►
From YouTube: baseline protocol with John Wolpert & Nick Kritikos
Description
Click to listen to a fascinating discussion with John Wolpert(cofounder of Hyperledger Fabric) and Nick Kritikos from the baseline protocol. John explains why Hyperledger Fabric has limitations in enterprise due to lack of data compartmentalization, cost and scalability and argues for a new approach using existing enterprise service bus solution patterns with public blockchain, such as Ethereum, as a messaging board for only storing data hashes of transactions. The baseline protocol gives enterprises a common frame of reference that their records match, despite having different ERP systems.
B
A
B
Before
coming
to
consensus,
I
was
at
microsoft
for
three
years
running
the
microsoft
technology
centers
in
the
us
and
prior
to
that
I
was
at
oracle
for
18
years,
where
we
used
to
centralize
everything
and
have
the
world's
greatest
database.
You
know
either
you
can't
diss
the
oracle
database
and
now
I'm
in
the
decentralized
space
trying
to
fix
that.
So
I'm
here
today
with
john
wilker
john,
take
it
away.
C
C
C
I
think
we
had
one
drink
and
we
were
like
so
we
should
start
a
foundation,
let's
yeah,
and
then
I
think
it
was
chris
ferris
that
convinced
us
to
use
linux
foundation
and
things
went
from
there
and
then
I
wrote
a
check
for
500
000
and
then
hyperledger
happened
so
yeah.
I
was
involved
with
hyperledger.
The
original
thought
behind
hyperledger
was
hey.
We
all
when
we're
trying
to
form
consortia,
we
all
need
to
say
that
we
have
control
without
anyone
being
in
control
of
the
system
through
which
we
do
business.
C
I
wrote
that
line
if
you've
heard
it
before.
I
also
think
I
wrote
the
line
for
jerry
that
he
uses
a
lot.
You
know
no
chain,
one
chain
will
rule
them
all.
Both
of
those
lines
are
wrong
and
I'm
going
to
explain
why
in
a
minute-
and
I
can
own
that-
because
I
I
wrote
them
yeah
there-
there
needs
to
be
in
distributed
systems
101.
If
you
want
multiple
machines,
two
or
more,
to
coordinate
in
any
real
way.
You
need
a
common
frame
of
reference.
C
C
C
It's
a
very
low
level,
boring
job
right,
basically
hash
management
and
ordering,
but
you
do
want
one
thing
and
preferably
something
that's
always
on
supremely
tamper
resistant
and
can't
lock
you
out
of
valid
operations
by
getting
controlled
by
somebody
that
doesn't
like
you,
and
that
is
my
definition
of
decentralization.
I
never
use
the
term.
Try,
never
to
use
the
term
decentralized
to
justify
something
tautologically.
Oh
it's
good,
because
it's
decentralized!
What
does
that
mean?
I
see
I
hear
it
all
the
time
I'm
getting
at
55,
I'm
getting
cantankerous
and
ornery
about
things
like
this
right.
C
C
Oh,
let's
nft
this
and
they'll
send
them
to
that
or
let's
you
know,
and
it
isn't
odd
that,
like
all
the
arguments
that
we
were
making
verbatim
for
base
for
blockchain
to
begin
with,
are
now
being
re-rolled
out,
but
instead
of
saying
blockchain,
they
say
nft,
I'm
like
what
happened
here
what's
happening,
we
debunked
why
all
those
things
weren't
good,
blockchain
cases.
Why
are
you
resurrecting
them
now
all
right?
So
that's
in
my
experience.
C
I
was
at
ibm
watson
for
a
number
of
years
and
then
I
was
for
some
period
and
then
came
back
and
jerry
cuomo
came
and
called
me
up
one
day
and
said:
hey
there's
this
thing
called
blockchain.
Let's
go
find
out.
What's
going
on
and
went
from
there
in
2017,
along
with
nick
criticos,
I
joined
joe
lubin
at
consensus
and
I've
never
looked
back.
The
reason
I
left
was
that
I
started
and
joined
joe
is
that
it
it.
C
I
was
always
a
little
nervous
about
what
we
called
andreessen's
revenge
mark.
Andreessen
was
making
fun
of
us
back
in
2015
for
creating
private
blockchains
and
we
were
like
well,
he
doesn't
know
what
he's
talking
about.
He.
You
know
what
he
he
doesn't
appreciate.
What
we're
doing,
but
in
the
back
of
my
mind,
I'm
like
mark
is
smarter
than
me
he's
gotta.
He
must,
he
must
know
something,
and
he
did.
C
If
you,
a
private
blockchain
is
blockchain
technology
in
general
is
a
digital,
nudist
colony.
That's
the
best
way.
I
can
explain
it,
it
is
a
it
is.
It
is
a
pattern
that
does
not
like
compartmentalization
oracle
learned
long
ago
for
four
years
ago.
Compartmentalization
is
fundamental
to
database
technology.
C
You
need
to
be
able
to
have
access
controls
party
a
can
see
table,
one
party
b
can
see
table,
two
rdc
can
see
record
and
in
table
two.
You
need
to
be
able
to
control
those
things.
Blockchains,
don't
like
to
do
that
public
or
private.
A
private
blockchain
is
like
a
nudist
colony
on
a
private
beach.
If
you
have
access
to
the
beach,
if
you
have
a
node,
you
may
not
have
access
to.
