Still learning this whole block chain technology, bitcoin miners get paid a fraction of bitcoin providing the process power needed for transaction. How about other application? Like documentation keeping or storage? Who "mines" that, and how? Thanks for your response.
djp3 thanks for the response, I'm still confused. If no one gets paid, why would anyone want to be a miner for other applications other than mining for Bitcoin? Keeping a copy of transaction doesn't seem like a strong incentive to me to be a miner. Thanks for your time!
The reason why people set up computers to do mining is because they get a reward (paid in bitcoin) for successfully closing a block of transactions. That is all that a bitcoin miner does. In order to do that though, you have to have electricity, an internet connection, a computer (of course) and storage. You need storage to keep the blockchain so that you can close future blocks correctly - in light of past transactions.
The recording, registering, and tracking of assets (digital or otherwise) is already available and working in the Digital Rights Exchange (DRE) provided by Xeden Cloud Concepts. The DRE allows you to control access grants to the data lodged in your library, registered entries can be public or private, plus it's supported by other relational applications. It's currently used for registering, storing, and tracking digital art, music, software, medical records, financial and legal documents. You can check it out at www.Xeden.us
excellent talk, represented all the ideas fast and efficiently! I am really curious on why you picked etherium for an example of a blockchain and not bitcoin :)
I understand what BLOCKCHAIN as used for banking, finance as well as investments. But can it be applied to store and manage information or data for any entity whether its personal, business even for a government? And if it does, how safe is it from any tempering or unwanted access by hackers, online criminals, intelligence agencies?
It's primarily a technology for transferring ownership of items from one person to another. It can be "ownership" of currency, or something like stocks etc. It isn't really designed to be a database. It's benefits are that it is decentralized, anonymous (in a way), and publicly verifiable.
If the chain is private on limited nodes it can be structured for databases however, this functionality is still in development. A lot of banks are work on this. to provide security when processing transactions especially on services like swift who suffered from hacks earlier last year. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Omavi Quadir Yup, it is still well under development. If that's the case (database applications) can be applied, it will be awesome. Will just let and see. Time will tell!
Well, the data will reside somewhere in some database, and maybe there could be a backup data storage facility ... in the event of a nuclear terrorist strike, hardware and data will be lost. In the event of a terrorist software hack, data could be lost.. Begin. Write, Delete all files. Next, press enter. End program. .. block chain, I thinks breaks data into small chunks to be distributed across a network, such as the Internet, rather than put the file on one computer. But when if you have a virus deleting files everywhere... national governments are unlikely to do this to each other in an age where the politically economies are soo highly dependent upon each other. See movie, stupid, crazy, love... wherefore, terrorist strikes, by disenfranchised, disenchanted persons, are the threat, to homeland security. .. so, keep data in a secure envelope, and lock a chain around it.
Very interesting indeed. Do you, by any chance, have any other information (articles, videos, papers, etc.) regarding blockchain-based voting system? thank you
+Constantin Ursu There are some academic papers around about it. But it would be easy enough to just give everyone one "VoteCoin" and then have them send it to the address of their candidate. Or split it up if they want to partially vote. The votes would be anonymous but completely traceable.
Thanks for pointing out these solutions. I am more interested in the blockchain itself. Currently you have the public blockchain used for cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin and the like. There's also Ethereum, which has some sort of a private Blockchain (I'm still in the process of learning how Ethereum works). In the context of elections, let's say the presidential election this year. The government wouldn't accept a public blockchain (at least that's my assumption), in the same time, a private blockchain controlled (only) by the government isn't a solution as well. So I'm wondering about the logistics of such a blockchain, would 50% of the nodes owned by other international organizations, so that a majority attack couldn't take place (in case of a corrupt government trying to rig the elections). I'm not sure I made myself clear. In any case, thanks for the answer ;)
+Constantin Ursu Well don't imagine crazy scenarios out of the box. Imagine if the blockchain scenario would be a step in the right direction. Right now the government controls the entire election process (in the U.S.) it is opaque and there is little ability for public scrutiny of the voting (there are safeguards, but it's not exactly transparent). The problem with a > 50% attack is that the software that makes up greater than 50% could change the rules of the game. But it would be sufficient to have a watch-guard organization running a miner that verifies that all transactions followed the agreed upon rules. In that case it doesn't matter if the government had over 50% control as long as the rules were agreed upon (the source code) and there was a competent oversight organization (any good college or university CS department could do it).
But just like I can burn or lose the physical paper, I can also lose or break the hard drive my private keys are stored on. Moreover, most people are not too much into tech. I think it will take quite a bit of time until people trust an encrypted hard drive more than their safe.
