4 ms·

For those who are interested and doesn't know already[0] this is one of the places where blockchains and similar, older technoologies are actually useful: to p

For those who are interested and doesn't know already[0] this is one of the places where blockchains and similar, older technoologies are actually useful: to provide irrefutable proof of knowledge at a given time. Note however that similar services has been done for years[1] before Bitcoins and blockchains became a thing but since they neither need multi-Gigawatt-Proof-of-Work [2] nor any kind of "Coin" that can be pumped (and dumped) it wasn't cool. [0]: https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/ (and hi to todays lucky 1/10000! : ) [1]: See here for an article that describes it: https://www.vice.com/en_nz/article/j5nzx4/what-was-the-first-blockchain https://www.vice.com/en_nz/article/j5nzx4/what-was-the-first... [2]: but, it kind of works anyway since it would take quite some work to find the majority + the archived ones of a certain days New York Times papers and change the classifieds section.

IAmEveryone 7y ago
I'm somewhat sure that prior art requires publication, and not just knowledge. The internet archive has long been used as evidence for such publication-at-time claims, and they even have a paid service allowing you to trigger snapshots IIRC. There's a FAQ regarding the use of their data in court cases that is somewhat interesting to read. I know the cryptocurrency community has this absurd notion that nothing without cryptographic proof could or should ever be regarded as evidence. That trusting institutions, people, or processes marks you as a gullible fool, and that the Federal Reserve is conspiracy by private banks to keep the gentile from the levers of power[0]. So this is the not entirely novel situation of crypto being proposed to solve a problem that doesn't exist, and failing due to the lack of (usually: active hostility to) subject matter expertise. [0] last point unrelated to this specific situation and just included for completeness
- eitland 7y ago
  > I know the cryptocurrency community has this absurd notion that nothing without cryptographic proof could or should ever be regarded as evidence. That trusting institutions, people, or processes marks you as a gullible fool, and that the Federal Reserve is conspiracy by private banks to keep the gentile from the levers of power[0]. So this is the not entirely novel situation of crypto being proposed to solve a problem that doesn't exist, and failing due to the lack of (usually: active hostility to) subject matter expertise. It reads like you count me in with the cryptocurrency community. If anyone else does: don't. I'm pointing out one single place were blockchain can be useful and then immediately pointing out that it isn't strictly necessary.

IAmEveryone 7y ago

I'm somewhat sure that prior art requires publication, and not just knowledge. The internet archive has long been used as evidence for such publication-at-time claims, and they even have a paid service allowing you to trigger snapshots IIRC. There's a FAQ regarding the use of their data in court cases that is somewhat interesting to read. I know the cryptocurrency community has this absurd notion that nothing without cryptographic proof could or should ever be regarded as evidence. That trusting institutions, people, or processes marks you as a gullible fool, and that the Federal Reserve is conspiracy by private banks to keep the gentile from the levers of power[0]. So this is the not entirely novel situation of crypto being proposed to solve a problem that doesn't exist, and failing due to the lack of (usually: active hostility to) subject matter expertise. [0] last point unrelated to this specific situation and just included for completeness

eitland 7y ago
> I know the cryptocurrency community has this absurd notion that nothing without cryptographic proof could or should ever be regarded as evidence. That trusting institutions, people, or processes marks you as a gullible fool, and that the Federal Reserve is conspiracy by private banks to keep the gentile from the levers of power[0]. So this is the not entirely novel situation of crypto being proposed to solve a problem that doesn't exist, and failing due to the lack of (usually: active hostility to) subject matter expertise. It reads like you count me in with the cryptocurrency community. If anyone else does: don't. I'm pointing out one single place were blockchain can be useful and then immediately pointing out that it isn't strictly necessary.