| ▲ | throw0101d 6 days ago | |
NIST's Blockchain Overview, IR 8202, document often comes top of mind when "blockchain" is mentioned: * https://www.nist.gov/blockchain Specifically the yes/no flowchart on whether "you may have a useful blockchain use case" (Figure 6 - DHS Science & Technology Directorate Flowchart): * https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Projects/enhanced-distribut... | ||
| ▲ | dperfect 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | |
Exactly. The only way for this to deliver on its goals would be for it to not be public or permissionless. And if that's the case, then it should really just be a database and/or a shared protocol between financial institutions. Once it's truly "open", you can't have any sensitive identifiers in there, so you need another protocol/system for correlating opaque identifiers with real-world entities (thus defeating the purpose). And if financial institutions are involved, they'll want the ability to do what they do now: rewrite history whenever they feel the need (or are compelled by governments). Another strike against using blockchain. | ||
| ▲ | Lerc 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
That flow chart seems pretty reasonable to me. The big one is "Are the entities with write access having a difficult time deciding who should be in charge of the data store" The vast majority of pointless blockchaining come from organisations that have already decided that they are going to be in charge. Which is just great for them, but it doesn't induce others to join them. I wonder how much of promoting blockchains is to project the illusion of relinquishing a degree of control. I guess all the ones doing it just because others were doing it are looking at AI now. | ||
| ▲ | wiredpancake 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Oh wow, the flowchart made by the Government. The government has a registered interest in preventing blockchains for anonymization and decentralization. Who would of thought? | ||
