Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

davidgerard.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 154 posts

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#31

Post by duskwuff »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #19
drcode wrote: post #17

As someone who is a CEO of a medical blockchain startup which is trying to find actual meaningful use cases, I agree 100% with the conclusions of this post. (finding actual convincing use cases in the medical space for this tech is hard)

so...why are you still the CEO of a medical blockchain startup? Surely you escorted yourself off the premises by now? ;) But seriously, isn't this putting the cart before the horse? The usual order is "find a problem, build a solution", not "find a technology, build a solution, work out who has a problem it can solve". How's that working out for you?

> "find a technology, build a solution, work out who has a problem it can solve"

Sadly, I feel like this could be used to describe most applications of "blockchain technology".

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#32

Post by kbenson »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #19
drcode wrote: post #17

As someone who is a CEO of a medical blockchain startup which is trying to find actual meaningful use cases, I agree 100% with the conclusions of this post. (finding actual convincing use cases in the medical space for this tech is hard)

so...why are you still the CEO of a medical blockchain startup? Surely you escorted yourself off the premises by now? ;) But seriously, isn't this putting the cart before the horse? The usual order is "find a problem, build a solution", not "find a technology, build a solution, work out who has a problem it can solve". How's that working out for you?

> The usual order is "find a problem, build a solution", not "find a technology, build a solution, work out who has a problem it can solve".

Well, there is a whole industry of universities of finding a technology and then licensing it out or spinning a company off to do something with it. It may be that it's very hard to do if you don't have all the things a university does going for it, but it does work in some cases.

Another way to look at it is to consider that if a technology excels at offering capabilities in a certain domain, and a certain industry is known to require capabilities in a certain domain, if there is a good fit for it, it will probably eventually be deployed there. But if you can be first, there's likely money to be made. In that respect, I imagine a "CEO of a medical blockchain startup which is trying to find actual meaningful use cases" is really just someone (or a small group of people) doing intensive research to try to locate the match if it exists and be the first to provide it. A gamble, but one okay odds given the potential payoff.

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#33

Post by JohnFen »

kbenson wrote: post #32
marcus_holmes wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so...why are you still the CEO of a medical blockchain startup? Surely you escorted yourself off the premises by now? ;) But seriously, isn't this putting the cart before the horse? The usual order is "find a problem, build a solution", not "find a technology, build a solution, work out who has a problem it can solve". How's that working out for you?

> The usual order is "find a problem, build a solution", not "find a technology, build a solution, work out who has a problem it can solve". Well, there is a whole industry of universities of finding a technology and then licensing it out or spinning a company off to do something with it. It may be that it's very hard to do if you don't have all the things a university does going for it, but it does work in some case…

> there is a whole industry of universities of finding a technology and then licensing it out or spinning a company off to do something with it.

Kinda sorta, but that's a difference in kind.

Most university research tends to be "basic research", meaning that it tends to be focused on understanding how things work rather than developing anything that is immediately useful.

In the course of doing that, sometimes something immediately useful is developed -- but that's not the most common case.

This sort of research is not "finding a solution, then looking for a problem to solve". It's simply trying to figure out how our world works.

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#34

Post by 80x25 »

godzillabrennus wrote: post #4

I recently worked on a yellow paper that outlines a data exchange with no centralized authority that puts ownership and encryption responsibility of that data back onto the users of the network. It's a data exchange not a blockchain because all data should be mutable and nullifiable. Blockchain is the wrong technology for so many things that it's been hyped for.

Perhaps your comment was meant to be tongue in cheek, but it sounds like this data exchange is a replacement for the World Wide Web? It's not IPFS is it?

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#35

Post by kbenson »

JohnFen wrote: post #33
kbenson wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The usual order is "find a problem, build a solution", not "find a technology, build a solution, work out who has a problem it can solve". Well, there is a whole industry of universities of finding a technology and then licensing it out or spinning a company off to do something with it. It may be that it's very hard to do if you don't have all the things a university does going for it, but it does work in some case…

> there is a whole industry of universities of finding a technology and then licensing it out or spinning a company off to do something with it. Kinda sorta, but that's a difference in kind. Most university research tends to be "basic research", meaning that it tends to be focused on understanding how things work rather than developing anything that is immediately useful. In the course of doing that, sometimes someth…

If you look at all their research, sure, but then you might as well include all their education too, which muddies it more. They definitely seem to also go for directed advances in specific areas. For example, battery technology. Usually, what's developed isn't something to replace the current best choice for most applications, but sometimes it does have features that make it extremely useful for specific applications (such as a very quick charge or discharge time). Was the university research intended to increase the understanding of the topic overall? Likely. Were they also hoping to develop something they could make some revenue from? Surely.

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#36

Post by tracker1 »

I cringe every single time someone suggests blockchain in our space. Either it's easier with other tech (even public/private key tech doesn't require blockchain), or open to potential leaks/abuse in the future (tracking how everyone voted).

There are a lot of use cases, most even, where it's not a great fit, and there are other, better, approaches.

Disclosure, I work for an election services company...

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#37

Post by tracker1 »

everfree wrote: post #10
thatoneuser wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would it actually solve a problem that couldn't be solved more conveniently with current standards?

It would provide an auditable, tamper-proof database with an immutable history, accessible by all health companies and not controlled by any one health company.

Cool.. what about the attached records, are they also accessible by all health companies? And if not, how do you know the ledger is really tied to the records, and if so, isn't this a breach waiting to happen?

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#38

Post by tracker1 »

oooshha wrote: post #12

Hard not to imagine a pompous Brit spraying saliva everywhere while reading this. To the content - there is only one way to place data on the cloud that is impervious to all global state, corporate and nefarious actors. That is with a robust blockchain. Whether or not you think that is useful in medical records is another story. I've been a medical doctor for 10 years and think that it is.

How do you use this and not allow for anyone with access to the block chain to also have access to all medical records? How do you secure this data without also securing the block chain access itself? How do you provide this security without effectively losing the usefulness of the block chain in general? How do you do this in a way that is effective in terms of performance/speed?

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#39

Post by encloser »

tracker1 wrote: post #36

I cringe every single time someone suggests blockchain in our space. Either it's easier with other tech (even public/private key tech doesn't require blockchain), or open to potential leaks/abuse in the future (tracking how everyone voted). There are a lot of use cases, most even, where it's not a great fit, and there are other, better, approaches. Disclosure, I work for an election services company...

I like to provide people the NIST Blockchain Overview pdf. Particularly the decision flowchart.

https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2018/NIST.IR.8202.pdf

Re: Medical records on the blockchain – the history of a bad idea

#40

Post by airstrike »

davidgerard wrote: post #22
Uptrenda wrote: post #15

I feel its become very fashionable to dismiss the simpler applications of the tech because of how unrealistically its been applied. It's so easy to do too. Look at the insane valuations, the fraud, and hype cooked up by marketers, and the whole thing looks very stupid. But its a mistake to let this get in the way of critical thinking. There is a reason why the topic is brought up so often and its because among all th…

The obviously convincing argument would be - after ten years - "something to show for it all." That is, something that blockchain is clearly and obviously the use case for. "Potential" goes only so far. Eventually you need kinetic.

Interstellar BBS log
Post reply on HN