[Discussion] Is Blockchain necessary for our future?

[0xMiracle]

Have get in touched with Blockchain since 2020. Personally speaking, I believe that it's splendid and will help us reshape the world.

However, recently I started thinking one question: how can Blockchain show its necessity in the current world besides the "decentralized" concept? For example, in the current internet world, people had get used to centralized storage and cloud services, there seems no need to pay extra money and attention to develop another technology that can help them to do the same thing (Such as Filecoin, Arware and Swarm). The same situation occurs in various areas such as data transfer and information security.

Will blockchain become as a pseudo-demand for the future world? What's your opinion on the irreplaceability of Blockchain besides the concept and financial side it brings to the world?

Please feel free to share your opinions

[1714513710]

1714513710

[1714513710]

1714513710

[1714513710]

1714513710

[cryptoaddictchie]

Will blockchain become as a pseudo-demand for the future world? What's your opinion on the irreplaceability of Blockchain besides the concept and financial side it brings to the world?

Please feel free to share your opinions

I believe the answer to that question is a big Yes. Blockchain innovation will reshare the world and improve future methods and processes for financial system. Knowing how digital advance so far in our modern era, plenty of big fish or firms will inject funds to more upcoming development and projects.

In my opinion, the world as we know it will surely get to the stage where adoption to bitcoin and blockchain projects are imminent.

[mk4]

Sometimes "blockchain" is a bit too glorified. It's pretty much just an append-only database. It's just that Satoshi found a really clever way of taking advantage of such database, and created Bitcoin.

And sure, you can use blockchains for other things. But the question is — is it actually necessary? I don't think blockchains should be used for almost everything. Sometimes(or most of the time), it seems quite unnecessary. And while I think there might be other good uses of a blockchain besides Bitcoin, I'm yet to be impressed.

[Lafu]

And sure, you can use blockchains for other things. But the question is — is it actually necessary?

I guess it depends really for what you will be use it for , as for a financial side its good as nobody can after a transaction is done can change this !
For Companies like Exchanges this would be something if they run there whole system and platform on a chain , if something happend you can look into the chain what was happend.
But as already written before its not needed for everything.

[Davidvictorson]

Will blockchain become as a pseudo-demand for the future world? What's your opinion on the irreplaceability of Blockchain besides the concept and financial side it brings to the world?

Aside from the financial side, I believe blockchain technology has a future in the healthcare sector. A Blockchain- health record technology would proffer solution to the accessibility of patient data.

With blockchain technology, the reliability of patients health records would not be questioned. As a result, better quality care for patients.

Although the adoption of Blockchain technology in the healthcare sector is still slow because of the several institutional, technical and regulatory barrier, I'm  confident that  in no time it will be accepted.

[joniboini]

Aside from the financial side, I believe blockchain technology has a future in the healthcare sector. A Blockchain- health record technology would proffer solution to the accessibility of patient data.

I've been hearing about this at least a hundred times since 2017. Which product actually tackles this solution? IMO can't companies developed a private network where one or two of the participant represent the users in this case? A health record is not a matter of security, but privacy too. Using public blockchain would be a disaster if somehow the decryption key was leaked. I don't think blockchain is really necessary for this sector. Just use a more efficient database, or if you still want to call it a blockchain, maybe a private blockchain would be better.

[mk4]

Exactly, decentralized service/protocol already exist far before Blockchain exist. For example, to share data you also could use BitTorrent or IPFS.

Yeap. And oh, I almost forgot: not. every. project. is. going. to. need. a. freakin. token. BitTorrent(the earlier iteration without Justin Sun) is a very good example of adoption without a token.

[stompix]

For example, in the current internet world, people had get used to centralized storage and cloud services, there seems no need to pay extra money and attention to develop another technology that can help them to do the same thing (Such as Filecoin, Arware and Swarm).

And why do you think they resort to centralized services?
Because nobody wants to tie their business to a token price that can fluctuate any day!

You don't need a token to have a decentralized distributed database, if you want one there is Cassandra.
Open source, decentralize, used by thousands of from Apple to Netflix to CERN, no coins, mining, no Defi or staking no nothing! But you still have the distribution, you still have nodes, everything else. Businesses want something reliable, that has clear costs, that isn't influenced by some Chinese farm adding 1000 servers and driving the price down or up as they mine more coins, not by a hacker getting his hands on 1/10 of the total supply and dumping them on the market.

Aside from the financial side, I believe blockchain technology has a future in the healthcare sector. A Blockchain- health record technology would proffer solution to the accessibility of patient data.
With blockchain technology, the reliability of patients health records would not be questioned.

