5 ms·

How can that be? By putting paper work in the blockchain they managed to cut shipping times by 40%! https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/ibm-maersk-tradelen

How can that be? By putting paper work in the blockchain they managed to cut shipping times by 40%! https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/ibm-maersk-tradelens-blockchain-alliance-cuts-shipping-times-40-percent/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/ibm-maersk-tradelens... Seriously though I believe the blockchain has always been hidden behind an API hosted by IBM (access to those who got approved and paid a fee), blockchain was an implementation/marketing detail and the whole thing could have been done with Sybase/MDB etc. If they had promoted this as a standard/open way of describing shipping data it might have been beneficial.

oxfordmale 4y ago
...and if IBM says it is 40%, it is definitely true. Just as IBM Watson is going to be the future of healthcare. Unfortunately, that future seems to consist of scrapping IBM Watson and selling it for parts /sarcasm
- danuker 4y ago
  > /sarcasm You mean, they won't even bother selling it for parts? Or why is this sarcasm?
  - conorcleary 4y ago
    Selling the sarcasm.
    - hef19898 4y ago
      I have plenty, and cynisism, in case someone is interested!
      - barking_biscuit 4y ago
        I would take you up on the offer, but I doubt it's geniune :P
  - oxfordmale 4y ago
    It is sold for parts https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/sivgoj/n_ibm_watson_is_dead_sold_for_parts/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/sivgoj/n_i... I add the sarcasm tag to make clear I am joking. If the future of healthcare is selling old computers for scrap, we face a bleak future.
- snapcaster 4y ago
  - pjc50 4y ago
    HN is terrible at interpreting sarcasm or jokes, partly because people will say the most extraordinary things with apparent sincerity.
    - chris_wot 4y ago
      On HN, it’s probably best to avoid sarcasm. I’ve used it and it didn’t work out well.
      - kelseyfrog 4y ago
        Sarcasm on HN is exceptionally difficult. The closest I've been able to get us deliberately playing around with Poe's Law. The issue with doing so, however, is not being entirely sure if you're getting up votes because people are in on it or think you're serious. And if you let the cat out of the bag and confess to it, it ruins the joke! Both the reader and the writer are left in this nebulous liminal space of perpetual standoff with no one able to make a move. I quite like it, but it's an acquired taste for sure.
    - dvaun 4y ago
      As do people in most internet forums. Poe’s law: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      The whole point of sarcasm is that there’s a chance somebody won’t get it. It is the author trusting the reader in the hopes of making a little connection when the reader gets it. If there’s no chance of failure, the reader doesn’t actually have to get it, so there’s point to the whole exercise. It just becomes a joke in a stilted format. If you ever feel the need to include a /s, just make a normal joke it will be funnier. Read /s as “NOT” in Borat-voice.
- dghughes 4y ago
  IBM's Phoenix pay system in Canada was a disaster.
  - knifie_spoonie 4y ago
    What is it with IBM and payroll systems. They botched another one here in Australia: https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-sued-over-queensland-health-payroll-system-debacle https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-sued-over-queensland-health-pa...
dmitriid 4y ago
> By putting paper work in the blockchain they managed to cut shipping times by 40%! You make the mistake of assuming that blockchain had something to do with it. And not the act of replacing paper records with digital records. Blockchain is entirely irrelevant.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- helsinkiandrew 4y ago
  > You make the mistake of assuming that blockchain had something to do with it. I was trying to be sarcastic!
  - chris_wot 4y ago
    It doesn’t work well on HN
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    Ah, I misread you. Apologies!
- tomalpha 4y ago
  > Blockchain is entirely irrelevant I believe that’s exactly what the OP said above > You make the mistake I think it might be the other way round here - do go and reread the post you’re replying to :)
danrocks 4y ago
> Seriously though I believe the blockchain has always been hidden behind an API hosted by IBM I kind of misread what you said and read "Bitcoin" instead of "blockchain", but this wrong scenario is as funny as your comment. Imagine if the whole Bitcoin is powered by IBM in secret as a ploy to sell their blockchain consulting services [0]. [0] - https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/services https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/services
- conorcleary 4y ago
  An astonishing amount of 'hackers' on this wee forum confuse the two.
anonymouse008 4y ago
> Seriously though I believe the blockchain has always been hidden behind an API hosted by IBM (access to those who got approved and paid a fee), blockchain was an implementation/marketing detail and the whole thing could have been done with Sybase/MDB etc. Yeah, I signed up for TradeLens - this is accurate. The primary 'integration' wasn't worked through though. You need to have your customer bank and your bank accept the digital documents, and still you need to work through the change log process in case the BoL is wrong. There's a lot here to do - and I have to imagine this field is where Flexport is heading. I also looked into Circle to use USDC as the primary transfer mechanism. However the commodities I know are all a 'trust' relationship of international wires that works 'just good enough'
- texasbigdata 4y ago
  What exactly does flex port do outside of the non descriptive marketing words on its website? Is it an oracle erp for a formerly pdf and paper heavy biz?
  - yunohn 4y ago
    Yes. Literally, that’s it.
    - hef19898 4y ago
      WiseTech is offering a similar solution with CargoWise. Among the users are, e.g., DHL.
- nwah1 4y ago
  Why convert USD to USDC and back again, and get two currency exchange dings, on top of the blockchain transfer fees... all for the privilege of still needing to trust Circle (backed by the sinking ship of Coinbase) when you could just do a cheap and simple wire transfer. Same amount of trust, but less fees and the trusted party is more trustworthy. Edit: Come to think of it, you'd need to trust both Circle and whatever cryptocurrency exchange.. in addition to your bank. With wire transfer you just need to trust the wire and your bank. So two parties vs three. Wire is actually more trustless!
mumblemumble 4y ago
I would guess that placing any sort of data like this on a publicly-visible distributed ledger is the very last thing an industry like international shipping wants. Pirates might love it, though.
- hef19898 4y ago
  Even better: Industrial espionage, those records get you at least half way to know everyones BoM, suppliers and prices.
satvikpendem 4y ago
> When you think about it, OpenSea would actually be much “better” in the immediate sense if all the web3 parts were gone. It would be faster, cheaper for everyone, and easier to use. For example, to accept a bid on my NFT, I would have had to pay over $80-$150+ just in ethereum transaction fees. That puts an artificial floor on all bids, since otherwise you’d lose money by accepting a bid for less than the gas fees. Payment fees by credit card, which typically feel extortionary, look cheap compared to that. OpenSea could even publish a simple transparency log if people wanted a public record of transactions, offers, bids, etc to verify their accounting. > However, if they had built a platform to buy and sell images that wasn’t nominally based on crypto, I don’t think it would have taken off. Not because it isn’t distributed, because as we’ve seen so much of what’s required to make it work is already not distributed. I don’t think it would have taken off because this is a gold rush. People have made money through cryptocurrency speculation, those people are interested in spending that cryptocurrency in ways that support their investment while offering additional returns, and so that defines the setting for the market of transfer of wealth. https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29845208 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29845208
- moffkalast 4y ago
  Speaking of gas fees, are they still a thing now that they've made the move to proof of stake? Since confirmation takes no energy now and can be done at comparatively infinite speed it would make sense for transaction fees to practically vanish.
  - miracle2k 4y ago
    Gas fees have nothing to do with Proof of Stake or Work. You are not paying for the work done. They are a function of demand / availability for block space.
    - kdragon 4y ago
      Gas fees are also a solution to the halting problem that comes with Ethereum's EVM (and its Turing completeness). So you are paying for space and computation.

