From doubting blockchain to building their own?

[Questat]

Check out this [news from CoinDesk]

Funny how things change because years ago, many people from traditional finance were dismissing crypto and blockchain, but now 39 U.S. state banking associations are planning their own nationwide blockchain network called BankChain Alliance. 

Based on the news, it will be used for payments, stablecoins and tokenized deposits, and of course it will still be controlled by banks, so this is still centralized, opposite to what Bitcoin represents.

Still, it says something when the same industry that was skeptical of blockchain is now building around it.

Maybe they didn’t really hate the technology after all, they just wanted their own version of it. 

[MArsland]

The BankChain Alliance wants to ensure that the incoming flow of money remains within their control and monitoring. Because when using third parties, they are worried that they cannot control or stop transactions in case of suspicion. With another frog now blockchain has to follow the rules of banks. So BankChain Alliance does adopt blockchain technology but in model it does not adopt blockchain like Bitcoin.

I wonder what really changed from the old banking system?

[mirakal]

I wonder what really changed from the old banking system?

The big difference is that in the old system, each bank has its own system and database, so transactions can take more time, especially when different banks need to verify and match their own records.

With blockchain or what some call a bankchain, it can still be centralized, but the participating banks can share one system or ledger, so transactions could become faster and easier to verify. So for me, it's basically a technology upgrade from the old system, and banks will adopt it if it can make transactions faster and more secure.

[Hatchy]

Based on the news, it will be used for payments, stablecoins and tokenized deposits, and of course it will still be controlled by banks, so this is still centralized, opposite to what Bitcoin represents.

What else do you expect? It is coming from the government, so they will have control over it, which makes it centralized. It might not be much different from digitalized fiat. The government is simply trying to make things more digital and incorporate more blockchain technology into the system.

Still, it says something when the same industry that was skeptical of blockchain is now building around it.
Maybe they didn’t really hate the technology after all, they just wanted their own version of it. 

The government never really hated blockchain technology.. what they disliked was the idea of decentralisation, where they have little or no control over the system. Bitcoin was a perfect example of a decentralised system, and because there is no central authority to control or hold accountable, governments had limited ways to stop it from growing into what it is today. It was never really about hatred, it was more about control and regulation..

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

Before now, they used to attack Bitcoin because they believed that the centralization was going to give a chance for manipulation, later do they discover that the blockchain technology could rather be the solution to the long-time challenges in financial economy, today many are being optimistic about bitcoin adoption and these are the same people that have counter against it in the past, they have also discover several benefits that could come from the use of blockchain technology on different aspect of the economy the control.

[notocactus]

Funny how things change because years ago, many people from traditional finance were dismissing crypto and blockchain, but now 39 U.S. state banking associations are planning their own nationwide blockchain network called BankChain Alliance.  

JP Morgan Chase are participating in 5 categories of cryptocurrency. Jamie lies!
It's two years ago and with Bitcoin Spot ETF approvals in the USA in January 2024, many things changed for Bitcoin adoption. It has reached to mainstream and Bitcoin has been adopted by many institutions, banks in the USA. Consequently, from the success of Bitcoin, governments and central banks consider about CBDCs, then more similar blockchain development and deployment in the bank systems globally.

[aoluain]

Bitcoin the technology/protocol is groundbreaking and the traditional finance institutions feared
it, or possibly didnt fully understand what it offered.

I also think they couldent separate it from the market which is a seperate entity altogether and
they used this to attach the technology or posswibly focussed far too much on the market and
the gigantic swings.

Now they have cherry picked the bit they would like for themselves, funny how it goes! They will
never give up the control though.

[Die_empty]

Check out this [news from CoinDesk]

Funny how things change because years ago, many people from traditional finance were dismissing crypto and blockchain, but now 39 U.S. state banking associations are planning their own nationwide blockchain network called BankChain Alliance. 

Based on the news, it will be used for payments, stablecoins and tokenized deposits, and of course it will still be controlled by banks, so this is still centralized, opposite to what Bitcoin represents.

