Would you Adam and EVE it.
  • Pleasure@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    4 months ago

    It’s not about proving anything. It’s the fact that society is moving towards subscription based models in any facet of life they can possibly work it in. Software, hardware, tv, cars… Are you upset with the way I referred to how the data is stored? Typically that’s the most cut and dry way of getting the point across. But since you’re an expert on the matter, why don’t you elaborate on why you’re so against technology that benefits people?

    • emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      0·
      4 months ago

      The data wouldn’t be stored “on the blockchain”, that would be incredibly inefficient. Even with NFTs which were mostly only JPEGs, the blockchain only stored a hyperlink to the file on a server somewhere. You couldn’t keep a 2GB movie file on a blockchain. So it really doesn’t solve any problems, as you’re still relying on a server somewhere to host your media for you. How exactly does that benefit anyone?

    • DreadPotato@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      0·
      4 months ago

      But you don’t need blockchain to solve the issue with the push for subscription business models, it actually has zero impact on whether or not companies want to use that model. I can buy a digital file (providing someone is selling it of course) without blockchain, it’s mine without blockchain, and I can use it however I want without blockchain, I can sell it without blockchain…so why would I need blockchain for this scenario? It doesn’t provide a solution to a problem.

      Companies will push for subscription models because they love that recurrent revenue and lock-in of the userbase it provides. blockchain isn’t going to stop them from having this preference.