Tagged: technology Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • user 8:18 pm on February 5, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: digital factory, , Scotiabank, technology   

    Yes, this is a bank. Five little known facts about Scotiabank’s Digital Factory 

     

    AAEAAQAAAAAAAAioAAAAJGU3YzBjNWQ3LWUzYmEtNDM4MS1hMDM0LWZmYzE4MzNkYTZiYg

    You may have seen the buzz last week about Scotiabank’s newest workspace in Toronto – our Digital Factory, home to some of Canada’s top and creative talent. Many stories focused on the impressive working space that is becoming the Bank’s Canadian digital headquarters.  But there is more to the story as continues its journey to digitize banking for its 23 million customers around the world.  Here are five little known facts about Scotiabank’s :

    1.     It’s not *quite* as new as you think. While the space opened in Toronto in January, the team has been hard at work since October 2015 when the Digital Factory was first created. Since then, teams launched formative projects such as our new digital banking app that allows customer to apply for a chequing or savings account within minutes;  a partnership with global fintech player Kabbage to re-invent small business lending – shifting processing time for entrepreneurs to get approved on a loan from weeks to mere minutes. When at its full size, the Scotiabank’s flagship Digital Factory in Toronto will house more than 350 of Canada’s top technology talent under one enterprise-wide mission: to help Scotiabank provide a seamless, personalized experience to its customers, so they can be served how, when and where they want.

    2.     It transcends global borders. The Digital Factory in Toronto is Scotiabank’s first fully-dedicated physical location for digital talent to work together under one roof, but this movement is actually happening around the world. We have opened Digital Factories in Mexico, Chile, Colombia and Peru, and each Digital Factory will be led by one of five Digital Banking leaders responsible for driving our digital strategy in the diverse markets we serve as Canada’s most international bank: Jeff Marshall (Canada), Fuencis Gomez (Mexico), Luis Torres (Peru), Daniel Kennedy (Chile), and Marcelino Herrera Vegas (Colombia).

    3.   We’re aligning ourselves with the right partners. We have collaborated with organizations in the design, technology and communities to explore unique opportunities and to change the way people feel about the future of banking. That’s why Scotiabank is partnering with a number of leading technology groups such as Georgian Partners, QED Investors, and Kabbage, and academic institutions including OCAD U, Ivey Business School, MaRS, Queen’s University, Rotman School of Management, Ladies Learning Code and more.

    4.   The Digital Factory Space has been designed to maximize collaboration. The space is a techie haven, completely outfitted with everything you’d need from an inspiring workspace. It’s a space that has been thought out; a technology-forward design enabling scrum teams across the bank’s footprint to work together. In fact, all resident desks are sit-stand, and monitors include single connection for PC, Mac, and double monitor. We also recognize the need for balance. There’s a cafeteria onsite that serves many healthy food options, a gym with instructor-led classes and a health consultant onsite. There’s various team building zones in the facility including a games tables and even a bowling alley!

    5.   You do not require banking experience to work here. The Digital Factory is currently recruiting for dozens of roles – product managers, front and back end developers, designers, agile scrum masters and many more. In fact, we are looking for people with non-traditional backgrounds to continue to build a diverse and strong team as possible.

    About the Digital Factory:

    The Digital Factory is a hub for creation and incubation of new and partner-led ideas to deliver game-changing solutions for Scotiabank customers. The Digital Factories are a cornerstone of Scotiabank’s digital transformation, and are focused on reinventing how banking serves people by first reinventing the way we work.


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/natalie-hickes-3765235″ connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Natalie Hickes”] is Recruitment Lead at Digital Factory

     
  • user 4:18 pm on February 5, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , technology   

    Blockchain in the London Commercial Insurance Market ? 

    In early 2016, as part of the London Market Target Operating Model Programme (see http://isupporttom.london for details), an initiative began to investigate and the opportunity for its adoption in the London Commercial Insurance Market.

    When the work started there was limited knowledge (or even awareness) of blockchain across the market and there were, to the best of the author’s knowledge, no active investigation into the by the community.

    The intention of the initiative was to increase awareness in the market, generate support for exploring the opportunity, with representation from the broking and underwriting community, and to learn more about it.

