Blockchains were designed to prevent double-spending, and not to solve other problems. Most blockchain enthusiasm is misplaced. One subjective (but powerful) r

Blockchains were designed to prevent double-spending, and not to solve other problems. Most blockchain enthusiasm is misplaced. One subjective (but powerful) reason for blockchain implementations, is that we're all human, and our egos want to avoid making someone else's database The Big Platform. Or maybe that's our rational sense (looking at GOOG/FB), we don't want our application controlled by someone else. This article spells out a few reasons why new categories of securities make sense to implement on a blockchain: https://hackernoon.com/the-security-token-thesis-4c5904761063 https://hackernoon.com/the-security-token-thesis-4c590476106... > “Do we need a blockchain for this? Couldn’t this be done with a database?” The answer is yes, some of it could be done with a centralized database, but it begs the question “why hasn’t it already been done?” The answer is that the current centralized solutions for electronic value transfer lack compatibility — they don’t talk to each other. I can’t send value from PayPal to Venmo, or from E*Trade to RealtyShares. These layers aren’t interoperable.