77 karma · joined March 13, 2015
We had a close look. It cannot solve most problems it claims to solve. The only thing it might be useful for is digital collectible tickets. This may be interesting for a tiny fraction of events and attendees.
Full detailed analysis here:
https://medium.com/@ticketpark/nft-tickets-a-realistic-look-...
How often do you actually know who that really is? Let‘s say Beyoncé is coming to the arena closest to you. Are you aware of who actually organizes that event and is in charge? Ticket buyers most often don‘t know and don‘t care.
Plus, if I have to go to the central entity and check all that data, where is the benefit of going decentralized?
All potential solutions to that question have one thing in common: An event has by definition a centralized entity, which is the organizer. Everything that a blockchain supposedly solves in event ticketing is after all a solution due to digitization, not decentralization.
Example from recent news: Most online shops offer Black Friday deals. The ones that don‘t are „under Zugzwang“ to join them.
Nonetheless, as a result there are many user-friendly alternatives to the few big names available nowadays. But it‘s a slow moving market and it will take some more time for them to win the trust of large organizers. I am sure, though, the change _will_ come.
I suppose, I doesn't understand my accent ;)
Maybe cache is a bad example. It could also be a HTTP client to fetch some data over an api. Let's say the library by default uses Guzzle. But if a user for some reason wants to inject his own implementation of Guzzle or even BuzzBrowser (which is compatible for basic operations) instead, he can.
For most simple projects, especially without a framework, the default implementation does the job and would save you some code.