Talk to this user

  1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    I wanted to follow up on your feedback on the “blockchain in healthcare” story. You mentioned that the story did not address whether blockchain makes things cheaper or more secure. But I didn’t fully understand what exactly you thought the story should be about…

    Could help me shape the next one? What question should be answered on this topic? Your comment would be very helpful!

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Thanks, Charles. I’d be happy to act as a questioning voice if you would find it helpful. I have quite a bit of technical knowledge on the topic. I don’t think I have time to go much farther than that, but you’re welcome to try to tempt me! 🙂

      The thing that I feel is missing from most reporting on blockchain and bitcoin is simply that it’s the New Hotness, and so people want to apply it to everything. But it’s actually a very, very expensive solution to the problem that it solves, and the reason that it’s proposed is a solution is that it eliminates a certain kind of attack on authenticity that other solutions do not eliminate (fiduciary misfeasance/malfeasance).

      But it also creates opportunities for new, much different attacks on authenticity that existing solutions are not as subject to, precisely because there is no fiduciary responsibility. And because it’s so expensive, adding it to any sort of transaction chain that is going to be widely used is highly problematic.

      When I see stories about blockchain like the one I commented on, it frustrates me that nobody ever examines the question “why is blockchain the right thing to use here” in any kind of detail. It’s just assumed that because blockchain is the New Hotness, the people trying to apply it to whatever problem is being looked at must know what they are doing. But by and large that hasn’t been the case when I’ve looked closely at what they are doing, and in this case it seems pretty clear to me that blockchain just makes the problem harder. That should be the assumption that you start from when reporting on blockchain, rather than taking at face value claims like “it’s more secure,” etc.

      Blockchain in the form of bitcoin has a completely laughable history of security failure after security failure.

      If you can, and haven’t already, I would really encourage you to look into the technical details of how blockchain works and why bitcoins have value. This is quite interesting, and once you see how it works I suspect you’ll look at stories like this in a very different way.

  2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    Thanks for your comment and edit to the constitutional law story!

    I took the suggestion of moving the “changing the 2nd Amendment” section and I also renamed it. Feel free to dig in and change it further.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Be the first to collaborate on our developing articles

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Connect with us on Discord Email us