C
C
We
were
talking
to
a
company
that
was
very
proud
of
their
private
blockchain
and
they
they
had
a
bunch
of
banks,
and
I
said
well
so,
where
where's
where's,
blockchain
who's,
who's
running
the
nodes
and
they
said
well,
we
are
we're
they're
all
in
our
server
farm,
and
I
said
oh
well,
do
any
of
the
banks
want
their
own
note
and
they
said
why?
Yes,
they
all
do.
I
said
well
what
happened
I
said
well,
the
problem
is,
none
of
them
want
any
of
the
other
banks
to
have
one.
C
You
see
the
problem,
so
a
shared
database
of
information
that
you're
very
happy
that
the
dumbest
administrator
in
your
network
is
going
to
get
hacked
and
out
you
all
on
is
okay,
but
I'm
really
worried
about
private
blockchains
right.
You
know
what
point
do
we
does
the
news
break
that
somebody
with
a
node
got
hacked
all
right
so
pri?
I
think
a
lot
of
pointy
hair
managers
as
it
were
think
that
blockchain
technology
is
somehow
a
magical,
high
security
database.
C
It's
not
right!
It's
hot!
It's
more
tamper
resistant
than
a
privately
administrated
single
company
oracle
database
traditional,
but
that
privately
traditional
air-gapped
well-administrated
oracle
database
is
really
good
at
compartmentalization
at
surveillance
resistance,
your
public,
your
private
blockchain-
is
not
very
good
at
it.
Public
blockchains,
of
course,
are
terrible
at
it.
C
Not
if
we,
you
know
not,
if
we're
going
to
use
it
to
store
any
kind
of
data
that
we
are
worried
about
getting
reached,
but
it
would
be
a
good
piece
of
middleware.
It
is
a.
It
is
especially
a
public.
Blockchain
is
extremely
good
at
tamper
resistance,
it's
hard
to
tamper
with
it
and
it's
hard
to
get
control
of
it.
It's
probably
the
most
hard
to
get
control
of
thing
that
we
have
in
computer
science
today
right.
Would
we
all
agree
with
that.
C
But
it's
really
the
the
worst
at
keeping
secrets
right
yeah.
In
fact,
you
have
to
think
that
maybe
the
the
whole
thing
was
invented
by
the
nsa
to
catch
stupid
criminals
who
think
that
they're
being
anonymous
right,
you
know,
give
me
a
good
machine
learning
system
and
a
little
time
and
I'll
make
you
in
seven
transactions.
B
A
C
And
han,
what
was
her
first
name,
catherine
hahn
yeah.
She
made
a
whole,
her
old
name
on
that
that
bust
right,
and
so
that
was
a
big
deal,
but
then
yeah
more
recently,
just
just
you
know,
talk
about
nfts.
We,
my
team,
did
a
little
nft
project
a
couple
of
years
ago.
We
launched
it
at
south
by
southwest,
and
we
just
had
a
few
whale
friends
buy
this
nft
and
trade
it
around.
It's
called
bootleg.
C
C
Well,
I
know
who
those
are
and
years
later,
in
fact,
two
weeks
ago
we
went
back
and
looked
at
that
contract
and
I'm
sitting
there
looking
straight
at
the
accounts
of
these
people,
and
I
know
who
they
are,
and
I
know
right
now
what's
in
those
accounts
and
they
may
have
other
accounts,
but
it
seems
a
lot
very
uncomfortable
for
me
to
know
what's
in
their
accounts,
so
think
about
that
from
a
corporate
perspective.
Right
is
that,
do
you
really
want
to
be
nfting
your
supply
chain?
C
Do
you
want
your
pallets
and
your
in
your
skus
to
be
nft'd?
You
definitely
want
good
data
hygiene.
You
definitely
want
to.
You
know,
do
do
good
digitization
and
you
definitely
want
better
collaboration
than
we
have
today
or
have
had.
But
do
you
really
want
to
put
these
discrete
items
on
any
kind
of
blockchain?
I
say
no,
so
again
it
doesn't
work
dumb
idea,
but
it
wouldn't
be.
If
and
that's
where
I'll
share
screen
we'll
talk
about
baseline
protocol,
any
questions,
while
I'm
doing
that
nope,
I
I'm
sorry
for
anybody
who's.
C
C
C
So
I'm
not
going
to
talk
about
blockchain
anymore,
I'm
going
to
talk
about
verified,
multi-party
workflows,
because
that's
really
where
it's
at
what
the
problem
block
chains
is
a
piece
of
technology.
We
need
to
talk
about
the
problem,
that's
at
hand.
The
problem
at
hand
is
you
could
spend
a
billion
dollars?
In
fact,
when
I
was
at
best
buy,
I
think
we
spent
a
billion
dollars
on
on
on
systems
of
record
erp
systems.
C
E-Commerce
systems
and
the
best
they
could
do
is
tell
us
what
we
thought
we
knew
about
our
business
partner
relationships
and
our
transactions
with
them.
It
didn't
tell
us
anything
about
what
we
what
was
actually
being
recorded
and
and
believed
on
the
other
side
of
any
of
those
relationships.
You
send
me
an
invoice.
I've
turned
that
into
a
bill.
C
My
billing
system
and
my
payable
system
has
as
a
piece
of
information
which
was
hand
typed
from
the
email
and
somebody
fat
fingered,
an
extra
zero
or
we
didn't
get
the
email
or
somebody
missed
it.
We
didn't
get
the
memo
in
that
counterparty's
invoice
system
is
an
invoice
in
my
system.
There
isn't
an
invoice
or
it's
a
different
data
set
of
data.
