You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

Post by nikanj » Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 7:08 PM UTC

MusaTheRedGuard wrote: post #78

root_axis wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people who are even a little bit serious about working/investing in crypto, are well aware of this Not really sure how you can back up this claim. After hundreds of interacts with blockchain enthusiasts, I have observed that most of them subscribe to at least one of false use cases listed in the article, especially #7 and very often #1-3 and #6 as well.

Anyone can call themselves a "blockchain enthusiast" that doesn't mean they're smart or know what they're doing. Examples of good thinkers are the guys over at multicoin capital, a crypto focused hedge fund: https://multicoin.capital I don't agree with everything they invest in, but they have clear, logical theses

Post by greglindahl » Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 7:08 PM UTC

vpmpaul wrote: post #128

gregschlom wrote: post #33

I've said this several times before on this site but will keep repeating it: there's exactly one use case where the blockchain is a superior (and, in fact, the only) solution: when you can't use contracts and the legal system to ensure trust between the parties. In other words, anything illegal. For any other conceivable use case, a database and a contract between parties are a superior solution. Edit: To clarify wha…

> It's literally how the world works. So the world works perfectly in your opinion? The good thing about blockchain is it lowers the cost bar for crazy expensive business legalize. It of course needs more work but a proper smart contract setup placed in front of a judge leaves little need for a dozen lawyers and business consultants to see the intent of the contract. The main issue is that the current very expensive…

Post by jhwang5 » Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 7:09 PM UTC

dangero wrote: post #31

I've spent a lot of time doing consulting around blockchains for fortune 500 companies. Most technology choices are not a need. You can use MongoDB or MySQL in most cases. There are places where MongoDB has benefits, just as there are cases where a permissioned, immutable record has benefits. It's not a silver bullet, but it can add trust. This article seems to miss that creating immutable records of intermediary att…

Post by basch » Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 7:12 PM UTC

nepthar wrote: post #66

Based on reading a few articles like this, I think my understanding of blockchain-related tech is different from other folks and I'm kinda confused. Could some kind soul help clear things up? When I think "blockchain", I basically think of a git branch: history is verifiably immutable and using some external tools like a public rng, one can prove that a block was not created before a certain time. When I think "distr…

Post by biot » Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

skilgarriff wrote: post #106

gregschlom wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying: you don't need the blockchain because you shouldn't be doing bad things. I'm saying: you need the blockchain if and only if you are doing things that are illegal in your country. It's a decision criteria for when you need the blockchain. I'm making no moral judgement. And there are very good reasons to want to do things that your government deems illegal (for example, donating to a political organizat…

I can send 1 bitcoin from myself living in Minnesota to my friend living in Japan for the equivalent of $0.46. That's an improvement over the existing system. I don't have to trust anyone in between to get my money to him. How would that be as possible and as "trustless" without blockchain?