3 ms·

Indeed I have conjectured multiple times that I think the only application of blockchains is in cryptocurrency. Introducing any physical asset like a yacht or a

Indeed I have conjectured multiple times that I think the only application of blockchains is in cryptocurrency. Introducing any physical asset like a yacht or a banana in Laos or a diamond in Africa really doesn't make sense: you can't literally put those physical things in the blockchain.

gibsons77 8y ago
I agree. You would need an oracle in order to put physical things on the blockchain, and that is subject to incorrect data or tampering. It's non-trivial, but not technically impossible.
- vec 8y ago
  Yes, but if you have a mechanism (either technical or institutional) that you trust to attach real-world goods to your blockchain in a sufficiently correct and tamper-resistant manner, why not just let that mechanism manage your ledger directly and skip the blockchain entirely?
  - neospice 8y ago
    Those seem like two separate problems to me. The oracle reliably reports to the blockchain while the blockchain ensures that the historical record is tamper-proof.
    - UncleMeat 8y ago
      But why can you trust the oracle to report correctly but not to maintain the record?
denzil_correa 8y ago
> you can't literally put those physical things in the blockchain You can not otherwise too, right? A blockchain holds interactions/transactions not the data itself. Most blockchains are incredibly small in size. For example, the size of the entire Bitcoin blockchain is 215.84 GB [0]. [0] https://bitinfocharts.com https://bitinfocharts.com
abraham_lincoln 8y ago
I can see its applicability in any kind of chain of trust for distribution of physical goods that have a potential to be counterfit or improperly handled/processed. Also, I see a possibility for licensing/DRM of some types of media IP. That does not mean it needs to be distributed, though.