Fascinating! Finally feel like I have a better understanding of the potential of Bitcoin and Blockchain tech. I loved the part about why Taxi cab drivers hate getting paid with credit crds. I own a waste container company and feel exactly the same way. It's as if I am an unwilling franchisee of Visa and MasterCard. Thanks Alex!
Solving the last mile problem in developing countries or those economies that rely on cash, could create new business models for existing and trusted brands, as well as entrepreneurs. I love how the musician/artist payment system can be remedied. Thank you for this presentation.
Alex, I am very impressed. I didn't think anyone was smarter than your dad. Good genes I suppose but I will give you credit as there is no substitute for hard work and execution.
Educational video on the nature and benefits of block chain. (Even if Mr. Tapscott's understanding of why Manuel Zelaya was exiled from Honduras to Costa Rico makes him sound really ignorant.) Also, Russia's largest bank has adopted blockchain and Iranian shoe-makers are already using bitcoin to avoid U.S. sanctions.
Sir.. first of all kudos to you for making this so simple for layman like us. I have a doubt - what if in a particular group of evil hackers make a group and try to masquerade as normal bitcoin users and try to hack the blockchain ledger or if tries to mess with others' transaction. What would be the ways for others to stop them??
I highly recommend getting to know the technical ins-and-outs of the blockchain and the way it handles transactions. I recommend the book "Mastering Bitcoin" by Andreas Antonopoulos. See, what happens is this: when a new transaction is created by Paul, with the intention of sending a certain amount of Bitcoin to Abhijit, the transaction is sent from Paul's wallet to one or multiple nodes in the Bitcoin network. These nodes will continue to send the transaction to other nodes in the network and so on. There are currently tens of thousands of active nodes in the network. Not all of these nodes need to receive the transaction, as long as some do. The nodes will then check the validity of the transaction. Does Paul actually have access to the funds he's trying to transfer to Abhijit? They do this by checking the entire blockchain and keeping track of all the inputs and outputs associated with Paul's wallet. If these don't add up, the transaction is deemed invalid. As you can see, having a public history of all transactions is a crucial part of the blockchain's workings and solves the so called "double spend" problem. If the transaction is deemed valid and some other criteria are met (for example, a transaction fee is included), a miner creates a new block that contains this transaction and adds it to the blockchain, before moving on to a new block that is going to contain new transactions. This process takes roughly 10 minutes. During this process, Paul's wallet and the other nodes that have already received the transaction information continue to propagate the information through the network. If a hacker plans to mess with a transaction, he would have to hack a majority of the tens of thousands of active nodes and change the information included in the transaction, before it gets mined into a new block and added to the blockchain. Keep in mind that a hacker only has 10 minutes to do this. As you can hopefully see, this is a major benefit of the decentralized approach compared to a centralized one, where someone with malicious intent would potentially only need to hack one entity to mess with a transaction. It should be noted that none of this will keep your funds safe when you don't control your wallet and the keys associated with it. If you keep your coins in an exchange, for example, you don't own the keys. If a hacker manages to hack the exchange and gain access to the keys (as has happened multiple times already), there's nothing you can do about it. Don't trust middlemen. As for the information already stored in the blockchain, it would take an unfathomable amount of processing power to change it. I hope this helped. Get familiar with the blockchain technology, if you're interested. Its potential is truly amazing.
Hello Alex, I liked the idea of the Brazilian Olympics and the issue of land rights. Last year I travelled to Uganda to see the African Crisis only to find that the UG Government had acquired ancestral land by force to house the South Sudanese, this is ethnic cleansing and using the humanity to wipe out tribes. How on earth can blockchain save these vulnerable people. Can we dismantle the United Nations?
hahaha. uploader edited out the speaker @48:29 right in the middle of his response for how blockchain could improve youtube and offer more value to content creators. nice job google.
