original post: we're not talking about crypto
comment: they're not talking about crypto but people still just say "F them crypto is bad!"
this comment: F them because crypto is bad!
Crypto (money, nfts) is bad, I think smart contracts are a mistake too, and I don't think LO needs blockchain either, but the objection is more like the one someone else said about, if there's some feature that needs it, fine, but don't just look for some excuse to use a solution with no problem.
But also it would be absurd to say that cryptography, authentication, and povenence have no valid application with documents.
https://esp.ethereum.foundation/about
“ ESP focuses on strengthening Ethereum's foundations and enabling future builders: improving infrastructure, expanding the range of tools available to those building on Ethereum, deepening our understanding of cryptographic primitives, and growing the builder ecosystem through education and community development. The work we support is open source, non-commercial and built for positive sum outcomes.”
It seems more likely to me that they were looking into "growing the [grifter] ecosystem through [...] community development" instead.
Any other "blockchain" related innovation is just a solution in search of a problem with the real purpose of pumping some virtual asset and selling it off in volume to other speculators. Anything you claim can be done with blockchains (other than decentralized finance) can be more easily done with databases, PKI, hashtrees, ZKPs and other technologies that exist for decades, and that includes smart contracts and anonymous & decentralized communication.
You clearly live with a political stable government you can trust not to steal from you or imprison you for engaging in political protests.
People in such places are using decentralized assets to protect themselves. What do you think they should do instead?
How about... they, and everybody else around the world, should work hard for good governance for all people of Earth?
It's simply obscene to claim that a speculative token peddled by SV venture capitalists could somehow magically solve things like disease, violence, corruption and lack of basic infrastructure keeping these nations down. It's so self serving and detached from developmental realities of poor countries - which I experienced fist hand in my life - that it makes my blood boil in disgust for the crypto bros.
[1] https://merehead.com/blog/maersk-blockchain-use-case/
[2] Entirely possible this could be done without a blockchain, yes.
Blockchain is just bookkeeping. I don't know, can you demonstrate a use case for accounting or book keeping?
Up to now we always had to do accounting in books that can be cooked and have to be trusted.
Blockchain is accounting with books that can't be cooked and don't have to be trusted.
It has other problems which are real, but so what? Everything has some kind of problem.
With blockchain the problem is if you go for convenience and use a centralizing key custodian, then someone else controls your keys and everything they protect, and if you don't, then it's too easy to lose your keys and everything they protected with no recovery.
Well those are real problems but they are no different from the problems of using a plain database that can be copied, modified, hidden, stolen, has to be trusted even though you know you actually can't trust the owner, etc...
Not really. It’s books that a couple people tediously agree on.
Blockchains can use proof-of-authority or proof-of-stake not as a means to accumulate “wealth” but firstly to secure the network from tampering while facilitating the resilient, chain of transaction records.
Ethereum is a distributed Turing machine (completely programmable)—first and foremost—and that is much more powerful than a simple coin.
An example is supply chain management [0] and supply chain traceability, which is already in use at Walmart [1].
[0] https://scholar.google.pt/scholar?q=blockchain+supply+chain+... [1] https://jbba.scholasticahq.com/article/3712.pdf
