Bitcoin Forum

Let's be honest. If anyone can really afford R&D in new technologies, it's IBM. Especially because they are already on a mission to implement blockchain in daily use. For example food industry with supply chain, advertising, finance trades. See for yourself: https://www.ibm.com/blockchain

But what actually this mean? Is IBM on a path to conquer the world of blockchain? Did they found the missing link to adoption BC to masses? Or are they still on a mission to find it?

Because since I first heard for blockchain, I've wondered what is the REAL usability of a new player in technology, so-called "blockchain".  Is it only good at being public, decentralized? For this case, I thought, OK, this may be good for finance (bitcoin), also elections, but what else?

Can blockchain technology really come ahead with a hybrid between public and private? I work in the Mechanical Industry sector and can clearly see what IBM is doing right now. And when companies will recognize the potential in it (savings, better, faster work, accuracy, less waste...) it will become huge. But in this case, we are talking about private blockchain that can still outperform traditional databases. So it means, it works.

Masses need to adapt technology to become global. But I think in this case those masses will be companies, later people. And companies don't like to share data with everyone, only with parties that are trustworthy. And this is how (hybrid) private blockchains can rise.

Since then IBM is involved in several blockchain projects. As far as I know, IBM is involved in Stellar coin development. Its  been exploring blockchain technology and in 2017 they launch a "Blockchain as a Service "  which is based on the open-source Hyperledger Fabric, version 1.0 .

I think it's very useful that the whole supply chain is on BC (from raw material to product). I doubt they will use the XLM platform. Maybe they will do their own BC.

IBM is one of the oldest players in the blockchain development iirc. And honestly, implementation of blockchain to our everyday transactions seem appealing yet underestimated by most. I for one don't know how important it is, but let us take note of how iBM has been a forerunner in this, and the recent announcement of China to concentrate in the development of Blockchain.

I remember IBM announcing a joint blockchain venture with walmart and many others in 2017.


Unfortunately, there doesn't appear to be anything done with blockchain by IBM over the last 2 years.

IBM has been in something like a decline. They sold their desktop/laptop PC manufacturing business to china, years back. It was rebranded and is known as Lenovo now. They may have opted to pursue blockchain projects in an effort to boost their stock price, which may have been common around that 2 year back timeframe, when many US stocks achieved significant price growth on the stock market simply by announcing blockchain projects which some of them had no real intent on following through on.

I think there is still some room for untapped potential in terms of blockchain utilization. IBM seems to have kind of given up on blockchain.

IBM has the power to Put funding into blockchain technology. But I doubt that it’s for mass adoption. They are there to improve the actual technology, but it’s just a second priority, in my opinion. I’m not part of IBM, but I think it’s reasonable to look at it that way.

I think it’s not just IBM who has the power or the capability to have R&D With regards to blockchain technology. All of the top 10 probably could have the ability to influence the market, like Microsoft and Google.

Why only IBM? If you talk about affordability, even Google can afford expensive R&Ds! Facebook can do that as well! There are other cash rich companies in the world who can do the same! I seriously do not remember anything great from IBM related to blockchain technology in all these years! Funding is not an issue to many companies, but the willingness to become the frontrunner in blockchain tech is certainly lacking, at a great scale!

Well, IBM was a forerunner. FB just started with their Libra, and I haven't heard any news about blockchain with google since the most I've heard of them was their quantum supremacy. And honestly, at the time blockchain started sprouting, I think it didn't bring out much in terms of allure for these companies to jump ahead and provide an R&D and funds for it. IBM was the only one whom started funding R&D to it and well, even if they did, it didn't actually result to much. Only when BTC popped off did most companies/countries took note of what Blockchain technology is.

Blockchain technology will be widespread eventually through various sources including decentralized cryptocurrency and through companies and governments. There will probably be other technologies that develop that may be even better as well.

Not quite so really. IBM has been doing things (as have many other large Consultancy firms and corporations) over these past few years. For example, Nestlé and Carrefour (supermarket chain) recently announced that they are implementing traceability of infant milk using IBM Food Trust. (See: https://beincrypto.com/nestle-is-putting-baby-formula-on-the-blockchain).

I took a look at IBM Food Trust recently (see https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/ibm-food-trust-trace-products for example) and there are some interesting things to it. Besides allowing for traceability of food, it also allows one to see alerts on inventory for perishable goods, trace the whereabouts of specific lots, and so forth. That is to say, the traceability is not only aimed at the end-consumer, but at the production and distribution layers.