Why do you think that?
The medical records will still be kept by doctors and only doctors would be allowed to enter data there.
Just as how now a doctor can enter whatever he wants in medical records, just how somebody can hack his identity, it will be the same with a blockchain, it's not that if anyone has a copy it can vouch for the data contained in it, the only thing is that it would guarantee the copy is not altered by a 3rd party, anything more.

Yeap. And oh, I almost forgot: not. every. project. is. going. to. need. a. freakin. token. BitTorrent(the earlier iteration without Justin Sun) is a very good example of adoption without a token.

Let's push this one step further, not every blockchain project needs a freakin token!

[mu_enrico]

"Blockchain" as in the holistic system of Bitcoin is interesting and seems useful, but is it necessary? Well, yes, if people can use the immutable ledger to its maximum potential. At the moment I don't see interesting apps utilizing the database/ledger. I only see the tokens (cryptocurrencies) which are only a part of the blockchain. If you count "centralized blockchain" however, many apps utilizing the smart contract for various cool stuffs, but if it's centralized why don't just run it over AWS?

Or maybe the ledger/database is just to "support" the token, thus it's not important. It meant to be left alone, not to build any apps on top of it.

[kxwhalexk]

We can simply attach the blockchain to other areas to see where the blockchain can be applied.

1. Blockchain + money = real money, there is nothing for nothing   Defi？

2. Blockchain + number =real number, no piracy infringement

3. Blockchain + things = real things, no fake or inferior  NFT?

4. Blockchain + people =real people, no fraud 

5. Blockchain + power = real power, no corruption  DAO?

[zanezane]

We can simply attach the blockchain to other areas to see where the blockchain can be applied.

1. Blockchain + money = real money, there is nothing for nothing   Defi？

2. Blockchain + number =real number, no piracy infringement

3. Blockchain + things = real things, no fake or inferior  NFT?

4. Blockchain + people =real people, no fraud 

5. Blockchain + power = real power, no corruption  DAO?

The problem with blockchain though is that it's not completely transparent since it's still should protect the privacy of the users but you are right though, it is a good and versatile technology that has a lot of uses.

[pooya87]

how can Blockchain show its necessity in the current world besides the "decentralized" concept?

You are a bit confused about "blockchain", it is simply a chain of blocks. It has nothing to do with decentralization! There are also both centralized and decentralized blockchains and everything in between. For example bitcoin blockchain is a decentralized database while a coin like Ripple has a semi centralized one and the coin that Facebook was once trying to build was completely centralized.

Will blockchain become as a pseudo-demand for the future world? What's your opinion on the irreplaceability of Blockchain besides the concept and financial side it brings to the world?

It depends on how it is utilized. For example for "file storage" as you suggested earlier or for centralized cryptocurrencies the blockchain is the worst choice because it is the least efficient and most expensive database that could be used.
For example if you want decentralized file storage and file sharing there is already a superior solution called Torrent for it. Or for centralized currency there are far more superior solutions called banking system or any of the centralized payment processors.

The only time "blockchain" is superior is when it is used by a truly decentralized cryptocurrency like bitcoin. In which case you don't say "blockchain" is necessary, it is the whole bitcoin protocol that makes it good.

[hatshepsut93]

Blockchain doesn't really solve many problems, it was just a massive hype that started with ICO craze, and then traditional companies jumped on it, because it allowed them to boost their stock by claiming they work on blockchain, and now it transformed into DeFi and NFT, but it's still all the same - unrealistic solutions for made-up problems.

Software engineers have been dealing with data integrity and database permissions for decades, it has never been a big problem to anyone, but blockchain people proclaimed themselves saviors even though no one needed their saving. Blockchain doesn't really offer good security or higher efficiency or scalability, so no one is actually going to use for medical records or supply chains. They have zero reasons to turn their servers into inefficient and redundant p2p networks.

[sapnu]

Have get in touched with Blockchain since 2020. Personally speaking, I believe that it's splendid and will help us reshape the world.

However, recently I started thinking one question: how can Blockchain show its necessity in the current world besides the "decentralized" concept? For example, in the current internet world, people had get used to centralized storage and cloud services, there seems no need to pay extra money and attention to develop another technology that can help them to do the same thing (Such as Filecoin, Arware and Swarm). The same situation occurs in various areas such as data transfer and information security.

Will blockchain become as a pseudo-demand for the future world? What's your opinion on the irreplaceability of Blockchain besides the concept and financial side it brings to the world?

