3 ms·
For most applications, yes. But the "multiple people which theoretically could be accessed by multiple competing hospitals" is actually a real use case too. In
by nexuist 5y ago
For most applications, yes. But the "multiple people which theoretically could be accessed by multiple competing hospitals" is actually a real use case too. In many fields competitors could benefit from having access to the same curated, real time dataset. For example, a list of pharmacies or local insurance policy plans if you're a hospital. The problem is that none of the players in the game are incentivized to build this service because it requires someone to host the server on their infrastructure - and if you don't host it yourself, what happens if/when your partner decides to shut it down, or cut you out, or serve you false information? With a small blockchain each competitor can host their own version of the data and share new rows in an auditable, traceable, and permanent way (such that another user cannot go in and delete anything).
It's easy to get lost in the hype, but peer to peer applications always serve valid use cases. A peer to peer database is no different even if it's enamored by cryptobros and scammers.
- XorNot 5y agoHow would this solve anything? Competing for what? If a bunch of people are competing on say, price, then what's stopping them putting any number they want into the system, or similarly just rejecting every number anyone else puts into the system? They have no aligned interests in the blockchain, and outside of it the legal system already defines their responsibility (i.e. prices must be advertised accurately). "Blockchain" aka a Git repository is only useful when multiple trusted parties are trying to coordinate a central source of truth without inadvertently removing each others changes. At which point we can dispense with anything that sounds like cryptocurrency because it's all just signed commits.