Please Stop

Comments

• neatchee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  OK but there are actually great uses for blockchain that are completely disconnected from anything you typically see

  For example, banks may begin using blockchain for maintaining their inter-branch ledgers. It will help solve a ton of issues around reconciling the transactions from all over the globe

  Blockchain has reasonable uses. Really good ones. Crypto and nft bros just completely ruined the image of it

  source

  • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Blockchain is only potentially useful if there’s no single entity that can be trusted. If banks can’t even trust themselves to manage their own internal ledgers, they have much bigger problems to deal with.

    source

    • TragicNotCute@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Trustless systems aren’t a bad thing that has to step in when the good thing fails. Trustless systems are inherently better because you don’t have to trust a bank (or anyone for that matter).

      Additionally, ledgers can be gamed/corrupted/falsified. This is significantly more complex (bordering on impossible) on the blockchain.

      youtu.be/bBC-nXj3Ng4

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      That’s the thing, they shouldn’t trust a single source of assumed truth. If the single source is tampered with, there’s nothing to compare to.

      Removing the need to trust a single entity is just a great security feature

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • kate@lemmy.uhhoh.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      guys they are putting micro chips in the cheese and using block chains to track the micro chips businessinsider.com/edible-microchips-on-parmigia…

      source
  • buried_treasure@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Blockchain has been around as a technology for nearly two decades. If financial institutions thought it could help them you can bet they would be all-in on it by now. As it is, blockchain has no significant advantages over traditional financial ledger systems, so what incentive is there for them to use it.

    It’s not something new or cutting edge any more, just waiting for a bright spark to discover the technology and put it to use.

    source

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If financial institutions thought it could help them you can bet they would be all-in on it by now.

      coindesk.com/…/goldman-sachs-bny-mellon-and-other…

      source
    • neatchee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Yeah I imagine they probably would.

      Maybe so a simple Google search next time? They ARE using it. It’s getting a ton of investment from them.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • S410@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Well, why would banks replace the system which allows them to charge fees for every other interaction with their services? A blockain solution would allow multiple different banks (and, possibly, even regular people) to access the data with no middlemen, and, therefore, no fees. Or, well, no fees that directly end up in the bank's pockets as profit, that is.

      Getting rid of that is bad for business. So, unless something magical happens and the EU, for example, pass a law requiring the banks to switch to a more de-centralized, more fair system, it's not going to happen.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • kameecoding@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    How is the blockchain different from a read only DB that follows ACID?

    source

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Blockchains add cryptographic signing and limit actions based on those signatures.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • some_designer_dude@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      It’s distributed so no single entity can take it down. Among many other possible benefits depending on architecture and infrastructure.

      It’s far more complex than coins and NFTs. Blockchain is like a new internet. Coins and NFTs are like those shitty GIFs you used to see everywhere. Evocative of old internet, but not the internet itself.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • DaleGribble88@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      How can you trust that the database is really append only? Blockchain provides a way to verify the state of the database and the ordering of the transactions. Beyond that, not much benefit to be had. However, for certain situations, that is a very big benefit!

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Natanael@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Replication and verifiable timestamps, which you can add to regular databases too BTW

      source
  • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Why would you want the computational power of a bank system have anything to do with whether it’s ledger is correct?

    source

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Banks/hackers can manipulate data if they want to. Manipulating data on blockchains in way waaaaay harder.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • NoiseColor@startrek.website ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    How do you see memes like this? Because I see them as lame and sad, especially since we have been seeing them for 10+ years now and they are still the same. But apparently you think blockchain has reasonable uses.

    source

    • neatchee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Misguided

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • HaywardT@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Damn! You had my up vote until that last sentence.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Draegur@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    i for one would have liked a media licensing system that operates agnostic of any centralized authority

    for instance, irrefutable and independently verifiable proof that you own a valid software, music, or visual art license and are therefore immune to prosecution for piracy.

