Later, the peasants told him: 'If I can say which company you are, can you return the sheep to me?' The man said 'OK'. The farmer said: 'You are a McKinsey company.' I was very surprised and asked how the peasants knew.
The farmer said: 'There are three reasons enough to let me know: 1. I did not ask you, you came by yourself; 2. You told me something that you already knew, and you have to charge me; 3. You can tell at a glance You don't understand our line, you are not a sheep, but a shepherd dog.
Although this story is not real (McKinsey's advisors certainly will not do such a low number of things as the sheep), it actually satirizes the general phenomenon of the consulting industry. It is to use some seemingly large methods to do something. There is hardly anything of any value. Not only that, because of the lack of understanding of the industry, consultants often make some very basic mistakes and make people laugh.
In fact, the concept of blockchain is amazingly restoring the irony of this story.
A few days ago, I was discussing the blockchain with a quite famous friend of technology authors. With a consistent routine, he became the embracer of new technology; and I became the skeptic of new technology. The beginning of the trend , Similar to the dispute between Chen Weixing and Zhu Xiaohu.
For the value of blockchain, he mainly put forward three arguments to prove:
The current blockchain is not a blockchain that can only be used for speculation in the 1.0 era. Many doubters actually think that the thinking is stuck in the previous generation, so the real value of the blockchain cannot be understood.
Now that the blockchain is at an early stage of development, the technology is not yet advanced. With the development of technology, blockchain application barriers will now be eliminated;
Many new technologies were questioned before they broke out. The blockchain is no exception. In 3-5 years, the blockchain will be widely used and popularized.
In fact, most of the blockchain advocates have used these reasons, or similar ideas, to call on everyone to embrace the blockchain. There are many big V players from a three point group. But these three reasons are carefully analyzed. , They found that they did not explain any substantial issues. Such reasons can be used to support almost any new concept, whether it is valuable or not.
For example: I said that I have a way to count the hair in my hair: If you question me, it must be your stage of thinking that still stays on the bald head; if you ask me to count, then I tell Now that the technology is not yet mature, you must invest in me and I can mature the technology. If you say that the numbers are clear and worthless, I will tell you who knows no value until the numbers are clear.
When I asked to find a specific application scenario where the blockchain could bring value, my friend was not very happy. Instead, he used the phrase “The current blockchain application has more or less defects”. The scene will be a pit, and blockchain supporters cannot easily fall into the pit.
This thing is terrible.
The scary thing is that in fact, many blockchain participants are very aware that blockchains are problematic in their applications, but they are reluctant to face them, and they are more reluctant to think about it. If they say, explain the value of blockchain applications. Things are a pit, so participating in a blockchain project can be a “crater.” If this is really a pit that can make a well-informed circle of science and technology people easily fall into it, then there will no doubt be many people Crying and jumping down.
This is a little bit like MLM. Actually, there are many similarities between the current blockchain project and MLM: various concepts on the Tall, solving various problems, policy support, and promising prospects...but compared with MLM, blockchain There is also a more wonderful place. When a MLM project goes offline, the entire project is destroyed.
But blockchain will not. Even if the initiator of the blockchain evaporates, because it is decentralized, as long as there is a node in operation, it can survive forever. The remaining nodes can become new online, continue Develop offline participation projects. This is a MLM that can never end and never worry about going home. This is the 'benefits' of decentralization. Of course, the premise is to maintain enough people to participate.
There are even more terrible. Although the blockchain currently does not solve practical problems in any one real scenario, its potential application scenario is too extensive. You can not only use it to count sheep, you can also use it to count Counting cats. You can package any physical object or any concept into a blockchain and give it investment value. Even if laymen can't understand the nature of the blockchain, at least they can see that the price of the token is climbing. So come up with real money and silver to participate in this game.
Despite this terrible risk, blockchain fans are not easy to give up. Although there is no actual value, there are still some great possibilities in the future. Then, go back to the beginning of the article. Why is blockchain a worthless 'number sheep' tool?
First of all, blockchain is ineffective for information asymmetry.
