Controlling their own money? Being responsible for signing transactions? Keeping their wallet safe? God forbid. They're in love with the system, it's how they make their wealth. They want to trust someone else with their money. They want a custodian. Preferably, someone to tell them they have Bitcoin instead of storing their own access. An email and password to view some arbitrary balance, because that's what they're comfortable with.
I suppose we should have seen this coming. Aside from the physical gold bugs, that's what people trust -- numbers on a screen at their bank or broker's website. In the mass adoption scenario, I wonder what proportion of "holders" will actually hold the keys to their coins. It's a tad depressing to think about.
State Street, one the largest institutional custodians on the planet, said there is no sense of urgency – at the moment, at least – from clients for the firm to move into safeguarding crypto assets. Speaking at the American Banker BlockFS conference in New York on Thursday, Jay Biancamano, State Street’s managing director for digital product development and innovation, acknowledged there is “a high level of interest”, however.
That's a big contrast from what BlackRock's CEO said over the summer.
He said their clients have zero interest...
