Re: Blockchain

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 09:44:59PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 03:08:23PM -0700, Michael Eager wrote:
> > On 06/29/2018 02:20 PM, Karen Shaeffer wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Michael,
> > > Your presentation is scattershot. 
> > 
> > I dunno.  There's nothing scattershot about saying that an argument 
> > based on a foregone conclusion is circular.
> 
> 
> Indeed. You might be interested in David Gerard's take:
> 
> https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2018/06/28/ibm-the-gdpr-and-blockchain-whatever-that-word-specifically-means/
> 
> And by all means, continue to ignore people who can't or won't
> define their terms while urging you to get involved -- which
> always seems to mean "give me money" in some form.
> 
> -dsr-

Hi Dan,
Thanks for posting the link. Interesting. I like the comparison to Git.
Even more telling, in my eyes, is this link

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/hyperledger_at_three/

In that review, the claim is blockchain will be at a healthy stable
plateau in five to ten years. I think that is a little optimistic and
wouldn't be surprised for it to take eight to fifteen years. Or maybe
even a little longer. Look at the linux adoption curve. My understanding
is Bharath Ramsunder is talking about maybe even twenty years out.

Even so, you look at the linux adoption curve. And early adopters were
making a lot of money long before linux became a bloated everyday
technology. It is very interesting to see all the major corporations
diving into blockchain technologies as enthusiastic early adopters. And
it just seems to smell of "The New Science of Radical Innovation" by
Sunny Giles, who uses Google as the archetypical example.

I'm just starting to pay attention to blockchain myself. Just starting
to watch it. So I don't care what happens to it at this point.

humbly,
Karen
-- 
Karen Shaeffer                 The subconscious mind is driven by your deeply
Neuralscape Services           held beliefs -- not your deeply held desires.