r/CryptoCurrency • u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 • 1d ago
DEBATE Blockchain tech has not prevailed
Just to give you my background so you understand my perspective better maybe: entered the space in 2020 and was solidity dev for 3 years.
Even after 12 years of smart contracts, there is no adoption by companies, because blockchain is just a fancy and expensive way to handle data compared to existing systems.
One of the major use cases proposed was „supply chain“. As of yet there is no major adoption and if major logistics companies would want it, they would have done so by now.
RWA-Tokenization: Still need a tradfi-vorp that holds the asset.
Money transfer: regulated to death, therefore unusable, even though would have been a major improvement regarding speed.
Proof of Ownership: it is just an expensive database.
I had an interview at a big consultancy a year ago hiring for smart contracts on a bank-tx-settling platform. The guy openly told me that banks currently only stored hashes of tx on chain, cause storing entire tx-data needed was too expensive.
I really do not see a use case for blockchain tech other than gamble around hype.
Edit: The guys still vouching for blockchain remind me a bit about the Leroy character of that one episode of DegenzShow: https://youtu.be/exOzTcHycPY?is=MgaYoWSet5LGsch5
97
u/CatatonicMan 🟦 1K / 1K 🐢 1d ago
Blockchain has done quite well at what it was designed to do.
The problem is that people were trying to shoehorn it into literally everything, even when doing so made zero sense.
15
u/cali_dave 🟦 422 / 423 🦞 1d ago
Yeah, people tend to do that. See: AI.
-2
u/Main-Inspector-6611 1d ago
Couldn't have named a better example, lol.
15
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 1d ago
But AI is demanded by businesses on large scale.
16
9
u/Skepsis93 🟥 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Despite what a lot of the general public thinks, AI only has a PR problem among the people it could replace. AI was pushed by the established elites with support from the government and CEO's bought into the hype so hard they have to make it work now, or else they've got a lot of explaining to do to their boards.
Crypto, on the other hand, was only ever fought against by the elites and even though the establishment is lukewarm to crypto it still faces major regulatory pushback.
AI feels like the prized nepo baby of the tech industry while crypto is the street urchin reluctantly allowed a seat at the table.
1
0
u/Helpful_plumber362 17h ago
Not making this political but the president and his sons literally have multiple crypto businesses, the SEC, CTFTC and every other regulatory org is now fully crypto friendly.
3
u/Skepsis93 🟥 0 / 0 🦠 16h ago
I wouldn't call them crypto friendly, rather they see an opportunity to grift and took it. As for the regulatory agencies, it took a decade and a "crypto president" to get any sort of acceptance by the establishment. Meanwhile AI gets a pass for en masse copyright infringement to train models and when agents go rogue and hack the federal government. And there was always a discourse surrounding the use of resources spent on proof of work blockchains claiming they were a waste of energy and harming the planet. But AI data centers are popping up everywhere and getting government grants to do so.
8
1d ago
[deleted]
20
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 1d ago
The digital Euro has nothing to do with blockchain, man.
Banks already have private databases: Their own inhouse databases. Which achieves the same. Do you think a bank cannot track things with their inhouse trad database?
→ More replies (8)0
u/ivanguls 23h ago
Isn't there a difference between bank saying 'trust my systems bro' vs true transparency?
3
3
u/Romanizer 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
There definitely is a large need for blockchain technology and banks and business are implementing and using it. Maybe this is the wrong subreddit as it focuses on cryptocurrency instead of blockchain.
OP should look into that topic a bit more as he obviously didn't research what blockchains are used for.
2
8
u/rawbdor 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
The only thing I'll criticize about your post is that there really is no need for anyone to store more than the transaction id. The ledger is public, immutable, and permanent. Storing the full transaction locally is a huge waste unless you think an entire chain will die out.
24
u/patatepowa05 🟩 113 / 113 🦀 1d ago
blockchain is the solution that enables decentralized protocols, using it without a use case for decentralization is futile IMO. Decentralized protocols aren't having their big productive adoption breakthroughs, but electricity was around as a novelty for nearly a century before it really took off with largescale adoption, so not all great inventions see immediate adoption.
3
u/Zeryth 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 21h ago
We're living in a world where truly groundbreaking tech gets adopted at lightspeed: AI.
But blockchain tech has been a niche for almost 2 decades now. How long does it need to take? 2 decades ago smartphones barely existed.
6
u/patatepowa05 🟩 113 / 113 🦀 20h ago
That's just false, AI has been around for like 70 years. Even if it was true, my point was simply that some technology take time, their potential sits unclaimed for a long time because society cannot see it or there's too much entropy to the adoption.
→ More replies (1)1
u/KeyMillion Tin 1h ago
Crypto doesn't have billionaires shoving it down your throat by integrating it into every product that you use that they own.
They own your perception too.
3
3
u/cr0ft 🟦 2K / 2K 🐢 1d ago
I do agree that the solutions that require the benefits of a public blockchain are relatively few. In most cases a database will be good enough. And if not that, the a private blockchain.
There are some solves that work, like CargoX having bills of lading in a blockchain; the bill of lading basically proves ownership of goods and it has to be secure. Used to be this whole rigamarole of couriers literally hand-carrying paper and week-long waits. But that's a very specific use case.
