Will centralized exchanges resist decentralization like the banks resist bitcoin

[taylortyler]

Decentralized exchanges seem to be an inevitable step for bitcoin. Problem is, centralized exchanges like coinba are making millions. They have a lot to lose if decentralized exchanges take over.. So, I think that we will start to see centralized exchanges like coinbase fighting to maintain "control" in a similar fashion to how banks and governments are doing with bitcoin in general. Thoughts?

[Saffronix]

They may very well aim to try and keep their money rolling in, or they could embrace it, or let said exchanges co-exist with no complaints.

I really do not know. I don't know enough of the exchange's owner's goals to make an informed decision.

[inBitweTrust]

Decentralized exchanges seem to be an inevitable step for bitcoin. Problem is, centralized exchanges like coindesk are making millions. They have a lot to lose if decentralized exchanges take over.. So, I think that we will start to see centralized exchanges like coindesk fighting to maintain "control" in a similar fashion to how banks and governments are doing with bitcoin in general. Thoughts?

Coinbase... not coindesk....

Both will coexist as centralized exchanges have venture capital investments and profits to allow them to hire more developers for different features and products and decentralized exchanges will be used by others for security.

[ThomasCrowne]

Personally I suspect centralized exchanges will be around for quite sometime.  But if a decentralized solution comes along that is obviously superior and has a proven track record I suspect long-term the centralized exchanges will ultimately be forced to either adapt or die out.

[franky1]

Decentralized exchanges seem to be an inevitable step for bitcoin. Problem is, centralized exchanges like coinba are making millions. They have a lot to lose if decentralized exchanges take over.. So, I think that we will start to see centralized exchanges like coinbase fighting to maintain "control" in a similar fashion to how banks and governments are doing with bitcoin in general. Thoughts?

yaw, boring flawed argument.

centralised exchanges have no fight against localbitcoins and ripple (the 2 main site deemed as being p2p exchanges)

moving on....

[taylortyler]

Decentralized exchanges seem to be an inevitable step for bitcoin. Problem is, centralized exchanges like coinba are making millions. They have a lot to lose if decentralized exchanges take over.. So, I think that we will start to see centralized exchanges like coinbase fighting to maintain "control" in a similar fashion to how banks and governments are doing with bitcoin in general. Thoughts?

yaw, boring flawed argument.

centralised exchanges have no fight against localbitcoins and ripple (the 2 main site deemed as being p2p exchanges)

moving on....

Very convincing rebuttal. Care to actually point out the flaws and explain what you mean by they have "no fight"?

[TRex95]

Personally I suspect centralized exchanges will be around for quite sometime.  But if a decentralized solution comes along that is obviously superior and has a proven track record I suspect long-term the centralized exchanges will ultimately be forced to either adapt or die out.

I really don't see a decentralized exchange with any meaningful volume ever coming to light as most large exchanges have volumes that are greater then that the block chain could handle. 

[Lethn]

I don't think that you'll be able to decentralise cryptocurrencies as long as people cling onto paper money, governments have too much of a strangehold, it can be easily done with cryptocurrencies, but not paper, unless we get some country that is willing to host such a system but that's still quite centralised.

[franky1]

Decentralized exchanges seem to be an inevitable step for bitcoin. Problem is, centralized exchanges like coinba are making millions. They have a lot to lose if decentralized exchanges take over.. So, I think that we will start to see centralized exchanges like coinbase fighting to maintain "control" in a similar fashion to how banks and governments are doing with bitcoin in general. Thoughts?

yaw, boring flawed argument.

centralised exchanges have no fight against localbitcoins and ripple (the 2 main site deemed as being p2p exchanges)

moving on....

Very convincing rebuttal. Care to actually point out the flaws and explain what you mean by they have "no fight"?

flaws:
1. coinbase make more money from merchants exchanging to fiat, than they do from 'day traders'
2. coinbase actually use things like ripple, bitstamp uses ripple. so there is no fight
3. localbitcoins and ripple have been around a while now.. i see no smoke damage or injuries, wheres the supposed fight?

[juicyjuice87]

 NXT multigateway, it's a crypto-exchange that is decentralised and probably one of the safest exchanges out there

[IDKwhatimdoing]

Decentralized exchanges seem to be an inevitable step for bitcoin. Problem is, centralized exchanges like coinba are making millions. They have a lot to lose if decentralized exchanges take over.. So, I think that we will start to see centralized exchanges like coinbase fighting to maintain "control" in a similar fashion to how banks and governments are doing with bitcoin in general. Thoughts?

yaw, boring flawed argument.

centralised exchanges have no fight against localbitcoins and ripple (the 2 main site deemed as being p2p exchanges)

moving on....

Very convincing rebuttal. Care to actually point out the flaws and explain what you mean by they have "no fight"?

flaws:
1. coinbase make more money from merchants exchanging to fiat, than they do from 'day traders'
2. coinbase actually use things like ripple, bitstamp uses ripple. so there is no fight
3. localbitcoins and ripple have been around a while now.. i see no smoke damage or injuries, wheres the supposed fight?

