There aren't that many uses for blockchains

Re:There aren't that many uses for blockchains by namdnay on Thursday August 11, 2022 @04:52AM (#32423153)

> Some of the "better" arguments i've seen are obsoleting/maintaining anything that is quasi public record. Think all sorts of land/legal transactions where it's basically "once x and y and z have said yes, process transaction from x to z"

The validity of any transaction can only be determined and guaranteed by the state, so honestly just having the state host a central database seems much easier

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There aren't that many uses for blockchains by josephg on Thursday August 11, 2022 @07:27AM (#32424103)

I’d be quite happy seeing the state host a signed, public append only log for records like this. Basically blockchain without the mining. Anyone can subscribe, but only the state (or anyone paying a nominal fee per byte) can write.

It could be used for notarising contracts, recording crop yields, declaring bankruptcies, listing property sales - you name it. Pay $1/kb and your data will be stored forever.

Anyone can replicate the changes to their own computer to validate the hashes and prove the government isn’t changing anything.

I think that would capture 90% of the value of a blockchain with almost none of blockchain’s downsides and it would be trivially easy to implement.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There aren't that many uses for blockchains by namdnay on Thursday August 11, 2022 @10:26AM (#32426152)

yup, basically Git + a PR submission system

[ Parent | on HN ]