Bitcoin woke up the Giants

[deisik]

blockchain does have many advantages over standard databases of the olden days. but fundamentally it is just a database. and its what the data will be and how that data is secured that changes things.
think of "blockchain" as simply "relationship database", but much more programmable and layer-able then standard

Do you suggest that branches of a bank should each keep an authentic copy of their blockchain of transactions, and with every transaction made they should broadcast this transaction to every other branch of the bank? What if there are thousands of such branches? I simply can't accept this idea as both feasible and meaningful. On the other hand, if a few branches become disconnected from each other, make transactions and end up with different blockchains, this would obviously wreak havoc in such a system. Since how would they synchronize their blockchains later? I'm strongly inclined to think that processing data in a centralized way is the only viable alternative in this case...

And that seems to be what payment processing systems like PayPal, Mastercard or Visa do

[franky1]

blockchain does have many advantages over standard databases of the olden days. but fundamentally it is just a database. and its what the data will be and how that data is secured that changes things.
think of "blockchain" as simply "relationship database", but much more programmable and layer-able then standard

Do you suggest that branches of a bank should each keep an authentic copy of their blockchain of transactions, and with every transaction made they should broadcast this transaction to every other branch of the bank?

yet again your thinking about bitcoins blockchain and how bitcoin functions.

ill repeat for a third time. a block chain is just a block of data linked to another block.
it does not require to be distributed.
does not require PoW,
does not require Sha
does not require the data to be financial based
dos not require immutability and endless growth
does not require these things but still defined as blockchain.

its just a relationship database (if you want to use old terminology)

however its more programmable than traditional databases to allow it to be secured in a multitude of different ways,
it can be where each branch just stores "headers only"
or yes it could be each branch has all account details of all branches
or even regional centres holding a percentage of the data and/or just headers.
its fully open to options and utility.
 
as for how i see banks using it.. some of the ethical concepts(towards society and customers)  i have thought of probably wont be what or how banks will use their hyperledger chains

what if there are thousands of such branches? I simply can't accept this idea as both feasible and meaningful. On the other hand, if a few branches become disconnected from each other, make transactions and end up with different blockchains, this would obviously wreak havoc in such a system. Since how would they synchronize their blockchains later? I'm strongly inclined to think that processing data in a centralized way is the only viable alternative in this case...

And that seems to be what payment processing systems like PayPal, Mastercard or Visa do

again your thinking of it in terms of bitcoins immutable ever growing blockchain that due to the amount of customers requires x,y,z. rather then just thinking of a relationship database, where data can be edited/split into clusters.

imagine it like a block of data is a database table, linked by a reference to another database table. and certain nodes only need to store certain tables and table could be altered if there were a number of authorisations to do so. thus preventing a single user from changing everything.

blockchain is not much of a big new perfect technology. its just a tool to then build ontop on with other things.

in short a blockchain is not a big powerful new thing. yes its a new tool for data utility. but a blockchain alone (without other security features) is not much by itself.
the only way you know what extra security layers and what way it will be used would be to talk to those contracted to build it.

blockchain is not the end tech.. its just the introduction.. bitcoin has many other mechanisms that make bitcoin special.

[eternalgloom]

They're still not there yet IMO, bank transfers are still painfully slow and until that changes, I'd still prefer Bitcoin and even Paypal for practical use, meaning just sending money to someone.

And I think they are just interested in the technology behind Bitcoin, but afraid, I don't believe that.

[Top2016]

is the most profitable ?

[deisik]

blockchain does have many advantages over standard databases of the olden days. but fundamentally it is just a database. and its what the data will be and how that data is secured that changes things.
think of "blockchain" as simply "relationship database", but much more programmable and layer-able then standard

Do you suggest that branches of a bank should each keep an authentic copy of their blockchain of transactions, and with every transaction made they should broadcast this transaction to every other branch of the bank?

yet again your thinking about bitcoins blockchain and how bitcoin functions

If you really think so, then don't tell me that the blockchain technology could help banks somehow

