I recently read about a steel maker in India executing a cross border order on blockchain. On further reading it turns out their bank used a third party company for digitizing letter of credit and that company claims to be using an enterprise blockchain R3 Corda. R3 itself is owned by a consortium of banks and on their website they don't use the word blockchain to describe Corda. They call it DLT.
My understanding is that a blockchain is supposed to be distributed, trustless, permissionless, immutable and open. At least that is what the core ideology behind it and is touted as the cornerstone features of blockchain. An enterprise blockchain is private, trustful, permissoned and everything that is a blockchain is not supposed to be. At that stage is it even a blockchain or just another propitiatory data store?
A blockchain is just a data structure. That description is more befitting of Decentralized Finance/DeFi
What would be the advantages of using a private, permissioned blockchain over a MySQL/Oracle/SQL Server database for storing data?
Why as an external user would I trust a centralized blockchain more than I would trust a centralized database? They are both private owned and controlled by a company.
As an external user? Nobody cares, it's not for you, move on.
And why couldn't a distributed SQL database be append-only, immutable, time-stamped, and implemented so each new entry has a hash of the previous state? (If you own it, just set it up to disallow updates or deletes, and allow inserts only through a trigger / stored procedure that adds the timestamp and hash.)
Incentivizing IPFS content pinning, Filecoin.
Allowing censorship-resistant / chargeback free donations, most coins.
Enabling private transactions, Monero.
Most "dapps" empower decentralization, distributed exchanges, trading, DNS, ownership contracts (DOAs), etc.
NFT's for art as silly as it is, more importantly for Handshake domain names and other cases where ownership proof comes into play.
Please feel free to go and attack all of those ideas and projects, but don't think for a second you can really gaslight people into believing they aren't worth of pursuit.
Paying for hosting with extremely volatile and environmental harmful tokens that only a part of population pretends has a real value, that you want to hoard rather than spend, and that might go to 0 at some point? To have basically torrents?
Sending deflationary ponzi scheme tokens to people is not helping them. Also, fees are high.
Private transactions are great if you are a criminal, I'll give you that.
Tell me one "dapp" (or "extremely wasteful programs that run on a CPU that is orders and orders of magnitude slower than an actual one) that is doing something useful. I haven't found one yet and I've been searching for some years now.
With NFTs you don't own anything, unless there's an actual contract that comes with it. Also you buy a hyperlink that points to central storage. Also money laundering and wash trading are rampant.
If the powers at be allow you to (PayPal, banks, credit card companies)
If Mastercard doesn't like you or your wares (porn or dissent) good luck!
> Private transactions are great if you are a criminal, I'll give you that.
Tired old trope. You don't have to be a criminal to enjoy privacy.
> Tell me one "dapp" (or "extremely wasteful programs that run on a CPU that is orders and orders of magnitude slower than an actual one) that is doing something useful. I haven't found one yet and I've been searching for some years now.
I have, read above. Decentralizing. Exchanges, payment processors, distributed DNS, distributed CDN, distributed royalties.
>With NFTs you don't own anything, unless there's an actual contract that comes with it. Also you buy a hyperlink that points to central storage. Also money laundering and wash trading are rampant.
Tired old trope. It's simply a non-fungible token that can represent your ownership of an asset. You can own a Handshake domain using NFTs. There are other uses other than a hyperlink pointing to artwork. Yes others can access your domain and artwork, but you own it and you can sell it. In regards to your domain that's how you prove you own it and can admin it.
This hostility is completely unnecessary.
But if you want I can add one more to the list: funding the North Korean nuclear weapons program.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/north-korean-hackers-stole-a-r...
It's annoying to see the constant crypto bashing with tired talking points regurgitated.
Anyways, did my list meet your expectations of valid projects, is that why you started going on about NK, lol?
Are chargebacks on donations are major issue for any legitimate non-profit organization?
Basically anything Stripe / PayPal locks your account for and considers you high risk or CC companies block.
>> Are chargebacks on donations are major issue for any legitimate non-profit organization?
> Virtual game currencies, controversial politics, porn, gambling etc.
Paying for porn is not a donation.
Paying for in-game currency is not a donation.
Gambling is not a donation.
Giving money to someone for "controversial politics" is almost never an issue, especially if you're actually donating (which is only possible if you are, e.g., giving money to a registered candidate, a PAC, or an org that files a Form 8872). I make a lot of political donations and have never had an issue.
If you're:
1. giving money to someone for political reasons, who
2. explicitly opts out of tax-advantaged status so that they don't have to use that money in a way that's congruent with donor's intent, and
3. has a huge issue with charge-backs on unrestricted non-tax-advantaged gifts...
IDK. I'd tend to consider that a massive red flag. But I guess funding scam artists who get tons of money from identity thieves and prey on controversial politics is indeed a use-case for crypto.
I can also imagine political orgs having foes.
Using fraud detection technology and/or swallowing the chargeback fees would probably be cheaper than the overhead of using a crpytocurrency+exchange.
Setting a minimum donation so that you're not a good target for card testing probably has a lower barrier to entry than requiring use of a crpytocurrency.
It sucks trying to run a game losing $20+ per chargeback and risking getting funds frozen entirely.
It sucks to be delisted by PayPal over political bullshit.
It sucks Mastercard and other CC companies can decide porn is essentially illegal.
- edit @ notahacker -
The point is you're at the whim of PayPal, Stripe, and credit card company policies for traditional fiat currency.
Have fun trying to sell guns (FFL be damned), porn subs (legal like you mentioned), virtual currency (legal ofc), or anything like that with traditional processors.
Crypto is the only option for those industries and a few others if you want to accept payment online.
Doesn't matter how many billions the industry is worth if you can't accept a credit card on your site for the service.
If all majors processors ban it, it's essentially blocked.
Configurations are infinite.
eg if the royalty goes toward a DAO, maybe that DAO’s charter is to grow awareness for the NFT project. Or the rewards could accrue toward a staked project token that all community members hold, or fees could go back to the creator to fund development for next gen.
I don’t know the best use, but my point is because someone programmed royalties, there’s now another dimension of configuration for NFT projects.
“EIP-2981 is a standard that focuses on signalling to market participants the royalty payment information for a given NFT or set of NFTs.”