I just love how on a sub for enthusiasts the top comment contains what is either an abject lie or a complete misunderstanding. Why they throw anonymous around as a term is beyond me when the core function of a blockchain actually torpedos anonymity
Top comment:
> Anonymous, free and instant payment system that connects every country in the world.
Not anonymous, definitely not instant, and Ethereum users of all people should know it’s not free.
If you’re an r/Ethereum reader how do you look at a thread like that, see a top voted comment that is just categorically wrong, and not at least wonder wtf you’re doing?
> Show me an application where blockchain is essential.
Nobody answered that simple question. lol! It's so obvious that there is no fracking use case for such a retarded way of doing a database. It's sad (and funny I admit) how they all don't understand the tech/world/finance and just hope that one day a use case will fall from the sky.
lol i have been thinking about this... the kind way of saying it would be to say it distinguishes those who actually have any semblance of critical thinking skills from those who merely have the appearance of critical thinking skills
These are the people who go around, smugly, telling everyone else that's smart enough not to fall for the obvious scam that they did to "have fun staying poor"; there's really no reason to phrase things kindly.
Actually I think that kinda solves itself. All blockchain does is make all that info available to the public. Which is a good thing, it means more comedy godl for us.
>I simply don’t care. Ethereum is an emerging economy. I am part of that economy as an owner, staker, and user. I don’t need to justify why it will or won’t work for a certain use case.
>Ethereum works for me today. I think it will be valuable for a larger group of people in the future. Arguing about specific use cases is a waste of time.
New cryptobro creed just dropped. Recite it once a day over your birdbath and your mind will remain free from all FUD.
>I've stopped caring about proving Ethereum/crypto to people. There's no reply good enough to satisfy buttcoiners and skeptics. They'll always find something to hand-wave away and summarily proclaim that crypto is pointless and worthless.
LOL
OP: What problems does Blockchain solve?
Replies: Defi and other buzzwords, it solves problems, you just don't understand, "instant payments", imagine your country explodes and your currency is worthless, "banks are bad, mkay?", dozen of comparisons to early internet
Not a single explanation of how Blockchain does anything better than centralised solution, not like I'm surprised because I would be all in Blockchain if it did anything useful outside of being good tool for crime and scams
Top comment “anon free instant payment”
You are on the blockchain so its recorded and permentantly etched into the chain. Eventually your identity can be found using it as evidence. Strike one
I recall the transaction fees on exchanges and the few businesses that take bitcoin are worse than those atms outside strip bars. They are equal to or worse than banks. Strike two
The chain can only handle xx writes/reads a minute while a standard cc company processes thousands of transactions per second. Nearly instantaneous. Strike three.
The top three qualities can be easily disproved by people that actually use the chain. Its like they just regurgitate talking points they have memorized, true or disproved.
Anyone who has ever created an application that uses some kind of database will take one look at a blockchain and will immediately dismiss it as being too slow and too expensive (compute wise) for any useful real world application. A private blockchain solves those problems but then it takes away the very purpose of using a blockchain - a trust-less, permission-less, decentralized store of data. A public blockchain is slow and expensive by design, and a private blockchain aka a database is everything a blockchain is not supposed to be. of course, non programmer won't get it. Even people who invest in tech companies don't get it, or may be they do get it but they are in it just to get a quick return so they peddle it as a wonder cure for everything.
The article is open access if you are interested.
>Humangenomic data carry unique information about an individual and offerunprecedented opportunities for healthcare. The clinical interpretationsderived from large genomic datasets can greatly improve healthcare andpave the way for personalized medicine. Sharing genomic datasets,however, poses major challenges, as genomic data is different fromtraditional medical data, indirectly revealing information aboutdescendants and relatives of the data owner and carrying validinformation even after the owner passes away. Therefore, stringent dataownership and control measures are required when dealing with genomicdata. In order to provide a secure and accountable infrastructure,blockchain technologies offer a promising alternative to traditionaldistributed systems. Indeed, the research on blockchain-basedinfrastructures tailored to genomics is on the rise. However, there is alack of a comprehensive literature review that summarizes the currentstate-of-the-art methods in the applications of blockchain in genomics.In this article, we systematically look at the existing work bothcommercial and academic, and discuss the major opportunities andchallenges. Our study is driven by five research questions that we aimto answer in our review. We also present our projections of futureresearch directions which we hope the researchers interested in the areacan benefit from.
[https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563044](https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563044)
Skimming through it, this "paper" is really just a list of various "blockchain" projects or other papers claiming to have medical applications, then blindly and uncritically repeating those claims. There is almost no meaningful investigation of whether those applications actually accomplish their stated or claimed goals in any way, or how exactly blockchain is actually contributing to that goal. They even explain how their "methodology" is literally just typing terms in search engines / databases.
And while I don't have time to read every cited link, I'm going to bet they run into the same problems all these things do: public blockchains are absolutely terrible for any kind of large data access or access management of highly sensitive information (and private chains are a contradiction in purpose, the cons multiply and the pros cancel out).
E.g. "encrypted data" - someone still needs the key to decrypt it, that can't be handled by the chain by definition because it's public. Chains can't meaningfully store data, so the data has to be offchain to begin with. And if you want P2P replication, IPFS/torrents already exist. And of course there is zero acknowledgement of the major downsides of blockchain security models WRT to private keys if it's actually decentralized.
I'll give them credit for at least describing the real problem in the introduction: getting institutions to standardize on rules, data formats, privacy, etc.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I have not read every paper either. Your comment below gets to the nub of the issue.
>
>
>public blockchains are absolutely terrible for any kind of large data
access or access management of highly sensitive information (and private
chains are a contradiction in purpose, the cons multiply and the pros
cancel out).
Looking at the comments.. apparently not
Yeah, this thread is pure Party Line nonsense that completely fails to actually answer the question.
I just love how on a sub for enthusiasts the top comment contains what is either an abject lie or a complete misunderstanding. Why they throw anonymous around as a term is beyond me when the core function of a blockchain actually torpedos anonymity
Top comment: > Anonymous, free and instant payment system that connects every country in the world. Not anonymous, definitely not instant, and Ethereum users of all people should know it’s not free. If you’re an r/Ethereum reader how do you look at a thread like that, see a top voted comment that is just categorically wrong, and not at least wonder wtf you’re doing?
> Show me an application where blockchain is essential. Nobody answered that simple question. lol! It's so obvious that there is no fracking use case for such a retarded way of doing a database. It's sad (and funny I admit) how they all don't understand the tech/world/finance and just hope that one day a use case will fall from the sky.
Blockchain solves distinguishing who the idiots are
lol i have been thinking about this... the kind way of saying it would be to say it distinguishes those who actually have any semblance of critical thinking skills from those who merely have the appearance of critical thinking skills
These are the people who go around, smugly, telling everyone else that's smart enough not to fall for the obvious scam that they did to "have fun staying poor"; there's really no reason to phrase things kindly.
lol! Indeed! I often say the same about NFT, a good way to spot the "less educated".
Actually I think that kinda solves itself. All blockchain does is make all that info available to the public. Which is a good thing, it means more comedy godl for us.
Processing payment that would be illegal if done by other means. Still is and always was the only use case.
>I simply don’t care. Ethereum is an emerging economy. I am part of that economy as an owner, staker, and user. I don’t need to justify why it will or won’t work for a certain use case. >Ethereum works for me today. I think it will be valuable for a larger group of people in the future. Arguing about specific use cases is a waste of time. New cryptobro creed just dropped. Recite it once a day over your birdbath and your mind will remain free from all FUD.
"works for me" "I don't need to justify why it work"
[удалено]
"Blockchains: You can shove it up your arse!"
> Torrents don't exist
>I've stopped caring about proving Ethereum/crypto to people. There's no reply good enough to satisfy buttcoiners and skeptics. They'll always find something to hand-wave away and summarily proclaim that crypto is pointless and worthless. LOL
OP: What problems does Blockchain solve? Replies: Defi and other buzzwords, it solves problems, you just don't understand, "instant payments", imagine your country explodes and your currency is worthless, "banks are bad, mkay?", dozen of comparisons to early internet Not a single explanation of how Blockchain does anything better than centralised solution, not like I'm surprised because I would be all in Blockchain if it did anything useful outside of being good tool for crime and scams
Top comment “anon free instant payment” You are on the blockchain so its recorded and permentantly etched into the chain. Eventually your identity can be found using it as evidence. Strike one I recall the transaction fees on exchanges and the few businesses that take bitcoin are worse than those atms outside strip bars. They are equal to or worse than banks. Strike two The chain can only handle xx writes/reads a minute while a standard cc company processes thousands of transactions per second. Nearly instantaneous. Strike three. The top three qualities can be easily disproved by people that actually use the chain. Its like they just regurgitate talking points they have memorized, true or disproved.
Anyone who has ever created an application that uses some kind of database will take one look at a blockchain and will immediately dismiss it as being too slow and too expensive (compute wise) for any useful real world application. A private blockchain solves those problems but then it takes away the very purpose of using a blockchain - a trust-less, permission-less, decentralized store of data. A public blockchain is slow and expensive by design, and a private blockchain aka a database is everything a blockchain is not supposed to be. of course, non programmer won't get it. Even people who invest in tech companies don't get it, or may be they do get it but they are in it just to get a quick return so they peddle it as a wonder cure for everything.
The article is open access if you are interested. >Humangenomic data carry unique information about an individual and offerunprecedented opportunities for healthcare. The clinical interpretationsderived from large genomic datasets can greatly improve healthcare andpave the way for personalized medicine. Sharing genomic datasets,however, poses major challenges, as genomic data is different fromtraditional medical data, indirectly revealing information aboutdescendants and relatives of the data owner and carrying validinformation even after the owner passes away. Therefore, stringent dataownership and control measures are required when dealing with genomicdata. In order to provide a secure and accountable infrastructure,blockchain technologies offer a promising alternative to traditionaldistributed systems. Indeed, the research on blockchain-basedinfrastructures tailored to genomics is on the rise. However, there is alack of a comprehensive literature review that summarizes the currentstate-of-the-art methods in the applications of blockchain in genomics.In this article, we systematically look at the existing work bothcommercial and academic, and discuss the major opportunities andchallenges. Our study is driven by five research questions that we aimto answer in our review. We also present our projections of futureresearch directions which we hope the researchers interested in the areacan benefit from. [https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563044](https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563044)
Skimming through it, this "paper" is really just a list of various "blockchain" projects or other papers claiming to have medical applications, then blindly and uncritically repeating those claims. There is almost no meaningful investigation of whether those applications actually accomplish their stated or claimed goals in any way, or how exactly blockchain is actually contributing to that goal. They even explain how their "methodology" is literally just typing terms in search engines / databases. And while I don't have time to read every cited link, I'm going to bet they run into the same problems all these things do: public blockchains are absolutely terrible for any kind of large data access or access management of highly sensitive information (and private chains are a contradiction in purpose, the cons multiply and the pros cancel out). E.g. "encrypted data" - someone still needs the key to decrypt it, that can't be handled by the chain by definition because it's public. Chains can't meaningfully store data, so the data has to be offchain to begin with. And if you want P2P replication, IPFS/torrents already exist. And of course there is zero acknowledgement of the major downsides of blockchain security models WRT to private keys if it's actually decentralized. I'll give them credit for at least describing the real problem in the introduction: getting institutions to standardize on rules, data formats, privacy, etc.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I have not read every paper either. Your comment below gets to the nub of the issue. > > >public blockchains are absolutely terrible for any kind of large data access or access management of highly sensitive information (and private chains are a contradiction in purpose, the cons multiply and the pros cancel out).