Find it here:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2018/06/01/ibm-will-beat-bitcoin/#4a1bb443696cInteresting article, but not in a good way. First, author Panos Mourdoukoutas starts off with the usual blockchain-without-bitcoin mantra, ignoring the fact (as so many others have) that the whole point of blockchain technology is that it provides for *immutable* data registration. As has been countered since this pseudo-argument first emerged, if you don't have immutability, then in many if not most cases you might as well just use a conventional database and indeed a conventional database could be better. But the author also seems to have missed the point of the person he interviewed, David Drake, Founder and Chairman at LDJ Capital, who observed (no doubt correctly) that ". . . most initial coin offerings are centralized businesses using a decentralized solution [and] IBM falls in the same category and certainly has a real business operations that is far more efficient than 90% of the current cryptocurrencies that don't have an operational revenue history like IBM.” In other words, IBM can beat most post-Ethereum ICOs and, as he said, "Ether and Bitcoin are decentralized solutions without companies running them."
So no, IBM won't beat Bitcoin. It will beat many non-immutable blockchain "solutions" with its own non-immutable blockchain "solution" -- a solution, that is, to the problem of would-be competitive non-immutable blockchains. It will then use either (or both) the Bitcoin and Ether blockchains to register their own hashes of their own transactions and label them as such as a kind of legal public notice.
In other words, all blockchains lead to immutability. And probably, soon enough, all databases too. After all -- why not?
