Is It Right That Banks Now Accept Bitcoin?

[SuperBitMan]

In my own country banks have not started accepting Bitcoin and the reason is because our government are not really friendly to Bitcoin before they were really fighting against Bitcoin but right now the fight has reduced and that is because they have made some rules and regulations that will be guiding Bitcoin transaction.
It is possible that banks will be accepting Bitcoin in those country that their government is Bitcoin friendly and I see nothing wrong with that yes Bitcoin was created in a way that there won't be any third person involvement in your Bitcoin transaction but one thing I want you to understand is that bank accepting Bitcoin is not a mandatory that you must use bank to exchange your Bitcoin it is a choice if you want to use Bank it is good for you but if you don't want you can use other means.
Bank is getting involved because they know that people are now using Bitcoin a lot and for them to stay in business they need to key in into Bitcoin and get some profit from there.

[henry_of_skalitz]

^ I wouldn't go for a bank to use my BTC or just to hodl it, it's a dead end and it would be the thing was created for - to not to have to go to the bank and have a third party to do the job for you.

[jcojci]

I think banks see the opportunity to gain more customers and become their loyal members. They offers the system that will allow their customers to buy Bitcoin from their account. Banks will profit from this because they will take the cost from customers who buy Bitcoin and the cost to save their Bitcoin in the banks. Maybe that is a good sign for the adoption because legitimacy is going on and will attract more businesses to do the same. It is a good progress too because that will challenge them to have a better system that can accommodate customers to buy Bitcoin without worrying about anything.

[Callido]

^ I wouldn't go for a bank to use my BTC or just to hodl it, it's a dead end and it would be the thing was created for - to not to have to go to the bank and have a third party to do the job for you.

Who do you blame when banks begin to receive bitcoin as deposits, most people are afraid of being their own bank, they can't manage total decentralization. We don't need to join them since we know what bitcoin stands for, whether banks now accept bitcoin or they don't (banks from my country do not) still doesn't change how we are supposed to use or what advantages comes alongside. You don't have to worry, bitcoin retains its value, no matter the involvement from government.

[Z-tight]

Unfortunately, some people get it the hard way only when they see their coin gone / frozen, for whatever reason. Only then they understand why BTC allows them to handle their custody themselves..

Self custody is the appropriate way to store your coins. However, if i am to start an unpopular opinion, i would say banks may be a better option to store coins for people who use centralized exchanges. Of course i do not recommend either service, but rather than use centralized exchanges that go bankrupt often, banks are a bigger institution and could provide more 'stability' for people. Take note that this option only applies to people who do not want to be their own bank.

[CryptoBuds]

People were already trusting centralized exchanges. If you are going to trust a custodian then might as well use something that is highly regulated. I don’t know if Bitcoin deposits are covered by insurance, but I imagine people still feel safe with banks that have been around for many decades.

Being your own bank might be fine for retail investors, but if you’re an institution or an investor worth billions, you will look for the most practical and safe approach to protecting your wealth. A windows laptop and a piece of paper with your phrase written on it is not going to be good enough.

We need to accept that not everyone is looking for privacy and freedom in bitcoin, many are just looking for profit. Besides, not everyone is confident enough to selfcustody and not everyone values ​​financial independence as much as we do. So they are not wrong in moving to centralized services where they feel safer.

Therefore, it is normal for governments, banks or centralized institutions to accept bitcoin, we don't need to make things complicated. Think about it, how can banks accept bitcoin if no one wants to use their services? There is clearly a huge demand from investors, and banks are just responding to that demand. We cannot blame only the banks, in this case.

[uchegod-21]

In another way, they try to create more laws, regulations as barriers against Bitcoin, in order to force Bitcoin users to use banks if they want to trade bitcoins for example. It's helpful for governments to do strict taxation on their citizens but believe me, governments and banks will not kill Bitcoin.

This is my own major concern with banks getting involved. Many people who invest in bitcoin are either too lazy to do anything relating to bitcoin on their own or don't have sufficient knowledge to be their own bank. They will definitely feel safe with the banks who will use that opportunity to create some unnecessary barriers for them. The banks are known for imposing unnecessary barriers.  Even those who keep fiat with them are not safe, how much more bitcoin which they say is a tool used by criminals? I will rather trade p2p than be comfortable having bitcoin dealings with the banks.