Coinbase probably looses money from consumers using it's services, and uses this part of their business as a "loss leader" to try to get more merchants to use their merchant services (bitcoin payment processing).

[beetcoin]

that's just capitalism for you. everybody wants to protect their assets. if saving $10 means it'll cost other people $1,000 more, then why not?

[illymoka]

Possibly... but there is not much they can do to stop it, just like the banks inability.

[cccarnation]

Imo decentralized exchanges is a myth hyped by this community. We already have a pretty usable exchange here

https://counterwallet.co

But imo trades on decentralized exchanges will always be few. People today trade at nano seconds. That is not prossible with blockchain.

[Coinfan]

The main problem of a decentralized exchange is how to handle fiat.

If members have to use banking accounts, decentralized exchanges will be little more than localbitcoins or www.bitcoin.de . They will lose all the instant nature of real exchanges. The only difference will be that the orderbook is p2p. But they will be little more than a system of ads.

If they decide to rely on a system of payments, like perfect money or egopay, they will lose their nature of decentralized.

Perhaps one solution would be to use as payment cryptos backed by fiat, with a fixed value. Recently, two or three were announced. But those cryptos also depend on a central institution that will guaranty the fixed value...

[cyberpinoy]

Firstly let me say anyone who seriously thinks the "BANKS" are not involved with bitcoin is a pure and simple idiot, and should not be even thinking of replying to centralization, trading, or any other form of forum not related to mining and doing faucets.

Banks like Barclays, JP Morgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, did not get where they are by not taking advantage of money making situations, they rule the stock market, they manipulate the foreign exchange market, and they run the commodities, they say what your money is worth....GLOBALLY, and if you honestly think they are sitting back in their $2000 dollar chairs and just waiting for a fiat collapse your an idiot. They are preparing, and I can bet have had many meetings already as to how they can "end" this bitcoin "fiasco"

These banks hold more gold in one vault than you can fit in your house, and even more paper contracts (IOUs) on commodities than you can pile in 20 houses. They do not die easily and they will not let some developer of a "worthless" protocol take their fortunes away. (What they feel bitcoin is) To them if they can't run it neither can you!!

The problem this community has is it is absolutely horrible, to many children trying to play the adults finance game, to many hackers trying to get rich quick, there is so much going against bitcoin, and not enough of the community coming together to progress it forward. Its just a means to an end for most people involved. A get rich quick scheme, and the banks know this and will use it against all of us. One day, maybe not soon, but one day the banks are going to jump in like a tiger on its prey and show all the children in bitcoin how the finance game works.

The banks are involved you can bet your sweet little donkey, and they are waiting, quietly sitting on bitcoins in about 20000 different addresses so the huge amounts go unnoticed, they are waiting patiently to pounce and destroy the coin. I would say from past research on how banks destroy a market, It will come after the second lowering of bitcoin returns per block found, meaning sometime after the reward drops from 25 coins per block to 12.5 coins per block.

See the banks dont like to just screw people they like to make people go bankrupt, they dont want to hurt you, they want to OWN you. OWN your property, OWN you finances, and essentially OWN you. So they will hold their coins they bought for 1 to 10 dollars each and hold in 20000+ addresses so you cant tell, then when the mining becomes so costly that it costs miners more to mine than its worth, they will pounce, just as people are upgrading their equipment in hopes to get more of that 12.5 coin reward and combat against the difficulty, they will sell it all off, making it so unprofitable the miners will close down their mines, in this happening the security of the coin fails, no miners = no proof of work, no transaction getting processed, if no one is processing transactions then BOOM coin fails. 

A lot of people hate the ultimate 51% threat right now, however pools like them will be the ones to save the coin, the only way for them to do it would be to break their 1 pool into many different pools and continue to mine to keep the coin alive. And then it becomes a battle between the real miners and the big banks.

[mamarried]

Imo decentralized exchanges is a myth hyped by this community. We already have a pretty usable exchange here

https://counterwallet.co

But imo trades on decentralized exchanges will always be few. People today trade at nano seconds. That is not prossible with blockchain.

very true, but decentralized exchanges will have a huge roll in shaping the crypto currency landscape.

You might not be able to make nanosecond trades but you'll sure be able to maintain a level of privacy and trade unhindered more than any centralized exchange could offer especially in light of what we see as proposed regulations.

[mamarried]

IMO everything must be decentralized to show those who want to assume control that they have none, this will in turn lead to a compromise on their end(more freedom) when dealing with centralized exchanges.

[MegaHustlr]

Imo decentralized exchanges is a myth hyped by this community. We already have a pretty usable exchange here

https://counterwallet.co

How is it a myth? It's something that can and will happens. It needs to happen for safety as well so we don't have to rely on keeping our coins on an exchnage.

[smashingpumpkin]

IMO everything must be decentralized to show those who want to assume control that they have none, this will in turn lead to a compromise on their end(more freedom) when dealing with centralized exchanges.

Sure but centralized exchanges will not seize to exist. In fact all meaningful volume will be on centralized exchanges