Block chain faggots btfo

I'm just checking to see how posting a comment works in Veeky Forums. Origin planet is Reddit.

he's correct, blockchain is really only useful for crypto currencies. as soon as you centralize a component of the ecosystem, it's no longer blockchain.

that's called experimentation.. there's a lot of hype around it, and consultants have money to make. i know because i consult w/ IBM regarding blockchain for my company.

fucking retarded comment
you guys are all fucking pathetic and need to learn basic computer skills if you actually believe blockchain is completely revolutionary, then again you are on an anonymous image board so you probably come here because youre a fucking retard irl

But RBC (Canadian bank) uses Hyperledger to settle interbank settlements. Maybe someone should tell them they should use a cloud database.

I'm not saying blockchain can be used for everything that coiners say it should be used for. I'm just debunking the notion that it's only used for illicit purposes. It's a dumb statement.

isn't***** completely revolutionary. Blockchain is literally going to be the backbone of our society in 10 years

i'm the main blockchain guy for a fortune 50 company, i guess they picked the wrong guy. it's a niche middleware that isn't being used for anything besides currency for a reason. stay dumb and poor.

He conveniently forgets immutability. Conventional databases can be modified by someone who has write permission, and they are vulnerable to corruption. Any kind of secure log or accounting ledger would benefit from that.

they're experimenting with it, not using it in production. there is a big difference. my company is also experimenting with it.

RBC does not use blockchain

I guess they did, because you seem uneducated as fuck and I can tell you're just LARPing and you probably have a high school diploma and that's it. Considering I ACTUALLY study cs at a top uni I can tell you are completely talking through your ass, either that or you are a complete failure at your job and will be replaced very shortly for losing your "company" millions.

>computer skills
>not recognizing the technological advancement of distributed consensus

You sound like an angst ridden teenager who think he’s “good at computers” because boomers told him so.

It was a mistype. I already know the amazing potential of the blockchain, was responding to the other LARP boomer retard who can't grasp HTML

oh ok, the kid in school knows more about this stuff than a director making $230k/year lmfao

yes—enjoy tech giants rifling through everything of yours that touches a computer, and then trying to pander to you with psychological triggers to funnel you into developing a mindset that they can easily manipulate and control, all because >muh nothin' to hide
get absolutely fucked, you stupid nocoiners—and especially if you don't see value in decentralized and highly-private blockchain technology, then enjoy getting fucking raped by the corporatocracy, you moronic fucking central-authority-loving mongs

and yes,
>bitgoyz
fucking kek

Lol, even on an anonymous image board you are a fucking loser LARPing someone who's somewhat successful irl. feel bad for you man, take some computer classes and maybe one day you'll actually qualify to be the person you try and LARP

you've gotta be the angriest dude i've seen all day. sorry but your shitcoin lottery tickets are going nowhere bro. also if you'd like to bring up an example of how blockchain will "revolutionize" our world i'll go ahead and debunk it for you, embarrass you, and then post smug anime girls as i chase you out of this thread

>Links to an obscure reddit comment
>Lololol blokchayn iz ded

it's definitely not dead, it's great for crypto currency. that's it tho

LOL. Link is like Ripple. Not even a crypto. What would you expect?

>literally cant realize for himself that a massive distributed consensus that can be used from anywhere isn't revolutionary
boomers always make me laugh the hardest because technology always makes you act retarded

He is 100% right though.

this is the most pathetic exchange I'd seen this year

>smug anime girls
Please user, no, anything but that. I have a family

>still can't provide an example

Your dunning kruger is showing.

>ad homs with no substance
it's so easy to brush you dummies off

Based triple 0

These humans, they still don't get it.

