The blockchain is slowly going to become a dominant pillar of our transactions. Whether it be information, money, etc., blockchain will probably be a part of it. If we want it to be secure anyway...
If we want it to be secure anyway...
You've read about the dozens on dozens of compromised exchanges?
You heard about the DAO hack?
You realize that the majority of bitcoin is mined by like a dozen people in China?
Maybe someday we'll get our act together, but right now blockchains are a recipe for FUD and centralization.
(I say this as someone who thinks bitcoin is cool. For instance, the traditional financial system makes it unnecessarily hard to send money overseas, a need bitcoin can fill well. But secure? No.)
all of those things improve the resilience of the implementations
exactly as the original white paper suggested
mining pool centralization has ebbs and flows. I'm not concerned about bitcoin's TODAY for example, but maybe tomorrow and at times in the past. There are a lot of blockchains people don't put under much scrutiny, where it turns out there is massive centralization. But this isn't an inherent problem, Satoshi was 100% of Bitcoin's network for a long time.
There's also the interesting psychological side to it: while a blockchain system is in a theoretical sense more transparent than anything else, from a popular standpoint it's incredibly opaque compared to a county registrar counting two different stacks of paper ballots.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-to-end_auditable_voting_sy...