Simply “secure” is not secure enough for the storage of certain critical information. For instance, what would happen if the proof of ownership for your real estate suddenly vanished? This scenario is not outlandish: it is exactly what many landowners experienced in Haiti after the 2010 earthquake, which destroyed a vast number of public records in the country.
Get In TouchIf stored in a single physical location (even digitally), vital information can easily be destroyed, lost, stolen or falsified.
Records of real estate or land ownership need to be kept in a safe place for decades, not only to prevent tampering or damage, but also to ensure easy access. As a result, authorities in developing countries often struggle to maintain an accurate record of real estate transactions. For instance, for the houses donated to the poor in an Argentinian land titling program, in 77.9% of the cases subsequent ownership changes were not registered. In emerging economies, lack of trust in authorities is common, so people simply don’t declare what they have. The price tag of such “dead capital” — according to Peruvian economist De Soto — amounts to $20 trillion. Use cases are not limited to the developing world, however. The tokenization of the financial underpinnings of assets in Western economies will create a similar need for highly robust systems to record and transfer ownership of assets.
Blockchain is seemingly well suited to tackling these problems, if it credibly creates and stores reliable records that do not depend on a central intermediary and provides the ability to prove original documents are what someone says they are to others who have a need to know as well.
In theory, blockchain is ideally suited to creating this type of transparency. In addition, by harnessing the power of smart contracts and connecting IoT (Internet of Things) to a network, processes that rely on information that must be verified could become much more efficient.
Blockchain Barriers
Despite the obvious advantages, however, various concerns have arisen about the viability of blockchain for such use cases.
-
-
Vulnerable
Existing blockchains using proof-of-work (PoW), proof-of-authority (PoA), or proof-of-stake (PoS) consensus mechanisms offer between 33% and 50% Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT). This may not be enough to repel a well-financed and coordinated cyberattack, particularly by state actors. -
Uncertain Future
It may not be long before 256-bit (or greater) encryption can be broken by quantum computers. This will undermine the security of existing blockchain platforms which have not planned an orderly upgrade path.
The Geeq Difference
Geeq enables people to send and receive micropayments with immediacy and for fractions of a cent.
Get In Touch-
Person-First
Geeq uniquely provides people with the ability to protect their own documents and assets. -
Sustainable
Geeq’s Proof of Honesty (PoH) consensus mechanism does not rely on mining, thus enabling high transaction throughput with less latency, while consuming far fewer resources than traditional blockchain solutions. -
Stable
Geeq places strong emphasis on reducing uncertainty and minimizing volatility in transaction fees. -
Secure
For any transaction with high value, security is paramount. The degree of security afforded by Geeq – using mechanisms like the Good Behavior Bond and Proof of Honesty – is unrivaled. -
Future-proof
Geeq’s quantum-ready architecture allows chains to be easily upgraded as quantum technology matures.