B
Even
today,
one
of
steve
cox,
one
of
oracle's
leaders
on
business
process
in
their
their
applications,
talks
about
when
they're
doing
a
financial
close
even
with
a
great
erp
system
like
oracle
you're,
still
doing
a
lot
of
chasing
and
waiting
chasing
and
waiting,
and
in
that
extended
period
of
time
on
the
financial
close.
If
you
didn't
have
to
chase
and
wait,
your
financial
close
could
happen
in
three
days
or
five
days.
Even
sorry,.
C
C
A
docusign
and
that's
these
are
big
numbers,
and
this
is
not
including
what
happens
when
best
buy
calls
the
supplier
and
says
hey
your
stuff,
isn't
on
our
dock
to
put
on
the
shelves-
and
it
was
due
here
today
and-
and
the
supplier
says
well,
my
records
say
that
it's
due
here
in
two
weeks
and
best
buy
says
I
don't
care
what
your
record
says.
You
will
do
whatever
it
takes
and
spend
whatever
money.
You
need
to
to
get
it
here
tomorrow
or
you
don't
have
to
do
business
with
us
anymore.
C
C
In
fact,
I've
got
a
journalist
friend
I
was
like
you
know:
let's
go
look
at
what
the
havoc
wreaked
upon
the
suez
canal
incident
recently
on
data
consistency,
acro
up
and
down
the
supply
chain,
just
not
nothing
else,
but
data
consistency.
What
got
unconsistent
during
that
event!
I
bet
it's
a
lot
so
data
consistency
is
a
problem
and
that's
what
we're
really
going
to
talk
about
and
it's
something
that
blockchains
really
can
address.
C
C
B
Yeah
generally,
when
you're
you're
working
with
large
network
partnerships,
you
know
we've
gone
from
a
period
of
vertical
integration
to
outsourcing
to
now
networks
of
relationships.
There
are
many
things
to
to
manage
right
things
like
total
volume
purchase
aggregate
spend.
You
know
all
of
these
inputs
in
the
process
keep
going
john
yeah
and
oftentimes.
Today.
B
C
Also,
it
doesn't
solve
the
problem,
consistency
if
you're
typing
into
their
portal.
You
can
get
it
wrong
and
then
you
can
go
and
change
your
data
on
your
side.
Even
if
you
use
the
api
and
you
and
you
and
you're
fairly
confident
that
the
api
ran
the
the
join
correctly
and
the
the
data
that
that
moment
was
consistent.
But
then
you
go
and
change
it
later.
C
B
C
C
Got
it
so
effectively?
What
we've
done
is
we've
we
started
with
in
2015,
and
this
was
my
thinking
that
we
need
a
single
source
of
truth
right.
This
is
the
walmart
thing.
This
is
the
mayor's
trade
lens
thing
that
we
we
need.
One
shared
system,
one
shared
database-
to
contain
our
shared
information,
so
that
we
eliminate
that
problem
of
consistency,
and
it
is
one
pattern
for
eliminating
the
problem
right
right.
We
can.
We
all
have
this
one
database.
We
all
share
a
node.
We
all
feel
like.
We
have
control.
C
Oh,
it
took
us
18
extra
months
to
get
there
because
none
of
us
understood
the
technology
and
there's
all
this
governance
stuff.
On
top
of
it.
On
top
of
the
fact
that
forming
consortia
is
hard
and
always
will
be
right,
politics,
politics,
you
know
you
didn't
get
rid
of
the
hegemon.
You
still
needed
the
walmart
to
make
everybody
do
it.
You
still
needed
the
maersk
to
make
everybody.
Do
it
and
then
still
people
grumble
about
the
fact
that
it's
really
walmart
or
maersk
right.
C
C
It's
the
magic
bus,
so
single
source
of
truth
is
one
way
to
go,
not
the
right
way
to
go,
and
then
we
got
into
sort
of
thinking
of
it
as
back
end
compute
right
the
world
computer,
and
this
is
one
thing
that
vitalik
batern
said
and
I've
said
to
him
to
his
face.
I
think
one
thing
I
don't
think
that
you've
said
that
I
didn't
agree
with
was
that
it's
the
world
computer.
I
think
that
metallic
has
a
pretty
nuanced
idea
of
what
that
means.
C
But
most
people
took
it
at
his
word
and
come
on.
You
can't
have
a
singleton
that
will
handle
all
the
reads
and
rights
of
everybody's
back
end.
You
know
it's
just
not
gonna
happen
it.
The
laws
of
physics
prevent
it
never
say
never,
but
never
is
that
going
to
be
a
thing
quantum
computing
isn't
going
to
solve.
C
That
the
reads
and
writes
cost
time
in
compute-
and
you
can't
even
a
supremely
sharded
cassandra
database
without
any
cons
without
any
data
consistency
or
without
any
consensus
algorithm
to
deal
with
is
still
not
going
to
handle
the
reads
and
rights
of
everybody's
back
end
not
efficiently,
so
don't
use
it
for
that.
Right
use
a
database
for
your
backend.
It's
a
good
thing
to
use.
They're
good
oracle
has
a
really
good
one.
C
Yeah
row
level,
locking
that
was
a
major
innovation.
It's
amazing
how
people
forget
about
the
cool
stuff
that
happened
before
teach
the
millennials
about
row
level,
locking
so
so
so
yeah.
So
if
you're
not
going
to
use
it
as
back
end
right,
it
can
be.
However,
an
effective
and
performant
enough.
I
used
to
run
performance.
You
know
all
the
ilities
for
a
company
that
was
my
job.
You
know
a
reliability,
maintainability
scalability,
all
those
abilities
and
the
when
you
do
the
math
on
a
public
blockchain
like
ethereum.
