Slashdot Mirror
Blockchain Technology Could Save Banks $12 Billion a Year (silicon.co.uk)
Mickeycaskill quotes a report from Silicon.co.uk: Accenture research has found Blockchain technology has the potential to reduce infrastructure costs by an average of 30 percent for eight of the world's ten biggest banks. That equates to annual cost savings of $8-12 billion. The findings of the "Banking on Blockchain: A Value Analysis for Investment Banks" report are based on an analysis of granular cost data from the eight banks to identify exactly where value could be achieved. A vast amount of cost for today's investment banks comes from complex data reconciliation and confirmation processes with their clients and counterparts, as banks maintain independent databases of transactions and customer information. However, Blockchain would enable banks to move to a shared, distributed database that spans multiple organizations. It has become increasingly obvious in recent months that blockchain will be key to the future of the banking industry, with the majority of banks expected to adopt the technology within the next three years.
I remember, back in the day, when ATMs were first proposed. They would save the banks soooo much money. They could have fewer employees since now their customers could get to their money whenever they felt like it. There would be less paperwork, shorter lines, the benefits were endless.
Which is why you are now charged to get your own money if you're not using your own bank's ATM.
I wonder what money-grabbing scheme banks will implement if they start using blockchains?
When incumbents get fat and lazy and start slowing everything down, they become encumbents.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
You should at least tell him how to spell it correctly:
encumbanks
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Bitcoin/litecoin/dogecoin/etc attempt to solve the trustless peer to peer model.
A multi-bank blockchain implementation would not use a trustless model, it would be a trusted model where the sender and receiver both sign the transaction, and it is then added to the blockchain for consumption by all participating banks.
It's a way to share an immutable (without retracting ALL transactions before the transaction to be deleted) ledger, in this case between trusted parties.
Actually working in the banking business instead of gambling in the stock exchange casino would save banks hundreds of billions. No wait, scratch that, it would save taxpayers hundreds of billions.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Actually, this has happened in the UK. I don't think it was legally forced but was more a suggestion from Government ("do it voluntarily or we'll force you"). The reasoning was a bank account is a basic requirement of living in the UK and not having one was making life more expensive for poorer people.
The banks don't push them so you have to ask. And like you suggest you get none of the bullshit - no overdraft, no credit but full online banking, over the counter, etc. And on the plus side, you get no overdraft, no credit and hence no charges.