Why is Blockchain a Polarizing Technology?

Share on linkedin
Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on email
Share on print

Even though blockchain has continued to mature over the past years, the technology still elicits bifurcated views from purists, technologists, analysts and industry experts. Looking beyond the well-known cryptocurrency and payments use cases, opinion is particularly split on the usefulness of blockchain in the enterprise.

Case in point, a recent article in TechRepublic, titled “Your blockchain project is dumb, and likely to fail” highlights the overzealous use of blockchain, when applied to problems that can be solved by conventional technologies – think databases or trusted third parties. The article goes on to cite a Gartner report explaining that weak use cases are among the factors which prevent blockchain solutions from reaching production.

At the same time, a more recent article entitled “Blockchain Is Gaining Trust In The Enterprise” indicates that 83% of executives are seeing compelling use cases for blockchain technology. What’s more, the data indicates 40% of enterprises are willing to spend $5M or more on blockchain initiatives over the next 12 months. In case you are wondering if the subjects in this survey might be purists or outliers, consider this data comes from a sample of more than 1300 executives surveyed by Deloitte.

So what exactly gives?

Well, like any newer technology, blockchain tends to be overhyped at times. It’s not unusual for deployments to overreach into use cases where the benefits are somewhat questionable. But while some deployments of blockchain may seem needless, rest assured, others offer capabilities and value that could not be realized otherwise.

All of this begs the question: what are good reasons to use blockchain over conventional technologies? Here are three:

  1. Security: In many ways, blockchain is far more secure than conventional solutions. In spite of this, arguments tend to rage regarding the immutability of blockchain and related distributed ledger technologies. After all, it is possible to coerce a majority of nodes, miners, or stakeholders to collectively rewrite a ledger in spite of powerful consensus technology, with susceptibility increasing if the parties are trusted. However, when the consensus model is well-matched to the use case, the process of altering a distributed ledger is exponentially more difficult than conventional technologies, which often rely on privately secured databases managed by a single entity. Let’s not ignore that by decentralizing control from a single party, the risk of insider threats can be reduced.
  2. Cross-organizational validation of data or assets: Outside of siloed environments, data may be coming from numerous sources. Here, the issue of trust looms large and the need for validation becomes essential. A personal spreadsheet used by an individual is not a use case for blockchain. However, initiatives that involve aggregating data from outside agencies, providers or an ecosystem that may include consumers, make a strong case for validation of data via a shared distributed ledger – with far less need for trusted intermediaries.
  3. Efficiencies: Perhaps one of the overlooked benefits of distributed ledgers is that the infrastructure is shared by multiple internal or external groups and organizations. Beyond removing the need for duplicate infrastructure, public ledgers allow organizations to participate without having infrastructure of their own. This makes blockchain an enabler for organizations that lack the wherewithal to build their own infrastructure. Aside from infrastructure cost savings, let’s not forget that reduced reliance on intermediaries enables additional efficiencies.

In summary, and to answer the original question posed by this article, are some blockchain use cases questionable? Yes. Are there blockchain use cases that enable capabilities previously unavailable from conventional technologies? Yes. Will folks continue to be polarized regarding the usefulness of blockchain? You can bet on it.

Nicos Vekiarides

Nicos Vekiarides

Sign up for our Newsletter

Nicos Vekiarides

Nicos Vekiarides

Nicos Vekiarides is the Chief Executive Officer & co-founder of Attestiv. He has spent the past 20+ years in enterprise IT and cloud, as a CEO & entrepreneur, bringing innovative new technologies to market. His previous startup, TwinStrata, an innovative cloud storage company where he pioneered cloud-integrated storage for the enterprise, was acquired by EMC in 2014. Before that, he brought to market the industry’s first storage virtualization appliance for StorageApps, a company later acquired by HP.

Nicos holds 6 technology patents in storage, networking and cloud technology and has published numerous articles on new technologies. Nicos is a partner at Mentors Fund, an early-stage venture fund, a mentor at Founder Institute Boston, where he coaches first-time entrepreneurs, and an advisor to several companies. Nicos holds degrees from MIT and Carnegie Mellon University.

Mark Morley

Mark Morley

Mark Morley is the Chief Operating Officer of Attestiv.

He received his formative Data Integrity training at Deloitte. Served as the CFO of Iomega (NYSE), the international manufacturer of Zip storage devices, at the time,  the second fastest-growing public company in the U.S.. He served as the CFO of Encore Computer (NASDAQ) as it grew from Revenue of $2 million to over $200 million. During “Desert Storm”, Mark was required to hold the highest U.S. and NATO clearances.

Mark authored a seminal article on Data Integrity, that was published in the online Wall Street Journal. Additionally, he served as EVP, General Counsel and CFO at Digital Guardian, a high-growth cybersecurity company.

Earlier in his career, he worked at an independent insurance agency, Amica Mutual Insurance Company as a claims representative, and later, was the CEO of the Bermuda captive insurance subsidiary of a NYSE company. Also, he was the president of WorldPath Health, an international healthcare company.