Please feel free to share your opinions

Blockchain technology offers new solutions and ways on how the world can keep on surviving as well as improving. Just by having bitcoin under the blockchain technology and seeing it become successful over the years regardless of the doubts and discrimination it went through, we can already say how effective blockchain would be in the future. It is not necessarily needed but it will play a vital role on enhancing the recording system of data in different aspects all over the world. The world is advancing due to the continuous innovation of technology so stuffs like blockchain is a must if we want the world to move forward into evolution.

[Welsh]

Blockchain doesn't really solve many problems, it was just a massive hype that started with ICO craze

Depends on the way its implemented. Bitcoin has exposed the Blockchain concept to more people, so more people are now asking the question why isn't x transparent, and in a decentralized manner. The Blockchain is a fantastic piece of technology, regardless if it was the first or not. The Blockchain I think could play a big part in things that the public should be allowed to see, without actually having a centralized authority controlling or manipulating it. I can think of a few things off the top of my head like voting, government spending, and potentially even some implementation in the healthcare sector.

I don't think its over hyped, I think its mainly misunderstood which has actually been demonstrated in this very thread. There are clear benefits to the Blockchain when it comes to transparency, and I think transparency is something that everyone wants, especially when it comes to government spending or sensitive topics which could be subject to corruption.

However, the Blockchain in its current implementation isn't suitable. There are still some issues when trying to implement them with the above mentioned use cases. However, I definitely think its possible.

I mean, universities are now incorporating Blockchain modules within their curriculum as it is a pretty damn good concept, and especially for teaching purposes. Bitcoin has proved that it works, and its one of the bigger draws to Bitcoin.

[TheNineClub]

It really depends on what time frame we are looking at. The immediate future? Absolutely! It's helping us right now in many ways. In the far future? I wouldn't take anything in the modern world to have a long-lasting expiry date. This will probably be a stepping stone to some other technologies that will be better suited for the time they are developed in.

[pugman]

Sometimes "blockchain" is a bit too glorified. It's pretty much just an append-only database. It's just that Satoshi found a really clever way of taking advantage of such database, and created Bitcoin.

And sure, you can use blockchains for other things. But the question is — is it actually necessary? I don't think blockchains should be used for almost everything. Sometimes(or most of the time), it seems quite unnecessary. And while I think there might be other good uses of a blockchain besides Bitcoin, I'm yet to be impressed.

I am on this take, pretty much. Most people just think the word blockchain is so fancy and add in their dumbass LinkedIn bio #BlOcKcHaiNENthuSiasT and don't know a goddamn thing about it.

And besides, if you ask me, the way people have used blockchain until now has just horribly done(except for a few cases), but mostly its just cut copy paste of the same thing over and over again.

Blockchain ain't a solution to everything, but I really wanna see the idea of blockchain being used creatively like how satoshi once did. No one does that shit anymore :/. Mfs go to stackoverflow and github and copy paste the same shit and there ya goo. fuckin buncha donerdicks.

[hatshepsut93]

I don't think its over hyped, I think its mainly misunderstood which has actually been demonstrated in this very thread. There are clear benefits to the Blockchain when it comes to transparency, and I think transparency is something that everyone wants, especially when it comes to government spending or sensitive topics which could be subject to corruption.

You don't need blockchain to have transparency, simple public reporting and maybe a bit of cryptography is enough. Corruption happens when the government is unwilling to fight it, in that case transparency doesn't help, because even when everyone knows exactly who and how much is stealing, no one gets punished.

[mk4]

You don't need blockchain to have transparency, simple public reporting and maybe a bit of cryptography is enough. Corruption happens when the government is unwilling to fight it, in that case transparency doesn't help, because even when everyone knows exactly who and how much is stealing, no one gets punished.

While I'm still going to stand for my previous statement in this thread, I think you actually need blockchain(unless there's a different solution I'm not aware of) to have true transparency. Yes, public reporting could happen, but how to we know if they're faking it to some extent? Whereas with blockchain, we can make the verifications ourselves.

[ABCbits]

You don't need blockchain to have transparency, simple public reporting and maybe a bit of cryptography is enough. Corruption happens when the government is unwilling to fight it, in that case transparency doesn't help, because even when everyone knows exactly who and how much is stealing, no one gets punished.

While I'm still going to stand for my previous statement in this thread, I think you actually need blockchain(unless there's a different solution I'm not aware of) to have true transparency. Yes, public reporting could happen, but how to we know if they're faking it to some extent? Whereas with blockchain, we can make the verifications ourselves.

In this case, blockchain only useful to keep history about adding, modify or remove the data. However, blockchain has "The Oracle Problem" where there's no way to verify external event within blockchain. For example, blockchain can't verify group of people who receive help actually exist.

