Bitcoin for Banks
September 16, 2015 8:39 AM Subscribe
Nine of world's biggest banks join to form blockchain partnership.
"We held several roundtables...to deeply consider what the possible implications of the blockchain were, and what it could possibly do to save money, and time, and to create a better paradigm for the world of Wall Street and finance," Rutter told Reuters on Tuesday. Those that have signed up to the initiative so far are JP Morgan, State Street, UBS, Royal Bank of Scotland, Credit Suisse, BBVA and Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
Rutter said the initial focus would be to agree on an underlying architecture, but it had not yet been decided whether that would be underpinned by bitcoin's blockchain or another one, such as one being built by Ethereum, which offers more features than the original bitcoin technology.
Gonna guess another one, considering what they are trying to get out of it.
it could save them money by making their operations faster, more efficient
posted by Drinky Die at 8:50 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Gonna guess another one, considering what they are trying to get out of it.
it could save them money by making their operations faster, more efficient
posted by Drinky Die at 8:50 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Because there's nothing more efficient than a massive ever-expanding record of every single transaction ever made maintained by having computers guess random numbers, consuming an amount of electricity that rivals small nation-states.
posted by truex at 8:58 AM on September 16, 2015 [37 favorites]
posted by truex at 8:58 AM on September 16, 2015 [37 favorites]
This is, of course, great news for Bitc--wait, what?
posted by Halloween Jack at 9:00 AM on September 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by Halloween Jack at 9:00 AM on September 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
Yeah, "transparency, efficiency, blah blah blah". Not buying it. Big multinational block of banks that are coming up with an expandable currency alternative? Nothing good can come of this.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:02 AM on September 16, 2015 [14 favorites]
posted by Slackermagee at 9:02 AM on September 16, 2015 [14 favorites]
At least none of those banks have ever backed anything questionable.
posted by Optamystic at 9:03 AM on September 16, 2015 [32 favorites]
posted by Optamystic at 9:03 AM on September 16, 2015 [32 favorites]
But just think of the possibilities for the creation of bizarre poorly understood financial vehicles that this will enable! Surely that won't lead to any kind of a bad outcome!
posted by nubs at 9:03 AM on September 16, 2015 [24 favorites]
posted by nubs at 9:03 AM on September 16, 2015 [24 favorites]
I'm putting all my money into pumpkin futures.
posted by Poldo at 9:04 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Poldo at 9:04 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
I'm putting all my money into pumpkin futures.
Be sure you balance your portfolio with spice bonds.
posted by Thorzdad at 9:08 AM on September 16, 2015 [12 favorites]
Be sure you balance your portfolio with spice bonds.
posted by Thorzdad at 9:08 AM on September 16, 2015 [12 favorites]
At last, banks will finally be able to wash money for gangsters, dictators and CEOs without the pesky interference of local governments!
posted by a lungful of dragon at 9:13 AM on September 16, 2015 [13 favorites]
posted by a lungful of dragon at 9:13 AM on September 16, 2015 [13 favorites]
This future sucks. I blame Gibson.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:14 AM on September 16, 2015 [8 favorites]
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:14 AM on September 16, 2015 [8 favorites]
So much easier to launder all that money!
posted by Happy Dave at 9:18 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Happy Dave at 9:18 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
I look forward to building our national economy on derivative bitcoin shares whose values can only be computed by burning a lump of coal and then sacrificing a small rodent to Baphomet (praise be him).
posted by msbutah at 9:20 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by msbutah at 9:20 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
But, we have also run into a small inflation problem on account of the high level of leaf availability. Which means that I gather the current going rate has something like three major deciduous forests buying one ship’s peanut. So, um, in order to obviate this problem and effectively revalue the leaf, we are about to embark on an extensive defoliation campaign, and um, burn down all the forests. I think that’s a sensible move don’t you?
posted by scalefree at 9:20 AM on September 16, 2015 [13 favorites]
posted by scalefree at 9:20 AM on September 16, 2015 [13 favorites]
Be sure you balance your portfolio with spice bonds.
