[lt]

> It wasn't set up by me, was it?

Yeah, you are the one claiming that blockchain has to somehow identify and categorize songs automatically in order for it to be in anyway useful. The undeniable appeal claimed is about how organizations coordinate and share information.

> Moreover, it means that every single company agrees that anyone can just write whatever they want to this database, sure.

No, you can design it with whichever rules you want on who can write, on what's written, and how the consensus is determined if that information is accepted.

> Oh cool. Data is useless without access to it though. Hence, APIs. You are not a programmer, are you?

This makes no sense. If I have a copy of the data, I can access it. Yes, I'm a programmer.

> Just count the number of assumptions you make to make this work:

Aren't those mostly the same assumptions you have to make to have music licensing work at all? Through an intermediary, on a relational database somewhere? Everyone has to agree to use this system, to provide truthful metadata, and use this intermediary's information as the only source of truth?

> BTW. Blockchain cannot handle either payments or royalties. It can hardly handle a few payments without buckling under its own load.

Again, don't take Bitcoin's limitations for Blockchain limitations.

[dmitriid]

> Yeah, you are the one claiming that blockchain has to somehow identify and categorize songs automatically in order for it to be in anyway useful.

Nope. Not me. I've even quoted the claims.

> The undeniable appeal claimed is about how organizations coordinate and share information.

Once again. I asked several times: the organisations cannot organise and agree now. Why would they agree in the case of blockchain? Just be cause you say "blockchain" it won't magically happen.

> Aren't those mostly the same assumptions you have to make to have music licensing work at all?

Yes. So. Once again. What's the undeniable appeal of the blockchain? You need all of the exact same assumptions that don't work or work very poorly in the first place, and you decide to add a blockchain on top of that because somehow it will magically make everything work.

So, once again. What exactly does blockchain bring into the equation if everything remains the same?

> Again, don't take Bitcoin's limitations for Blockchain limitations.

Riiight. There apparently exists some magical blockchain that doesn't have any of the limitations that every single blockchain on the market has.

[lt]

> So, once again. What exactly does blockchain bring into the equation if everything remains the same?

I did state it, repeatedly, but it doesn't count because everything else remains the same and it doesn't magicaly makes everything simple and easy. Allright.

[dmitriid]

You did, and it breaks immediately, because everything else (the things that actually don't work) remain the same, and you for some reason expect them to work in your blockchain.

If something doesn't already work, adding something that's completely orthogonal doesn't help it, or solve it. All other perceived benefits are just not good enough, and blockchain brings enough problems of its own.