3 ms·

Going from "paper" directly to blockchain, with not a peep about traditional databases. Surely the executive is just using blockchain as a buzzword for databas

Going from "paper" directly to blockchain, with not a peep about traditional databases. Surely the executive is just using blockchain as a buzzword for database.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
wmf 8y ago
The comment you replied to mentioned that "Large companies ... make billions of dollars handling [databases] for $companies." Central databases have become excuses to erect toll booths that blockchain may eliminate.
- pphysch 8y ago
  So why doesn't $company roll their own database? Why go the extra mile and roll out an infamously-inefficient blockchain? It's a lot of work, that's why.
  - wmf 8y ago
    This stuff is being proposed for data that needs consensus between multiple companies, so each company can't have their own.
    - foepys 8y ago
      If you don't trust your business partner, don't do business with them. If there are problems, contracts and courts decide what to do. There is no need for blockchain.
      - zeroxfe 8y ago
        This is not how the real world works. When you have large industries with thousands of peering organizations all over the world, you can't just "trust" -- there is, in fact, no metric for trust and no ability to measure trust. That's why the middlemen exist. This is especially true in finance, healthcare, and other industries where blockchains are being used.
  - masklinn 8y ago
    Because $company is only one of a number of competitors and none of them is going to let one of them handle the pot. And because there's distribution but also only a small number of semi-trusted peers, a "blockchain" would be efficient as it wouldn't have to be a proof of work, it would only need to be a signed "public" ledger (public in the sense that all companies can access and add to it). Don't think bitcoin, think a git repo with a bunch of committer signing all their commits.
diroussel 8y ago
How do you make a traditional database immutable? Who controls writes and updates? Well it’s a matter of consensus.
- pphysch 8y ago
  Who determines if competing companies are entering authentic data into the communal blockchain? How do you address a consensus attack in an aggressively competitive industry with relatively few players? Immutable garbage is still garbage. Databases are perfectly compatible with any variety of authentication layers.
- pards 8y ago
  Blockchains are not immutable - the DAO hack and subsequent hard-fork proved that to the tune of millions of dollars.
  - zeroxfe 8y ago
    That was a fork, not a mutation of the database. You can still today go back and see the history play out in the different chains.
sixdimensional 8y ago
Believe me, I empathize with your comment. However, I think maybe you're missing one thing that is being proposed as a real thing - and that is, that blockchain has become like a distributed database - I mean, there are people proposing that they can be considered as the same kind of technology, or blockchain tech can be seen as an evolution supporting database technology. I am still on the fence if I completely believe it, which is probably why I won't get rich building blockchain-based database technology or implementing it. But I think it is a valid consideration and we as technologists should look into what this model (blockchain as a kind of database technology) really represents. It's another arrow in the architect's quiver, perhaps.

Going from "paper" directly to blockchain, with not a peep about traditional databases. Surely the executive is just using blockchain as a buzzword for database.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

wmf 8y ago

The comment you replied to mentioned that "Large companies ... make billions of dollars handling [databases] for $companies." Central databases have become excuses to erect toll booths that blockchain may eliminate.

pphysch 8y ago
So why doesn't $company roll their own database? Why go the extra mile and roll out an infamously-inefficient blockchain? It's a lot of work, that's why.
- wmf 8y ago
  This stuff is being proposed for data that needs consensus between multiple companies, so each company can't have their own.
  - foepys 8y ago
    If you don't trust your business partner, don't do business with them. If there are problems, contracts and courts decide what to do. There is no need for blockchain.
    - zeroxfe 8y ago
      This is not how the real world works. When you have large industries with thousands of peering organizations all over the world, you can't just "trust" -- there is, in fact, no metric for trust and no ability to measure trust. That's why the middlemen exist. This is especially true in finance, healthcare, and other industries where blockchains are being used.
- masklinn 8y ago
  Because $company is only one of a number of competitors and none of them is going to let one of them handle the pot. And because there's distribution but also only a small number of semi-trusted peers, a "blockchain" would be efficient as it wouldn't have to be a proof of work, it would only need to be a signed "public" ledger (public in the sense that all companies can access and add to it). Don't think bitcoin, think a git repo with a bunch of committer signing all their commits.

diroussel 8y ago

How do you make a traditional database immutable? Who controls writes and updates? Well it’s a matter of consensus.

pphysch 8y ago
Who determines if competing companies are entering authentic data into the communal blockchain? How do you address a consensus attack in an aggressively competitive industry with relatively few players? Immutable garbage is still garbage. Databases are perfectly compatible with any variety of authentication layers.
pards 8y ago
Blockchains are not immutable - the DAO hack and subsequent hard-fork proved that to the tune of millions of dollars.
- zeroxfe 8y ago
  That was a fork, not a mutation of the database. You can still today go back and see the history play out in the different chains.

sixdimensional 8y ago

Believe me, I empathize with your comment. However, I think maybe you're missing one thing that is being proposed as a real thing - and that is, that blockchain has become like a distributed database - I mean, there are people proposing that they can be considered as the same kind of technology, or blockchain tech can be seen as an evolution supporting database technology. I am still on the fence if I completely believe it, which is probably why I won't get rich building blockchain-based database technology or implementing it. But I think it is a valid consideration and we as technologists should look into what this model (blockchain as a kind of database technology) really represents. It's another arrow in the architect's quiver, perhaps.