Now the key question here is deciphering whether blockchain is really necessary, or whether it is just some fancy nice to have, with a publicity edge to it (trendy, alleged transparency with end-consumers, etc.). The software implementation for traceability here could just as well have been implemented on conventional software (tailored ERP for example).

So where is the added value and need? (this is the dual core question to ask for any blockchain implementation).

You could argue here that the value is in the inherent principal of blockchain: being transparent over system that provides trust in essence through the inmutability and traceability of the data. That, taken on to the traceability of the food industry is a potential value from a corporate point of view, and, if properly exploited, can position a brand as both trendy and transparent. It’s at least exploitable marketing-wise (whether it comes along with a desired ROI is to be seen on a case by case basis).

Not what I expect for the company IBM. I see their organization to lead that time and do great projects that could potentially help (although they did, but again not what I expected it to be) I can't really say that they have lost along the way after the competition had surfaced, I haven't heard from them after unveiling of their Blockchain as a service, open source hyperledger fabric v1.0. This is not what I expect for IBM to be, or did I just over expected for one of the most influential technology company?

Good point of view in asking "is blockchain necessary?". If you'll buy a candy for a penny would you unlock your phone, open an application and scan qr to pay? rather than getting a penny out on your wallet? Some companies are doing things on blockchain with much significant and correct approach. It isn't just for fancy, to look more techie, to look more advance thing, value and necessity must be fulfilled.

As IBM is a technology depended company it giving importance to blockchain and other advancement isn't a big thing. Always they'll be keeping their business alive and active with the booming technology. Also I confirmed its presence in blockchain technology through a friend of mine working for IBM. On a regular conversation had to discuss about weekly classes cum training sessions conducted on IBM. It was completely about blockchain technology.

There's really more to it in our world then saying that "supply chain" is something that can change our world for the good, this is just a blockchain technology from a single company that will just improve efficiency and transparency we don't even know yet how they will apply this to the masses yet so we can't quickly assume if everyone can benefit from this at all. The way I see it just like what other companies do it is they will just roll it out on a small group and see how things will benefit from it and since we are talking about supply chain we are talking about companies who will use it so it's not really directed to the consumer stand point but for the company's efficiency when they apply this, there is no direct benefit to us.

IBM is a lover sound technology, they are always interested in innovation technology which is the reason why they have their doors opened for any partnership from small and big outstanding enterprise. So, I won't be surprised if they bring blockchain with the inclusion of crypto to the masses since they have already create an equipment for the blockchain and cryptosphere

They are flipping huge! IBM is one of the only companies that is actively trying to push blockchain technology, and they've been very successful with this sort of stuff, trying to adopt this new technology with everything.

IBM is trying to push blockchain technology into a lot of random industries, they are trying to even involve the technology into the food industry, trying to use it for successful tracking of food, etc.

Pretty interesting stuff.

There are a few projects, in insurance, the food industry, payments transfers, etc. The thing is that IBM 'promote' its blockchain as BaaS or via partnerships, and it has many.

Just 6 months ago, Nestlé and a supermarket brand deployed IBM's blockchain for traceability in my country. We can scan a QR code and get the information (what we call here the transaction details). But we have no way of checking (cryptographically speaking) if the information is accurate. We have to trust them and they're just showing us some information on a web page. It's not really more advantageous than a database (I'm talking at the citizen level)

I tried once and to be honest, a waste of time. Ok it tells me my potatoes are grown in the north, okay, but it was already written at the supermarket when I bought them.  ::)

They had the huge advantage on the side of crypto, and gladly as they're involvement with Stellar coin development; of course more upcoming updates will be more focused. Being out of date of the technology isn't possible, since IBM is widely known and popular on computer generation. Blockchain technology is generally their expertise in terms of more new discoveries that's going to be revealed in the near future.

That's good news for the community, but IBM is also developing quantum computers, so blockchain will be the object of their first test to prove the power of quantum computers :)

IBM stock price still in decline since early-mid 2013. This situation should give us some context about its performance. Speaking about permissioned DLT, I don't see how it can be appealing to the public. Bitcoin, the first blockchain, was designed to be public and permissionless. It's difficult to imagine if the next-gen DLT would be private/permissioned.

