Santander Quits R3 Blockchain Consortium - It's beginning to crumble

[franky1]

Many developers say that the Linux Foundation is the garbage bin of open source projects. 

a majority of organisations using 'the linux foundation'. cared more about 'foundation' than 'linux'

foundations are used as tax havens.
EG
have $100k an need to pay 20% tax($20k)
dont pay $20k to taxman. put $20k into a foundation.
get the $20k wrote off meaning no tax to pay...

and then be on the foundation board to then claim back $20k for expenses/costs of your service to the foundation. and get to privately play around with your whole $100k for anything you please

so when you see banks 'investing' $90mill.. its not costing them $90m. its costing them far far less because instead of $90m going to taxman. its siphoned through a foundation.

check out the clinton foundation or any other rich guy that publicly talks about 'donating' to a foundation.. and then see where the funds went to.. basically a majority ends up back in their own pocket eventually.

and thats why the inux foundations many projects are garbage. because the ones that fail are suppose to fail. just to get a tax break.
however if a project can lead to getting them more back then they put in. then they will fund it and make it happen (small percentage do this)

[pereira4]

Damn it seems like R3's fantastic idea of private blockchain is going to hell, recently Goldman Sachs and a lot of other companies are leaving too. R3 was a fucking failure, Mike Hearn is a clown and justice has been made. Bitcoin will win, there's no stopping. Segwit will be activated soon and then we will take over the world with lighting network. It's set is stone.

[franky1]

Damn it seems like R3's fantastic idea of private blockchain is going to hell, recently Goldman Sachs and a lot of other companies are leaving too. R3 was a fucking failure, Mike Hearn is a clown and justice has been made. Bitcoin will win, there's no stopping. Segwit will be activated soon and then we will take over the world with lighting network. It's set is stone.

no.
R3 was a consortium that demanded a members fee. and not quite a tax rightoff..

but now the banks are in hyperledger (a tax right off foundation) there is no need of the membered consortium
the banks are still doing their private blockchains. but now being more direct in their approach while also now getting all the tax breaks.

the banks have not given up "blockchain" idea's they are just re-organising themselves into a foundation instead of a consortium.

know your enemy. the banks are still in the battle, they are just reinforcing/reorganising their troops

20th-22nd october.. R3 joins hyperledger
http://www.the-blockchain.com/2016/10/20/r3-blockchain-consortium-open-source-corda-platform-make-available-linux-hyperledger/
http://www.newsbtc.com/2016/10/22/r3-corda-hyperledger-open-source/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3134014/bankers-plan-to-give-corda-blockchain-code-to-hyperledger-project.html

in spring 2016
R3 got banks to pay a members fee into a consortium pot and then some of that went into the hyperledger foundation.
in autumn 2016
now the banks are getting rid of the consortium and paying direct into the hyperledger foundation

research if you dont want to be spoon fed:
santander invested in R3 and DAH.. DAH is part of hyperledger. santander dropped R3 but still part of DAH
goldman sachs invested in R3 and DAH.. DAH is part of hyperledger. goldman sachs dropped R3 but still part of DAH

if you prefer to be spoonfed
http://fortune.com/2016/11/21/goldman-sachs-r3-blockchain-consortium/

Both Santander and Goldman are investors in Digital Asset Holdings, a rival blockchain startup headed by headed by Blythe Masters, a former J.P. Morgan top exec.

then look at
https://www.hyperledger.org/about/members

hopefully this should now have everyone uptodate with why, what, who and where the bankers stand

oh... and this should wake everyone up too..


hopefully this should now have everyone uptodate with why, what, who and where the devs like
Greg maxwell (Gmaxwell, nullc), Pieter wuille(sipa), matt corrallo(bluematt), christian decker (cdecker) and a dozen others stand

[WhiteSkinnedFREAK]

I don't know if that means it is going to crumble though. Blockchain will stay strong my man

[Wind_FURY]

The realization will be how brilliant the Satoshi definition of a blockchain really is, and this will always include Proof of Work. We may have missed the point by trying to exclude PoW from blockchains because it wastes energy. But it may be the only concept that makes censorship resistant blockchains a possibilityreality.

Fixed.

This is an important point ("POW wastes energy") going forward IMO, Bitcoin is bound to get attacked by the climate change nuts at some point.

Can you see, from what you're saying above, that Bitcoin's POW literally isn't a waste of energy? Every bit of so-called "excess" hashing is in fact raising the bar for a malicious hashing attack trying to re-roll the Bitcoin blockchain?

My first impression would be to think "yes". But thinking beyond that and on to Bitcoin's need for energy to create a censorship resistant blockchain and as a means of real value transfer, then I would say no. The concept is so new and foreign that we tend to see that PoW is wasteful.