Now all the blockchain projects, except for the speculation projects, are almost all emphasizing a value. That is to promote open and transparent information and to ensure information symmetry. It is true that for many industries, if the information is transparent, the information between the parties is symmetrical. , can really bring great benefits to the industry.
The problem is that the blockchain only solves the risk of tampering in the information preservation process, and it does not solve the problem of lack of information collection and fraud. It is the latter that is the culprit of information asymmetry in the industry. But it is the key to this. The problem is that blockchain technology is completely powerless.
Philanthropy is a place where many people think that the blockchain can play a big role. Indeed, the accounts of charitable donations seem to be much better managed by a charity that is not transparent to the accounts if registered on the blockchain. It is wrong to think about it carefully. If the charity is not willing to register the books on the blockchain, how can the blockchain be established?
If the charity is willing to register the books, then let them directly disclose the books directly for everyone to supervise. Isn't this more transparent than the complex blockchain, and the threshold for mass supervision is even lower? In this scenario there is also a more The key issue is the qualification review of the recipient. This is an important responsibility of the charity. If the charity is replaced with a blockchain, who is going to verify that the recipient does not really need to be donated? If the blockchain Proponents question that charity organizations will be tricky in their audit work. I'm sorry, the blockchain is completely powerless.
Now the concept of the hottest blockchain is the issue of tokens. Someone translates it into tokens, others think it is not a currency, but a 'password', an encrypted digital asset that can represent any interest. Anybody can establish Smart contracts, an asset, can be a point, a note, a security, or any right or resource. It can be traded on a blockchain to achieve its value
The token is encrypted to ensure that the security of its flow can be verified. However, the biggest problem is that the evaluation of the value of these actual assets is a power blockchain. A company issues tokens, which can be distributed according to tokens in the future. However, what dividends do you have, regardless of your responsibilities? Can the blockchain solve these problems? The answer is obviously negative. The blockchain can only ensure that the registered information is not tampered with, and cannot ensure that the information is properly registered.
However, the initiator does not need to worry too much about the failure of the token. Because the cryptographic technology has guaranteed the uniqueness of each token. Even if it has no real value, as long as there are enough people involved, it can fire up its price.
Second, the blockchain decentralized information operation is much less efficient than the centralized approach.
For a simple example, a blockchain project uses blockchain to record user online transaction information. Each merchant will upload user transaction data so that all participating nodes can know the transaction status of each user. , which can accurately deliver ads.
Not to mention the enormous waste of resources that a huge amount of user transaction data is stored in a blockchain way, and that it is not likely that Alibaba.com will upload its own e-commerce data to the blockchain. Say it is different from the current DMP platform (which can be seen as a centralized information store).
In fact, it does not bring any more value than the DMP platform. In addition to circumventing the DMP platform's own tampering with data or the server destroying the risk of data loss. However, this risk is minimal, so the value of this blockchain will be minimal. But the waste of resources and costs it brings is extremely impressive.
It can be said that for any information center that can be operated centrally, there is no need to use a blockchain solution. Because the value it can bring is too limited, the loss caused is very large.
Then, are there areas in which there are no natural centers for storing information? Blockchain advocates often give examples: There are many companies within an industry chain, and there are various business transactions between these companies. You need to understand the information of your collaborators to assess the risks and formulate your own business plan. At the same time, external financial institutions can also use the transaction information to grant credit. In this case, if you use blockchain to record Will all transaction information be of great value?
The idea is very good. In fact, for most companies, the value of obtaining information from other households is weighed against the risk of leaking their own data. Many companies will choose the latter. Each company (or part of the company) thinks so. Such a blockchain is completely impossible to establish. Even if such a blockchain is really established, it will not have an advantage over the bank's centralized information organization. After all, banks have mastered the company's more detailed financial flows. Happening.
Both Chen Weixing and Zhu Xiaohu represented the front and back of the blockchain. Nobody persuaded him to finally break up completely. But the controversy over the blockchain will obviously continue. If it cannot solve the blockchain in the actual scene In the issue of value, I believe that any advanced technology or idea cannot bring long-lasting vitality to the blockchain.