C
Finality
doesn't,
is
not
no
longer
an
issue,
and-
and
you
can
you
can
get
these
through-
they
don't
have
to
happen
immediately,
so
you
can
also
the
cost
of
it
goes
down.
So
the
back
end
two
back
ends
the
consistency
engine
and
what
we'll
call
the
common
frame
of
reference
right.
So
we've
gone
from
single
source
of
truth
to
the
notion
of
common
frame
of
reference.
I
have
still
I
have
a
database.
C
I've
got
netsuite,
you've
got
jd
edwards,
somebody
else
has
got
sap
or
microsoft
dynamics
or
somebody
else
that's
got
an
excel,
spreadsheet
or
or
or
or
quickbooks
these
all.
All
these
systems
of
record
in
a
baseline
world
become
once
again
the
core
the
important
thing
I've
got.
My
database
you've
got
your
database,
I'm
not
primary
in
yours,
you're,
not
primary
mine.
C
The
half
of
this
work
is
is
about
making
sure
that
the
cso
we
call
them
celia
and
cecil
deciso
that
the
the
security
officer
would
actually
go
from
hating
blockchain,
which,
by
the
way
they
all
do
for
good
reason.
I've
never
met
one
that
did
that
liked
it
big
giant
threat.
Surfaces
are
not
something
that
csos
like
to
something
that
they're
they're,
quite
comfortable
with,
like
oh
yeah,
you're
putting
hashes
on
a
bulletin
board
great.
Do
it
no
problem
at
all?
C
C
A
E
No
you're
good,
I
mean
the
the
issues
that
you
talked
about.
I
think
we
hit
up
against
the
same
problems
that
you
mentioned
with
the
foreign
consortia
and
trying
to
establish
governance
logic
and
the
same
idea
of
having.
Basically
it's
a
it's
a
fancy
database
where
you've
you've
agreed
the
maybe
agreement
smart
contracts,
you've
agreed
the
business
logic,
you
agree:
the
hierarchy
and
yeah.
Finally,
you
come
up
against
the
the
lead,
the
lawyers
and
the
the
security
officers
and
these
enterprises
and
it
ends
there.
Yeah.
C
C
We
need
that
right,
that's
and,
in
fact,
I
think
it's
going
to
drive
a
lot
of
the
data
hygiene
work
that
we've
always
30
years.
We've
needed
to
do
and
just
didn't
prioritize
because,
let's
be
honest,
the
house
is
never
so
clean
as
when
you
have
neighbors
or
over
right.
So
the
cross
company
multi-party
workflow
integrations,
I
think,
will
drive
a
lot
of
internal
integration
hygiene
over
time.
I
think
it
prioritizes
it
way
more
than
this.
C
You
know
some
new
cio
coming
in
and
saying:
we've
got
to
get
our
data
hygiene
together
and
then
people
sort
of
say
yes
for
a
while
and
then
it
kind
of
drops
off
the
radar.
I
think
that
when
you,
when
you're
working
when,
when
you're
integrating
more
deeply
with
your
counterparties,
you
you
you
tend
to
be
keep
your
hop
your
own
house
in
order
better.
So
I
think
it's
a
good
trend,
but
I
I
I
think
you
know
the
probably
the
smart
thing
would
to
do.
C
If
you
can
get
away
with
it
is
tell
everybody
you're,
starting
a
blockchain
and
then
write
it
in
anything
other
than
a
blockchain
and
then
make
it
a
sas
system
and
if
everybody's
a
little
creeped
out
by
that
shamir
the
keys
right,
so
that
every
I'll
give
each
administrator
a
keys
to
a
root,
a
shamir
of
shmear
sharing
of
secret
sharing
slice
of
of
the
root
keys.
So
that
every
you
know
a
plurality
have
to
turn
their
keys
to
to
make
any
changes
to
the
route.
C
E
C
C
Is
a
baseline
protocol
so,
first
of
all,
it's
very
important
to
know
that
and
understand
deeply
that
I
need
to
say
these
words
so
that
people
will
get
this
especially
blockchain
people
they're
expecting
some
magical
thing.
This
is
the
most
boring
thing
you
will
ever
see
in
blockchain.
It
is
the
most
boring
use
of
a
blockchain
ever
devised.
C
There's
nothing
interesting
about
this.
We've
been
doing
the
pattern
for
40
or
50
years.
It's
a
basic
middleware
pattern.
You
know
it's,
and
so
this,
if
you're,
if
you're
waiting
for
the
punchline
it'll,
never
come,
I'm
going
to
describe
something,
that's
supremely
boring,
which
is
why
your
cso
is
going
to
like
it.
C
There's
no
tokens,
there's
no.
I
mean
people.
Companies
with
tokens
can
offer
things
around
it,
but
no
there's
no
core
token
to
it.
There's
no
there's
no
chain
there's!
No!
It
doesn't
even
stipulate
that
you
need
to
use
necessarily
ethereum,
although
I'm
going
to
argue
that
ethereum
is
a
pretty
good
candidate
for
being
that
ultimate
bulletin
board.
But
but
you
know
you
could
use
an
arduino
in
your
closet
as
the
common
frame
of
reference.
C
I
would
just
laugh
at
you
because
you've
you've,
you've
perpetuated
the
same
problem
that
we're
trying
to
get
out
of
which
is
you've
created
a
new
middleware
silo
right.
That's
the
whole
point
of
using
a
public
blockchain
for
this,
so
that
you
can
generate
workflows
under
supreme
compartmentalization
supreme
privacy.