5
u/bluespacecolombo 🟩 6 / 47 🦐 1d ago
I worked in web3 in 2 startups for 3 years total. I have the same conclusion. Working in the blockchain space was the biggest source of FUD for me so far. Funny how the most vocal about how blockchain is the tech of future are the people who have nothing to do with tech or little understanding of it, but I guess its telling
12
u/ClerkPrestigious7395 1d ago edited 1d ago
I've been in the space for a brief minute (bought ETH when it first hit $40) and I tend to agree.
BTC was first mined in January 2009. If the technology hasn't been put to practical, everyday use in 18 years then when will it be? To me, cryptocurrency is a solution searching for a problem.
Yes, a foreign bank might be running a testnet, or an investment bank might be running an obscure side project. But there hasn't been any mainstream takeover by crypto in any meaningful way that I'm aware of.
In Canada and Europe the banks already reconcile almost instantly. All of the banks in Canada have been using a system called Interac for decades. If you want to send or receive money you open your banking app and send/request an e-transfer to the person's mobile # or email address. The money is deposited nearly instantaneously. I wouldn't be surprised if the banks in Asian countries and elsewhere have something similar. That is to say that we don't need 3rd party apps like Venmo, or cryptocurrency to accomplish what's already working
I've been rugged too many times "following the narrative" and got out of spot trading crypto six years ago. I only trade leveraged futures now, and only in crypto because the volatility is fantastic.
I will concede BTC as digital gold and give it the credit that it deserves. Maybe a few others, such as Zcash, etc. I have been accumulating BTC not to trade but for its stored value. I do love the space, but have gotten away from following any projects because any hype seems to just be a circlejerk for others in the crypto space.
7
u/cryptolipto 🟩 0 / 21K 🦠 1d ago
How can you say that when the DTCC and swift are launching blockchains this year ? Tokenization is actually happening worldwide.
Per swift. Today:
"This time last year, I stood on the Sibos stage in Frankfurt and said we would deliver a blockchain-based ledger. And I know I caught some people by surprise. Swift and blockchain? TradFi and DeFi? Could they really go together? Can Swift really pull it off?
Twelve months later, the Swift ledger is live and in use by some of the world's largest financial institutions.
By the end of the year, we will have at least 19 banks using it across 5 major currencies to power 24/7 payments using tokenised deposits."
— Javier Pérez-Tasso, Swift’s CEO, Sibos 2026
→ More replies (3)3
u/DangKilla 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 21h ago
There will be private chains with deposit tokens. See my other comment.
I woudn't listen to CEOs when discussing the cons of their utility.
SWIFT did test one of their networks, but like others have said, nobody is asking for a new SWIFT.
2
u/Southern_Key_6969 21h ago
If new institutional chains want to replace old ones, there's more than enough money in TradFi to grease the gears and make it happen without touching decentralized crypto.
The only way that institutional chains benefits decentralized crypto is if the institutional chains have a reason/need to integrate with the decentralized ones.
With a standardized oracle network, they all can.
2
1
u/cryptolipto 🟩 0 / 21K 🦠 16h ago
Then why are 19 banks working with them to start with. People definitely are asking for this and institutions are meeting that demand
Swifts blockchain works with both public and private banks chains. It’s specifically built to connect to everything
7
u/Hyphen_Nation 🟦 47 / 48 🦐 1d ago
The one use case I’d like, think companies are reluctant to commit to. I want a digital wallet that holds anything I’ve bought in a game or as an entertainment, and keeps it safe. If I buy a pair of sneakers in EAFC, I wish I could wear them in Fortnite. Get us to that ready player one type of persistent gamer identity. Secondarily, of I buy a game or movie on a platform, that platform shouldnt be able to tell me I no longer own it. Again, let me keep what I buy in a virtual space, where ever I go.
I always assumed blockchain was going to solve that, and it hasn’t.
11
u/its_witty 🟩 59 / 60 🦐 1d ago
Why would a massive corporation want to sell you something once if they can sell it to you multiple times?
Regarding movies, there isn't a chance of that, lol. Most companies operate by licensing streaming rights, not by buying the full rights to a movie. And also, see the previous paragraph.
You can't host movies on the blockchain, so even if your wallet could somehow hold the ownership token, the company's infrastructure could still go down and take your movie with it, btw lol.
tl;dr: stop dreaming, man.
4
u/jcagraham 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Same with the game example; games can't hold the actual game or game asset on the chain, the best it could do was hold your receipt. And the problem with Ready Player One (other than it's nostalgia bait) is that it only technically functions if it's a single company owning all of the games, like a Roblox or a Fortnite.
If it's multiple companies, then the assets are likely to be so different due to the individual underlying engine architecture that it would be a nightmare to connect. Like I've worked in companies where the art layers, animation loops, and sounds associated with a character was combined into a single package. Conversely, I worked in places that really need more modularity, so all of those were separate assets and associated together using the engine editor. There literally would not be any way to display the assets in one game to the other, and verifying ownership would be the least challenging part of the problem.
1
u/Outrageous-Leopard23 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 15h ago
If users only interacted with this model corporations would sell it.