The BankChain Alliance is an alliance of thirty-nine US state bankers associations with the aim of creating an industry-owned, industry-designed, and industry-governed network. There will always be criticism of every invention. Bankers pushed against the blockchain because of fear of losing the market. Some criticised the blockchain because they thought it was not reliable.

https://www.ledgerinsights.com/state-bankers-plan-industry-owned-blockchain-for-tokenized-deposits-stablecoins/

Still, it says something when the same industry that was skeptical of blockchain is now building around it.

Maybe they didn’t really hate the technology after all, they just wanted their own version of it. 

Nobody wants to lose control, so they hated the blockchain because of its threat to their existence. The banks are now offering attractive crypto services to people. Banks now know the benefits of blockchain technology, and they are taking advantage of them. Crypto users are growing globally, and crypto service charges and transaction fees are a viable source of bank revenue.

[Questat]

Now they have cherry picked the bit they would like for themselves, funny how it goes! They will
never give up the control though.

This is something that I don't think will ever happen, because how can a bank freeze assets if they don't have control over them? So this kind of blockchain is really being used for centralized transactions, not the same idea we had when Bitcoin was created.

It's kind of like stablecoins compared to Bitcoin, they're using some of the same technology but the system and control are different. For me, Bitcoin is still the original one, everything else just followed after it.

[Marykeller]

Maybe they didn’t really hate the technology after all, they just wanted their own version of it. 

That's the way it is. As they feel they are being left behind. Let them have their own version of blockchain that will stand a chance to compete, while they are in control of the finance space.

For the banks, this is a competition to render the same services of faster, cheaper, and 24/7 payment mechanisms. But all of these are in their terms and conditions, not on crypto.

[Alpha Marine]

In their defence, they've not been against blockchain, they have been against Bitcoin. I remember reading an article that said something like "Blockchain is revolutionary, while Bitcoin is not". I don't know if I got the headline correctly, it's a while ago, but it's along that line.
There are few people who were against Blockchain, but most of the arguments I've seen are that it's not useful or whatever. Even the Bitcoin they were against, they are all in favour of it right now. As long as something is profitable, people, especially financial corporations, will always go into it if it's not too messy.
A good innovation like blockchain, it's only a matter of time before more people adopt it and find ways to twerk it in ways that it favours them and they have control.
It's more like a "if you can't beat them, join them" kind of thing. They couldn't beat Bitcoin, so they joined and are also making profit from it. They've created RWAs and stablecoins just to take part in it. I believe we will see more involvement from corporations later on.

[BlackBoss_]

In their defence, they've not been against blockchain, they have been against Bitcoin. I remember reading an article that said something like "Blockchain is revolutionary, while Bitcoin is not". I don't know if I got the headline correctly, it's a while ago, but it's along that line.

Blockchain is an industry and in history, there are other projects created before Bitcoin project that are in Bitcoin prehistory. However, Bitcoin is a first ever decentralized blockchain, it succeeds and makes a lot of contribution for blockchain industry. It's wrong to talk about blockchain industry without talking about important roles of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin prehistory.

Talking about revolution, Bitcoin does have it.
An accounting revolution.
Bitcoin shook the world.

[Ruttoshi]

When you have people that are so keen to control everything around them and if possibly, your life. This is how they behave, they forget to look into a new innovation and see what they can benefit from it just because it wasn't created by them.

 Initially, the government hated bitcoin for decentralization. Assuming, bitcoin didn't survive and grow up to this level would the banks have looked into blockchain and see the benefits of using blockchain for their banking system? Anything that's good is good no matter the level of critics, it wouldn't change anything. Bitcoin has brought light to the world through its blockchain.

[Zoomic]

I know we're always happy when we see news like this because to us in the crypto world, it's a big win as it brings more adoption but on this one, I think they're simply using the technology on their own terms.

Most of these banks didn't suddenly became fans of decentralization, they probably realized that blockchain can make their existing processes faster and easier to manage.

They're are still opposite of Bitcoin even when there are now few similarities. They can't still be placed on the same category as Bitcoin.

The bank still keep their existing authority in place while the Bitcoin was designed to remove the need for any central authority.

[Faisal2202]

Still, it says something when the same industry that was skeptical of blockchain is now building around it.

Maybe they didn’t really hate the technology after all, they just wanted their own version of it. 

