5 ms·
Replace the word blockchain with database and describe how your example works any differently. I'll give you a hint: it doesn't. There is nothing in your exa
by qyv 8y ago
Replace the word blockchain with database and describe how your example works any differently. I'll give you a hint: it doesn't. There is nothing in your example that requires the use of a blockchain. If that beef was tracked in a standard database they would still need to buy beef that was "legit" as far as the database is concerned if they wanted to make a legit claim.
Tracking external assets requires trust, period. And that being the case, what advantage does blockchain bring to the solution?
- arisAlexis 8y ago"I'll give you a hint: it doesn't" It surprises me how much anger and claims of authority people that don't like blockchain show. Just be modest and open to potential uses of a technology. Are you a coder? Have you ever used Javascript? If yes then it's creator is a big proponent of blockchains. Take a moment to think about this. Numerous other examples too.
- Dylan16807 8y agoAnswering a rhetorical question to the detriment of the other person's argument isn't anger.
- Thiez 8y agoIts creator also opposes same sex marriage. Perhaps creating a programming language doesn't mean you're right in all other contexts.
- arisAlexis 8y agoyou are confusing social with technical
- Thiez 8y agoI'm not confused. Do you honestly believe that all programming language creators agree on all technical subjects? They can't even agree on curly braces vs whitespace sensitive. And blockchain is a different subject than programming languages, they can't make an argument from authority.
- arez 8y agoactually it does, in a blockchain it's theoretical impossible to change past values, in a database one or many actors could easily change past events and nobody could proof that they did (If you say, ok then let's apply checksums or hashes to past events you just ended up with making it (kind of) a blockchain again
- Dylan16807 8y agoThere are people that will argue any form of sequential data signing is a "blockchain". But now secure messengers are blockchaining, ZFS is blockchaining, bitcoin had no technical novelty... I think it's a bad definition. If the system can still run without a consensus algorithm, it's far from being a blockchain.