That doesn’t change anything. How do I trust that the car company has entered valid data? How do I know they won’t pull a VW and fudge with data? (they can fudge the data before putting in on the blockchain, so immutability not only doesn’t help, but is actually detrimental, in this case) And that is just with one car company. So I have to build trust with each individual car company myself.
How about I outsource the job of verifying the trustworthiness to one single entity dedicated solely to this, whom I trust. That way, I have less work to do, while not changing the fact that I still had to put my trust somewhere in the first place.
And therefore, the transport authority.
pki verifies the originator of the data. It says absolutely nothing about the data itself.
pki does not solve the problem of establishing a solid root of trust. And neither do blockchain technologies
I don’t care about what happens after the data is written in the blockchain. I care that accurate data goes in in the first place. that part blockchain cannot solve. And if inaccurate data does make it in, I want it corrected. So I’d have to trust someone to make those changes.
besides, what do I do if it gets stolen? prove I own it? I can already do that.
and if you do want that immutability, that’s what digital signatures are for. We both sign the same copy of a document with our private keys. Then we both keep a copy of the signed document. There is no need for anyone to have a copy of it, nor do we need anyone else’s computing power for us to be able to show it has not been tampered with, since we don’t have each other’s private key. The blockchain is not needed.
I don’t care about what happens after the data is written in the blockchain. I care that accurate data goes in in the first place. that part blockchain cannot solve. And if inaccurate data does make it in, I want it corrected. So I’d have to trust someone to make those changes.
That’s unsolvable in general besides through consensus algorithms (which blockchain can facilitate). I’m not really sure what the example here is in the analogy we’ve been using - an auto manufacturer sells a car to someone that’s a different model than they wanted? They could refuse purchase.
Blockchain adds authenticity through proof of when it occurred, which is not available through signature chains.
That doesn’t change anything. How do I trust that the car company has entered valid data? How do I know they won’t pull a VW and fudge with data? (they can fudge the data before putting in on the blockchain, so immutability not only doesn’t help, but is actually detrimental, in this case) And that is just with one car company. So I have to build trust with each individual car company myself.
How about I outsource the job of verifying the trustworthiness to one single entity dedicated solely to this, whom I trust. That way, I have less work to do, while not changing the fact that I still had to put my trust somewhere in the first place.
And therefore, the transport authority.
pki verifies the originator of the data. It says absolutely nothing about the data itself.
pki does not solve the problem of establishing a solid root of trust. And neither do blockchain technologies
The data can’t be fudged after the fact. If you say you sold a Nissan Nassina to Bob Jones on Aug 10 2023, that’s there forever.
I don’t care about what happens after the data is written in the blockchain. I care that accurate data goes in in the first place. that part blockchain cannot solve. And if inaccurate data does make it in, I want it corrected. So I’d have to trust someone to make those changes.
besides, what do I do if it gets stolen? prove I own it? I can already do that.
and if you do want that immutability, that’s what digital signatures are for. We both sign the same copy of a document with our private keys. Then we both keep a copy of the signed document. There is no need for anyone to have a copy of it, nor do we need anyone else’s computing power for us to be able to show it has not been tampered with, since we don’t have each other’s private key. The blockchain is not needed.
That’s unsolvable in general besides through consensus algorithms (which blockchain can facilitate). I’m not really sure what the example here is in the analogy we’ve been using - an auto manufacturer sells a car to someone that’s a different model than they wanted? They could refuse purchase.
Blockchain adds authenticity through proof of when it occurred, which is not available through signature chains.
are you really suggesting that blockchain invented timestamping???
No. Blockchain provides timestamps via the block height, which means the signer(s) can’t forge them.