From doubting blockchain to building their own?

[RGBTC]

Yes, they used to hate blockchain before realizing it could be made semi-centralized. Those banks certainly won't sacrifice their interest in controlling people's money, even as they undergo a massive technological transition. However, it is hard to call it "blockchain" when the network is maintained by only a handful of entities (and I hope that alliance remains intact); at some point, it will likely have security vulnerabilities.

[Natalim]

If adapting blockchain and create bankchain alliance will make the banks transactions more efficient and create effective services, then they are actually seeing the real essence of having a blockchain now. Its normal for them to doubt it at first because its new to them, but there's always room for learning, and right now they have clearly understood why having a blockchain plays a very vital role.

They hate the idea of blockchain technology at first, maybe because its a key type of a decentralized system. But now they're actually moving into it and applying it into their own centralized system.

[macson]

Why be surprised? Just remember that there are institutions that were once so skeptical of Bitcoin and claimed it was nothing more than a global money-laundering scheme, yet today they have become one of the largest providers of Bitcoin ETFs.

So it's not really surprising that this banking alliance is beginning to adopt blockchain as its network, since they've seen such rapid growth in stablecoins and don't want to lose their competitive edge in the market. It's all just a matter of their business interests, because if they can't adapt quickly to new developments, they'll simply fall behind.

[lionheart78]

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

These institutions see the trend.  They see how popular blockchain or let us say Distributed Ledger Technology is, and they wanted to have this technology integrated on their system to cater client that are inclined to use blockchain technology.

The banking institution sees that they cannot beat blockchain tech with their traditional system, so although they are initially hostile to the blockchain implementation being decentralized, they understand that implementing a centralized blockchain can be in par with decentralized blockchain technology, with them having more control.

I think for the bank this move is a step forward and there is no harm in implementing a kind of blockchain technology that they have control.

[Dave1]

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.

I'm not surprised though, I mean if you look throughout the history of man, there are a lot of technologies that are being frown upon but later accepted it, like what we all have bee using, the Internet. And with the old banking system, they might have seen that in order to maintain it, they will have to cope with the latest technology and that is blockchain. So that they can picture themselves as somewhat open minded to this technology, but at the end of the day, it's all about profits.

And so with this, they might get a lot of new customers because they have embrace blockchain. And then can provide services much faster as before and everything is written, can't be tampered. So still the same principle, but just different face value to their customers.

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

I'm not surprised though, I mean if you look throughout the history of man, there are a lot of technologies that are being frown upon but later accepted it, like what we all have bee using, the Internet. And with the old banking system, they might have seen that in order to maintain it, they will have to cope with the latest technology and that is blockchain. So that they can picture themselves as somewhat open minded to this technology, but at the end of the day, it's all about profits.

And so with this, they might get a lot of new customers because they have embrace blockchain. And then can provide services much faster as before and everything is written, can't be tampered. So still the same principle, but just different face value to their customers.

There are revolutions in human civilization history and the entire world adaptation follows very naturally because revolutions are good for societies. From individuals, companies to governments, real revolutions make life and operations in societies more efficiently and better, so it's intelligent to adapt to such revolutions, just sooner or later.

Bitcoin and blockchain have already changed the world, they are true game-changers so not only bank system but also the other industries have been adapting to this blockchain and accounting revolution recent years and will be more intensively doing such adaptation in the upcoming years.

The history of technology timeline.

[X-ray]

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.  

Would it be correct to say they don't hate technology if they created their own version though? At that point it is quite different tech.

These banks don't really care about the technology in my opinion, but they want to prevent capital flight from their business, we know how much money they've spent to lobby the clarity act to ban the yield which could risk them of capital flight.

They apparently not stopping at that and want to create their own version of blockchain which maybe used to secure capital and to create yield.

This is just another bank's attempt to strip the crypto market of their capitals. They want to create competition, specifically for remittances. Not a good thing to me.

[atookz]

It is not a "win" for blockchain or an indication that Bitcoin is becoming mainstream. it's just the opposite. The 39 U.S. state banking associations are just taking the technology, and dumping the principles that it was supposed to uphold – decentralization, a lack of a single controlling body. It looks as if the BankChain Alliance will be a permissioned ledger, a private blockchain, similar to Hyperledger and Corda, that banks have already been operating since approximately 2016. Unlike the Bitcoin network, nodes and rules will be under the control of the bank consortium itself.

Its intended use is straightforward: payments, stablecoins, and tokenized deposits—all remain under bank control. The emphasis is more on survival than on ideology: faster settlement, especially as the payments sector has steadily been ceded to private stablecoins like USDT and USDC, particularly since the GENIUS Act. The irony here is that it's the same kind of associations that weren't interested, if not downright skeptical, about blockchain a little while ago and now joining forces to create their version of blockchain. That isn't an indication that they're “seen the light,” it is an indication that they've realised they need the infrastructure, just as long as they are the ones holding the keys. It's not blockchain per se that is winning. It's the narrative that's being revived for a mission that's contrary to the original mission of Bitcoin.

