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…
You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
361–370 of 415 posts
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In other words, anything illegal. Not exactly. It's anything for which the legal system is not effective. For example, you can have a perfectly legal contract, but the other party is in a corrupt foreign jurisdiction that would never find in your favor in the event of a breach. Then you can't contract with them because they have no incentive not to breach, without an alternative method of ensuring compliance that d…
What I see as the 'hard to solve' problem isn't the contract. That's difficult but ultimately resolves to logic and proofs of logic. The difficult to resolve problem is enforcing what the contract is trying to measure. It doesn't magically authenticate the state of the real world or objects within it. It can't do things like answer the question: "Did the occupant cause harm or ware beyond normal to a rented unit?" It…
Suppose you have someone designated to identify plumbers, call him Bob. Bob has a public key, and if a plumber, call her Alice, comes to him and proves in the usual meatspace ways that she's a licensed plumber, Bob signs the plumber's public key, along with their name and license number and the date, signature good for a year. Maybe Bob works for the government, maybe he doesn't, but in either case he's a trustworthy guy who genuinely only identifies real plumbers and both the landlords and tenants trust him to do that.
Now the contract says that if the tenant identifies a plumbing issue, the landlord will provide a plumber identified by Bob to have a look at it. So the tenant can sign a statement declaring a plumbing issue and if the landlord doesn't get a signature by an identified plumber saying it's resolved within a given time, the landlord is in breach, verifiable with math. But if the plumber comes and signs a statement that there wasn't a plumbing issue, the errant tenant has to pay their fee for showing up, again verifiable with math.
Then the remaining issue is corrupt plumbers. But you can't solve every problem all at once, so you rely on the state to revoke licenses in demonstrated cases of corruption. Or on Bob to stop authorizing them.
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is what stablecoins are for, such as USDT, TUSD, etc. I'm sure you'll bring up the point that you still need exchanges for USD -> stablecoin. You can alternatively use crypto ATMs, or trade with someone you know.
Stablecoins rely on the trust of the company to float the value of the USD or whatever currency with the coin that is generated. USDT is owned and operated by a single, foreign company that hasn't had an audit yet and has no insurance protections what-so-ever. I'm not going to trust them with my money or business. This about the worst of all cases: they pretend to be a blockchain, but they're really just a standard o…
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#364Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#365why is this comment rated so highly? it's completely niave with respect to the use cases of blockchain technology. I realize that a lot of people like here like to boohoo this stuff but there are several legitimate reasons to use a blockchain. One of the most important reasons being the ability to resist government censorship of information that would otherwise be subject to cease and desist or outright take downs. A…
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#366I'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…
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I see as the 'hard to solve' problem isn't the contract. That's difficult but ultimately resolves to logic and proofs of logic. The difficult to resolve problem is enforcing what the contract is trying to measure. It doesn't magically authenticate the state of the real world or objects within it. It can't do things like answer the question: "Did the occupant cause harm or ware beyond normal to a rented unit?" It…
A lot of this stuff is just bootstrapping though. Suppose you have someone designated to identify plumbers, call him Bob. Bob has a public key, and if a plumber, call her Alice, comes to him and proves in the usual meatspace ways that she's a licensed plumber, Bob signs the plumber's public key, along with their name and license number and the date, signature good for a year. Maybe Bob works for the government, maybe…
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In other words, anything illegal. Not exactly. It's anything for which the legal system is not effective. For example, you can have a perfectly legal contract, but the other party is in a corrupt foreign jurisdiction that would never find in your favor in the event of a breach. Then you can't contract with them because they have no incentive not to breach, without an alternative method of ensuring compliance that d…
"What you're arguing is that a perfect system of government removes the need for any alternative. But we haven't got a perfect system of government." Yeah, but maybe something like bitcoin is a cancer on an imperfect system. If you asked a tumor, maybe it would say, well, the infrastructure of the body I'm living in sucks! There are all these use cases that the immune system and the circulatory system and so on don't…
Every blockchain needs some sort of social credit system, a tool to cut off the tumor, eh?
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I see as the 'hard to solve' problem isn't the contract. That's difficult but ultimately resolves to logic and proofs of logic. The difficult to resolve problem is enforcing what the contract is trying to measure. It doesn't magically authenticate the state of the real world or objects within it. It can't do things like answer the question: "Did the occupant cause harm or ware beyond normal to a rented unit?" It…
A lot of this stuff is just bootstrapping though. Suppose you have someone designated to identify plumbers, call him Bob. Bob has a public key, and if a plumber, call her Alice, comes to him and proves in the usual meatspace ways that she's a licensed plumber, Bob signs the plumber's public key, along with their name and license number and the date, signature good for a year. Maybe Bob works for the government, maybe…
Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Blockchain is a fractional reserve system... I'd argue that it is the opposite since you can't receive 1 bitcoin and produce 10 bitcoins through the magic of a fractional reserve system (unless, of course, you run one of the exchanges and keep the transactions local). If you have 1 bitcoin you can only spend/loan/destroy 1 bitcoin as the blockchain prevents double spending.
But it's a fractional reserve system with respect to fiat currency. The price of Bitcoin is supported only by a fraction of its market cap in real fiat money. If everyone decided to sell all Bitcoins in existence on the open market, the total amount of fiat that they would get for it would not match the total market cap of all Bitcoins before the selloff started.