do you guys think big tech is losing sleep over blockchain?

[lewdicrous]

6 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

autonomous driving and transportation organization: https://dav.network/

decentralized cloud computing company: https://iex.ec/

IoT Companies (with an s) working with Blockchain: https://builtin.com/blockchain/blockchain-iot-examples

And, according to you, these are making "big tech" lose sleep?

[Blue4130]

26 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

guys, these things arent hypotheses, these are real projects that have actual developers. you can look them up. the fact that a tech forum does not have a blockchain section THIS LATE into the industries maturity is concerning.

The fact that most tech forums don't have a blockchain section this late should tell you something. Maybe that blockchain is not the great messiah like you claim it to be. 

[zombiepixel]

fuck it. i give up. 

[lewdicrous]

This is kind of like CRISPR in that it's been overhyped to hell and back.

This is a tool that can be used, not the tool for every job. It's not the be-all and end-all for tech as we know it, like CRISPR, it can be used in some instances, but you're better off using something else in other instances where it wouldn't perform as well or won't be viable at all.

[mr moose]

11 hours ago, Eigenvektor said:

Isn't the same true for the blockchain as well? You don't need a copy of everything to detect manipulation, git commit hash codes are enough. You can't modify a commit without changing its hash and the hashes of all subsequent commits. You still need a copy if you want to know how stuff was altered. How does the blockchain solve this?

What form of security does a centralized copy of a blockchain add to the game here that a central git repository doesn't already have?

Why would the information be freely accessible simply because it is stored in a blockchain? If you require a FOI request right now to access an archive, why would that requirement be dropped simply because the information is stored in a different format? What is preventing governments from hosting all of their records online right now?

 

And it doesn't really alleviate my initial concern: How do you know the initial record that was archived is the actual truth?

Storing stuff in a blockchain doesn't remove the bureaucratic hoops unless it is decentralized to begin with. If there's a single source of the truth (i.e. central archive) there's nothing preventing a government from requiring the same hoops as they do now.

Sorry, i think the mistake I made was assuming people would treat an idea as just an idea for thinking about.  It was not meant to be a completely reasoned out policy for as is implementation that requires in depth debate.

 

 

[Blue4130]

40 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

fuck it. i give up. 

Maybe you can answer this. I've asked variations of this question to other blockchain pushers and no one can give me a real answer.

Example. I rent a 4 core 128gb ram server from a cloud provider to do some compute. It resides in a companies central server warehouse. In comes Blockchain Bob saying "Hey! You should run that decentralized on the blockchain, it's more secure and better in every way"

 

Ok fine, say I believe him. Where are these decentralized servers? I don't see racks of working servers sitting on the streets for my compute needs. Server farms must reside somewhere...

[zombiepixel]

5 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

Maybe you can answer this. I've asked variations of this question to other blockchain pushers and no one can give me a real answer.

Example. I rent a 4 core 128gb ram server from a cloud provider to do some compute. It resides in a companies central server warehouse. In comes Blockchain Bob saying "Hey! You should run that decentralized on the blockchain, it's more secure and better in every way"

 

Ok fine, say I believe him. Where are these decentralized servers? I don't see racks of working servers sitting on the streets for my compute needs. Server farms must reside somewhere...

ur partially right! good question where are these servers? the servers are going to be those exact servers you rented along with every device that is connected to the blockchain. ur phone. ur car. ur kitchen appliance, and every device connected! they all will become ur server! they are all going to be pooled together.  

[zombiepixel]

1 minute ago, zombiepixel said:

ur partially right! good question where are these servers? the servers are going to be those exact servers you rented along with every device that is connected to the blockchain. ur phone. ur car. ur kitchen appliance, and every device connected! they all will become ur server! they are all going to be pooled together.  

think about how many phones, cars, washing machines that are inactive when you are not using them. they can contribute massive amount of computing power when they are not in use.

obviously these devices are not equal in computing power so they will get rewarded relative to how much they provide. but what matters the most in this is that they are all participating!

[piratemonkey]

15 hours ago, zombiepixel said:

make centralized servers and centralized data almost obsolete and untrustworthy

Most people don't care enough or know enough to be super concerned with privacy. Nor do most people even know what blockchain is, or want to know about it. Most don't care about where there data is stored, or how it's being used by the companies storing it. As long as it's convenient for them, and they can access it from anywhere, most don't care. That's not to say that somethings from blockchain won't be used. Having a backup that is updated every couple of minutes, and backed up in multiple places may be good for smaller amounts of data for private data. Think a companies records, or employee info, not users data, cuz that's a lot

[Blue4130]

20 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

ur partially right! good question where are these servers? the servers are going to be those exact servers you rented along with every device that is connected to the blockchain. ur phone. ur car. ur kitchen appliance, and every device connected! they all will become ur server! they are all going to be pooled together.  

So what benefit does it bring to the current servers owners to switch to blockchain over the current method? Why would they do it? There is a value in holding the "keys to the fortress" that disappears when blockchain is introduced. 

[Blue4130]

19 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

think about how many phones, cars, washing machines that are inactive when you are not using them. they can contribute massive amount of computing power when they are not in use.

obviously these devices are not equal in computing power so they will get rewarded relative to how much they provide. but what matters the most in this is that they are all participating!