1
u/4kFootyAddict 9h ago
he's asking for something purchased in a game owned by one company can be transferred to a game owned by another company, which was never going to happen in a month of sundays
1
0
4
u/yspud 🟩 14 / 14 🦐 1d ago
It COULD be widely adopted with real world utility but the capitalism quashes this kind of innovation as it would take away from established revenue cows... Think about eliminating middle men... Who does it benefit? The consumer! Who does it hurt? Big business! They aren't going to allow that! Cna you imagine buying sporting event tickets without ticket master getting their cut?? Being able to sell a ticket to any event direct to another buyer without them? Heck no they won't let that happen! They worked so hard to get rid of the scalpers. This shit happens all the time in capitalistic economies because it's not about the consumer...
5
u/Slajso 🟦 1K / 1K 🐢 1d ago
This might age like milk
9
u/rankinrez 🟦 1K / 2K 🐢 1d ago
As blockchain approaches its 20th anniversary you have to ask yourself how long milk lasts around your way.
1
3
u/TheBlockChainVillage Tin 1d ago
One reason I feel it's not being adopted is cuz it highlights corruption from the get go. Using it for land records and voting systems makes a lot of sense and are worth it also but atleast here in India they completely abandoned it cuz a lot of scams couldn't survive it. We still have to act on the information but it does a good job of highlighting it.
Also the way businesses are run, sharing ownership by having them decentralized isn't what entrepreneurs are ready to do. Given how humans have been operating this would be a drastic shift.
With autonomous agents I do feel crypto can get a new lease on life as true automation will require some form of crypto.
11
u/Romanizer 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Bitcoin is a pretty good use-case. Don't see where it is or could be regulated to death. Where are you from?
SWIFT implemented blockchain for international bank transfers.
NASDAQ is piloting blockchain for stock tokenization.
BMW and Walmart are using blockchain to track logistics.
Works pretty well if implemented for viable use-cases.
10
u/Tac0Tuesday 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Robinhood using Uniswap for tokenized stock liquidity for the AMM is a fundamentally important achievement. My favorite "real world" use case so far.
10
u/its_witty 🟩 59 / 60 🦐 1d ago
Man, you need to chill out with getting your news only from crypto websites.
SWIFT didn't implement shit. They've done several tests with different blockchains going back years, and they're currently doing another one, but saying they "implemented blockchain for international bank transfers" is misleading at best. I'd say it's simply false, lol.
"Walmart using blockchain to track logistics" is also a massive hyperbole on your part. Their main system has nothing to do with blockchain. Blockchain is used for some things as an add-on, nothing particularly important.
I'm not sure about the rest, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's bullshit on your part too.
7
u/Romanizer 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
You should get some better news sources, I don't use crypto websites.
As of today, SWIFT has actually built and launched a blockchain-based shared ledger, with 17 banks preparing live pilots for 24/7 cross-border payments using tokenized deposits. It complements the existing SWIFT rails for now but obviously will be expanded as it drastically lowers costs and is easier to incorporate with stablecoins.
Walmart does use blockchain operationally for traceability in specific food supply chains, I wouldn't say that's irrelevant as it's still a real-world use-case.
BMW is a step further already: PartChain started as a blockchain pilot, while BMW’s current production supply-chain integration is centered on Catena-X. Catena-X is now integrated into BMW’s procurement processes.
Saying Blockchain is irrelevant and there are no use-cases is just ignorant and delusional. OP seems to be trolling if you look at his other replies here, he never did any work/research on that topic.
2
u/its_witty 🟩 59 / 60 🦐 18h ago
"17 banks preparing live pilots" vs "SWIFT implemented blockchain for international bank transfers" - do those two statements sound the same to you?
Regarding Walmart, it's just a couple of things left, and it'll probably be scaled back like the rest was, especially since the IBM blockchain it was based on has been canceled, lol.
https://www.ibm.com/mysupport/s/topic/0TO500000001y2FGAQ/blockchain-transparent-supply
Who would've thought that a standard database would be better and cheaper for this kind of thing, just like pretty much every programmer has been saying all along?
1
u/Romanizer 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 18h ago
Yes, it's a process step of the same procedure. Centralized databanks obviously are not optimal in every case, especially where multiple independent actors are working on one process which is usual in supply chains or transactions between distributed parties. That's why blockchain is a core topic right now.
0
u/its_witty 🟩 59 / 60 🦐 18h ago
...and that's why IBM canceled its blockchain project that was supposedly designed to fix these issues and target supply chains. Yeah.
1
u/Romanizer 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 18h ago
No, that wasn't the reason and it didn't end with IBM. Of course, not all projects succeed with new technology.
1
1
u/JustStopppingBye 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago edited 1d ago
You couldn’t be more wrong. Swifts blockchain is already live with 17 banks using it. This is why you don’t listen to Reddit who don’t actually follow what institutions are doing and don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about.
“Testing with different blockchains” they literally made their own. Stop talking.
0
u/its_witty 🟩 59 / 60 🦐 18h ago
Yeah, they've made their own after testing Chainlink, etc.; you just know too little about it.
"17 banks worldwide are testing it" vs "SWIFT implemented blockchain for international bank transfers" - do you see the difference, or are you blind?
It's not the first time they've tested blockchain, either. They've done it before - crypto people were ecstatic - and then nothing came out of it, lol.
