Sort of. Without an authority to honor and enforce those receipts, they are useless. Game DLC is enforced by game clients and servers, which raises the question of what value blockchain adds if that system needs to be replicated anyway.
-
-
Replying to @BartronPolygon @cmuratori
It has value for the consumer, as they can second-hand trade DLC, right? Still trying to figure out if there’s a producer advantage.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @grumpygiant @cmuratori
They can trade receipts. The content isn’t encoded on the blockchain. I don’t see how it’s better than trading DLC within a walled garden?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
The advantage of a common ledger I can think of is that you could trade unrelated assets, and also that you'd need just one set of software/credentials/servers/etc. But, I think you could just have e.g., the Post Office run that common ledger though, and save the planet...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chadbarb @BartronPolygon and
At its core, all the expenditure is to preclude double-spending without having a trusted third party. So just.. trust a third party. An issue with the common ledger is that e.g., ticketmaster doesn't *want* a secondary trade in their assets(tickets) they don't get a piece of.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Tickets are an interesting use case because the event itself can’t be duplicated and happens in one location. Check the blockchain at the door. For digital, I’m trying to picture how e.g., Unity Asset Store would use it unless a consortium of asset stores agreed to interoperate.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
But the blockchain isn't even "useful" here, because the authoritative thing is _the person at the door_. Either they let you in or they don't. That's the part everyone seems to not get.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Not quite. These days the tickets are scanned for validity. In this case, so long as block chain continues to exist, it could be a way to cut out Ticketmaster and other centralized distributors. You don’t need two central authorities (Ticketmaster and the venue) — only the venue.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes quite? Who cares if the tickets are scanned? My point is that the person who controls the door (or employs the person who controls the door) chooses what to do with the information that gets scanned. They can choose to use whatever they want.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori @BartronPolygon and
Blockchain does literally nothing here. It literally doesn't do anything that a server doesn't do. It guarantees you nothing. It enforces nothing. At any time, the venue can simply choose to or not to let whomever in, however they want - they are in complete control.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
There is literally no difference between a venue deciding to use the blockchain vs. deciding to use Brown Paper Tickets vs. deciding to use TicketMaster. The blockchain is no different whatsoever from just a ticket server.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.