What is the advantage of using a block chain for storing the information rather than just having a database? Is there some intrinsic benefit or is it just marketing hype?
There are third party institutes, tests labs and the like whose only job is ensure everyone plays by the rules. Making matters worse not all of these institutes can be trusted either in every case every time. It's turtles all the way down ...
The blockchain perhaps is not a comprehensive solution to all of these issues but it eliminates a significant opportunity for fraud right from the start.
I'd go as far as to say that supply chain management probably is one of the few truly viable use cases for the blockchain.
I get that there is a massive amount of hype and bullshit around everything "blockchain", but surely it's way too early to write it off[1]. It could be as prevalent as HTTP or SQL some day (or maybe it disappears, but it's too early either way).
I think one exciting area is voting - imagine the convenience of mail-in ballots, verifiable, instant vote counts, and the ability of anyone, e.g. the electorate, universities, political parties, transparency non-profits and so on to act as a node and therefore monitor the voting in real time. I think it could be a great innovation to strengthen democracy. Imagine a real time, direct democracy that has voting (or even just opinion polls) on a continuous basis to keep politicians in check.
[1] PG likes things that are written off as geek's toys: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/819810970021134337
Uhhh… I'm no expert regarding blockchains, just know what the basic idea is. And in my understanding you can't have truly anonymous votes using a blockchain. Or can that be done?
To provide the anonymous tokens, fully homomorphic encryption could be used to have a trusted authority blindly sign a token when a voter requests it. (Maybe these requests could also be recorded in the blockchain, to make sure nobody gets two tokens?)
The hard part will probably be the anonymous network access.
Secret ballot requires that it's hard to verify tokens, or else paying or otherwise coercing voters to vote one way becomes way easier to do at scale.
> “As a global integrator of container logistics with the ambition to digitize global trade, we are excited about this cooperation and its potential to bring substantial efficiency and productivity gains to global supply chains, while decreasing fraud and increasing security,” said Ibrahim Gokcen, chief digital officer, Maersk.
> This promotes sustainable transport by integrating shipping processes and partners, and establishing evaluation frameworks through increased transparency and trusted access.
Seems like the benefits are a) transparency, and b) distributed. This is Maersk leading the effort, but it seems the plan is to get the entire chain onto the same system, which basically requires decentralisation.
Edit: The New York Times article [1] lays out more details in their reporting too.
[0]: http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/51712.wss [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/business/dealbook/blockch...
Scenario:
1. You request service A from me
2. I confirm receipt of service request
3. I provide service A
4. You confirm receipt of service A and provide payment
5. I confirm receipt of payment
Since each block of a blockchain is dependent on the previous blocks, it makes it impossible for me to go back and adjust the record to say, claim you never paid me, or change the order quantity, or for you to go back and claim you never ordered a thing.
It makes 5 depend on 4 which depends on 3 which depends on 2 which depends on 1 and altering any of the steps "breaks" the later steps in such a way that you not only can tell they're broken, but also at which step did the chain break.
In this sense you can basically use math to provide enforcement of the kinds of transactions that might occur during a sale. With shipping containers you can simply put in movements of the container, or manifest of the containers or track bill of lading [1].
Implementing that may be somewhat more difficult though, and I have no idea if this is really that large of a problem or not.
Maersk will be implementing a new standard of implementation here, replacing a standard that's been bootstrapped over centries. Expect an ISO or similar to be created to define it, with a lot of reach into the workflow of insurance companies and banking (LCs, etc).
This would be an interesting area to 'disrupt' if you could catch early wind of the emerging standards and ride on the back of a new standard coming into implementation.
It is now moving in the direction of becoming a politically only acceptable solution, when no one can impose any negative judgment making the solution provider look malicious even before anything bad happens.
So kind of a measure to eliminate potential risk