[Welsh]

You don't need blockchain to have transparency, simple public reporting and maybe a bit of cryptography is enough. Corruption happens when the government is unwilling to fight it, in that case transparency doesn't help, because even when everyone knows exactly who and how much is stealing, no one gets punished.

Public reporting is easily manipulated, if we could implement something along with the Blockchain which can't be manipulated as easy, it would be the better solution. You don't absolutely require the Blockchain, but the Blockchain is a way of trying to prevent corruption. The government, and any other organization for that matter will always have a few bad eggs, so while public reporting sounds good, it doesn't necessarily mean it will be carried out by everyone. If every action of government representatives was automatically recorded to the Blockchain, there would be less corruption.

However, there are major issues before we can implement this. I don't exactly know how it could be implemented, but something like the Blockchain is definitely helpful in a situation like this. The issue is, preventing manipulation or corruption before it enters the Blockchain.

[Pmalek]

And sure, you can use blockchains for other things. But the question is — is it actually necessary? I don't think blockchains should be used for almost everything.

That is one of the reasons that many startups/ICOs (call them whatever you want) fail. They don't need a blockchain for their use case at all. The developers only make one to earn money from it. I remember reading about an ICO that wanted to build movie theatres and you would have to buy tickets with their tokens. Why would I want to go through that hassle if we already have other cryptos that can be used for the same thing or we can just stick to fiat!?

And while I think there might be other good uses of a blockchain besides Bitcoin, I'm yet to be impressed.

A decentralized and open-source voting system seems like a good use case. Blockchains are used in the shipping industry to show the movement and origins of goods. A database that can show you where each component of your item came from. I think Walmart tracks the shipment of pork through an IBM-developed blockchain.   

[hatshepsut93]

You don't need blockchain to have transparency, simple public reporting and maybe a bit of cryptography is enough. Corruption happens when the government is unwilling to fight it, in that case transparency doesn't help, because even when everyone knows exactly who and how much is stealing, no one gets punished.

While I'm still going to stand for my previous statement in this thread, I think you actually need blockchain(unless there's a different solution I'm not aware of) to have true transparency. Yes, public reporting could happen, but how to we know if they're faking it to some extent? Whereas with blockchain, we can make the verifications ourselves.

The most popular for of corruption is when government officials buy something for higher than market price and split the difference with the seller. And they do it even under full transparency, they just say that the price is justified and that's it, they never get prosecuted, because law enforcement and courts can be bribed. I live in a country with high corruption, and detecting corruption was never a problem, as long as journalists aren't being thrown to jail for doing their work, corruption will be uncovered, but what's next?

And blockchain works best when it has a decentralized network of nodes and no trusted input, which is not what most non-crypto blockchains offer. Especially not the blockchains for government.

[stompix]

While I'm still going to stand for my previous statement in this thread, I think you actually need blockchain(unless there's a different solution I'm not aware of) to have true transparency. Yes, public reporting could happen, but how to we know if they're faking it to some extent? Whereas with blockchain, we can make the verifications ourselves.

And what verifications can you make other than what the government is telling you in public reporting?
It's them who are going to insert all that data, it's them who are going to make all the transactions, it's not like they magically take one hundred billion and stash them into their accounts directly and you'll be able to trace that with the blockchain. If they are faking reports they can easily fake transactions in a chain too, it's the same, some numbers are written in an accounting book, no matter what form this might take.

Besides, the strong point of the blockchain is not transparency is the immutability, and that can be easily achieved with any distributed database. You can see that the only real-life usages of blockchain technology that have actually been implemented are aimed at private companies internal settlements, no transparency, no public, no tokens.

[mk4]

And what verifications can you make other than what the government is telling you in public reporting?
It's them who are going to insert all that data, it's them who are going to make all the transactions, it's not like they magically take one hundred billion and stash them into their accounts directly and you'll be able to trace that with the blockchain. If they are faking reports they can easily fake transactions in a chain too, it's the same, some numbers are written in an accounting book, no matter what form this might take.

Besides, the strong point of the blockchain is not transparency is the immutability, and that can be easily achieved with any distributed database. You can see that the only real-life usages of blockchain technology that have actually been implemented are aimed at private companies internal settlements, no transparency, no public, no tokens.

Of course it wouldn't be feasible for literally everything. I think it's just more of the case of finding which ones, and I just think that it's just probable that there's at least one or a few use-cases out there that are bound to be realized.

[ashleyknight]

I guess YES because it provides ways that you might have not thought of otherwise. With the popularity of Quantum computer security, in classical systems, it is still questionable but I am sure that there will be a way out.

[clorasteinberg]

Maybe. Blockchain has been attracting the interests of various people and helping in secure transactions so maybe it can be the future.