Banks getting into Bitcoin could easily bring back the same restrictions and control that the crypto space was intended to avoid. People might trust banks out of convenience, but more often than not, that trust has its unspoken costs and limits. And once banks take over, they may stipulate strict regulations, fees, and monitoring whereby Bitcoin will no longer have the freedom that it is decentralized for. Personal feelings aside, I would prefer peer-to-peer trading where I am in full control of my assets without relying on banks or middlemen.

Convenience comes with a price. Trust me, once the bank becomes a thing, most bitcoin enthusiasts will not be able to escape verification and KYC processs, there will also be close monitory of funds that go in and out of their individual wallet addresses, privacy too will be affected. This is the exact  thing we are running away from, coming to us well packaged to attract attention.

We don't need all of this; the beauty of Bitcoin is freedom, once that is lost, your assets will be at the mercy of the government. Bitcoiners should be wise and avoid anything that gives third parties access to their private keys. If they think p2p is risky, then they should trust the banks and see which is riskier.

[Cekikafa]

KYC is illicit activity and banks are criminal also.

[AmoreJaz]

Unfortunately, some people get it the hard way only when they see their coin gone / frozen, for whatever reason. Only then they understand why BTC allows them to handle their custody themselves..

Self custody is the appropriate way to store your coins. However, if i am to start an unpopular opinion, i would say banks may be a better option to store coins for people who use centralized exchanges. Of course i do not recommend either service, but rather than use centralized exchanges that go bankrupt often, banks are a bigger institution and could provide more 'stability' for people. Take note that this option only applies to people who do not want to be their own bank.

If you know how to handle crypto, then, there's no reason that you need bank to store your coins. Or maybe, the bank is offering certain interest , hence, the move of some to store or deposit their coins. Also, for some who are not yet very familiar with crypto, they tend to rely on established institutions to handle their finances. Thus, they will buy btc from the bank and store it in the bank itself. Because some banks may already be offering such financial service where they just do all the transactions and the end game is that thei client is having a btc deposit in their bank. So whether you are knowledgeable with btc or not, you can avail such service. But once this client learned the ins and outs in crypto, I would say, he will get his btc and store it on his own.

[r_victory]

Whether it's right or wrong, I don't know, but I do know that banks are where the money is, and right now, Bitcoin is riding the crest of the wave. The banks' intentions are more than obvious. I believe it could be good in a way, joining forces instead of going it alone, but what can't happen is the loss of Bitcoin's autonomy. Using Bitcoin without intermediaries or through a bank will be a matter of personal choice.

[irhact]

Who do you blame when banks begin to receive bitcoin as deposits, most people are afraid of being their own bank, they can't manage total decentralization. We don't need to join them since we know what bitcoin stands for, whether banks now accept bitcoin or they don't (banks from my country do not) still doesn't change how we are supposed to use or what advantages comes alongside. You don't have to worry, bitcoin retains its value, no matter the involvement from government.

Most individuals are always scared to be the protector of their own money and that's why banks get lots of business because they receive lots of money. We're all different individuals therefore if I don't want the banks to hold my money, there'll be others that'll love the idea of bank holding their money. We can't change everybody thinking therefore what we can do now is what favours us and allow others to do the things they think it favours them. In the due time, they'll learn that banks can't be trusted and I hope by that time, they still get another chance to invest and hold their own Bitcoin instead of giving it to a third party.

[endut15]

It’s kind of ironic, but also expected. Banks always go where the money is.
If people start using Bitcoin, of course they’ll try to integrate it and make profit from it.

For me, it’s not a bad thing — it just shows how strong Bitcoin has become.
As long as we still have the option to hold our own keys, banks “accepting” BTC doesn’t change its original purpose.

Just my 2 sats.

[KiaKia]

As crazy as it may sound some people really want this to happen, they are son in love with the centralised world of control, keeping money in the bank is more safer than self custody they will say.

Such people will prefer to see banks offering such services, it is not wrong for banks to offer bitcoin related services but I won't allow them to be in control of my life all the time, they have my bank account.

