As a context just before that NC was explaining how advertising leads to distortion in rational decision making which is the basis for all of the current economic free market system.
Hello n3x10e8! We don't do that as that would limit you to an investment of Rs.50000/ fund house/ year. Plus there is lack of clarity around acceptance of Aadhar based e-KYC based on the new central KYC regulations. We do the full KYC for you which then has no restrictions for you.
That totally works today. Its one of the many applications of blockchain tech due to its "immutable ledger" property.
Egs: ipfs.io
Besides this there are even many cool applications such as "golem.network- airbnb for computing", "filecoin.io - airbnb for storage" ,"ethereum dapps" etc.
After a quick glance ipfs.io looks exactly what I've been thinking about but in a much more dry way.
As I see it, right now there is an opportunity window for a P2P hosted social discussion platform.
That's because many big social media companies have been increasingly cracking down on user submitted content, leaving a lot of people to wonder where they could participate without having all their content at the whims of some commercial third party, which can be bullied to censor/delete by state actors at any point in the future.
One could argue Thor offers such a place, but imho in terms of usability Thor is far off from something everybody can use easily.
With distributed blockchain enterprises can make use of each others assets without actually a single party dominating, and with zls layer over distributed block chain they can make use of each others confidential assets without actually disclosing the secrets.
Like a customer of one bank can prove his credit history to another bank without actually giving his credit history.
A patient of one hospital proving his medical history without actually disclosing medical records.
Supply chain efficiencies without disclosing trade secrets.
And many other efficiencies and asset sharing.
The problem with these examples is that the literature is filled with alternative protocols that accomplish the same task without the deadweight of the blockchain. This seems to be a solution in search of a problem with the added cost of "let's make it anonymous because we are cool" without tangible upside. If you start from the assumption that we are all mutually distrustful, adversarial entities it may make sense, but this does not accurately describe any of the enterprise relationships I have ever been involved with.
To some extent we are mutually distrustful, adversarial entities and to overcome that we employ contracts, compliance , patents etc to minimize the distrust and this adds overhead of lawyers, lenghty paperwork etc. With blockchain we can solve the trust problem via crytographic means more efficiently.
It seems to me that the problem with this answer is that we have already paid the up-front cost of these offline systems over generations and so you are supposing that the switching cost is less than the ongoing maintenance of what already exists. There may be efficiency gains to be realised somewhere, but unless there are incremental and quantifiable advantages at each intermediate step from here to there I can't see this existing outside very small (albeit potentially lucrative) niches.
Blockchains are ponzis. You need them so that you can offload yourr risk onto the community and exit your project profitably. Non-blockchain investments don't offer that feature.