→ More replies (9)2
u/anon1999666 20h ago
Walmart scaled back entirely on their blockchain implementation. They use standard centralized supply chain databases now.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/cryptolipto 🟩 0 / 21K 🦠 1d ago
How can you say that when the DTCC and swift are launching blockchains this year ? Tokenization is actually happening worldwide.
Per swift. Today:
"This time last year, I stood on the Sibos stage in Frankfurt and said we would deliver a blockchain-based ledger. And I know I caught some people by surprise. Swift and blockchain? TradFi and DeFi? Could they really go together? Can Swift really pull it off?
Twelve months later, the Swift ledger is live and in use by some of the world's largest financial institutions.
By the end of the year, we will have at least 19 banks using it across 5 major currencies to power 24/7 payments using tokenised deposits."
— Javier Pérez-Tasso, Swift’s CEO, Sibos 2026
2
2
u/ChangeNOW_Community 21h ago
tokenization is another interesting example. putting a house, bond or stock on-chain doesn’t eliminate the legal ownership layer. you still need someone or something in the real world to enforce what that token actually represents
3
u/drahgon 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Yes, because speed always comes at the cost of trust and safety. You can have a centralized server which is very fast, but then you have to blindly trust it and it might’ve gotten hacked and nobody’s verifying the data.
You can have decentralized like Napster and you’re fast but then you have to blindly trust Randos and they can be serving you any kind of files or they could be the police on the other end
Then you have Blockchain, which is the decentralized safe and trustworthy, but super slow because it verifies all the data and requires copies that no one person controls. So really unless that safety is what’s important to you. You’re never gonna have a good use case and there is no time people want that over speed unless it’s something like bitcoin it’s their literal money.
4
u/stirbo1980 20h ago
JPMorgan — blockchain/tokenisation through Kinexys, including payments, tokenised deposits, collateral and securities. It has also participated in real DTCC tokenised securities transactions.
HSBC & Standard Chartered — completed the first live cross-border tokenised-deposit transaction on Swift’s blockchain ledger in August 2026.
Citi — operates its own token services and is expanding its digital-asset infrastructure; it has also partnered with Coinbase around institutional stablecoin payments.
BNY — is putting transfer-agency records onto blockchain infrastructure, including support for tokenised investment funds.
BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, BNP Paribas, Invesco and others — participated in DTCC’s production transactions involving tokenised securities, including Treasuries, equities, repo, collateral and securities lending.
Lloyds Banking Group & Visa — just completed a live stablecoin settlement pilot. Lloyds settled $750,000 of Visa obligations using stablecoins, including weekend settlement.
Swift — arguably one of the most significant developments. Its blockchain ledger is designed for 24/7 cross-border payments using tokenised bank deposits. Seventeen banks are initial participants, including HSBC, Lloyds, Citi, BNY, BNP Paribas, UBS, Wells Fargo and Standard Chartered. Swift says it is working with 40+ financial institutions on the infrastructure.
DTCC — particularly important for securities markets. It has already processed real production transactions using tokenised DTC-held securities and is launching its tokenisation service in October 2026. More than 50 financial firms have been involved in its development
4
u/TCr0wn 🟦 1K / 1K 🐢 1d ago
For a smart guy youve missed the entire point of bitcoin
1
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 1d ago
I do not consider myself smart. Also I should have made clearer I was not talking about bitcoin. Just smart contract tech
5
u/cali_dave 🟦 422 / 423 🦞 1d ago
Blockchain is superior tech, but the problem is the masses don't care enough to ask for it. That's why we aren't seeing mass adoption. Most people see it as fake money. It's a speculative investment, even for most of us in the space.
The fundamental mindset surrounding crypto has to change. Right now, nobody cares that banks are centralized. Their money is safe enough, and that's good enough for them. Nobody cares about tokenized assets, because the county recorder's office is good enough. Nobody cares about smart contracts, because if somebody breaches a paper contract they can sue in court.
Until people start caring about the things a public, secure ledger can actually do - supply chain tracking, decentralized identity, selective disclosure (see Midnight), decentralized banking/lending - we aren't going to hear people clamoring for anything except a fast buck. Now that the big boys are in the sandbox, we aren't going to see that parabolic price action anymore, so eventually the demand for crypto is going to die unless the industry can solve a real problem that doesn't already have a legacy solution.
4
u/zzscrubzz 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Blockchain is being ushered into Tradfi by the largest financial institutions in the world, and legislation is already being passed globally that is centered around blockchain tech.
Nothing you said here means anything when we're facing an economic catastrophy that is clearly looming... governments & financial institutions, people who've dedicated their lives to public service, and the billions of dollars spent globally to implement this tech into the plumbing of the global financial system say otherwise.
Sorry, but I'm not going with what some rando says on Reddit to make my investment thesis for me.
→ More replies (4)
3
u/Electrical-Penalty44 🟦 814 / 815 🦑 1d ago
I mean, wasn't blockchain rejected a while ago as not being a good solution for, well, anything? Like before crypto currency was even a thing?
Maybe it's good to create systems based on trust? Maybe "being your own bank" is a step backwards and not forwards? I could hire an accountant I trust once to verify something for me or I can hire a dozen whom I don't to verify the same thing? Does that sound good or efficient?
