Please don’t auto downvote before reading.

A little bit ago some asked a question about why the hate of the blockchain, and that got me thinking if there even was a legitimate use case where the blockchain would be beneficial, but I couldn’t think of one outside maybe some sort of decentralized bank, but before I knew I was thinking it would instantly turn into some crypto scheme and strapped it, because crypto currencies are a scam on every level – and no they aren’t private or secret as some think either.

So I wanted to ask the community. Instead of using the blockchain for crypto, is there a better use where the blockchain could benefit society?

  • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    The most attractive part about blockchain is the decentralized ledger showing each transaction made.

    This is probably the key thing. Let’s say that you wanted to purchase a home in Turkey but you live in Canada (just play along). A transaction on the blockchain can show a verified transfer of funds, record the purchase and act as proof of ownership.

    As you mentioned, the big issue is computational expense.

    • DaseinPickle@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      But is this actually a problem. Does people go around now and need proof that they bought some property?

      To me it seems like blockchain is a solution looking for problems that doesn’t really exist.

      • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        It is a problem. I used a very specific situation, but the need is there. That said, is blockchain the best solution for an ever shrinking planet? That’d be a no.

      • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        But is this actually a problem. Does people go around now and need proof that they bought some property?

        Yeah, all the time, obviously. That’s literally what a receipt is. If people did not need to prove that they owned things, then receipts, titles and deeds wouldn’t exist.

      • fluxion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Palestinians commonly have to defend their home ownership to settlers claiming their land but i doubt blockchain would help even if it was around long enough to record such a thing. American Indians are another obvious case of “but it’s written right here …” where blockchain probably wouldn’t help.

    • BougieBirdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah, my original thought was that you could see a record to show that a public works contract put forth by Politician Joe and awarded to ABC Roadwork Inc, and then later you’d see that most of the contract money ended up in Joe’s cousin’s investment account.

      And again, I don’t think it’s foolproof because ABC would just immediately convert everything into cash to pay their vendors. But it’s still nice to think about alternatives even if we know they might be impractical because hey, that’s how we come up with better alternatives.

      • Acamon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        If we’re imaging a world where corporations and governments would agree to this level of accountability, wouldn’t it be eaiser to just make certain financial transactions into public records?

        Currently we consider some things public records (registering a company y, the voting roll) and other things private (income and taxes, bank transactions). If there was the will to chnage things we could just make the financial records of all elected government officials and corporations with government contracts automatically publically accessible. This doesn’t need block chain, a law could be passed deeming these “in the public interest” such that banks would have no grounds to refuse a request from journalists or any citizens to access them.

        This would be a lot simpler and cheaper than block chain. But its unlikely to happen for the same reason that block chain won’t be used for this either.

        • BougieBirdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Sure, I suppose any public record is a public record. And you’re right, as much as I’d love to see it and it’d be good for the world, I don’t imagine it happening in my lifetime.

          I suppose either way an unscrupulous person might find a way to launder their money.

        • Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          The only counterpoint I can think of is that the distributed ledger is much harder to fuck with than a physical or digital archive with a couple backups.