There are many scaling proposals, of which lightning network is my favorite. What it essentially does is that it allows you to transact off chain but such that if one player plays foul, the others can essentially grab all of his money and close the deal on the blockchain without the need for a third party. In other words: You put $100 on the table and me, too. Now we write contracts about who owns how much of these $200 but if I now try to finalize the deal, telling the blockchain that I own them all, then you have days to mathematically proof that that's not the case and grab the $200 yourself.
see minute 50 - He is emotionally tying our focus on things we care for - privacy, security, justice - eliciting our feelings of hope and this: „yes, that is the way to go“-feeling. Keeping us unaware of why the hopes he entices us with - are precisely not going to fulfill - right because with already ongoing block chaining property rights - no further questions asked - the huge advantages just outweigh completely for those who concentrate +90% of our planet in their few hands. He says himself: the question is: who is going to issue... - Is it going to be John, Jim, Jane or Mary? Or even Liu, Usnavy, Ibrahim... Have a guess.. Now, you have the opportunity to - if not know, just feel the answer: For some, it would make things a lot easier - the contemporary version of having people believe in eternal god created monarchy or the caste system - what fascinates and deeply tempts to try - is systemically "BLOCK all fights for true justice and CHAIN the people with that +90% property". Best wishes, Daniel
Not feasible to pull off with bitcoin - each time stamp is used to create all subsequent blocks in the blockchain. to undo a past timestamp, you have to rebuild all subsequent blocks (a process that will take a very long time and hundreds of millions of dollars). this is because of "proof of work" mining used in bitcoin ensures immutability. If you have some bank trying to create a brand new blockchain without tons of mining, then yes, it is possible that timstamps can be tampered with.
Who could blame them? The concept of this technology is pretty abstract and the value of it might not be that apparent to the average person. I'd also argue that the barrier to entry is still too high for it to be able to achieve widespread adoption.
The slide at 31:53 (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3PdO7zVqOwc.htmlm53s) has nothing to do with what he is talking about, it is a bootstrap frontend template (github.com/puikinsh/gentelella). No further comments about the quality of this talk from my side.
If the goal of every decision is to maximize average well-being of a citizen, then you need to be able to predict an impact of every choice on that average well-being. You can't be an expert in every domain like biotechnology, computer science, economics, social sciences. Thus, you can't predict how a particular choice related to that domain will effect society. Direct democracy is like letting everybody to drive a car, operate a nuclear plant and operate a bank at the same time, without checking that they are qualified to perform any of those tasks. That is not to say that the current system is better than direct democracy in that regard, because we don't check whether representatives are qualified to make some of those those decisions. But, in theory, direct democracy does not seem to be the best way to maximize well-being of a society. Ideally, you want decisions to be made by somebody or something that is an expert in that domain and can accurately estimate impact of every option on the table, so you can choose the option that has the best consequences. Just to give a taste of how bad direct democracy could be. 89% of people in US (based on 2014 poll) believe in God. The majority does not have any real expertise in technology, economics or social science. And even if you're smart, you can't be smart at everything.
Jon Wise So, in other words, nobody is psychic. Well, of course!!! The problem we have is the "representatives" are only in the interests of the corporations, as the corporations have bought off these pathetic and weak representatives.
chrisgast Well, I agree that what we have right now is bad. As for you remark that nobody is psychic... An expert obviously can only estimate the impact that decision might have and he could be wrong. It's about risk minimization, not risk elimination. When you need to have a surgery, you go to somebody who has experience in that domain and can better decisions, even if the are not perfect decisions. Obviously, a professional surgeon is not a psychic and not a wizard, so it might be that in your case there is 90% chance that you'll not survive. But it's better than 99.9999999% risk of death (e.g., if you were to let some shaman make decisions about your treatment or attempt a surgery on yourself). The problem with the current system is not only corruption, but also bad decision making even in the absence of any special interests corrupting that decision making. So, even if we were to eliminate corruption completely, I would argue that the current system is broken. In terms of corruption, direct democracy is probably much better. But I I think it's not absent of corruption. Right now you can't be elected without a very large sum to spend on your campaign. This is because whoever has the most resources has the loudest voice and has more persuasion power (e.g. through advertising, PR control, damage control, etc). In direct democracy it becomes hard for your idea to be "elected" if you have zero and somebody has millions of bucks to spend on brainwashing the electorate. Again, when it comes to corruption and special interests, its much better than what we have now it term of corruption, but it's not a magic bullet as some people seem to believe.