Because he who controls the spice...
posted by scalefree at 9:21 AM on September 16, 2015 [10 favorites]
Because he who controls the spice...
posted by scalefree at 9:21 AM on September 16, 2015 [10 favorites]
"Big multinational block of banks that are coming up with an expandable currency alternative? Nothing good can come of this."
A blockchain is not a currency.
posted by I-baLL at 9:24 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
A blockchain is not a currency.
posted by I-baLL at 9:24 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Neither is Bitcoin.
posted by truex at 9:26 AM on September 16, 2015 [8 favorites]
posted by truex at 9:26 AM on September 16, 2015 [8 favorites]
Why are banks interested in blockchains? I thought the main advantage of Bitcoin was not having to trust a central authority. And the trade-off is that you spend a lot of computer cycles on mining, you have long delays before confirming a transaction, potential schisms, the risk of a 51% attack, etc. The main reason that you take this trade-off is if you _really_ don't trust central authorities -- thus the uptake of Bitcoin among money launderers and black markets.
But if you could trust a central authority to hold a ledger of transactions, you could use an actual database. You could even fold in all the pseudonymity, the public-key security, and the "smart contracts" from Bitcoin. Banks trust central authorities every day and have lawyers to enforce that trust -- why adopt such an expensive technology with so many disadvantages just to eliminate a central authority?
posted by ectabo at 9:27 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
But if you could trust a central authority to hold a ledger of transactions, you could use an actual database. You could even fold in all the pseudonymity, the public-key security, and the "smart contracts" from Bitcoin. Banks trust central authorities every day and have lawyers to enforce that trust -- why adopt such an expensive technology with so many disadvantages just to eliminate a central authority?
posted by ectabo at 9:27 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
So far, we've had references to Dune, Restaurant at the End of the Universe, and Simpsons.
I sometimes wonder if future people will be able to figure out what we were talking about at all.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:27 AM on September 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
I sometimes wonder if future people will be able to figure out what we were talking about at all.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:27 AM on September 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
"Hey, guys, let's explore a technology that allows for a substantially smaller amount of transactions per second than what we currently have, and that can also be completely gummed up by anybody with a few extra thousand sitting around! What could possibly go wrong!"
posted by truex at 9:27 AM on September 16, 2015
posted by truex at 9:27 AM on September 16, 2015
Well, Simpsons will still be on the air so that will be the Rosetta Stone.
posted by Drinky Die at 9:29 AM on September 16, 2015 [21 favorites]
posted by Drinky Die at 9:29 AM on September 16, 2015 [21 favorites]
Oh, they'll need this: They've been going up the whole month of October and I got a feeling they're going to peak right around January. Then, bang! That's when I'll cash in.
posted by Drinky Die at 9:30 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Drinky Die at 9:30 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
"Neither is Bitcoin."
Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency that utilizes a blockchain.
As Wikipedia says:
"A block chain or blockchain is a distributed database that maintains a continuously growing list of data records that are hardened against tampering and revision, even by operators of the data store's nodes. The most widely known application of a block chain is the public ledger of transactions for cryptocurrencies used in Bitcoin. This record is enforced cryptographically and hosted on machines running the software."
posted by I-baLL at 9:30 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency that utilizes a blockchain.
As Wikipedia says:
"A block chain or blockchain is a distributed database that maintains a continuously growing list of data records that are hardened against tampering and revision, even by operators of the data store's nodes. The most widely known application of a block chain is the public ledger of transactions for cryptocurrencies used in Bitcoin. This record is enforced cryptographically and hosted on machines running the software."
posted by I-baLL at 9:30 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
So instead of coming up with a workable international payment system where it doesn't take days for money to transfer, the banks are signing on to the flavor of the month? Am I missing something here?
posted by Cash4Lead at 9:33 AM on September 16, 2015
posted by Cash4Lead at 9:33 AM on September 16, 2015
Three blockchains for hacker kings under the sky
Seven for the darkmarkets in their halls of code
Nine for mortal banks, doomed to die
One for Pirate Roberts in his dark cell
In the land of .onion where the shadows lie
posted by scalefree at 9:44 AM on September 16, 2015 [41 favorites]
Seven for the darkmarkets in their halls of code
Nine for mortal banks, doomed to die
One for Pirate Roberts in his dark cell
In the land of .onion where the shadows lie
posted by scalefree at 9:44 AM on September 16, 2015 [41 favorites]
Given that I won't trust the value of gold, and I think fiat currency has officially jumped the shark... I'm starting to see the advantages of investing in ammo.
