4 ms·

Help me out here, I really don't see how a traditional database could solve the problem today. If you have various different, independent actors that operate i

Help me out here, I really don't see how a traditional database could solve the problem today. If you have various different, independent actors that operate in a shared environment but with distinct roles, how does traditional DBs help you do anything that isn't already being done today? For example, sharing data between those actors is still a heavy duty process. Trusting the data coming to you from other actors is still a high risk area, even if they aren't intentionally acting maliciously. Determining actors who have acted in poor faith without trusted and transparent data sources is incredibly difficult as well. How do you overcome these issues and come to the point of a centralized DB either? Who's going to own that central DB and pay for everything going into and out of it? So in that way, I don't see your point about how a traditional or central DB could solve these issues. I agree with all your other points, and I certainly agree the buzzword charm is heavy as always with this topic, but I don't buy that part. Happy to hear otherwise. Full transparency, to me, it does seem like DLT has an enterprise value so I'm a bit more of a homer than most.

fragsworth 8y ago
> sharing data between those actors is still a heavy duty process. Utter nonsense. Everything is HARDER TO DO when done through a blockchain. > Trusting the data coming to you from other actors is still a high risk area Utter nonsense. Public / private key encryption solves this in the same way a blockchain would, because a blockchain uses public / private key encryption. > Who's going to own that central DB and pay for everything going into and out of it? Walmart. Or IBM. It would likely cost less than $50/month of AWS resources, including backups and redundancy.
- TheColorYellow 8y ago
  > Everything is HARDER TO DO when done through a blockchain Could you explain? PKI is solves the issue of identity. It can't solve all the issues around accuracy, consistency, and provenance when it comes to data sharing. Ignoring the idea that you think it's a cheap endeavor, my bigger point is that putting every single bit of the responsibility on a single entity is a tough challenge.

fragsworth 8y ago

> sharing data between those actors is still a heavy duty process. Utter nonsense. Everything is HARDER TO DO when done through a blockchain. > Trusting the data coming to you from other actors is still a high risk area Utter nonsense. Public / private key encryption solves this in the same way a blockchain would, because a blockchain uses public / private key encryption. > Who's going to own that central DB and pay for everything going into and out of it? Walmart. Or IBM. It would likely cost less than $50/month of AWS resources, including backups and redundancy.

TheColorYellow 8y ago
> Everything is HARDER TO DO when done through a blockchain Could you explain? PKI is solves the issue of identity. It can't solve all the issues around accuracy, consistency, and provenance when it comes to data sharing. Ignoring the idea that you think it's a cheap endeavor, my bigger point is that putting every single bit of the responsibility on a single entity is a tough challenge.