3 ms·
Well, then perhaps they have misunderstood their own needs. If they want to be "the" central party, why can't they just do this with a simple database, rather t
by osrec 8y ago
Well, then perhaps they have misunderstood their own needs. If they want to be "the" central party, why can't they just do this with a simple database, rather than issuing coins and whatnot?
- tyingq 8y agoThis is my biggest issue with typical proposals for a blockchain. If the proposal requires trusting a central authority, it's just a ledger, and might as well be a database. Less complicated, faster, albeit not as cool on your resume.
- osrec 8y agoYeah, just looked up Umar Farooq, the guy heading this. He's ex-McKinsey... Says it all really.
- kickopotomus 8y agoBecause they have been doing that for decades. The issue is that the tech used is relatively slow, antiquated, and expensive. Additionally, the transactions that the coins would be used for are complex and fit nicely with the ledger model of blockchain tech. As pointed out in the article, they are going to initially use their coin on a trial basis to compare it to business-as-usual.