I'm pretty sure that is the investment strategy most likely to blow up in your face.
posted by srboisvert at 9:45 AM on September 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
I'm pretty sure that is the investment strategy most likely to blow up in your face.
posted by srboisvert at 9:45 AM on September 16, 2015 [9 favorites]
So far, this entire thread is predicated on the following syllogism:
Bitcoin is a currency that utilizes a blockchain.
Banks have formed a private blockchain partnership.
∴ Therefore, banks are forming a private currency.
And yet it's pretty clear that the banks don't need or want a private currency, if only because that prevents them from using the "private profit, public risk" financing model.
They're hoping to use the blockchain to sign transactions in a secure and verifiable way, just like the article says. This is pretty well-trod territory already, and thus, kind of boring. Bitcoin isn't the currency of the future; the currency of the future is dollars and euros and yuan and yen, but transacted and tracked using a blockchain.
I mean, Apple Pay's one-time use credit card numbers already do something similar with cryptograms and tokenization.
posted by anotherpanacea at 9:46 AM on September 16, 2015 [33 favorites]
Bitcoin is a currency that utilizes a blockchain.
Banks have formed a private blockchain partnership.
∴ Therefore, banks are forming a private currency.
And yet it's pretty clear that the banks don't need or want a private currency, if only because that prevents them from using the "private profit, public risk" financing model.
They're hoping to use the blockchain to sign transactions in a secure and verifiable way, just like the article says. This is pretty well-trod territory already, and thus, kind of boring. Bitcoin isn't the currency of the future; the currency of the future is dollars and euros and yuan and yen, but transacted and tracked using a blockchain.
I mean, Apple Pay's one-time use credit card numbers already do something similar with cryptograms and tokenization.
posted by anotherpanacea at 9:46 AM on September 16, 2015 [33 favorites]
Oh, they'll need this: They've been going up the whole month of October and I got a feeling they're going to peak right around January. Then, bang! That's when I'll cash in.
If these trends continue...
posted by Sangermaine at 9:48 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
If these trends continue...
posted by Sangermaine at 9:48 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
"Barclays™ is proud to offer to our most valued accounts holders the opportunity to participate in this blockchain mining opportunity. For a low down payment and monthly fee, you can own a genuine BarclaysMiner™ which will add valuable BarclaysBitAssets™ to your BarclaysBitAccount™ every week. You can let your BarclaysBitAssets™ accumulate or convert them to your standard accounts easily and for nominal fees. You can even elect to have Barclays™ operate the BarclaysMiner™ on your behalf for an additional monthly fee, subject to operating costs."
posted by ardgedee at 9:58 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by ardgedee at 9:58 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
Bitcoin isn't the currency of the future; the currency of the future is dollars and euros and yuan and yen, but transacted and tracked using a blockchain.
Right, nothing here is about OMG banks are taking BitCoin the currency seriously. (And if they are, fools, money, etc.) This is about exploring a better way of keeping transaction records than having to reconcile them through something like a central clearinghouse (ACH).
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:59 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
Right, nothing here is about OMG banks are taking BitCoin the currency seriously. (And if they are, fools, money, etc.) This is about exploring a better way of keeping transaction records than having to reconcile them through something like a central clearinghouse (ACH).
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:59 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
So instead of coming up with a workable international payment system where it doesn't take days for money to transfer, the banks are signing on to the flavor of the month? Am I missing something here?
