Is there any cool stuff that doesn't involve speculative trading in some "coin" or "token"?
I recently read about a steel maker in India executing a cross border order on blockchain. On further reading it turns out their bank used a third party company for digitizing letter of credit and that company claims to be using an enterprise blockchain R3 Corda. R3 itself is owned by a consortium of banks and on their website they don't use the word blockchain to describe Corda. They call it DLT.
My understanding is that a blockchain is supposed to be distributed, trustless, permissionless, immutable and open. At least that is what the core ideology behind it and is touted as the cornerstone features of blockchain. An enterprise blockchain is private, trustful, permissoned and everything that is a blockchain is not supposed to be. At that stage is it even a blockchain or just another propitiatory data store?
OK so a privately owned and controlled blockchain which only allows trusted users to add blocks is still a blockchain?
What would be the advantages of using a private, permissioned blockchain over a MySQL/Oracle/SQL Server database for storing data?
Why as an external user would I trust a centralized blockchain more than I would trust a centralized database? They are both private owned and controlled by a company.
You'd use a private, permissioned blockchain over federated SQL databases due to the technical difficulties of synchronizing audit tables across organizational boundaries -- since an enterprise blockchain is append-only, immutable, time-stamped, and each new entry has a hash of the previous view, it overcomes a lot of data integrity issues inherent to a distributed SQL database. None of the companies here will fully trust each other to hold an exclusive copy of the data, so the blockchain here replaces an expensive manual reconciliation step in the event local accounting databases don't match up.
As an external user? Nobody cares, it's not for you, move on.
> since an enterprise blockchain is append-only, immutable, time-stamped, and each new entry has a hash of the previous view, it overcomes a lot of data integrity issues inherent to a distributed SQL database.
And why couldn't a distributed SQL database be append-only, immutable, time-stamped, and implemented so each new entry has a hash of the previous state? (If you own it, just set it up to disallow updates or deletes, and allow inserts only through a trigger / stored procedure that adds the timestamp and hash.)
Talking of R3, their recruiters reached out to me. I wish they'd mentioned Blockchain or crypto hype up front, it would have saved me a few minutes browsing their website.
Allowing censorship-resistant / chargeback free donations, most coins.
Enabling private transactions, Monero.
Most "dapps" empower decentralization, distributed exchanges, trading, DNS, ownership contracts (DOAs), etc.
NFT's for art as silly as it is, more importantly for Handshake domain names and other cases where ownership proof comes into play.
Please feel free to go and attack all of those ideas and projects, but don't think for a second you can really gaslight people into believing they aren't worth of pursuit.
Paying for hosting with extremely volatile and environmental harmful tokens that only a part of population pretends has a real value, that you want to hoard rather than spend, and that might go to 0 at some point?
To have basically torrents?
Sending deflationary ponzi scheme tokens to people is not helping them. Also, fees are high.
Private transactions are great if you are a criminal, I'll give you that.
Tell me one "dapp" (or "extremely wasteful programs that run on a CPU that is orders and orders of magnitude slower than an actual one) that is doing something useful. I haven't found one yet and I've been searching for some years now.
With NFTs you don't own anything, unless there's an actual contract that comes with it. Also you buy a hyperlink that points to central storage. Also money laundering and wash trading are rampant.
If the powers at be allow you to (PayPal, banks, credit card companies)
If Mastercard doesn't like you or your wares (porn or dissent) good luck!
> Private transactions are great if you are a criminal, I'll give you that.
Tired old trope. You don't have to be a criminal to enjoy privacy.
> Tell me one "dapp" (or "extremely wasteful programs that run on a CPU that is orders and orders of magnitude slower than an actual one) that is doing something useful. I haven't found one yet and I've been searching for some years now.
>With NFTs you don't own anything, unless there's an actual contract that comes with it. Also you buy a hyperlink that points to central storage. Also money laundering and wash trading are rampant.
