3 ms·
Agreed, there are use cases, even obvious use cases. Blockchain provides guarantees that other databases do not. They're just guarantees that assume that some p
by staticassertion 4y ago
Agreed, there are use cases, even obvious use cases. Blockchain provides guarantees that other databases do not. They're just guarantees that assume that some portion of people connecting to it are bad actors. Most people don't really care about solving that problem because they just don't give those people access, but that implies a single authority for access ie: centralization.
So blockchain only makes sense when:
a) You have bad actors
b) You need decentralization
The use cases for that are, for the most part, "subvert government authority". There are some cool other things you can do, like web of trust stuff, but the vast majority of the market is in the "subvert government authority" in one way or another, or is an outright scam.
- 8note 4y agoa) isn't quite specific enough You use blockchain if you have one very specific type of bad actor, and know for sure that they won't try bad things
- jjoonathan 4y agoI don't think this is so crazy of an idea. Many of our institutions (example: democracy, checks and balances) are designed to "subvert government authority" in exactly the same spirit. The idea is to ensure that some rules are followed regardless of who is in charge.
- whywhywhywhy 4y agoTry to fly with over $10,000 (Not even a lot of money these days) in cash and see what happens. Might change your opinion of it.
- staticassertion 4y agoWhat opinion? You just demonstrated an example of subverting government authority, which is exactly what I said it can be useful for. I didn't make any judgment about doing so.
- whywhywhywhy 4y agoHow is carrying money around subverting government authority? You can carry 500K in your wallet on your bank card but if you carry 10K in cash it's somehow different?
- staticassertion 4y agoBecause traveling with more than 10,000 dollars without declaring it is illegal.