In America, they have something called Title Insurance, essentially a computer database that lets people who do title searches know who owns what property. ... delete... enter... I guess block chains are meant to stop that kind of electronic fraud. .. you have to see beyond labels and names to see what is really going on... that said, First American Financial was the biggest title insurance company, years ago.. maybe they still exist?
+djp3 Great lecture. I apologize if this is dumb question, but you start with a very understandable and relatable example of a car title. How does this then get translated into a transaction on blockchain without both parties having an identifier in the ledger and signing off that the transaction took place? I understand how a bitcoin is electronically transferred and the transaction is recorded, but I am failing to grasp more tangible examples that happy regularly in day to day business.
+Gregory Nebergall It requires some changes to the interface of a bitcoin client, but let's say that you associate a 1.0 bitcoin transaction with a title. Then you track that 1.0 bitcoin. Whomever has that 1.0 worth of bitcoin has the title. It's like colored coins in principle. The only thing that you have to change is to make sure that the participants don't see "coins" but see "titles" and that the "title" is never broken apart. But otherwise everything could work the same way.
+djp3 Thanks for the feedback! Bear with me for just one more second. The aim is to have the blockchain be the unquestioned source of truth, but lets say I sell my car to you and I associate the title to a coin (coin is now "colored") and I transfer the coin to you. Now there is a title still floating around that has a digital counterpart in the blockchain. I then turn around and sell the car and the paper title to someone else. How could they know that the paper title has a digital counterpart in the blockchain? My concern is that their is certain intrinsic knowledge that everyone understands, i.e. you buy a car and the title represents your ownership. At what point do people start referring to the blockchain to look up ownership instead of what they have always known to represent ownership?
+Gregory Nebergall The paper isn't that important, what is important is the association of the physical car with the bitcoin. So you would have to have the original bitcoin id engraved in the car, like a VIN today.
This sounds ominous. Look at the stock market. Are prices set by the interaction of buyers and sellers, or one entity, the stock market company, that decides at what price a share will be bought, and at which it will be sold, moment from moment, while the difference is logged as profit? If the latter, than might not a block chain be used to hide this fact? Maybe the block chain is a grand illusion?
Very good talk. Thanks! However I don't really see any reason to do any of these on a distributed database rather than a centralized database other than those political, idealogical, etc reasons the speaker refers to early on in the talk. I think using the file folder is misleading; it's not a binary choice of blockchain or paper records. We already have centralized databases that the DMV, banks or whoever can use. In fact, central databases work faster and can do more in terms of calculations or self-executing code or smart contracts or whatever you call it. So it really just comes down to an issue of trust. In other words, why can't you build a centralized database system for all of these use cases that is public, time-stamped and persistent. All you need is to open read access, time-stamp which is extremely simple and back it up! What am I missing here?
+Will Freeman It is exactly the political reasons that motivated bitcoin. The blockchain eliminates the need for trust in a central organization. Instead you trust the algorithm, which is open source. Although the code for a database might be open-source, the running of it is not. The blockchain open-sources the actual operation of the database as well. It is clearly described what goes in and how and it's validated by distributed proof of work and cryptography.
A decentralised systems removes the one point of failure. What would happen if the server location were to have fire. It would destroy millions of dollars worth of data. But having it decentralised means it would need to be destroyed on every computer on the network
Thanks for the video, very informative, i am new to this technology but quite interested to know more about it. I had few queries; 1. As the base of block chain is having distributed data base, how are you going to solve the problem of cost? inst having distributed db will increase cost? 2. Also reliability, it needs to be public but also they need to be anonymous so how this will be carried out? the reliability is transferred to the entity who will verify it and upload the data into the system. how will this problem be handled? for example in your video you talk about land registry, i as an owner would like to try this technology but what is the fact that I am the true owner of the land (this has happened in Honduras were land registry is problem and duplication of land owner ship exists) but still i dont want the entire world to know about the owner ship of this land in my name only selected authorities, in the case wont the reliability be shifted to the authorities who manage all this?
+shree sule The block chain contains a proof that the owner of a private key can claim. It's like there is a mathematical statements that says "Whoever owns the matching key to this one: has the rights to this bitcoin (or house or whatever) You don't have to reveal that you have the key to anyone.
