{"id":3945,"date":"2017-04-18T09:47:00","date_gmt":"2017-04-18T09:47:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/projects\/horsesforsources\/simplify-blockchain-refusing-interoperability-issues_041817\/"},"modified":"2017-04-18T09:47:00","modified_gmt":"2017-04-18T09:47:00","slug":"simplify-blockchain-refusing-interoperability-issues_041817","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.horsesforsources.com\/simplify-blockchain-refusing-interoperability-issues_041817\/","title":{"rendered":"Simplify Blockchain by Refusing to Let Interoperability Issues Bog You Down"},"content":{"rendered":"

We’ve previously written how interoperability<\/a> will hold back blockchain adoption, at least until we can find ways around the problem. The cost and friction of joining multiple blockchains may hinder widespread adoption until we can figure out how to get them to talk to each other and reduce the cost of joining a blockchain implementation. However, recent thinking suggests there are some shortcuts we can take to make better use of blockchains in the short term, as their development and adoption matures.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

For example, recently I met with the Deloitte blockchain team, and Principal Eric Piscini disagreed with my premise. He believes that interoperability really isn’t that big of an issue. First, he points out that, today, we have multiple environments that don’t connect to each other and the work still happens effectively. For example, different credit card payment vendors each have unique systems but everyone can still use any of them without an issue.<\/p>\n

He also notes that interoperability seems like a bigger issue if you look at the blockchain implementation as needing to do every<\/em> part of a transaction. However, he thinks of blockchain as having three layers:<\/p>\n