Yup, that’s pretty much it.

And you’re exactly correct: it is a niche solution to a very specific problem.

And that makes the OP meme wrong and ignorant; an overly broad generalization that fails to educate, instead perpetuating a “crypto bad” mentality projected onto a useful piece of tech.

It’s like saying “when do you need nuclear fission? Never” ignoring the fact that nuclear power is the perfect solution for some very specific use cases (like powering rovers on Mars) and a good solution to a few others (large scale terrestrial power generation)

Right, but if it’s being used internally within an organization then the business itself is the authority. I think I mentioned this in another reply somewhere but in many of these use cases it’s about preventing tampering or falsification of records.

Let’s take the pharmaceuticals use case as an example. In that scenario the important things to track are:

• When did a product come off the production line
• Who or what system handled the packing and shipment
• When was it shipped
• When was it received
• Who received it
• When does it expire
• When was a specific item provided to a patient
• Has a participant had their permissions revoked

If the pharmaceutical company is the one managing that system, and they provide individual health care facilities (and any intermediate handles) with “private keys”, that’s the entire extent of the central authority that’s required. Literally every other element can be encoded on the blockchain.

Compare that to a traditional system where you have to maintain databases, provide always-on connectivity to those databases for every participant, manage access control permissions for every user, etc etc etc

With blockchain, every participant can get the entirety of what they need with just their “private key” and a copy of the blockchain from one other peer. That’s it. They can submit their blocks (for a leaf node, “I received this package”; “I gave the item to this patient”; etc) to that one peer and as long as there is a path through that peer to the distributed network, the rest of the network can authenticate the validity of those blocks through network consensus. Tampering is immediately evident. And every block they submit is traceable to whoever that private key was issued to. And once they submit a block to the chain it can never be undone or modified, even if they have all the “permissions” in the world. They’d have to take over a massive percent of the distributed network to alter consensus.

You’ve misunderstood. They’re not using this for inter-bank transfers. They’re using it for inter-branch/intra-bank communication. And most major banks - certainly the ones investing in blockchain - have hundreds to thousands of branches.

Not to mention signing+encryption and blockchain are not mutually exclusive. You can have signed and encrypted blocks on a chain

I don’t mean to be rude but it sounds like you aren’t very familiar with digital identity management paradigms in the first place?

Proving who you are is always a relative operation. It’s always about the relationship between two things. “I am the person who generated this other message” or “I am the person whose face looks like this”.

Key/certificate issuance follows a variety of different models depending on the use case. Sometimes “this object was generated/signed by the person who controls this key” is enough, as is the case with things like secure emails (think gpg/pgp). Other times you need an authority to give relative meaning to a key/certificate (think SSL).

It’s certainly not necessary, it just provides specific advantages in terms of tamper resistance, validation, etc. If you’re not working in a system where the integrity and authenticity is paramount and doing that validation over the wire constantly is prohibitive then there’s no significant benefit. But there are lots of scenarios where those are EXACTLY what you want to prioritize. Several of the examples I added to my initial reply offer clear use cases that benefit.

As for my definition, I’ll defer to the literal definition:

A blockchain is a decentralized, immutable digital ledger that records transactions chronologically in “blocks” linked together using cryptography. Each new block contains a hash of the previous one, forming a secure chain that is distributed across a peer-to-peer network of computers, making it tamper-evident and resistant to changes without network consensus. This distributed and transparent system eliminates the need for a central authority, allowing participants to verify and trust the recorded data.

Note that proof of work is NOT part of the definition. Proof of work is very specifically related to cryptocurrency, and exists only as a mechanism to prevent the arbitrary creation of additional currency (blocks). There is nothing about blockchain that requires proof of work. Often you use proof of stake instead of proof of work, but even that isn’t strictly necessary

P.s. this is exactly what I mean when I talk about how grifters have ruined a perfectly good technology by poisoning the public awareness of it. The fact that you considered proof of work to be a core element of blockchain is because of cryptocurrency, and the notoriety it has received because of the grift. Other examples of this phenomenon include Tesla and their impact on the perception of autonomous vehicles (which Teslas are not, but try very hard to make you think they are), and LLMs and “AI” and their impact on the perception of real AI projects and other forms of machine learning.