Because it most likely can't, and that was my question precisely. Namely, whether there is any real benefit or advantage of using the blockchain technology by banks, since many on the forum have been claiming that banks are either interested or already implementing their take on it. Blockchain is blockchain which means that a transaction (or what can be loosely called a transaction) is accepted by a consensus (majority) of independent nodes in a trustless network thereby validating it, and then it gets written down into a ledger with each node having an identical copy of it provided the transaction is valid (emphasis added):

Every node in a decentralized system has a copy of the blockchain. Data quality is maintained by massive database replication and computational trust. No centralized "official" copy exists and no user is "trusted" more than any other. Transactions are broadcast to the network using software. Messages are delivered on a best effort basis. Mining nodes validate transactions, add them to the block they’re creating, and then broadcast the completed block to other nodes. Blockchains use various time-stamping schemes, such as proof-of-work to serialize changes

Basically, you start claiming one thing (that the blockchain technology could actually help banks) and then proceed to something very different, which is inconsequential to the matter in question

[Herbet Fry]

Dont think so. It ia just wisheful thinking. It would be really great though imagine being a millionaire !! xD

[mrcash02]

The "Giants" will never fall back. If they can't stop Bitcoins, they will try to buy them. What I mean is that they can start accepting and using Bitcoins, but changing some things to benefits them, like increasing fees in countries over BTCs. They just want the profit, if they can get it, even with BTCs, no problem, but if they can't, they will do anything to achieve what they want!

[calkob]

Bitcoin has not just brought us a decentralized P2P payment system or a alternative for the banks. It woke the Giants in the Fintech world. Before Bitcoin, clients at banks were treated as the scum of the earth, even more so, when you are middle class or poor.

Bitcoin came in and they threatened to disrupt the Banking and Remittance services. What happen? These financial services realized that they will lose money, and they suddenly dumped Billions of dollars into Blockchain based technologies and also user-friendly banking services with 24 hour access via Social media platforms like Facebook Messenger and WeChat and some of their own in-house apps.  

We have not seen this level of attention given to clients for many years. Why, because the Giants were comfortable with their foot on our neck. They had the monopoly, backed by governments.

We should support Bitcoin to keep these Giants on their toes. If Bitcoin fails, these Giants will go back to sleep and we will be stuck with high fees and poor service.

Yeah i agree but thats all about to change.....lol   

and about time too ......

[Victorycoin]

They're still not there yet IMO, bank transfers are still painfully slow and until that changes, I'd still prefer Bitcoin and even Paypal for practical use, meaning just sending money to someone.

And I think they are just interested in the technology behind Bitcoin, but afraid, I don't believe that.

They are interested in the technology behind bitcoin and not bitcoin itself because the decentralized nature of bitcoin means bad business for them, so now they are looking at how the technology can be twisted so that it would be business as usual.

The revelation bitcoin opened our eyes  to about banks, isn't something they can easily sweep under the carpet, they have been milking us dry all the while, but with bitcoin, we now have a voice to say enough is enough!

[Aamir1]

The "Giants" will never fall back. If they can't stop Bitcoins, they will try to buy them. What I mean is that they can start accepting and using Bitcoins, but changing some things to benefits them, like increasing fees in countries over BTCs. They just want the profit, if they can get it, even with BTCs, no problem, but if they can't, they will do anything to achieve what they want!

That is not what OP is saying i guess, he is saying that they are awaken because they see bitcoin as a thread to their banking systems, that is why they are giving too much attention to their clients so that they don't leave them and move towards bitcoin or any other thing, so for that reason he said bitcoin has woken up "Giants".

[yndye]

They were threatened by the new technology that's why they act and then keep up with the changing financial system in order to keep their business. There will always be innovations given that from time to time there is always something new emerging so in order for them not to lose their business, they should invest and research on what's the better way to have an edge against their competitor.

[franky1]

Every node in a decentralized system has a copy of the blockchain. Data quality is maintained by massive database replication and computational trust. No centralized "official" copy exists and no user is "trusted" more than any other. Transactions are broadcast to the network using software. Messages are delivered on a best effort basis. Mining nodes validate transactions, add them to the block they’re creating, and then broadcast the completed block to other nodes. Blockchains use various time-stamping schemes, such as proof-of-work to serialize changes

Basically, you start claiming one thing (that the blockchain technology could actually help banks) and then proceed to something very different, which is inconsequential to the matter in question

you're not understanding what blockchain is.
imagine it like the difference between

DBMS - database management systems
RDBMS - relationship management systems

even your quote is saying the opposite of what your thinking.

