I would guess since you are already going into centralised control and fractional reserves of banks, ecash follows the same functionality, whereas #bitcoin and banks doesn’t work as smoothly
Discussion
I understand Dell’s statement to be decentralized though.
Centralized banks will use XLM / XRP and potentially Solana (as Mastercard is already talking with them)
So in my head, Dell is saying we need decentralized and fully private banking system…wherein these private banks hold bitcoin and/or transaction via ecash.
But that begs the question why do we need a private Bitcoin bank using ecash when the entire point of bitcoin is self-custody and people taking responsibility for their own money?
Thanks for the thoughtful response and further explanation. I did not listen to Dell on this topic. The most of what I learned about how ecash works comes from this developer (CALLE)’s interview (I recommend): https://fountain.fm/episode/aRawwvphCkYqxeS7EjOV
So from this understanding cash as a bearer asset still will require a centralised point of trust (the mint) to record transfers
>>why do we need a private Bitcoin bank using ecash when the entire point of bitcoin is self-custody and people taking responsibility for their own money?
Often missed is banks are engines of credit, not just depository institutions. Making credit/lending when one has the funds to lend us easey, but banks use fractional reserves, so centralisation of information of available funds to lend and lending something other than the asset is important if one is lending something one does not have and issuing something other than the original asset like #bitcoin
Not sure ecash would be able to operate with fractional reserves concept; a derivative of ecash (or #bitcoin for that matter) would have to be made and lent by these banks
TL;DR credit in pure #bitcoin space (no #fiat) is still a Wild West