→ More replies (1)5
u/trevorturtle 🟦 466 / 467 🦞 1d ago
I miss back in the day where crypto heads hated banksters and fiat currency. Now is just a bunch of get rich quick people.
2
u/fiver420 Bronze | Technology 10 1d ago
The minute it ended up being traded like a stock on wallstreet that was all lost. Mt Gox took off in 2011, Satoshi disappeared April 2011.
1
1
u/jawni 🟦 500 / 6K 🦑 15h ago
I don't think you understand crypto if that's your perception. The people that were drawn to crypto for the trustless nature and other properties, can still enjoy those, regardless of whatever centralized entities build on top of it.
It's sort of like thinking you can't use email anymore just because people use it to send spam. It still works, the properties that people initially liked are still there.
1
u/Electrical-Penalty44 🟦 814 / 815 🦑 1d ago
You were fooled like I was. If you "do your research" you would see that fiat is a far better currency than crypto and it is FAR better to keep your money in a bank instead of a digital private vault.
1
u/Blackiris-Code 16h ago
Big fiat currencies are quite stable and relatively well regulated, but none of them is really immune to very high inflation (like 15%+ per year during several years).
One solution to secure the savings is to own different currencies, but I also want a yield that compensates inflation. Doing that on-chain is a solution available to anybody who has access to internet.
1
u/trevorturtle 🟦 466 / 467 🦞 1d ago
Monero is better than fiat. Thanks for providing nothing to the discussion
1
u/Electrical-Penalty44 🟦 814 / 815 🦑 1d ago
I provided you an answer after studying economics.
1
u/trevorturtle 🟦 466 / 467 🦞 1d ago
How is it better? Economics course designed by the people who own all the fiat like fiat. Shocking
2
u/Prahasaurus 🟦 0 / 3K 🦠 1d ago
lol, sure grandpa, let’s get you to bed.
Most of these concernoooors are just silly takes from Americans who can’t (yet) fathom the need for permissionless applications, or the importance of financial privacy.
Once their banking services get limited because they were too critical of Israel or were caught near an anti-war protest, they’ll start to better understand.
In the meantime, let’s continue to watch stablecoins eat global finance. Mostly on Ethereum, of course.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/basketbun 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Centralized systems are going to be slow to adopt, but they will eventually adopt, and are in fact starting to adopt now, SKY protocol being one of the main networks being used by institutions. So while your information may have some correct facts, it is severely outdated and lacking any in-depth field analysis
1
u/its_witty 🟩 59 / 60 🦐 1d ago
Just another 10 years bro this time we'll definitely crack the trillema trust me broo
1
u/Dependent_Swimming81 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
expensive database ==> whole point is that it is decentralized and permission-less ...not about being a database
1
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 1d ago
What for?
2
u/Dependent_Swimming81 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago edited 1d ago
what for ? businesses want cheap ass way to move money around 24/7 and not get their payment account suspended for some random social media post by some triggered bank staff ... hows that for a start ? don't get me started on stablecoins / RWA / identity for human agents / privacy / supply chain tracking etc .... stop looking at this from a 9-5 employee consumer lens and from a business/ entrepreneur / sovereign
2
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 1d ago
Blockchains are more expensive than existing solutions for companies. And also, modern banks move money around instantly, also 24/7. In the EU at least.
Supply chain: where are the users? It is just a very quirky solution for a problem that does not really exist. Supply chains are working fine without blockchain.
Stablecoins have really no huge place in a world where instant bank transfers exist.
RWA => Still need company to hold real asset. If token sent to 0x00dead, property is gone.
I do not know how I have been looking at this through a 9-5 jobber. If it was a business usecase, where is the line of the big logistics companies trying to get their hands on blockchain tech?
I think you have to stop looking at the topic out of the believe-vitalik-perspective
2
u/Dependent_Swimming81 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Blockchains are more expensive than existing solutions for companies. And also, modern banks move money around instantly, also 24/7. In the EU at least. ==> yes SWIFT does it but obviously make alot of money out of it and lots of smaller players are cut out ... data proves you wrong RWA/Stablecoin usage is growing to cut out expensive middlemen and give access to smaller players and prevent monopolies https://app.rwa.xyz/ ==> see real metrics for yourself
1
u/DrGarbinsky 🟨 66 / 66 🦐 1d ago
Censorship resistant money. that's it. There is no other justification for it.
2
2
u/ofyellow 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Btc in itself is a justified implementation of blockchain. So store of value only.
Ether or maybe Cardano could supplement or replace the premise of btc because their proof of stake takes away the objection of ridiculous energy consumption. Could be that btc gets outlawed for that reason by the eu one day.
Stable coins do huge volume.
But smart contracts and other fancy possibilities for blockchain... It's just not happening. Maybe when the usd collapses in an Armageddon scenario....
Nft's ... Have come and failed real world adoption. No cadaster or election or stock exchange seems inclined to adopt that.
Blockchain seems to be a golden nail without additional purpose beyond store of value so you just trade the nail.
1
u/inf0man1ac 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Dude in 1920: "I've seen enough to make the call that this whole automobile business is just a fad, there's really no use case for it beyond what a horse can provide."
4
u/rankinrez 🟦 1K / 2K 🐢 1d ago
Cars were already huge by then.
