VeChain Centralization

[Anonymous No.10703826]

VeChain's 101 Authority Nodes must each be approved by VeChain's Steering Committee, see pic. It's true that the nodes aren't publicly known, but regardless of that, can this committee be trusted to select those nodes and ensure they're not concentrated in the hands of a few with a mutual interest?

I'd argue yes, mostly because of the presence of DNV GL on the board, but I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts. Is this a better approach than EOS' 21 block producers?

And what about Proof of Authority? There is serious competition in the Blockchain space that comes outside of the cryptocurrencies we all love to trade in the form of private blockchains backed by PoA. Just a few days ago, Microsoft released Ethereum Proof of Authority on Azure:
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/ethereum-proof-of-authority-on-azure/

And IBM Blockchain, another private solution, has a partnership with Mersk:
http://newsroom.ibm.com/2018-08-09-Maersk-and-IBM-Introduce-TradeLens-Blockchain-Shipping-Solution
Not to mention what they're doing with massive corporations like Walmart, Nestle, and so on.

I see VeChain as a smaller-scale startup competitor to IBM and Microsoft, but unlike those two, we can purchase a stake in their blockchain solution via tokens. Is this hybrid approach a good idea, or should cryptocurrencies be diametrically opposed to what IBM and Microsoft are doing and be fully private and fully decentralized?

[Anonymous No.10704102]

>>10703826
You fucking retard op. Its a supply chain ofc it will be centralized.

[Anonymous No.10704232]

>>10704102
>Its a supply chain ofc it will be centralized.
That's not what I'm asking. They're going with PoA because it's the fastest way to handle the number of transactions needed in a supply chain solution, since Ethereum and other platforms aren't there yet. That's not what this is about, those are just the basic facts. It's whether or not the committee can be trusted to select nodes that are sufficiently spread apart so as to not compromise the integrity of the blockchain. If the nodes were held by shady people, or shady people associated with each other, they could tamper with the data.

As far as I know, the only known nodes are DNV GL's and Cahrenheit's. Both have direct ties to VeChain, so that's not the most promising thing so far.

A frequent FUD for VeChain is that there are only 101 validating nodes and that defeats the purpose of blockchain, but I disagree, as long as we can trust those nodes were carefully selected and diversified.

[Anonymous No.10704240]

its a fucking chink blockchain trying to protect people from counterfeit and dangerous good

>chink
>cointerfeit
>chink
>dangerous

you see the problem?

[Anonymous No.10704263]

>>10704232
If you need to trust a node or anything for that matter, you don't need a blockchain. It's basic math.

[Anonymous No.10704283]

>proof of authority
>secret nodes
>decided by 7 people
>all in cahoots

[Anonymous No.10704303]

>>10704263
But how can you explain the corporations adopting Proof of Authority blockchain solutions by IBM and Microsoft? There are no coins there, there's no trading in it for them, it's not like Walmart is buying up tokens hoping to make a profit. It's straightforward BaaS shit, Microsoft and IBM are implementing private blockchain solutions with PoA nodes for their clients.

https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/53013.wss

[Anonymous No.10704307]

>>10704232
>They're going with PoA because it's the fastest way to handle the number of transactions needed in a supply chain solution,
the funny thing is. they couldnt even improve that lmao.
the block times are still 10 seconds long...

in answer to your question OP, no. It is not better than eos.
Eos has developed an entirely new VM, has 0.5 second block times, developed their own API for interacting with the blockchain and has hundreds/thousands of indpendent developers already working on it.
I dont even hold EOS but veshit is a chink scam and needs to die.

[Anonymous No.10704338]

>>10704303
you retard. You think they're actually going to use it? It's literally just for PR because of the 2017 hype. Do you seriously think Microsoft wouldn't have started developing blockchain stuff years ago if it really had value for them? They spend billions on R&D for upcoming tech. They have would have known about "blockchain" for years.

[Anonymous No.10704385]

>>10704338
I think you're betraying your ignorance of what's actually going on. What you wrote makes sense from the perspective of someone uninformed, like I agree, not knowing anything it makes sense as a PR move because it's a "next-big-thing" sort of tech and it'd net these companies clients.

But that's not what's actually happening.

Read this:
http://newsroom.ibm.com/2018-08-09-Maersk-and-IBM-Introduce-TradeLens-Blockchain-Shipping-Solution
>Maersk (MAERSKb.CO) and IBM (NYSE: IBM) today announced the creation of TradeLens, jointly developed by the two companies to apply blockchain to the world's global supply chain. TradeLens is the result of a collaboration agreement between Maersk and IBM, a blockchain-enabled shipping solution designed to promote more efficient and secure global trade, bringing together various parties to support information sharing and transparency, and spur industry-wide innovation.
>More than 20 port and terminal operators across the globe, including PSA Singapore, International Container Terminal Services Inc, Patrick Terminals, Modern Terminals in Hong Kong, Port of Halifax, Port of Rotterdam, Port of Bilbao, PortConnect, PortBase, and terminal operators Holt Logistics at the Port of Philadelphia, join the global APM Terminals' network in piloting the solution. This accounts for approximately 234 marine gateways worldwide that have or will be actively participating on TradeLens.
> One example demonstrated how TradeLens can reduce the transit time of a shipment of packaging materials to a production line in the United States by 40 percent, avoiding thousands of dollars in cost. Through better visibility and more efficient means of communicating, some supply chain participants estimate they could reduce the steps taken to answer basic operational questions such as "where is my container" from 10 steps and five people to, with TradeLens, one step and one person.

