3 ms·
The trust problem is solved with contract law. If you mean the producer has to trust Walmart not to change its entry after the fact, as stated, they could just
by bildung 9y ago
The trust problem is solved with contract law. If you mean the producer has to trust Walmart not to change its entry after the fact, as stated, they could just sign the entry in an ordinary database.
As Walmart is the sole owner of the database anyway, nothing is gained by using a blockchain.
- pests 9y agoI have to disagree with you. Walmart is making this change to improve something. They obviously already have a database somewhere with suppliers and shipments and to think they don't is just crazy. Sure, contract law. But why when there is a technical solution? If there is a dispute that then has to be settled in the courts with your solution that costs more money and time. The 6 days to 2 minutes might end up way longer after amortizing time spent dealing with trails and compliance and ensuring suppliers are doing things right.
- bildung 9y ago> Sure, contract law. But why when there is a technical solution? I think I don't see any of the multiple trust relations solved in this case. Walmart still can't trust the producer to itemize the physical product correctly. The producer still can't trust Walmart to not change the item already in the database (see mining discussion above). What trust relation do you have in mind, that is solved with this blockchain implementation, and that wouldn't be solved with a ordinary database with signed entries?
- cm2187 9y agoIf a hash does not match, that does nothing to your bank account of the inventory of your warehouse. You still need to go to court with your broken hash in case of a conflict. Technology can only help making the evidence temper proof not bypass courts.