| > Again, you're calling me "crypto-absolutist" shows your clear hate for the technology only for the sake of it. No, it shows that I define people talking about this tech by how much of reality they ignore. > This would also make very easy to prove ownership. You have access to the address that owns said property, it's yours. It's as simple as that. Who is this "you"? And who do you prove this ownership to? How all the other use cases like death and loss of access to the address are resolved? How are court orders are resolved? And so on, I've provided links where I listed various use cases in similar discussions. See? Your "easy" ignores so many complexities. > The database you'd need locally would be pretty much to store useful information and to track data on the blockchain. So, you need to store useful information somewhere anyway. What exactly is the value of blockchain in this case? > that doesn't give me the right to hate the entire technology that makes it possible. Your emotional outbursts don't affect me. It's not hate when every single thing that you say is possible is only possible for the most trivial cases, makes other cases hard or impossible, requires complex workaround for complex issues, and in general doesn't improve an iota over existing situation. |