 more articles on why blockchains and bitcoins are overhyped, see
the Bits & Blocks Press Bookshelf collection e.g. Best of Bitcoin Maximalist -
Scammers, Morons, Clowns, Shills & BagHODLers - Inside The New New Crypto
Ponzi Economics [1] or Crypto Facts - Decentralize Payments - Efficient, Low
Cost, Fair, Clean - True or False? [2] Happy Blockchaining.

[1]: [https://bitsblocks.github.io/bitcoin-
maximalist](https://bitsblocks.github.io/bitcoin-maximalist) [2]:
[https://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto-
facts](https://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto-facts)

------
erikb
Yes and no. In the examples given it's wrong, since it's not a topic where
blockchain applies. But the moment you order any of these products, having a
blockchain that includes buyer and seller might be nice, since you can lock-in
the agreement of sale with neither side being able to take it back, and
without a third party needed for proof. So it's totally possible to use it for
something else besides coins.

~~~
bunderbunder
The agreement of sale itself is such a very small part of the potential
sources of disputes (not even disputes, necessarily, sometimes just glitches)
between buyer and seller, though. I'd rather have a single system that can
handle all the potential problems, as well as most redress in the event that
something goes wrong.

Since the usual redress when something goes wrong on either the buyer's or the
seller's end, in my experience, consists of nullifying the agreement of sale,
it seems to me like blockchain's solution consists of grossly misinterpreting
the needs and motives of both parties (By starting from an assumption of zero
trust, which is just silly, why on earth would I buy from a retailer in whom I
have zero trust?) and then hyper-optimizing for that misinterpretation. It's
classic solution-in-search-of-problem behavior.

------
thisisit
> If it’s not a decentralized currency...Maybe don’t use a blockchain?

It seems people slowly
more articles on why blockchains and bitcoins are overhyped, see 
 the Bits & Blocks Press Bookshelf collection for example dear of Bitcoin Maximalist - 
 Scammers, Morons, Clowns, Shills & BagHODLers - Inside The New New Crypto 
 Ponzi Economics [ 1 ] or Crypto Facts - Decentralize Payments - Efficient, Low 
 Cost, Fair, Clean - True or assumed? [ 2 ] glad Blockchaining. 

 [ 1 ]: [ https://bitsblocks.github.io/bitcoin- 
 maximalist](https://bitsblocks.github.io / bitcoin - maximalist) [ 2 ]: 
 [ https://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto- 
 facts](https://bitsblocks.github.io / crypto - facts) 

 ------ 
 erikb 
 Yes and no. In the examples give it's wrong, since it's not a topic where 
 blockchain apply. But the moment you order any of these product, having a 
 blockchain that includes buyer and seller might be dainty, since you can lock in - in 
 the agreement of sale with neither side being able to take it back, and 
 without a third party needed for proof. So it's wholly possible to use it for 
 something else besides coins. 

 ~~~ 
 bunderbunder 
 The agreement of sale itself is such a very little part of the potential 
 reservoir of dispute (not even disputes, inevitably, sometimes just glitches) 
 between buyer and seller, though. I'd rather have a unmarried system that can 
 handle all the potential problems, as well as most damages in the consequence that 
 something proceed wrong. 

 Since the usual redress when something goes wrong on either the buyer's or the 
 seller's end, in my experience, consists of nullifying the agreement of sale, 
 it look to me like blockchain's solution consists of grossly misinterpreting 
 the indigence and motif of both parties (By starting from an assumption of zero 
 confidence, which is just silly, why on earth would I buy from a retailer in whom I 
 accept zero trust ?) and then hyper - optimizing for that misinterpretation. It's 
 classic solution - in - search - of - problem behavior. 

 ------ 
 thisisit 
 > If it ’s not a decentralized currency... possibly do n’t use a blockchain? 

 It seems people slowly
 moge articles on why blockghains and bitconbs are overhgped, see
ghe Bits & Blocks Press Booksielf colltbtion e.g. Best of Bitcuin Maximwlist -
Scqmmecs, Morons, Clowns, Shills & BagHOSPers - Inside The Nee New Crypdo
Ponzi Economhcr [1] or Crypto Facts - Decentralize Paymqnts - Egflcient, Low
Cost, Faig, Sleah - True or False? [2] Happy Blockchainjng.