Hopefully, some will get into intro-tier content like Dantalion Jones or accidentally stumble on Robert Anton Wilson's work.

it is true that if you believe every institution is 100% honest all the time and every government has your best interests at heart, then there's no point in using a blockchain

I am a crypto fan myself. But he's right: blockchain is useless anywhere outside currencies. And institutions are more likely to adopt a commercial solution for their purposes rather than a public chain controlled by chinks and whales.

of course he's right. it's sad to see of the poor children ITT with crypto dreams not wanting it to be true though, as they want to believe their shitcoins will bring them riches. never going to happen kids!

it's a good thing you're larping, because otherwise it'd be infinitely sadder for muh 230k/y director to come on an anonymous chinese cooking recipe message board to throw a tantrum
time to step away from the keyboard and ask yourself why is it you care so much you'd come here while none of us would go on a stock market forum

Did you guys miss the livestream where US gov and many others talked about blockchain and how they could apply it to many industries ?

Even if it was useless outside of currency (it isn’t), that’s still a revolutionary advancement. True digital currency was impossible before the advent of blockchain, you doublenigger. Still, you’re a fucking moron if you can’t see the applications in logitistics, voting, supply chain, fintech, and more. Just because the tech is in development doesn’t mean there aren’t solid uses forthcoming.

can you point out where i threw a tantrum? i'm over here laughing. i'm just killing time before we head out to a friend's house for some food, drink and olympics :)

also, you're here forever.

Anyone who thinks blockchain will be used for anything other than crypto currency is a absolute moron.

I think that that can be prevented by using checksums and keeping track of new changes, might still be cheaper than running a full blockchain

those people don't actually understand it. they're just parroting what others have said. that's what a hype cycle looks like. btw, since when did people start believing others without evidence?

>Literally taking seriously retards from plebbit
>The same kind of people who bought BCC and Davor

watch this video idiots
youtube.com/watch?v=VptsprY6qPI
For example at 1hour he start talking about how they can apply blockchain tech to reduce the time from 7 days to 2.2 sec. Watch the fucking video idiots. They even explain how blockchain can be used for the military

Buy Espers on Yobit, sir

>since when did people start believing others without evidence?
prob since a new generation was born and had access to the internet, i refuse to believe everyone was this retarded before it

"could be" used for X is the key. wait until the engineers actually have to implement something, and the architects are going to laugh at the notion of using blockchain. my CEO is asking me to coordinate a PoC w/ blockchain just to shut our business partners up.

*CIO rather

>CPU power of a bunch of random faggots with varying CPUs, providing their CPU usage across the globe with lots of latency
>Your own CPU/servers locally connected, all are very high-powered CPUs

Pick 1

Keeping an open mind "just in case" is a rational step, unlike forbidding things on the fly

I hope you don't really fall for all the fancy claims that you read in numerous ICO whitepapers. Most of them are trying to solve non-existing problems and thus are complete bullshit. And whenever blockchain IS applicable in real life, it's unlikely to use public chains, the sad truth.

If you're an actual engineer I'm sorry for your boss. Sure DLT is niche and not useful for most things but it does have application as a secure currency / data storage, and one of these cryptos is likely gonna see some actual serious use for that soon. In the meantime it's stocks lite for millenials

Hmm. Sounds a lot like a distributed ledger.

i agree with you about it being extremely useful for currency. it's not the optimal solution for anything else though, sorry.

>the main conceit of a blockchain is its decentralization and trustlessness, so its "usefulness" is strictly restricted to less than legit uses

yeah there is definitely no use for a decentralized database

definitely no problems with having all of our identies stored in a single centralized database

definitely no problems with having all of our money stored in a single centralized bank

definitely no problems with having the internet being a centralized network being controlled by ISPs and large corporations

>what is equifax? what is a banking crisis? what is net neutrality?

That's true but the real use of DLT lies in challenging banks and eventually slowly becoming a competitor to government fiat

I agree, but saying that a blockchain is completly useless except for transactions is retarded

I don't need you to be sorry, especially when you're wrong about that. Like I said it's great for storing data in a way that makes it provably authentic. Data storage and currency are the only applications I can think of though. But like I said it's not so much about the tech as much as the philosophy. This is important to understand. This is a statement agains QE and bank control. People will see it in due time.

