So if one ignores the liability/regulation part of this stunt, and just look at the technical merit. Could you then say that this blockchain really provides nothing that a traditional centralized system wouldn't? But at much higher complexity and cost?
Wouldn't that just mean that the whole schtick is to avoid regulation? If I as a regulator saw this, I'd just schedule it for my next meeting, since you want to avoid having companies doing regulatory exploits "until regulation catches up". It's Uber all over otherwise.
> Could you then say that this blockchain really provides nothing that a traditional centralized system wouldn't?
Blockchains (in general) enforce not only open code, but open data.
Technically, nothing prevents traditional banks to offer standardized easy-to-use and easy-to-onboard API access to their financial data, but in reality incentives are not there (quite the opposite).
Blockchains are a contrived way to enforce open code and open data. There are other technical ways to do that, but none of them has been found to actually work in reality.
Wouldn't that just mean that the whole schtick is to avoid regulation? If I as a regulator saw this, I'd just schedule it for my next meeting, since you want to avoid having companies doing regulatory exploits "until regulation catches up". It's Uber all over otherwise.