131–140 of 291 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In can do some of the things you'd use a notary for. Or, just use an entirely conventional database, operated by the notary.
Finding a notary trusted by all parties may prove an issue, especially in international contexts. A blockchain may be cheaper.
Venmo for all. We're used to Venmo in the US but many places in the world don't have an equivalent. Valora is a new Venmo-like mobile app that's built on the Celo blockchain, a new network where mobile devices can efficiency sync with the chain, with a native stable coin, and a decentralized phone number verification protocol. Check out https://valoraapp.com and https://celo.org
In my country this is already fully supported: PayID will let you transfer money instantly instantly between accounts (up to some daily limit), with no fees. Similarly, an app called BeemIt, which is supported by the major banks here gives you a very similar experience, albeit with a prettier UI/UX. As it stands, there’s now no advantage that cryptocurrency offers in this space anymore IMO.
Maybe im just a stick in the mud, but i always thought it worked pretty great.
I use blockchain to pay people to block phone spam.[1] It's also the subject of my patented algorithm on killing phone spam by requiring a refundable cash deposit for non-contacts phone calls. [2] I wrote a short white paper on this theory too. [3] [1] https://myrobocash.com/ [2] https://uspto.report/patent/app/20200304647 [3] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c1GyiVVZFDiUuxWkBCQ63qLdJgP...
I use blockchain to pay people to block phone spam.[1] It's also the subject of my patented algorithm on killing phone spam by requiring a refundable cash deposit for non-contacts phone calls. [2] I wrote a short white paper on this theory too. [3] [1] https://myrobocash.com/ [2] https://uspto.report/patent/app/20200304647 [3] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c1GyiVVZFDiUuxWkBCQ63qLdJgP...
Here in France, phone spam is essentially non-existant, and I'm nearly sure there are no block chains involved.
I'd posit that this is a tech workaround for a political problem. Which is fine in my book, but it's not exactly a killer application for the technology that is block chain, if really you'd want (and could have) something that does the job better.
However none of them would be caught dead calling themselves a "blockchain"
The biggest use case I have found of blockchain tech is timestamping, especially in a case where the timestamping party cannot be trusted to act honestly because of conflicting interests. I'll give you an example, from one of my startup's enterprise customers. This company needs to ensure that their high-end auto inventory remains in the same state through transport — the mileage, the car body, etc. They've had issue…
Sorry, but your solution solves nothing. The transporter could take a picture of the odometer and tweak the image. Your solution is only as secure as the input flow and you can't control it. A blockchain can't reflect physical reality. It can only reflect what someone said/says physical reality is. Additionally, they have to trust you to push the "right" data to the blockchain. If they are already trusting you, you c…
Broadly speaking blockchain only solves a singular problem: Trust. If there is some work that needs to be done between parties and you don't trust the parties involved then you can use blockchain to do the work in a trust-less setting. This is why money has been the first and most prominent use case; people are less trusting with their own money. For a specific non-money potential use case of blockchain I would say i…
You say that: “Broadly speaking blockchain only solves a singular problem: Trust.” but there is another equally significant contribution that deserves to be acknowledged: scarcity. Bits & bytes can be cloned effortlessly by computers which is why a version of Photoshop ripped from a DVD is indistinguishable from the same version downloaded from a CDN as an iso. As long as the hashes match, you wont be able to tell ap…
The biggest use case I have found of blockchain tech is timestamping, especially in a case where the timestamping party cannot be trusted to act honestly because of conflicting interests. I'll give you an example, from one of my startup's enterprise customers. This company needs to ensure that their high-end auto inventory remains in the same state through transport — the mileage, the car body, etc. They've had issue…
Blockchain is not a "killer" feature of the app, but it's another layer of security. Databases are the core, but staff with access can edit a database in seconds. Maybe one way to think of it is like cash registers. The person operating a cash register can still steal it, but it's a lot harder than if it were just a box. It won't stop a dedicated person, but will greatly discourage doing it casually.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> where the timestamping party cannot be trusted to act honestly because of conflicting interests But in this case, isn't whoever controls your code the "timestamping party"? Looking at two examples: A: With blockchain The timestamp that the photo was taken is immutably, publicly logged. B: Without blockchain The timestamp the photo was taken is logged by you, the software provider. What is a scenario where (B) is le…
The picture of the car is not protected by hard crypto until it's inserted into the blockchain. Until it is inserted the trust chain breaks at the questions of: When was it taken? Who was taking the picture? What is the picture of? The car to be protected? Or someone else's car. Blockchain works for currencies, since currencies are just numbers in a ledger. And numbers can be easily secured with strong crypto.