I'm happy to answer any follow-up questions here.
the immutability, is unique.
"Harmony is a new blockchain base document technology that works with your existing imaging or document management solution to create a secure, transparent, unalterable record for the final loan documents." https://www.factom.com/products/harmony
This still has a currency, Factoid or something. I don't know that anyone has created a consensus mechanism that doesn't use a coin
gpg already solves that as well, again without blockchains.
Blockchains do no more for identity gpg. Whether they're more or less usable is debatable.
It achieves this because cryptographic signatures exist fine without blockchains
The claim I'm refuting is that digital identity was impossible before the blockchain (Edit: or more difficult, either way, point stands). Digital identity is a cryptographic thing and a distributed thing. That doesn't mean it needs a blockchain.
People have been proving digital ownership and identities for longer than the blockchain, and the blockchain brings nothing new or interesting to the table in terms of identity.
> Are there any concrete uses of a blockchain that have clear advantages than to using a standard database other than cryptocurrencies?
Seems you're refuting something no one said, as far as I can tell.
Edit:
> Digital identity is a cryptographic thing and a distributed thing
How is it distributed? I assumed it was some company's servers -- maybe in multiple data centres around the world. But nothing like 24k nodes (& possibly more in the future).
---
Edit (reply to your edit):
I think the claim is that the identity system will be more resilient, not that it will be easier to implement. Censorship resistance.
I'd imagine it'll be harder to implement & cost more. A trade-off.
Which is along the lines of what I originally asked,
> Is Keybase resilient against the country's government in which it resides?
You said that gpg was. But didn't mention the computers. I asked about the servers & the ppl. (We didn't talk about the team).
The need wasn't specified. I'm presuming it's censorship resistance. Governments can't meddle with identities. Wipe someone off the face of the earth.
[0] https://science.tokenhub.com/2017/08/03/startup-incubator-sc...
Edit: stephengillie, can't currently use reply. Think I'm being throttled b/c of my VPN.
I guess Bing is your friend here! I've not been keeping an eye out for that particular type of thing (soz).
Since blockchains appear to be the future of both transactions and applications, I was wondering if any incubators will offer advice, coaching, and support for a Blockchain-as-a-(Platform|Service) startup. Like the Lyft to Etherium's Uber-like presence.
How is this any different than the wild west days of stock sales prior to the regulations that came about during the great depression in the US?
The ecosystem will eventually mature and follow some guidelines learned in the past decades by angels and VCs i.e Doing a small seed round first, proving you are building something people want and then, if you achieve your milestones, you can get to a series A and so on.
The ironic thing is that these milestones and progressive rounds are easier to achieve and track with tokens. If the milestone is not met, the smart contract automatically returns the funds to investors.
That can't work that way. The only way the smart contract can return the funds is if they are locked somehow, but what's the point of raising money then? People raise money to spend them, so they by definition don't have that money and it can't be returned, much less "automatically".
What do you think will happen wrt token sales & US regulation, in the near term?