Hi Colin, 

I think it might be helpful to have wider representation of the blockchain community on the thread.  I mention the DG-BSC when I am in conversation with them. 

On deliverables, I think we have spent good time well on discussing what blockchains and smart contracts are and aren't, and could do more on how they fit into a broader picture of automation, institutions, privacy and security.  (Elements of the blockchain community, IMHO, sometimes think they don't need to think about institutions, since ridding the world of institutions is the goal of decentralization.)

I suggest that we could:

Describe a general "smart contract" paradigm on the lines of:

i)   events - (Barclay's and R3's "parameters")
ii)  text objects ("prose," actors, things, places, etc.)
iii) Smart Contract Description Language
iv) code

We could describe the relationship between this "smart contract" record of relationships and transactions, on the one hand, and various databases on the other.  

We could describe some uses cases where blockchain databases were useful.

This would not exclude developing use-case verticals.  The consent to use of genetic information use case seems potent.







On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Colin Wallis <colin_wallis@hotmail.com> wrote:

Thanks All

Interesting thoughts and discussion.

Indeed we could invite some other folks not engaged here to add their use cases.

But it would need to be pretty soon.

We are more than half way through the 6 month period for collecting use cases, allowing some time for the report to be written up with recommendations on what work we might take forward to a WG to deliver a specific useful tangible output.

There is plenty of talk in this domain. But Kantara value proposition that it is about 'doing', and the community will be the better for a useful deliverable as a result. Let's not divert from that goal. 

That said, there is nothing to stop another DG, or a re-charter of this DG, working on a another suite of use cases perhaps for a particular context.

Cheers

Colin




From: dg-bsc-bounces@kantarainitiative.org <dg-bsc-bounces@kantarainitiative.org> on behalf of Patrick Curry <patrick.curry@bbfa.info>
Sent: 28 August 2016 22:15
To: James Hazard
Cc: dg-bsc@kantarainitiative.org
Subject: Re: [DG-BSC] FYI
 
The devil is in the detail and also in the minds of innovators and start ups.

Back end transactions of smart contracts differ from the smart contracts in BCs with their transparency property.  My colleagues see a difference and it is giving rise to new user cases.  One involves the ability of all parties in a police incident to be able to validate that the legally permitted individual policeman is assigned to a specific task for that incident in real time based on his skills, training, authority etc.  The rules are being executed in a distributed fashion with distributed inputs, all assured.  This particular example is in the concept stage.  However, there is another international logistic example. leveraging an existing pilot, that is expected to move into implementation soon.

I’ll speak to Colin.  We could be inviting some of the more forward BC companies to engage in the KI discussion.

regards,

Patrick

Patrick Curry
Director

British Business Federation Authority - BBFA Ltd
M: +44 786 024 9074
T:   +44 1980 620606
patrick.curry@bbfa.info
www.bbfa.info – a not-for-profit, self-regulating body   



On 28 Aug 2016, at 20:07, James Hazard <james.g.hazard@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, IPFS is a very useful resource.

The chain of consent to use of information seems to unify many use cases.  A few links in the chain from prior threads in the discussion:

Patient consent from our discussion earlier this week:

Data transfer agreements on the EU "Model Clauses":
(Available in 20+ languages, about six of which are in the demo).




On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu> wrote:

Jim,

With regards to legal contracts for data-sharing, this could be (should be) a good use-case for BSC.

/thomas/



________________________________________
From: Jim Willeke [jim@willeke.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2016 9:56 AM
To: John Wunderlich
Cc: Thomas Hardjono; dg-bsc@kantarainitiative.org
Subject: Re: [DG-BSC] FYI

I agree with /thomas/. There is no reason smart contracts could not be done via a protocol with the back-end system be unknown.

IPFS could be used as an example.

JLINC<http://www.jlinclabs.com/protocol/> is one such idea.

--
-jim
Jim Willeke

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:24 AM, John Wunderlich <john@wunderlich.ca<mailto:john@wunderlich.ca>> wrote:
Blockchains of adherence?

If smart contracts are published on well known URI’s, then agreeing to them by signing the contract and putting the MAC on the blockchain provides some level of assurance. This becomes even more powerful when the smart contract can accept or negotiate terms and what gets recorded on the blockchain memorialized the terms freely negotiated by both parties bots.

???


Sincerely,
John Wunderlich
@PrivacyCDN

Call: +1 (647) 669-4749<tel:%2B1%20%28647%29%20669-4749>
eMail: john@wunderlich.ca<mailto:john@wunderlich.ca>

On 28 August 2016 at 08:20, Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu<mailto:hardjono@mit.edu>> wrote:

Thanks John,

Good piece.

I think there is still a lot of confusion about the promise of smart-contracts executing collectively on a syntax-rich set of nodes, vs the very limited Bitcoin-blockchain of today.

Maybe BSC-DG could come up with our own new terms or language to describe the possible features of smart contracts.


/thomas/

___________________________________

On Aug 27, 2016, at 11:48 PM, John Wunderlich <john@wunderlich.ca<mailto:john@wunderlich.ca>> wrote:

https://theconversation.com/blockchain-really-only-does-one-thing-well-62668



Thanks, John
4giv spellin errurz from mobile devize



This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.
_______________________________________________
DG-BSC mailing list
DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org>
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc



This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

_______________________________________________
DG-BSC mailing list
DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org<mailto:DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org>
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc

_______________________________________________
DG-BSC mailing list
DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc



--
@commonaccord
_______________________________________________
DG-BSC mailing list
DG-BSC@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-bsc




--
@commonaccord