3 ms·

> (not blockchain) Why not?

• billpg 4y ago
  Because blockchain solutions to anything are almost always awful. (And I'm unsure about needing the word "almost".)
  • FateOfNations 4y ago
    I always replace "blockchain" with "distributed ledger" and see if the idea still make any kind of sense (it rarely does).
  • White_Wolf 4y ago
    Awful? Ignoring the crypto coins, I'd love to see all spending/funds in for governments, ONG, non-profit orgs, (mass)media channels, public hospitals, all companies that have shareholders/sell shares, anything that runs on public funds and so on should be tracked via publicly available blockchains. You can probably see where I'm going with this. I have mixed feelings about banks, national banks, lenders, art trading, casinos, pawn shops and such though. I'm a bit worried about tracking private individuals at that extent because of these.
    • billpg 4y ago
      You can do that without a blockchain. Have all those orgs publish their accounts in a form that allows for anyone to make copies and to audit that the published versions don't get modified over time.
    • dbbk 4y ago
      Nothing about this requires the blockchain though. It's additional complexity for no gain.