The argument makes sense when you put it that way, and especially in the terms of NFTs. In my opinion it all depends on what we envision the future will look like. If you ask me, I’d love to take the responsibility of managing my own keys and being my own bank , regardless of the issues that come with this approach (for example losing the keys).
I suggest you take a look at what we at AMPnet (www.ampnet.io) are doing and how we plan to bridge the real world assets to the blockchain.
two main issues here pointed out:
- losing the keys
- ownership transfer issue
We are building the decentralised network of auditors, on top of Ethereum. Auditors are randomly selected every now and then to continuously verify listed assets and check if the ownership structure fetched from the government databases matches the blockchain representation of the listed asset. In order for asset to get listed, one must provide the collateral less than or equal to the $$$ value of the asset (depending on some factors this amount can vary from asset to asset). Once the asset is bridged you get all the nice things distributed ledgers can provide, such as the cheap transfer of wealth, or out of the box integration with many existing defi protocols. If something shady happens with the listed asset (for example owner sells the asset in the real world while he remains the owner on the chain) then he gets slashed and the collateral is automatically liquidated. Auditors will detect this in the next auditing cycle.
For the faint of heart or the ones wanting to play with the blockchain but are not ready to take care of the keys we’ve integrated the hosted wallet support by using the Arkane services. They hide the wallet behind the simple google/fb signin methods and users don’t have to worry about losing the keys. Arkane guarantees to not lose or leak your keys and provides the insurance on every hosted wallet.
So yeah, I agree the challenges exist, but so do the solutions. Benefits of the blockchain are simply too good to not try many different approaches on solving these issues.
I suggest you take a look at what we at AMPnet (www.ampnet.io) are doing and how we plan to bridge the real world assets to the blockchain.
two main issues here pointed out:
- losing the keys
- ownership transfer issue
We are building the decentralised network of auditors, on top of Ethereum. Auditors are randomly selected every now and then to continuously verify listed assets and check if the ownership structure fetched from the government databases matches the blockchain representation of the listed asset. In order for asset to get listed, one must provide the collateral less than or equal to the $$$ value of the asset (depending on some factors this amount can vary from asset to asset). Once the asset is bridged you get all the nice things distributed ledgers can provide, such as the cheap transfer of wealth, or out of the box integration with many existing defi protocols. If something shady happens with the listed asset (for example owner sells the asset in the real world while he remains the owner on the chain) then he gets slashed and the collateral is automatically liquidated. Auditors will detect this in the next auditing cycle.
For the faint of heart or the ones wanting to play with the blockchain but are not ready to take care of the keys we’ve integrated the hosted wallet support by using the Arkane services. They hide the wallet behind the simple google/fb signin methods and users don’t have to worry about losing the keys. Arkane guarantees to not lose or leak your keys and provides the insurance on every hosted wallet.
So yeah, I agree the challenges exist, but so do the solutions. Benefits of the blockchain are simply too good to not try many different approaches on solving these issues.