Tired old trope. It's simply a non-fungible token that can represent your ownership of an asset. You can own a Handshake domain using NFTs. There are other uses other than a hyperlink pointing to artwork. Yes others can access your domain and artwork, but you own it and you can sell it. In regards to your domain that's how you prove you own it and can admin it.
> Please feel free to go and attack all of those ideas and projects, but don't think for a second you can really gaslight people into believing they aren't worth of pursuit.
This hostility is completely unnecessary.
But if you want I can add one more to the list: funding the North Korean nuclear weapons program.
I'm confused. Are you being facetious about crypto having adverse uses too, or are you saying we should ban rocketry (another technology with good & bad uses), or something else entirely?
>> Are chargebacks on donations are major issue for any legitimate non-profit organization?
> Virtual game currencies, controversial politics, porn, gambling etc.
Paying for porn is not a donation.
Paying for in-game currency is not a donation.
Gambling is not a donation.
Giving money to someone for "controversial politics" is almost never an issue, especially if you're actually donating (which is only possible if you are, e.g., giving money to a registered candidate, a PAC, or an org that files a Form 8872). I make a lot of political donations and have never had an issue.
If you're:
1. giving money to someone for political reasons, who
2. explicitly opts out of tax-advantaged status so that they don't have to use that money in a way that's congruent with donor's intent, and
3. has a huge issue with charge-backs on unrestricted non-tax-advantaged gifts...
IDK. I'd tend to consider that a massive red flag. But I guess funding scam artists who get tons of money from identity thieves and prey on controversial politics is indeed a use-case for crypto.
That's interesting, but I don't see how it's related to OP's point. (Which was ostensibly about legitimate donations to legitimate non-profits, but was apparently actually about gambling, porn, and politics...)
Using fraud detection technology and/or swallowing the chargeback fees would probably be cheaper than the overhead of using a crpytocurrency+exchange.
Setting a minimum donation so that you're not a good target for card testing probably has a lower barrier to entry than requiring use of a crpytocurrency.
Yup, and crypto nips that in the bud. If you get a confirmed transaction, it's not going to be reversed by some unfair arbitration, you can trust it.
It sucks trying to run a game losing $20+ per chargeback and risking getting funds frozen entirely.
It sucks to be delisted by PayPal over political bullshit.
It sucks Mastercard and other CC companies can decide porn is essentially illegal.
- edit @ notahacker -
The point is you're at the whim of PayPal, Stripe, and credit card company policies for traditional fiat currency.
Have fun trying to sell guns (FFL be damned), porn subs (legal like you mentioned), virtual currency (legal ofc), or anything like that with traditional processors.
Crypto is the only option for those industries and a few others if you want to accept payment online.
Doesn't matter how many billions the industry is worth if you can't accept a credit card on your site for the service.
If all majors processors ban it, it's essentially blocked.
If I'm understanding what you're referring to, this is one of the worst part of NFTs. How is it any different than me having to pay Ford a royalty when I sell my used car on Craigslist? It's such a toxic feature for consumers. Sure, when used correctly it could be cool to help creators or whatever. It will absolutely be abused. It already is being abused by scammers who create NFTs that can't be sold.
It can be abused, but it allows the creator or developer to align incentives in different ways.
eg if the royalty goes toward a DAO, maybe that DAO’s charter is to grow awareness for the NFT project. Or the rewards could accrue toward a staked project token that all community members hold, or fees could go back to the creator to fund development for next gen.
I don’t know the best use, but my point is because someone programmed royalties, there’s now another dimension of configuration for NFT projects.
That's not example of something NFTs can do, is it? Royalty fees are not programmable. How does the NFT know whether someone has to pay royalties? And how on earth is an NFT going to make people pay royalties? An NFT can't use coercive force.
I don't know what this means. Let's say I own the copyright of a musical composition, and I sell a license to a film producer. How does this standard help me collect royalty fees?