And also, why would I let my extra device cycles be used this way? What is the incentive for me? You mention rewards? What are these rewards? Who pays the rewards? Where do they come from? 

[Bombastinator]

15 hours ago, zombiepixel said:

nope. you are wrong.

 

[zombiepixel]

7 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

And also, why would I let my extra device cycles be used this way? What is the incentive for me? You mention rewards? What are these rewards? Who pays the rewards? Where do they come from? 

so you would get compensated in the token that is associated with that specific cloud computing blockchain u are participating in as a reward for giving up computing power to the network. and the data would be encrypted amongst multiple nodes or devices so no one has the "keys to the fortress"

[Arika]

44 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

think about how many phones, cars, washing machines that are inactive when you are not using them. they can contribute massive amount of computing power when they are not in use.

obviously these devices are not equal in computing power so they will get rewarded relative to how much they provide. but what matters the most in this is that they are all participating!

cool, so now my phone randomly heats up and loses a significant portion on it's battery life. all other devices that are plugged in now draw more power, driving up my power bill and my already slow internet now gets even slower. Man blockchain is certainly "amazing"

[lewdicrous]

8 minutes ago, Arika S said:

cool, so now my phone randomly heats up and loses a significant portion on it's battery life. all other devices that are plugged in now draw more power, driving up my power bill and my already slow internet now gets even slower. Man blockchain is certainly "amazing"

Yea, but think about the number of tokens that you're gonna get. Totally worth it if you ask me! 

Spoiler

/s, of course. 

 

[Arika]

4 minutes ago, lewdicrous said:

Yea, but think about the number of tokens that you're gonna get. Totally worth it if you ask me! 

i would rather get paid in exposure just like all those designers and photographers i keep hearing about

[Blue4130]

27 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

so you would get compensated in the token that is associated with that specific cloud computing blockchain u are participating in as a reward for giving up computing power to the network. and the data would be encrypted amongst multiple nodes or devices so no one has the "keys to the fortress"

I am saying right now, the companies have the keys to the fortress. Why would they give them up to everyone? Our data is a currency to them. Putting it on the blockchain train devalues that currency to them. 

[Bombastinator]

42 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

And also, why would I let my extra device cycles be used this way? What is the incentive for me? You mention rewards? What are these rewards? Who pays the rewards? Where do they come from? 

And who pays the power bill?  Those things are all about low power stand by modes.

[Bombastinator]

15 minutes ago, Arika S said:

i would rather get paid in exposure just like all those designers and photographers i keep hearing about

No you wouldn’t.  All that exposure is just promise of future payment.  Look up the life of Jackson pollak sometime.  He was one of the most famous living artists when he was alive.  Paintings he made sold for millions.  Not when he tried to though.  The man couldn’t afford groceries.  Might be worth more Than tokens  I guess.  There used to be a saying “don’t take any wooden nickels”. 

[Blue4130]

12 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

And who pays the power bill?  Those things are all about low power stand by modes.

Exactly, if I have to pay power, the reward would have to be higher than the power bill for me to want to use my device. Any time a device is used, it's longevity is decreased. I need to be compensated for it. 

[Bombastinator]

I’m gonna call this one.  Group answer is a resounding “NO” followed by the opinion that the people who do think so only do because they’re not following the thought through.  Blockchain is just a protocol.  It’s handy but all this “disruption” crap is just that.

[zombiepixel]

17 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

I am saying right now, the companies have the keys to the fortress. Why would they give them up to everyone? Our data is a currency to them. Putting it on the blockchain train devalues that currency to them. 

so you bring up a good point. why would they want to give up the data? to them its gold right? but the thing is, they have no choice. the beauty of blockchain projects is that they are open source! its not 1 company giving up the data. in fact the network itself is not a company the company just contributes to that open source code that runs on the network. idk exactly how they make money but they are not the owner of the blockchain. WE are the owners of the blockchain. its a democratic system. they are only contributor to the project they created. what they might get is the increase in value of the tokens they own.

[Bombastinator]

2 minutes ago, zombiepixel said:

so you bring up a good point. why would they want to give up the data? to them its gold right? but the thing is, they have no choice. the beauty of blockchain projects is that they are open source! its not 1 company giving up the data. in fact the network itself is not a company the company just contributes to that open source code that runs on the network. idk exactly how they make money but they are not the owner of the blockchain. WE are the owners of the blockchain. its a democratic system. they are only contributor to the project they created. what they might get is the increase in value of the tokens they own.

More not thinking it through.  

[zombiepixel]

31 minutes ago, lewdicrous said:

Yea, but think about the number of tokens that you're gonna get. Totally worth it if you ask me! 

  Reveal hidden contents

/s, of course. 

 

i dont mind you being a skeptic. in fact its good that you are. how else would people question idiots like me who bring up very controversial topics? 

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, zombiepixel said:

i dont mind you being a skeptic. in fact its good that you are. how else would people question idiots like me who bring up very controversial topics? 

It’s not even controversial. It’s just dumb.  Controversial implies there are two sides.