Re: <nettime> Josh Hall: Blockchain could reshape our world – and the far right is one step ahead (Guardian)

[Carsten Agger <agger@modspil.dk>]

On 23-02-2018 13:11, Patrice Riemens wrote:
> Original to:
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/23/blockchain-reshape-world-far-right-ahead-crypto-technology 
>
>
>
> Blockchain could reshape our world – and the far right is one step ahead
> Crypto technology is coming to a crossroads. Those who want to use it 
> to radically redistribute wealth must take urgent action
> [...]
>
> Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain reads the title of a 2017 book. From 
> currency speculation through to verifying the provenance of food, 
> blockchain technology is eking out space in a vast range of fields.
It's ironic, amusing more likely, that the conclusion of the book 
"Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain" is that the "Blockchain revolution" 
will likely not amount to much of anything. The main reason is this: Who 
needs a global, public and distributed ledger? What's it good for?
As a matter of fact, all proposed use cases I've seen founder on the 
problem of reliability: Yes, if your crate of organic bananas has a bar 
code, and that bar code was entered on the block chain along with a 
statement that the crate was shipped from a fair trade/fair pay organic 
cooperative in Costa Rica, nobody can know if that means that the 
physical crate was actually there only that someone says that it was. 
You might improve on that situation with tamperproof, sealed 
cryptographic tokens, but you still don't know if the bananas were in 
the crate at the time. An ordinary inspections regime would probably 
work better. I.e., all use cases for blockchains which require 
real-world interaction requires some sort of verification that the data 
entered is correct, which the blockchain itself can't certify - anything 
beyond the simple fact that the information was entered. And that sort 
of tracking could ordinarily best be achieved by that high-end bleeding 
edge innovation called a "database"; along with an external verification 
process, the advantages of using a blockchain over a database are 
exactly zip.
Now, if the data had to do with the blockchain itself and were entirely 
digital ... then it's another matter. That's why blockchains make sense 
for cryptocurrencies. But cryptocurrencies are not really useful, and in 
their current incarnation are riddled by scams to an extent where the 
best advice anyone could give is to stay the f... away.
Distributed ledger systems do exist, though - one is called "Git". And 
it's very useful for tracking source code changes. And as opposed to 
blockchain, transactions can be reversed and history can be rewritten, 
which is actually a necessary feature (e.g., with the GDPR coming up 
here in the EU).
So, fortunately or unfortunately, it's not likely that Blockchain is 
going to reshape anything, except for possibly the wallets of some quick 
movers and scam artists.
Best
Carsten
#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: