Topic: Do we need blockchain technology? - page 19. (Read 11569 times)

Traditional transactions are so many problems that solutions must be found to solve the problem, I think blockchain technology is very good and can be a solution for future transactions.

If you'll read Satoshi's whitepaper - the origin of blockchain technology, you'll understand that it was created with a purpose of timestamping transactions to prevent their double spending. A lot of real world applications don't require timestamping, so they don't require blocks and miners. So when you look at some private blockchain project, you will quickly understand that it's very different from Bitcoin, it lacks all it's defining features and just don't bring anything new. In its core, private blockchain projects are just application of digital signatures via public key cryptography and databases distributed between some participants of the network. So, private blockchains can't really compete with Bitcoin.

With blockchain technology you get an opportunity to have multiple people active on something at the same time. Think of Google docs vs Microsoft word. With Microsoft word you need to write edit and email your copy to whoever you want to collaborate with. This cycle continues with the other person. However, with something like Google docs and blockchain technology, numerous people can edit at the same time. All you have to do is share it with the person. This is the power of blockchain tech.

Here's another facet to the blockchain debate.

Many believe centralized or monolithic software algorithms are preferable to distributed algorithms. One of the issues with this is many aren't aware of distributed software engineering they encounter in their daily lives. Blockchain is the only example of distributed software many are aware of.

Don't forget there is software like bittorrent which is built using a distributed networking algorithm with many peer nodes, not completely dissimilar from a blockchain. Some might argue that a direct peer to peer file sharing system is superior to bittorrent. But possibly we might see there are advantages to distributed software like torrentz.

Correct many of those coins that offer a particular service are not offering anything new since we could use the bitcoin blockchain instead of using a coin that no one cares about it, but even then there are some projects that have merits and that we may need to use in the future.

Yes,we all need blockchain technology.It ensures security of information used,lessens paper work more,eases the tasks and saves more time.Bitcoin has been secure mainly for the reason that it works on a secured blockchain technology.Its true that more shit coins nowadays use this technology.But they would soon disappear if they failed to deliver any thing unique and useful.Governments have realized the importance of blockchain technology and that's why,they have started to use it in medical fields and various other sectors to make the work ease and safe.The truth is that all the bankers and some governments may not accept bitcoin,but they could not avoid blockchain technology.

Lots of companies are now using the blockchain technology in new and different ways, the technology was first started by bitcoin(or probably first used) now sites like steemit allow users to post articles and get paid when they are upvoted using blockchain technology.

I think the network that is still using the blockchain technology to develop itself and serve its users
effectively, I was on steem the other time and I was just confused at the way the whole place was, it doesn’t seem organized though looks legit.

yes we need blockchain technology , it is main to start or own coins system

i agree with you there are many unused coins  but it is open source and people can do what they want so that this is not reason that make use hate  this technology

You really need to watch this video https://youtu.be/sDNN0uH2Z3o. This will broaden your view beyond bitcoi  alone. Definitely worth a watch.

We are still in the early stages of crypto, many of those coins have value because they have a chance of becoming something in the future but if they fail then its value is going to be zero but if successful those coins could have market caps of billions of dollars.

My personal perspective is that the value of blockchain technology introduced by Bitcoin is more of a conceptual one. The idea that we can decentralize the process of governance and consensus, and in that process value is created, which then can be distributed. It's quite interesting, because the cryptographic nature by design introduces a form of scarcity and security. Approaches like Iota's 'tangle', and some lesser known approaches such as the Holochain that don't store the full ledger at every node, are all essentially the same in achieving some form of decentralized governance, consensus, and value.
 
I think this is the real value, and the reason why the answer is a resounding *yes* to the question of whether we need blockchain technology.
Consensus, governance, and value, are all crucial parts to various kinds of systems, the degree to which still is unexplored.
 
You might have heard the phrase 'token economy' floating around, which encapsulates this.
 
The thing is, our world is really goddamn complex, and as certain systems and services grow in number and complexity, centralization becomes increasingly problematic. Take the government for example. The government is responsible for such a wide array of things, with so ridiculously many people depending on the adequate execution of their responsibilities, and the drawbacks of centralization become clear. The smaller the governing system and the larger/complex the system to be governed, the more difficult it is to achieve adequate control - it's just a mathematical constraint.
 
We depend on services and tools to deal with our increasingly complex environment, but what about the other way around? I know it sounds a bit fight-club esque, but our relation with our environment is more often than not out of balance. You may use facebook, but facebook uses you as well. Whether the relationship is fair, I'm not sure of, but that facebook doesn't care much, I am pretty sure of.

On a more positive note, I do believe we are in a transitionary phase of deconstruction.  A deconstruction of the services we need, and the tools available to fulfill these needs in a manner that gives the users more control, by decentralizing governance, and removing a need for trust from some central institution. We're just still learning the possibilities available with this new technology, which is going to become increasingly clear and exciting when we're going to get past this money-grabbing phase as reflected by unethical ICOs and shitcoins.

                  Yeah! I do really agree with you, since there are also projects that are only good at the beginning and some worst case is that it is only popular for about weeks or months then suddenly the popularity would go down and in the end it would just be forgotten and be phased out. Keep in mind that most of the successful project up until now or up to date are projects that are beneficial or still being used right now, just like you have said someone or few people would really ask what's the purpose of the internet.

What do you mean by blockchain? If you are referring with the system itself, then yes Blockchain is the heart of every crypto currency. It makes the crypto thing very secure , fast and prone to hack.

Depend on what kind of coins we're talking about, bitcoin-blockchain is necessary, we need it even though you think there is no benefit in real life but bitcoin running on blockchain and we use bitcoin which mean; we use blockchain indirectly. If we're talking about shitcoins which offers something or services but not really useful, then those coins mostly used as trading object.

A lot of assets and shitcoin already made through generate the assets in the blockchain i meant the blockchain that already has the capability to issued the assets such as erc20 token and others.
A lot of them are not building its blockchain at all.

Even if that is the case I see those others as still significant because they introduce a new way to use something traditional or is something that is already there, just improved. Also even if they are shitcoins, most of them somewhat gives their users decentralization so I think we still need them. Just consider those failed ICO's as failed attempt to introduce a new way of using something or an innovative tech that have not been used by many people.

I do not think that the technology of blocking is bad thanks to itself, because it has already become clear that all banking institutions and even state organizations are trying to introduce this technology into their system. Apparently there is such a merit with which they want to feel much simpler and more secure.

Blockchain technology is a must, because it's been a confirmed statement that it's an innovative technology that has given higher efficiency. Just based on the perfect functioning without flaws Blockchain technology was getting implemented into different sectors and bitcoin too is gaining more popularity because of the technology behind it.

I think the answer is that we only need a coin if it provides something beneficial that other coins cannot. Some coins have faster transactions or serve a different purpose or have lower fees. So the blockchain technology is not necessary.

Blockchain technology is groundbreaking technology but not all coins need to be built on it. They can come up with a new innovation or purpose and still be just as useful as Bitcoin.