That's not "just" PR. It's real.

[Anonymous No.10704450]

>>10704385
of course it looks "real", otherwise it wouldnt be good PR... IBM is a pretty dead company nowadays btw but aside from that,
if you understand how cryptocurrencies work, and why it needs a blockchain you would understand that using it without an incentivised system for transaction verification is contradictory in itself; it just doesnt make sense.

You dont need a blockchain unless you need trustless actors to compete with their hashrate for mining rewards and verifying transactions... aka decentralisation.

That "blockchain use case" that you just greentexted would be far more efficient if it was just something like a single MongoDB or SQL database where companies have specific write permissions.

[Anonymous No.10704456]

>>10704338
And an example of what Microsoft's doing.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-ca/solutions/blockchain/

[Anonymous No.10704486]

>>10704450
So what you're saying is that Maersk, the largest supply vessel operator in the world, wasted their time on a blockchain solution that reduces transit time from shipping of materials to a production line by 40 percent, because they were too dumb to try MongoDB or SQL?

Seriously? Really? You're saying this conglomerate with all that R&D never thought to use MongoDB, those dummies, and they wasted time on blockchain?

[Anonymous No.10704708]

>>10704486
They didnt waste time you brainlet. They got marketing and PR out of it. And look, it seems to have worked because now normies like you are eating that shit up and talking about Maersk on a mongolian goat milk site.

>reduces transit time from shipping of materials to a production line by 40 percent
again, its literally just fucking PR. How often do you hear about Mearsk saying something like, "we are rewriting our backend shippping API's in golang"... You dont. Because its literally a non-event. As should be changing how their databases are formatted - but no, they decided to announce to the whole world that they are using "muh blockchain" because it is what is hyped now and it is what is good for marketing. Should also add, that these are literally billion dollar companies. Do you seriously fucking think that their billions spent on R&D only discovered blockchain in 20fucking17, something that could reduce their transit time by 40%??! Its just retarded. I feel sorry for the fact that you are taking their bait.

Blockchain outside of decentralisation has zero use case. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

[Anonymous No.10704956]

>>10704708
I'm sorry, you're just full of shit. You can write off every single real-world implementation of blockchain all you want as just "PR" but the truth is that this is what's being used in the world right now, today, while normal old Ethereum's being used to power ponzi games.

There are 92 participants in Maersk's solution. They didn't sign up 92 partners for an elaborate marketing push. That's fucking retarded.

I'm not denying it's PR, no fucking shit, I linked you a press release. That doesn't mean it's not real. You're saying that this solution they've developed, that they've signed up all these companies for, that has passed all these successful pilot tests and is starting to be rolled out, has "zero use case" because it's not based on a decentralized token? Just fuck off, you don't know better than them. There's a hell of a lot more evidence for their use-case than with the coins we're buying and selling.

I'm wasting my time arguing though. I think this board's filled with NEET children and the memes are funny but you're all dumb as rocks. This isn't even the intended point of the discussion, but we can't even get to that because you can't take a basic truth without spinning it into a theory about how it's all a lie to trick the normies.

[Anonymous No.10705091]

>>10704956
Did Oxford confirm the PoA numbers yet?

[Anonymous No.10705407]

>>10704338
Corporate behemoths like Microsoft and IBM move slow as shit, anon. Frankly I'm surprised they got into blockchain this soon.

[Anonymous No.10705728]

>>10703826
>imagine unironically writing this long of a treatise on a shitcoin
Someone’s mind has been belown

[Anonymous No.10705782]

>>10703826
>we can purchase a stake in their blockchain solution via tokens
You’re purchasing a stake to collect pennies in fees

[Anonymous No.10705845]

>>10704956
Lol you’re still in denial after getting rekt by that anon

[Anonymous No.10705848]

>>10704450

>IBM is a pretty dead company
>70 billion in revenue
>massive restructuring to target cloud computing and blockchain tech

lol DNV GL has 2 billion in revenue you fucking dumb faggot. It's an ant compared to IBM.

[Anonymous No.10706036]

>>10703826
>>10704708

guy has a point OP. Blockchain is a database and these 'private' blockchains from ibm are fucking retarded. not saying they are just pr stunts but as far as i can see it negates the entire point of blockchain. This doesn't necessarily apply to vechain though as nodes are financially incentivized. can vechain be trusted to pick nodes? initially yes but there has to be a mechanism for the community to vote them out and pick new ones. it can't be held by vechain in perpetuity and they cannot be left private. their identities need to be known otherwise we have to trust shady lu who is a known grandma rapist.