
Ask HN: Is blockchain useful outside Currency?Is decentralized validation used? - robertAngst
(I&#x27;m looking for ideas, not shilling coins)<p>I am very skeptical of blockchain as a revolutionary technology.<p>Isnt the entire purpose validation of data?<p>To me, for social media, Facebook isnt going to lie about my July 4th vacation pictures. I can trust Facebook with this data. If they screw up, I can leave facebook.<p>So where do we need decentralized Validation?<p>Currency, Voting, Timestamps.<p>I dont think Logistics is worth the extra price and is untrustworthy due to the garbage in garbage out problem.<p>dApps are are extremely rigid, and if they arent, the decentralized verification means nothing. Smart Contracts are not smart and are only useful for niche scenarios that are also very rigid.<p>Services, Products, and Leadership is still needed, blockchain ONLY decentralizes the validation.<p>I understand Bitcoin is valued around the world because the currency&#x2F;rare number is validated and trusted. This is a real use of blockchain where people do pay extra for having 7 &#x27;Notaries&#x27;.<p>I&#x27;d like to hear from other programmers if I am wrong about my understanding of blockchain. Will blockchain allow any sort of revolution to happen? Or is it an expensive way to write to a database?<p>(Goal is to communicate ideas an learn, if you have a coin that solves a problem, I&#x27;m all ears.)
======
dozzie
> Isnt the entire purpose validation of data?

No. Digital signatures are for validating the data (who said what). The whole
purpose of blockchain is to tell who said what _when_. Document timestamping,
in other words. There were previous attempts at solving this problem, though
they needed a trusted third party.

> Services, Products, and Leadership is still needed, blockchain ONLY
> decentralizes the validation.

No, it does not decentralize validation. It decentralizes assigning timestamps
to documents.

> Will blockchain allow any sort of revolution to happen?

Doubtful, given the previous timestamping protocols haven't brought about any
revolution.

> Or is it an expensive way to write to a database?

If you try to use it as a database, of course it will be expensive and
unwieldy. Blockchain is a service not designed to work as a database. It was a
document timestamping service from the day 1.

~~~
robertAngst
Thanks man.

This is basically been my understanding for a while.

Glad I'm 90% BTC and didnt fall for alt coin mania.

------
WhiteOwlLion
Logistics is the low hanging fruit that absolutely makes sense to use a
blockchain for. You have multiple agencies and actors that don't need to trust
each other... just send their data to the distributed database.

If you have tainted spinach, you can track where it was introduced into the
supply chain and figure out very quickly the source of the issue.

When you have pharmaceutical returns, you can validate the source of the
manufacturing and validate the returned product can be resold.

~~~
robertAngst
My turn to be a skeptic, looking for a response :)

We already have barcodes to track the source, this is already done outside
blockchain.

Maybe its more immediate after a problem happens, but what is the cost to:

>Blockchain soil ph

>Blockchain fertilizer

>Blockchain water schedule

>Blockchain that workers washed their hands

>Blockchain the weight of the product

>Blockchain the date picked, shipped, etc........

If you do every step along the way, the cost becomes enormous. I cant imagine
the size of the hash either.

Not to mention the extreme problem of garbage in garbage out. Sure you have an
expensive thermometer that writes to a blockchain, but what about when its
time to weigh it? What if someone accidentally sweat and that drip added 1g to
the weight of something that needs precision.

Then the entire chain becomes unreliable.

------
PaulHoule
How about some kind of distributed database you share with your friends, say
to keep track who has borrowed books or equipment from each other?

~~~
smt88
How is blockchain beneficial there? This problem seems well-solved with
traditional databases with ACLs.

The only benefit of Byzantine fault tolerance would be if you don't trust your
friends.

P2P lending (none of the lenders/borrowers know each other) is a better
candidate because there is no central authority and actors can't be trusted.

~~~
robertAngst
Remember that if your friend claims they returned the book, the blockchain
accepts it even if your friend never got it.

~~~
smt88
If I understand your meaning, I think that's a problem with any kind of
software tracking real-world transactions, not something limited to
blockchain.

~~~
robertAngst
The point is blockchain provide no additional value.

------
coolspot
Git is decentralized append-only tamper-resistant ledger aka “blockchain”.

~~~
smt88
I think append-only ledgers and specifically BFT distributed ledgers have
obvious uses.

The question is whether you can call them blockchains (I'd argue that you
can't) and whether the added traits of a blockchain have any additional
benefit.

~~~
robertAngst
Can you speak to the 'obvious' uses? They are not obvious to me unfortunately.

~~~
smt88
Append-only ledgers have been used for a while and pre-date the concept of
blockchain. Some accounting systems use them. Other examples are IPFS (which
uses Bitcoin technology but technically doesn't need to), Internet Archive,
some types of event logs, some message queues, chain-of-custody applications,
and some P2P marketplaces.

As for Byzantine fault tolerance, it's a bit more of a niche. The most famous
examples I know of are extremely high-risk situations, like aircraft software.
I don't fully understand how it's used there, but to my knowledge, it prevents
"bad" signals (from malfunctioning sensors, cosmic rays, etc.) from corrupting
the rest of the data that controls the hardware.