chrisgast Well, there's a big list. From Aristotle's times they figured it out that democracy decays into tyranny. To put it plainly, people are stupid and selfish so it would take highly educated and moral people with sound values to govern themselves without hurting others. First, it would get to a dictatorship of majority. 51% might vote to abolish some rights of the 49, even to expropriate them, to overtax them on some arbitrary criteria. Than there is the aspect of competence: how qualified is the average Joe to make decisions on complicated issues like banking, oil industry, environment, infrastructure? What would happen is a small group with high interests would manipulate the debate, would inflate passions and trick the public to go for one option or focus on irrelevant debates. Imagine there would be only one TV channel and the program would be democratically voted. We would watch the Kardashians all day long or something :))
see minute 49 - He is emotionally tying our focus on things we care for - privacy, security, justice, prosperity - eliciting our feelings of hope and this: „yes, that is the way to go“-feeling. Keeping us unaware of why the hopes he entices us with - are precisely not going to fulfill - right because with already ongoing block chaining property rights - no further questions asked - the huge advantages just outweigh completely for those who concentrate +90% of our planet in their few hands. He says himself: the question is: who is going to issue... - Is it going to be John, Jim, Jane or Mary? Or even Liu, Usnavy, Ibrahim... Have a guess.. Now, you have the opportunity to - if not know, just feel the answer: For some, it would make things a lot easier - the contemporary version of having people believe in eternal god created monarchy or the caste system - what fascinates and deeply tempts to try - is systemically "BLOCK all fights for true justice and CHAIN the people with that +90% property". Best wishes, Daniel
natale DJ His father just spoke at my university giving the same speil, and I couldn't help but consider the exact same points you just made. To me It just seems like another system, much like the one we already have. Only the new intermediaries, or middlemen are super computers potentially controlled, and run by the same people we already distrust.
Trusted because cannot be hacked! But what if you get your hack software into the synchronization between the nodes. I am sure this can disrupt the blockchain.
it won't work with just software. to pull off something like this (a 51% attack), you need to have more mining power than the rest of the entire network - which amounts to requiring hundreds of millions of dollars in terms of mining computers as well as access to a whole lot of electricity (enough to power a small country).
A private block chain is an encrypted ledger -- by its nature it can not be decentralized because it is centrally controlled --- this is why it is stupid to try to seperate block chain and decentralization -- for it to work it has to be decentralized. So AGAIN -- Block Chain without decentralization is not block chain - it is an encrypted ledger.
These are the people we need to be defending as Canadians and part of the Commonwealth where nobody wins. I love your passion for Aid and how Blockchain can change the dynamics. Check this video out. Much love - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hfmY9Wlxx0o.html lyricstranslate.com/fr/gimme-power-gimme-power.html#ixzz5FuCEawiV The police are extorting you (money!) but they live of what you are paying and if they treat you like a criminal (thief!) is not your fault, give it thanks to the regent. We have to uproot the problem, and changing the government of our country, to the people who is in the bureaucracy, those people who likes the crumbs. I therefore complain and complain, because here is where I live I'm not a fool anymore who does not watch the government positions, there are people who are getting richer. People who live in poverty, nobody does anything because no one cares it. The people up there hate you, there are more people who want to drop their heads. If you give more power to power, harder they're coming to fuck you. Because we were a world power we are poor they mishandle us. Chorus: Give me give me give me give me all the power to fuck you. Gimme gimme gimme gimme all the power so I can come around to fuck you.(2x) Give me it, Give me it, Give me it, Give me it, all the power Give me it, Give me it, Give me it, Give me it, all the power (Yes it is faggot, fuck you faggot dumbass) Because we were not born where there is not to eat, we do not have to ask ourselves, how can we do? If they drawn us as sluggish, we are not VIVA MEXICO CABRONES Let’s feel the Mexican power! Let’s fell it! All together as brothers, because we are more, we pull more together. Why are we following a bunch of assholes? Who lead us where it suits them and it is our sweat what support them which it keeps them eating hotcakes that bread is the bread of our people. Chorus (4x) The people united will never be defeated, El Tito y el Huidos, will never be defeated
This guy is saying almost the exact same speech as a TED talk I just watched about blockchain. WTF??? who copied who? Seriously.. he says the same senteces, and same jokes.
They are all telling the same thing, even the same anecdote and the same joke. This is an incredible I do not know how to name it. There is no information in all these presentations, once you see one you know all the others. And they get paid for that!!!
