Blockchain Decision Tree - Reading Assignment

Blockchain Business Course
#141
  1. It is easy to CRUD, easy to manage, and many resources related to traditional database are available in market.
  2. The project will fail. It will be difficult to manage and time consuming and for updation, and it will not be used anyway, as there is no required business case.
  3. To make it decentralized and trusted.
1 Like
#142

1
The speed and the privacy of transaction storing. Experts and tools easily available in the market to implement it in the company.

2
Waste of resources: the installation of a bc is time consuming even in the project stage and more expensive.

3
Because one of the works the bc excels is the writing in a defined order all the stream of entries. A normal db can’t handle this work efficiently as bc tech and just one user doesn’t generate much data. Also you don’t need a trustless enviroment.

1 Like
#143
  1. A normal database is faster and easier to build and maintain. Processing data and querying are faster.
  2. In that kind of scenario, the business would loose money and flexibility.
  3. If there is only one writer in a database there is never an issue with trust or accountability. Those issues only arise when more than one writer is involved.
1 Like
#144
  • What are the benefits of using a normal database instead of a blockchain?
    It’s simpler and cheaper
  • What do you think the consequences would be of using a blockchain when you in reality don’t need one?
    Wasting a lot of resources
  • Why should there be more than 1 writer to a database in order to justify a blockchain?
    Because if there is only 1 we can assume they are trusted as such traditional database may be a better solution.
1 Like
#145
  1. What are the benefits of using a normal database instead of a blockchain?
    It is cheap to implement and easy to use and fast
  2. What do you think the consequences would be of using a blockchain when you in reality don’t need one?
    You create a expensive implementation with low level of knowledge on the merket. This will cause many trouble in implementation and also in support and maintenance.
  3. Why should there be more than 1 writer to a database in order to justify a blockchain?
    With only one entity, the consensus is centralized and so the idea of a decentralized network does not work
1 Like
#146

  1. What are the benefits of using a normal database instead of a blockchain?
    A: You do not need a database or shared write access you can just leave it to a trusted 3rd party making less work for you

  2. What do you think the consequences would be of using a blockchain when you in reality don’t need one?
    A: It would be if the control of functionality would be private or public

  3. Why should there be more than 1 writer to a database in order to justify a blockchain?
    A: To confirm all the data and to make sure the safty of the data is correct

1 Like
#147

1- Fast, easier, and cheaper to use than a blockchain database.
2- It will be a waste of energy and money.
3- more than 1 writer implies less trust justifying a blockchain.

1 Like
#148
  1. Fidelity of data being stored, ability update information, need for fast and efficient transmition.
  2. You may realize that there is a lack of control and efficiency that was needed for the use case and would imply you may lose time and money fixing or restarting your project.
  3. If there is less of a need for trust between entities / peers / nodes, while other needs for the use case fit, than a blockchain may be justified.
1 Like
#149

  1. The benefits of using a normal database instead of a blockchain are complete centralization and control, and increased speed and efficiency (cheaper).

  2. One of the consequences of using a blockchain when you do not need one could be the loss of a possible customer base. This is because if people can more easily access the type of content you provide somewhere else, when security and transparency don’t matter, then people will not use your product over another that provides speed and efficiency to that same content. Higher costs (because finding someone to build it is difficult), as well as decreased speed and loss of control could also be consequences of using a blockchain when you do not need to.

  3. If there is more than one writer in a database it is not completely centralized. This means that you have to trust more entities on a centralized system, which would bring with it increased risk in security. If there is only one writer you only have to trust that one entity, and if you trust it there is really no point in using a trustless database like a blockchain.

1 Like
#150

1. What are the benefits of using a normal database instead of a blockchain?
A normal database maintains control of the data in the database within a centralised organisation. This means that that secrecy and control can be kept as well as improved speed.

2. What do you think the consequences would be of using a blockchain when you in reality don’t need one?
This would over complicate the solution, reduce speed and compromise some of the business’s competitiveness and security.

3. Why should there be more than 1 writer to a database in order to justify a blockchain?
If there is only one writer then the database is by definition centralised. If there is more than one writer then it may be the case that a blockchain is the best solution as this will require trust between the writers. If this trust is already implicit between all writers then a blockchain may not be required. However if there is doubt about whether all writers will act in the collective interests then a blockchain will enforce trust between all parties.

1 Like
#151
  1. A normal database is fast, easy-to-use, cheap, efficient and flexible.
  2. It can be time consuming, costly and control prohibiting.
  3. If there is only one writer, then the purpose of a BC is corrupt. It means that there is full control in an individual and therefore is completely trust dependent.
1 Like
#152

1)established “technology” and techs have knowledge (i.e. SQL, and rdbms-administration; cheaper, easier and faster to access data
2)the usual ones, if you chose the wrong technology in it projects: unhappy users and clients, bad acceptance
3)assuming a writer would also be running a node - there is no decentralized solution with 1 writer

1 Like
#153
  1. What are the benefits of using a normal database instead of a blockchain?
    The company has full control of the database and it costs less money than the blockchain.
  2. What do you think the consequences would be of using a blockchain when you in reality don’t need one?
    It would cost a lot more money and consume a lot more time.
  3. Why should there be more than 1 writer to a database in order to justify a blockchain?
    To reduce the need of trust.
1 Like
#154
  1. can store bigger size and resolve more complex relationship with good acceleration
  2. will reduce the efficiency of work
  3. to reduce being too subjective and can get wider perspective to resolve each task.
1 Like
#155
  1. Speed, versatility, cost.
  2. Unnecessary lack of flexibility, administrative overhead, storage requirements, performance.
  3. Security. That’s the main reason for a blockchain database.
1 Like
#156

  1. Normal databases are quicker, easier, cheaper

  2. Wasted time and money

  3. If there is just 1 writer there is no need for shared write access, so no need for a blockchain database at all. If 2 or more require shared write access (and there is no trusted third party required or wanted) then a blockchain could be useful, especially if the 2+ writers are not fully trusted to each other or interests not aligned - but they both need access.

1 Like
#157
  1. The use of the normal database is cheaper, faster, and efficient. Resources are readily available in the market.
  2. It takes time to integrate the system into blockchain and very expensive. It isn’t easy to find an experienced personal.
  3. Blockchain use consensus for verifying the trusted information is written on the blockchain. If there is only one writer, then the purpose of having a blockchain isn’t achieved.
1 Like
#158

Normal databases are better understood, easier to implement and cheaper to run

Using a blockchain when one isn’t needed is likely to lead to longterm pain and expense. As a system matures features you want to implement might not be possible, forcing you to try misuse the blockchain to get it to work as you want, or more simply you may be forced to re-architect your system in a way that would have been more suitable from the off.

There should be more than one writer since the blockchain exists to store the truth and consensus of many know, unknown or untrusted actors. If you only have one user, definitely use a regular database.

1 Like
#159
  1. It is quicker and cheaper
  2. It will complicate things
  3. Because otherwise what would the benefit be if you are the only one interacting?
1 Like
#160

  1. There are more resources available, it is easier and cheaper to build, and there are more developers with the skills and experiences to develop normal databases.

  2. It would not be a cost-efficient way of operating, and would not boast a similarly great user experience.

  3. Because only one writer would take away the issue with trust.

1 Like