Sure but when the Blockchain is restricted to operation within a specific ecosystem that is kinda moot, no? Like, if I’m managing a supply chain but have concerns about the participants in that supply chain being compromised, then it’s okay for me as a central authority to define the standard and then use the decentralized nature of Blockchain to validate and distribute the use cases for that standard.

Take a company like Target as an example. They want to make sure that their supply chain ledger is immutable and trustworthy. They don’t want anyone within their organization, from the CEO down to the shipping dock workers, to be able to falsify or tamper with line items in the ledger. As a central authority they can define a standard using Blockchain that solves that problem AND doesn’t depend on a central authority to do it beyond the initial standard definition. That reduces attack surface significantly.

Blockchain itself is just, at its core, a method of cryptographically proving the authenticity of a ledger history. That’s it. What you DO with that technology is fairly boundless. You can embed anything in a block on the chain. We have lots of existing ways to handle proof of identity that can be inserted into a block (imagine if blocks contained the public key of block’s creator and then the entire block (including the public key) is signed with the private key)

Using Blockchain in these situations provides clear advantages. The whole point is removing the need for trusted parties in yes scenarios because it introduced significant risk. Centralization has implicit dangers.

Sure do! Quoting my other reply:

Immutable ledger for inter-branch bank transaction synchronization.

This is already in use at multiple financial institutions with significant value. It has increased the speed at which transactions can be verified and distributed across large networks of bank branches so that, for example, when you deposit your money at one bank branch it becomes available elsewhere on the network immediately without waiting for the end-of-day ledger reconciling. Previously, banks had to send just the transaction details and trust that it would be valid during reconciling (the “pending” status).

Want some more?

EDIT: Took the liberty of adding a bunch of examples to my original reply 👍

Immutable ledger for inter-branch bank transaction synchronization.

This is already in use at multiple financial institutions with significant value. It has increased the speed at which transactions can be verified and distributed across large networks of bank branches so that, for example, when you deposit your money at one bank branch it becomes available elsewhere on the network immediately without waiting for the end-of-day ledger reconciling. Previously, banks had to send just the transaction details and trust that it would be valid during reconciling (the “pending” status).

Want some more?

EDIT: Went ahead and added several examples to my original reply. 👍

This is just plain wrong. Blockchain is not a synonym for cryptocurrency or proof-of-work.

Grifters ruin everything and this reply is a perfect example

I hate this so much because it’s absolutely false. Nobody needs cryptocurrency. But Blockchain has very real value that has nothing to do with currency, grift, or “proof of work”. Blockchain is NOT synonymous with crypto and the fact that everyone believes it is shows exactly how much damage the grifters have done :(

EDIT: Haters gonna hate. Hope everyone who down-votes reads the replies too.

EDIT 2: Here you go, everybody. I did the research for you…

Supply chain management

• Food safety: Companies like Walmart and IBM Food Trust use blockchain to track food products from their source to the store shelf. This allows for a swift, precise response to contamination by tracing affected items, potentially saving lives and reducing waste.
• Logistics and shipping: Shipping giant Maersk has partnered with IBM to create TradeLens, a blockchain platform that digitizes and automates shipping documents and processes. This increases transparency and efficiency across the global supply chain.

Healthcare and medical records

• Secure data sharing: Blockchain can create a secure, interoperable system for storing and sharing patient medical records. Patients can use private keys to control who accesses their sensitive data, ensuring privacy while allowing authorized providers to get the information they need.
• Pharmaceutical tracking: The MediLedger Project uses blockchain to secure the pharmaceutical supply chain, verifying the integrity of drugs and reducing the risk of counterfeit medications.
• Clinical trial management: Platforms like TrialSite use blockchain to record clinical trial data securely and transparently. This helps maintain the integrity of results, building greater trust among researchers, regulators, and participants.

Government and public services

• Land and property records: The government of Georgia has used blockchain to secure land and property records, creating an immutable and transparent public record. This reduces fraud and ensures the integrity of land titles.
• Voting systems: The mobile voting platform Voatz uses a blockchain-based system to enable secure, transparent mobile voting for eligible service members and travelers abroad. This provides a resilient solution against fraud and data corruption.