    A series of Proof of Concept’s (POC’s) were undertaken to explore the use of blockchain – using business processes that provided representative use cases. These were used to validate that it could provide an alternative approach and to explore what benefits it could offer. Additionally, independent research by Z/Yen was commissioned to investigate the potential of smart contracts for wholesale insurance.

    It was very timely that, on the same day as the 3rd London Blockchain Week began, a series of reports about the work undertaken were published.  Details can be found here.


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/garynuttall” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Gary Nuttall MBCS CITP”] is Managing Director at Distlytics Ltd

     
  • user 4:54 am on January 22, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Gambit, , technology   

    The Passporting Gambit 

    As it turns out, this past week was the wrong week to quit sniffing glue. You will be mistaken if you think I am alluding to various political gatherings that occurred first in the United States then all over the world. Nothing could be further from my mind. Of course I am alluding to the itsy-bitsy bit of news the Telegraph planted in this article. And before you believe I allude to the momentous piece of news where we learn President Trump refers to Prime Minister May as &;my Maggie&;, then you shall have to guess again.

    Let me put you out of your misery. I am referring to the &8220;&8221; system bombshell, and no, I am not referring to the EU passporting system. Let me put me out of my misery. I am referring to the US-UK passporting system bombshell, and I quote the Telegraph: &8220;Donald Trip is planning a new deal for Britain&; The historic trip comes as: &; A deal to reduce barriers between American and British through a new &8220;passporting&8221; system was considered by Mr Trump&;s team&8230;&8221;

    Try that on for size.

    Screen Shot 2017-01-21 at 11.30.12 PM

    I did and the thoughts swirling in my mind at the speed of light ended up making me dizzy.

    First, given this is the Telegraph, I discounted the possibility of fake news. Second, we all know Trump has not been tender with the EU, so the possibility of sticking it to European countries by weakening them and creating further uncertainty cannot be discounted entirely. Third, Trump has now put the world on notice we have entered a new era of bilateral deals and America first, and a special deal with the UK, on the back of the Brexit vote and what can only be tense negotiations with the EU certainly fits the bill. Fourth, such a passporting system may benefit US banks in light of the threat Brexit poses them by coupling London and NYC as capital markets brethren &8211; do note that several Trump nominees are former Goldman Sachs partners, most notably the Treasury Secretary nominee. Fifth, the US and EU have had recent trade disagreements, notably around the safe harbor agreement on overseas data transfers, thusly a banking passporting system threat may be a useful bargaining chip with the EU in the near future. Sixth, any weakening of the EU may further Trump&8217;s plan for rapprochement with Russia &8211; arguably the UK &8220;elite&8221; is not on the same wavelength. Seventh, we may be witnessing a Trump judo move aimed at softening the EU intransigent stance and, indirectly, secure more favorable Brexit terms for the UK, especially for the financial services industry &8211; this would indeed be masterful. Eighth, could this move be part of the upcoming currency wars &8211; surely this piece of news has the potential of strengthening the pound and weakening the Euro this coming week. I am sure we can come up with many more potential meta reasons for this move and I am looking forward to your comments and ideas.

    Let&8217;s us now switch to more practical matters. How easy would it be to build a financial services passporting system between the US and the UK. Fairly easy on the UK side given there is only one financial regulator, the FCA. Less so on the US side given we are dealing with several federal regulators (the OCC, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, the CFPB, FinCen to name the main ones) and 50 state regulators on the banking side, as well as 50 state examiners on the insurance side. Quite a complicated landscape. For those who have followed the push back state regulators made recently once the OCC revealed its plans for a charter, think of the issues raised by a federal level passporting system pushed by the Trump administration. Obviously, we will need to figure out the details of a potential passporting system. Will it cover only banks, and if so apply only to national charters on the US side? Will it cover broker/dealers, asset managers, payments companies and even startups too, let alone insurers? How wide will be the mandate, how deep? The devil will be in the details, as usual.

    It is a truism to state that trade deals covering products are &8220;easy&8221; to ink, not so with services and last I checked banks or insurers are in the financial services industry. I am no expert but I suspect current international trade treaties will have to be scrutinized to analyze potential conflicts or limits &8211; to be broken or renegotiated? We should also think of any implication and consequences, intended or not, with Basel III and other global financial services accords.

