3 ms·
I read this as "we, the banks, want our own blockchain which we control and you should trust". Only you shouldn't trust it because the whole idea of a blockchai
by gtrubetskoy 11y ago
I read this as "we, the banks, want our own blockchain which we control and you should trust". Only you shouldn't trust it because the whole idea of a blockchain is that it cannot be influenced/controlled.
- Afforess 11y agoNo. It is unlikely private citizens will even have access to mine on the banking blockchain. Banks are looking at using it for intra-banking ledgers and commercial transactions. Longer term, it may replace the outdated ACH clearing house.
- roymurdock 11y agoIt's not about trust...it's about efficiency. In any blockchain network, users implicitly trust the developers of the software. If you use Bitcoin, you trust that Gavin Andresen & the core developers are making changes to the client software in the best interest of the network. If you disagree with any implemented changes (say they decide to increase the hard limit) then you can either refuse to update your client or move to another currency. Refusing to update only works if you have enough other users to stay on the same client version as you. In this case, assuming each bank has equal representation on designing/maintaining the blockchain, the developers are the users, so there is no need for implicit trust. It'll just make it easier to do transfers between banks without a 3rd party.