4 ms·

The irony about the hate is that having a decentralized way to do things like this is actually going to help unseat some of the banks' powers.

by gleenn 11y ago

Animats 11y ago
No, what this does is reduce the need for clearinghouse entities, such as Depository Trust Company, National Securities Clearing Corporation, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation, and The Options Clearing Corporation. There's a back-end bookkeeping system in finance which tracks who owns what. That's where blockchain technology applies. Banks can't do this themselves, because there's a mutual mistrust problem. So there are all those clearinghouse companies, which maintain the databases.
- civilian 11y ago
  This is a great observation, I didn't realize that clearinghouses were a thing. John, have you thought about what other backend bookkeeping systems could benefit from using blockchains?
- MikeNomad 11y ago
  So the solution is moving to a new method and process driven by the banks, and with the removal of third party oversight? No thanks. If there is a system, it can, and eventually will, be gamed.
Sven7 11y ago
I'll don't buy this BS about the block chain, when the power to verify it centralizes power in the hands of those that can afford the most computing resources.
- icebraining 11y ago
  A few notes: Being the people or group who can afford "the most" computing resources is not enough, at least as that expression is commonly used. To make an analogy, Bill Gates is the US citizen with the most wealth, but you'd need to join hundreds or thousands of people to gather 50+%, which is what you need to launch the attach you're mentioning. Also, it's not true that only they would get the power to verify it; everyone can verify the transactions on the blockchain. What they would gain is the ability to double-spend their Bitcoins, and not without getting noticed by the rest of the network.

The irony about the hate is that having a decentralized way to do things like this is actually going to help unseat some of the banks' powers.

by gleenn 11y ago

The irony about the hate is that having a decentralized way to do things like this is actually going to help unseat some of the banks' powers.

Animats 11y ago

No, what this does is reduce the need for clearinghouse entities, such as Depository Trust Company, National Securities Clearing Corporation, the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation, and The Options Clearing Corporation. There's a back-end bookkeeping system in finance which tracks who owns what. That's where blockchain technology applies. Banks can't do this themselves, because there's a mutual mistrust problem. So there are all those clearinghouse companies, which maintain the databases.

civilian 11y ago
This is a great observation, I didn't realize that clearinghouses were a thing. John, have you thought about what other backend bookkeeping systems could benefit from using blockchains?
MikeNomad 11y ago
So the solution is moving to a new method and process driven by the banks, and with the removal of third party oversight? No thanks. If there is a system, it can, and eventually will, be gamed.

Sven7 11y ago

I'll don't buy this BS about the block chain, when the power to verify it centralizes power in the hands of those that can afford the most computing resources.

icebraining 11y ago
A few notes: Being the people or group who can afford "the most" computing resources is not enough, at least as that expression is commonly used. To make an analogy, Bill Gates is the US citizen with the most wealth, but you'd need to join hundreds or thousands of people to gather 50+%, which is what you need to launch the attach you're mentioning. Also, it's not true that only they would get the power to verify it; everyone can verify the transactions on the blockchain. What they would gain is the ability to double-spend their Bitcoins, and not without getting noticed by the rest of the network.