11–20 of 24 posts
No.
Since you're big on privacy, do you see potential value in better user data systems created on distributed networks? Probably along these lines: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7163223
Better database for specific industries (financial data?) - Core value is not relying on third-party servers by using IPFS So instead of relying on a third-party with a contract, they'd instead rely on a peer-to-peer network with no SLA? LOL Better authentication (the in-browser wallet auth is smooth!) Oh, it's plenty smooth alright - seems like a day doesn't go by without somebody's apes getting snatched with just a…
on (2), isn't that an application-layer fix? i.e build better/more secure wallets.
the underlying identity system with addresses seems useful is what I meant. I like to think of interesting access control systems that can be built upon this. using a wallet's ownership data/activity, you can assign access/rights.
It has incredible potential according to all the 12 year olds financial advisors of tiktok. Please go waste your life trying to solve problems with crypto and leave the rest of us alone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since you're big on privacy, do you see potential value in better user data systems created on distributed networks? Probably along these lines: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7163223
There's a lot of cool privacy stuff you can do with zero-knowledge tech (not necessarily blockchain) but the biggest problem is that companies can just... not adopt that tech because they'd make less money.
while it probably makes sense for certain consumer data companies, do you think about cases where poor data security/privacy actually harms the company? eg: when sensitive company data gets leaked during third-party interactions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a lot of cool privacy stuff you can do with zero-knowledge tech (not necessarily blockchain) but the biggest problem is that companies can just... not adopt that tech because they'd make less money.
i see. that's a game theory lens. while it probably makes sense for certain consumer data companies, do you think about cases where poor data security/privacy actually harms the company? eg: when sensitive company data gets leaked during third-party interactions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i see. that's a game theory lens. while it probably makes sense for certain consumer data companies, do you think about cases where poor data security/privacy actually harms the company? eg: when sensitive company data gets leaked during third-party interactions?
Then you get into the fact that the tech is really complex and slow so the cost doesn't offset the benefits.
what i think is more important is finding form factors of using zK that make sense to enterprises. from outgoing api calls to file sharing, the scope of vulnerabilities is extremely large.
It's an interesting tech demo for a very niche use case: when you need both a decentralized database and a way to avoid editing history (e.g. "double-spending"). All of the uses you mentioned only need one or the other. If you need to keep track of transactions like a ledger, it's trivial to use a normal, centralized database with a published transaction log for trust-free audits. That gets you protection against dou…