[Questat]

"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.

That's the point, blockchain and decentralization should come together, but they created their own. Well, they still copied some parts of the system, but that's alright since we cannot stop them from doing it. Since it is still backed by USD or fiat currency, people will eventually realize that it will not really help in protecting their money from inflation. When they want to invest, Bitcoin will still be one of the choices, and as adoption continues to increase, banks might become less useful in some areas.

[Odusko]

Uptil now the sentiment is that, crypto is bad but we can welcome blockchain infrastructure.
This is where we are with traditional financial dev team coming up with all of the scrap ideas, if you adopt blockchain you must first of adopt cryptocurrency, left for you to be focused either on Bitcoin or altcoins, at this point is left for the company to decide which alternative best suit their interests in the long term.

[Maslate]

Why be surprised? Just remember that there are institutions that were once so skeptical of Bitcoin and claimed it was nothing more than a global money-laundering scheme, yet today they have become one of the largest providers of Bitcoin ETFs.

So it's not really surprising that this banking alliance is beginning to adopt blockchain as its network, since they've seen such rapid growth in stablecoins and don't want to lose their competitive edge in the market. It's all just a matter of their business interests, because if they can't adapt quickly to new developments, they'll simply fall behind.

I guess being skeptical does not really hate the technology itself, it only means they just don't trust it yet. But who doesn't want to adapt blockchain anyway when it can offer faster speed, lower costs, enhanced security, and transparency and auditability for any traditional finance. Maybe it takes time for centralized banks to move into blockchain, but here they are now creating a BankChain alliance out from the simple version of blockchain.

If decentralized platform benefits from blockchain, much more for centralized ones, be it banking, logistics or gaming.

[Luzin]

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. 

They’re not funny, it’s just that they don’t want to admit there’s good technology. But there are some systems they don’t like with decentralized blockchain because they can’t control it. So it seems like they learn from the blockchain system and then modify it with a centralized system so they can still control it. But for me, I wouldn’t be interested in a centralized system except for fiat, which forces me to comply with the rules they want.

I wonder what really changed from the old banking system?

It seems there isn't any, the system is the same, still centralized even though the technology might be different. They will never change the centralized system, I feel certain.

[YellowSwap]

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. 

They want the piece of the pie, it's not as if they like the technology, they are banks and for such companies it's always about the money, they must have think about it carefully first.

This is the only way to bring people from crypto space into banks Blockchain and that's their own problem not mine because I am not going to be one of those people.

It's not always about the products itself, it's more about the people behind the project, just like how important Nakamoto is to Bitcoin, they are the banks and they will handle their Blockchain projects as banks.

[vztwoae]

That’s an interesting point. It really shows how the view of blockchain has changed over the years. Even if a bank-controlled network is very different from Bitcoin’s decentralized model, the fact that traditional finance is adopting the technology is significant. It will be interesting to see whether these networks actually deliver meaningful benefits or simply create another centralized system with blockchain underneath.

[Cleanshit]

Yes, they used to hate blockchain before realizing it could be made semi-centralized. Those banks certainly won't sacrifice their interest in controlling people's money, even as they undergo a massive technological transition. However, it is hard to call it "blockchain" when the network is maintained by only a handful of entities (and I hope that alliance remains intact); at some point, it will likely have security vulnerabilities.

Yea this main difference here, same underlying technology can be use but I FBB being control by small group of bank. Trust model becomes different from Bitcoin.
Banks do prefers  this setup because cause of the benefits of shared records and also a faster settlement while keeping control, having to call it blockchain don’t automatically give it decentralized and permissionless nature which makes Bitcoin different. Interesting part is weather this institutions would realize that decentralization is one of the strength of technology then just copying the part that useful to them.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

One of the greatest assets of bitcoin is the use of blockchain technology because it is well secured beyond ordinary doubts. The use of blockchain technology is not getting white spread because many are getting to know some of its advantages over using a centralized server; every sector is now considering blockchain technology to make everything they do in a transparent and accountable atmosphere.

[Taskford]

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. 

They made lot of things to discredit or try to block Bitcoin to be recognize or used by people.

But they failed for so many times, maybe this is the reason why they decide to adopt. Instead of continue to became negative.

This is maybe the reason why they try to introduce that project. But for sure those people already settled with crypto or Bitcoin, are unlikely to switch on a chain which controlled by bank. Because those centralized platforms can able to restrict or even freeze their funds. While Bitcoin continue to remain permissionless and also decentralized.