[community] Revisiting the discussion about blockchains...
ather.shabbar at gmail.com
Thu Jun 16 00:35:52 UTC 2016
This is one way to reduce the size of government! The role of legislators
as intermediary - it's like the "wild west".
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Jutta Treviranus <jutta.trevira at gmail.com>
> Last year I broached the topic of blockchains to many people on this list,
> asking what the implications and opportunities were for inclusive design.
> How could we make use of a fully decentralized immutable technical system
> without intermediaries (e.g., trusted diversification of academic
> credentialing without academic institutions as gatekeepers) and what were
> the risks for an area currently dependent on regulations for intermediaries
> (e.g., regulating UBER for ridesharing vs. a completely distributed person
> to person ridesharing system)?
> Several of you gave very good arguments for dismissing blockchain
> technologies. I spoke to Tim Berners Lee about the implications of
> blockchains at the WWW2016 conference and he maintained that the same
> functionality can be derived from existing Web technologies and standards.
> He said the same later in his keynote address.
> Since then Don Tapscott and his son have released a book on the potential
> of blockchains:
> ….and our friends at the Internet Archive co-hosted a summit on the topic
> (unfortunately I couldn’t go because of all the things happening here this
> week) that included Tim, Vint Cerf, Brewster Kahle and others. See:
> http://www.decentralizedweb.net <http://www.decentralizedweb.net/>
> I wanted to revisit this discussion…. not necessarily limited to the use
> of blockchains specifically (for one thing the power consumption of
> maintaining and growing them seems to be prohibitive) but how to achieve
> the functions that blockchains promised.
> What are your thoughts?
> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca)
> To manage your subscription, please visit:
More information about the community