Except, of course, if the only way to increase DLT's capacity is to make it private/permissioned.

Even they could bring it into the public, it's not gonna have that significant impact on Bitcoin's price. Manipulators could however take advantage of such news but it would be only a simple short pump that would reverse immediately.

By saying hybrid you mean by having different systems for different access control preferences. Such as when data is private to small group of companies, they would make use of centralized rather than decentralized blockchain.

I think there is little significance on some IBM projects that uses blockchain technology when all the while they had been providing excellent solutions similar to those projects even  without the need to implement this emerging technology!

Thus I think its a little bit redundant and unnecessary that I agree with your opinion that IBM is just riding this blockchain tech trend but in reality, some of its blockchain projects are just developed aesthetically and maybe to give the impression that they are also at the forefront of providing solutions through blockchain technology and assert its position as one of the top solutions provider. Imho.

Indeed, blockchain technology is new and we know there is an opportunity. Big tech companies are  "racing" to develop a systems that will have significant uses. To be a pioneer in the industry is something that can be proud of and becoming a leader in it.IBM is partnering already with other companies for the adoption and application of its blockchain technology.

IBM rolled out a basic blockchain based ledger system in 2017. That was back when many private sector companies like kodak and atari announced vague sounding blockchain proposals in an effort to boost their stock price. Since then, IBM hasn't done anything new or innovative with blockchain technology even though it is very easy to envision other roles under which blockchain can be utilized.

You've used "transparency" and "traceability" to describe advantages blockchains have when utilized as ledgers. There's another key aspect where blockchains offer advantages as well. Namely "maintaining data integrity". This lies at the foundation of the "traceability" aspect you mentioned.

Questions have been raised about voting machines since day 1. One obvious and potential future use of blockchains is being incorporated inside of a voting machine system, to ensure legitimacy of votes. And create something like a "paper trail". There are many other projects a large corporation like IBM could easily pursue if they were truly inclined to develop blockchain technology further. That's simply not something we've seen much of since 2017 when many US corporations were announcing vague blockchain proposals in efforts to artificially inflate their market value.

Its not going to be a surprise for me that IBM is developing something because its important that they make the announcement whether they are really developing or not the reason is that technology companies are known to place themselves in the future even though they might start copying each other depending on the first that launch so they make the announcement so that they can hide under that as a way of developing while while waiting for others to make headway considering that they might looking at the cost and other factors. I have also read about SAP developing something related to blockchain without leaving out Microsoft and other companies. Blockchain would be massive eventually which would then spread to crypto currency.

I think it's pretty much nailed on they'll use their own blockchain with their own token.

They don't seem to be interested in the tech for moving money, but instead for storing data in a way that cannot be tampered with unless someone reverses all the blocks.

That was the last thing I heard from the IBM, their first version hyperledger fabric. Not until this year, Nestle announced their partnership with IBM in blockchain based food category, sad part is that it is still on pilot program for determining success however it shows good results. IBM could've enter in some blockchain application which is way near from their expertise that could lead to more innovative products. What happened to IBM?   ???
 
I don't know why there are no projects regarding this one, something's fishy on this side. IBM is extremely great technology company and has the power to conquer the technology world if they really want especially with the help of blockchain. Google already announced their latest ace and is yet to come, how about the IBM? what you guys think?

IBM seem to have adopted blockchain already. A lot will adopt blockchain to their systems including these grocery stores and probably even the small companies we know today but the cryptocurrencies will not benefit from all these adoptions unless there will be crypto payments involve.  Just like the Chinese government, they only are interested to blockchain but not the currencies.

Private blockchains of course are just for the record of the companies, its theirs alone we have nothing to do about it. The adoption of cryptocurrency will still be slow compare to the technology behind it.

I may be wrong but there is a strong impression from the latest news that IBM was more concerned with merging with Red Hat and promoting MacBooks among its employees than promoting blockchain technology to the masses ;) When the topic was fashionable then any company shouting about their developments in this area, but now other topics for their own advertising.

Probably bringing blockchain to large companies. Blockchain if implemented by major companies it will not be felt by ordinary people but for companies using the technology it could bring changes in terms of their operations.

