I can’t say that I especially found what I was looking for in the article. For one, the author fails to show the immediate threat blockchain technology poses on the distributed nature of the internet. Well, okay, fine, maybe it’s a threat in the sense that it does not require the “central authority” that’s required for the internet to work (quotation marks because you do need a DNS, but in effect you can yourself decide what names resolve to, even though for all intents and purposes that’s impractical. I digress).
The only point the article makes is essentially that for end users, copying the whole of the Bitcoin blockchain is expensive in terms of hard drive space. I’ll agree that it’s definitely not space-efficient to copy all the internet on every computers (in a way that makes it mega-distributed though). The alternatives suggested by the writer revolve around software that cannot trivially exist on an end-user’s laptop.
Probably a “cleaner” solution exists in things like the Dat Project and Rotonde, a blogging platform powered by the Dat Project.
Bonus points for readability. Can’t say that I enjoyed the structure of the content (the introduction lacked the appropriate guidance into the content of the article), nor did I find the arguments convincing. I don’t find the thing to make much sense at all as an idea. It would only be a threat if the fear of everything being copied everywhere was realized, which is not practical (or possible, for the most.)
I can’t say that I especially found what I was looking for in the article. For one, the author fails to show the immediate threat blockchain technology poses on the distributed nature of the internet. Well, okay, fine, maybe it’s a threat in the sense that it does not require the “central authority” that’s required for the internet to work (quotation marks because you do need a DNS, but in effect you can yourself decide what names resolve to, even though for all intents and purposes that’s impractical. I digress).
The only point the article makes is essentially that for end users, copying the whole of the Bitcoin blockchain is expensive in terms of hard drive space. I’ll agree that it’s definitely not space-efficient to copy all the internet on every computers (in a way that makes it mega-distributed though). The alternatives suggested by the writer revolve around software that cannot trivially exist on an end-user’s laptop.
Probably a “cleaner” solution exists in things like the Dat Project and Rotonde, a blogging platform powered by the Dat Project.
Bonus points for readability. Can’t say that I enjoyed the structure of the content (the introduction lacked the appropriate guidance into the content of the article), nor did I find the arguments convincing. I don’t find the thing to make much sense at all as an idea. It would only be a threat if the fear of everything being copied everywhere was realized, which is not practical (or possible, for the most.)