4 ms·

If you were Google, Apple or MS, would it be better to create one's own blockchain and promote that instead? Gcash, iMoney or Credits respectively.

wcoenen 15y ago
If you want "your own" then there is no point in using a distributed blockchain. You'd just set up a centralized ledger under your control.
- adrianwaj 15y ago
  No, they can guarantee their computers supply minimum level of computing power to make the network trustworthy, they can also cover transaction costs perhaps, and the block chain is still open for all. They can also offer an exchange and make money that way. Ideally, they can protect the network from corporate and government attack or interference -- keep it somewhat unregulated, promoted, trustworthy and developing.
  - wcoenen 15y ago
    They can do all those things with bitcoin without starting their own chain. I still don't see an incentive for a company to do this.
    - adrianwaj 15y ago
      They can issue to themselves all the initial coins. I suppose they can do it transparently and fairly, or in a more exploitative way to their financial advantage. (another way to make money off it!) Not sure, but in terms of government, wasn't bringing the power to issue money away from central banks and into the government's treasury what Lincoln did with his greenback and what had him murdered? A government run blockchain would be what Lincoln would do today if he were a hacker!
mlinksva 15y ago
Or if you were a government. If in the long term bitcoin-like cryptocurrency is to play a significant role in society as money (not totally implausible, in the long term), I don't see why any entity with a more or less captive audience of payers (eg taxpayers) wouldn't start its own, taking a large cut ... http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2011/05/30/cryptocurrency-cambrian/ http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2011/05/30/cryptocurrency-cambr...

wcoenen 15y ago

If you want "your own" then there is no point in using a distributed blockchain. You'd just set up a centralized ledger under your control.

adrianwaj 15y ago
No, they can guarantee their computers supply minimum level of computing power to make the network trustworthy, they can also cover transaction costs perhaps, and the block chain is still open for all. They can also offer an exchange and make money that way. Ideally, they can protect the network from corporate and government attack or interference -- keep it somewhat unregulated, promoted, trustworthy and developing.
- wcoenen 15y ago
  They can do all those things with bitcoin without starting their own chain. I still don't see an incentive for a company to do this.
  - adrianwaj 15y ago
    They can issue to themselves all the initial coins. I suppose they can do it transparently and fairly, or in a more exploitative way to their financial advantage. (another way to make money off it!) Not sure, but in terms of government, wasn't bringing the power to issue money away from central banks and into the government's treasury what Lincoln did with his greenback and what had him murdered? A government run blockchain would be what Lincoln would do today if he were a hacker!

mlinksva 15y ago

Or if you were a government. If in the long term bitcoin-like cryptocurrency is to play a significant role in society as money (not totally implausible, in the long term), I don't see why any entity with a more or less captive audience of payers (eg taxpayers) wouldn't start its own, taking a large cut ... http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2011/05/30/cryptocurrency-cambrian/ http://gondwanaland.com/mlog/2011/05/30/cryptocurrency-cambr...