Finance (non-crypto) and banking

• Efficient transaction processing: Financial institutions like the Singapore Exchange Limited are using blockchain to streamline interbank payments. This reduces manual reconciliation and enables more efficient processing of thousands of transactions.
• Supply chain finance: TradeIX uses blockchain to provide a transparent platform for supply chain finance, automating processes and streamlining transactions.

Education

• Credential verification: Learning Machine uses blockchain for the secure issuance of digital diplomas and credentials. This provides a more trustworthy and efficient method for verifying academic achievements.

Intellectual property and media

• Transparent ticketing: Companies like Guts use blockchain to create a transparent ticketing ecosystem that eliminates ticket fraud and the secondary ticket market.

Energy and utilities

• Peer-to-peer energy trading: Homeowners with solar panels can use blockchain-based platforms to automatically sell their excess energy to neighbors. Smart meters record the transactions on a blockchain, automating the entire process.

Unfortunately, no, not really. They are absolutely able and willing to confiscate your devices at any time once you’re on Chinese soil, and once you’ve lost physical control, that’s the end of trust for that device. Even beyond that, it’s not unheard of for there to be vulnerabilities in Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc that make your device susceptible to wireless attacks. IMO it’s not worth the risk.

Here is just one example of this type of thing uncovered by The Guardian, New York Times, and others in a joint investigation: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/02/chinese-border-guards-surveillance-app-tourists-phones

Do not bring your normal personal devices to China. They are notorious for injecting spyware on foreign devices at every opportunity. Use a freshly formatted device and create all new accounts to use with it.

Regarding services: do not use self-hosted services unless you you spin up fresh, isolated instances of your services for use while abroad and spin them down afterwards, including formatting any OS they were hosted on.

Regarding VPN: because we are assuming that any device used in China is compromised, do not connect to your VPN unless you have set up a segregated VLAN and are connecting through a VPN server instance created specifically for use while in China.

Basically, assume anything you use in China is compromised. And assume your connections are being monitored. And assume that any device you are connecting to from China is at risk of being compromised. So everything needs to be segregated from the rest of your network and set up specifically to be deleted after you’re back home.

My solution for this type of situation is MicroBin running on my home network from a non-standard port, with a port knocker to open and close the port when needed.

My router handle DDNS so I can always contact my home network easily. I port-knock to trigger an iptables command on the router to forward traffic to the MicroBin host.

I also have my phone set up to connect via openvpn to my home network so that I can remotely do things like start and stop services, set port forwarding rules, etc.

Oh boy, let’s take this piece by piece…

DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT A LAWYER AND THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE

First: let’s talk about the difference between copyright, patents, and trademark

A patent protects a method of doing something - like a novel piece of code, or a newly invented drug formula - from being duplicated and used or sold without your consent.

Copyright protects creative works - like art, books, and computer software - from being mimiced. It literally deals with the rights to copy something

Trademark protects brands - like a logo or company name - from being used by other people for profit. It usually deals with marketplace confusion, as when someone creates a competing product with a similar logo to try to benefit from the logo’s recognition and popularity.

So, with that said, what are YOU dealing with?

Well, since you’re not selling software or utilizing anything from the WatchDogs game universe, you’re pretty much free and clear on both patent and copyright.

What about trademark?

Well, on the one hand, you are not competing with Ubisoft in any way, nor are you attempting to represent yourself as related to WatchDogs. So, by the letter of the law (in the US), they don’t have a valid complaint.

However, trademark under US law has this funny feature where an entity that holds a trademark is required to vigorously defend it when they become aware of potential infringement. This is to prevent the selective application of trademark. That is, if I know John is using my trademark and I don’t go after him, then Steve uses my trademark too, I can’t suddenly claim to have an interest in defending it when I didn’t care before. Steve can point at the fact that I didn’t go after John and say “you already gave up your trademark by failing to enforce it”.

So how does this impact you? Well, unfortunately, even if you are technically allowed to use “dedsec” under US law, if Ubisoft has a trademark on the term “dedsec” specifically, AND if someone at Ubisoft became aware of your use of their trademark, they would likely come after you for trademark infringement just to cover their ass. You might even win in court, but it would cost a whole lot of money that you would likely never be able to recover.

