https://www.ft.com/content/20c10d58 -8d9c-11e7-a352-e46f43c5

>>3309545
I don't subscribe, text or screenshots

Here is another similar article listing exactly which banks:

http://www.gata.org/node/17605

i assume in this event, bitcoin would be fine (if not crash some, but once the "trustworthiness" of central banks rubber stamp a coin, why would normies ever want anything else?

more details:

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/six-global-banks-join-ubs-digital-currency-project-aims-go-live-2018/

No but the banks are.

>>3309545
How are alts btfo?

This is bank tokens with only banks being able to own the tokens.

It is like if I printed a million 100000 USD bills and traded it between my friends and pretended it was money.

>>3310041
isnt that how all blockchain currencies work? anyway im just assuming that if banks could get a coin working why would they not want to try to make it available to the general public and market it as what "all the kids are using to transfer money instantly"

>>3309994

This is talking about a banked owned Ripple. Meaning, normies Don't use it, banks would when working with each other. I'd consider jumping ship on XRP, but otherwise private blockchain won't affect public ones.

That being said, this is the kind of shit that drew me to ARK. Companies, not just banks can create their own private blockchain which is fully administered by that company. Smartbridge will allow them to work directly with other companies using their own blockchain without even touching the other companies blockchain. Since these are all separate forks, the model has little to no scalibility issues.

I think a bank will eventually create their own public blockchain, but not this soon. There are too many regulatory issues they'd have to address in administration, let alone the ICO process.