3 ms·

In 2009, China had a very serious problem dealing with tainted milk, leading to infants dying and getting sick. People had sold more than 900 tonnes of tainted

by Dowwie 9y ago

In 2009, China had a very serious problem dealing with tainted milk, leading to infants dying and getting sick. People had sold more than 900 tonnes of tainted milk. It eventually executed two involved with the production process: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/24/china-executes-milk-scandal-pair https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/24/china-executes... The blockchain solution presented here wouldn't have verified safety in that case, although the author did mention the case which makes the article misleading. Melamine was added to the formula to fool a protein test. The chemical was added by trusted members of the supply chain. Since the members were trusted, they would pass the authenticity test of the blockchain.

deevolution 9y ago
Yeah, unfortunately you cant do a checksum on physical ingredients.
- myth_drannon 9y ago
  Today we can't.
  - mythrwy 9y ago
    Actually I think we could. It just hasn't been implemented. (not to say it's practical).
- diggan 9y ago
  Actually, from the article, it mentions this: > Leanne Kemp, an Australian who in 2015 founded a company called Everledger, has now encrypted the distinguishing features of 1.8 million diamonds and their provenance on a blockchain. > More than 40 features are logged to create a fingerprint for each diamond, logging it from mine to ring. So it seems, in the case of diamonds, they are unique enough to create a fingerprint. I'm no expert on diamonds, so that might not really work in reality.
  - Isomatik 9y ago
    I can't find very much information on Everledger's features process, just on the blockchain aspect, which doesn't inspire confidence. It's not enough for them to create 40 features you can fingerprint a diamond by, they have to be 40 features that are independently and consistently verifiable. If I have to send my diamond to Everledger to verify it, I'm effectively just trusting them. Representing a physical object as a cryptographic hash for security doesn't work if the consumer can't independently verify the hash.
- cal5k 9y ago
  Surely you wouldn't hash a car?
aisofteng 9y ago
Executed? Can't say I have a problem with that.

by Dowwie 9y ago

deevolution 9y ago

Yeah, unfortunately you cant do a checksum on physical ingredients.

myth_drannon 9y ago
Today we can't.
- mythrwy 9y ago
  Actually I think we could. It just hasn't been implemented. (not to say it's practical).
diggan 9y ago
Actually, from the article, it mentions this: > Leanne Kemp, an Australian who in 2015 founded a company called Everledger, has now encrypted the distinguishing features of 1.8 million diamonds and their provenance on a blockchain. > More than 40 features are logged to create a fingerprint for each diamond, logging it from mine to ring. So it seems, in the case of diamonds, they are unique enough to create a fingerprint. I'm no expert on diamonds, so that might not really work in reality.
- Isomatik 9y ago
  I can't find very much information on Everledger's features process, just on the blockchain aspect, which doesn't inspire confidence. It's not enough for them to create 40 features you can fingerprint a diamond by, they have to be 40 features that are independently and consistently verifiable. If I have to send my diamond to Everledger to verify it, I'm effectively just trusting them. Representing a physical object as a cryptographic hash for security doesn't work if the consumer can't independently verify the hash.
cal5k 9y ago
Surely you wouldn't hash a car?

aisofteng 9y ago

Executed? Can't say I have a problem with that.