The good news is that the very first step in a trademark dispute is a cease and desist letter. They’ll demand you stop using their trademark. At that point you can either comply, refuse, or offer to settle the matter by selling them the domain.

What you do with this information is up to you.

Troll mode: Rip the first 5 minutes of each movie then splice in Rick Astley

Troll activist mode: Rip the first 5 minutes of each movie then splice in Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion live reading

Troll comedian mode: Rip the first 5 minutes of each movie then splice in Monty Python’s The Life of Brian

Activist mode: Find a set of movies to rename that teach about the harm religion has caused

Ethical absolutist mode: Refuse to host them, and explain why

Non-confrontational familial support mode: Give Mom a unique user and make the god movies only accessible to that user

In all seriousness it depends on what your priorities are. Is it more important to you to provide judgement-free support to your mom so she knows she can rely on you, or is it more important to try to reduce harm in the world by deplatforming harmful media? Or maybe it’s more important to try to teach your mom what’s wrong with those movies and you can come to an arrangement where she can watch those movies only if she agrees to watch movies you choose in equal amounts (since you can track it) to counteract the propaganda?

What is most important to you?

That’s a non-trivial number of devices, so I would recommend a decent router that will last into the future, including service upgrades. Especially if anyone in the house is gaming and streaming movies at the same time

I recommend purchasing the modem and router as two separate units.

For the modem, because you have symmetric gigabit service, you’ll need one that supports gigabit upstream. That means the less expensive SB8200 is out. Instead, you’re looking at the ARRIS SURFboard S33. You can also find a comparable product from Netgear, the CM2000

For your router, I personally like and trust Asus. Their user interface is robust but user-friendly, and their firmware is well supported by the home networking community (including a stellar ‘expanded’ version called AsusMerlin that frequently has features pulled into the official firmware)

While you could go with an older model that only supports WiFi 5 (AC), those models have reached end-of-life and will only receive critical security updates. Instead, it’s worth spending a bit more for the WiFi 6 (AX) version.

The minimum you’ll want to support a symmetric gigabit connection like what you have is the Asus RT-AX86U. However, to support possible higher speeds in the future, and to get the most rock-solid performance, I recommend the Asus RT-AX88U. This is what I personally own for my symmetric gigabit connection

NOTE: There are older versions with the same model number that have extra LAN Ethernet ports (8 total) and no 2.5Gbps port. Do NOT get them! There are known issues when using ports 5-8 on these units

Again, you could find a similar product in the Netgear Nighthawk brand.

Anything above that is going to be extra bells and whistles. Things like extra WiFi bands, stronger radios, more 2.5Gbps ports, support for link aggregation, and some one-click gaming features that I personally think aren’t worth the money.

Depending on the size of your home and your personal use case, you may also find value in adding mesh WiFi nodes to your network. Asus and Netgear both have their own implementations here. Asus’ version is called AiMesh and is pretty seamless. All of their modern routers can act as the primary mesh node.

Personally I do not game on WiFi, so I went with 3x Asus ZenWiFi AX Mini (XD4) mesh nodes. They can be connected wirelessly to the main router, or by Ethernet to reduce latency. If I were going to be gaming on WiFi, I would have gone with the beefier ZenWiFi AX (XT8) nodes instead

Hope that helps, and let me know if you have any questions! Happy to go into more detail on whatever you need

Based on your edit, what you need isn’t MoCA. What you need is a cable modem and a router (preferably as separate units, not a combo one like you have. Happy to explain why if you care)

• What is your ISP?

• What is your current advertised upload and download speed for the internet plan you have?

• Do you get TV or phone service through the same provider?

• Is your house wired for Ethernet? Coax? Both?

• How many people live with you?

• How many sqft is your home?

• How many devices well be connected? How many are wired? How many on WiFi?

• What is your use-case? Simultaneous streaming in 4k and latency-sensitive gaming? Mostly non-competitive gaming? Big downloads? Do you plan to stream content from your home while traveling or similar?

Help me help you :p