|
|
|
|
|
|
by OkayPhysicist
1233 days ago
|
|
|
The problem with "serving communities around the world" with radically de-centralized systems is that in order to interact with the real world you need to have trusted parties. And with blockchain, once you have a trusted party, you might as well have them host a database. So you get to choose: either you have your trustless, radically-decentralizable system that only is relevant in its own small ecosystem (like cryptocurrency) or you have trusted parties and thus have no need for the trustless, decentralized system, and would be better served with a federated system of trusted parties (like "real" money). |
|
|
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2020/03/12/in-defense-of-block...
You can run an election like stackexchange sites - trusting that the admins don't mess with the votes - or you can do it with a blockchain. (You don't need blockchains, you can use Merkle trees etc. but the point is, people should be able to check the Merkle branch and know their vote is counted properly)
And that's just one example of many. Just like HTTP, the network is global. You could say in the real world you need magazines, newspapers, radio to get the word out -- or a closed network like AOL or MSN, but then the open, permissionless Web put the lie to all that. It was an open protocol, whether it's Web with HTTP and Email with SMTP etc. Open beats closed. People just need the software and the protocols.