6 ms·

Diamond Blockchain Initiative

26 points by iafrikan 9y ago

mikro2nd 9y ago
Doomed to be subsumed by whichever Chain-of-Custody/Certification-of-Origin blockchain project wins out in the long run. And there are lots of them -- this is an obvious and compelling use of the technology. It's just a case of waiting to see which solution dominates, but I'm pretty certain it WON'T be a proprietary or vendor-owned blockchain since that violates the very thing a blockchain solution brings to the table -- trustless verification.
- pjc50 9y ago
  I'm not sure; it doesn't seem obvious that the certification chains of unrelated products should be on the same blockchain, and it doesn't seem obvious that users of this system will want to pay the high energy prices of proof-of-waste.
  - mikro2nd 9y ago
    Seems to me that once you've solved the problem, applying it across a variety of unrelated products is an easy thing to do, with the advantage that your solution is already proven, has gained some traction in another sector and is not something new and untried. It's one of those things where the first one to win is likely to win big (unless they fuck it up along the way somehow.) Not sure how your comment on PoW applies, though (despite agreeing with you.) Plenty of the solutions in developments are using PoS/other/hybrid consensus mechanisms.
unboxed_type 9y ago
I wonder how one may prove that a thing originates from some specific place? I mean, you have to have some kind of trusted by all parties external observer who will assure that fact. Am I wrong here?
simias 9y ago
I've seen many claims that the blockchain can be used to provide traceability for various goods but I don't get it. For one thing this isn't trustless, the blockchain doesn't know what a diamond is so if a person entering a new diamond to the blockchain "database" decides to lie there's no way to prevent it "trustlessly". How do you prevent the same diamond to be entered twice in the chain? How do you prevent somebody from entering a diamond that doesn't exist in the chain? How do you make sure that some physical diamond you have in your hands matches an entry in the blockchain (and one only)? The ledger is immutable but diamonds aren't, what if a diamond is recut and the blockchain entry is not updated to match? What if I decide to "launder" some blood diamond by adding a transaction on the blockchain saying that it was destroyed, followed by a brand new clean entry pretending that I've just mined a new one? In the end you'd have to trust some sort of authority to put the diamonds on the chain honestly. So if you have decided to trust some authority, what do you need the blockchain for? Just have the De Beers cartel digitally sign a certificate for each diamond like an HTTPS certificate authority and bundle it with the stone. Exactly the same trust model and you don't have the overhead of the blockchain. Is there a use case that I'm missing or is it just yet an other occurrence of "let's say we do blockchain stuff and people will throw money at us"?
- thisisit 9y ago
  You are correct. Humans will be the weakest link in this security link, specially at the origin. Bitcoin etc solve this by using PoW. But here there can be issue if there is a malicious first entry That said, a case might be made for a traceable and immutable book which shows the movement of each diamond. But that might run into privacy issues. This can be solved by using a private blockchain but then again it goes back to trusting someone who has the blockchain with them.
  - tomwalker 9y ago
    Completely agree. It seems to be the application of the current "trendy tech" to industry.
  - simias 9y ago
    I agree with you but I want to point out that "a traceable and immutable book" is perfectly achievable without blockchain. Just have De Beers (or the authority of your choice) publish their signed "immutable" ledger publicly at regular intervals. Anybody can mirror it (like the "nodes" of bitcoin mirror the blockchain). If the authority decides to cheat and rewrite history (for instance to change the origin of a diamond) any of the 3rd party mirrors can detect the conflict and blow the whistle.
lawlessone 9y ago
This is the probably one of the first non-crypto currency uses for blockchain I've seen that i like. It's a shame as diamonds aren't really worth that much, just a monopoly.
Joeboy 9y ago
I'm wondering: 1) Do diamonds have unique digital fingerprints? How do I know if the diamond I see in front of me corresponds to the record the dealer shows me on the blockchain? 2) What happens when people (inevitably) put bad information in the permanent digital record? Does anybody have the authority to correct it?
- routerman 9y ago
  With regard to your first question, I was wondering the same too. Found this Coindesk article which might be helpful (https://www.coindesk.com/everledger-blockchain-tech-fight-diamond-theft/ https://www.coindesk.com/everledger-blockchain-tech-fight-di...). "Before a stone like this can be digitised, pricey or not, it needs a unique identifier – a fingerprint – that allows it to be tracked on Everledger’s platform as it changes hands. This is calculated from 40 data points related to each stone – alongside the Four C's. Any diamond over 0.16 carats will also have a serial number inscribed on its girdle during the grading process. While a criminal could reshape a stone to distort its 'digital fingerprint', Kemp explained that diamonds are not, in fact, the sum of their parts. The cutting process results in a lot of wastage, so any attempt to alter a diamond, or split it into two, will drastically reduce its value."
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - unboxed_type 9y ago
    Thanks for that quote!
- routerman 9y ago
  As for your second question, it depends on what kind of platform the diamond industry builds on. If the diamonds are tracked using a smart contract on the public Ethereum chain, there may be special functions in the contract that allow certain entities to edit data in the contract. The problem with this is that consumers have to trust that the companies use this write access honestly. A partial solution might be to only allow certain data in the smart contract to be edited IF at least X number of companies in the consortium agrees to it. Still requires trust, but less of it. If they're building their own blockchain to track the diamonds, and consensus is simply maintained by a small group of entities in the industry, then it's trivial to edit the data. But of course, if this is the case, then it begs the question of why a blockchain is even needed. Just use a shared database.
0wing 9y ago
There's something very poetic about this, as the similarities of diamond cartels [1] and cryptocurrencies [2] effectively granting a small amount of people the control the majority of supplies of artificially constrained assets both of which have vastly inflated prices relative to production costs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers#Diamond_monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers#Diamond_monopoly [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-inequality-2014-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-inequality-2014-1

