Why hasn't Big Tech adopted crypto in a Big Way?

  1. Isn't that why these companies partner/buyout smaller companies doing that work? Let the small companies take the risk, develop, crash and burn and when you have a few that seem to have a decent setup you offer them a bil and implement that tech into the large company?

  2. Adding to the fact that no company wants to run nodes voluntarily and if you want companies to run nodes on volunteers based then it will add closure, cause they don't want to incur losses so they might do transaction monetisation etc.(Infura) This is like a big punch to the whole decentralisation narrative.

  3. going to hop on this comment and say they are entering in a big way and in the way big tech enters. fund needed infrastructure, iron out policy and constraints to CYA, work with partners to build quality products on that infrastructure. it’s happening now

  4. This is what I’ve been telling my friends. Learn about the current stuff but don’t invest to much time or money. Don’t get attached because there’s not enough standardization and nobody really knows what we’re doing yet. It’s cool and compelling tech but the real shit is a very long time out.

  5. Which smart contract platform do you believe is the most promising? Like you said, they suck. But which one has the most potential and why?

  6. This is the all time dumbest take. The iPhone came out roughly the same time as Bitcoin and it’s value was immediate and obvious. It transformed society. I could list dozens of apps, companies, or new tech that came out in the late 2000s that immediately had obvious value.

  7. Maybe it's just that there's no meaningful applications for big tech companies. I mean blockchains and decentralized defi services are very cool stuff for degens and tech-savvy people, but what's there really for big tech companies?

  8. supply chain certification that can be cheated at moment of writing the data but can't be cheated afterwards, proving authenticity of products, transferable licenses

  9. Look at Project Alvarium, a bunch of huge tech companies involved with it. Trust fabric / edge /iot security.

  10. The infinite scalability of some chains make for great use in companies - if they were to trust it. On Sia, you can rent endless amounts of storage over time for super cheap prices for example. There is also compute, VPN, edge networks, proxy networks, and so on that enable developers to pay for computing resources through blockchain.

  11. To be very honest I am for sure not a degen or a tech savy. But I am aware of the technological development that's happening especially with quantum computers. A bank in Canada has plans in using this computer where it can run zillion possibilities just in a few minutes which is awesome. A supercomputer is a simple term. But this computer poses a serious threat to the crypto space by compromising all the elliptic curve cryptography-based wallets. Again to put it simply our wallet's private keys will be decoded in minutes and it will be public so anyone can take our funds easily! So now to have our funds safe NIST recently approved a post cryptography algorithm called the CRYSTALS-Dilithium. And I see just one or two blockchains are using this algorithm and we should be aware of this by all means!

  12. When asking why big tech hasn't been involved in crypto, you need to first ask yourself if there is anything useful being created with blockchain tech they could actually use. The hard reality of that question is that they don't get much use out of DeFi.

  13. If meta makes a blockchain, then wouldn’t it just be centralized? Are you saying they are creating a decentralized protocol?

  14. The company I work for did some investigating on it for records creation and abandoned the project. It wasn't feasible. Also, several game dev friends see zero value add in it.

  15. The games that have incorporated crypto are absolutely terrible. EA will eventually use it because it's a really easy way to fuck people over who buy your game.

  16. Crypto feels as if it would have to be fool proof to not be able to make a mistake in a transaction for it to be implemented in any games it feels like. Otherwise I can see a lot of customer service tickets being filled

  17. Because they already use better or similar tech. Why reinvent the wheel for payments for example if things like VISA with great customer protection already exist? Just to put on a blockchain? What's the point.

  18. The only argument is cost. VISA has operational costs, if the cost to use blockchain is lower compared to rolling their own network then the choice is obvious. Of course blockchain is nowhere near that point but someday it might be.

  19. "When computers, the Internet or email first emerged, the value they presented was self-evident. This is why the growth of these technologies was exponential."

  20. It also took decades for the average user to have access to them and then they caught on quickly.

  21. The first computer was the size of a room and horrendously expensive. As soon as computers were small and cheap, adoption exploded. Crypto already takes up zero space and can be bought in any amount. Bad example.

  22. I think they are waiting for regulations (legal permission) and some type of ‘protections’. The thing with Luna/Terra shows that crypto is making the same mistakes as fiat, and they don’t want to bankrupt their companies on new technology.

  23. It's not just luna. Look over the last half year at all the hacks, failures, bankruptcies, etc. The crypto ecosystem in general is getting a reputation for being unstable.

  24. A company like Apple doesn't have to be first anymore. They can let other start ups figure out how to profit off crypto technology. Then Apple buys them out or just builds something similar. My guess is payment processing and ticketing will be the use cases for big tech in the future

  25. but how does crypto add anything to those systems which are already in place? And don't forget until literally everyone is into crypto, ticketmaster (e.g.) will always have to have their non-crypto processing running in parallel.

