Topic: The "interblocknet" (a possible future of the service industry) - page 2. (Read 1167 times)

Potential promo material:
   

Whilst I agree that most altcoins are rubbish I disagree that we can only have one "proof" system.

Anyone who is an engineer likes to have "failsafe" backup mechanisms so anyone that says we "don't need one" would be view as "suspicious" in my mind.

yep possible could work for a "mall shopping centre" blockchain currency.. i admit that could be a possibility. covering multiple stores. but i dont envision a 1 currency per business as that gets too complicated for customers.

maybe the first step into you achieving it is to promote it first as a loyalty card system for a mall.. and then expand it to allow customers to buy/sell coins, to expand it into a a currency once the retailers are comfortable and trained in using it

we can't have many proof of work blockchains, under the assumption that mining hardware can be sufficiently programmable or replaceable.

Why? Simple, the miners from the strongest blockchain (where mining consumes the most Joules of energy), can change/reprogram the mining chips and "hop" to the weaker chain and cause havoc, double-spends, then hop back.

Many proof of work block chains only works in the universe where there are different possible proof of work functions and the hardware is tough to engineer.

In this case there would be 1 chain per mining algorithm. This is why Lite and Doge is in my opinion an anomaly. The Lite miners can jump to doge and cause havoc any time.
From a different point of view Doge was meant to be a joke so the Doge people know about it and it was their goal to create a shitty "fun" coin from the start.

Of course things like X11 are pure pile of shit because The chain is only as strong as the weakest link, so if one of the algorithm is prone to collision then the whole function is not strong at all. Furthermore assembling hash functions in this manner may be weak because of the interaction between two or more successive functions. Putting on a tinfoil hat, if we are unlucky these successive functions could cancel each other collsion resistance in an unknown manner, that the creator couldn't predict.

Looking from a different point of view, it's good that we have so many shit coins. This is consistent with the bad money drives out good money theory. People hoard the strong coin and circulate the shit coins because

Altcoins follow the Worse is Better programming philosophy. After the PUMP phase their value drops forever so people are forced to spend them, similiar to Quantitative Easing or negative interest rates. This generates real economic activity on the internet.

Now to actually get to the "meat and bones" in China they have "smart cards" that are used for shopping malls (mostly often for just one chain of shops or for most of the shops at one shopping mall).

Those are extremely popular in China (in fact they are actually used as an underground "currency" but we don't need to go into that).

So the model that I am working on is actually based upon a "real system" that is handling hundreds of millions of RMB per day (i.e. not something that I just made up for this topic).

@franky1 - can you please stop with the stupid schoolyard insults (you've been doing that to me all over the place and basically it just makes you look like a stupid kid).

If you hadn't noticed I didn't bother self-moderating this topic (so there was no need to delete your previous post).

blockchains per company will piss people off having to convert each time they use a different store or service..

maybe sidechains, where each side chain represents a continent, or a country.. and if user adoption gets too high in that main area, creating a bottle neck. then new sub-side chains are created to represent a smaller population base of that area ( states, provinces, counties)

that way people are not
1. worried the chain becomes useless if a company goes into bankruptcy, taking their miners offline
2. swapping between currencies every time they want to shop locally.
3. worried funds wont disappear as its based on geographic location rather than company.

also if one company was using a chain.. it would just be a ledger, and no real point in the decentralized blocks.. (unless its a international company or something with 1000 different stores). but even so swapping applecoin for bitcoin then into walmart coin.. or even applecoin after buying an ipad to then change directly into walmart coin to then spend walmart coin.. is a few too many transactions in the middle, that people wont like.

they would prefer however UKcoin  to buy things in the uk and only swap if they are going on holiday abroad

(i expect you to knit pick and whinge like a school girl.. so have a cup of coffee first and think about it for a while)

What is the "interblocknet" and why does it matter?

The revolution that Bitcoin has started with money will continue with services but as we know Bitcoin will never scale to handle all of the world's transactions so how will this be managed?

IMO we are going to end up with many blockchains (most likely one blockchain per major service or even company) that allow for specific service payments which will remove the "middle-men" (i.e. websites currently who are instead replaced with "miners").

Consider something like Uber - do drivers really need to pay a % fee to a company in order to offer a service?

If there was instead a "blockchain service" whose tokens were perhaps "kms of travel" then you can do away with the centralised website and the commissions (only requiring a mining fee to keep that blockchain going).

It is possible that these will be "side-chains" although I think it might be wise to have more than one "core blockchain" (in case of systematic failure).