> I don't know any private blockchains that have apps running on smartphones
In the example you mentioned: supply chain, you have an external device (outside the blockchain) pushing transactions to the blockchain. You can see this example repeated over a billion of times, it is the typical private blockchain use case. I am not inventing anything new here, just exposing the claim vs. the reality.
> Definitely not true (in any jurisdiction I have worked in, mostly EU), and if it was lawsuits are very expensive and drag out over long periods of time.
The law is the last resource I cannot imagine NASDAQ and financial institutions having security issues because the financial institution doesn't recognize a message signed by NASDAQ. This is clearly ridiculous. This can be handled in many ways If the message was signed because of fraud or a security breach.
> I am not inventing anything new here, just exposing the claim vs. the reality.
I have worked on on proof of concept experiments that did this. Because it's easier to showcase "data goes in here, comes out there". But that's obviously not how these products will run in production. All these experiments aim to test/showcase the viability of using a blockchain between parties. The app is just there to show the business people how it works (also for PR reasons).
> The law is the last resources I cannot imagine NASDAQ and financial institutions having security issues because the financial institution doesn't recognize a message signed by NASDAQ. This is clearly ridiculous.
I'm not saying that if NASDAQ signs a message that won't hold up as proof that NASDAQ said something. I am saying that if two parties engage in a transaction and it's recorded in a digital contract on a blockchain, that might not always be enforceable as such in a court.
As you said you worked on proof of concepts, not production ready products. Show me a production ready product and I can show you how you can do the same without a blockchain.
As I said before and can expand now, blockchains have very specific security assumptions that are not present in a public blockchain. Once you remove those assumptions cryptographic protocols are enough to give security when organizations are not anonymous.
> I am saying that if two parties engage in a transaction and it's recorded in a digital contract on a blockchain, that might not always be enforceable as such in a court.
Digital signatures are recognized by the law in most countries.
Digital contracts are recognized if you have a private contracts agreeing on recognizing them.
> I don't know any production blockchain solutions
Nothing more to say. There is no production ready private blockchain to show.
BTW, I work in this field in very well known projects (e.g. RSK, Algorand, Xapo, Jaxx, Ripio) in the public blockchain space and have adviced companies like MuleSoft at the CXX level in the private blockchain space.
> Pulling things out of context eh ;) It's unfortunate you're not aware of any production ready private blockchain solutions. Maybe keep that in mind before you start with your next discussion.
Correction: I am not aware of any production ready private blockchain that cannot be replaced by another technology not using blockchain.
> Woah your e-penis is indeed very long! I am impressed!
It seems you don't know how to talk here in HN. You started your thread saying "I've worked on private blockchain solutions for financial firms" then there are many of your comments where you are showing some level of experience. I am showing my level of experience in the business like you.
> You started your thread saying "I've worked on private blockchain solutions for financial firms"
Yes: I stated "I work in this field, this is what I see around me at companies that are doing private blockchains. I haven't heard these arguments around me before."
While your approach is: "Here is my resume, now I demand you to give me examples so I can prove my point."
> Correction: I am not aware of any production ready private blockchain that cannot be replaced by another technology not using blockchain.
Ah great! Since your argument is that they can all be replaced, can you name a private blockchain solution that IS running in production that can be replaced?
While you are at it:
> Digital contracts are recognized if you have a private contracts agreeing on recognizing them.
IANAL but AFAIK this is completely false. Do you have any examples of smart contracts running on blockchains being enforced in a court?
> While your approach is: "Here is my resume, now I demand you to give me examples so I can prove my point."
I already probed my point beyond what I said afterwards. You just need existing cryptography and don't need a blockchain to make secure agreements between parties.
> Ah great! Since your argument is that they can all be replaced, can you name a private blockchain solution that IS running in production that can be replaced?
I don't need to since I am arguing about the no sense of private blockchains.
> IANAL but AFAIK this is completely false. Do you have any examples of smart contracts running on blockchains being enforced in a court?
If the smart contract uses digital signatures they are enforced by the existing law.
Also, as you probably know, this field is very new and the law was not, in general, involved with this kind of technologies.
In the example you mentioned: supply chain, you have an external device (outside the blockchain) pushing transactions to the blockchain. You can see this example repeated over a billion of times, it is the typical private blockchain use case. I am not inventing anything new here, just exposing the claim vs. the reality.
> Definitely not true (in any jurisdiction I have worked in, mostly EU), and if it was lawsuits are very expensive and drag out over long periods of time.
The law is the last resource I cannot imagine NASDAQ and financial institutions having security issues because the financial institution doesn't recognize a message signed by NASDAQ. This is clearly ridiculous. This can be handled in many ways If the message was signed because of fraud or a security breach.