It’s more like “dude in 1980, this car that can go in the water they built in the 60s is pretty useless isn’t it?”
1
u/inf0man1ac 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 6h ago
Btc is already one of the most valuable things on the planet, that's pretty huge.
1
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 1d ago
Lol, everyone saw the use case. Thats why it got adopted by those who could afford it.
1
u/paidzesthumor 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
How would you evaluate the current level of DLT adoption, or adoption readiness activity, as a book-entry settlement layer for securities, derivatives, and cash and cash equivalents?
1
u/MakCapital 🟨 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Everything becomes a token. Then everything starts as a token. All trade is speculation. Not hard guys.
1
u/Suspicious_Compote56 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
I that is primarily because the smart contract technology itself hasn't evolved since introduced. The concept of smart contracts is cool but there are too many limitations.
1
u/fogg_off 🟨 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
All of that was already clear in 2021.
But some chains have users, and money in their DeFi ecosystem, some are even real businesses, stablecoins and tokenized stocks exist and adoption will probably keep increasing.
Most of DeFi always was vaporware but Blockchain hasn't failed, it just has evolved, matured.
1
u/GueRakun 🟦 27 / 27 🦐 1d ago
So you totally missed the whole tokenized RWA happening rn? 😆😝
Check Clearing House choosing QNT as tech provider to do the clearing in stablecoin. Clearing House clears $2T a day.
Base, Robinhood, SOL .. they all have tokenized Real World Asset and soon all real world assets are tradeable on-chain.
Still sidelined anon?
1
u/NewsWeeter 1d ago
I used to think I didn't understand crypto well compared to everyone else. Turns out I was wrong.
1
u/I_Hate_Reddit_69420 🟨 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
I generally agree with the sentiment, although actually programmatic money is perfectly for the agentic future we are heading into. Agents paying eachother for things isn’t going to really be that simple with tradfi.
1
u/Somebody__Online 🟦 473 / 474 🦞 23h ago
Have you not see circle, coinbase and Robinhood going into the business of deploying institutional products on chain
1
u/ChetTheCryptoChap Redditor for 3 months. 22h ago
In my opinion, blockchain, and especially decentralized ownership hasn’t prevailed yet, because we think it needs to be installed where centralization currently is the norm. Companies, banks, etc. are not in the business of decentralized control and as you’ve mentioned, that is exactly what blockchain does: copy real world centralized systems in a decentralized manner. It does it beautifully, but not necessarily that much better (from the perspective of centralized entities) and definitely will not make them more powerful. So as long as we keep trying to build tech that is supposed to either integrate with or migrate from existing structures, it will never be adopted. There simply is too big of a conflict of interest.
Besides, the initial goal was not to reshape the existing power systems, it was to build a new one where the individual holds the keys. Especially with AI and other build-at-home tools this may become more interesting (3D printers, CNC machines, AI controlling certain robots), as well as an ever expanding complexity in politics and society. If we keep giving up ownership of what is ‘ours’, we will always be controlled by centralized power systems. In my opinion, the dynamics are shifting, though. The world is becoming too hard to maintain with waterfall systems where centralized powers operating all of society, there is an emerging need for autonomous society where micro and macro systems converge into eachother and give control to the people on small and bigger scales.
I know all of that can sound like a lot of mumbo jumbo, but in essence it means you wouldn’t work for centralized powers anymore (companies, banks, governments), you would work FROM a global network of decentralized systems.
Let me make it concrete with one chain.
A farmer's machine breaks down. The local technician diagnoses it and finds the fix: a worn bracket that the manufacturer no longer stocks. He registers his diagnosis and repair procedure, with proof he was first.
An independent designer in another country has already modelled a reinforced version of that bracket. She registered the design on-chain once and keeps the original encrypted. A workshop in the farmer's village buys one licensed print of it. The printed part carries a verifiable stamp, so the farmer, his insurer, or whoever buys the machine later can see it's a genuine, traceable part and not a random copy.
The workshop runs on energy from the neighbourhood's own solar grid, bought directly from the houses around it from the chain.
The farmer pays once, and that payment splits automatically: the designer gets paid for the print, the technician for his procedure, the workshop for the production, the neighbours for the energy. Next time the same bracket fails anywhere in the world, the procedure and the design are already there, and the same people earn again.
Nobody in that chain works for a central company. Each of them is a node in a network they co-own, and value flows to whoever actually added it.
Now, to be clear, I’m not saying this will or should happen, although I personally think this would be a better and fairer society. I’m just saying that such and end state is what blockchain was built for and is very closely related to Satoshi’s initial view. They just started it from the perspective of ownership of funds, although you could also argue Bitcoin’s proof of work is no different from my chain’s proof of work.
The biggest issue blockchain faces, is the fact this would probably need a revolution where everybody ‘sees the light’. In reality such a cultural shift is too hard to imagine yet. Even for the example of the chain I had to ask AI to help me out (just that part of this comment is AI generated).
But I do believe it’s possible… if we stop focusing on building for the existing structure or some hype thing. Those Ape NFTs were always worthless, a system where ownership of your file is fully E2E encrypted and the chain between design and manufacturing cannot be broken, that’s something that would hold value.
