4 ms·
One thing I struggle with understanding for all these blockchain based solutions is the fact that the "trust" aspect fails in the face of an adversarial counter
by lsowen 9y ago
One thing I struggle with understanding for all these blockchain based solutions is the fact that the "trust" aspect fails in the face of an adversarial counterparty. For example, how do you know that the fish with id XYZ was _really_ ethically sourced? You only know that the counterparty asserts that fish XYZ was. The only advantage that I can see to the current system is that you can trace that assertion back to the originator.
- plopilop 9y agoWhat bothers me with this blockchain is, who will actually run the nodes? If only the merchants do so, then they can also counterfeit everything just as they want. In the end you rely as much on your trust to the merchant than with the classical method (i.e., a tag that reads "Product of [country]", which is way more eco[nom/log]ical.
- samirillian 9y agoYeah, I mean, that's why you have to include the financial incentive of the coin to keep "disinterested" 3rd parties involved. The real-world uses give the coin value and the coin's value allows the blockchain to function. At least that's how I understand it.
- unboxed_type 9y agoWhy not to use already running platforms like Ethereum where all those incentive issues are already solved?
- majewsky 9y agoHow will you use your supermarket to use Ethereum instead of their own blockchain where they can mine as much coins as they need without wasting huge amounts of energy?
- unboxed_type 9y agoIf a supplier is running its own blockchain, then it really makes little sense. But to gain real trust of its clients, supplier will actually put it on a public blockchain. Only then external experts will say: "yeah, this supplier is really trustworthy". In other words, the incentive to use a public blockchain instead of their own, private one, is to gain real trust.
- JumpCrisscross 9y agoI always thought storing e.g. a hash of the animal’s DNA on the blockchain would be neat. Testing would need to become faster, cheaper and more reliable, of course.
- empath75 9y agoWhat would that accomplish?
- JumpCrisscross 9y agoNothing more than a USDA database.
- mythrwy 9y agoTo compare it to. But for the tested fish verification maybe. Wait, how do we know they actually took representative samples of fish DNA? Well, obviously we are going to need hashes of video files of the tests. Also on the blockchain. But how do we trust that video corresponds to those tests? Timestamps and GPS stamps on the blockchain? There is no problem can't be solved without enough blockchain see. But I won't be syncing a node! In all seriousness, for now blind trust and reputation are still important and the rest is just layers designed to produce credibility. Not necessarily verification. And there is a difference. But I am in favor of more objective tools whenever possible so not to bag on blockchain efforts.
- majewsky 9y agoThat relies on the false assumption that an animal has the same DNA in each cell.
- usrusr 9y agoIt's trust the original supplier of the fish vs. trust the original supplier and all intermediaries. An improvement but no silver bullet.
- unboxed_type 9y agoBy using such BC solution, you can be sure that you eat a fish caught by some certified supplier and not by some poachers. A certifying body is assumed to check ethical questions.
- sharemywin 9y agocouldn't you use some kind of random audit in the system/contract?