If I am not wrong then they never opposed blockchain technology, maybe some might have but majority has always admired the blockchain technology and they loved the concept but they disliked Bitcoin due to its decentralization.

But blockchain can be centralized and they knew that and that's why they adopted it and used it. But it is true that they want a centralized version of everything, they just love it haha.

So 39 US banks will form an alliance to create one single blockchain, well that's crazy for many reasons but let's see how it turns out to be.

[KiaKia]

I'm still not going to fall for anything similar to this, just because they have Blockchain to their name doesn't mean they still won't operate like the banks that they are.

You will be treated the same way as you would if you are running a bank account, so therefore I wouldn't want to come close to any projects that's coming from a bank, there is no difference between centralised companies and these banks.

I'm so done with anything centralised and banks type of operations combined, the only centralised company that I use is stable coins, that's because of the Volatility nature of cryptocurrencies.

[pooya87]

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

I say we are in the "they fight you" stage where the governments are issuing increasingly restrictive laws when it comes to cryptocurrencies while their banksters try to create "alternatives" to force people to use instead of bitcoin.

What's funny is that centralized and blockchain don't make sense together! The only reason why this inefficient form of database we call "blockchain" is acceptable for something like bitcoin is because of its decentralization.

[Renampun]

The idea of creating a blockchain network for the banking sector has been around for quite some time, but no bank has actually implemented it yet... If it’s true that they are developing such a blockchain, it means they recognize that adopting blockchain technology now can improve the efficiency of their banking operations.. However, the blockchain technology they are building may focus on banking operations, rather than being like the blockchain used in Bitcoin.. So, while it might benefit banking customers, it would have no impact on Bitcoin.

[PrivacyG]

Maybe they didn’t really hate the technology after all, they just wanted their own version of it. 

They never hated Blockchain technology, they only did not like Bitcoin and particularly how it attracted a lot of attention in a short time.  Some of them knew what was coming and tried to purchase more time so they can have a large hold of the Market, others lied to them selves that Bitcoin will eventually simply fade away and STILL purchased more time for them selves, just in case.

When you look back at all the media hate Bitcoin had, you can only see it as a kind of coordinated attack against it.  It was probably not an actual collective agreement that they should attack it but they all knew what was coming particularly every time there was a new wave of the Bullish Market.  Every time there was a Bullish trend, the Internet would be absolutely flooded with all these news articles where CEOs and other influential people say Bitcoin is dying, is a Ponzi, is not worth it et cetera.

Their dream was that people would listen.  The reality is that many of them did, but the number of people who did not is significant enough to matter.  Now what can they do other than joining us?

[Alphakilo]

Maybe they didn’t really hate the technology after all, they just wanted their own version of it. 

They never hated Blockchain technology, they only did not like Bitcoin and particularly how it attracted a lot of attention in a short time.  Some of them knew what was coming and tried to purchase more time so they can have a large hold of the Market, others lied to them selves that Bitcoin will eventually simply fade away and STILL purchased more time for them selves, just in case.

When you look back at all the media hate Bitcoin had, you can only see it as a kind of coordinated attack against it.  It was probably not an actual collective agreement that they should attack it but they all knew what was coming particularly every time there was a new wave of the Bullish Market.  Every time there was a Bullish trend, the Internet would be absolutely flooded with all these news articles where CEOs and other influential people say Bitcoin is dying, is a Ponzi, is not worth it et cetera.

Their dream was that people would listen.  The reality is that many of them did, but the number of people who did not is significant enough to matter.  Now what can they do other than joining us?

It was only a matter of time before the banking sector joined the cryptocurrency market just to save themselves from being sucked into the liquidity pool of crypto currencies. Despite all bad claims, they realize the Blockchain isn't the enemy but decentralization is to them, and that's why so many centralized systems are being built to maintain control and dominance of the financial sector.

They got no choice than to join the bandwagon of digital currency as an upgrade to traditional banking system which is losing customers because people trust that they can have some peace and control over their finances instead of trusting third party managers with exorbitant fees during transactions. It's definitely an upgrade which makes crypto currencies more of a hybrid integration rather than a pure permissionless and self custody system as it should be. It's all about control if you look at it closely and the bid to shift the narrative of decentralization to centralization by any means necessary.