https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/ten-years-nobody-come-blockchain-153000922.html
As we talk of fees and network, there is an interesting article from the Yahoo network.
It's worth a read. What I take from the article is that the blockchain needs to evolve more....we of course are early adopters.
This article is a piece of crap! It seems to have been created for an ulterior motive. The author is intentionally dense on most of the issues, speaking of things that have come to pass, or what he/she claims "people" are doing (no sources). In reality much of the info is incorrect, incoherent or purposefully drug through the mud.
The article was written Dec 26th and the video at the top with Jamie Dimon is a misleading one. 3 days after the video (Oct) Jamie Dimon announced that his investment company, JPMorgan Chase announced the launch of a blockchain-based system of their own! So much for the second sentence of the article!
And yet, after years of tireless effort and billions of dollars invested, nobody has actually come up with a use for the blockchain — besides currency speculation and illegal transactions.
So, yeah, Jamie Dimon was already late to the party and his predictions over the years have been obviously wrong up to this point.... as is the author of this article. Visa and others are trying to create their own blockchain tech and patent it. See, this is an attempted power grab to TAKE/STEAL an existing technology that is threatening, so as to control and profit from the use of said tech and to maintain a power dynamic in the banking industry.
The government-backed banking system provides FDIC guarantees, reversibility of ACH, identity verification, audit standards and an investigation system when things go wrong. Bitcoin, by design, has none of these things.
Much of which, the blockchain eliminates by design. The physical identities need not be known. The "auditing" of the system is done by function of the blockchain. In theory, the blockchain doesn't need an investigation system for if things don't go right, the transaction will fail.
As for the FDIC, well, who gives a flying turd! That's for insuring against bank failures. This is what the blockchain eliminates! It's decentralized.
It's worth noting two particular payment use cases where people are particularly excited about blockchain-based currencies: micropayments and bank-to-bank transfers. In terms of micropayments, people enthuse that bitcoin transactions are free and instant. Actually, they take about eight minutes to clear and cost about 4 cents to process.
Really. First, no one thought it was free... ever. That would be stupid and the whole idea of blockchain is that miners are paid with transaction fees, for processing transactions. Very fundamental stuff here. Secondly, "people" are not talking about microtransactions with bitcoin. A ludicrous statement.
Why haven't banks preferred this new technology? The answer is that setting up a Ripple Gateway isn't actually much different than using the existing corresponding-account system
Is that an answer? Or, rather, is the answer "Banks don't make any money off of transfers or by being the gatekeepers, therefore, banks do not see the incentive to adopt such things."
I think that is the answer. Why would a bank be falling all over itself to adopt the technology that eliminates them? To say that blockchain tech is almost the same as SWIFT is ludicrous.
except that a lost password or security token can lead to much larger and more instant actual losses — which, as a reminder, has happened to more leading bitcoin exchanges than have managed to avoid it.
First, you're relying on single-point encryption — your own private keys — rather than a more sophisticated system that might involve two-factor authorization, intrusion detection, volume limits, firewalls, remote IP tracking and the ability to disconnect the system in an emergency.
Never keep your money on an exchange as a storage method, everyone knows this. As for exchange security, most of the problems have been from lax security and/or problems with the exchange operations itself. In the recent NiceHash hack, they were keeping ALL of their Bitcoin in a single HOT wallet - a big NO NO for anybody... first, don't store wealth in a hot wallet. Second, split funds up into multiple wallets, preferably, one per customer.
As for security, a cold wallet on physical paper is hard to crack for a hacker. Trezor, Leger Nano or any other hardware wallet is going to give you better-than-bank security. No mention of that.
"Ten years in, nobody has come up with a use for blockchain"
Well, there you have it.. author Kai Stinchcombe has addressed us, and the 600B market cap on crypto must be part of the "no use found" scenario. Yeah, right! What's this guy smoking?