oxfordmale 4y ago

...and if IBM says it is 40%, it is definitely true. Just as IBM Watson is going to be the future of healthcare. Unfortunately, that future seems to consist of scrapping IBM Watson and selling it for parts /sarcasm

danuker 4y ago
> /sarcasm You mean, they won't even bother selling it for parts? Or why is this sarcasm?
- conorcleary 4y ago
  Selling the sarcasm.
  - hef19898 4y ago
    I have plenty, and cynisism, in case someone is interested!
    - barking_biscuit 4y ago
      I would take you up on the offer, but I doubt it's geniune :P
- oxfordmale 4y ago
  It is sold for parts https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/sivgoj/n_ibm_watson_is_dead_sold_for_parts/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/sivgoj/n_i... I add the sarcasm tag to make clear I am joking. If the future of healthcare is selling old computers for scrap, we face a bleak future.
snapcaster 4y ago
- pjc50 4y ago
  HN is terrible at interpreting sarcasm or jokes, partly because people will say the most extraordinary things with apparent sincerity.
  - chris_wot 4y ago
    On HN, it’s probably best to avoid sarcasm. I’ve used it and it didn’t work out well.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      Sarcasm on HN is exceptionally difficult. The closest I've been able to get us deliberately playing around with Poe's Law. The issue with doing so, however, is not being entirely sure if you're getting up votes because people are in on it or think you're serious. And if you let the cat out of the bag and confess to it, it ruins the joke! Both the reader and the writer are left in this nebulous liminal space of perpetual standoff with no one able to make a move. I quite like it, but it's an acquired taste for sure.
  - dvaun 4y ago
    As do people in most internet forums. Poe’s law: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    The whole point of sarcasm is that there’s a chance somebody won’t get it. It is the author trusting the reader in the hopes of making a little connection when the reader gets it. If there’s no chance of failure, the reader doesn’t actually have to get it, so there’s point to the whole exercise. It just becomes a joke in a stilted format. If you ever feel the need to include a /s, just make a normal joke it will be funnier. Read /s as “NOT” in Borat-voice.
dghughes 4y ago
IBM's Phoenix pay system in Canada was a disaster.
- knifie_spoonie 4y ago
  What is it with IBM and payroll systems. They botched another one here in Australia: https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-sued-over-queensland-health-payroll-system-debacle https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-sued-over-queensland-health-pa...

