Distributed ledgers have done more than just anonymize data and secure individuals identities. It has democratized data integrity in an efficient way. Why would large global financial institutions balk one day on the technological and philosophical advances of blockchain one day, but quietly move to put their own initiatives in place for a ledger strategy of their own the next?
Economies of scale through machined efficiencies, and essentially the guy-next-door’s “fits of fiscal policy grandeur” can only be to blame, right? It’s true – we live in a virtual world where a white-label tokenization can essentially strap on any off-the-shelf (or made by a high-schooler) fiscal and currency circulation policy and test if it has legs to stand on – namely a market of supply and demand.
Banking executives may be able to smell their own demise. Bitcoin did more than just establish a currency to buy and sell, just as its blockchain infrastructure did more than create a proven form of secure transactions. In proving that a demand exists to create a market for a borderless currency (despite the scepticism behind needing an underlying asset), Bitcoin’s existance proved that we can have a borderless society, where each global citizen could exist with their own currency, establish their own bank, and essentially their own country – self-sovereinty.