Every node in a decentralized system has a copy of the blockchain

not

Every node in a decentralized system needs a copy of the data, to then be classed a blockchain

in short a blockchain can work on one system. a blockchain can be edited by having multisig instead of hashes. which the owners of the keypairs have full access to.
a blockchain has no big built in technology requirements to be deemed a blockchain. it just needs something(literally anything) that links one lump of data to another lump of data.
that is all..

once you realise that the quote you pulled up is trying to specifically talk about bitcoins blockchain by talking about transactions, proof of work(mining) and decentralization.. rather than the fundamentals of a blockchain. you will realise that blockchain alone is not big of a deal. but what can be done once you add on the other options could make it a big deal.
emphasis: options added ontop.

now as for HOW the banks will use that simple mechanism.. well there are a million ways it can use it.
options outside of the term blockchain, but easily programmable in to increase security of a blockchain
it could go PoA, PoS, PoW, PoL, PoT
it could use SHA, ripemd, md6, (list goes on) or a combination
it could be central to one location, or distributed to regional hubs, distributed to local bank branches.
it could be split up. where local locations only holds one block of data per location and the region just holds the headers of all locations
it could be split up. where central location holds all data, and the region only holds the headers of all blocks
it could be split up. where specific location only holds the headers of all blocks and the region holds all data
all options are open
now all the stuff above is just protecting the outer shell (the blocks)

as for the data inside
the data can be anything. doesnt need to be financial (eg ID, medical records, inventory, even a phonebook/yellowpages)
the data can be locked with hashes, or signatures or timestamps, or any other method.
the data can be stored/checked as anything, hex, json, ascii, xml or anything

again a blockchain is not a big deal alone. but opens up the possibility to what can be done
the blocks and data within blocks can be secured not by requiring storing the whole data on every secure system. but just storing the link between the block securely

eg
"data123data123data123data123"-linkabc-"data456data456data456data456"-linkdef-"data789data789data789data789"-linkghi
you dont need to store all of the line above. you can as an option ontop. have the main 'checking' mechanism just stores
linkabc-linkdef-linkghi
and program it so that the system should reject a block unless its 'header' (link) is recognised.

now again how the banks will use blockchain. is another question that cannot be answered. because blockchain is just a small tools that allows MANY things top be built ontop of it and inside it... that traditionally were not being done

blockchain is not the end solution with built in security. its just a new tool that expands what the old database models limits were. and allows freedom to build layers ontop and new ways of storing/distributing/validating/editing/securing.

think of it as changing from a DBMS to a RDBMS where it opened up new options of use.
blockchain is just the next level up from that. allowing more options of use. but alone is not a big deal

[deisik]

Every node in a decentralized system has a copy of the blockchain. Data quality is maintained by massive database replication and computational trust. No centralized "official" copy exists and no user is "trusted" more than any other. Transactions are broadcast to the network using software. Messages are delivered on a best effort basis. Mining nodes validate transactions, add them to the block they’re creating, and then broadcast the completed block to other nodes. Blockchains use various time-stamping schemes, such as proof-of-work to serialize changes

Basically, you start claiming one thing (that the blockchain technology could actually help banks) and then proceed to something very different, which is inconsequential to the matter in question

you're not understanding what blockchain is.
imagine it like the difference between

DBMS - database management systems
RDBMS - relationship management systems

even your quote is saying the opposite of what your thinking.

Every node in a decentralized system has a copy of the blockchain

not

Every node in a decentralized system needs a copy of the data, to then be classed a blockchain

I'm not interested in semantic gymnastics, really

Until I see some bank actually employing the blockchain technology as it is commonly understood, and it will be something different than Bitcoin (or like Bitcoin, for that matter), I remain skeptical about real benefits and advantages this technology could offer to the banking sector. I heard it in the news myself that some banks had been studying it, but that seems to be all so far