3 ms·

> No. A company can point at an entry that claims to be from an ethical supply chain. It's not proof that that entry actually represents reality. Sure, simply

by 2cb 5y ago

> No. A company can point at an entry that claims to be from an ethical supply chain. It's not proof that that entry actually represents reality. Sure, simply writing metadata that says "we promise we did this" into a blockchain doesn't automatically make it proof. But that's not what anyone talks about when they discuss this. The point is each company down the supply chain is recorded on the blockchain. The companies used to provide raw metals to the companies that run the factories to the distributors, all cryptographically sign the blockchain throughout production. What you get at the end of that is cryptographic assurance that each party is who they claim to be and they publicise their practices. If a someone in the supply chain is found to be using unethical practices, and the company using this approach makes a public statement promising they will use a more ethical supplier, this would be verifiable by any member of the public. And of course all the actual software backing this would be in smart contracts meaning the source code of the actively running software on the blockchain can also be verified by anyone. This is like having reproducible open source builds but for real life objects. TL;DR: Quite obviously, a blockchain doesn't magically turn everything ethical, but it is a tool that could well be used for that purpose if utilised correctly and combined with other public knowledge such as public audits of factories and mines and increasing regulations enforcing supply chain transparency reports etc. It's a piece of the larger puzzle that means when a company claims to be ethical you can see for yourself instead of taking their word for it. > Because a publicly available hash on a publicly available blockchain is different from a QR code and cannot be spoofed... how? If the entire supply chain and the code managing it is on a public ledger, so is a log of every unit produced. Blockchains carry cryptographic proofs, so a business can use a cryptographic signature to allow a buyer to verify an item's authenticity. The signature could still be on a QR code to make it easy for the end user, but it'd be a lot lot harder to fake if backed by tried and trusted cryptography.

dmitriid 5y ago
> Sure, simply writing metadata that says "we promise we did this" into a blockchain doesn't automatically make it proof. But that's not what anyone talks about when they discuss this. And then you immediately go and say exactly this: > If a someone in the supply chain is found to be using unethical practices, and the company using this approach makes a public statement promising they will use a more ethical supplier, this would be verifiable by any member of the public. What you're basically saying is: "If a company somehow records their PR stunt on the blockchain, they are immediately bound by it because public record, and blockchain, and smart contracts". > And of course all the actual software backing this would be in smart contracts meaning the source code of the actively running software on the blockchain can also be verified by anyone. And how would software running inside some other software would actually verify that a company is ethical? Or that it properly labels its products? Or that it adheres to standards? Or... > combined with other public knowledge such as public audits of factories and mines and increasing regulations enforcing supply chain transparency reports etc. All this is already being done, and without blockchain. What exactly does blockchain bring into the equation? I mean, TIR has been around since 1975, to give just one example [1] > If the entire supply chain and the code managing it is on a public ledger, so is a log of every unit produced. 1. Almost everyone already logs every unit produced. Even now you can probably trace an random individual apple from a supermarket to where it was produced. What does blockchain add to this? 2. As all logs, it doesn't log "every unit produced". It logs whatever is input into the log. If someone inputs "eco bananas", but instead ships radioactive slime, what good is blockchain? Oh, and before you start with "audits" and all that. The supply chain isn't "producer -> consumer". It's "producer -> dozens of intermediaries -> consumer". And everything depends on what those intermediaries input. And there are already laws, practices and audits in place that ensure that you get your eco bananas instead of radioactive slime. Or, lets use a more realistic example: 20% of seafood in restaurants is mislabeled, https://www.rd.com/article/restaurants-serve-fraudulent-fish/ https://www.rd.com/article/restaurants-serve-fraudulent-fish... Every single item there can already be traced to origin, passes multiple inspections etc. How does blockchain help? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIR_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIR_Convention

by 2cb 5y ago

dmitriid 5y ago

> Sure, simply writing metadata that says "we promise we did this" into a blockchain doesn't automatically make it proof. But that's not what anyone talks about when they discuss this. And then you immediately go and say exactly this: > If a someone in the supply chain is found to be using unethical practices, and the company using this approach makes a public statement promising they will use a more ethical supplier, this would be verifiable by any member of the public. What you're basically saying is: "If a company somehow records their PR stunt on the blockchain, they are immediately bound by it because public record, and blockchain, and smart contracts". > And of course all the actual software backing this would be in smart contracts meaning the source code of the actively running software on the blockchain can also be verified by anyone. And how would software running inside some other software would actually verify that a company is ethical? Or that it properly labels its products? Or that it adheres to standards? Or... > combined with other public knowledge such as public audits of factories and mines and increasing regulations enforcing supply chain transparency reports etc. All this is already being done, and without blockchain. What exactly does blockchain bring into the equation? I mean, TIR has been around since 1975, to give just one example [1] > If the entire supply chain and the code managing it is on a public ledger, so is a log of every unit produced. 1. Almost everyone already logs every unit produced. Even now you can probably trace an random individual apple from a supermarket to where it was produced. What does blockchain add to this? 2. As all logs, it doesn't log "every unit produced". It logs whatever is input into the log. If someone inputs "eco bananas", but instead ships radioactive slime, what good is blockchain? Oh, and before you start with "audits" and all that. The supply chain isn't "producer -> consumer". It's "producer -> dozens of intermediaries -> consumer". And everything depends on what those intermediaries input. And there are already laws, practices and audits in place that ensure that you get your eco bananas instead of radioactive slime. Or, lets use a more realistic example: 20% of seafood in restaurants is mislabeled, https://www.rd.com/article/restaurants-serve-fraudulent-fish/ https://www.rd.com/article/restaurants-serve-fraudulent-fish... Every single item there can already be traced to origin, passes multiple inspections etc. How does blockchain help? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIR_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIR_Convention