No
data
goes
on
the
thing,
but
you
can
do
really
cool
workflow
integrations
even
after
you
discover
somebody
else's
workflow
years
later
that
you
want
to
integrate
with.
C
You
can
do
that
as
long
as
you
share
a
common
repository
of
of
hashes
of
proofs,
so
common
framework
yeah
frame
of
reference.
So
if
you
haven't,
if
you've
gone
off
and
created
your
own
private
comment
frame
of
reference-
and
somebody
else
has
done
the
same
thing-
then
you're
back
to
having
to
decide
whose
machine
you're
going
to
use
for
your
integration
and
that's
the
problem
right
so
it'd
be
nice.
C
If
we
just
had
it's,
not
the
it's,
not
the
world
computer,
it's
not
the
internet
computer,
it's
the
internet's,
I
think
ethereum
could
be
rightly
called
or
in
the
future
the
internet's
boring
state
service
for
hashes
and
ordering
that
would
be.
I
don't
know
that
that's
good
marketing
for
ethereum,
but
I
think,
that's
ultimately
from
a
cio's
perspective,
a
pretty
good
job
for
it
it's
fit
for
purpose.
Ethereum
is
scalable
enough
for
that.
It's
secure
enough
for
that.
C
C
Yeah
as
long
as
your
databases
are
gdpr
compliant,
then
you
don't
have
to
worry
about
a
new
thing
having
to
be
gdr
pr
compliant
and
then
making
it
do
sort
of
weird
crazy,
backflips
of
of
technical
complexity,
to
get
it
to
do
that
when
it
really
wasn't
a
good
design
pattern
for
that
right,
I
mean
blockchains
like
to
spread
information
out.
Gdpr
says
no.
You
need
to
keep
it
over
here,
because.
F
F
Because
of
gdp,
so
that's
right,
yeah,
that's
right!
So
I
I,
if
you,
if
you
do,
if
you
do
find
a
point
to
cross
reference,
something
like
like.
I
don't
know
if
you're
familiar
with
fire
as
an
interface
in
in
medical
records,
if
it's
a
kind
of
like
a
message
bust
as
well
for
interfacing
between
between
hospital
systems-
and
you
know
different
organizations,
it's
the
idea
of,
because
I'm
not
familiar
with
enterprise
buses
and
I'm
just
trying
to
see.
F
B
C
C
F
C
C
We
had
to
give
all
the
code
away,
not
under
apache
under
cc0
universal
yeah,
creative
commons,
because
they
can't
even
own
a
license
to
it
if
they,
if
they're
auditing,
any
company
that
has
the
tech
in
it,
they
can't
even
own
an
apache
license
to
it.
So
we
went
full
open,
openly
governed,
open
source
under
a
creative
commons
license.
But
then
oasis's
cc
cla
covers
things
like
patents
and
ip
requirements
that
enterprises
need.
So
we
gotta
get
all
we
get
all
the
we
cover.
C
All
we've
been
doing
this
open
source
stuff
for
a
few
hundred
years,
so
we're
pretty
good
at
it.
So
that's
the
organization,
it's
yeah,
it's
over
a
thousand
people,
just
in
the
slack
channel
and
it's
quite
vibrant,
and
now
there
are
many
projects
happening
and
they're,
not
getting
stuck
in
poc
hell,
because
what
we're
doing
makes
sense
and
it's
safe.
C
But
go
and
let's
go
back
to
what
durham
had
said
about
about
the
middleware
part.
Part
of
the
standard
here
is
to
say:
hey.
You
can
become
baseline
compliant
when
we
promulgate
the
standard
later
this
year
early
next
year
and
and
make
it
official
your
implementation
will
test
to
be
baseline,
compliant
and
yeah.
We
may
we
want
to
make
that
a
thing
we
want
you
to
be
saying,
send
me
that
purchase
order
make
sure
to
baseline
it
right.
It's
a
verb
right,
it's
not
a
product,
it's
not
a
platform.
It's
not!
C
It's,
not
a!
We
in
fact,
it's
a
lowercase
b
baseline,
it's
not
a
brand.
It's
not
it's!
Not
even
like
hyperledger
fabric,
which
is
truly
a
platform.
It
became
that
fun
a
fun
fact
on
that.
We
called
it
fabric
because
we
didn't
want
it
to
become
a
platform,
but
then
it
turned
into
a
platform
we're
like
no
it's
a
fabric.
It's
underneath
the
platforms.
B
So
coda
actually
started
koda
actually
started
their
bottling
harbor
on
fabric
and
they
found
the
cost
too
prohibitive
for
all
of
their
smaller
suppliers.
So
they're
leveraging
baseline
to
extend
that
project
to
68
suppliers
in
north
america,
originally
255
worldwide.
Following
so
and
that's
going
into
production
as
we
speak,.
C
Yeah,
that's
going
to
production
right
after
a
few
months,
full
production
not
sort
of
like
we're,
calling
it
production
full-on,
real
production,
and
so
that.
Why
is
that?
Well,
because
it's
just
based
on
core
good
common
sense
it
protocol,
which
is
so
so
dartmouth
to
be
baseline,
certified
you'll.
You
won't
be
allowed
to
use
a
message-
bus,
for
example,
to
move
data
from
database
one
to
database
two.
That
is
like
gossip,
because
you
would
be
breaking
gdpr,
so
you
can
use
anything
you
like
you
use
nas.
