Is It Right That Banks Now Accept Bitcoin?

[Hamza2424]

Some say it’s a good sign, its mass adoption means more legitimacy and convenience, but others see it as a step backward, a slow takeover of something that was meant to be free from centralized control.

So is this progress, or just another way for banks to profit from what was supposed to challenge them?

To be honest, I don't think they can benefit much from this, because the most profit this deal will give is to us, the bitcoin investors and enthusiasts who wants it to be adopted by them because even if they have adopted it they don't like it because this sector is taking their clients, haha.

Nobody likes the other provider who is taking their clients so.

Now speaking seriously, the adoption these banks can have be enormous, although you did not mention which adoption you were talking about haha, like which bank is accepting bitcoin, did some new big bank joins the list, although is there any list at all haha. I mean bro there were banks before that allowed the buying and selling not directly though but with third parties but what are you talking about share more details please.

[Felicity_Tide]

~snip

So is this progress, or just another way for banks to profit from what was supposed to challenge them?

Motives of every Centralized organization always have something to do with making profits, and banks are not left out of the equation. If a bank chooses to associate with Bitcoin, then offering it has a similar service to fiat is definitely going to be their agenda, except otherwise which I haven't heard of. I can still remember a thread concerning something like "Bitcoin Bank in El Salvador". These institutions are joining not because they don't want to be left out, but because they want to introduce some form of centralization that will profit them in a long run.

But the thing is, at the end of the day, there is really no problem with banks doing whatever they want, because no one can stop them in the first place. They can join because Bitcoin does not discriminate. The only problem comes from the users who chooses to use their service rather than practice self custody.

Satoshi already made this clear in the Bitcoin whitepaper...

A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.

[RealNoblee]

Nobody likes the other provider who is taking their clients so.

Now speaking seriously, the adoption these banks can have be enormous, although you did not mention which adoption you were talking about haha, like which bank is accepting bitcoin, did some new big bank joins the list, although is there any list at all haha. I mean bro there were banks before that allowed the buying and selling not directly though but with third parties but what are you talking about share more details please.

Though, there must be many conception on banks accepting Bitcoin.

Perhaps they considered enhanced operational efficiency
By utilizing blockchain technology can significantly reduce the time and cost of international transfers by eliminating intermediaries like the SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) system, which benefits both the bank and its customers.

Bitcoin transactions recorded on an immutable ledger (blockchain) are highly secure and final, minimizing risks associated with fraud and chargebacks that are common in traditional systems

[colinistheman]

Isn't it ironic? Wasn't Bitcoin designed to keep people away from traditional banks? So what are we seeing now? Banks are now trying to act like they've always supported Bitcoin, which is killingly funny

In my opinion, this is not adoption of bitcoin at all but pure opportunism, lol. The banks smell profit and pretend to accept bitcoin all while holding control of the asset and regulating how people can actually utilize it. This is not what bitcoin stands for, okay? Actual adoption means self custody, not holding your BTC under the permission of a bank. The only silver lining I see is exposure and maybe some normies find out about it through these banks

[Maslate]

In my own point of understanding, as long as it's considered a currency, hence banks should therefore be a part of it. I don't see having issues on it. This kind of deal is perfect for banks, but I don't see it perfect for us knowing we do want to get rid from the control of banks and government. But what else can we do, we are working on bitcoin for its future global adoption as a legal tender, or as a reserved currency. So banks should be a part of it, no matter how we hate that idea. Its up to us already how we will manage the risk.

[Churchillvv]

Some people perception of this is that bitcoin had grown so much now that everyone will like to get involved with it and some humans out there are so in love with not carrying the load of taking responsibility of their actions so they let want the banks to hold their bitcoin in other for whatever comes up they can be compensated.

Personally, I don’t fuck with those shit that has to negate the core intentions of bitcoin and the primary thing I have known bitcoin for. So banks attempting to accept bitcoin is not something I want to even imagine.

[Vaculin]

Isn't it ironic? Wasn't Bitcoin designed to keep people away from traditional banks? So what are we seeing now? Banks are now trying to act like they've always supported Bitcoin, which is killingly funny

In my opinion, this is not adoption of bitcoin at all but pure opportunism, lol. The banks smell profit and pretend to accept bitcoin all while holding control of the asset and regulating how people can actually utilize it. This is not what bitcoin stands for, okay? Actual adoption means self custody, not holding your BTC under the permission of a bank. The only silver lining I see is exposure and maybe some normies find out about it through these banks

What else can you expect from this sudden shift of mind? This is just like Trump suddenly promote bitcoin no matter how he cursed it before, that's because he smells big opportunities and potentials waiting for bitcoin. Same with the government and banks, there is always hidden agenda behind their sudden favorable action to bitcoin.

