Topic: Blockchain study finds 0.00% success rate in 43 cases - page 2. (Read 391 times)

Perhaps I've choose my words poorly, what I've meant is that over the course of the last 3-5 years, the period when people were actively saying "Blockchain, not Bitcoin", Bitcoin's price increased by a lot, which I think is a sign of trust. Even the current bear market is in my opinion not a sign of weakness, but totally normal considering the prices during the last bull period.


I too agree and disagree with this statement. Bitcoin is not going to achieve mass adoption and replace fiat, like many people here think, but Bitcoin has many uses, and there will always be people who value their freedom and privacy, even if they are a minority. And "a solution in search of a problem" sounds like a perfect description of blockchain, rather than Bitcoin.

OP is late with his post (article) at least for a couple of years


This is my thought exactly (which I decided not to dwell on in my post)

Nevertheless, I can give you one example where the blockchain technology can make a difference, actually a life-changing one, though it doesn't have anything to do with corporations in particular and business in general. The blockchain technologies can really help with the electoral system by making it totally transparent and incorruptible (we just need its Satoshi Nakamoto to pop up). It kinda goes without saying that the corrupted governments will never agree to a possibility of tamper-proof elections, but that's a different question


It's in fact an age-old adage about selling shovels in a gold rush

The good thing is cryptocurrencies can be easily modified to suit any demand or utility, hence it can technically be applied to different use cases. I do not see any need ro alienate cryptocurrency from blockchain.

Considering the number of useless icos and shitcoins out there i am surprised it is only 43. I guess the other crap projects have marginal use as 1 person might use it as a case study

Thank you for pointing that out, because if you didn't I would have.  The statement that "bitcoin increases day by day" or words to that effect get parroted all over the forum, even when it's obvious that it's not true.

When I used to frequent the old JREF forum (for skeptics, in case you never heard of it), some of the members there used to call bitcoin a solution in search of a problem--meaning that it doesn't solve any current problems the world is having.  While I don't completely agree with that, it does not surprise me in the least that bitcoin hasn't been more widely adopted than it has.  The average person isn't looking for a new form of currency and would not see the purpose of paying for something in a currency that you'd have to buy somewhere and hope that volatility doesn't cause it to lose value before you can spend it.

As far as blockchain in general, I don't hear anything in real life about how it's changing the way people do things and I'm not sure if it's going to solve any problems that need solving.  Granted, I'm not an expert in blockchain tech--not even close--but it's been around for 10 years now and you'd think that corporations/governments/individuals would have latched onto it by now if it would be to their advantage.

Haven't read the article OP linked to yet, but I'm going to right now.

Edit:  Read it, and I liked this quote:

That's exactly what all these ICO projects are doing, promising that their tech will revolutionize whatever industry they're targeting, and the only ones who make money from them are the devs.  Everyone else loses out when they're stuck with a token that's not even traded on an exchange.  Can anyone show me a successful ICO where the project is actually benefiting something/someone other than the project developers?

The future of the blockchain tech will be the private blockchains. Medium/Large companies have the financial resources to invest massively in. In a near future, we will probably use it without knowing. 3-4 years isn't a lot to "blockchainize" a company. As it's new probably most of them are still in their research phase (at the beginning). And if you don't see them talking about is because there is a financial side in

Well, are you sure about Bitcoin growing in price and number of users?

In respect to price, we can see that it is not growing (and far from that), so you kinda have to check your sources. But how do you know that the number of Bitcoin users is actually increasing? What metric are you looking at specifically? Number of wallets (addresses)? Given that any user can create any number of addresses, it is a useless and utterly misleading metric

Other that that, I agree that Bitcoin is the epitome of the blockchain, while cryptocurrencies in general are likely the best use cases that this technology could potentially have. That's why they are evolving while the blockchain doesn't (outside cryptocurrencies)

Blockchain is a separate entity from bitcoin now since many services are wanting to get their own version of the blockchain for their own private gain. What else would you expect on a tech that's being utilized by a lot of companies for their own good, while the rest of the open-source developments are only for tweaking and no major update on the existing code. Anyways the bottomline is many companies are creating their own blockchains, and we might not see how those things work, so the development might still be underway but we won't see them since they're being kept as secrets by the companies that are creating them.

The article: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/30/blockchain_study_finds_0_per_cent_success_rate/

My thoughts:

People were telling "Blockchain, not Bitcoin" for so many years, but the reality is the exact opposite. Bitcoin's technology is showing so many progress, we have adopted SegWit, LN is on mainnet for a year, even though it's still in beta, developers are discussing potential features. Bitcoin keeps growing, both in price and in number of users.
Meanwhile, blockchain fails to show any noticeable results during the last 3-4 years, so many talking, so many millions invested in ICO's, so many money spent on test and research and barely anyone actually uses it.