    Further, UK financial regulators have historically had a principles based approach vs the US regulators&8217; rules based one. Two things to note here: a) UK financial regulation is based off of and integrated with EU directives and laws, and b) US regulators have recently toyed with the idea of moving towards principles. Be that as it may, it is clear a US-UK deal that includes a passporting system for financial services industry participants will have to wait for the UK to disentangle itself from the EU.

    A few other thoughts intrigue me. We all know the FCA&8217;s ground breaking initiative with its approach to fintech and financial innovation in general and its sandbox in particular. If a passporting system allows for a transfer of knowledge and purpose and US regulators espouse new ways to engage with and innovation, then I am all for it &8211; note to all, US regulators abhor the word &8220;sandbox&8221;. As my friend Mariano Belinky from Santander InnoVentures stresses, the US banking market is saturated, certainly so on the retail side. It is also fragmented. The UK banking market is highly concentrated. What would be the consequences of passporting for both markets on the retail side? The US banking market has seen few if not any new banking licenses granted of late. New entrants spur innovation and competitions is, in my opinion, somewhat stale in the US. On the other hand, the FCA has now allowed a certain number of challenger banks in the UK to foster innovation and enable competition. If another byproduct of passporting means the US shores will see more challenger banks, I am all for it. Finally, if passporting talks usher an era of simplification and integration between US regulators, as well as be the impetus for global regulatory rethinking, then I will become a huge fan &8211; London+NYC is a rather formidable financial services axis. The deregulation touted by Trump may not be enough alone to usher a new regulatory era in the US. Add a new alliance to the anticipated demise of Dodd Frank and all bets are off. On the other hand, I wonder if the FCA is or will be a champion of deregulation for deregulation&8217;s sake. If smart deregulation ends up permeating both sides of the Atlantic while speaking a different but common language &8211; regulatory and linguistically speaking &8211; then I am all for it.

    Be that as it may, and we need to be cautious given we know so little, we can say the possibilities are as endless as the volatility created by this announcement is high. On the other hand, this may turn out to be one of many crazy ideas without a future. Welcome to a fascinating 4 years trip.

    FiniCulture

     
  • user 12:18 pm on January 7, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , technology   

    Braintree CTO to Do Fireside Chat at Bank Innovation 2017 

    Juan Benitez, general manager and chief officer of , a PayPal subsidiary, will participate in a at  . Bank Innovation 2017, March 6-7 in San Jose, Calif., will feature dozens of speakers on investing in innovation, chatbots, open banking ecosystems, and more. Benitez has been CTORead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 am on January 7, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , technology   

    Regulation, Data Management Top Industry Concerns 

    Professionals in the financial services are focusing their energy on and , according to a survey from consulting firm and services provider Synechron. Financial regulation remains the top concern for the new year among those in the financial industry, with 38% of the firms surveyed markingRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 4:54 am on January 3, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , technology, Wishlist   

    My Current Fintech Wishlist 

    There are many nitty gritty problems that need solving in the financial services industry. , common sense, thoughtful regulation and new business models will address these over time.

    There are also complex problems, bigly ones, that will require either deceptively simple solutions and/or intricate collaboration among many stakeholders.

    I invest in solutions that address either, depending on scale and economics, and am passionate about the latter.

    Here is a non-exhaustive list of solutions that address complex solutions which I am passionate about.

    shutterstock_421243957

     

    1) Low cost reliable banking: We know many consumers are underbanked, non banked or unhappy with their . We still have not cracked the code for low cost reliable banking. I have invested in neo banks as well as digital startup banks in the UK. I still think there is much to do in this field and am interested in digital startup banks in the US to foster further competition and usher new simple licensed banking business models. I am equally interested in retail and SME low cost banking models.

    2) New core banking/insurance systems: There are no new core banking systems in use by banks, same with insurers. This is a technology anomaly in need of being rectified. What with new technologies, new needs centered around data analytics, edge computing on the horizon and interoperability, we are in dire need of new core systems that are low cost to develop and low cost to maintain. I am keenly interested in open source initiatives in this space as a means to unlock this major issue.

    3) Open Source financial technology: This is linked to the above core banking systems item. The power of open source software is tremendous. We see it with technology, we see it with AI. Developing business models around open sourcing of basic code that powers financial services will deliver untold riches.