They know how much I move out and in, they have my address and information, as if that's not enough? Now the only self custody control that I have is my bitcoin and my non custodial wallet, I should be in control for once.

[Tungbulu]

Point of correction. Bitcoin wasn’t created to replace the traditional monetary or banking system, I’d say it was created to only give individuals control over their own finances, but that doesn’t mean they can do without the banks and the fiats since it’s already tied to every country’s economy. And secondly, the fact that banks starts accepting Bitcoin or has opened their doors for Bitcoin still doesn’t mean that they’ll magically take control of Bitcoin, Bitcoin is still 100% decentralized and people can still have completely control over their finances so I don’t see it as much of a threat.

[tottong]

If you know how to handle crypto, then, there's no reason that you need bank to store your coins. Or maybe, the bank is offering certain interest , hence, the move of some to store or deposit their coins. Also, for some who are not yet very familiar with crypto, they tend to rely on established institutions to handle their finances.

It actually seems more foolish when someone invests but stores their assets through features provided by a bank.
Honestly, I don't know if this is true or not, but someone can independently take advantage of opportunities to invest in Bitcoin. While banks are beginning to consider these good intentions in an effort to provide opportunities for their customers, there remains considerable skepticism about banks seriously implementing this for Bitcoin, and frankly, there's no benefit to users from using these features, as banks are openly government products.
Leveraging Bitcoin without the need for a third party is powerful, and it would be foolish for anyone to trust a bank as a safe haven for their Bitcoin investments.

[nemesis_incarnate]

Point of correction. Bitcoin wasn’t created to replace the traditional monetary or banking system, I’d say it was created to only give individuals control over their own finances, but that doesn’t mean they can do without the banks and the fiats since it’s already tied to every country’s economy. And secondly, the fact that banks starts accepting Bitcoin or has opened their doors for Bitcoin still doesn’t mean that they’ll magically take control of Bitcoin, Bitcoin is still 100% decentralized and people can still have completely control over their finances so I don’t see it as much of a threat.

It was created to be an alternative for those interested, imo.

To what extent it would go - nobody knew and knows even today, but we see for a fact that BTC makes big progress.

[Tungbulu]

✂️✂️✂️✂️

It was created to be an alternative for those interested, imo.

To what extent it would go - nobody knew and knows even today, but we see for a fact that BTC makes big progress.

Very true, because Bitcoin isn’t for everyone. There are people who even with the opportunity right in front of them would still choose to lock up their money in the bank and refuse to take the opportunity, so not everyone is interested in taking charge of their money.

And concerning the extent Bitcoin would go, sure no one knows for sure but IMHO I know it ain’t gone replace the fiat system completely because even Bitcoin kinda needs fiat, at least for now, cos you can’t buy bitcoin without fiat right? Just to tell how important the fiat system is even to Bitcoin.

[Peanutswar]

Most of the banks here in my country already supported the use of the feature with the deposit and withdrawal pf crypto and even exchange to local currencies into coin they are desired for me its easier and convenient in my part but of course needed to be considered the transaction fee and rates even though they support it still some of their features are quite so slow to operate and compared with the international exchange well they just offer a feature for those who would like to invest too. For veterans already of course they will choose not link to their accounts.

[Mighty97]

It is a little of both. On one side, banks being involved leads to more legitimacy, accessibility, and regulatory clarity— which are tools that helps Bitcoin get to a larger audience. And on the other side, it reduces the original vision of financial independence and decentralization. At the end, it relys on how people uses it: when Bitcoin remains true to its peer to peer form, banks won't be able to own it, but they will definitely build around it

[CryptSafe]

It has got to the point now that institutions want to use every opportunity to make a good profit, so I  would not be surprised to see that banks are now accepting Bitcoin because they stand a chance of making a good profit from it, but however, it is a clear sign of adoption on the rise in that region where such banks exist.

I tell my friends that such is not a bad idea, but I see it as a kind of a trap because the government must definitely, one day, be fully involved in  it, because they know why the banks made such a move and they too would want to step in to also take what they feel is their right and the bank can never say no because they are licensed by the goverment so they would defdinitely comply to retain their position and all the brunt would be on their customers who are the bitcoin holders.