> sharing data between those actors is still a heavy duty process.
Utter nonsense. Everything is HARDER TO DO when done through a blockchain.
> Trusting the data coming to you from other actors is still a high risk area
Utter nonsense. Public / private key encryption solves this in the same way a blockchain would, because a blockchain uses public / private key encryption.
> Who's going to own that central DB and pay for everything going into and out of it?
Walmart. Or IBM. It would likely cost less than $50/month of AWS resources, including backups and redundancy.
> Everything is HARDER TO DO when done through a blockchain
Could you explain?
PKI is solves the issue of identity. It can't solve all the issues around accuracy, consistency, and provenance when it comes to data sharing.
Ignoring the idea that you think it's a cheap endeavor, my bigger point is that putting every single bit of the responsibility on a single entity is a tough challenge.
Utter nonsense. Everything is HARDER TO DO when done through a blockchain.
> Trusting the data coming to you from other actors is still a high risk area
Utter nonsense. Public / private key encryption solves this in the same way a blockchain would, because a blockchain uses public / private key encryption.
> Who's going to own that central DB and pay for everything going into and out of it?
Walmart. Or IBM. It would likely cost less than $50/month of AWS resources, including backups and redundancy.