14 ms·
The blockchain solution can gives more benefits more than "when the manufacturer's API goes down". So there are 3 actors in supply chain: manufacturers, retail
by langitbiru 9y ago
The blockchain solution can gives more benefits more than "when the manufacturer's API goes down".
So there are 3 actors in supply chain: manufacturers, retailers, and consumers. In your solution (centralized database and API), you rely on the goodwill of the manufacturers which is fine (I guess) in most cases. But retailers and consumers have good reason sometimes not to trust the manufacturers. Vice versa.
Okay, let's consider this case: the manufacturer produces milk packaged in a bottle. So they put QR code in the milk, and put some information in their database. Let's say they put the production date into this database.
QR code: Abbbccc
Information: produced on January 5th 2018
They send the milk to the warehouse A. Warehouse A keeps the milk for a night before sending to the retailers. But alas, there is a storm preventing the warehouse sending the milk to the retailers. So 1 week later, it delivers the milk to the retailers. Warehouse A informs the manufacturer about the incident. But let's say this milk only has 10 days before it hits expiry date after the production. Manufacturer decides to lie to the retailers. They updates the database.
QR code: Abbbccc
Information: produced on January 11th 2018
In blockchain, this corruption can be prevented.
- icebraining 9y agoThe blockchain is not what prevented that; the manufacturer publicly publishing that information is what prevented that. The fact that they did so to a blockchain is irrelevant. Say the manufacturer instead just has an RSS feed on their site, where they publish that information (digitally signed, of course) as the milk is produced. The retailers just have to keep a local copy of that feed, and so they can detect any later tampering.
- eridius 9y agoAnd if you really love the blockchain, you can always run your own blockchain that simply records snapshots of the manufacturer's RSS feed! </sarcasm> That said, this does bring to mind one genuinely useful aspect to the blockchain I forgot about, and that's the fact that Keybase uses the bitcoin blockchain (IIRC) to periodically record the Merkle tree roots that they use to verify their own information. The only reason to do this is as proof that they're not tampering with the Keybase history that they publish, and so fundamentally this is just the same thing as digital notarizing that I did mention before (except in this case it doesn't matter whether the courts recognize it as being valid). And you could still accomplish this without a blockchain simply by having a neutral third party agree to keep a record of the merkle tree roots, but this is one of the few cases where the 'trustless' aspect of the blockchain actually is useful. Though of course even with a 'trustless' blockchain you still have to trust the chain itself. With Bitcoin, you can assume nobody's managed to execute a 51% attack against the chain (at least, for the time being; AIUI with the way things are going it looks like the Chinese government might be able to do it by exerting pressure on all the Chinese miners), but if you're running your own chain, how do you make mining the chain popular enough to prevent attacks? In fact, to my mind, the only real benefit of Bitcoin at this point is the fact that it's so popular it's hard to attack (well, except by the Chinese government).
- icebraining 9y agoYeah, as long as the cryptocurrency speculators are paying for it, getting a public timestamping service for almost free is nice. I'm not actually a Bitcoin/blockchain hater; I can't avoid having a soft spot for any tech that makes me feel like I'm living in a cyberpunk world :) What I dislike is the mania. Bitcoin is a cool experiment, not a production-ready solution to anything.