    A registry of licenses like this could shield creators from copyright claims on social media applications such as youtube. Could also automate revenue sharing and royalties for artists whose works are used in derivative media so the people who actually perform the work get paid. Would be nice to cut the publisher middleman out. And there is absolutely no reason there has to be anything like a “proof of work” system burning down entire fucking rainforests’ worth of energy to verify every single gods damned transaction because this sort of system isn’t for trading shit, it’s strictly for proving a valid chain of custody between producers and consumers and you don’t need megawatt-hours to just fucking LOOK SOMETHING UP.

    imagine if, for instance, fucking warner brothers couldn’t “takes backsies” content that they SOLD to end users through a distribution network; the license is yours, and anyone can look up the fact that the license was sold to the user id you happen to control.

    imagine if, for instance, you buy a video game through a digital distributor like steam but then the store goes out of business and no longer exists to serve you a copy or recognize the sale, but on this massively distributed and decentralized database you can prove that you did indeed compensate the developers of that software and thereby legally acquire entitlement to access it in accordance with the end user license agreement.

    imagine if ownership of stuff you bought fair and square can never be taken away from you

    THAT’S what we could have had

    instead of this fucking bullshit.

    source

    • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I feel like here you get to the NFT problem of having proof of ownership of something doesn’t mean much when that thing is being hosted on servers you don’t control

      so if you have an entry with a licence for a steam game, and steam gets closed, you are out of luck

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • BakerBagel@midwest.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      NFT’s don’t show you have proof of ownership of anything other than the NFT. Think of all the people who got their metamask account hacked and lost all their apes with zero recourse.

      Why would anyone want anything required for daily life attached to something so insecure and irreversible as that?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      imagine if, for instance, you buy a video game through a digital distributor like steam but then the store goes out of business and no longer exists to serve you a copy or recognize the sale, but on this massively distributed and decentralized database you can prove that you did indeed compensate the developers of that software and thereby legally acquire entitlement to access it in accordance with the end user license agreement.

      What you’re arguing for is forcing the distributor to distribute in perpetuity, which has nothing to do with how you show ownership of your license.

      Right now, I can show steam I’ve purchased, say Delistopolis, and they will agree I am indeed perfectly allowed to have and play it. But they are not required to provide me with a copy.

      A blockchain system will not solve this.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • aesc@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Well, if those licenses are entries on the blockchain, they could be transferred on the blockchain. You could sell your game used when you’re bored of playing it. You can’t play it after you sell it but someone else can. Publishers hate resale markets though, when people buy used games they don’t make any money. So they’ll probably never go for this.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Natanael@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      All such copyright licenses are rooted in local jurisdictional law, so your country’s copyright office should be the authority because anything else means the courts can tell you that your on-chain transactions are invalid

      source
  • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    blockchains do not do jack shit with reconciliating records.

    source

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Please go and attempt understanding the thing you are talking about before talking about it.

      source
    • Fedop@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Walmart seems to have had success here, and logistics is their whole thing.

      hbr.org/…/how-walmart-canada-uses-blockchain-to-s…

      source
  • Empricorn@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I love how you can’t provide even a single example of useful Blockchain functionality. Doesn’t mean it didn’t exist, but says something… And no, “banking” and “internal ledgers” is not detailed enough to be a sufficient example.

    source

    • Supermariofan67@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      How about Git?

      source
    • neatchee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Try again

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Pika@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  as hostile as people are to block chain due to MFC’s and bad implementations, the technology itself has its use cases. It’s a great solution for information exchange that requires verification and Immutation. This makes them perfect for ledgers or transaction networks.

  It’s just there is so much bad PR regarding it everyone just discredits it. Not all of the block chain technologies are massively energy intensive per transaction, it’s just many of the cryptocurrencies use the most intensive one because it’s also arguably the most secure

  source

  • RegalPotoo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Absolute immutability is kind of a terrible property for a financial system though, cos it completely ignores the fact that mistakes and fraud happen and you need a way to forcefully recover funds other than “lol sucks to be you I guess”.

    The one actually genuinely useful application for this kind of technology that anyone has come up with is Certificate Transparency, but crypto people don’t get excited about it cos it’s not possible to make money from it.

    source

    • anivia@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      You can implement clawback while still having an immutable blockchain. The transaction will always stay on the blockchain, but the funds can be recovered

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • uis@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      You can revert transactions with immutable storage. For example git can do revert-commits.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • zaphod@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    the technology itself has its use cases.

    Cool.

    Name one.

    I mean, it’s been, what, 15 years of hype? Surely there must be a successful deployment of a commercially viable and useful blockchain, right?

    Right?

    source

    • nothead@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I can’t find the case study, but this blockchain project by IBM was implemented in Singapore and was shown to reduce customs processing times from several weeks to just several hours.

      The general idea was that with a successful blockchain implementation, the Singapore government was able to expedite parts of their customs process which normally require intensive human labor, and the use of smart contracts removed the need for having documents sent and resent when all parties had access to the smart contract directly.

