It's still a very young tech though. The same could be said for many things we use today 15 years ago

You could be right, Ridzwan.

But I dont want support tech.

blockchain has draw back of usage of huge data , &


(1/2) Hmm I haven't looked at the data. I'd think there are folks working on achieving efficiency gains on those fronts though. I'm curious to see the energy comparison data though. Much of the literature I've chanced upon seems to gloss over that the energy consumed for maintaining a chain isn't just about taking into account the electricity consumed but also the human energy requirements of the intermediary entities - like if you displace a bank, its not just the

Hey Ridz,

That is a long % interesting explaination.

It is good those issues are being addressed. I was thinking somebody will start working on it.

Certainly, I've thought of your points before. It is acceptable for for


(2/2)... server and utilities but all the energy required(food, transportation, etc) to maintain the humans that keep the banking system running.

My point here being that the present state of a very nascent tech might not be the best version for long term evaluation of whether society/environment will benefit/lose out. The whole space is very much a series of lab experiments run in the open imo. Too early to dismiss I feel.

I was referring to implemention of for .

Isn't the amount of data generated/shared/stored much higher than transaction ?


Yup there would be more data and types of data to store but I do think how efficient/wasteful the storage solution is/will be would be dependent on the implementation. There are projects whose intent is to better utilise idle storage capacities of individuals which, though yet to be seen at scale, might help to not put everything on-chain but still use a chain as a means to manage and detect/prevent tampering. But still too early though to tell though haha

Have check out which is in alph stage for using idle storage to distribute cloud storage.

Though, Safenetwork is not using . This give better control of usage of data.

I yet to start using it. Liked the core tech


My main concern of using with is concern.

I've interacted with / regarding block chain with ability to modify/edit and it seems it not going to happen.


Yeah I share your privacy concerns too. Haha which is kinda why I'm also staying clear of using products which store my sensitive data on chain.

That said, I'm not ruling out the possibility of a chain that may allow for the ability to edit/delete in future though. Though I'm not sure how that might work and if so, whether it's compatible with why a chain should be used over a centralised data store (since one kind of forgoes the immutability property)

Privacy is one of important aspect to me.

Storing personal/private on permanently on sounds insane to me. :)


The reason I rule out early because, I am early adapter of new .

So as far I can see now, with is not for me.


I have signup an account with .

A with .

I am sure that not going post anything personal or interact there.

One of goodness of is that it pays out for how the posted contents received. So I am seeing a lot of good , selective contents there.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!