Another blockchain snakeoil. Look at one of the excerpts it's no different than today's way of doing things, where publisher needs to take the help of legal enforceable contracts. Not going into technical details where today's distributed systems with immutable records are already very good to handle structured data from multiple sources without the unnecessary complications of blockchain. It's just convoluted way of repackaging how it works now. Hopefully instead of spending time on these things, hope research community can make it better to work with semantic data and build easier tools for managing it.<p>> Clients must pay for each query they send to AnyLog. Once a client obtains access to the result of a query, there are few effective technological mechanisms for preventing or constraining further disclosure. A client may attempt to resell the data they have access to or disclose it publicly. Therefore, publishers must take unauthorized disclosures into account when setting query prices or providing access to decryption keys. In some settings, relying on more traditional deterrence mechanisms such as legal contracts may be appropriate
This might catch on with people selling bulk passwords from cracked accounts, or stolen personal info, or for mailing lists for spamming.
They need a way to not pay for duplicates, and nobody trusts anybody else. The criminal crowd likes blockchains, too.
Is there a market about collecting and selling IoT data like this ?<p>If we don't think about why one would need such a solution will this blockchain will ever have enough participants to ensure its stability?
Explanation and analysis:<p><a href="https://blog.acolyer.org/2020/02/24/anylog/" rel="nofollow">https://blog.acolyer.org/2020/02/24/anylog/</a>
Remarkably similar to a previous gig I had except they were focusing on music industry data rather than "generic". Needless to say, that didn't get very far...