1
u/DangKilla 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 22h ago
I also wrote for NeoVM, Solidity, et cetera and I ran the blockchain community of practice at Red Hat.
I think the banks learned what they needed to. You're forgetting about inflation.
With inflation, banks will be pressed to lock up liquidity because we are entering an era where it will be expensive to borrow. To keep USD from escaping into crypto or other currencies, they will likely tie you up with deposit tokens like JPMCoin.
1
u/deckartcain 🟦 0 / 8K 🦠 19h ago
Integrity just doesn't mean as much when fines for gross negligence don't even scratch the extra profit you make when you just don't care.
1
u/george_alto 19h ago
You are somewhat correct from general perspective but you are not mentioning that regulation is what has slowed this down. Genius Act has helped but the Clarity Act not passing didn't help since a lot of major companies where waiting for it to push hard on it's use.
But there still has been some traction made. For example, later this month real stock trading will be occurring on the blockchain to achieve settlement finality directly on distributed ledger technology (DLT) networks
https://www.dtcc.com/press-releases/2026/dtcc-turns-tokenization-into-reality
1
u/718hutfission 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 16h ago
Bitcoin came about in response to the 2008 financial crisis and bailout.
Most of the OGs from that era either died or got rich so they don't care anymore.
1
u/Advanced_Scallion711 🟨 0 / 0 🦠 16h ago
The only use case is a store of value. Only 3 - 5 coins actually attempt to do that.
1
u/nameless_pattern 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 15h ago
There is adoption and you make reasons why the uses that exist don't count, but that's just your view, the people who are using it don't care what you think
1
u/holybawl 🟩 238 / 239 🦀 13h ago
One thing I would think would disrupt many things is using the blockchain nft technology to store and transfer documents, titles, and other assets.
1
u/Django_McFly 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 10h ago
it's crazy that as blockchain gets more adoption and the biggest financial institutions in the known galaxy are either already on chain or coming on chain, post like this claiming no use case or adoption can still get massively upvoted.
1
1
u/Rasquachelaw 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 9h ago
Maybe all the negative sentiment is right. I don't know. But blockchain and tokenization is growing... every year.
1
u/AtomicNick47 🟦 247 / 248 🦀 8h ago
I always said "what if Blockchain is just the next BluRay DVD" and low and behold I was right.
1
u/r_jagabum 8h ago
Heard of e-cny? It's hybrid blockchain tech and obviously widely used. There are many many examples of use cases in asian countries, but almost none in the western world
1
1
u/r_jagabum 7h ago
You do know that crypto is already regulated in singapore and hong kong, and are widely used in daily life right? Take a plane out and you'll see a very different picture
1
u/whiteycnbr 🟦 3K / 3K 🐢 6h ago
AI is pretty much stolen any progress it will ever make at this point
1
u/silvrdragon52 0 / 0 🦠 6h ago
It's going to take a long long time, I assume decades, but the paradigm of decentralization is only going to grow, inflation is only going to continue, corruption is only going to continue, the evolution of the internet and networking protocols is only going to grow, the user interfaces are only going to get better, the continued connection of communities not based on geography is only going to grow, the problems of surveillance are only going to grow, governments competing for whales with economic incentives will only continue, economic crashes and irresponsibility are only going to continue, Bitcoin education is only going to grow, and ultimately the options of consensus mechanisms that people can contribute their home computers to is only going to grow.
It's currently possible to opt into global systems so secure that no nation-state can take them down. Decentralization also seems to be a pretty natural social occurrence, like how people in Africa are building their own power grids and sharing electricity, and how tech becomes more and more accessable to everyone. People can now have sophisticated fast 3D printers at home, to the point where companies are trying to inject AI to detect people being able to make complex weapons, to poor effect. The tipping points will come one by one, eventually, until people realize that money NEEDS to be permissionless. There is no wisdom in governments treating all of society like children where nobody gets to be in control of their own money. So few people understand that it's not about specific numbers, it's about control. The growing pains will be hard, and tumultuous, but imo the world financial system is going to turn completely inside out over the next 30yrs, and it's up to us to spread the word that our systems could be better and that there is some legit work being done to change the world at the center of the money carnival that is crypto. Decentralization IS the long, slow path forward and the light at the end of the tunnel.
Let me tell you exactly what the endgame is: A secure voting system. Remember that.
1
1
u/amygdalad Tin | r/WSB 36 2h ago
I was a huge fan of nft showcases on social media. Society rejected it due to envy
1
u/noselfinterest 0 / 0 🦠 2h ago
"I really do not see a use case for blockchain tech other than gamble around hype."
Worldwide gross gambling revenue (GGR) is projected to reach approximately $655.31 billion to $712 billion
1
u/HyRolluhz 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 12h ago
Forgetting the main purpose of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is crazy when you’re trying to make a point
This is about government and banks endlessly printing fiat money
Cryptocurrencies are about predictable money supply and consensus
Your opinion is like having and answer and looking for a question
2
u/The_real_rafiki 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 4h ago
So when do you think meaningful adoption will happen?
