3 ms·
The author makes claims about hundreds of different assets without actual investigation, citation, or even reference to the particular use-cases, business model
by SubiculumCode 5y ago
The author makes claims about hundreds of different assets without actual investigation, citation, or even reference to the particular use-cases, business models, or technologies of individual assets, and naturally, the author arrives at her (probably) preordained conclusion. If you want to actually investigate whether the crypto-space is viable, valuable, or useful, then do so, with evidence and specific examples, counter-examples. As it is, the author appears to exercise a sort-of pseudo analysis with intellectual pretensions that only a fool would base their investments upon.
- louwrentius 5y agoName one.
- SubiculumCode 5y agoThat is on the author who was making a thesis about their intellectual incoherence as an asset. But if you are asking me, I'd bring up several: 1. Vechain: https://www.vechain.org/ https://www.vechain.org/ A blockchain focused on supply chain transparency and authentication. 2. Theta: https://www.thetatoken.org/ https://www.thetatoken.org/ A blockchain from the co-founder of youtube that seeks to increase performance, lower costs, and decentralize video streaming of ultra-ultra high definition content. 3. Oracles like Chainlink: https://chain.link/ https://chain.link/ Use cases of crypto increase the more that real-world data can be linked to blockchain contracts.
- louwrentius 5y agoYou don’t explain why I should trust this over a regular boring SQL database. Let alone exactly what the actual problem is that is addressed here. “Supply chain transparency”, sounds fancy though. The problem is that the data must come from somewhere and blockchain can’t guarantee that the data is valid, only that it hasn’t been tampered with. We can assure that with less energy intensive solutions, no blockchain stuff needed. And we know how well smart contracts (code is law) are doing. Trust can never be replaced with technology. Trustless is bullshit.
- SubiculumCode 5y agoYou hadn't asked. But since you do now: Using Vechain as an example: Immutability is the difference and it’s what matters the most when building parts for products because it provides an unchangeable audit trail verifying the quality/parts of a product. But don't get me wrong, there may be better centralized SQL solutions, but the market will decide, won't it.
- louwrentius 5y agoThe marked may be full of idiots, I don't care. It's the concept that is ridiculous, a solution in search of a problem.
- SubiculumCode 5y agoOver 30 companies within the Fortune 500 have live solutions running on VeChain including Walmart, BMW, LVMH, Renault, Deloitte, and PwC. They are obviously interested enough to to examine costs and benefits of the system.
- ac29 5y ago> it provides an unchangeable audit trail verifying the quality/parts of a product How? How does the blockchain verify, for example, that the electronic parts used to build my widget aren't inferior quality counterfeits with lower lifespans?
- SubiculumCode 5y agoThrough a nfc chip tagging scheme. https://www.vechain.com/solution/retail https://www.vechain.com/solution/retail https://destift.nl/official-vechain-nfc-chip-label/ https://destift.nl/official-vechain-nfc-chip-label/
- acdha 5y agoIn other words, it doesn’t. The real work is being done by the trusted auditors who verify that the NFC tags are legitimate, have been attached to a legitimate product, and remained there all the way to the consumer. If you don’t have that, you’re still vulnerable to all of the common attacks businesses have been fighting for aeons; if you do, you don’t need a blockchain.