Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

Re:Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides by cozicoolmail on Sunday April 01, 2018 @11:05PM (#16732003)

How would you prove identity on a blockchain? You'd be worse equipped than Facebook. Are you suggesting some entity verify folks who sign up for this distributed social network? Make an Ehtereum contract to do it? Either way, this sounds dubious at best.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides by _betty_ on Sunday April 01, 2018 @11:41PM (#16732126)

I think the idea is:

* Website gives person a unique code to broadcast on the blockchain to prove they have control over that identity

* 'Approved' services claim things publically about identities (eg age, allowed to drive) which others can use to verify claims

What I don't get is:

* how you know which 'approved' services to trust in the first place

* why you'd want all of that information public

* how it'd fix the original issue

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides by JimmyAustin on Monday April 02, 2018 @09:09AM (#16734155)

You can treat the 'approved' services list using a whitelist, like a CA.

The other issue is that none of this is necessary. If I want to prove to Person X that Gov Y says that I have property Z, why can't I just present a cryptographically signed certificate saying I have property X. You could even have a similar revocation list as CA.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides by _betty_ on Tuesday April 03, 2018 @06:55AM (#16743440)

revocation seems easier with the blockchain. it just comes with too much other baggage to feel worth it.

[ Parent | on HN ]