Quote from: btcxindia on June 18, 2015, 04:23:50 AM

Quote from: skang on June 17, 2015, 01:22:25 PM

A cryptocurrency can't be national, by definition.
Read my explanation above.

As per Coinbase compliance head, Hody said that " bitcoin is a protocol, a payment network and a digital currency often simultaneously it may attract the interest of various different regulators ( http://www.coindesk.com/be-vigilant-on-compliance-coinbase-warns-bitcoin-startups/ )

Already Internationals banks are adopting the Ripple as a payment network, why can't a National Cryptocurrency used as a protocol / a payment network (http://www.coindesk.com/australia-commonwealth-bank-ripple-experiment)

Britain and Greece are analyzing national cryptocurrency as a payment network , why can't a National cryptocurrency used as a payment network in India( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/11434904/Bitcoin-revolution-could-be-the-next-internet-says-Bank-of-England.html)

You didn't read that explanation, did you? Read its last para again for "why not".

1. I agree as per Hody that it may attract interest of regulators, but they can't do anything about it.
2. Ripple is centralized. Since it started so early, when things were not that clear, lot of early investors have vested interests. Yes, you can do something like ripple. PayTM and Trestor are already doing it!
3. "They are analyzing". RBI's Raghuram has said himself that "bankers would have to find new jobs" because of cryptocurrencies.

Apart from that, people who trust banks in India (which is more than 3% of Indians who pay tax and less than 50% of Indians who have bank accounts) will have no problem trusting them again with a 'national' cryptocurrency, but the rest would not. Former is a big market but how would that be any different from Axis Ping Pay?

I welcome any Indian cryptocurrency.

Naming anything 'national' doesn't actually make it so, but yes names can cause an illusion and would serve nice marketing to lure the uneducated.