Imagine telling me I need to buy a selfie stick when I already have long arms and take perfect pictures of myself, this is exactly how I felt reading the latest proposal from SWIFT to enhance blockchain transactions - or was it tokenized payments it said?
Same thing really.
Why add an extra struggle to what already works perfectly well?
If we want to talk about blockchain transactions, honestly speaking, performing a transaction on-chain is a piece of cake.
It's no different from a bank transfer. Input a recipient, input amount, gas auto-picked, press send, input password or verify with biometric, what's difficult about that?
I'll tell you, nothing!
The only thing wrong with blockchain transactions is that the word “blockchain” encompasses a lot and people get overwhelmed hearing of it before even trying it.
When it comes to getting a wallet set up and performing a transaction, it's far easier than getting a bank account and doing the same.
But people are far up their ass with delusions to admit this, SWIFT is no different.
“Shared ledgers are not well suited to carrying and storing high volumes of data due to the way data is synchronised across parties and the computing power required. This is where a messaging layer fits in.”
“For transactions to be frictionless, additional types of data also need to be transferred to enable value-added services such as AML, compliance, sanctions screening, trade and accounts receivable reconciliation,” it continued.
Frictionless? I just talked about how easy it is to send tokens across various addresses a while ago, and to think that on Hive that takes less than 3 secs on average, what is this company talking “frictionless” about?
You know I saw this report on two websites, Coingape and Cointelegraph and I chose to quote Cointelegraph version because it shared a great response tweet from some individual commenting on the SWIFT proposal
Here it is:
I would send you some “That's what I'm about token” but no shitcoin dev seem to have thought about creating that one… Yet…
Crypto certainly doesn't need your damn “centralized” messaging layer designed to honor your gay masters that call themselves “the government”.
I wonder how this company really thinks an ecosystem that has managed to build a trillion dollar market for itself without “central control” on the base layer would be dumb enough to not spot the freaking nonsense being coated to sound like something revolutionary for a technology that has solved cross-border transaction flaws with ease.
The fact that they had the guts to talk about compliance and sanctions screening is just peak level fooling.
The entire idea of “decentralized finance networks” is to facilitate transactions that do not conform to centralized entities.
Transactions are meant to be peer-to-peer, require no third centralized layer and if by chance, any third layer should be needed, it ought to be an equally decentralized layer.
This is where we talk about things like decentralized blockchain oracles enably value flow from legacy finance systems to decentralized finance protocols without a central entity to interfere with the data passed around.
SWIFT should go take a piss, we know that blockchain with crypto threatens its business, it either bends to DeFi or makes way for who will.
Posted Using InLeo Alpha
SWIFT is outdated. Ripple Labs has already done what they're trying to do, and for the same target market. There will sadly be some financial institutions follow SWIFT off the cliff. In the end, crypto will win.
Interesting analogy:
I think you are right, that some banks are being led right off the cliff to their death. I think it's just centralization at work. Those in power have control and wealth, but want more. Their appetite seems insatiable.
The Old Guard will follow their own. Partly human nature. The rest is confirmation bias.
Strong words, you sound like a revolutionary. But then aren't we all in this space revolutionaries, seeking to learn and earn enough to escape the centralized banking system which siphons and steals at every opportunity.