An RMIT Guide to the Blockchain Economy

And this from Instapundit. Those last three named persons are all at RMIT and one, bless his heart, even our overseer here at Catallaxy.

SO JUST WHAT IS THIS BLOCKCHAIN THING, ANYWAY?: Jeff Tucker explains how Blockchain Technology could be the answer to a problem that has bedeviled property rights since antiquity – a problem that is the source of the cynical expression, “possession is nine tenths of the law.”

If that intrigues you, here’s Chris Berg, Jason Potts, and Sinclair Davidson with a beginner’s guide to the Blockchain Economy.

I also notice that when I write “blockchain” I am being alerted to a spelling error. That will not continue for very long, I predict.

This entry was posted in Cryptoeconomics. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to An RMIT Guide to the Blockchain Economy

  1. cuckoo

    I’ve watched several ‘blockchain for dummies’ videos and I’m barely any the wiser. I’ll have to wait for the Homer Simpson version.

  2. Back Burn

    These are not very informative at all. Not once is the mention of POW (Proof Of Work) or the incentive to verify a transaction.

    All these proponents repeatedly try to separate “blockchain” and “bitcoin”without realising that to make a “blockchain” anything other than an append only database, you require incentive and work.

    Satoshi’s brilliance was not just in partially solving the Byzantine Generals problems, but also aligning incentives for all actors. Users, Nodes, Miners. Each has a role to play. Understanding the role each actor plays, will give you the full insight into this invention.

    Once you have grokked those roles, you then have to turn your head to technical concerns. Network propagation speed, game theory of forks etc…

    IMO, Satoshi should be awarded both the Noble Economics Prize and Turing Award.

  3. mh

    Is blockchain a plumbing device?

  4. True Aussie

    Is blockchain a plumbing device?

    Its a pyramid scheme

  5. H B Bear

    Is this a contra for Snic plugging Steve’s book yesterday?

    The Cat goes pay-for-play. Sad.

  6. Jock

    Even Scott Adams of Dilbert fame has a piece on blockchain in his blog. But beware Sinc he is a Trump supporter.

  7. Pingback: Politics makes strange bedfellows specially on the left | Catallaxy Files

  8. RobK

    The Cat goes pay-for-play. Sad.
    I thought it was rather funny.

  9. craig

    7,000 dollars for 1 bitcoin, go hard….

  10. Awake

    The things that I understood only from the video are that blockchain tech does away with middlemen and transaction is super quick. Probably this system is suitable for big firms which have their credibility already established in the traditional real world but not so much as suitable to the private individual users.

    What I can forsee is that the blockchain system will be a festival for scammers. How will an end user consumer for example be able to determine the authenticity and credibility of a supplier ?

    I bought an item worth $10 on the internet from an advertisment while I was on my yahoo mail account (looked very credible ad). The goods did not arrive and my credit card was then charged 2 x with $130. It’s good I had the bank as my middleman so they took on the responsibility of sorting it out, contacting the other bank and then crediting back the amount on my card. My point is that with the current system operating and with the big boys backing you up, scammers and hackers can still penetrate a system.

    Where will a person go to if he encounters scammers in the process? This blockchain system will leave you to your own devices.

    How can blockchain supporters convince people that the system will not be rife with fraud when until at present they still have not uncovered the real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto? I mean it’s easy to hide on the cyberspace.

    How will a person know that, for example, a land he’s buying somewhere exists physically? You still need someone to physically see it and determine that the seller is the real owner. Ok, the name of the owner is on the blockchain, but how foolproof is the system?

    Also, how will a user know the market value of his asset if he decides to sell it? Alright, maybe there’s a buy/sell history somewhere in the system’s database. But the market is not just numbers it’s the people, that’s why you see prices of houses going over the roof when people bid in an auction.

    Now, I think blockchain is identical to globalization of economy. I still would like my nation to have some say in the economy of the country.

  11. Tel

    How will a person know that, for example, a land he’s buying somewhere exists physically? You still need someone to physically see it and determine that the seller is the real owner.

    As it turns out, no you do not need to know anything about the seller, if the land titles are on blockchain and the title deed transferred over to you… end of story. That’s the point of the blockchain.

    Suppose the land title deed identifies the lat/long corner locations of the block of land, those of us who trust that the world is round can be confident that all lat/long coordinates do physically exist (unless there’s some black holes in play). In terms of what you purchased (possibly ocean or Antarctic ice pack), you might want to view the land itself, but that’s largely up to you what sort of assay you feel is worthwhile. It’s your money, same as buying washing powder.

    If you are worried about someone selling the same square of land twice, you can pretty quickly check the entire database (all public) with some kind of algorithmic analysis (or pay someone who knows what they are doing).

  12. Roger W

    Jeffrey Tucker says, “First, you need to claim a thing. Second, you need to defend your claim. Third, you need to verify that claim against every form of theft, fraud, deception, cheating, and anyone who would use some measure of ambiguity to take what is rightfully yours.”
    He has earlier said that, “Establishing who owns what is a crucial feature of ownership itself.”
    He has mentioned stone tablets, clay tablets, papyrus, parchment, velum, paper etc. as ways of recording ownership. Nowadays, we increasingly rely on digital records. At least, in the past, you had to physically destroy all records before you could rort the system. This was difficult to do, which is why ancient records, books etc have survived to today, despite endless wars and acts of destruction. Now you simply hack a computer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_computer_security_hacker_history ), something any 15 year old nerd can apparently do overnight (I’ve watched my NCIS so I know!). And that is supposed to be more secure? We might be better off reverting to stone tablets – or even the Gold Standard!

Comments are closed.