  26. I would say companies didn't just jump into big tech as well. Internet with Mosaic web browser was avail in mid 90s but Google came much later. Even Microsoft came in late with their browser, a regret that Bill Gates gave for years and even though they defeated Mozilla, they had to resort to monopolistic bullying and later still lost to Google.

  27. bc it’s not secure enough. hacks every other day of ppl stealing multi-millions and exchanges/coins going bankrupt(Luna, Celsius, etc)

  28. volatility for starter, lack of regulatory oversight is second, rather keep codes (IP) in behind closed door than public and have a good sleep for third.

  29. Meta just announced a partnership with Oasis Network, a data-pricacy focused blockchain. They might start using this tech a lot more as they have issues with data privacy and trust in general

  30. It's less of a tech and more of a finance/fintech thing though for the moment (companies like Visa), as the most plausible use cases are focused around payments.

  31. Because they can't control it. You think big tech wants to give away the keys to a decentralized global monetary network? No, they would rather have you use FacebookCoin

  32. This is bogus tbh, big tech just doesn't get much use out of DeFi thats it. Don't assume that big tech doesn't want to get involved in blockchain because they certainly are trying. Just not so much with DeFi, look at privacy and computation and you'll see that big companies are trying to implement it.

  33. Nah. Most cryptos are heavily centralized. No reason to think that they wouldn't just do the same thing is there was actually a use case. There just aren't any use cases and even less interest from the general public.

  34. If this is true then why is Meta literally partnering with a blockchain firm (Oasis Labs) for use with their products?

  35. This has to do with legal constraints technology companies have in the United States. Crypto has not been given laws or sustainability requirements. Public companies are not able to participate in crypto until laws and regulations are implemented.

  36. Mostly because the vast majority of people don't care about crypto in any way. FANG companies basically have nothing to gain by pushing for a tech that people don't understand and don't care about.

  37. Big companies are still on legacy systems what makes you think they will start using tech thats still getting established

  38. I think it is also largely because of the systems they themselves created. They are in the centralised game, and have no interest in decentralised systems. I've once heard someone argue that Apple is more like a bank than a tech company. The amount of money they make on fees/transfers from the apple store is totally insane. That's where their value lies nowadays. So why throw it away for something they have way less centralised controll over.

  39. Crypto is the solution to the problem that is not even a problem. Everything bitcoiners say about usd is true but bitcoin aint solution.

  40. Because Wallstreet is more predictable... No execs like waking up to seeing their portfolio/trade options tank because Elon musk tweeted. Once crypto becomes less volatile, we'll see this start to change...

  41. They'll only adopt it once they are in control. Until there, all these funds and such entering the field is to make sure that they get control of a bigger chunk of the battle

  42. Big Tech can't because they are a company that needs to keep its shareholders happy. You can't keep banks and rich old dudes happy with volatility and "imaginary money"

  43. Yeah this is what I don't think people get. Why is a big tech gonn buy your bag of coins and make YOU rich. They will either just start their own coin that is designed to have no value (reddit moons) or take pieces of crypto that allow them to keep control.

  44. This is still very uncharted territory and a major disruptor to the digital sector. When computers or emails were first introduced their value wasn't self evident, in fact most people thought it was cheesy and unneeded because of what already existed.

  45. It takes a lot of money, time and resources to invest in a new thing. Just look at Meta, they incurred losses on their metaverse project.

  46. Exactly... until they can all figure out how to make as much money from it as they do now with all of the free data we hand over to them.

  47. The “top” crypto, namely BTC & ETH, are a complete joke. They are not currencies, they have no usability, high fees, and based on speculation. Most people don’t want to use them, don’t expect “Big Tech” to.

  48. Probably because it’s a direct hit to their business model. If decentralized cloud services, social media, streaming platforms, etc become mainstream they will have a hard time making money. And for digital currency uncle sam is not ok with it because if bitcoin goes mainstream it will undermine government as we know it.

  49. Still got to take into account that crypto and the tech is still very very new in the grand scheme of things. I'm sure those companies are all looking into it and working on things but why publicise it if they haven't actually got a product or a usage. Corporate dealings take forever to get things confirmed and working.

  50. Usually peer to peer things have a lot of trouble picking steam. Because typically the establishment can't control it or parasitically benefit from it, it meets a lot of opposition.

  51. Not much value in it. They do not want to open source their data and want to keep it within the company. They want centralized control of their data as well which means you don't want everyone having equal access to them.

  52. Unfortunately, either industry is closely coupled with Wall Street Finance meaning there's little incentive if any to support crypto or the regulatory questions around crypto are two big and it's not worth the risk. Look at what the SEC did to Ripple and later Coinbase. Look at the Tornado Cash ban. It's not so much why Big Tech hasn't adopted but why industry in general hasn't. After all all industry use tech.

