.

[BTCBinary]

Yeah. and Mike Hearn seems to be working with those guys. That's why he went on and wrote that article that shoke the bitcoin community. Now that he is out, we got rid of a person who wasn't helping much.

[1715501945]

1715501945

[1715501945]

1715501945

[pereira4]

I thought there were banks supporting the blockchain but not creating their own version of Bitcoin. But the question is how can Bitcoin Classic help banks? I mean weren't banks focusing on an altcoin like ripple?

Bitcoin Classic helps banks because it centralized nodes with the blocksize increase. Anything that raises the blocksize helps banks. Also they are anti-privacy, you will see if they win, how they will start inserting anti-Tor stuff onto their code. Those guys are the same evil that XT was, but gullible newbies want big blocks and they will not pay attention to anything else.

[allthingsluxury]

This does not mean in any way, shape or form that they will be successful. Honestly, I don't believe they will. Wall Street has almost no credibility amongst many in the crypto community.

[jonald_fyookball]

So far , I haven't seen a single article clearly explain how
banks could actually use a distributed ledger for fiat.

Banks already have ledgers and balances with each
other and no one can be forced to pay except in
court.

I guess it might be easier for a bank to sue another
bank if there's public record of what was owed?

But even that seems like a kind of weak argument
as there would be records.

So, whats the point of a distributed ledger
between banks?

[btcxyzzz]

OP, thank you for nice bullshit opening post.

[CarrotTALKS]

does tgis bank even work pls reply 

[jbreher]

What the heck does Bitcoin Classic have do with the banks' plans to copy blockchain technology???

Absolutely nothing. And MicroGuy knows it, too. Fucking liar lying to try to sway any who don't bother to think things through.

Wrong. Private blockchains are like 1990's intranets. They're peanuts compared to Bitcoin which threatens the bank's financial monopoly.

Stick your head in the sand and resort to name-calling if you wish. That won't wash away the current reality.

I apologize for the vitriol, but not for the underlying sentiment. Your opening salvo was clearly designed to create in the mind of those that do not know better that Bitcoin Classic was created merely as a tool to be used to wrest (in some yet to be revealed manner) control over cryptocurrecy by the banking establishment. Which is, as anyone with a brain can tell, absolute twaddle.

[jbreher]

I apologize for the vitriol, but not for the underlying sentiment. Your opening salvo was clearly designed to create in the mind of those that do not know better that Bitcoin Classic was created merely as a tool to be used to wrest (in some yet to be revealed manner) control over cryptocurrecy by the banking establishment.

Yes. That is my theory in part. The banking establishment sees Classic as a more vulnerable target and/or an opportunity to divide.

Walking it back. Duly noted. Was 'Bitcoin Classic was created by the banksters as a tool to kill crypto', now changed to an unverifiable speculation that 'banksters think they can subvert Bitcoin Classic trivially, while subverting Bitcoin Core presents an insurmountable obstacle'.

I call bullshit. Again.

Regardless, by encouraging division (which I've previously documented) they weaken the entire community.

Encouraging division? They? Who? The banksters? Care to point out where the banksters are sowing this discord? Let alone the obvious grey area as to who is the divided and who is the dividee. Core has been getting a clear signal for months that at least a non-negligible minority -- and perhaps a clear majority -- is not buying into their so-called scaling plan. It could be argued that it is Core that is the source of the discord.

The bottom line is, Classic is an Altcoin and needs to be seen as such by the greater community. United bitcoin stands, divided it falls!

Umm Humm. Classic, which is planned as legacy with a changed value of one constant, is an altcoin, while Core, which is legacy plus RBF plus SegWit, plus... and totally changes the validity protocol, is not an altcoin. Do you even listen yo yourself?

[watashi-kokoto]

Walking it back. Duly noted. Was 'Bitcoin Classic was created by the banksters as a tool to kill crypto', now changed to an unverifiable speculation that 'banksters think they can subvert Bitcoin Classic trivially, while subverting Bitcoin Core presents an insurmountable obstacle'.

I call bullshit. Again.

You are wrong.

Umm Humm. Classic, which is planned as legacy with a changed value of one constant, is an altcoin, while Core, which is legacy plus RBF plus SegWit, plus... and totally changes the validity protocol, is not an altcoin. Do you even listen yo yourself?

You are so stupid that further discussion is completely unnecessary. I've just Ignored you.

[jonald_fyookball]

Yes. That is my theory in part. The banking establishment sees Classic as a more vulnerable target and/or an opportunity to divide.
 

