Great, entertaining article from Erik Voorhees on the blockchain which picks at the idea that the blockchain is ripping past bitcoin in the Zeitgeist and the media seems to be in some kind of collective group hug kicking bitcoin to the curb and chest banging on it’s cousin, the blockchain. Is he right?
What’s your blockchain strategy? Bro, do you even blockchain?
The ascent of this term in the media and financial industry has been dizzying.
And “Bitcoin,” as a thing somehow distinct from “blockchain,” has been left by the wayside, ignored like an embarrassing relative at a family gathering.
Some of us have been amused by this development, but many confounded. Why is everyone talking about the blockchain, and ignoring its central fuel, Bitcoin proper?
First, let’s understand why the change in narrative had to happen, why it was necessary and indeed inevitable.
It remains to be seen how long it takes for the financial industry to realize that the true valuable innovation is not the distributed ledger of the blockchain (which has existed in other forms prior), but rather the open platform of financial inclusion with no trusted party or cartel (which has never existed).
It is precisely Bitcoin’s openness which, like the internet before it, brings revolutionary change to how humans interact. Bitcoin wasn’t revolutionary because it could move money faster, or more cheaply, than banks. Most of the banks’ delay isn’t due to technology – they’re just sending digital messages representing virtual money, after all – it’s due to regulation, bureaucracy, and habit.
Supporters who are “all about the blockchain” may counter that the blockchain demonstrates truth, demonstrates finality, and thus as banks adopt this technology they will be made more efficient because the uncertainty of settlement will be resolved. Sure, blockchains can help with this, and banks can be more efficient for it. It seems clear that blockchain-based banking networks could settle payments in minutes, not days.
Read full article here.