view there is no noticeable difference so the perception remains choose:
centralised closed data ledger with selfish/uncontrolled money creation vs public decentralised data ledger with stable deflationary money creation.

in the end bitcoin will always have social, economical, ethical positives compared to any alt a bank would create

[semaforo]

As for the .info... very scattered auto correct is to blame.

   Thank you for the insightful commentary.

I was just wondering if any of this press or action among startups heralded any fundamentally new perspective or impact to bitcoin, but it seems it does not. Rather just a coherent response from the financial industryto adapt to and survive the existential threat that bitcoin presents to it.

[LiteCoinGuy]

[Lauda]

As for the .info... very scattered auto correct is to blame.

   Thank you for the insightful commentary.

I was just wondering if any of this press or action among startups heralded any fundamentally new perspective or impact to bitcoin, but it seems it does not. Rather just a coherent response from the financial industryto adapt to and survive the existential threat that bitcoin presents to it.

They're trying to move away the attention from Bitcoin towards the technology that it is built on. This is how they're trying to fight Bitcoin since they're sheep are easy to redirect into another way. You should not worry about it. Bitcoin and blockchain technology have their own places. Bitcoin is a revolution to say at least. Blockchain technology is going to be helpful in many systems (make them efficient and whatnot). Bitcoin is technology based on a protocol that is constantly evolving.
"Bitcoin is a value transfer ownership registration protocol with a currency on top. It can do a lot more than traditional payment networks can't." In addition to giving you money sovereignty (which is why media and banks call it "useless"  ).

[dothebeats]

I wonder how would they create a similar tech without also adopting its fundamentals? And I wonder how secure banks' systems are compared to millions of dollars worth of equipment invested in bitcoin miners that solve complex algorithms, unequally distributed around the world and works in a decentralized fashion?

Bitcoin > Banks.

[semaforo]

This is confirming what I already suspected.

It's kind of scary for the poor dupes who buy into it- I mean, imagine a pump and dump coin spawned by someone with hundreds of billions of dollars to throw at their scam.

   It would basically be creating an alt-coin that has the advantages of decentralization, instantaneous transfers, dark web compatibility, and insulation from inflation and inflation fears, but putting the top notch professional marketing, programming, and the full cooperation of both financial institutions and governments at its disposal. So far this seems like the most cogent and viable strategy for banks to confront bitcoin that I have seen yet, and basically what it does is clone bitcoin, but use all of the wealth and power available to replace the current set of early adopters with the established elite.

    Of course one has to weigh the drawbacks for the banks- declining income from fees that can no longer be charged, shrinking of the fractional reserve deposit system as use of the cryptocurrency rises. Fractional reserve is a sword that cuts both ways- while deposits enable many times the amount of the deposit to be issued as interest bearing loans, as deposit volume declines the loan issuing potential declines by the same multiplier.

      There is also the interest that is charged in the delay time on international transfers. Ultimately, in the final cost-benefit analysis I really think that for the bank to create a bitcoin clone that reinforces their power would require either such structural changes to the global financial system as to make it too risky for the present elite, or changes to the fundamental structure of the protocol as to lose some of the basic advantages of bitcoin.

   Of course, a basic component of the banks power is the power of deception, and I wouldn't underestimate their ability to suck a large number of people into their scam, however, since many of the people involved in bitcoin are the smartest and most dynamic people on earth I don't think they will be fooled, and bitcoin's value will be determined in part by the extent of their influence.

          I actually really wouldn't be surprised if this current media push is part of a coordinate p-r campaign with substantial capital backing it. And I honestly don't think that regulators are smart enough to understand the implications of what is coming- they are just trying to keep their jobs by pleasing their masters.

   This whole drama gives the whole thing a nice air of a revolution. I think this really places a great responsibility on everyone in the bitcoin space to understand this development and work pro-actively toward education. While the power of the establishment sometime seems overwhelming, it actually is exceedingly fragile and teetering on a very delicate axis between inflationary and deflationary pressures. And the power of the truth is not to be underestimated, even if it may seem on the surface to be very fragile.

[gentlemand]

It's kind of scary for the poor dupes who buy into it- I mean, imagine a pump and dump coin spawned by someone with hundreds of billions of dollars to throw at their scam.

Does anyone truly believe there'll be an actual coin released on the open market by a retail bank? That's ludicrous. They're not in the business of creating currencies and never have been.

They'll take the bits of BTC they like and use them to make the use of regular currencies smoother and increase their control of them.

[Xagon6]

It seems silly to me because a large part of the appeal and value of bitcoin is its decentralized nature.

Yes, and the banks thrive on centralization, hence why they demonize decentralization

[VeritasSapere]

I thought this article was pretty good with a few good quotes.
http://cointelegraph.com/news/115395/top-5-quotes-bitcoin-expert-quotes-on-banks-building-blockchains

Andreas Antonopoulos as always does a great job speaking on this subject as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0mykANOMGQ

[BitUsher]

    “It is kind of like the difference between Che Guevara and a Che Guevara T-shirt being worn by a hipster in Brooklyn. So what do (the banks) do? They look at Bitcoin and say “Let’s see. It is an open, borderless, decentralized, transparent, and peer-to-peer currency. Fantastic! can we have that without the open, decentralized, borderless, transparent, peer-to-peer, and instead add a nice dose of heavy control?”

    - Andreas Antonopoulos, speaking at the reinvent.money Conference in Rotterdam, on September 26th.

[SwagGirl]

Free advertising for bitcoin. Note the price increase.

[X42]

Its a great way to incorporate the super ledger technology of bitcoin into current bank systems. This would allow bank great autonomy and ease of verification, but it would certainly have administrative powers over their "blockchain".

This means they could allow chargeback and corrections when a transaction has been improperly sent to the wrong destination or wrong amount. It would just be a method for them to secure the transactions and ownership.

It would be hard to hack, etc.

[Mickeyb]

  I have seen a number of references in the .edit lately to big banks talking about how the blockchain represents a real innovation but how bitcoin itself is useless. This sounds to me like an attempt to adopt some of the advantages of bitcoin for the established banking system without giving up any of their centralized power. It seems silly to me because a large part of the appeal and value of bitcoin is its decentralized nature.

 So my question is is there anything to this talk of the blockchain being the real value of bitcoin, or is this just hogwash from the big banks? Or maybe someone can link to a thread where this is discussed in detail.

Yes, we have discussed this already in many threads. This is what all of us think it's going to happen. Banks will develop their centralized blockchains.

I think that this is a way of banks and governments fighting us. And I think that is better that they fight us like this than that they ban us altogether.

I also think that this will fork for them in the beginning, but this banking system must fall a part. This is unsustainable. With the banking system will go their centralized blockchains as well and all it will rest is us!

[semaforo]

ok I am reassured. Thanks for the replies.

[BitUsher]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60s4Z7iQ-kU


9 Reasons why Bitcoin will Outcompete Private Blockchains

[Amph]

it's the new trend, to avoid admitting that bitcoin is actually far better than their shitty centralized system, so they prefer target their interests to something is not seens as a malicious as bitcoin, with allt he hacking, flaw etc...

[Q7]

What I can interpret from their actions is that they want to create something which is bitcoin-like stuff having the same feature in order to divert people's attention from the real thing. Unfortunately most people have not really understood the core principal on why we have bitcoin in the first place, so easily newbies will fall for it. Plus they will further mislead with something like banks created blockchain are more secure in order to further confuse people.