F
F
C
Yeah,
what
you've
got
is
a
record
in
your
database
you're,
going
to
generate
a
commitment,
a
a
zero
knowledge
proof
or
a
commitment
that
will
ultimately
generate
that
proof.
You're
gonna,
sign
it.
You're
gonna
send
that
package
via
carrier
pigeon
to
your
counterparty
or
your,
and
if
this
could
be
n
lateral
network,
so
it
doesn't
have
to
be
just
two
parties:
they're
gonna
receive
it
they're
gonna,
sign
it.
They're
gonna
generate
their
side
of
the
proof.
They're
gonna
send
it
back.
C
It's
gonna
go
into
this
zero
knowledge
service,
and
that
is
you
know
something
you
have
to
add
to
your
stack.
So
you
know
in
the
future.
You
can
imagine
sap
just
comes
baseline
native
you
just
you
know.
It's
just
got
that
stuff
in
it
or
netsuite.
Or
what
have
you
today?
There
are
vendors
or
vars
that
will
sell
you
stuff
that
you
can
bolt
onto
the
side
of
sap
or
dynamics
or
what
have
you
be
nice
to
have
one
for
netsuite
and
then
effectively
you're
going
to
receive
that
event?
C
That's
going
to
check
the
proof
and
then
it's
going
to
call
a
what's
called
a
shield
contract
on
the
on
the
on,
whatever
you've
decided
to
make
your
common
frame
of
reference,
whether
that's
the
public,
ethereum
blockchain,
or
whether
it's
a
private
instance
of
of
a
blockchain
or
your
arduino
right.
You
know
so
you're
gonna,
it's
gonna
generate
this
the
shield
contract
and
then
the
shield
contract
will
call
something
called
a
verifier
contract.
C
C
You
can
make
sure
your
data
is
still
consistent
at
any
given
time
with
the
other
party.
What
you've?
What
you've
got
now
is
a
proof
of
consistency,
which
is
just
very
very
little
more
than
what
you
had
before
as
a
proof
of
existence.
A
hash
right.
I
don't
know
why.
Why
didn't
we
get
all
excited
about?
Hashes
hashes
are
profoundly
important.
I
can't
buy
it.
Why
is
it
a
hash,
a
trillion
dollar
thing
right,
yeah.
C
You
should
be
able
to
buy
the
original
hash
data,
a
function
for
68
million
dollars
in
nfts
or
whatever
happened
just
the
other
day.
That's
an
important
piece
of
work.
Hashing
right
didn't
think
it
was
pot
in
the
70s.
True,
true
story,
mathematicians
didn't
think
hashing
was
possible,
so
you've
received.
You
know
it's
instead
of
just
a
hash
of
some
data
that
you
can
then
prove
was
the
original
data.
You
have
a
proof
of
consistency.
C
C
Right,
that's
it!
That's
the
whole
thing,
it's
as
simple
as
that,
so
what
you
wind
up
and
the
reason
we
do
it
under
zero
knowledge
was
two
reasons
one.
You
can
create
these
really
cool
zero
knowledge
circuits
that
can
enforce
workflow
integrity
from
work
step
to
what
work
step.
I've
got
a
master
service
agreement.
I've
got
an
rfp
that,
had
you
know,
sam
nasa
or
something
I
had
to
go
through
a
bunch
of
rules
to
distribute
the
rfp.
I
can
say
verifiably
I
occurred.
C
It
went
to
all
the
appropriate
parties
identically
the
same,
but
then
each
party
responding
is
completely
invisible
to
the
other
parties.
Responding
which
you
don't
get
in
a
fabric.
Channel
right,
everybody's
going
to
know
stuff
is
happening
even
if
you
encrypt
it
they're
going
to
know
the
other
parties
are
responding
in
this.
C
You
don't
even
know
that
if
you're
one
of
10
rfp
recipients,
you
don't
know
who's
bidding
back,
there's
a
complete
compartmentalization.
That's
one
of
the
important
parts
of
this
right,
but
each
party,
as
they
go
through
that
workflow
step
to
step
rfp,
to
bid
to
msa
to
master
service
agreement
to
discount
rate
table,
to
purchase
orders
and
many
steps
in
between
all
the
way
to
delivery
of
a
product.
C
C
Wouldn't
it
be
nice
if
short
of
them
opening
up
the
box
and
seeing
your
logo,
they
can
give
you
the
ship
date
or
the
or
the
the
the
delivery
date
verified,
but
they're
just
dropping
it
on
the
bulletin
board
in
a
way
that
nobody
would
notice.
Nobody
would
see
nobody
would
be
able
to
generate
a
classifier
on,
but
you
because
you're
subscribed
to
that.
One
piece
of
nonsense
are
now
able
to
say
to
generate
your
invoice
to
your
customer
without
amazon.
C
C
B
Well
long
story
short:
it
allows
you
to
maintain
your
systems
of
record
their
gdpr
compliance,
their
hipaa
compliance.
What
have
you
and
synchronize
them
using
public
infrastructure
right?
So,
just
as
you
need
it,
you
pay
as
you
go
effectively,
so
this
is
very
valuable
when
you've
got
business
processes.
Obviously
that
need
multiple
parties
where
some
of
the
partners
may
be
smaller
and
they
don't
necessarily
have
the
ability
to
invest
up
front
on
the
kind
of
infrastructure
that
they
need
for
a
traditional
eai
type
system
where
it's
doing
relatively
low
volumes.
B
So
you
don't
need
to
worry
about
real
time.
You
know
it's
not
it's
not
stock
trading
or
settlement
things
of
that
nature.
You
know
these
are
like
net
30-day
invoices
or
you
know
it
needs
to
be
there
tomorrow.