    4) Bank as a Service platforms: I have written about this subject extensively. My interest lies in technology platforms that will drive the marginal cost of delivering a set of financial services or products to near zero. One can argue this is linked to points 2 & 3 above. (I need to think about Insurance as a Service).

    5) Low cost savings platforms for the US: The 401K market is woefully inefficient, fees are too high, the value chain is too sclerotic. A new cheaper 401K platform would be ideal, but maybe there is a need for a new product altogether which would need legislative & regulatory nudges. Either way this is a massive investment opportunity in the US.

    6) Secure micro payments platforms: There are no inexpensive and secure micro payments solutions for either digital goods & services, person to machine or machine to machine interactions. I do not see credit or debit card rails addressing this need. Maybe new models built off of Ethereum, maybe something else?

    7) Regtech as a Service platforms: I believe regtech solutions will still be needed going forward for certain use cases even if we move towards a financial deregulation era. I do not believe in the viability of point solutions in regtech. I also do not believe one vendor will be able to provide a best of breed portfolio approach &; the needs are too heterogenous, the technologies too varied. Hence, applying the concept of Bank as a Service to Regtech as a Service, with platforms that allow demand to meet supply in a frictionless way will be winners.

    8) Digital Identity solutions: We live more of our lives digitally, we buy, sell, interact with one another, on social media platforms, on mobile apps. Our data is insecure, our payment data is insecure and our identities are are nightmare to manage. Comprehensive digital identity solutions that allow us to build trust, interact with one another and with companies, while securing our data and our privacy will emerge. I am keen to participate and collaborate with the winners in this space. Incidentally, I am equally interested in digital identities for things and for enterprises. Whoever cracks this space will have a very large success on their hands.

    9) Data Marketplaces: By that I mean data marketplaces to monetize financial services data whereby at least one stakeholder (the seller or the buyer) needs a very different level of assurance with regards to data privacy & financial regulation. If we are enterting the digital age, and if data is a key ingredient of that age, then ways to monetize, exchange, buy, sell data that is tied to the financial service industries will be big businesses. Think the NYSE or NASDAQ, but for data and data sets.

    10) House Purchasing/Renting platforms: Face it, buying or renting a home is a pain. It is a pain to show you are a good tenant, and it is a pain to secure a mortgage. There are many documents to procure, many signatures to make, many steps to go through, much due diligence on the buyer/tenant and seller/landlord side for buying/renting. Any solution that helps make the experience a delight, with little friction and with embedded financial services/products is a winner.

    11) Cybersecurity insurance: Nascent space for sure, with lack of understanding of the risks. I dream of a marriage of reason between a insurtech startup and a cybersecurity consulting firm, backed by a forward thinking reinsurer. Definitely interested in exploring this space, especially knowing about the untold risks of IoT security or lack thereof.

    12) Securitization markets for insurance: Admittedly I know little about this space, but the potential for pooling risk, segmenting risk, providing liquidity to certain asset classes seems rather interesting. Big problem to solve, bigger opportunity.

    13) On demand micro insurance platforms: Mostly for retail, tailored for new usages of any type of asset, or new behaviors &8211; gig economy or otherwise &8211; on the fly. We have barely scratched the surface on this one.

    14) Specialized Climate *Change* Insurance platforms: For farming in developed or emerging markets for example. Enough said.

    Let me know about what makes you tick and which solutions/problems in financial services should be tackled.

    ps: I have several other pipe dreams that are not as investable as the above, the main one being digital fiat currencies (physical fiat be gone). Maybe the subject for another post.

    pps: Even though I am bullish on enabling technologies &8211; AR/VR, blockchain, AI, advanced data analytics, quantum computing &8211; I have not focused on these in this post, believing any of the above will be powered by one or several of them, hence my agnosticism.

     

    FiniCulture

     
  • user 11:35 pm on December 30, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , technology   

    The Blockchain explained to my VP (and my President-CTO) 

    Last week I was contracted by my last employer before I retired, a world-class satellite operator in Luxembourg, to do a training on satellite business and — it’s always a pleasure to meet old friends again. I had the opportunity to discuss with 2 VPs who asked me about the and how it can be useful for the satellite and space industry. It was a nice opportunity to discuss about what the blockchain is useful for, instead of the usual speech on what the blockchain is.