+djp3 no problem, i will certainly do that. i do understand your busy schedule, but could please help me out with the below queries?i have kept a log of queries which i keep on updating as and when i read more abt it :) I do appreciate your time and apologies if find questions too naive; My understanding about blockchain technology is that instead of keeping a centralised database, the data base is been distributed and stored at different entities. Lets consider a following exapmle; Today the core banking application working is as follows; let us say BANK A has its data placed at a centeralised database in one location and a data recovery centre away at another location. Lets say BANK. A has total of 100 branches, so whenever a transaction is carried out in any branches the data will be updated at the centeralised database along with the data recovery centre (basesd on the replciation frequency). Going forward, implementation of this blockcahin technology would me decentralising this database i.e. each branches (i.e. 100 of it) will have its own database and will be synced with one and other as a soon as the transaction is carried out at anyone of the branch. Am i correct in assuming this? Query 1) In this case wouldnt the cost of having multiple database placed at each node increase? Query 2) I would assume the concept called permissioned technology (oppsite to what bitcoin use) would be used/ supported by most of the institue Query 3) Assuming the permissioned technology would be implemented which would mean only handful of participants will have the say over whether the transaction conducted is going to be valid or not. So wouldnt the core functionality of blockchain will fail? Which is to not to give control to corrupt and baised officals and transaction is agreed upon by majorty of consense? Query 4) In continuation to the above question, many other use cases apart from finacial sericves using this technology are coming out like land registry, patent registry and others where the use of valuable items are used. My worry is while uploading the data into the system the control is totally with the offical who is entering the record how would we tackle this issue? This will continue to be an issue unless its been authorised by a proper governing body. Query 5) Today a customer anonumus but is identified by key pin verification, 3ds and many more such protocls as we have a single point of truth (centralised database) today. How will this be handled in a shared
+shree sule There are distributed database technologies that aren't based on blockchains. The blockchain is about not having a central authority validating transactions. Right now it requires each participant to have a full copy of the database. Other distributed database technologies don't require a full copy of the database at each node, but do require a central authority - like Cassandra for example. People are trying to use blockchain tech for anything that involves a certified transfer by a central authority now. Essentially removing central authorities from any transaction you can think of - stock, real estate titles, digital art, etc. etc.
Blockchain can be used in media. We all know media bends the truth and sometimes lies but I think I know the way how to make information transparent through blockchain. However I'm not a very technical person and I'll need some help...
A market is a place where people go to buy and, or sell something similar. And a bazaar is a place where people go to buy and/or sell similar, or disimilar items - like jeans and oranges. The stock market - you should be able to call your broker and say, those shares of xyz corporation I bought, mail them to me. And you should be able to sell, gift, or trade those certificates with whomever. Or send them back to the broker to be traded on the stock market. The point is, if that option to keep those certificates under your mattress does not exist, then how do you know if the stock market actually exists? Maybe it is simply a company of brokers who are setting prices - will buy the shares at .. will sell the shares at... and it is not the case that for every buy there must be a sell? That would be bad. Maybe that is why most brokers now will no longer mail to you the stock certificates you bought? Or maybe it is because stock certificates, like money, can be counterfeited? The point is, they changed the rules without public discussion, or official explanation given. .. maybe block chains are an attempt to ensure the existence of markets, in the absence of paper claims? Maybe. .. If the total number of shares of a particular company cannot be known... then what are they worth? Hyperinflation destroys value. Anarchists, and eugenicists, and other "bad people" exist. I guess they got think tanks at the Pentagon that are for, and not against, America - right?
Actually, because anyone can see the blockchain there is a lot more transparency than in the stock market. It's like there was a big wall with all of the stocks that anyone owned listed. They aren't listed by a person's name but by a number that only that person knows.
Not convinced. Mail me the stock certificates. If I lose them, I can always call the Transfer Agent company to get replacements. But with this blockchain system, you neither get anything that is legal tender in the mail, nor is there anybody to call. It is just you, and the computer. And computers hate me. Seriously.
Subprime mortgages, loans made by the bank, were packaged and sold as bonds, graded AAA, to other financial institutions. You just have to call your broker and say, mail me that bond, and I imagine the bond along with a detailed "prospectus" would arrive containing a list of all the mortgages that bond represented... and then taking that info, you could go to those tenants and say, So, you gonna pay, or what? .. the computer versus the block chain - who you gonna trust? A Trump Administration? El Dictator? .. where's Jimmy Stewart when you need him?
Hi. I think our future is inextricably linked with blockchain technologies. actively developing new projects with great ideas and attracting a lot of money on ICO, one of these platforms TokenGo. With minimal investment, possible huge earnings.
Sounds communistic, the end of anonymous transactions. On the other hand, it may become easier to keep valuable works of art from being stolen, or make them, easier to recover. .. assuming the art is legal. A stock certificate - how like a work of art?
