Blockchain is a terrible future vision as well as a bad innovation. Since systems based on trust, norms, and institutions perform better intrinsically than the no-need-for-trusted-parties systems envisaged by blockchain, it has yet to gain widespread acceptance. That is unchangeable: cryptocurrency will continue to step in the wrong direction no matter how far it advances

In December, I published a widely circulated article about blockchain's inapplicability to any real-world problem. People werе mostly against the technology argument, but thеy hoped that decentralisation would lead to greater integrity
For starters, Venmo is a free service for sending money, while bitcoin transfers are not. However, after I published an article in December stating that bitcoin was useless, someone responded that Venmo and Paypal were raking in cash from customers and that they should switch to bitcoin

What an odd analogy between blockchain's lack of utility/adoption and its followers' confidence! This person did not become a bitcoin supporter because they were looking for an easy, free way to transfer money from one person to another and happened upon bitcoin. In reality, I don't believe there is anyone alive who hasn't had a problem to solve, discovered that a blockchain solution was the ideal solution, and then become a blockchain enthusiast as a result
Nobody has ever had a problem to solve, discovered that a blockchain solution was the best way to solve it, and then turned into a blockchain enthusiast as a result
The number of merchants accepting cryptocurrency as a payment method is dwindling, and the industry's biggest proponents, such as IBM, NASDAQ, Fidelity, Swift, and Walmart, have gone long on press but short on implementation. Even Ripple, the most well-known blockchain company, does not use it in its product. That's correct: Ripple came to the conclusion that the only way to send money across international borders was to stop Ripples
A blockchain is a real technology, not a metaphor
Why is there so much enthusiasm for something that, in practise, is so ineffective?
People have made a number of implausible claims about blockchain's future, including that it should be used for AI rather than the kind of activity monitoring that Google and Facebook do. This is due to a misunderstanding of the blockchain. A blockchain is a complex data structure that consists of a linear transaction log that is typically replicated by computers whose owners (known as miners) are compensated for logging new transactions

In The Golden Compass, dust is everywhere. It is created by consciousness and is conscious of itself, with the ability to condense into angels. This is not the case for blockchain technology
This data structure has two features that are especially appealing. One is that any change to a block invalidates all subsequent blocks, rendering tampering with previous transactions impossible. The second is that you're only paid if you're on the same team as everyone else, so everyone is driven to obey the same rules
The end result is an unmistakable shared historical record. Furthermore, since agreement is achieved by each person acting in their own best interests, inserting a false transaction or working from a different history simply means you will not be paying while everyone else is. Since the codes are mathematically implemented, no government or police department is required to come in and notify you that the transaction you've logged is incorrect (or extort bribes or bully the participants). It's a great idea
To summarise, blockchain technology is as follows: “Let's create a long series of small files, each containing a hash of the previous file, some new data, and the answer to a complicated math problem, and allocate money every hour to anyone willing to certify and store those files on their computers for us.”
“What if everybody stores their data in a non-owned, tamper-proof archive?” asks blockchain-the-metaphor
Consider the following example of a distinction: In 2006, Walmart launched a system to monitor bananas and mangoes from farm to market. They abandoned it in 2009 due to logistical challenges in getting everyone access to the information, and they re-launched it in 2017 on blockchain (to much fanfare). “I know: let's create a very long series of small files, each containing a hash of the previous file,” is nonsense, but “What if everybody keeps their records in a tamper-proof archive not owned by anyone?” At the very least, it answers the question correctly!

Please visit MyArticles for more great articles