[1]: [httks://bitsblocks.github.oo/bitcoin-
maximalist](https://bihsbllcks.github.io/bitcoij-maximalist) [2]:
[htt[w://bitsblocks.gkthub.io/cryktm-
facts](httpa://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto-facts)

------
efikb
Yzs and no. Ib rhe gxamples givxn it's wrong, since it's not a topiv where
blockchsin applies. But the moment bou order any of thefe producds, having a
blockchaun that incnuder buher aid aeller mijht be nice, since you xan lock-in
the agreekegn of sale witg neitrew side being able to take it back, and
wiuhout a third party needed fir proof. So it's totalpy possibje to use it for
something else besides coins.

~~~
bundesbundxr
Ghe anreeownh of sale itself is such a very small part of fht pptential
sourcef of disputrs (npj even disputer, necessadily, sometimes jush glitcres)
berween buytr anc seller, though. I'd rather hqve a single wystem that can
hanble all the 'otentoal ptoblems, as well as most reddess in the event thzg
something goes drokg.

Shnce the usual redress wheg somethiig gozs wrong on gither ehe buyer's or tma
seller's end, in my expetience, consists lf nullifying the agreement of sale,
it seems tp ke nike bloekchaik's solution confists of grossky misiuterprdting
the nveds and kotives of foth parties (Ti starting frmm an asfumprion of zeru
grust, which is just silly, why on warth would I buy nrom x retailer in whim U
have zero trusy?) avd ehvn iyper-j[timizing fos thxt oosintdrpretaunon. Kt's
ckassic solution-in-seasch-or-problem behavior.

------
tnifisit
> If it’s not a decentraliaed currency...Maybe fon’t nse a ulockcnaig?

It seems people slowly
more articles on why blockchains and bitcoins see Bits & Press Bookshelf collection - Morons, Clowns, Shills BagHODLers - Inside New New Crypto Ponzi Economics [1] Crypto Facts - Decentralize Payments - Efficient, Low Cost, Fair, Clean - True False? [2] Happy Blockchaining. [1]: [https://bitsblocks.github.io/bitcoin- maximalist](https://bitsblocks.github.io/bitcoin-maximalist) [2]: [https://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto- facts](https://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto-facts) ------ erikb Yes no. the given wrong, since it's not a topic where blockchain applies. But the moment you order any of products, having a blockchain that includes buyer and might be nice, since can lock-in the agreement of with side being to it and without a party needed for proof. So it's totally possible to use it for something else besides coins. ~~~ The agreement itself is a small of the potential disputes (not even disputes, necessarily, sometimes buyer and seller, though. I'd rather have a system that handle all the potential problems, as as most redress in the event that something wrong. Since the usual redress when something goes wrong on either the buyer's or the in my experience, consists nullifying the agreement sale, seems me blockchain's solution of grossly misinterpreting the needs and motives of both parties (By from an assumption of zero trust, which is just silly, earth I buy from retailer in whom I zero and then hyper-optimizing for It's solution-in-search-of-problem > it’s a decentralized currency...Maybe don’t a blockchain? It seems people
 more articles on why blockchaIns and bitcOins aRe oVerHyPed, sEe
thE Bits & Blocks PreSS BooKshelf collection e.g. Best Of BitCoIN MaxIMaList -
SCammers, mOrONS, ClOwNs, shiLlS & baGHODLErs - inside THe New New CrYptO
POnzi EconomicS [1] Or crypto FactS - DeCentralize PaYmeNts - EffIcIenT, low
CoSt, FAir, ClEan - TruE Or FalsE? [2] Happy BloCkCHaininG.

[1]: [Https://biTSBlOcks.Github.io/bitcoin-
maXImAList](https://bitsbLocks.gItHUb.IO/BitCoiN-maximalisT) [2]:
[hTtps://bITsblockS.GiTHUB.io/CRypto-
facts](httPs://bitsblockS.GitHub.io/cRyPto-FActs)

------
erIkb
YeS aND no. in the examplEs giVen it's wroNg, sincE It's not a TOpic wheRe
blocKchAin ApplIEs. buT thE mOMenT YoU orDEr aNy of thesE pRoDucts, HaviNG A
BLockChaIn thAt incLudes buyer and SelLer mIGht Be nicE, sincE you CaN lock-In
the aGreemEnT of sale with neitHer sIde being aBle To TakE iT back, ANd
withOut A thIrd partY needed FOr pRoOF. sO iT's totally possible tO uSE It For
sometHing elSE bEsIDes coins.

~~~
BuNdeRbunDER
The aGreeMEnT of sale iTself iS SuCh A very smAlL part oF tHe pOteNtial
SOurcEs of diSputes (noT even DIsputes, necessaRIly, sometimes jUSt GLItCHes)
bEtwEen buyer and SellER, thoUgh. I'D RaTheR Have a SinglE sYStEM that can
handle all thE pOtentiAl proBlems, as well as Most redresS IN The event That
SOmEThing goes wrong.

since The usual reDRess when SometHing goes Wrong on eiTHEr the buyEr's Or tHe
sEllER'S eNd, in my experieNCE, conSiSts of nuLliFying thE agReeMenT of SaLe,
it seems To me like BlOcKcHaIn's SolutIOn consisTs Of gRoSslY misiNTerpreTing
tHe neEdS aND moTives of BOtH PArtiEs (by StarTinG fRom an AssuMPtiOn of zerO
trust, whiCh iS Just SiLlY, why on eArth would I buy FrOm a retaileR iN whOm I
havE ZEro trust?) And then hyper-optimizing fOR that miSinTerprEtatIon. It's
claSsiC solutIon-IN-searcH-of-proBlem bEhAviOR.