Many banks have invested in Bitcoin startups or want to use blockchain technology
themsleves, possibly Bitcoin.  Nasdaq is already doing so.

Your theory of the "banking establishment" out to divide or attack Bitcoin is
unsubstantiated, let alone that they are taking notes about Classic.
 
Ok maybe Jamie Dimon is plotting something.  He's obsessed with Bitcoin.
But he's one guy.

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

Yes. That is my theory in part. The banking establishment sees Classic as a more vulnerable target and/or an opportunity to divide.
 

Many banks have invested in Bitcoin startups or want to use blockchain technology
themsleves, possibly Bitcoin.  Nasdaq is already doing so.

Your theory of the "banking establishment" out to divide or attack Bitcoin is
unsubstantiated, let alone that they are taking notes about Classic.
 
Ok maybe Jamie Dimon is plotting something.  He's obsessed with Bitcoin.
But he's one guy.

[watashi-kokoto]

It's Over

Toomim Coin REKT

[gkv9]

Whether such syndicates being organized seem a threat, I would still say that this had always been a winning innovation and will always be...
The devs here ain't stupid to just let their superb technology be spoiled by so-called "Banks" so to allow them to just ruin the opportunity of an average joe to live on his own without showing his finances to government...

[Tacalt]

Maybe after their hard work on the blockchain technology, they found bitcoin is the best to adopt for their business. They might provide services based on bitcoin.

[DimensionZ]

Whether such syndicates being organized seem a threat, I would still say that this had always been a winning innovation and will always be...
The devs here ain't stupid to just let their superb technology be spoiled by so-called "Banks" so to allow them to just ruin the opportunity of an average joe to live on his own without showing his finances to government...

The blockchain technology is great and everyone wants to develop their own versions to use in their networks. I am wondering what will happen if down the line we have competing blockchains and services. Can the banks and Bitcoin co-exist peacefully?

[MicroGuy]

Whether such syndicates being organized seem a threat, I would still say that this had always been a winning innovation and will always be...
The devs here ain't stupid to just let their superb technology be spoiled by so-called "Banks" so to allow them to just ruin the opportunity of an average joe to live on his own without showing his finances to government...

The blockchain technology is great and everyone wants to develop their own versions to use in their networks. I am wondering what will happen if down the line we have competing blockchains and services. Can the banks and Bitcoin co-exist peacefully?

It depends on what you mean by the word "peacefully". Will there come a day when central banks won't want to "control and own" everything, including bitcoin? No.

[Tacalt]

Whether such syndicates being organized seem a threat, I would still say that this had always been a winning innovation and will always be...
The devs here ain't stupid to just let their superb technology be spoiled by so-called "Banks" so to allow them to just ruin the opportunity of an average joe to live on his own without showing his finances to government...

The blockchain technology is great and everyone wants to develop their own versions to use in their networks. I am wondering what will happen if down the line we have competing blockchains and services. Can the banks and Bitcoin co-exist peacefully?

If bitcoin is not declared by governments, it will coexist with other government coins peacefully. But bitcoin will be the reserve currency.

[European Central Bank]

Why does any bank need to take over Bitcoin? The way it works simply won't ever fit with how those guys operate. They'll take some ideas from it and make something that makes normal banking better but it won't solve any of the deep rooted problems.

[Yakamoto]

Whether such syndicates being organized seem a threat, I would still say that this had always been a winning innovation and will always be...
The devs here ain't stupid to just let their superb technology be spoiled by so-called "Banks" so to allow them to just ruin the opportunity of an average joe to live on his own without showing his finances to government...

The blockchain technology is great and everyone wants to develop their own versions to use in their networks. I am wondering what will happen if down the line we have competing blockchains and services. Can the banks and Bitcoin co-exist peacefully?

If bitcoin is not declared by governments, it will coexist with other government coins peacefully. But bitcoin will be the reserve currency.

Bitcoin will only be the reserve currency if every other coin is interested in allowing it to be the reserve currency. There is the potential for the USD becoming a cryptocurrency and it just remains in the same position.

Bitcoin and other cryptos can co-exist, it all depends on if the government wants to allow for them to or not. And even then, there isn't much they can do about it.

[enquirer]

What banks are trying to create is a single standard for information sharing. Currently each bank has its own database, and they have a lot of trouble synchronizing data between them. Now they want a single shared db that everyone will use. They call it "blockchain", for whatever reason. Nothing in common with bitcoin.