The comparison between enterprise level blockchain and a decentralized blockchain is relatively new. Maybe that is why there was more of a discussion than a debate at the Debate panel today.
Hosted and moderated by David Moss, CEO of StrongBlock, the panel consisted of Pei Chen, Director at Consensys, Kapi Attarwar, the Chief Revenue Officer and leader of Blockchain for Samsung in North America and Jordan Fried, SVP Business Development at Hedera Hashgraph.
Kicking off the discussion, all three panelists agreed on how both Enterprise and Decentralized are good on their own accord. Starting with Jordan Fried, he pointed out that Hedera, is a public network. But depending on where the use case lies, the need for any chain will be chosen. For instance, companies such as Trust Your supplier, or other such consortiums of inventory or supply chain management are all dependent on public or private chains.
Adding to this, Pei Chen says “An ideal world has both private and public network chains” This, she says includes platform protocols. Kapi Attarwar adds that by using consensus in enterprise, you can generate control over certain aspects such as inventory management etc., which samsung has been helping for companies such as Ford.
He also added how samsung, right now has two verticals in its blockchain. The first is the aforementioned private network that is for the enterprise level. The other is public chain that is based on ethereum and is focussed onto devices. He even mused about how the panel seems to defeat the purpose of debate as they all are ending up arguing with each other.
David Moss, at this point brought up a client. This client seems to have a reputation of not playing well with others, as he quotes. For this, he says, the choice of enterprise vs public chain is purely use case dependent.
Speaking of use cases, Jordan Fried brings up a beautiful point as to how use cases vary within a single point. For instance, when we are pointing towards the supply chain or any device management of a particular machinery, you want it to be on a private chain for you to keep track of it. You cannot want the competition to have a peep on its depreciation. But while spinning it up, placing the machinery records or status on a public hash make it easier.
Another example he quoted was the Telecom industry. Companies do not want to share the subscriber information hence the private chain. But they need to share the details of outgoing calls or texts ergo the public chain.
Pei Chen brings up a similar yet documentation based use case of an example of the Congo Oil refinery project. 14 of the largest banks have a consortium to validate documents of commodities. When it comes to decentralization, she quotes that “merchants pay more for transactions” hence a decentralized network decreases the charges. She also quoted the market of APIs as well.
Kapi Attawar quotes on how consensus could work brilliantly at a central level. Samsung tracks about 170000 consignments around Asia every 15 seconds through a consortium of companies. These companies can look at the status of any consignment in real time without the need to login to multiple systems.
He also brings up the instance of the Korean Group of Banks and how until 18 months ago, Korea needed customers to have individual IDs and different KYCs to make transactions on every individual bank. But the birth of the Korean Group of Banks led to centralising identities. Now with just a single identity, a customer can transact almost in any bank within the group. This gave birth to a myriad of new services.
When we talk about consensus, we often come across regulations. Closing up on their thoughts, Kapi Attarwar said that the need for regulations are imminent and this may be controversial but ” you cannot walk on a street when there is no police in sight”.
Thank you for reading this article.
Binance now allows Lending with interest rates of up to 15%. Open your Binance account.
Consider subscribing to get ONE email per week with all the important curated information, tax alerts and free eBooks.
All product and company names are trademarks™ or registered® trademarks of their respective holders. Use of them does not imply any affiliation with or endorsement by them.
Everything in this article is an opinion, not an advice of any kind. This material has been prepared for general informational purposes only and it is not intended to be relied upon as accounting, tax, investment, legal or other professional advice. Please consult with a professional for specific advice.
We do not endorse or guarantee the accuracy of the information and claims made.