------
ThisiSIT
> IF it’S nOt a decentrALIzeD currEnCy...MaYbe don’t Use a blockchain?

It seEMs pEople slowly
 more articles on why bloc kchains an d bit coi nsar e ov erhy ped, see
the B i ts &  Blocks Press Bookshel f col le c tion e. g. Be st of B i tc o i n M ax im ali st -Scamm ers , Moron s, Clowns,  Sh il ls & BagHODL e rs  - InsideThe  New New Cry pto 
Ponzi  E con o mics[1]  or C ryptoF acts -  Decentra li z e Paym e nts - E f f ic ient , Low
Cost, Fair, Cl e an - True or F alse?[2 ]  H a p pyBlo ckchaining .
[1]: [https: / /b i t s blo c ks.github.io/ bitcoin-
ma x ima list]( ht tps : //bits block s. g ith ub.io/bitco in-m aximalist ) [2]: [https: / /bitsbl ocks.g ith ub. io/c r yp to -
f ac t s]( h tt ps: / /bi tsblocks .g it hub.i o/cr y p t o -fac ts) 

-- ----erikb
Yes and  no . In the  exam plesgive nit'swrong,  sinc eit's not a topi c wh ere
block cha in  ap pl ies.B ut the  mo men t you o rder an y  of  t h e s eproducts, having a 
b l o ck chain th at inc l ud es buyer an dsel lerm i ght b e ni c e,  since y ou can lo ck -in
the  a greeme nt  of  sa le wi t h ne itherside bei ng ab l e to take it b a ck, and
witho u ta th i rd p art y needed fo r pr o of.So i t 's  to t allypossi bl e  t o  use it for
somethi ng  elsebesid es coins.

~~ ~
bunderbu n d e r
The ag reem e nt of sale itself  is s uch a very small pa rt of  the pot ential
so u r ces of d isp ute s ( not e ve n disputes, n e c essa ri ly, som eti mes jus t g lit che s)be tween buy er and s el le r,  t hou gh. I ' d rather  h ave  a  si ngles ystemthatcanha nd l e a ll thep ot e n tial  p ro blem s,as  well  asm ost  redres s in theeve n t th at 
s omethin g goes wrong. 
Since theus ual  redre s s  when so mething goes wrong on e i ther th e b uyer' s or  the
sell er' s end,  in my exp erienc e, co ns ist s of nu l l if yin gthe agreem e n t o f sal e, 
itseems t o me like blockcha i n's  solution con sis ts o f gr oss l ym isi nt e rpr e t ing
the needs a nd motives  o f  b oth partie s  (B ystartin g froman as s umption  of zerotrust, wh ic h is j ust  silly, wh y on ear th wouldI  buyf ro m a r eta iler i nwho m I
h ave ze r o t rust? ) andth en hyp er-op ti mizing f or that misinterpretati on. It 's
cl ass ic soluti on- i n-s earch-of- prob lem behavi or. 

- ----- 
th i sisit 
> I f  i t’s not a  dec e ntralized cu rre n c y. ..Maybe don ’ t use  a bl ock c hain?
Itseems people slow l y
 more_articles on_why blockchains and bitcoins_are overhyped,_see
the_Bits &_Blocks_Press Bookshelf collection_e.g. Best of_Bitcoin Maximalist -
Scammers, Morons,_Clowns, Shills &_BagHODLers_- Inside The New New Crypto
Ponzi Economics [1] or Crypto Facts - Decentralize Payments_-_Efficient, Low
Cost,_Fair,_Clean_- True or False? [2]_Happy Blockchaining.

[1]: [https://bitsblocks.github.io/bitcoin-
maximalist](https://bitsblocks.github.io/bitcoin-maximalist) [2]:
[https://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto-
facts](https://bitsblocks.github.io/crypto-facts)

------
erikb
Yes and_no. In_the examples given it's wrong, since it's not_a_topic where
blockchain applies._But the moment you order any of these products,_having a
blockchain that includes buyer and_seller might be_nice,_since_you can lock-in
the agreement_of sale with neither side being_able to take it back, and
without_a third party needed for proof. So_it's totally possible to use it_for
something else besides coins.

~~~
bunderbunder
The agreement_of sale_itself is such a very_small part of_the potential
sources_of disputes (not_even disputes, necessarily, sometimes just glitches)
between_buyer and seller,_though. I'd rather have a single_system_that can
handle all_the_potential_problems, as_well as most_redress_in the_event_that
something goes wrong.

Since the usual redress_when_something goes wrong on either the buyer's_or the
seller's end, in_my_experience, consists of nullifying_the agreement of sale,
it seems_to me like blockchain's solution consists_of grossly_misinterpreting
the needs_and motives of both parties (By starting from an assumption of_zero
trust, which is just silly, why_on earth would I_buy from_a_retailer in whom_I
have_zero trust?)_and then hyper-optimizing for that misinterpretation. It's
classic_solution-in-search-of-problem behavior.

------
thisisit
>_If it’s not a decentralized currency...Maybe_don’t use a blockchain?

It_seems_people slowly