Hacker News Reader

The people can though. Centralization via the state entity can allow for efficient decicions (like corporate hierarchies) as everyone knows which direction to look for common consensus.

With a blockchain approach, rather than separate entities clamoring to be the source of truth in lieue of an ineffective state everyone can instead look to the blockchain. (Which theoretically has no agenda, distributed control, etc...)

View on HN

I think you are inverting causality. Myanmar is denying the Rohingya people their identity because it does not want them in their country. It does not deny them participation in their country because they can't verify their identity.

Let's assume this blockchain-based identity exists. What problem is now solved? What does it matter if people can now point to the blockchain to say "Yup that's me"? The state has a monopoly on force - that's rather what makes them "the state." Why would people look to the blockchain rather than the entity with a police force and military?

So it's more solving the wrong problem than solving the problem wrong.

Yes, completely. Which is why I personally find the proposals so baffling.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com