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

Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

asia.nikkei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 22 posts

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#11

Post by icebraining »

rtpg wrote: post #4
cma wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traditional offline storage can do that too, right?

well it's distributed, so just caching a DB is a bit of a tricky question. What are you going to be caching in your offline storage? If you just used flat-file CSVs, and don't want to re-download the entire DB twice a day, you want to now come up with syncing strategies, merging strategies, and probably conflict resolution. If you just have a blockchain, then you get all of this for free (so long as your data fits th…

Why would you need merging and conflict resolution when there's a single source of truth? All you need is a stream of messages and some way to record them. If you want to distribute them P2P, add some metadata to sort them.

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#12

Post by icebraining »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #10
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not particularly. It's using the wrong tool for the job. A distributed database is helpful in many ways, but you don't need an attached proof-of-work system. Blockchain doesn't imply PoW. You could consider each block minted with e.g. a M of N signature scheme, in the case of a stock-trading system you don't need open anonymous/participation and it's quite fine to rely on trusted parties.

I suppose, but at that point you're really blurring the line between 'blockchain' and 'authenticated database logs', and it starts to become a mere buzzword.

Yeah, every invoicing software in my country hash chains the documents for validation purposes (it's a requirement for SAF-T[1]), yet we don't call it a "blockchain".

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAF-T

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#13

Post by rtpg »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #6
rtpg wrote: post #2

I started writing a furious "why would you even do this?"-style post, but this paragraph stood out: >Blockchain technology shares transaction records with multiple computers. Stock trading is typically saved in servers at bourses, but records cannot be referenced when communications infrastructure fails. >Using blockchain systems, brokerages can continue a minimum of operations, such as checking past transaction reco…

> The "blockchain as a distributed transaction DB" concept is more interesting than I thought Not particularly. It's using the wrong tool for the job. A distributed database is helpful in many ways, but you don't need an attached proof-of-work system.

Oh, you're right, I forgot about proof of work. I guess you can go in and remove proof of work to make a simpler blockchain. But then you're losing some of the plug-n-play aspects.

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#14

Post by rtpg »

icebraining wrote: post #11
rtpg wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well it's distributed, so just caching a DB is a bit of a tricky question. What are you going to be caching in your offline storage? If you just used flat-file CSVs, and don't want to re-download the entire DB twice a day, you want to now come up with syncing strategies, merging strategies, and probably conflict resolution. If you just have a blockchain, then you get all of this for free (so long as your data fits th…

Why would you need merging and conflict resolution when there's a single source of truth? All you need is a stream of messages and some way to record them. If you want to distribute them P2P, add some metadata to sort them.

per the article, in the Burma case, you have multiple banking branches with only intermittent internet connections, and therefore want to be able to work offline easily while still querying the (albeit stale) database state.

Streams of messages don't work as well when you're multi-party, and the default state is offline, not online

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#15

Post by icebraining »

rtpg wrote: post #14
icebraining wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you need merging and conflict resolution when there's a single source of truth? All you need is a stream of messages and some way to record them. If you want to distribute them P2P, add some metadata to sort them.

per the article, in the Burma case, you have multiple banking branches with only intermittent internet connections, and therefore want to be able to work offline easily while still querying the (albeit stale) database state. Streams of messages don't work as well when you're multi-party, and the default state is offline, not online

In what way do stream of messages which are recorded by the receiver not work in this case, and how does the Blockchain differ?

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#16

Post by forgotpwtomain »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #10
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not particularly. It's using the wrong tool for the job. A distributed database is helpful in many ways, but you don't need an attached proof-of-work system. Blockchain doesn't imply PoW. You could consider each block minted with e.g. a M of N signature scheme, in the case of a stock-trading system you don't need open anonymous/participation and it's quite fine to rely on trusted parties.

I suppose, but at that point you're really blurring the line between 'blockchain' and 'authenticated database logs', and it starts to become a mere buzzword.

'Blockchain' pretty explicitly specifies the data structure, the method of securing a block is an implementation detail. For example Proof of Stake is basically a variation on a M of N signature scheme.

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#17

Post by forgotpwtomain »

icebraining wrote: post #12
Dylan16807 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose, but at that point you're really blurring the line between 'blockchain' and 'authenticated database logs', and it starts to become a mere buzzword.

Yeah, every invoicing software in my country hash chains the documents for validation purposes (it's a requirement for SAF-T[1]), yet we don't call it a "blockchain". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAF-T

Because there are no blocks, no transaction ordering and no distributed consensus?

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#18

Post by DennisP »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #10
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not particularly. It's using the wrong tool for the job. A distributed database is helpful in many ways, but you don't need an attached proof-of-work system. Blockchain doesn't imply PoW. You could consider each block minted with e.g. a M of N signature scheme, in the case of a stock-trading system you don't need open anonymous/participation and it's quite fine to rely on trusted parties.

I suppose, but at that point you're really blurring the line between 'blockchain' and 'authenticated database logs', and it starts to become a mere buzzword.

At this point "blockchain" pretty much refers to a hash chain, transactions signed by private keys, and some kind of distributed consensus, which could be proof of work, proof of stake, or traditional byzantine consensus if you know who all the node operators are.

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#19

Post by icebraining »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #17
icebraining wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, every invoicing software in my country hash chains the documents for validation purposes (it's a requirement for SAF-T[1]), yet we don't call it a "blockchain". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAF-T

Because there are no blocks, no transaction ordering and no distributed consensus?

A block is just a structure with a set of transactions, a date and the hash of the previous block. SAF-T has all that, except the "blocks" have a single transaction. Transaction ordering is provided by the chain of hashes - each record/block links to the previous, just like in the Blockchain.

There is no distributed consensus, but that's the point - there doesn't seem to be here either.

Re: Daiwa to adopt blockchain for Myanmar stock trading

#20

Post by tedunangst »

rtpg wrote: post #4
cma wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traditional offline storage can do that too, right?

well it's distributed, so just caching a DB is a bit of a tricky question. What are you going to be caching in your offline storage? If you just used flat-file CSVs, and don't want to re-download the entire DB twice a day, you want to now come up with syncing strategies, merging strategies, and probably conflict resolution. If you just have a blockchain, then you get all of this for free (so long as your data fits th…

That something else is called rsync.
Post reply on HN