rellfy

It seems to me there is a contradiction there between "Apple’s positive effect on my life should not be underestimated [...] and I should love apple for that" and "Apple is not a real person and not worthy of your love".

People, including those you love, can also do things you don't like.

I'm not sure if I have a point here but the line of reasoning there doesn't quite make sense to me.

To some extent that's just how bitcoin works [1]

To your last question, bitcoin is just digital gold. Unlike ethereum which is inflationary.

[1]: https://river.com/learn/terms/c/change-output

That's fair, and manufacturing and UX could very well be a challenge. But the technology does work

The devices can ship with an embedded hardware security module that holds a private key. The private key has its public key whitelisted by Rolex, and can be used to sign a message transferring the ownership to the current owner's public key. If you can do this transfer action, the device is legitimate. Of course you'd need to check that the public keys/addresses match Rolex's.

Synchronisation is the hard part. I suppose there are a few different ways to do it. One way would be to use a hardware that holds a private key in a secure chip, and whoever has access to the physical watch can sign a message with that key to point to an arbitrary address. This can then be submitted to the blockchain. Confirmation is easy, as the blockchain takes care of that. It would be emitted by a verifiable/trusted public key. If the address is not Rolex's address, the item is fake.

The digital owner of the item needs to be synchronised with the physical owner of the item. The authenticity then can be confirmed by crypto.

why not both?