Everything is wrong here, everything is being planned. And the best remedy we can do is to never trust them, more specifically our bitcoins.

[Raflesia]

The government is still trying to outsmart some things including for control although it may only be temporary or even have little effect.
I actually don't really care when the government and banks try to initiate such things because in the end, control certainly starts with oneself.
It may be true that later on the banks will start to try little by little try to emphasize for some exchanges that they agree to make a record of what we do because certainly when we deal with exchanges then indeed this can become centralized but again the choice is in our own hands.

I am free to do anything in bitcoin including where we transact even though the government can emphasize about exchanges but of course we can refuse or just make this as an alternative.

[Rockstarguy]

So is this progress, or just another way for banks to profit from what was supposed to challenge them?

It is a good development; this is to say that Bitcoin is really doing well when it comes to adoption. At least people will see the reason why they need Bitcoin for banks to accept it. This shouldn't be a surprise to you; even people like the current president of the US, who was against Bitcoin, are now big fans of Bitcoin. In the past, those who were against Bitcoin were just being ignorant of what it is, but today it is well understood, and for banks to accept Bitcoin shouldn't be a surprise to us.

[gogarza63@hotmail.com]

It feels strange seeing banks suddenly open their doors to Bitcoin when the original message was “banking without banks.” Bitcoin was created to remove middlemen, to let people control their money directly without relying on traditional institutions. yet now, the same system that Bitcoin tried to replace is starting to embrace it.

Some say it’s a good sign, its mass adoption means more legitimacy and convenience, but others see it as a step backward, a slow takeover of something that was meant to be free from centralized control.

So is this progress, or just another way for banks to profit from what was supposed to challenge them?

U.S Banking ~ "I missed the bus... I'll be buying some more soon"

[Hypnosis00]

Whether it's right or wrong, we can no longer control the future plans of banks towards bitcoin. But we are still in full control of our bitcoin, so we need to be more wise and cautious in our decisions for bitcoin so that in the future, banks will never gain an edge over our bitcoin, and our bitcoin will never be exposed to the banks. For me, that's the best key for now. That what, no matter how these banks trying to reach out to us and attract our bitcoin, we will never fall on their traps.

[OcTradism]

Whether it's right or wrong, we can no longer control the future plans of banks towards bitcoin. But we are still in full control of our bitcoin, so we need to be more wise and cautious in our decisions for bitcoin so that in the future, banks will never gain an edge over our bitcoin, and our bitcoin will never be exposed to the banks. For me, that's the best key for now. That what, no matter how these banks trying to reach out to us and attract our bitcoin, we will never fall on their traps.

Bitcoin blockchain opens for everyone to accept it, use it at either individual level or business level. It turns to something extremely wrong if there is such restrictions against any entity that wants to accept and use Bitcoin blockchain. Fortunately, we don't have such centralized restrictions with Bitcoin blockchain and banks no matter they are good or bad banks are welcome as same as all other entities.

People only need to learn about risk with banks and possibility of losing their money by storing in bank accounts. Anyway, if banks have any products that bring more people to Bitcoin market, it's their good contributions to Bitcoin adoption. The remaining task for people is knowing which one is best for storing their fund, it's bitcoins, not fiat currency, and it's Bitcoin non custodial wallets, not bank accounts.

[Dunamisx]

Banks can choose to accept Bitcoin and there's nothing bad in that's but we should only know that this will only take away our privacy from us, because they are going to have every details information about nus linked to the bank account we have, but anyone that is privacy minded and wants the same freedom we have always wanted with our finances, they will know that all these are not needed, because they will definitely deprived us of our privacy.

[alastantiger]

Some say it’s a good sign, its mass adoption means more legitimacy and convenience, but others see it as a step backward, a slow takeover of something that was meant to be free from centralized control.

So is this progress, or just another way for banks to profit from what was supposed to challenge them?