26 points by iafrikan 9y ago

Doomed to be subsumed by whichever Chain-of-Custody/Certification-of-Origin blockchain project wins out in the long run. And there are lots of them -- this is an obvious and compelling use of the technology. It's just a case of waiting to see which solution dominates, but I'm pretty certain it WON'T be a proprietary or vendor-owned blockchain since that violates the very thing a blockchain solution brings to the table -- trustless verification.

pjc50 9y ago
I'm not sure; it doesn't seem obvious that the certification chains of unrelated products should be on the same blockchain, and it doesn't seem obvious that users of this system will want to pay the high energy prices of proof-of-waste.
- mikro2nd 9y ago
  Seems to me that once you've solved the problem, applying it across a variety of unrelated products is an easy thing to do, with the advantage that your solution is already proven, has gained some traction in another sector and is not something new and untried. It's one of those things where the first one to win is likely to win big (unless they fuck it up along the way somehow.) Not sure how your comment on PoW applies, though (despite agreeing with you.) Plenty of the solutions in developments are using PoS/other/hybrid consensus mechanisms.

unboxed_type 9y ago

I wonder how one may prove that a thing originates from some specific place? I mean, you have to have some kind of trusted by all parties external observer who will assure that fact. Am I wrong here?

simias 9y ago

I've seen many claims that the blockchain can be used to provide traceability for various goods but I don't get it. For one thing this isn't trustless, the blockchain doesn't know what a diamond is so if a person entering a new diamond to the blockchain "database" decides to lie there's no way to prevent it "trustlessly". How do you prevent the same diamond to be entered twice in the chain? How do you prevent somebody from entering a diamond that doesn't exist in the chain? How do you make sure that some physical diamond you have in your hands matches an entry in the blockchain (and one only)? The ledger is immutable but diamonds aren't, what if a diamond is recut and the blockchain entry is not updated to match? What if I decide to "launder" some blood diamond by adding a transaction on the blockchain saying that it was destroyed, followed by a brand new clean entry pretending that I've just mined a new one? In the end you'd have to trust some sort of authority to put the diamonds on the chain honestly. So if you have decided to trust some authority, what do you need the blockchain for? Just have the De Beers cartel digitally sign a certificate for each diamond like an HTTPS certificate authority and bundle it with the stone. Exactly the same trust model and you don't have the overhead of the blockchain. Is there a use case that I'm missing or is it just yet an other occurrence of "let's say we do blockchain stuff and people will throw money at us"?

thisisit 9y ago
You are correct. Humans will be the weakest link in this security link, specially at the origin. Bitcoin etc solve this by using PoW. But here there can be issue if there is a malicious first entry That said, a case might be made for a traceable and immutable book which shows the movement of each diamond. But that might run into privacy issues. This can be solved by using a private blockchain but then again it goes back to trusting someone who has the blockchain with them.
- tomwalker 9y ago
  Completely agree. It seems to be the application of the current "trendy tech" to industry.
- simias 9y ago
  I agree with you but I want to point out that "a traceable and immutable book" is perfectly achievable without blockchain. Just have De Beers (or the authority of your choice) publish their signed "immutable" ledger publicly at regular intervals. Anybody can mirror it (like the "nodes" of bitcoin mirror the blockchain). If the authority decides to cheat and rewrite history (for instance to change the origin of a diamond) any of the 3rd party mirrors can detect the conflict and blow the whistle.

lawlessone 9y ago

This is the probably one of the first non-crypto currency uses for blockchain I've seen that i like. It's a shame as diamonds aren't really worth that much, just a monopoly.

Joeboy 9y ago

I'm wondering: 1) Do diamonds have unique digital fingerprints? How do I know if the diamond I see in front of me corresponds to the record the dealer shows me on the blockchain? 2) What happens when people (inevitably) put bad information in the permanent digital record? Does anybody have the authority to correct it?

routerman 9y ago
With regard to your first question, I was wondering the same too. Found this Coindesk article which might be helpful (https://www.coindesk.com/everledger-blockchain-tech-fight-diamond-theft/ https://www.coindesk.com/everledger-blockchain-tech-fight-di...). "Before a stone like this can be digitised, pricey or not, it needs a unique identifier – a fingerprint – that allows it to be tracked on Everledger’s platform as it changes hands. This is calculated from 40 data points related to each stone – alongside the Four C's. Any diamond over 0.16 carats will also have a serial number inscribed on its girdle during the grading process. While a criminal could reshape a stone to distort its 'digital fingerprint', Kemp explained that diamonds are not, in fact, the sum of their parts. The cutting process results in a lot of wastage, so any attempt to alter a diamond, or split it into two, will drastically reduce its value."
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- unboxed_type 9y ago
  Thanks for that quote!
routerman 9y ago
As for your second question, it depends on what kind of platform the diamond industry builds on. If the diamonds are tracked using a smart contract on the public Ethereum chain, there may be special functions in the contract that allow certain entities to edit data in the contract. The problem with this is that consumers have to trust that the companies use this write access honestly. A partial solution might be to only allow certain data in the smart contract to be edited IF at least X number of companies in the consortium agrees to it. Still requires trust, but less of it. If they're building their own blockchain to track the diamonds, and consensus is simply maintained by a small group of entities in the industry, then it's trivial to edit the data. But of course, if this is the case, then it begs the question of why a blockchain is even needed. Just use a shared database.

0wing 9y ago

There's something very poetic about this, as the similarities of diamond cartels [1] and cryptocurrencies [2] effectively granting a small amount of people the control the majority of supplies of artificially constrained assets both of which have vastly inflated prices relative to production costs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers#Diamond_monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers#Diamond_monopoly [2] http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-inequality-2014-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-inequality-2014-1