      There are specific use cases where it can benefit existing processes, but people just think blockchain = crypto.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Supermariofan67@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      git-scm.com

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • hglman@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Who are you? Go make bad arguments elsewhere.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • mlg@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I mean… the original Bitcoin?

      Blockchain never promised anything related to economic viability or stability. Only that it would ensure a P2P network would remain practically safe from malicious transactions by utilizing a system that rewards verification.

      By that standard, every other crypto that people use happens to be a pretty successful blockchain use case.

      If you want something stable and not a straight cryptocurrency then I’m pretty XRP qualifies because it also handles fiat and other commodities.

      Otherwise, most DDBSs don’t use blockchain because they don’t need verification requirements relating to transactions and ownership. DHTs are way more common like IPFS.

      source
    • sloppy_diffuser@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      csa-iot.org/…/distributed-compliance-ledger/

      Matter Distributed Client Ledger. In use by Apple, Amazon, Google, Samsung, and many more.

      Contains all the attestation information for on boarding Matter devices. Where once it was Google Home vs Apple HomeKit vs Amazon Echo / Alexa, supporting devices can now work cross ecosystem.

      Since many of these companies are competitors working together. A distributed ledger makes sense to keep everyone honest and provide a level of tech supported governance.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Randomgal@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    There is nothing Crypto can do better than regular database. Immutability is not a desirable property.

    source

    • hglman@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      It can coordinate disjoint actors without a 3rd party.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • uis@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      “There is nothing math can do better than math.”

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Fisch@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Monero actually has very good uses. It does use POW but their algorithm is made to encourage using CPUs instead of GPUs and slower, power efficient devices, which makes it a lot less energy intensive than other POW cryptocurrencies.

    source
  • blackstampede@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I find the actual technology very interesting. At one point I wanted to create a distributed research journal, and I spent some time trying to develop a trustless, immutable ledger that didn’t have the high overhead that most blockchains have for proof of work. It was extremely cool, but nobody gives a shit unless it has coins lol

    I look forward to 20 years from now when it gets resurrected and used for interesting things that don’t involve cryptocurrency.

    source
  • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    This makes them perfect for ledgers or transaction networks.

    It doesn’t scale well, so it generally works best for ledgers of relatively small scale. Anything that might need to go beyond that small scale will run into technical/performance issues.

    source
  • reassure6869@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    the technology itself has its use cases.

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=15RTC22Z2xI I would love to hear the counterarguments. video is <15 mins, academic setting.

    source
• bruhduh@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Image

  source
• saigot@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Blockchain is a nebulous buzzword with a vague meaning. But I have yet to see a sensible definition of a blockchain that doesn’t include git.

  Git is pretty useful imo.

  source

  • ElCanut@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Well yes but can you pump and dump git commits ?

    source
  • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Blockchain is pretty well defined.

    Git doesn’t have update rules that are only valid if signed by a particular private key.

    source
  • kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Git might not count because you can have branches that then merge? But yeah, git is useful, it’s decentralized and distributed, it could be used P2P…

    source
  • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Who decides to commit changes though? A human. A human who can be corrupt.

    The best use case for blockchains in my opinion is elections. The dude who owns the election server won’t be able to manipulate results in any way.

    While manipulating results isn’t impossible in case of a blockchain, it is still very very difficult.

    source
• itsmect@monero.town ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I think it’s funny how most lemmy users are pro open source, pro privacy, pro digital rights; but once it comes to money all that is thrown out of the window and they happily get on their knees for paypal and the few other large players.

  Yes, the current state of crypto is a mess. People are attracted by the promise of the big payout, rather then seeking an alternative payment system, making them ripe for scammers that promise the world, but in the end only rug “investors”. Even “functional” cryptos are often highly centralized, making them as bad as banks in terms of reliability. Almost none implement any privacy features, and if they do, its typically a tacked on afterthought.

  But this does not make the original idea invalid. Will it ever live up to the promise of alternative money? Maybe. Maybe not. Only time will tell if the issues that exist right now will be fixed.

  source

  • csm10495@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    If making payments in crypto back to FIAT was free it would be more popular. For me it’s mostly useless since the fee to spend crypto is more than the (often free) fee for using my credit card.

    New needs to be better and cheaper to be picked up.

    source
  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Crypto is a liberterian capitalist’s wet dream.

    Tax-free, anonymous, with no accountability. Perfect for white washing corporate gain.