They didn't have a choice because they're losing customers to the services that the cryptocurrency market is offering as people can now lend or borrow money through cryptocurrency smart contracts without needing the banks anymore, assuming the banks didn't join the industry, they'll be missing out but the banks being involved is for only one purpose, they want to take back their custom and only observing to see how things are being done while they're here, they also want to make some profits to strengthen their institutions.

We can't stop anybody or institution from adoption of Bitcoin instead we want them to keep adopting because they're contributing to the popularity of Bitcoin and with increased demand, the market is only growing to greater heights. It was about time the banks begin to collaborate with Bitcoin to stay relevent again or they get forgotten.

[FinneysTrueVision]

People were already trusting centralized exchanges. If you are going to trust a custodian then might as well use something that is highly regulated. I don’t know if Bitcoin deposits are covered by insurance, but I imagine people still feel safe with banks that have been around for many decades.

Being your own bank might be fine for retail investors, but if you’re an institution or an investor worth billions, you will look for the most practical and safe approach to protecting your wealth. A windows laptop and a piece of paper with your phrase written on it is not going to be good enough.

[crwth]

I don't think there should be a problem with them accepting, but treating them as middlemen —the banks —makes BTC a different thing in principle. Decentralization should be part of it, and being able to do P2P should be well implemented. It's your keys and your coins, so the coins should be under your control. If not, it defeats the purpose.

But I guess we have to do it just because they have the money and they could really increase the volume, and since they can invest in ETFs, why not?

Maybe some possible stuff to do is check major press releases from banks about BTC services.

[tottong]

It feels strange seeing banks suddenly open their doors to Bitcoin when the original message was “banking without banks.” Bitcoin was created to remove middlemen, to let people control their money directly without relying on traditional institutions. yet now, the same system that Bitcoin tried to replace is starting to embrace it.

This can be discussed further if we begin to understand the understanding of banks suddenly opening the door to Bitcoin together and what aspects do we want to discuss?
Indirectly, I still use the bank every time I make a Bitcoin transaction for deposits or withdrawals. Do you think this is also part of the discussion we are trying to talk about? If you don't want the bank to control the investments you make then there are still opportunities available such as regular purchases that you can apply so that the system in question still looks like usual without any intermediaries.
The choice is up to each of us, whatever use we use must be seen based on our needs and never force ourselves for irrational reasons.

[Belarge]

This is a sign that nothing is certain in the world not even bitcoin or cryptocurrency in general and if the bank is now interested in bitcoin, is a sign that soon we will have a centralized system where everything will be controlled maybe not today but someday which is very much against what the system was designed for.
There was a time people celebrated government acceptance of bitcoin, but I saw a different view because I knew and I have always known that, government meant nothing good for the people and its involvement in this whole cryptocurrency thing will raise a step closer to privacy bridge and now total the government has bent laws and making it seem very difficult for decentralized institutions and even the bitcoin believer now prefer to trade on registered exchanges over the decentralized ones.
People are more interested in holding than the regular decentralized transactions and don’t care what people are interested in the system as long as the price keeps rising to their favour.

[Smack That Ace]

The good point is that all of this does not affect BTC in itself. I have said this so many times, i don't mind saying it again, the network is censorship resistant and what people decide to do with their keys does not change what BTC is or what it represents.

Yes, banks integrate bitcoin into their systems and accept it, or people give them bitcoin for the banks to hold. Or even if banks hold the majority of the bitcoin supply, they cannot change the core structure of bitcoin. The bitcoin network remains the same, decentralized, immutable and uncontrollable.

Those who deposit their bitcoins in banks, ETFs, that means they are facing risks as they have lost control over their assets. That doesn't affect the bitcoin network at all.

[nemesis_incarnate]

The good point is that all of this does not affect BTC in itself. I have said this so many times, i don't mind saying it again, the network is censorship resistant and what people decide to do with their keys does not change what BTC is or what it represents.

Yes, banks integrate bitcoin into their systems and accept it, or people give them bitcoin for the banks to hold. Or even if banks hold the majority of the bitcoin supply, they cannot change the core structure of bitcoin. The bitcoin network remains the same, decentralized, immutable and uncontrollable.

Those who deposit their bitcoins in banks, ETFs, that means they are facing risks as they have lost control over their assets. That doesn't affect the bitcoin network at all.

Unfortunately, some people get it the hard way only when they see their coin gone / frozen, for whatever reason. Only then they understand why BTC allows them to handle their custody themselves..