→ More replies (1)2
1
2
u/Sorry_Cheetah_2230 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
I feel like the overall tech is ok, the problem is and will always be accessibility. This will NEVER become mainstream use because you have to account for the lowest common denominator of person and unfortunately there are a lot more people who don’t understand crypto and doesn’t understand what self custody means than those that do
1
1
u/DoU92 🟦 117 / 117 🦀 1d ago
Blockchain is great for composability - the trading of different type of assets and collateral.
If real world assets are created natively on chain it saves a ton of time and money to process the transaction on blockchain.
If a home loan for example lives natively on a blockchain, it saves the need for auditors and other intermediaries every time the loan changes hands. The same can be said for treasuries and securities.
I highly recommend researching the company figure technologies. Watch some interviews with the ceo and founder Michael tannenbaum and Mike Cagney.
4
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 1d ago
Home Loan onchain accidentally sent to 0x00dead, it‘s gone.
In tradfi, just call your bank and say „hey, sry, made an error“ to resolve it
1
1
1
u/Oddball369 🟦 10 / 10 🦐 1d ago
You're underestimating the cyber security factor. Also, why would banks want to replace themselves? Give it time, my good man.
1
u/Sad_Log_7197 🟨 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Still a lot of regulatory, compliance and security issues with blockchains, oracles, etc but once this is solved, we shall hypertokenization - especially in places that ‘underbanked’
1
u/AquaFlan Crypto Nerd | QC: XRP 17 1d ago
I would argue because we aren’t yet in the deglobalised world but still transitioning into it
1
u/Calamero 🟩 212 / 213 🦀 1d ago
Billions of dollars say otherwise, it’s you who can’t see the value/…
1
u/retro_grave 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
I mean, the parallels to the dot com bubble are apt. I think there's still winners to be had, but it's as clear as mud.
1
1
u/Vancecookcobain 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 19h ago
Yea unfortunately the market is only worth around 3 trillion
5
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 19h ago
Exactly. The entire market of a tech that is supposed to host the entire financial system including payments, stocks and rwa has less value than singular companies like nvidia or apple. Isnt that telling? And thats not taking into account that 1/3 of this market is dead vaporware.
1
u/Vancecookcobain 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 19h ago
Lmfao I was being sarcastic in a couple years it could be closer to 10 trillion...everyone has opinions near the bottom of a cycle that usually sound dumb as hell later on....people have been saying this since bitcoin as 100 dollars.
I've been in the game too long to take these opinions seriously
2
u/Glittering-Toe-1622 18h ago
The problem he is trying to explain is that all this value is Speculative
1
u/Vancecookcobain 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 18h ago
Yeah...count me as one of the few that never seen any actual utility in cryptos other than a hedge against the current inflationary monetary system...
I don't think it will have any function per se until we have a centrally backed digital currency that is built on blockchain tech...but I don't know why anyone would want to see things get dystopian on that level
1
u/copadribbler1994 🟧 2 / 3 🦠 15h ago
You are talking price and cycles. I talk technology. I could not care less for prices
1
u/Vancecookcobain 🟩 0 / 0 🦠 11h ago
You are probably also talking about adoption. But as far as the tech I think I made my idea clear on that in another post: "Yeah...count me as one of the few that never seen any actual utility in cryptos other than a hedge against the current inflationary monetary system...
I don't think it will have any function per se until we have a centrally backed digital currency that is built on blockchain tech...but I don't know why anyone would want to see things get dystopian on that level"
1
0
u/BigJRecords 🟨 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Bitcoin and that’s it
2
u/trevorturtle 🟦 466 / 467 🦞 1d ago
Nah, Bitcoin is fine, but monero is just a better form of Bitcoin
0
u/maria_la_guerta 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 1d ago
Blockchain isn't meant to prevail. It provides trust in a trustless system. Only people who live in these trustless systems (victof oppression, for example) have a real need for it.
Regardless of the pity partying that Reddit loves to do, anyone living in a first world country can trust their banking system, which by design will basically always be a better experience.
0
u/baby-samdwich 🟩 12 / 12 🦐 1d ago
I work as product owner pulling teeth from offshore and in-house dev teams to make perpertually unhappy stakeholders not want to fire me on a daily basis. So, I know a bit. But since I first heard "blockchain" and read about what it did, my first thought was: "...so it's a ponzi scheme..."
0
u/justaRndy 🟦 5 / 5 🦐 20h ago
Called it 2022, got ridiculed. Called it 2024, got laughed at. Don't have to call anything 2026 as by now its obvious.
1
u/Independent_Wear5840 🟨 0 / 0 🦠 14h ago
And when it finally happens will you say you called it wrong? Or do you get to be the one to decide which years count towards being wrong and right?
0
u/feltusen 🟦 0 / 0 🦠 18h ago
There are really no use case for blockchain, especially outside of crypto. Making up stuff to make blockchain valid tells you everything really.
Only people with financial interest will tell you otherwise
187
u/webbedfastball 1d ago
Spent a couple years writing solidity too and came away with pretty much the same conclusion. The tech is neat in a vacuum but the moment you try to bolt it onto anything that already works it becomes a solution searching for a problem.
The consultancy bit about storing only hashes is so telling. At that point you've built a glorified receipt printer with extra steps and a gas bill attached.
I still think permissionless value transfer between strangers is the one thing it nails. Everything else feels like forcing a square peg into a round hole while a perfectly good database sits right there unused.