Talking about private companies means talking about profits or margins. IBM saw and action to get a big cake in the blockchain technology market. IBM's market is a corporate, especially a Fast Moving Consumer Goods company, a product that has a fast turnover, and a relatively low cost. FMCG products have a relatively short shelf life due to their perishable nature. The nature of FMCG is Frequent and repeat purchases & low prices, huge volumes, low contribution margins, extensive distribution networks, and very high inventory turnover.

Throwing blockchain products to the market, of course, IBM class companies do a series of modifications or adjustments according to the dynamics of consumer needs.

Although based on permissioned and centralized peer to peer blockchain technology, IBM as the organizer of the system can choose what information can be shared with partners. Because it uses a business network that is closed (closed network), licensed and confidential. Only those who are given permission can access, process and view data according to the portion of their respective involvement. "Not all business network members can see all transactions that occur in the blockchain system.

this may be absolutely true for the future since this ledger can save transactions automatically very quickly and I really appreciate blockchain technology. In most developed countries, blockchain technology is being applied to production services as well as agency transactions. A number of Coca Cola agents did this and surprisingly their productivity increased by over 55% and saved significant labor costs. In the future, as blockchain technology becomes more familiar and easier to operate, it becomes even more popular.

Blockchain is the tool that can improve existing systems to amazing extents. This technology not only provides decentralization but improves security, transparency, productivity and immutability too. All the corrupted systems can be replaced by blockchain systems. It is actually remedy to existing problems. Big companies are already deploying it to save costs and increase work rate.

You are saying about it like current systems are full of spies, hacks, problems, inefficiency.
But I think it is more correct to compare current systems vs blockchain as HDD and SSD.
Second one is better, faster etc. but you still can work with first one.

To be honest we are too late to understand the uses of blockchain technology because blockchain was invented in the 1990s but only in 2009 we used to for cryptocurrency.But blockchain is not limited to any technology or industry it can be used anywhere when we want to store data and access them much faster than a common database. Its good that IBM involved in the adoption but still many government sectors are not aware of this technology so they need to realize its significance if we want mass adoption of blockchain.

Not only that the companies mainly the mobile companies are trying to integrate blockchain , like an integrated mobile wallet that it would already be in the mobile when you buy the new set and I think this is also a way that they are planning to bring the blockchain in the market regarding cryptocurrencies because blockchain is not cryptocurrencies it's everything , from hospitals to .. your school it's starting to get used everywhere day by day it's like a software way ahead of time.

IBM is a great company and has certainly done a great deal for the development of information technology and new technologies.
But it is also a heavy and slow bandwagon, so you can hardly expect innovation and creativity in any sector.
Anyway, we'll see.

I am sure that IBM will not get into the blockchain technology without looking first of the possible market. And just because IBM is not really noisy about the many developments taking place on their business and platform does not mean that IBM has already been on the decline and has given up the whole thing) as what some are insinuating here). We should be thankful that there is a big and well-known brand taking up the blockchain technology seriously so that other companies or organizations can easily venture into the many possibilities of this technology. Maybe we should be demanding that IBM should be updating the things happening with the platform and the many companies already adopting the "Blockchain as a Service" they are offering.

I need to say, it's an interesting discussion.
I absolutely agree about IBM being a slow heavy bandwagon, but we are still talking about the first "baby" steps. Companies are still pivoting and trying to find a solid grip, because customers are ones who will pay after all. And yes, blockchain exists for years now, but the same goes with the story of the laser. It needs to become mature.
Mass adoption can appear in many ways but imho it is crucial that big players show their belief in the blockchain. And right now, it seems like they start to care about it.

This is exactly what I mean, Blockchain is not the first option. Recently, I encountered many articles about Blockchain and quantum technology. Google has developed the first quantum computer successfully with unprecedented power, this raises the question of whether iBM or Blockchain still has a foothold? With quantum technology, it can solve everything quickly, if compared in speed, blockchain really cannot compete.

Does one has to replace the other? I am talking about blockchain and quantum computers. Can we not possibly utilize the blockchain technology on top of quantum computers?

I don't have any issue with blockchain for as long as it sticks to being a public ledger. There are apparently blockchain that are private, the ones that are used by some companies, for example. That would defeat the transparency idea that is supposed to be promoted alongside blockchain.

IBM is really doing a lot for blockchain adoption for already several years. This is really good for technology

It's no wonder that IBM is developing cryptocurrencies. IBM is among the top numbers whose companies are introducing blockchain to the masses.