It
doesn't
need
to
be
there
in
seconds
where
oftentimes
there
are
material
disputes
and
those
disputes
could
be
quite
costly,
whether
in
time,
money
people
or
what
have
you
and
ultimately,
you
want
to
be
able
to
do
this
and
maybe
even
integrate
into
these
workflows
at
a
later
point
in
time.
B
C
And
and
the
the
punchline
of
all
that
is
we're
starting
a
business.
In
fact
I
can
say
yeah,
you
know
I
don't
mind
telling
you
that
our
intention
is
to
build
a
company
that
says
if
your
invoices
are
baselined,
we
will
buy
them
from
you
and
not
for
three
percent
for
30
days,
but
for
50
basis
points
over
a
t
bill
or
something
like
that
right,
because
it's
a
you
know,
it's
quite
qed
right.
If
you,
you
could
have
a
great
credit
score.
C
The
buyer
could
have
great
credit
score
if
they
didn't
get
the
invoice
they're
not
going
to
pay
it
right.
So
it
would
be
nice
if
you
have
a
verified,
non-temperable
act.
That
said
or
ack.
That
says
we
definitely
have
the
same
information.
You
definitely
got
the
memo
you're.
Definitely
you
definitely
gave
me
a
poa
right.
B
68
the
68
bottlers
in
kona,
just
in
north
america,
do
over
900
million
dollars
a
year
in
invoices
just
amongst
themselves.
They
have
long-standing,
well-known
business
relationships,
they're
not
going
away.
They
know
they're
they're,
you
know
their
sugar
suppliers,
their
water
suppliers,
their
aluminum
providers
very,
very
well.
Yet
they
plan
they
expect
to
save
some
in
the
neighborhood
of
40
to
50
million
dollars
a
year
just
on
processing
invoices
by
baselining,
their
systems.
C
C
Service
now
is,
is
now
baselining
their
systems
in
a
different
way.
It's
a
giant
company
and
many
others.
So
those
are
the
two
that
have
been
brave
enough
to
come
out
in
the
open,
but
there
are
more
and
so
that
the
cool
thing
about
that
is
that
once
you
are
able
to
baseline
imagine
this
right.
You
have
the
banking
facility,
the
special
purpose,
a
vehicle
that
is
rolling
up.
These
invoices
and
they're
gonna
sell
them
right.
So
you
could
you
could
this
is
where
tokenization
still
works.
C
C
Does
this
right
now
they
do
a
couple
million
dollars
in
in
toronto's
a
month,
and
but
all
the
data
behind
that
still
needs
to
get
unpacked,
because
you
don't
want
a
mortgage
backed
security
event
like
we
had
in
2008,
so
a
regulator
still
needs
to
be
able
to
get
in
and
unpack
that
tranche
right
it
with
a
click
of
a
button.
Well,
in
this
case,
you
wouldn't
that
what
they're
doing
is
their
erc20ing,
those
or
erc
721
in
those
those
invoices
which
again
big
threat
surface.
C
I
don't
like
that
with
baselining,
you
simply
baseline
it
into
a
private
database
or
even
better.
You
generate
the
proofs
in
such
a
way
that
you
can
get
the
roll
up
of
the
values
and
the
rating
and
some
other
key
attributes,
while
never
moving
the
actual
data
from
the
buyer
and
the
supplier
right,
because
that's
what
you
can
do
with
zero
knowledge
proofs
by
the
way
we're
not
talking
about
zero,
not
zk,
snarks
on
the
blockchain,
those
are
expensive.
These
are
zero
knowledge.
C
Proofs
run
off
chain
in
your
baseline
stack,
so
there's
a
little
bit
of
gear
there
that
you
need
to
plug
in.
But
it's
fine.
You
know
again.
That
means
you're,
not
you're,
not
beholden,
to
a
blockchain
and
you're,
not
going
out
in
the
clear
with
your
business
logic
or
your
data,
which
even
under
zk
snarks
you
you
have
to
throw
your
your
business
logic
out
there
for
other
people
to
see
before
you
pack
it
up
into
a
zero
knowledge
proof
or
into
it.
B
Yeah,
so
it
it
may
be
prudent
as
well
to
connect
dermid
with
mark
paddle,
conduit,
they're
they're,
exploring
baseline
for
a
lot
of
the
medical
payer
provider.
Patient
type
use
cases
as
well,
so
that
you
know
medical
companies
can
basically
synchronize
your
systems
without
putting
data
in
the
open.
That
might
be
good
good.
C
And
the
easy
way
to
do
that
or
is,
is,
if
you
go
to
baseline
dashprotocol.org
and
you
click
up
on
the
upper
right
into
the
slack
channel.
You
can
get
into
our
slack
channel
and
you
know
ping,
either
nick
or
myself
or
or
go
straight
to
mark
cattle,
if
you
remember
his
name
and
very
friendly
crew.
So
anybody
any
of
the
you
guys
that
want
to
start
baseline
there's
lots
of
companies
out
there
that'll,
happily
take
your
money
to
help
you
baseline.
C
There
are,
but
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
people
just
give
you
free
advice
about
how
to
do
it
and
would
be
great
to
have
your
teams
involved
in
the
community
helping
set
the
standard.
The
standard
will
be
into
draft
by
the
middle
of
summer
and
then
we'll
go
through
the
process
of
finally
getting
it
into
iso.
B
B
A
It's
great
it's
good
to
see
what
other
people
are
doing
and
their
experiences
as
it's
quite
varied
in
terms
of
people's
experience
and
what
they're
doing-
and
I
think
you
definitely
get
value-
certainly
german
and
patrick.
