4 ms·

It doesn't sound like this guy really has the permission of his country to do what he's proposing to do. He appears to be struggling to fit an ICO into his cur

It doesn't sound like this guy really has the permission of his country to do what he's proposing to do. He appears to be struggling to fit an ICO into his current role. It's simply a bad idea IMHO. A blockchain is not a good fit for an organisation that is cleary centralized. An ICO is a way to raise funding, why does a government department need to do that.

rando444 9y ago
There's nothing wrong with a centralized blockchain. The central organization can scale the infrastructure much better than something decentralized, with the end benefit of the blockchain being that the data in it can not be changed like you could if it was just fields in a database.
- chris_wot 9y ago
  There is literally no point to a “centralised blockchain”.
  - davidgerard 9y ago
    I'm sure we could use a centralised blockchain! it could use a transaction ledger in a Merkle tree, everything made tamper-evident. You could widely distribute copies of the thing, saying what the hash is, so anyone would know this was the good copy. We need a good name for a software product like that ... something like ... Global ... Information ... Technology. Think that'd work?
  - stale2002 9y ago
    A global public database is still useful. It allows everyone to easily verify the chain. The only centralized part would be the issuing. Blockchain is completely different than a decentralized proof of work algorithm, and I am not sure why everyone always confuses the 2.
    - chris_wot 9y ago
      Yes, a global public database would be useful. And you could put it in a Merkel tree. But a blockchain as most people know it includes the nonce that allows for the POW mechanism. If the blockchain was just the transaction ledger, great. But it’s not.
  - nokcha 9y ago
    >There is literally no point to a “centralised blockchain”. Sure there is! E.g., in the SSL Certificate Transparency system, each CA maintains a certificate log that is essentially a blockchain. And even in the context of cryptocurrency, a centralized blockchain at least prevents the central authority from secretly issuing currency and lying about how much has been issued.
    - chris_wot 9y ago
      They don’t use a Merkel tree. Where did you get that information from?
skeletal88 9y ago
As an Estonian I have no idea what the ICO would be about, and why it would be a good idea. This seems to be a one man show by the author of the article. ICO-s are popular so lets do one of our own! kind of attitude.
- jaclaz 9y ago
  >This seems to be a one man show by the author of the article. ICO-s are popular so lets do one of our own! kind of attitude. Said by an Estonian this is preoccupying, Kaspar Korjus is usually presented as an official speaker for the Estonian Government for the e-residency program: https://cybersecforum.eu/en/speaker/kaspar-korjus/ https://cybersecforum.eu/en/speaker/kaspar-korjus/ https://europe.money2020.com/speakers/kaspar-korjus https://europe.money2020.com/speakers/kaspar-korjus

rando444 9y ago

There's nothing wrong with a centralized blockchain. The central organization can scale the infrastructure much better than something decentralized, with the end benefit of the blockchain being that the data in it can not be changed like you could if it was just fields in a database.

chris_wot 9y ago
There is literally no point to a “centralised blockchain”.
- davidgerard 9y ago
  I'm sure we could use a centralised blockchain! it could use a transaction ledger in a Merkle tree, everything made tamper-evident. You could widely distribute copies of the thing, saying what the hash is, so anyone would know this was the good copy. We need a good name for a software product like that ... something like ... Global ... Information ... Technology. Think that'd work?
- stale2002 9y ago
  A global public database is still useful. It allows everyone to easily verify the chain. The only centralized part would be the issuing. Blockchain is completely different than a decentralized proof of work algorithm, and I am not sure why everyone always confuses the 2.
  - chris_wot 9y ago
    Yes, a global public database would be useful. And you could put it in a Merkel tree. But a blockchain as most people know it includes the nonce that allows for the POW mechanism. If the blockchain was just the transaction ledger, great. But it’s not.
- nokcha 9y ago
  >There is literally no point to a “centralised blockchain”. Sure there is! E.g., in the SSL Certificate Transparency system, each CA maintains a certificate log that is essentially a blockchain. And even in the context of cryptocurrency, a centralized blockchain at least prevents the central authority from secretly issuing currency and lying about how much has been issued.
  - chris_wot 9y ago
    They don’t use a Merkel tree. Where did you get that information from?

skeletal88 9y ago

As an Estonian I have no idea what the ICO would be about, and why it would be a good idea. This seems to be a one man show by the author of the article. ICO-s are popular so lets do one of our own! kind of attitude.

jaclaz 9y ago
>This seems to be a one man show by the author of the article. ICO-s are popular so lets do one of our own! kind of attitude. Said by an Estonian this is preoccupying, Kaspar Korjus is usually presented as an official speaker for the Estonian Government for the e-residency program: https://cybersecforum.eu/en/speaker/kaspar-korjus/ https://cybersecforum.eu/en/speaker/kaspar-korjus/ https://europe.money2020.com/speakers/kaspar-korjus https://europe.money2020.com/speakers/kaspar-korjus