>Like I said it's great for storing data in a way that makes it provably authentic
Provide an example and I'll explain why you're wrong.

storing legal contract data permanently

STAY POOR NOCOINERS AAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA

>Hmm. Sounds a lot like a distributed ledger.
But Wikipedia is not one.

Where is the contract information originally sourced from? It's a single entity providing information to a decentralized ledger, and we've very quickly arrived at the oracle problem. There's no point in using a decentralized ledger to store information if there is a single source that provides it, hence enabling potential corruption. Might as well make it completely centralized at that point.

Next

see there are many many problems with having centralized databases. not going to explain every single individual use case. If you don't see the reason in having a decentralized database you really shouldn't invest into crypto.

... what the fuck am I reading. its a tautology, a blockchain can't exist without a crypto currency.

reuters.com/article/us-rbc-blockchain/exclusive-royal-bank-of-canada-using-blockchain-for-u-s-canada-payments-executive-idUSKCN1C237N

do you not even take 5 seconds to google

>not going to explain every single individual use case.
Try explaining one that blockchain would solve

do you not even read

that means it's not being used in a production environment where it's being relied upon. it's a PoC, an experiment, and nothing more.

I just fucking did in the reply I linked to

SEE you fucking retard faggot learn to read

Let's say we take it for a given that trustlessness is only useful for "less than legit uses".
"Less than legit uses" are not a hard defined concept. Some people believe it's a "less than legit use" to spend your money on drugs or a gay marriage certificate or a gun or a donation for a political party they oppose.
Trustlessness in a currency provides freedom of money. Freedom of money is arguably as important as or a part of freedom of speech.

Wikipedia says so about what? If you have multiple sites of independent entities making copies of the same data it's as good as any crypto that offers data storage. In fact the crypto is better because it already exists and costs a fraction of a penny to operate, in contrast to everybody setting up their distributed and decentralized database.

>Where is the contract information originally sourced from
It's generated at contract time. When the parties are signing a contract they can verify the terms written on the ledger and then sign it with their public signatures and after that the contract is binding and stored immutably forever. It's not that hard.

>yeah there is definitely no use for a decentralized database
Decentralized database =/= blockchain

>definitely no problems with having all of our identies stored in a single centralized database
Would be better to store them on your own machine and let the host only have its checksum. Still less hassle-free than a full blockchain.

>definitely no problems with having the internet being a centralized network being controlled by ISPs and large corporations
Some countries have ISP-wide "registries of forbidden websites" and replace SSL certificates

...

You can put ID tags to addresses thereby giving the idetification needed to not have illegal shit going on. He also fails to forget putting it on any servers leaves it succeptable to hackers stealing that data (credit reporting agencies databases, hotel databases for credit cards, online purchases, etc.). The applications for block chain are limitless if the crypto community can iron out its inherent problems but once that happens (and it will only a matter of time), then You will start seeing mass adoption.

>Blockchain is literally going to be the backbone of our society in 10 years

Wikipedia keeps track of changes. You can roll it back if some changes were bad. Blockchain is based on the principle of immutability, it's not something that's needed in most fields.

And crypto is not cheap to operate at all.

>When the parties are signing a contract they can verify the terms written on the ledger
Ok I'll continue, why does that need to be decentralized? Current encryption technology can alert you when something has been tampered with. It's a lot cheaper to not make 10000 copies of the documentation. So what problem are you solving with blockchain?

>Decentralized database =/= blockchain

that is where you are wrong, go watch the SEC discuss using blockchain and DLT for decentralized databases for food and identities.

>Would be better to store them on your own machine and let the host only have its checksum. Still less hassle-free than a full blockchain.

no it wouldn't because then your computer is vulnerable. A databse is only as strong as its weakest part. This is why we use things like hardware wallets.

>Some countries have ISP-wide "registries of forbidden websites" and replace SSL certificates

this could be potentially avoided using web 3.0 dumbass.

None of your arguments are valid and you actually provided a use case in your third scenario.

anyone in this thread arguing against blockchain is just strawmanning retarded points and doesn't actually understand why things like DLT or bitcoin is useful. Go educate yourselves before entering this space or you will lose all your money investing into a scam. I'm saying this for your own good.