    I made a 1-minute elevator pitch, which proved itself interesting enough that we chained on a 15-minute coffee explanation immediately after that. Note: This has also been checked by my former President 🙂

    Executive Summary – 1-minute elevator pitch

    • Today’s services bookkeeping and reporting rely heavily on the double-entry ledger.
    • This method of bookkeeping is a kind of manual checksum that has been invented in 13th century to support the lucrative wool trade across Europe. Doing this, each of the parties maintain their view of the ledger and the counterpart’s view, and both views must balance (“reconciliation”)
    • Mathematically speaking, the number of links among n parties grows as n-square in a peer-to-peer organisation, while it grows much more slowly (only logarithmically) in an hierarchical organisation.
    • So the double-entry ledger favoured a centralised model of trade, with layers of intermediairies, but also generated a need for regulations and auditing. Today’s entire financial world actors, regulators and auditors are organised from this double-entry ledger of the 13th century.
    • The blockchain brings back the simplicity of the single-entry ledger (journal) and peer-to-peer transactions protected by cryptographic primitives from glitches, from errors in operations sequencing or from deliberate frauds. We take full advantage of the speed of communication and of the calculation accuracy of computers.
    • But despite its great promises of simplification and cost reduction, its adoption may be hindered by the threat of disruption of the existing organization (actors, regulators, auditors).
    • Outside the finance world, every day-to-day activity that would be essentially peer-to-peer may benefit from the blockchain. The has the most success currently, but its blockchain is dedicated to crypto-currency transactions, while Ethereum and other blockchain platforms, being Turing-complete, have more potential.
    • Some examples of peer-to-peer activity: housing swaps, hotel rooms or airplane seats booking, spare parts tracking in airliners maintenance, tracking freight containers load, individual healthcare history, real estate transactions, proficiency certification of non-commercial pilots, mutuel pension funds, mutuel health funds, micro-insurance, micro-finance etc.

    What are the problems that the blockchain solves?

    The blockchain is best known through its impact on financial services, so we’ll start with this application before moving to other fields.

    The of keeping accurate records of commercial transactions existed since the Egyptians, but was not solved satisfactorily until back in the Middle Age. At that time, Flanders was the center of the wool textile industry. Merchants all over Europe bought the finest wool clothes there and retailed them to the richest families in the rest of Europe. Payment was done partly with various currencies, partly in kind. Some were done cash, some were paid at term.

    Let’s take the example of a wool merchant located in Munich, with subsidiaries in Paris, in Frankfurt, in Warsaw, and local representatives and warehouses in Bruges, in Brussels, in London. At that time, communication was done at the speed of a walking man, at best of a galloping horse.

    The problems were:

    • how to keep track of the amounts owed by customers, as well as owed to suppliers, in different locations?
    • how to keep accurately inventory of goods at different warehouses with their delivery status and synchronise the information among locations?
    • how to make sure that the same piece of cloth in Bruges warehouse is not sold simultaneously by both the Paris agent and the headquarters in Munich? accessorily how to make sure that the same piece of cloth has not been smuggled out and falsely booked as sold to someone?

    One could use a single-entry ledger per location, a journal, to record each operation. But it was very difficult to detect when and where an error would occur, until it would create an inconsistency with the rest. During the 13th century the double-entry ledger started to be used (the Farolfi ledger of 1299 in Nîmes, France). In such a ledger, each transaction would appear twice, once in the column of credit (where the article came from) and once in the column of debit (where it went). With this method, each transaction could be double-checked, making sure that any flow of goods or money has a starting point and an ending point, and that the total of both parties were equal (balanced). We can see it as the ancestor of a checksum :-).

    In practice, the journal would still be used to record the transactions and, at the end of the day, the accountant would copy and dispatch the transactions in the double-entry ledgers, identifying the origin and destination of each movement, making sure that all accounts were balanced after each operation and matched the journal (reconciliation).

    In 1495, an Italian named Luca Pacioli formalised in a printed book the details of the method and made it popular (Gutenberg’s first book was 1439). So popular that this double-entry ledger is still the basis of today’s accounting practices, of today’s official regulations, and of today’s financial processes. It is so deeply embedded in the commercial practices that the most recent payment settlement automation efforts of the Bank of England, of the Monetary Authority of Singapore and of the Australian New Payment Platform faithfully reproduced this process.