dmitriid 4y ago

> By putting paper work in the blockchain they managed to cut shipping times by 40%! You make the mistake of assuming that blockchain had something to do with it. And not the act of replacing paper records with digital records. Blockchain is entirely irrelevant.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
helsinkiandrew 4y ago
> You make the mistake of assuming that blockchain had something to do with it. I was trying to be sarcastic!
- chris_wot 4y ago
  It doesn’t work well on HN
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- dmitriid 4y ago
  Ah, I misread you. Apologies!
tomalpha 4y ago
> Blockchain is entirely irrelevant I believe that’s exactly what the OP said above > You make the mistake I think it might be the other way round here - do go and reread the post you’re replying to :)

danrocks 4y ago

> Seriously though I believe the blockchain has always been hidden behind an API hosted by IBM I kind of misread what you said and read "Bitcoin" instead of "blockchain", but this wrong scenario is as funny as your comment. Imagine if the whole Bitcoin is powered by IBM in secret as a ploy to sell their blockchain consulting services [0]. [0] - https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/services https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/services

conorcleary 4y ago
An astonishing amount of 'hackers' on this wee forum confuse the two.

anonymouse008 4y ago

> Seriously though I believe the blockchain has always been hidden behind an API hosted by IBM (access to those who got approved and paid a fee), blockchain was an implementation/marketing detail and the whole thing could have been done with Sybase/MDB etc. Yeah, I signed up for TradeLens - this is accurate. The primary 'integration' wasn't worked through though. You need to have your customer bank and your bank accept the digital documents, and still you need to work through the change log process in case the BoL is wrong. There's a lot here to do - and I have to imagine this field is where Flexport is heading. I also looked into Circle to use USDC as the primary transfer mechanism. However the commodities I know are all a 'trust' relationship of international wires that works 'just good enough'

texasbigdata 4y ago
What exactly does flex port do outside of the non descriptive marketing words on its website? Is it an oracle erp for a formerly pdf and paper heavy biz?
- yunohn 4y ago
  Yes. Literally, that’s it.
  - hef19898 4y ago
    WiseTech is offering a similar solution with CargoWise. Among the users are, e.g., DHL.
nwah1 4y ago
Why convert USD to USDC and back again, and get two currency exchange dings, on top of the blockchain transfer fees... all for the privilege of still needing to trust Circle (backed by the sinking ship of Coinbase) when you could just do a cheap and simple wire transfer. Same amount of trust, but less fees and the trusted party is more trustworthy. Edit: Come to think of it, you'd need to trust both Circle and whatever cryptocurrency exchange.. in addition to your bank. With wire transfer you just need to trust the wire and your bank. So two parties vs three. Wire is actually more trustless!

mumblemumble 4y ago

I would guess that placing any sort of data like this on a publicly-visible distributed ledger is the very last thing an industry like international shipping wants. Pirates might love it, though.

hef19898 4y ago
Even better: Industrial espionage, those records get you at least half way to know everyones BoM, suppliers and prices.

satvikpendem 4y ago

> When you think about it, OpenSea would actually be much “better” in the immediate sense if all the web3 parts were gone. It would be faster, cheaper for everyone, and easier to use. For example, to accept a bid on my NFT, I would have had to pay over $80-$150+ just in ethereum transaction fees. That puts an artificial floor on all bids, since otherwise you’d lose money by accepting a bid for less than the gas fees. Payment fees by credit card, which typically feel extortionary, look cheap compared to that. OpenSea could even publish a simple transparency log if people wanted a public record of transactions, offers, bids, etc to verify their accounting. > However, if they had built a platform to buy and sell images that wasn’t nominally based on crypto, I don’t think it would have taken off. Not because it isn’t distributed, because as we’ve seen so much of what’s required to make it work is already not distributed. I don’t think it would have taken off because this is a gold rush. People have made money through cryptocurrency speculation, those people are interested in spending that cryptocurrency in ways that support their investment while offering additional returns, and so that defines the setting for the market of transfer of wealth. https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29845208 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29845208

moffkalast 4y ago
Speaking of gas fees, are they still a thing now that they've made the move to proof of stake? Since confirmation takes no energy now and can be done at comparatively infinite speed it would make sense for transaction fees to practically vanish.
- miracle2k 4y ago
  Gas fees have nothing to do with Proof of Stake or Work. You are not paying for the work done. They are a function of demand / availability for block space.
  - kdragon 4y ago
    Gas fees are also a solution to the halting problem that comes with Ethereum's EVM (and its Turing completeness). So you are paying for space and computation.