  53. Today's garage startup could be tomorrow's big tech; Example, apple pc was consider for hobbyist and all the big tech were after big servers, home pc was only seen as a toy.

  54. Project Alvarium: Iota, Dell, VMWare, Intel, Arm, Linux Foundation and a bunch of others to secure edge devices.

  55. Blockchain for money reminds of that quote about Democracy, its the worst system except for all the other systems. For things other than money ... its just the worst system.

  56. I mean the simple answer is what would they do with it that they don't already offer a service for. There's pretty much no market for a Blockchain as a service kinda idea, enterprises don't care or want decentralised applications and most developers actively avoid it like the plague.

  57. there are companies that are experimenting with private chains. There may be value there. One of the big problems is it turns out people actually don't like immutability for important things like $$. If an error has been made they like having easy reversibility.

  58. Big tech is very proprietary, in other terms they don’t like things built by others (although they use a lot of open source tools)

  59. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft all offer blockchain services on their clouds. Outside of that, large IT companies may be using blockchains behind the scenes as part of their corporate infrastructure, for data and supply chain projects, but the public would never really hear about it. IBM also offers blockchain solutions for large companies.

  60. I think because big tech is ultimately a centralised service, meaning they have full control over everything to maximise profits.

  61. I think the biggest issue for companies is that they just don't know what they can do with the tech in legal terms, yet. They likely don't want to risk putting a good amount of resources into something that may turn out to be illegal in the future

  62. Why exacly should they? Just asking. I feel like people here dont care about it unless it can make them money.

  63. Why spend money trying to figure out the technology yourself when you can just let someone else build it then pay them a fee to use it? Also, blockchain technology might not have as many uses as you think.

  64. Exacrly, the same question rings my mind at times, till now... But the latest concepts like web3, walk2earn, play2earn etc are really changing the way they looked at crypto... Explained walk2earn concept to one of my elder family memeber and he was amazed... Things will change with time...

  65. Simply because for every blockchain use case there seems to be an existing technology that is better than what is being developed. Until that paradigm is crossed, big tech will not be adopting blockchain for any core process outside of a pet project.

  66. Adopting crypto for real means giving up control. Business don’t do that. This is why there aren’t any truly popular truly blockchain based social media platforms. Control is everything to both business and users.

  67. Because there is absolutely no use for that. Companies want it as centralised as possible. Why get the blockchain if you have millions of servers already.

  68. Why would they? They have more control with centralized system. Decentralization will come to get then, not from them

  69. The internet is...free to use, email is...free to use. Blockchain is...not free to use, not mentioning a few exceptions. For mass adoption...there is only one real option. Free to use AND better or similar ux than current excisting centralised services.

  70. Finance and economics are pseudoscientific make believe garbage, capitalism is inherently unstable, exploitative and unsustainable with a built in expiration date. All finance assets like money,crypto,debt,bonds etc are purely parasitic in nature and serve no purpose nor have any inherent value. Ever escalating recessions, poverty,wealth inequality, disease, pollution, slavery, conflict and wars are fundamental and necessary functions of it, not glitches, and every single financier or crypto dudebro is a literal parasite.

  71. With your mindset human life itself is nothing more than a parasitic bacteria. It doesn't take much intelligence to break a system down, try building one that isn't going to instantly fall apart. I'd love to hear your solution to the parasites but please use terms braindead people like me can understand.

  72. How can you scale something which is based on volunteers, complex and is not paying for its core infrastructure? Why would companies use it when it is not feasible for them in any form? Crypto maxis should think out of the box.

  73. People make these threads having no clue how many people are actually on it, how fast it's growing, and how fast the thing they swear blew it out of the water actually grew.

  74. I've had crypto over 9 years now, zero genuine reasons to use it in that time. Prices may go up and down, but I suspect we'll be having the same discussion in 10 years, and the same discussion in 20 years. Blockchain tech certainly has uses, but unfortunately the hype of the market doesn't match the reality of the technology. In fact, if we completely strip away the secondary market from all of this, it's just whole bunch of companies losing money with projects that are designed to remain in neverending development. Plus a whole bunch of digital beads that pretty much do nothing, and at best do the same job as what we have now, just in a much more convoluted way.

  75. I’d imagine if big tech or full on mainstream would adopt crypto, then there would be a TON of new money coming in and I’m not even sure if I want that to happen. I see a lot of burning, dilution, regulation and etc will be ADOPTED first before they ultimately begin the new world or whatever crypto’s purpose is. When Lambo though?!

  76. From the point of view of a crypto skeptic, my answer is that cryptocurrency simply does not offer any improvement in a meaningful way compared to existing technology.

