Live data from Hacker News

Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

reuters.com

31–40 of 487 posts

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#31
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My major questions have always been: where is the business value in blockchain applications? what can a blockchain app do that can't be done by non-blockchain (beyond decentralization - bc I don't think this produces much business value)?

Sending money without fees and delay? Have you ever tried a normal bank transfer? How long did it take? Have you ever tried, say, nano? It literally takes seconds and 0 fees. Here is some value.

> Have you ever tried a normal bank transfer? How long did it take?

For less than $5,000 it is free and instantaneous in the United States (e.g. Zelle). For more, it is free and instantaneous (wire; my bank waves the fee; most charge $15 to $35).

The number one thing holding back the blockchain from becoming a proper database technology is its proponents insistence on applying it to problems that already work faster and cheaper.

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#32
post #7

It is interesting that even in an article like this that they still say things like "for all its potential, blockchain is still in its early days." It is sticking with the unfounded assumption that it will be a success in the future, if only it is given more time. In technological terms, it is old. Innumerable efforts have been attempted, yielding almost no fruit. At what point are the fundamental assumptions going t…

It's younger than most technology is when it becomes successful. Much younger when you realise you think about the age of the concepts, designs, algorithms, etc. that eventually become successful rather than a specific attempt at implementation.

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#33

My question is if your conclusion is that blockchain is a solution in search of a problem, what was all that effort being spent on (not just in finance, but everywhere blockchain is being considered)? I'm not saying that blockchain is not a valid solution to a problem, but as a veteran of the online industry, I can say I've seen a lot of hype around new technology, actual effort being put into it, and then the realiz…

I flippantly thought, from the first time about when I was reading about dark pools in the financial times newspaper, the delay in reporting less interesting than I hadn't expected the reporting, I have felt as if the bankers were unravelling their own life support and ecosystem, without realising what they are doing. Dark pools existed for advancing business in a grey area of regulatory distinction. This is the habituated purpose of the modern banker. The most important exposition of the expansion of banks into grey area meaning uncertain legal ground in which crucially the advantage of any interpretation and codification by case law, is strongly to the advantage of who can deploy the greater resources, must be "Wriston" the biography of Walter Wriston, who created the modern Citibank from the National City Bank of New York. Precisely by expansion in grey areas of business.

But the ad absurdam finality of creating ever more custom trading venues, is that you inevitably end up only being able to game yourself. The professional advantage of executing in a public market is replaced by the mind rotting process of writing your own rules and looking for where you can faithfully attest you weren't developing a rule for suitability for your trading desk abilities, you either accept you know that your own rules are already beaten by your own operations and become at best a pragmatist, of you devolve into second guessing the nature of your own company to be able to claim your rules are unbiased neutral and blind to be fair to all comers.

This has turned banks into navel gazers not Watchmen over economic instability and guards of our capacity of production in daily life and ready in case of war. The regulation was wanted by banks to assure the public. This move to reliance on in house mechanisms for all of your flow, eliminate the advantage of regulation. This erodes the raisin detre of regulatory government but it far worse dissolves the conveyance of trust from government institution that the regulated bank enjoys.

I am saying that one day I realised that the behaviour of banks had become self destructive and it wasn't a flu or affliction but a inherent character trait come out of much poorly understood history I think is too important to never let the public see. We need the institutions to function, too.

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#34

Of course banks can do it better with the traditional technologies. They operate in a centralized, trusted and regulated environment. Their consensus algorithm is "settling disputes in courts". And still, it takes up to 5 days to receive a payment from USA in the EU and the sender pays 40$ for the wire transfer. The blockchain technologies will disrupt the banks themselves, because they are the intermediaries in this…

Whats to stop a new bank springing up and allowing transfers a lot faster and cheaper using traditional methods?

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#35
Looking at the history of Wall Street, it should be safe to predict that Block chain technology will be the reason for next global meltdown. They can and will do wonders generating derivates after derivates and make huge bonuses.

I have never understood why financial instruments like derivates like options etc. exists. I understand what they do but I do not understand what value they add to the economy specifically.

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sending money without fees and delay? Have you ever tried a normal bank transfer? How long did it take? Have you ever tried, say, nano? It literally takes seconds and 0 fees. Here is some value.

> Have you ever tried a normal bank transfer? How long did it take? For less than $5,000 it is free and instantaneous in the United States ( e.g. Zelle). For more, it is free and instantaneous (wire; my bank waves the fee; most charge $15 to $35). The number one thing holding back the blockchain from becoming a proper database technology is its proponents insistence on applying it to problems that already work faster…

Or Dwolla! Funny - searched google for Dwolla and Zelle came up as the first match

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#37

Of course banks can do it better with the traditional technologies. They operate in a centralized, trusted and regulated environment. Their consensus algorithm is "settling disputes in courts". And still, it takes up to 5 days to receive a payment from USA in the EU and the sender pays 40$ for the wire transfer. The blockchain technologies will disrupt the banks themselves, because they are the intermediaries in this…

> it takes up to 5 days to receive a payment from USA in the EU and the sender pays 40$ for the wire transfer

Only if you use a wire transfer. Payment by credit card is instant and costs about 1% for the merchant and maybe another 1% in change fees if there is a currency conversion needed.

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#38
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

governmemts are thinking of putting assets and laws on Blockchain, stock exchanges are waiting for scalability to start putting everything on the blockchain. Immutable government records already exist. Where do you base your argument?

“governmemts are thinking of putting assets and laws on Blockchain” Two things: this statement is so vague it borders on meaningless. What assets? Who will put it in there? The president? Why would a government do that? Is it free to do or is there budget? Etc. Secondly, even if we could surmount the vagueness that plagues not just this idea but all blockchain ideas, the Herculean effort required to move governments…

assets like everything from real estate records to money to corporate stocks to car ownership to birth certificates. What you call vagueness I call short sightedness and failing to see the big picture. It has been done before with all major breakthroughs since the applications are not immediately obvious to everyone.

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#39
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My major questions have always been: where is the business value in blockchain applications? what can a blockchain app do that can't be done by non-blockchain (beyond decentralization - bc I don't think this produces much business value)?

Sending money without fees and delay? Have you ever tried a normal bank transfer? How long did it take? Have you ever tried, say, nano? It literally takes seconds and 0 fees. Here is some value.

[deleted]

Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality

#40

Of course banks can do it better with the traditional technologies. They operate in a centralized, trusted and regulated environment. Their consensus algorithm is "settling disputes in courts". And still, it takes up to 5 days to receive a payment from USA in the EU and the sender pays 40$ for the wire transfer. The blockchain technologies will disrupt the banks themselves, because they are the intermediaries in this…

> it takes up to 5 days to receive a payment from USA in the EU and the sender pays 40$ for the wire transfer

U.S. dollar Fedwires are “immediate, final, and irrevocable“ [1] regardless of from where they are initiated. If your EU bank takes 5 business days to swap between the world’s two most liquid currencies, you have a uniquely shitty bank.

[1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/fedfunds_about...

Post reply on HN