JayJuanGee
Legendary
 Online
Activity: 4200
Merit: 12851
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to "non-custodial"
|
 |
September 15, 2015, 11:04:23 PM |
|
Yeah, right!!! Does this really mean anything for Bitcoin? They are creating a competing platform to have a private blockchain, but surely that blockchain is going to be centralized and secretive... .and then in the end, to what extent would it incorporate bitcoin's infrastructure at all? |
|
|
|
|
|
sAt0sHiFanClub
|
|
September 15, 2015, 11:33:07 PM |
|
Yeah, right!!! Does this really mean anything for Bitcoin? They are creating a competing platform to have a private blockchain, but surely that blockchain is going to be centralized and secretive... .and then in the end, to what extent would it incorporate bitcoin's infrastructure at all? The main thrust of a similar project that i'm aware of is that it would be decentralized between the participating banks - they would all carry out verifiable POW activity (mining) which will secure the network for all participants. There would be an initial release of tokens, after which no more would be created (absent a need to expand the network) Transaction fee's would be a form of demurrage, creating an internal market for the tokens among the participants. But the tokens would not be a currency in themselves - they would simply represent a real world asset, be it currency, trade finance, bonds, shares, etc. Banks would effectively settle among themselves with the same token, over and over again. It would have zero impact on bitcoin. It would more than likely be employed over a leased line network similar to SWIFT, but there is no reason why it couldn't use the public internet at some point. I cant see how it could use the same Blockcain as bitcoin - there is no technical need for them to do so. |
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Online
Activity: 4200
Merit: 12851
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to "non-custodial"
|
|
September 15, 2015, 11:56:28 PM |
|
Yeah, right!!! Does this really mean anything for Bitcoin? They are creating a competing platform to have a private blockchain, but surely that blockchain is going to be centralized and secretive... .and then in the end, to what extent would it incorporate bitcoin's infrastructure at all? The main thrust of a similar project that i'm aware of is that it would be decentralized between the participating banks - they would all carry out verifiable POW activity (mining) which will secure the network for all participants. There would be an initial release of tokens, after which no more would be created (absent a need to expand the network) Transaction fee's would be a form of demurrage, creating an internal market for the tokens among the participants. But the tokens would not be a currency in themselves - they would simply represent a real world asset, be it currency, trade finance, bonds, shares, etc. Banks would effectively settle among themselves with the same token, over and over again. It would have zero impact on bitcoin. It would more than likely be employed over a leased line network similar to SWIFT, but there is no reason why it couldn't use the public internet at some point. I cant see how it could use the same Blockcain as bitcoin - there is no technical need for them to do so. Your further explanation doesn't really contradict anything that I said in my earlier post. Admittedly, you seem to be much more informed about the details than me, yet the whole concept seems to have quite a bit of variability in how it could develop and then be implemented. So, even though money may NOT be a central concern of big banks, yet I could envision scenarios in which some of them may want to build some kind of private system, but to incorporate the bitcoin infrastructure in order to save money on computing power and security issues, meanwhile retaining some control over the extent to which they use the bitcoin blockchain infrastructure to achieve their private money moving objectives - in that regard, rather than reinventing the wheel to take advantage of some of the wheel that already exists. |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
 |
September 16, 2015, 12:02:50 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sAt0sHiFanClub
|
|
September 16, 2015, 12:40:48 AM |
|
Yeah, right!!! Does this really mean anything for Bitcoin? They are creating a competing platform to have a private blockchain, but surely that blockchain is going to be centralized and secretive... .and then in the end, to what extent would it incorporate bitcoin's infrastructure at all? The main thrust of a similar project that i'm aware of is that it would be decentralized between the participating banks - they would all carry out verifiable POW activity (mining) which will secure the network for all participants. There would be an initial release of tokens, after which no more would be created (absent a need to expand the network) Transaction fee's would be a form of demurrage, creating an internal market for the tokens among the participants. But the tokens would not be a currency in themselves - they would simply represent a real world asset, be it currency, trade finance, bonds, shares, etc. Banks would effectively settle among themselves with the same token, over and over again. It would have zero impact on bitcoin. It would more than likely be employed over a leased line network similar to SWIFT, but there is no reason why it couldn't use the public internet at some point. I cant see how it could use the same Blockcain as bitcoin - there is no technical need for them to do so. Your further explanation doesn't really contradict anything that I said in my earlier post. Admittedly, you seem to be much more informed about the details than me, yet the whole concept seems to have quite a bit of variability in how it could develop and then be implemented. So, even though money may NOT be a central concern of big banks, yet I could envision scenarios in which some of them may want to build some kind of private system, but to incorporate the bitcoin infrastructure in order to save money on computing power and security issues, meanwhile retaining some control over the extent to which they use the bitcoin blockchain infrastructure to achieve their private money moving objectives - in that regard, rather than reinventing the wheel to take advantage of some of the wheel that already exists. Because I was agreeing with your post. :-) I think you are right, Banks will have some interaction with the bitcoin blockchain, especially if adoption improves and they find that more of their customers use it, then they will have to integrate it into their systems. But I think their interest in Blockchain tech, for now, could easily exist independent of bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
