You Probably Don't Need a Blockchain

Re:You Probably Don't Need a Blockchain by dlubarov on Thursday February 22, 2018 @01:29AM (#16435613)

It's not really "needing", but one of the strong use cases is disrupting escrow. If domains, car/house titles, etc. existed as blockchain objects then they could be sold securely with no escrow.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Probably Don't Need a Blockchain by nosuchthing on Thursday February 22, 2018 @03:45AM (#16436186)

so you can lose the deed to your house because it gets hacked..?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Probably Don't Need a Blockchain by dlubarov on Thursday February 22, 2018 @01:38PM (#16440063)

Physical deeds are forged all the time, and sorting it out requires a quiet title lawsuit. A stolen electronic deed would be handled similarly. You would ask a court to declare the stolen title invalid and issue a new one.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Probably Don't Need a Blockchain by voiper1 on Thursday February 22, 2018 @02:43PM (#16440749)

so if the court is doing that, then we have a centralized power... the opposite of the idea of blockchain.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Probably Don't Need a Blockchain by dlubarov on Thursday February 22, 2018 @05:14PM (#16441996)

Just to make sure it's clear, I'm not saying that courts should have any special power to manipulate the blockchain, just that they could declare a stolen title invalid, and issue a new one in the form of a new colored coin on the blockchain.

I'm not claiming any benefit related to government control, just that escrow would be unnecessary.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Probably Don't Need a Blockchain by nosuchthing on Thursday February 22, 2018 @10:16PM (#16443915)

At which point the blockchain is not needed.

A centralized source will be held accountable to the legal demands, thus as trustworthy as the blockchain yet significantly more beneficial for all users in terms of speed, storage and utility.

[ Parent | on HN ]