| > But I don’t have an option to sync with a service that I can guarantee will remain in existence How does blockchain ensure this? (I'm not sure that blockchain has any particular advantages or disadvantages here compared to the classic "upload it to Usenet" approach to reliable backups.) > and outside of state control. How does blockchain ensure this? In particular, - State still control almost every network connection in the world, and blockchain is meaningless if you can't actually connect to the network. - Almost all blockchain schemes distribute power in proportion to existing ("real-world") power, e.g., people with the most existing capital, people with the most computational resources, people with the most coercive ability. Wouldn't you specifically not want a blockchain if you're worried about state power executing a 51% attack? - What, precisely, is a state going to do by "controlling" your encrypted password store? Controlling a cleartext password store, sure, but there are already well-established mechanisms to just encrypt them, no blockchain required. And I don't really understand what a 51% attack on an encrypted file is supposed to do. Blockchains are very good at one thing: avoiding double-spend attacks in a system otherwise susceptible to Sybil attacks. That turns out to be exactly the problem that a worldwide distributed electronic currency has. But it's not the problem everyone has. If you don't have that problem, blockchains are not particularly useful to you. |