If they use a blockchain to verify transactions, then, yes, money will transfer faster because they don't have to rely on an ACH.
posted by zsazsa at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
If they use a blockchain to verify transactions, then, yes, money will transfer faster because they don't have to rely on an ACH.
posted by zsazsa at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
This will perhaps make banking more secure, but it seems also that it will reify the abstraction of money itself to a new degree; in that sense, it's a big win for traditionalistic property rights enthusiasts, since now there will be a whole new (and very technologically complex) apparatus that can be pointed to as empirical reality underpinning the existence of money and legitimate ownership.
posted by clockzero at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by clockzero at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
Why are banks interested in blockchains? I thought the main advantage of Bitcoin was not having to trust a central authority.
or be inspected by them
unintentionally, i think you've hit it - it's not about a new currency, it's about control of various things we already have wtihout governments barging in
posted by pyramid termite at 10:11 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
or be inspected by them
unintentionally, i think you've hit it - it's not about a new currency, it's about control of various things we already have wtihout governments barging in
posted by pyramid termite at 10:11 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Its amazing how fast I can go from believing a concept is laughable to believing its dangerous when someone changes the group of people adopting it.
posted by lownote at 10:17 AM on September 16, 2015 [7 favorites]
posted by lownote at 10:17 AM on September 16, 2015 [7 favorites]
Reuters' typo is delicious: "crytocurrency"
With scare quotes and everything.
posted by chavenet at 10:20 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
With scare quotes and everything.
posted by chavenet at 10:20 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
My only question is whether a blockchain will fit under my mattress with all the gold bars.
posted by goatdog at 10:24 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by goatdog at 10:24 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
It should be noted that Bitcoin, as it stands today can run ~7 transactions per second, according to the Bitcoin wiki. That same wiki article estimates Visa averages somewhere between 2,000 and 4,000 transactions per second.
While the shittiness of ACH, and checks, and wire transfers in this day and age can't be understated, the transactions-per-second that Visa currently handles proves it's not the centralized part of ACH thats the problem. Similarly, no one should believe a blockchain to be able to magically fix any problems with speed. (Blockchain is also not necessarily slow, but the most common application today, Bitcoin, was not implemented to handle VISA-levels of scale.)
(Seriously, why does anything still require not just using a check, but also mailing it, with a stamp and an envelope, to the other side of the country?)
posted by fragmede at 10:29 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
While the shittiness of ACH, and checks, and wire transfers in this day and age can't be understated, the transactions-per-second that Visa currently handles proves it's not the centralized part of ACH thats the problem. Similarly, no one should believe a blockchain to be able to magically fix any problems with speed. (Blockchain is also not necessarily slow, but the most common application today, Bitcoin, was not implemented to handle VISA-levels of scale.)
(Seriously, why does anything still require not just using a check, but also mailing it, with a stamp and an envelope, to the other side of the country?)
posted by fragmede at 10:29 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
Similarly, no one should believe a blockchain to be able to magically fix any problems with speed.
There are a surprisingly large number of people who seem to believe that the blockchain will fix literally all problems in the universe.
posted by Sangermaine at 10:31 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
There are a surprisingly large number of people who seem to believe that the blockchain will fix literally all problems in the universe.
posted by Sangermaine at 10:31 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
"or be inspected by them
unintentionally, i think you've hit it - it's not about a new currency, it's about control of various things we already have wtihout governments barging in"
Are you saying that bitcoin can't be inspected? I mean, all of the transactions are visible to everybody. That's the point of it, it's a public ledger.
posted by I-baLL at 10:35 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
unintentionally, i think you've hit it - it's not about a new currency, it's about control of various things we already have wtihout governments barging in"
Are you saying that bitcoin can't be inspected? I mean, all of the transactions are visible to everybody. That's the point of it, it's a public ledger.
posted by I-baLL at 10:35 AM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'm starting to see the advantages of investing in ammo.
Bottled screaming like in Monsters Inc. could be the way to go.
posted by colie at 10:44 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Bottled screaming like in Monsters Inc. could be the way to go.
posted by colie at 10:44 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Bloomberg Article about why banks care about blockchain.
upside: it's interesting, and it's a pretty clever solution to some very bank specific problems
upside: a brilliant woman is spearheading the push to use block chains
downside: same brilliant woman basically invented credit derivatives which crashed the global economy.
posted by larthegreat at 10:46 AM on September 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
upside: it's interesting, and it's a pretty clever solution to some very bank specific problems
upside: a brilliant woman is spearheading the push to use block chains
downside: same brilliant woman basically invented credit derivatives which crashed the global economy.
posted by larthegreat at 10:46 AM on September 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
What does Elizabeth Warren have to say about this? that's an opinion i'd like to hear.
posted by OHenryPacey at 11:04 AM on September 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by OHenryPacey at 11:04 AM on September 16, 2015 [5 favorites]
What first amazed me was the sheer amount of people conflating cryptocurrency and the ledger which is used to account for it: the blockchain.
