Blockchain as a service: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
 
(12 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{g}}One of those beautiful logical oxymorons, [[blockchain as a service]] — "'''B.S.'''" to those of us who admire it at least for its staggering chutzpah — as the instant solution for those who, one one hand, so distrust financial intermediaries that they would cast operation of their ledger into monstrously slow, infiexible and environment-massacring gears of a [[blockchain]] but, on the other, so lack resources or expertise in [[distributed ledger technology]], that they will hand the entire implementation over to a random startup, who will charge them handsomely, and in perpetuity, for providing an open-source software solution.
{{A|buzz|[[File:Bullshit.jpeg|thumb|center|450px|[[Blockchain as a service]]. Also known as “BS”.]]}}One of those beautiful logical oxymorons, [[blockchain as a service]] — '''B.S.'''to those of us who admire at least its staggering chutzpah — as the instant solution for people who, one one hand, so distrust financial intermediaries that they would cast their ledger into monstrously slow, inflexible and environment-massacring gears of a [[blockchain]] but, on the other, so lack resources or expertise in [[distributed ledger technology]] to do so, that they would hand the entire implementation over to a random startup, who will charge them handsomely, and in perpetuity, to implement a “proprietary” [[open-source software]] solution for them.


So, what do you call someone who (1) wants to re-intermediate a technology whose sole apparent benefit is ''dis''intermediating, and (2) who doesn't trust [[Clearstream]] or Visa, but is prepared to trust a couple of guys in Bulgaria who met on 4chan?
If [[blockchain]] itself is to all intents a bust — beyond the sovereign wallet (and, ahhh, discreetly financing drug trafficking and terrorism) no-one has come up with a plausible use case yet, in ten years of trying — then combining it with the boneheaded [[rentier]] carry-on of [[software as a service]] is ''essence'' of extra-virgin, first-pressing snake oil.


Hopefully not "your Chief Technology Officer".
Yet the airwaves are full of it.<ref>{{Google|blockchain-as-a-service}}.</ref> So, what do you call someone who (1) wants to re-intermediate a technology whose sole apparent benefit is ''dis''intermediating, and (2) who doesn’t trust [[Clearstream]] or Visa, but is prepared to trust a couple of guys in Bulgaria who met on 4chan?
 
Hopefully not “your [[Chief Technology Officer]]”.


{{Sa}}
{{Sa}}
*[[Software as a service]]
*[[Software as a service]]
*[[Blockchain]]
*[[Blockchain]]
*[[Snake oil]]
*{{t|Snake oil}}
*[[Rent seeking]]
{{Ref}}

Latest revision as of 13:31, 30 December 2020

Lingo update
Blockchain as a service. Also known as “BS”.
The JC keeps you bang up to date with the best in class.
Click ᐅ to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

One of those beautiful logical oxymorons, blockchain as a service — “B.S.” to those of us who admire at least its staggering chutzpah — as the instant solution for people who, one one hand, so distrust financial intermediaries that they would cast their ledger into monstrously slow, inflexible and environment-massacring gears of a blockchain but, on the other, so lack resources or expertise in distributed ledger technology to do so, that they would hand the entire implementation over to a random startup, who will charge them handsomely, and in perpetuity, to implement a “proprietary” open-source software solution for them.

If blockchain itself is to all intents a bust — beyond the sovereign wallet (and, ahhh, discreetly financing drug trafficking and terrorism) no-one has come up with a plausible use case yet, in ten years of trying — then combining it with the boneheaded rentier carry-on of software as a service is essence of extra-virgin, first-pressing snake oil.

Yet the airwaves are full of it.[1] So, what do you call someone who (1) wants to re-intermediate a technology whose sole apparent benefit is disintermediating, and (2) who doesn’t trust Clearstream or Visa, but is prepared to trust a couple of guys in Bulgaria who met on 4chan?

Hopefully not “your Chief Technology Officer”.

See also

References