= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ChristianKl comments on Are smart contracts AI-complete? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (46)
With the internet of things physical goods can treat their owner differently than other people. A car can be programmed to only be driven by their owner.
Reputation and escrow are also mechanisms that can be used. SilkRoad managed delivery of physical goods via reputation and escrew. SilkRoad did however had central servers that could be attacked. An Ethereum based system couldn't be taken down in a similar way.
Theoretically yes, but that doesn't seem to be how "smart" devices are actually being programmed.
There's a IBM/Samsung project that wants to create a framework where smart devices move in that direction: http://www.coindesk.com/ibm-reveals-proof-concept-blockchain-powered-internet-things/
Slock.it basic model is also about creating infrastructure for this.
Current smart-devices often rely on a central server. If you buy a device from a startup that might go out of business you have an interest in there not being a central point of trust. Does that mean that success of Ethereum is a certainty? No, it doesn't. But a possible model of how success would look like is there.
It's also worth noting that various luxury brands have a problem with forgeries. There can be a clear chain of purchase for a smart product that makes it clear that the product is authentic.
Which shift the verification to the imperfect car code.