133
134

do_you_need_a_blockchain.png (imgur.com)

bluecoffee が 投稿

全 20 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]RaptorXP [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Next up: do_you_need_smart_contracts.png

[–]i_can_get_you_a_toe [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Do you like money?

-> YES

Would you like people to give you money?

-> YES

You need to say "blockchain".

[–]saddit42 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I think you can add "can you appoint a fixed group of people which majority decision can be trusted" -> you don't need a blockchain

[–]killerstorm [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But federated blockchains are specifically designed for a fixed group to make a majority decision which is then trusted by the rest of users.

[–]UpGoNinja [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Do you want crazy magic Internet money? --> You need a blockchain.

Have you been listening to Tim Swanson? --> You don't need a blockchain.

[–]jmw74 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

How about "are there enough parties involved that you can trust that a majority of them won't collude?"

[–]theymos [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Another very common misunderstanding: If you're trying to use a (decentralized) block chain to determine ownership of real things (a car, a computer, etc.), then the property itself is centralized, so a block chain is pointless. You're going to either need to trust a person to administrate the property, or you'll need the property to be smart enough to administrate itself; in both cases, there's no need for a decentralized block chain when you have a centralized administrator.

[–]utopiawesome2 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

it's called a blockchain not a block chain, much like it is now Bitcoin and not BitCoin, bit-coin, or bit coin.

also, a blockchain, the blockchain, blockchain technology, all make sense while modifier 'blockchain' doesn't (hear that IBM?)

Anyway, the banks want to say that Bitcoin is run on Blockchain tech which is a subset of distributed ledger tech.

Can you think of any good reason for these businesses to actually use BCs?

[–]theymos [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Satoshi always said "block chain", never "blockchain". Also, "block chain" makes it more obvious to uninformed people that you're talking about a technological concept rather than a company.

Can you think of any good reason for these businesses to actually use BCs?

A federated (ie. not decentralized, no PoW) block chain such as Liquid might make sense in some cases. For example, it might be an improvement over the current interbank settlement system. (But I really only find this stuff interesting if it's decentralized, which is very likely a bad idea for all aspects of the traditional banking system.)

[–]guywithtwohats [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Can you create a system of incentives to make your consensus algorithm work and keep the nodes in your system honest?

[–]approx- [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I wonder what the next VC buzzword to come out of bitcoin will be?

[–]Introshine [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Oh snap!

[–]uboyzlikemexico [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Maybe one edit, to add clarification:

"Does there exist a common person, group, or entity that they trust?"

Other than, we should make this required reading to people interested in blockchains. Nice work!

[–]acec [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So true

[–]MaxSan [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

This is correct.

[–]ihaphleas [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Pretty good, though let's remember that even trusted people can die or be "forgetful" and data decays without good checksumming, etc (ala zfs).

[–]Glutius [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Great graph man!

[–]FlailingBorg [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Very well said.