3 ms·

Blockchains don't work for digital assets either because there is no way to 'give' anything digital i.e., ensuring sender no longer has a digital copy

• insulanus 8y ago
  True for things likes movies and songs, but you can make sure that a "bitcoin" / UTXO is transferred. So, "things" on the blockchain you are interested in can be accounted for. And that can be used in conjunction with a server-side process to give a client some benefit of server-side processing. e.g. Player A has sword "X" in their inventory.
  • cwkoss 8y ago
    Yeah, I think access rights is a big use case. Even could be useful for real-world services, assuming people are willing to trust the service provider. - Spend a cryptotoken as the cost of creating a forum account to fight spammers or malicious users. - Only stream this video to people who have signed a message with a privkey that controls a token which corresponds to the video. Use steganography to encode privkey into stream, so if they release it publicly, their access rights can be stolen. - Concert tickets that can be validated and transferred on a blockchain would also be cool, but maybe a bit heavyweight and unnecessary. Have trust when buying ticket from a scalper that it is real and valid, transfer to your own privkey so it can't be sold twice. All of this is complicated by regulatory uncertainty, though. No way that any of these are economically viable if you have to deal with AML on every transaction, and it's not clear you can transact in non-monetary cryptoassets without being liable for following money transmitter laws.
• AlexCoventry 8y ago
  AWS and Google Cloud are in the business of providing digital assets to customers (results of calculations.)