• Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    19 hours ago

    And yet, every single company that has ever tried to implement a distributed zero trust ledger into their products and processes has inevitably ditched the idea after releasing that it does not, in fact, provide any useful benefit.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      It is exceptionally useful for the auditing of damn near everything in digital space, as long as shared resources and 3rd parties have access to the blockchain … which is probably the major reason corporations and politicians don’t want anything to do with it.

      It’d be a lot harder to hide crimes, fraud, grey business dealings, bribery and illegal donations, sanction violations, secret police slush funds, etc, etc if every event in the entire financial system and supply chain was logged and cryptographically verifiable.

      EDIT: NOTE I’m not talking about everyones transactions being in a public ledger (bad). Only enhancing the current system between businesses and orgs so it’s exceptionally difficult for any of them to falsify data without the others knowing, as well as having near instant visibility and analytics of the entire market (great for regulators, academics, etc).

      A supply-chain wide blockchain could enable individuals to view every raw material that went into every product they consume, down to the location, date — even the exact time in many cases — each was mined, refined, harvested, transported, picked, traded, etc. in a way that no individual corp could hide or falsify dramatically. Each corp and individuals true (embodied energy consumption would be visible to every buyer; developed world politicians and corporations couldn’t simply blame China and other developing countries for their own consumption.

      • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        The reason major businesses haven’t bothered using distributed blockchains for auditing is because they fundamentally do not actually help in any way with auditing.

        At the end of the day, the blockchain is just a ledger. At some point a person has to enter the information into that ledger.

        Now, hear me out here, because this is going to be some totally out there craziness that is going to blow your mind… What happens if that person lies?

        Like, you’ve built your huge, complicated system to track every banana you buy from the farm to the grocery store… But what happens if the shipper just sends you a different crate of bananas with the wrong label on them? How does your system solve that? What happens if the company growing your bananas claims to use only ethical practices but in reality their workers are effectively slaves? How does a blockchain help fix that?

        The data in a system is only as good as your ability to verify it. Verifying the integrity of the data within systems was largely a solved problem long before distributed blockchains came along, and was rarely if ever the primary avenue for fraud. It’s the human components of these systems where fraud can most easily occur. And distributed blockchains do absolutely nothing to solve that.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 minutes ago

          Counterpoint, having a currency where every token is tied into its own transaction history might be unpopular with large businesses for other reasons. Like maybe they don’t want to be that transparent or accountable. The FBI have made public statements about how much easier it is to track criminals who used Crypto.

          Your opinion seems to contradict reality.