    Just because it is “open-source” doesn’t mean it will be used for good.

    source
  • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    This is what I learnt on Lemmy. Not all people who agree with your position have arrived there logically. (In my case, this position would be leftist ideals). People who you share the same values with are not exempt from being illogical.

    New tech leads to scammers pouncing on it to make a quick buck. However, just because scammers pounce on it doesn’t make the tech bad inherently.

    See Lemmy’s hate for AI for instance. The advancements in the field of machine learning are mind boggling. Lemmings unfortunately fail to disassociate the tech from the scammers who talk about this tech. It’s disappointing, but oh well… ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

    source
  • calcopiritus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Just because it’s open source doesn’t mean it’s good. Also not every situation is the same. Using Linux instead of windows has advantages/disadvantages very different than using crypto instead of fiat.

    I can think of thousands of reasons to pick Linux, thousands to pick windows and thousands to pick fiat. I’d have to think real hard to even think of a single reason to pick crypto over fiat.

    source
  • merc@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    but once it comes to money all that is thrown out of the window and they happily get on their knees for paypal and the few other large players.

    I don’t think anybody likes paypal, Visa, Mastercard or any of the other major players. It’s just that blockchain “currencies” are much, much worse.

    The idea of “Alternative Money” is a silly idea. Money has always been, and will always be connected to a state. The taxing and spending of the state is what gives money its value.

    With cryptocurrencies, the “value” is only “greater fool” value. Someone is willing to pay 70k in dollars for a bitcoin because they think someone else is going to be willing to buy it from them for $71k at some point in the future. If it were a legitimate currency people wouldn’t bother checking its value in dollars because it would be useful in its own right. The only legitimate demand for cryptocurrencies is to pay ransom, and even then, the people who get the ransom immediately transform it back to a useful “fiat” currency.

    Lemmy users are knowledgeable about open source, privacy, digital rights and knowledgeable enough to know that cryptocurrencies are a scam.

    source
  • turmacar@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Currency is a pretty sound idea, whether it will ever get (back?) to a usable place is it’s own discussion.

    A lot of the conversation about blockchain as a technology though involves the ones that store additional information as a distributed database, which comes with problems.

    It’s also ‘neat’, but they all depend on trusting the validation method for putting info into the database, which largely defeats the point of having a “trustless” database once the data is in there. There’s the occasional proposed use case that seems vaguely useful, but they mostly boil down to replacing legal contracts with a database that’s distributed “somewhere”.

    source
  • zergtoshi@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Fixing issues like energy consumption, confirmation time, fees?
    Just in case you haven’t heard of Nano, allow me to tell you it’s an attempt at creating a peer-to-peer digital currency with minimal energy consumption, 0 fees, 0 minimum account balance, very fast confirmation (ideally sub-second, sometimes a bit slower) and 0 supply inflation.
    It focuses on doing one thing and doing it well: transferring value efficiently, sustsinably and without middlemen.
    It’s around since 2015 and still kicking, getting better and better with each release, ironing kinks out.
    It might sound too good to be true, but it’s worth a look; make up your own mind.

    source
  • moon@lemmy.cafe ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Open source has nothing to do with it. All the things you’ve mentioned is made for the good of the people. Crypto is not. Crypto is for the rich to get richer and exploit the poor.

    Anonymous payments is not a good thing and throws any sort of fraud protection out the window. It’s just for libertarians trying to avoid taxes, and criminals trying to launder money. It’s not beneficial to hide from the government that you bought a extra fatty pizza.

    Also nothing about Crypto is grass roots whatsoever unlike what you listed before. Crypto took off because it was inorganically and heavily pushed by very rich people knowing they can make a large profit.

    Your instance is literally an archaic PoW token that causes a tremendous amount of harm to the environment and wastes energy so you can hide buying drugs. That’s not including the fact either that you have to go through exchanges who require identifying information to withdraw into non monopoly money.

    Centralization is not always bad, this is libertarian logic.

    source
• ace@lemmy.ananace.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I think the only project I’ve seen so far where I’ve felt that a blockchain has actually been the correct choice is Alfis, which is a decentralized DNS that uses the blockchain as the public append-only ledger that it is, and it uses proof-of-work to add arbitrary costs to updates - to make spamming or namesquatting expensive.

  source

  • sxan@midwest.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Amazon has a database project called QLDB that uses blockchain for its audit log.

