I assume it would be something like, the door lock is tied to the current owner as defined by the blockchain. No need for intermediaries, and no physical key.
This is the classic definition of a solution looking for a problem though.
I don't know about "no need for intermediaries" because of course you need someone who creates and maintains this blockchain, since blockchains are not present in nature (perhaps that is a decentralized group of people but the blockchain and its maintainers are then the intermediary between the two parties) so let's focus on the no physical key part.
If the primary benefit of blockchain is that only the registered owner of the house can get access to it, on that blockchain, that's a pretty weak feature and actually pretty shit. I would like my family to also get access to my house, as well as perhaps other people like houseguests or a maid etc. Keys seem to work pretty well, nobody is pounding down the door to buy "smart locks" as far as I can tell.
I'm not saying blockchain won't provide transformative utility, it might, but it probably won't look like what we imagine it will (existing paradigms, but on a blockchain).
Sorry I meant centralized intermediaries, which is what is often meant when referring to blockchain tech. Some other examples of centralized intermediaries are banks, ticket resellers like ticketmaster, deed notaries, etc.
And as for sharing keys with family members, perhaps just list them as sub-members of the owning member on the blockchain. When the owner changes, all previous sub-members lose access too. This can probably be done using a smart contract
You can certainly do it. But then the problem being solved is "keys are bad". Typically in startup lore you want a product to be 10x better than the existing solution to gain mainstream adoption. I have a hard time picturing smart locks to your doors on the blockchain as being 10x better than keys.
So we're back to the original question: without an Internet connection, this blockchain-controlled door won't open, even if you're the legitimate owner.
Or if it does open without Internet, then you can buy the house NFT, but the seller disabled the Internet connection in the house so the door doesn't know about the transaction. Now you're locked out even though you theoretically own the house on the blockchain.
Turns out the blockchain doesn't solve ownership of physical objects. You still need intermediaries like the police and courts to decide who owns the house.
I agree. It's not only that it's dangerous (let's say the internet always worked, someone could still ship a bug to the protocol, or too many nodes could fail, or it could get hacked), it's just not even better. Technologists often seem to not start with problems. What is the problem being solved by a blockchain based lock? What pain point exists that would no longer exist? Having to carry keys?
Keys are already decentralized and fully controlled by me. I can copy it and distribute it freely. Putting an intermediary (a blockchain) between myself and access to my house just seems silly.
Perhaps keys are valid for 24 hours. So if internet goes down, as long as you were validated sometime within the past 24 hours, you can enter. This also means that it takes 24 hours for ownership to change, which should be fine when selling a house. This also gives the city 24 hours to deploy countermeasures (like starlink receivers) in case the internet outage is expected to last longer
I don't know about "no need for intermediaries" because of course you need someone who creates and maintains this blockchain, since blockchains are not present in nature (perhaps that is a decentralized group of people but the blockchain and its maintainers are then the intermediary between the two parties) so let's focus on the no physical key part.
If the primary benefit of blockchain is that only the registered owner of the house can get access to it, on that blockchain, that's a pretty weak feature and actually pretty shit. I would like my family to also get access to my house, as well as perhaps other people like houseguests or a maid etc. Keys seem to work pretty well, nobody is pounding down the door to buy "smart locks" as far as I can tell.
I'm not saying blockchain won't provide transformative utility, it might, but it probably won't look like what we imagine it will (existing paradigms, but on a blockchain).