I don't quite understand your last paragraph, but for the rest:
The whole point is to cryptographically be able to prove ownership of something to the network.
I don't think that's the problem that blockchains solve. That problem can be solved without blockchain just by using public/private key cryptography and digital signatures, along with for instance a public ledger. But a public ledger doesn't need to be distributed and subject to consensus protocols, mining dynamics, etc. It can simply be hosted on a website.
As for the last paragraph a good example of this is the closing of a contract from an iot device signal. The device signal may be on the iot chain or chain code instance and the contract logic on another.
The only problem with your theory is how to do that with a turing complete system. I can send signatues for anything but actions which occur based on those signatures you would want a somethingwhich continues the chain of trust. Im not sure of any way to do this how you are describing while still maintaining turing completeness.
It is though. You cant ensure ownership if there is no third party the point that of the blockchain is that it solves that issue by turning the entire network into the notarius. Public/private key cryptography does not solve that.
You're talking about a different problem - not having a trusted third party or authority. I agree that blockchain solves that problem (well, it tries).
Comments
I don't quite understand your last paragraph, but for the rest:
I don't think that's the problem that blockchains solve. That problem can be solved without blockchain just by using public/private key cryptography and digital signatures, along with for instance a public ledger. But a public ledger doesn't need to be distributed and subject to consensus protocols, mining dynamics, etc. It can simply be hosted on a website.
As for the last paragraph a good example of this is the closing of a contract from an iot device signal. The device signal may be on the iot chain or chain code instance and the contract logic on another.
The only problem with your theory is how to do that with a turing complete system. I can send signatues for anything but actions which occur based on those signatures you would want a somethingwhich continues the chain of trust. Im not sure of any way to do this how you are describing while still maintaining turing completeness.
It is though. You cant ensure ownership if there is no third party the point that of the blockchain is that it solves that issue by turning the entire network into the notarius. Public/private key cryptography does not solve that.
You're talking about a different problem - not having a trusted third party or authority. I agree that blockchain solves that problem (well, it tries).