Over the past few days, a McKinsey study has been leaked to the social media at the end of which it seemed questionable to the reader whether blockchain technology really is needed?! This question is being raised far too early, because:
- Direct peer-to-peer transactions are another evolutionary stage of economic interaction. Intermediaries are attacked from all sides. Nevertheless, the currently favored platform approach replaces only the integrated middleman, but not the model itself. Direct transactions are in many ways difficult to enable – security and transaction costs are major challenges. The blockchain offers a solution for both problem areas. This alone shows the scope of the technology.
- Crypto”currencies” are not “the blockchain” but the first concrete use cases of the technology. Cryptocurrencies are by and large assets rather than full currencies. That does not make them any less exciting. Among other things, they close gaps in fast global transactions or in the export of restricted currencies. Only they themselves are too speculative objects to guarantee necessary value stability for currencies. Technologically, they are interesting applications, but both the method of the proof of work and the proof of stake always have their own weaknesses. Currently, proof of work is the built-in energy guzzler. Which leads us to the next aspect.
- The technology is not yet at the end of its maturation. With different methods under the generic term “blockchain”, it becomes clear how big and unexplored the terrain is. Public or private or consortium, multi-layer blockchain architecture, proof of work or proof of stake and so on … the playing field is just beginning to open up and quickly becomes very complex , The technology is in its infancy … which makes understanding its application so difficult.
My personal conclusion: We make a judgment about sound storage mediums based on the gramophone. Is not blockchain one of the biggest and most public experimental development fields of our time? The hype of cryptocurrencies has brought into the limelight a young technology that is not mature, yet. Which has so much potential that companies and governments all over the world feel they have to do something based on the technology – meaningful or not, being there is key. If something so young already seems so powerful, it is too early for fundamental judgments. We must protect ourselves from arrogance and the evaluation of new opportunities based on old ways of thinking!