Although proof of work protocol had served the blockchain community faithfully since its inception with bitcoin, its inability to scale and its support for centralization were some of the identified weaknesses. How is the proof of work protocol perceived as supporting centralization?
While the developed countries easily adopt these technologies easily because of their educated populace and advanced infrastructure, the developing countries have their own challenges that make them either delay or forego the adoption. This article will highlight the most likely barriers developing countries will likely face in adopting blockchain.
With so many use case coming up for a lot more scenarios, this article endeavours to speculate how blockchain can be used in the near future to help fight poaching and natural resource depletion especially in African countries that seem to be at the receiving end of these illegal activities.
Blockchain deals with digital documents and any authentication to be done in the system will demand the use of digital authentication mechanisms. As such, all documentation is ‘stamped’ with digital signatures.
In addition to part 1, this article will focus on some other third party based payment systems and how their existence could be threatened because of the unrelenting conquest launched by block chain.
Aside from addressing many bottlenecks associated with proof of work, proof of stake is not without its flaws. For instance, it seem to have introduced its own problems such as the “Rich getting richer”, liquidity issues and the possibility of one changing the history of the block chain.
Millions of individuals have suffered allergic reaction after consuming products bought from some chain stores. How will the adoption and implementation of blockchain helps?
In this article, we continue to look at that comparison by considering other features that make it unique and adaptable for worldwide use such as distributed, a chain of blocks and process integrity.
The term “smart” in smart contracts may well excite many readers to think they are the ultimate solutions. Perhaps you may think of smartphones and what they are capable of doing. You use smartphones to surf the net, send emails, watch movies, conduct zoom meetings, transact, take pictures and videos, learn, teach, and many other everyday conveniences. While that is smart indeed, does the same apply to blockchain’s smart contracts in their current form?
In part 1, we discussed the implications of using generic and public or private design models on blockchain operations. In part two, we will further discuss the implications of using a chosen consensus algorithm on the operations of a blockchain platform.