September 16, 2015, 01:03:57 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
|
|
September 16, 2015, 01:24:07 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Online
Activity: 4200
Merit: 12851
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to "non-custodial"
|
|
September 16, 2015, 01:31:42 AM |
|
Yeah, right!!! Does this really mean anything for Bitcoin? They are creating a competing platform to have a private blockchain, but surely that blockchain is going to be centralized and secretive... .and then in the end, to what extent would it incorporate bitcoin's infrastructure at all? The main thrust of a similar project that i'm aware of is that it would be decentralized between the participating banks - they would all carry out verifiable POW activity (mining) which will secure the network for all participants. There would be an initial release of tokens, after which no more would be created (absent a need to expand the network) Transaction fee's would be a form of demurrage, creating an internal market for the tokens among the participants. But the tokens would not be a currency in themselves - they would simply represent a real world asset, be it currency, trade finance, bonds, shares, etc. Banks would effectively settle among themselves with the same token, over and over again. It would have zero impact on bitcoin. It would more than likely be employed over a leased line network similar to SWIFT, but there is no reason why it couldn't use the public internet at some point. I cant see how it could use the same Blockcain as bitcoin - there is no technical need for them to do so. Your further explanation doesn't really contradict anything that I said in my earlier post. Admittedly, you seem to be much more informed about the details than me, yet the whole concept seems to have quite a bit of variability in how it could develop and then be implemented. So, even though money may NOT be a central concern of big banks, yet I could envision scenarios in which some of them may want to build some kind of private system, but to incorporate the bitcoin infrastructure in order to save money on computing power and security issues, meanwhile retaining some control over the extent to which they use the bitcoin blockchain infrastructure to achieve their private money moving objectives - in that regard, rather than reinventing the wheel to take advantage of some of the wheel that already exists. Because I was agreeing with your post. :-) I think you are right, Banks will have some interaction with the bitcoin blockchain, especially if adoption improves and they find that more of their customers use it, then they will have to integrate it into their systems. But I think their interest in Blockchain tech, for now, could easily exist independent of bitcoin. Sorry, I did NOT mean to imply some kind of confrontation... hahahahaha, and really it seems like both of us, and probably a lot of other bitcoin (blockchain) watchers are trying to pay some attention and to learn details about these kinds of various options to attempt to verify the extent to which various big players in the financial world integrate into the bitcoin blockchain or attempt to build competitive systems that might attempt to innovate on blockchain technologies. Accordingly, without really being certain about how it plays out whether it complements or competes against bitcoin, some posters may find a large number of these kinds of developments to be bullish for bitcoin. I personally do NOT really know what to think in terms of whether some developments are bullish or bearish because sometimes we identify some kind of current and new development that seems like it should have a positive effect on bitcoin and its price, and the price may in fact move the opposite direction in spite of such new development. |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
September 16, 2015, 02:03:01 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JayJuanGee
Legendary
Online
Activity: 4200
Merit: 12851
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to "non-custodial"
|
|
September 16, 2015, 02:22:01 AM |
|
6 Hour turning bullish.  The volume the past 24 hours has been relatively pathetic, compared with several weeks previously... Does that affect your "bullish" assessment regarding the 6 hour view? |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
September 16, 2015, 03:04:00 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
aztecminer
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1092
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 16, 2015, 03:50:45 AM |
|
6 Hour turning bullish. hows the bitfinex 5000btc buy wall ?? ... that still happenen ?? |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
September 16, 2015, 04:03:42 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
DieJohnny
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1639
Merit: 1006
|
|
September 16, 2015, 04:04:36 AM |
|
I forgot about bitcoin for a few days, it was really nice
|
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
September 16, 2015, 05:03:41 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
September 16, 2015, 06:03:50 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mavericklm
|
|
September 16, 2015, 06:47:27 AM |
|
I forgot about bitcoin for a few days, it was really nice
we all need a holiday from time to time! a nice beach with crystal clear waters or a lake in the mountains... |
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Online
Activity: 2660
Merit: 2364
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
September 16, 2015, 07:05:47 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
edgar
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1859
Merit: 1001
|
|
September 16, 2015, 07:15:29 AM |
|
I forgot about bitcoin for a few days, it was really nice
we all need a holiday from time to time! a nice beach with crystal clear waters or a lake in the mountains... speaking of which, took my dad & daughter to the beach for a bit of a paddle, ended up surrounded by 'lots' of different fish(es) we all giggled like it was magic - it kinda was. bought 12 more coins when we got home, and ate calimari. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