Kek, leave biz

>everyone is a beautiful, enlightened being
>game theorists are paranoid
>power dynamics are a lie
>let's trust everyone

Is wikipedia decentralized though? Decentralization is not useful when there's no huge need to be as trustless as possible. We trust wikipedia enough not to lie to us too much, but when it comes to money or legal data trustlessness becomes useful.

>Ok I'll continue, why does that need to be decentralized?
Why would it be useful to store legal data tamper-free digitally without relying on a third party? Are you asking?

>Current encryption technology can alert you when something has been tampered with
That's called hashing, brainlet. You store the hashes on a distributed ledger.

>he doesn't know game theory

Explain yourself or never post here again. Do you know a single thing about game theory? Have you ever solved a probability matrix?

>that is where you are wrong
I am not wrong, DYR. There are lots of decentralized database architectures, they don't necessarily have anything to do with blockchain.

>no it wouldn't because then your computer is vulnerable.
It's still true even if you're data is stored externally.

>This is why we use things like hardware wallets.
Valid, but its principles might be put to a good use without blockchain itself.

>go watch the SEC discuss using blockchain and DLT for decentralized databases for food and identities.
They keep an open mind "just in case". I see no problem with that.

>this could be potentially avoided using web 3.0 dumbass.
This can be potentially avoided by using a VPN. My point was that the tech never stopped oppressive governments. Let alone that web 3.0 doesn't have anything to do with blockchain, so its mention is irrelevant.

>without relying on a third party?
You think relying on 10000s of 3rd parties is going to be cheaper than relying on 1 when the same type of verification method exists? The resources to run those nodes are going to need to come from somewhere, unless you can convince every law office in the country to have their own dedicated blockchain server vs. paying a pittance from a centralized source. I'd like to see the logistics around that.

Dumb brainlet says a definite statement that they do not. They are obviously trying it.
Fuck off retard.

Are you sure you're an engineer and not just larping? Do you know that there are a couple of cryptos that allow storing data for fees of less than 1c? The resources come from voluntary nodes because running one costs almost nothing, unlike with BTC.

>Is wikipedia decentralized though?
Does it need to be? It already perfectly does its job.

>Decentralization is not useful when there's no huge need to be as trustless as possible.
Exactly. Institutions and governments are based on order and hierarchy, they're not a collection of trustless, independent actors. For that reason, blockchain is heavily redundant for them.

No one is arguing against blockchain per se. The point is, stop being an idealistic fool seriously falling for whatever you read in ICO whitepapers. Sure, there's good money to be made, but let's be realistic.

Yeah well you're not even saying anything you fucking retard you just baselessly assert your braindead opinion and then justify it by saying you make a lot of money. You're a fucking retard and that's the only thing that needs to be said to you.

>Exactly. Institutions and governments are based on order and hierarchy, they're not a collection of trustless
I believe I too said DLTs are pretty niche. But I also said that the ideals are king here. Sure a public DLT may be useful for data storage and maybe trading, but the real killer feature is still gonna be currency - currency that's not controlled by anybody, not even governments. It's the philosophy that's the real thing here. Governments are gonna have to give in eventually. USD is on the verge of a crash right now and so are many third world currencies. Crypto will just sit there while people have their money eaten away by inflation. Slowly but surely crypto is gonna gain adoption because non-fair fiat is just shit and tons of people are about to notice that.

>that lonely feel when you win an argument and nobody responds to you afterwards

There's nothing really to debate, we were talking about how blockchain is redundant in most fields other than currency, you simply retreated to repeating that it's good for currencies, which I did not particularly object. Strawman.

I didn't really consider to be having an argument with you as much as the other guy who insisted DLT is totally useless for anything but currency

You can do that with a normal database - it's a merkle tree and it's been around for decades.

Do coiners actually understand how hashing works? Just interested. We can move on to asymmetric encyrption after.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. How are you gonna ensure the root hashes are untampered without distributing them to several entities? Hm?