I
think
you
guys
will
get-
are
part
of
your
ctos
right,
your
technical
people.
I
think
we've
got
a
lot
of
value
from
and
a
fiona,
perhaps
you
guys
as
well,
so
we're
top
of
the
hour
actually
a
little
bit
past.
So,
thank
you
very
much,
john.
Thank
you
very
much
nick.
F
C
Oh
public
blockchains,
private
blockchains
are
slow
by
comparison
to
their
counterparts
that
don't
use
consensus
mechanisms
right,
but
public
blockchains
are
super.
Slow
always
will
be.
Okay,
don't
ever
expect
that
the
public
blockchain
is
going
to
be
your
your
twitch
gaming
back
end
right,
so
you
don't
want
to
be
using
blockchains
directly
as
your
transaction
processing
unit,
but
in
baselining
you're,
not
you're,
just
you're,
basically
locking
down
what
your,
what
your
traditional
systems
of
record
are
already
pretty
good
at
and
now
all
it's
adding
is
the
ability
for
you
to
say.
C
C
C
You
know
that
might
be
squeamish
about
blockchain
and
certainly
public
blockchain
is
to
say
we're
not
using
the
public
blockchain
for
any
kind
of
data
at
all
we're
using
the
public
blockchain
for
the
one
thing
that
it's
supremely
good
at
and
stripping
everything
else
away,
right,
we're
using
it
for
tamper
resistance
and
conferring
tamper
resistance
to
our
traditional
systems
that
we
already
own.
That
now
we
don't
have
to
throw
out.
D
Yeah,
so
it's
interesting
really
really
interesting
what
you're
doing-
and
I
I
represent
nsai,
which
is
our
national
standards
authority
here
in
ireland
on
iso
tc307,
which
is
blockchain
and
dlt,
and
I'm
co-editor
of
the
use
cases
report
there
and
we
have
a
number
of
different
use
cases,
including
an
agriculture
one.
That
essentially
is
using
the
public
blockchain
in
a
similar
fashion,
but
as
a
business
use
case,
and
I'm
wondering
is
there
a
way
of
describing
what
you're
I
mean.
D
You're
you're
very
you're,
very
sure
that
you're,
not
a
blockchain
provider,
you're,
it's
integratable
with
a
blockchain,
but
it's
not
like.
I.
I
mean
some
of
the
way
that
you're
talking
about
it
is
kind
of
like
commercial
language
and
positioning.
I
think-
and
that's
just
how
I'm
hearing
it
right,
because
what
you're
doing
essentially
is
is
solving
through
standards
and
interoperability
problem
which
all
multi-party
system
problems
essentially
are.
D
C
D
A
C
G
G
G
So
if
I
don't
own
the
data,
because
I
might
not
want
to
fight
with
the
ownership
with
the
power
company,
but
I
simply
go
to
hang
on
to
the
so
that
is
my
and
if
that
is
the
way
to
do
it.
So
my
real
question
to
you
guys,
then,
is
that
if
I
put
my
academic
heart
on,
I
all
buy
in
with
with
your
your
standard.
The
way
that
are
you
baselight,
your
invoice
and
data
float.
G
C
They're
already
there
yeah,
they
just
can't
be
said
to
be
compliant
yet
because
we
haven't
promulgated
the
standard
but
they're
consistent.
You
know
so
so
we're
early
on
that
this
time
next
year,
we'll
have
compliance.
We'll
have
tests,
you
know
you'll
be
able
to
be
compliant.
The
one
thing
cracking
that
you
said
that
I'll
just
end
on
is
you
know
the
whole
idea
of
data
ownership
is
much
easier
to
enforce
in
a
baseline
than
than
saying
this
drives
me
crazy
blockchain.
C
E
C
You
but
then
you
can,
you
can
say
well,
this
represents
something
that
can
be
owned
and
nobody
can
repudiate
that.
Nobody
can
say
that
you
don't
own
that,
but
you
didn't
have
to
put
it
on
a
blockchain.
You
just
put
a
proof
on
the
blockchain
that
you
won't
that
everybody
agrees
legally,
that
you
own
it,
which
is
really
the
important
thing
in
the
end
right.
C
You
want
the
proof
that
says
nobody
can
say
that
you
don't
own
it
that
everybody
who
is
required
to
say
that
you
own
it
has
attested
to
this,
and
then
you
can
generate
a
verified
credential
which
again
doesn't
require
any
blockchain
at
all
right.
This
is
w3c
standard,
but
you
can
you?
Can
you
can
anchor
all
that
in
a
proof
so
that
it's
all
tacked
down?
Nobody
can
mess
around
with
the
change.
G
G
So
that
is
one
issue.
We
thought
that
we
might
look
into
to
help
with
data
scientists
that
they
said
that
the
data
set
is
the
ownership.
So
when
you
look
into
your
your
baseline,
would
I
be
right
to
say
that
that
really
is
not.
The
case
is
the
fact
that
you
used
a
blockchain,
but
it's
not
the
blockchain
as
such,
so
you
set
the
standard.
G
C
Right
on
well,
it's
great
to
to
see
you
all,
and
it
would
be
great
to
have
your
engineers
and
your
standards,
people
you
know
in
in
involved
in
the
community,
really
it's
it,
and
this
is
ian.
This
is
the
story
for
for
oracle
as
well.
You
guys
want
to
be
at
the
table
defining
the
standard.
You
really
do.
Yeah.