What the blockchain does enable is a purely digital document of ownership/bond/stock/sale/whatever with a built in chain of ownership. This can be used for any document with a purely digital origin. Imagine a court document, made on a computer, which then goes from network to network and each 'transaction' stamping it with the doument hash and the computer hash: you could follow each and every-one who saw the document AND check to see if it hadn't been tampered with.
Or what about the proof-of-sale of a house or land? Do you know how often problems arise from no-one knowing where the deed went or how it got there? Here is a system where you can tell exactly who has owned the deed.
But a consortium of banks starting their own? Well, read about the 51% problem with the blockchain and you will see EXACTLY why that is a BAD idea. I can't but have a sneaky suspicion 'they' will be fucking us with this 'instrument'.
posted by MacD at 11:15 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
What the blockchain does enable is a purely digital document of ownership/bond/stock/sale/whatever with a built in chain of ownership. This can be used for any document with a purely digital origin. Imagine a court document, made on a computer, which then goes from network to network and each 'transaction' stamping it with the doument hash and the computer hash: you could follow each and every-one who saw the document AND check to see if it hadn't been tampered with.
Or what about the proof-of-sale of a house or land? Do you know how often problems arise from no-one knowing where the deed went or how it got there? Here is a system where you can tell exactly who has owned the deed.
But a consortium of banks starting their own? Well, read about the 51% problem with the blockchain and you will see EXACTLY why that is a BAD idea. I can't but have a sneaky suspicion 'they' will be fucking us with this 'instrument'.
posted by MacD at 11:15 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Reuters' typo is delicious: "crytocurrency"
Nothing compares to cold hard cash.
posted by maryr at 11:17 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Nothing compares to cold hard cash.
posted by maryr at 11:17 AM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Blockchain Technology! Just keep saying it over and over until the magic happens.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 11:28 AM on September 16, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 11:28 AM on September 16, 2015 [6 favorites]
Hadn't seen the Bloomberg article yet, lots of interesting details in there.
Like others, I'm not sure how the benefits of a blockchain can work when the number of participants is tiny - my understanding is that in blockchain systems, manipulation can occur if there is collusion among enough participants within the system. That said, I think the 'banks are bad and this sounds scary' rhetoric around this might be premature. Transaction trust and transparency seem to be the root of a lot of financial fraud - this sounds like a good step towards removing some of the human failure points that allow for financial market manipulation to occur. I'd like to see if anyone has a thorough technical analysis before rushing to judgement.
posted by the_querulous_night at 11:39 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
Like others, I'm not sure how the benefits of a blockchain can work when the number of participants is tiny - my understanding is that in blockchain systems, manipulation can occur if there is collusion among enough participants within the system. That said, I think the 'banks are bad and this sounds scary' rhetoric around this might be premature. Transaction trust and transparency seem to be the root of a lot of financial fraud - this sounds like a good step towards removing some of the human failure points that allow for financial market manipulation to occur. I'd like to see if anyone has a thorough technical analysis before rushing to judgement.
posted by the_querulous_night at 11:39 AM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
maryr: "Reuters' typo is delicious: "crytocurrency"
Nothing compares to cold hard cash."
It's worth more as it gets colder. South Pole base will be trillionaires.
posted by Chrysostom at 12:00 PM on September 16, 2015
Nothing compares to cold hard cash."
It's worth more as it gets colder. South Pole base will be trillionaires.
posted by Chrysostom at 12:00 PM on September 16, 2015
"And the trade-off is that you spend a lot of computer cycles on mining, you have long delays before confirming a transaction, potential schisms, the risk of a 51% attack, etc. "
Well, yes, but what if you got a bunch of banks together and formed a 51% …
"reify the abstraction"
arg. brain.
posted by klangklangston at 12:08 PM on September 16, 2015
Well, yes, but what if you got a bunch of banks together and formed a 51% …
"reify the abstraction"
arg. brain.
posted by klangklangston at 12:08 PM on September 16, 2015
I'm putting all my money into pumpkin futures.