    I met concretely the reality of this kind of issues when I accepted to be treasurer of the Luxembourg Air Museum in Mondorf. This non-lucrative association has one bank account, one petty cash box for operations, one petty cash box for the Museum (selling tickets and souvenirs). It has also an inventory of postcards, DVDs, catalogs and wine bottles bearing the logo of the Museum. I use the bank account to receive subsidies and to pay suppliers. I use the cash boxes to feed the bank account, and I track the inventories. Considering the limited activity of the Museum, we do the bookkeeping ourselves instead of hiring an accountant. I discovered thus the mysteries of manipulating double-entry ledgers, inventories and journals.

    What are the steps involved in a financial transaction?

    To follow the steps of a transaction, let’s imagine I received an SMS from the president of the association “let’s take 100 € from our account to the petty cash box of the Museum“.

    • Step1 – submission: the president sent me a transaction request. In this case it is a SMS. For a bank transaction it could be submitted either with a check (in France or in UK), or a money transfer in the other countries. Generated from paper or directly by web banking, a formatted electronic message is sent to the bank’s payment system. For large amounts between , the interbank SWIFT messaging network would be used (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication).
    • Step2 – validation: I checked that the SMS came indeed from the president. A bank would check that the accounts of the payer and beneficiary indeed exist. It would check the syntax, verify that the amount is within some threshold, control an authorised signature etc.
    • Step3 – confirmation: I checked that Museum’s bank account had enough balance for me to withdraw 100 €. In real life, the bank would check the account balance, the regulatory status of the transfer (reporting threshold, exchange control etc.)
    • Step4 – settlement: I withdrew the amount and fed the Museum petty cash box. For a bank transaction, one account would be credited and the counterpart would be debited.

    Now that the payment is settled, comes the serious job: I have to record the operation in my journal, update the double-entry ledgers of the Museum’s account and of the petty cash box (in my case they are simply 3 worksheets of the same Excel file) and make sure that both have their double-entry balanced. At the end of the month, I’d verify that the bank statement carries the same amount as in my journal.

    On the bank’s side, in addition to keeping the equivalent books for the Museum’s account (journal, general ledger) it has also to keep an archive of the transaction, add it to the monthly reporting to the authorities for Anti-Money Laundering purposes etc.

    • Now what if I, the Museum M, have to pay a supplier S; and if M has an account in Bank A and S has an account in Bank B? In its simplest form, in cascade, Bank A would debit M and credit Bank B, and Bank B would debit Bank A and credit S. The double avalanche of updates and archives and reporting as above would also be unrolled.
    • What if between Bank A and Bank B there is no commercial relationship? The would be to involve a Bank C who would have relationship with both Bank A and Bank B. There comes another avalanche of updates and archives and reporting.
    • What if Bank B goes bankrupt before S is credited but after having received the credit from Bank A or Bank C? The answer is to involve a Central Bank that would never go bankrupt. We have another avalanche of updates and archives and reporting.
    • What if at the end of the day, there has been 200 billions Euros worth of transactions between the nation-wide set of 200 banks? Would all the 20’100 possible pairs of banks proceed to the mutual transfers knowing that the total compensated amounts will be much smaller? The solution is a common Chamber of Compensation (for example Clearstream) that would simply debit each bank of the difference. We have another avalanche of updates and archives and reporting.

    All this complexity was progressively built because initially the double-entry ledger was invented to do somehow a manual and medieval version of a checksum.

    Side note: all payment services Fintechs actually handle steps 1, 2 and 3, the easiest and most lucrative ones. Step 4 and the actual burden of complexity are still left to banks. This is why the European Payment Directive (PSD2) calls these services “Payment Initiator Services”, not “Payment Services”.

    Today the computing power is such that an iPhone 6 has 115 GFLOPs while a Cray-2 (a super computer of 1989) had only 2 GFLOPs. A GFLOP is one billion floating-point operations per second. And with the Internet, information travels at the speed of light, not at the speed of a galloping horse. In the same time we are still doing banking operations as if calculations were done manually, and indeed hundreds of thousands of accountants are still employed to verify manually on the double-entry ledgers the tricky cases generated by manual entry. Let’s go back to the initial questions and see how the blockchain solves them.

