> The actual last thing in the world home users want is an authentication system where credential loss is literally irrevocable.
This is generally a concern I have about blockchain technology. What if it succeeds in its goal to play a major role in some sector, and something immensely important becomes attached to it.
Mistakes happen. Both by humans and by computers. Software having bugs, hardware failing, bits randomly changing in RAM, are all obvious and commonplace. Mitigations exist (ECC, signatures...), but never along the whole chain. For example, BTC addresses might have checksums, but if the wrong row in a database deciding the address is selected in the first place, through human, software, or hardware error, that will not matter.
Do we want to attach extremely important things to a system that is by design irreversible?
This is generally a concern I have about blockchain technology. What if it succeeds in its goal to play a major role in some sector, and something immensely important becomes attached to it.
Mistakes happen. Both by humans and by computers. Software having bugs, hardware failing, bits randomly changing in RAM, are all obvious and commonplace. Mitigations exist (ECC, signatures...), but never along the whole chain. For example, BTC addresses might have checksums, but if the wrong row in a database deciding the address is selected in the first place, through human, software, or hardware error, that will not matter.
Do we want to attach extremely important things to a system that is by design irreversible?