Fools. Tulip futures are where the real money is. Prices have been rising at unprecedented rates for nearly a decade, and I'm sure1637 2016 will prove to be a banner year.
posted by Mayor West at 12:26 PM on September 16, 2015
Fools. Tulip futures are where the real money is. Prices have been rising at unprecedented rates for nearly a decade, and I'm sure
posted by Mayor West at 12:26 PM on September 16, 2015
All my money is in groceries. (But I am keeping a large stockpile of Girl Scout Cookies, which can only increase in value)
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:29 PM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:29 PM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
reify the abstraction
And immanetize the eschaton!
posted by Chrysostom at 12:32 PM on September 16, 2015 [7 favorites]
And immanetize the eschaton!
posted by Chrysostom at 12:32 PM on September 16, 2015 [7 favorites]
This is an unfair swipe at someone for their name but... you could not come up with a better name for a gestalt personification of the the bankers running the world than Blythe (Blithe) Masters.
posted by Reyturner at 12:37 PM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by Reyturner at 12:37 PM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
reify the abstraction
And immanetize the eschaton!
Update all and POD into Cosmos! (MeMail me If you recognize this and don't/haven't worked for a delivery service)
posted by achrise at 12:52 PM on September 16, 2015
And immanetize the eschaton!
Update all and POD into Cosmos! (MeMail me If you recognize this and don't/haven't worked for a delivery service)
posted by achrise at 12:52 PM on September 16, 2015
Problem is, banks are bad, and not to be trusted, as proven by the LIBOR scandal.
That said, the 51% problem is not something I'd worry about when it comes to a private blockchain with restricted access.
posted by fragmede at 12:56 PM on September 16, 2015
That said, the 51% problem is not something I'd worry about when it comes to a private blockchain with restricted access.
posted by fragmede at 12:56 PM on September 16, 2015
Reuters' typo is delicious: "crytocurrency"
Is that like a currency that is deep frozen while still barely alive in the hope of being revived at some far later and more technologically advanced time? Because there are a few countries that could really have used that over, say, the past couple hundred years.
But that would be cryocurrency, I suppose--one small but very important letter different . . .
posted by flug at 1:10 PM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Is that like a currency that is deep frozen while still barely alive in the hope of being revived at some far later and more technologically advanced time? Because there are a few countries that could really have used that over, say, the past couple hundred years.
But that would be cryocurrency, I suppose--one small but very important letter different . . .
posted by flug at 1:10 PM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
This future sucks. I blame Gibson.
Gibson wrote the present. The future belongs to PKD. Look forward to wearing outlandishly idiotic clothes, paying your front door to let you out of your house, and being trapped in hellish paranoid uncertainty that even death won't allow you to escape.
posted by 3urypteris at 2:15 PM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
Gibson wrote the present. The future belongs to PKD. Look forward to wearing outlandishly idiotic clothes, paying your front door to let you out of your house, and being trapped in hellish paranoid uncertainty that even death won't allow you to escape.
posted by 3urypteris at 2:15 PM on September 16, 2015 [2 favorites]
Poldo: "I'm putting all my money into pumpkin futures."
The people of Morton, Illinois, thank you and invite you to attend their pumpkin festival. There's trebuchets.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:36 PM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
The people of Morton, Illinois, thank you and invite you to attend their pumpkin festival. There's trebuchets.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:36 PM on September 16, 2015 [4 favorites]
This future sucks. I blame Gibson.
"The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed." -William Gibson
posted by lumpenprole at 4:48 PM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
"The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed." -William Gibson
posted by lumpenprole at 4:48 PM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Speaking of Visa, I recall reading some news articles about their interest in blockchain technology recently. From the Wall Street Journal on September 9, 2015:
posted by cynical pinnacle at 5:19 PM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Some of the biggest companies in the financial sector have invested $30 million in Chain Inc., a San Francisco-based company that works with banks and other institutions to develop ways to trade and transfer financial assets using the system that underpins the virtual currency Bitcoin.I wonder if some of this surge in interest is driven by some bank executives thinking, "Well, everyone in the industry is getting in on this, we should too!"
