• chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s pretty reasonable not to implicitly trust an organization to always get things right or always be honest about what they are doing. Couldn’t there be theoretical value in spreading backups across multiple organizations and having cryptographic evidence they are all doing their jobs correctly, to reduce the need for that trust?

    • fubo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Theoretically? Sure. But in reality, blockchain pushers are fanatics, scammers, or both, so no real organization should trust them.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        IMO that’s a pretty limiting perspective. The existence of a lot of noise around a technology isn’t a great reason to take a hard stance against ever using it.

        • fubo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you think you’ve found the one honest snake-oil salesman, you’re almost certainly wrong. That’s part of reality.

          • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I can agree that it’s a bad idea to trust a salesman trying to market a blockchain product or service, but part of the point of open standards and techniques is that you can evaluate them on their own merits and implement them without needing to trust anyone.