    How does the blockchain solve these problems?

    To start with, by definition the blockchain is a set of data that is shared by all computers (“nodes”) that participate as peers to a blockchain network and use the same blockchain protocol executed by a “client” software.

    How to keep track of the amounts owed by customers and owed to suppliers in different locations?

    Each participating node receives a copy of all transactions. It executes steps 1, 2, 3 and 4 above and share the result with peers.

    • Step1 – submission: this is solved with the blockchain by purely data network transmission.
    • Step2 – validation: cryptographic primitives are used to validate signatures; they involve heavy computing. It is part of the blockchain protocol and done by all nodes.
    • Step3 – confirmation: checking that there are sufficient funds to pay the transaction is part of the blockchain protocol and done by all nodes.
    • Step4 – settlement: the updated balances (or outputs of the transaction) are broadcast over the network to all other participating nodes and a consensus is build to record the settlement.

    How to keep accurately inventory of goods at different warehouses and their delivery status and synchronise the information between locations?

    Because the computation is now done electronically by the same “client” software, any discrepancy between nodes may come from a computing glitch, or from a difference in the sequence of execution of transactions: some nodes may receive transaction B before transaction A and other nodes in the reverse sequence.

    Addressing a computing glitch is easy: the faulty node is isolated and the corresponding result is rejected by peers. Handling a discrepancy in sequence is more subtle because there may be a minority subset of nodes that agree on a diverging sequence.

    The blockchain protocol states that if nodes achieve different results, they would all agree to chose randomly one of them to be right. This is called the “consensus”: the others discard their calculations and use the result of the chosen one. There are many ways to achieve consensus, the most widely used is the “proof of work”: the competing nodes try randomly to find a number that satisfies a given property. It may takes billions of billions of trials before finding it. The first node who finds a solution wins the consensus.

    How to make sure that the same piece of cloth in Bruges warehouse is not sold simultaneously by both the Paris agent and the headquarters in Munich?

    This can happen by coincidence in time, or by deliberate fraud. It is called “double-spending”. The blockchain protocol solves this problem by using a cryptography primitive called a “hash”. A hash of a document proves that it has not been modified. It is very difficult to forge but very easy to verify. We talked above about the “proof of work”: it consists of collecting a number of transactions together in a “block” and calculating a hash of it, as part of the work of finding a random number. If a block is modified, a verification of the hash will reveal it immediately. The blocks are “chained”, i.e. each block contains the hash of the previous block. If this previous one is modified, its hash changes and therefore the content of the next block also is, as well as the hash of this next etc. As a result, the whole (block)chain would reveal this single change.

    If the double-spending incident happened by coincidence, the problem is similar to the above: it is a matter of sequencing, so the transaction that gets first its block approved by the general consensus is the only one valid.

    If the double-spending was done on purpose for fraud, subsequently to the first spending being approved, the cheater will issue a second spending of the same good and this must also be approved, and at the same time somehow the block containing the first spending needs to be invalidated.

    However, because this previous block has already been approved by consensus and chained to other blocks, the cheating node that wants to invalidate that block must build a variant chain faster than the rest of the community. This means it needs more computing power than the rest of the community. It is not impossible, but economically very unrealistic because of the cost versus benefit of such cheating.

    As a result, there is a minimal need for auditing and verification from a higher authority because of the consensus is always achieved among all actors.

    So is the blockchain only good for financial transactions?

    If we take a step back and look at the big picture, the general problems that the blockchain solves are:

    • how can we track the inflows and outflows of something (money or token), among a large number of peer actors?
    • how can we protect against a quasi-simultaneous commitment (spending) of this “something” by 2 or several actors or by a same fraudulent one?

    Does it sound familiar to you?