Investors include Visa Inc., Nasdaq Inc., Citi Ventures, Capital One Financial Corp., Fiserv Inc. and Orange SA .
posted by cynical pinnacle at 5:19 PM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
From the Wall Street Journal on September 9, 2015
Whoops, forgot the link to the article.
This is non-premium content, so the article should be publicly accessible.
posted by cynical pinnacle at 5:29 PM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
Whoops, forgot the link to the article.
This is non-premium content, so the article should be publicly accessible.
posted by cynical pinnacle at 5:29 PM on September 16, 2015 [1 favorite]
If you're even moderately interested in finance and don't read Matt Levine, your life is poorer for it.
Levine on blockchains
OTOH, he probably won't be of interest to people that unironically use the word "bankster."
posted by jpe at 5:47 PM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Levine on blockchains
OTOH, he probably won't be of interest to people that unironically use the word "bankster."
posted by jpe at 5:47 PM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]
Thanks, jpe. After reading that article, I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one who doesn't see the advantages of a blockchain over a centralized database.
posted by ectabo at 6:29 PM on September 16, 2015
posted by ectabo at 6:29 PM on September 16, 2015
What this is about is banks biting the hand that protects and bails them out.
"cojones mega politico"
posted by Fupped Duck at 7:49 PM on September 16, 2015
"cojones mega politico"
posted by Fupped Duck at 7:49 PM on September 16, 2015
jpe: OTOH, he probably won't be of interest to people that unironically use the word "bankster."
Unless you're simultaneously reading this guy.
posted by clawsoon at 8:09 AM on September 17, 2015
Unless you're simultaneously reading this guy.
posted by clawsoon at 8:09 AM on September 17, 2015
"Private blockchain" is just a confusing name for a shared database
- It is true that adding signatures and hash pointers makes a shared database a bit more secure. However, it’s qualitatively different from the level of security, irreversibility, and censorship-resistance you get with the public blockchain.
- The use of these crypto techniques for building a tamper-resistant database has been known for 25 years. At first there wasn’t much impetus for Wall Street to pay attention, but gradually there has arisen a great opportunity in moving some types of financial infrastructure to an automated, cryptographically secured model.
- For banks to go this route, they must learn about technology, get everyone to the same table, and develop and deploy a standard. The blockchain conveniently solves these problems due to the hype around it. In my view, it’s not the novelty of blockchain technology but rather its mindshare that has gotten Wall Street to converge on it, driven by the fear of missing out. It’s acted as a focal point for standardization.
- To build these private blockchains, banks start with the Bitcoin Core code and rip out all the parts they don’t need. It’s a bit like hammering in a thumb tack, but if a hammer is readily available and no one’s told you that thumb tacks can be pushed in by hand, there’s nothing particularly wrong with it.
What really tickles me is this: Blythe Master's involvement.
She's the source of credit derivatives and the Credit Default Swap/CDO (yes, the source of the financial meltdown). She does for JPMorgan the kind of thing which made Enron rich and go bust.
I cannot fathom why anything this woman pushes is not immediatly distrusted and made illegal.
I mean, I understand why she's being hired and listened to: she made people insanely, filthily, disgustingly rich. But what she dreams up to do so tends to create worldwide problems which literaly have killed people and thrown the wolrd in turmoil as secondary effects.
posted by MacD at 3:47 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]
She's the source of credit derivatives and the Credit Default Swap/CDO (yes, the source of the financial meltdown). She does for JPMorgan the kind of thing which made Enron rich and go bust.
I cannot fathom why anything this woman pushes is not immediatly distrusted and made illegal.
I mean, I understand why she's being hired and listened to: she made people insanely, filthily, disgustingly rich. But what she dreams up to do so tends to create worldwide problems which literaly have killed people and thrown the wolrd in turmoil as secondary effects.
posted by MacD at 3:47 PM on September 18, 2015 [1 favorite]
« Older Batman Deja Vu | "Where a penguin can get ashore, so, in theory... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Nanukthedog at 8:49 AM on September 16, 2015 [3 favorites]