  77. Yes, well pretty obviously because it's a 1-2 trillion dollar useless industry. Unless you like rug pulls and gas fees.

  78. Dude one of the largest and well known tech companies in the history of the world rebranded and restructured entirely to be a crypto company. There’s also Ripple and Coinbase which are massive players in big tech now

  79. It would be a harder task to find a tech company not interested in crypto. It is interesting though to see people so confidently ignorant in what they're typing out. I'm genuinely stunned by it.

  80. GLM is great for ML & AI, especially after getting a community-made solution for GPUs in the recent weeks. Besides, you know too little of what utility networks exists as most of the companies have decentralized counterparts for most of their services. AWS - Akash, Google Drive - Sia, then most of the rest deals with hardware which is unfair 😂

  81. Big tech is big on reliability. Make fun of Visa or any other payment processors or already existing tech all you want, but they are and have been working. Average people is not okay with transactions failing (even though it's low). Crypto is not AI or ML though, the reverse can be true that AI or ML can be utilized for crypto (CMIIW).

  82. Blockchain technology was built and introduced in the world by Satoshi Nakamoto to replace the corrupt banking system and it worked but unfortunately people are filled with greed and corruption. They only saw it as a means to develop more copies of Bitcoin through altcoins to get rich. This is why we have a lot of shitcoin copy pasta everywhere. Blockchain Tech is slow and can not fix the trilemma problems based on Vitalik Buterins statement. I called it the DSS or the Decentralization, Security and Scalability. Ethereum could not fixed it hence the reason why it’s moving to POS and away from POW. All Layer 1 chains can not scale and that’s why Layer 2 came in play to fix it but still could not compete with VISA and MasterCard. Fortunately I came across some Layer 1 chains that are not blockchains but are called DLT or digital ledger technology and I truly believe they have fixed the trilemma problem with its sharing and atomic composability. Soon we will see this companies taking over all the old Layer 1 chains. Perhaps we can see other use cases instead of only NFTs and shitcoin projects.

  83. Blockchain (not crypto) has very specific advantages for very specific use cases, other than that there's no point using it. It's really more "here's a new tech that other non Big Tech industries can use to potentially save millions". And those companies won't be using public blockchains because they don't want to deal with crypto and its volatility. They just want an IT back end that can save money or simplify processes or whatever.

  84. Why would they? They don't want daos and they don't need distributed databases. Smart contracts have the unsolvable oracle problem and they are immutable, can't fix something if you make a mistake.

  85. I just love how the NFT idiots who want to monetise everything get down voted on here. It's a little slice of sweet justice. They are one of the reasons crypto is not taken seriously and why we can't have nice things. Badly drawn jpegs that you dont even own, that are constantly shilled for uses that we already have and that doesn't need blockchain.

  86. Because crypto leans towards decentralisation and web3 which is the definition of running apps in a decentralised world which means Apple couldn’t possible charge 30% on fees anymore and all large centralised companies are at risk.

  87. Because crypto is very very very inefficient for most cases and only very few cases the advantages are better than the disadvantages

  88. There is only 1 purpose for blockchain and that's decentralization, if it can't offer that we might as well keep using centralized networks that scale easily. We seem far away from reaching any meaningful decentralization, this space is overrun by gamblers are companies looking for easy money and only a small group of people actually seem to care about decentralization.

  89. Looks like they're working on it. Just saw an interview with Mark Zuckerburg (Meta), and it seems like they're planning to implement web3 concepts over the long term. I honestly think we're just early.

  90. One of the reasons some big tech companies find it difficult to adopt crypto is because of the numerous regulations that are in the space. Allianceblock is trying to seamlessly bring traditional and decentralized finance. The TIDV they're about to launch would make it very easy.

  91. Web2 is nearly all about your data and privacy getting hurt , so these practices by Big tech would change gradually, but decentralization is going to happen sooner or later.

  92. Agreed, but web2 is a literal money printer for them harvesting and selling our data. Once they figure out how to monetize web3 things will change I'm sure. Until then it will be fought/ignored.

  93. I don't think it's needed in may places. Like it's a good idea the whole DLT thing, but we wouldn't really be talking about this tech this way if it didn't have the golden eggs called crypto attached to them.

  94. Why doesn’t Apple take the lead from metamask - they could basically own defi if they wanted to.. I think Steve would have seen the potential

  95. Isn’t SWIFT soon going to be replaced by a blockchain technology that will enable faster and more efficient inter-bank and cross border funds transfers? It is perhaps somewhat ironic that one of the strongest use cases for blockchain that will materialise first on a large scale is in fact in the banking industry that has (publicly) been the sector most vehemently opposed to it.

  96. The most obvious answer is that it's not as useful as people think and/or doesn't solve a need in a way most beneficial to creating value for shareholders.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *