4 ms·

DLTs are not the problem. The problem is idiocracy. Most people don't think anymore. Some people even buy NFTs thinking ownership right come with those - not ev

by pabe 5y ago

DLTs are not the problem. The problem is idiocracy. Most people don't think anymore. Some people even buy NFTs thinking ownership right come with those - not even asking legal questions... DLTs can indeed be incredibly useful, e.g. when multiple parties use the tech as a trusted pseudonymous data log, e.g. drug tracking from production to pharmacies. Or decentralized certificate wallets which allow you to actually own certificates you earned and prove that those are valid. Those are just not the stories media can sell as good as "some stupid link to an ape / rock picture has been sold for x gazillion USD".

riskneutral 5y ago
> DLTs can indeed be incredibly useful, e.g. when multiple parties use the tech as a trusted pseudonymous data log, e.g. drug tracking from production to pharmacies. Why can't they just use a database? Tracking information isn't a new problem.
- pabe 5y ago
  * Because traditional databases are owned by a specific party. You have to trust that party. * Because most traditional databases are not designed to be decentralized. * Because administrators by default can change data in databases. Of course you can work your way around that and get an audit for your solution. But it is a native feature of blockchains. Let's say it is law pharmacies have to ensure each drug they sell was produced by a trusted vendor and rules regarding logistics (e.g. temperature) were respected. Nobody must be able to manipulate that data and it has to be available offline for all pharmacies in case the network goes down. It'd be almost trivial to set something like this up using a blockchain. In an early prototype, you'd just give each party one or more wallets (private keys), allow the pharma to mint a token for each package and track how those are sent between wallets, each representing a different state in the supply chain. Pharmacies run a full node to have data available in case anything goes down. I made it a bit easier here than it likely would be in reality, but I hope I can transport the beauty of the approach.
  - cuteboy19 5y ago
    Why not just have the trusted vendor expose an api for all the info? An append only linked list is ludicrously expensive solution to this problem. To a person with a hammer, everything is a nail. Also, the problem itself is very convoluted and likely doesn't exist in the real world. You trust the vendors enough to let them do the data entry but distrust them thinking that they will manipulate the entered data somehow? It's a very strange situation
    - pabe 5y ago
      It's not about a single trusted vendor here, it's about a supply chain on which multiple independent parties are working. The blockchain is kind of a neutral intermediary. Scenarios like this are not "very strange" but very real. Europe and China are actively working on blockchain projects, e.g. https://ec.europa.eu/cefdigital/wiki/display/CEFDIGITAL/2021/10/04/University+pilot+proves+value+of+a+European+Blockchain https://ec.europa.eu/cefdigital/wiki/display/CEFDIGITAL/2021... or https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-selects-pilot-zones-application-areas-blockchain-project-2022-01-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-selects-pilot-zone...
dgellow 5y ago
> The problem is idiocracy. Most people don't think anymore Most people are dumb and uninformed, that’s not something that is going to change. If this new blockchain world that is being created only work for an imaginary world where agents are rational logical, and well educated the result will be disastrous.
shepherdjerred 5y ago
> Most people don't think anymore. Do you really believe that making mistakes is somehow on the rise, or that as a race we are getting less intelligent? This doesn't seem like a genuine argument other than a generic "people are dumb and getting dumber" statement.
- pabe 5y ago
  You're right, I didn't provide a single source. Sorry for that! Here is one: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/04/29/technology-is-on-the-rise-while-iq-is-on-the-decline/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/04/29/te...

by pabe 5y ago

riskneutral 5y ago

> DLTs can indeed be incredibly useful, e.g. when multiple parties use the tech as a trusted pseudonymous data log, e.g. drug tracking from production to pharmacies. Why can't they just use a database? Tracking information isn't a new problem.

pabe 5y ago
* Because traditional databases are owned by a specific party. You have to trust that party. * Because most traditional databases are not designed to be decentralized. * Because administrators by default can change data in databases. Of course you can work your way around that and get an audit for your solution. But it is a native feature of blockchains. Let's say it is law pharmacies have to ensure each drug they sell was produced by a trusted vendor and rules regarding logistics (e.g. temperature) were respected. Nobody must be able to manipulate that data and it has to be available offline for all pharmacies in case the network goes down. It'd be almost trivial to set something like this up using a blockchain. In an early prototype, you'd just give each party one or more wallets (private keys), allow the pharma to mint a token for each package and track how those are sent between wallets, each representing a different state in the supply chain. Pharmacies run a full node to have data available in case anything goes down. I made it a bit easier here than it likely would be in reality, but I hope I can transport the beauty of the approach.
- cuteboy19 5y ago
  Why not just have the trusted vendor expose an api for all the info? An append only linked list is ludicrously expensive solution to this problem. To a person with a hammer, everything is a nail. Also, the problem itself is very convoluted and likely doesn't exist in the real world. You trust the vendors enough to let them do the data entry but distrust them thinking that they will manipulate the entered data somehow? It's a very strange situation
  - pabe 5y ago
    It's not about a single trusted vendor here, it's about a supply chain on which multiple independent parties are working. The blockchain is kind of a neutral intermediary. Scenarios like this are not "very strange" but very real. Europe and China are actively working on blockchain projects, e.g. https://ec.europa.eu/cefdigital/wiki/display/CEFDIGITAL/2021/10/04/University+pilot+proves+value+of+a+European+Blockchain https://ec.europa.eu/cefdigital/wiki/display/CEFDIGITAL/2021... or https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-selects-pilot-zones-application-areas-blockchain-project-2022-01-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-selects-pilot-zone...

dgellow 5y ago

> The problem is idiocracy. Most people don't think anymore Most people are dumb and uninformed, that’s not something that is going to change. If this new blockchain world that is being created only work for an imaginary world where agents are rational logical, and well educated the result will be disastrous.

shepherdjerred 5y ago

> Most people don't think anymore. Do you really believe that making mistakes is somehow on the rise, or that as a race we are getting less intelligent? This doesn't seem like a genuine argument other than a generic "people are dumb and getting dumber" statement.

pabe 5y ago
You're right, I didn't provide a single source. Sorry for that! Here is one: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/04/29/technology-is-on-the-rise-while-iq-is-on-the-decline/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/04/29/te...