    • have you ever been victim of an airline seat overbooking?
    • how can a tour operator makes sure that a hotel room has not been booked twice?
    • how can a peer-to-peer Uber reservation avoid that the same taxi be booked to 2 clients?
    • how can an air traffic controller be sure that another flight sector has not assigned the same flight level and same route than his, to another plane?
    • how to track over the lifetime of an liner aircraft the spare parts replaced gradually and independently by different airlines and repair shops? Airbus has 7000 subcontractors.
    • how to simplify registration and declaration of all customised add-ons equipments to homebuilt and kit aircrafts made by passionate “homebuilders“, instead of today’s heavy process of paper work and local inspection made by Civil Aviation delegates or private Quality Control agencies.
    • how about letting each private pilot log their hours in a blockchain and letting the doctors log the medical certificates of these pilots, both of which naturally confirms their proficiency for flying, instead of spending time and effort of all national aviation agencies to certify them, controlling an activity that is non-commercial.
    • how to track individually the placement of identified satellite parts in subsystems by subcontractors?
    • how to make sure that the same KWh from a solar array has not been sold to 2 different clients?
    • how to guarantee that a house has not been sold simultaneously by 2 remote real estate agents?
    • how to keep track of the loading of a fleet of container ships by peer forwarder stations?
    • etc, etc.

    All these problems have already been solved today by introducing some central coordination and distributed databases, which may be suited below a certain number of stakeholders and become polynomially complex when this number grows. But such centralisation is a source of failure, is of error-prone complexity and is a target for attacks. Above a certain volume and number of more or less independent actors, these problems would benefit from a peer-to-peer solution, and the resulting system would gain in flexibility, efficiency and resilience.

    Why did the financial services become the first application of the blockchain?

    • Since beginning of mankind, everybody uses some sort of financial service, every day. It’s an ideal peer-to-peer candidate application.
    • The lack of a satisfactory technology to detect and correct distributed mistakes fostered the creation of a multi-layered centralised system.
    • Then the centralisation and aggregation of transactions lead to huge movements of funds…
    • … and huge financial flows created a need for strict regulations, to detect and punish frauds.
    • A transformation into a peer-to-peer model needs significant changes in regulations and may deeply transform the financial industry.

    Which one of the above use cases are better candidates than the finance industry for blockchain transformation? Probably none. That’s why the first applications of blockchain were in this field. But all the other examples can at some stage take profit of the blockchain technology.

    The Bitcoin, the first well known blockchain platform, has been designed specifically for monetary transactions with a remarkable incentivizing scheme to support its use. This is why it is so successful. The Ripple blockchain platform has also been designed for monetary transactions. The Ethereum blockchain platform is more ambitious and targets to be universal. The task is huge and the product takes time to mature, but ultimately, it would not be limited to financial transactions and support the other use cases cited above.

    What else?

    If Ethereum succeeds, the question is “would it make sense to store in the same public blockchain the information of all the above use cases, and more (for example trading Pokemon-Go characters)“? Probably not. This is why there would be most certainly in the future

    • one public (Bitcoin or Ethereum or other) blockchain that supports public peer-to-peer trading Pokemon tokens, DVD cassettes, antique stamps, collector vynils, house swaps (AirBnB), car transportation services etc.,
    • and a number of private and restricted Ethereum-based (or not based) blockchains to manage more confidential matters.

    To cite only the current contributions to the open source Hyperledger project, that pave the road for different types of blockchains, we have today:

    But talking about them will be another discussion, that I’ll have with the same ex-colleagues VPs of the space industry, or with others.


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/kvutien” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Khang Vu Tien”] is Blockchain & Ethereum practitioner and this article was originally published here.

     
  • user 12:18 pm on December 30, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Superstars, , technology   

    Breaking Banks: Tech Superstars 

    In this episode of , which aired on Dec. 15, Brett King hosts two renown stars- Keith Teare, a founding member of Tech Crunch and Archimedes Labs; and Brian Solis, expert in and customer behaviors. They discuss everything from robos to fake news.
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 am on December 30, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , Patenting, technology   

    Creating a ‘Blockchain Industry:’ Patenting the Blockchain 

    Patent filings for have more than tripled since 2014; this spike includes patents filed by exchanges such as Coinbase, payment processors like Mastercard, and like Goldman Sachs and the Bank of America. According to a report conducted by law firm Reed Smith, the most popular areasRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 pm on December 28, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Hitting, , , technology,   

    Is Social Media Key to Hitting the Trillions for (Fin)Tech Companies? 

    Could Microsoft be the first company to earn a one trillion market value? Analyst Michael Markowski seems to think so, citing the technology giant’s recent acquisition of professional site LinkedIn as the boost that pushed Microsoft into the race. According to Markowski, this places Microsoft alongside digitalRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel
Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami