You can read at a speed I could only wish. Kudos.
And of course they don't "need" them. We don't necessarily "need" the cloud, Docker, or web frameworks either, yet here we are. Yes, there could be a new, completely open, distributed database that let multiple users monitor and inspect all historical changes, while allowing some others to make modifications in it.
We could just use Cassandra and build the whole distributed identity and storage infrastructure based on it.
I read the sensational headlines. They are as boring and as old as ever: it's the same "use-cases" over and over again, none of them require blockchains, and in none of them blockchain provided anything of value.
> Yes, there could be a new, completely open, distributed database that let multiple users monitor and inspect all historical changes, while allowing some others to make modifications in it.
You have just described a regular database with an open dataset.
> We could just use Cassandra and build the whole distributed identity and storage infrastructure based on it.
Yes. Yes, we could. And that's what all of those "researches" and "use cases" will inevitably end up doing: scraping "blockchain" and replacing it with MySQL, Postgres, BigQuery, Cassandra, MongoDB, sqlite etc.
I must admit that this right here was bait, because one of the storage backends used in enterprise blockchains is indeed Cassandra.
That’s part of the issue here. Blockchain technology is just something built on top of pre-existing tools, like Docker or Spring. My point is that if we were to scrap abstractions just because they could be done at a lower level already, why stop at blockchains?