    What do you call an audit log that’s cryptographically verifiable? A blockchain.

    source
  • ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    So why not do the same with a bank ledger?

    source
• menemen@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Man, I remember how back in 2009 we were hyped about this possible chance for a fairer world that a independent currency might bring. Guess we were quite wrong. :)

  source

  • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    The independent currency was still worth standard currency… So the ones already hoarding all of that existing make-believe-number money just bought up and schemed us out of new make-believe-number money.

    How did we not see this coming? :(

    source
  • HumanPenguin@lemmy.cafe ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Not gonna claim any foresight.

    But now in 2024. It dose seem rather insane to me. That no one predicted the energy problems of proof of work.

    We were well aware of the co2 cost of computing.

    source
• intensely_human@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Even if a particular coin has a finite number of possible coins, it exists in an unbounded universe of other coins.

  source
• daltotron@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I’ve read through this whole thread, and I still haven’t really come to any solid conclusions on it. I’m skeptical of crypto as a kind of idiotic speculative market, but that’s also every market ever. But then, the blockchain is apparently different from crypto, even though they’re both hype-laden marketing terms that have been completely fucked up. I think doing [redacted] with crypto is still potentially cool, though I think it still has limited anonymity, from what I’ve heard, and the speculative market also fucks it up.

  Is “the blockchain” just like some nerd shit that’s for internal hospital ledgers, and beyond that it’s all kind of moot garbage, or what? Someone spoonfeed me.

  source
• NoiseColor@startrek.website ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Haha crypto sux. So funny.

  source
• basxto@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  we need the blockchainsaw

  source
• Oderus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I’ll likely get downvoted but Polestar, the EV automaker that used to build performance variants for Volvo, uses blockchain to track minerals used in their EV’s.

  Circulor Circulor’s blockchain technology enables tracing of extracted raw materials, particularly those with significant impact to communities and the environment.

  I like that they use blockchain to ensure the minerals they use aren’t coming from negative sources but I’m sure someone will argue and say it’s stupid or that SQL can do the same.

  source
• BobGnarley@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  @itsmect mentioned this too but it is wild how this community just hates cryptpo. There’s a good chance the instance you’re on accepts it for donations. Why would they do that if it is so unusable and bad? Open source everything except the money. Makes no sense.

  source
• SwingingKoala@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  As a bitcoiner I couldn’t agree more, please don’t make another cryptocurrency.

  source
• oweka@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I’m kinda amazed I haven’t seen anyone mention the biggest upcoming use case for block chain here. In a world where anyone can create any media with Ai we are going to need robust systems of cryptographic proof of origin and history that anyone can access and that is not controlled by anyone who may wish to manipulate information. The exact strength of block chain.

  As for cryptocurrency I’m seeing a lot of confusion here in how people think it works. While scaling has been an issue its not an insolvable one and multiple solutions exist. The issue with crypto is its image not the tech in general. And thats a combination of people using it to scam and governments/banks doing their best to discredit it.

  source
• strahlemann@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  git is a blockchain, just without PoW

  source
• EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  “crypto currency is a scam and it’s bad for the environment!..now excuse me, I have stocks to buy!”

  source
• AVincentInSpace@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Ok but the Fossil version control system (which uses a mini-blockchain to store software version history) is pretty cool

  source
• ReallyKinda@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  People are always like “it doesn’t do anything we couldn’t do with SQL,” as if riding a horse isn’t an improvement in transportation over walking. Things don’t have to be impossible to accomplish in any other way in order to be marginally more useful or efficient depending on the goal. Public ledgers are indeed useful. Blockchain is one technology among a small handful that might be appropriate for your project depending on trust dynamics it demands. Consensus protocols are also useful.

  One example, right now our global food supply’s movement and distribution is based largely on market dynamics. Say we want to focus on distribution based on need instead. A blockchain based ledger could allow a fred to ‘commit’ a few bushels of carrots which george ‘commits’ to transporting to mike, who in turn has committed to do do a supply run to Uruguay with his barge. Could they have done this in excel? Probably. Would it be more organized on blockchain? Yes. Would a regular database with a lot of contributors that is carefully designed to keep out bad actors work too? Yes, sure.

  source
• spaphy@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Can someone tell me how decentralized money became the enemy? It is decentralized currency that is like everything we stand for literally using mastodon protocol here.

  it’s not the creators fault that the first thing the userbase did was centralize it onto these marketplaces lol. I’m reminding people that this is conceptually great but terrible implementation, across the board.

  source
• Rustmilian@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  You can use blockchain technology for a wide variety of things, just please more cryptocurrency and NFTs.

  source