You’d need to hack the majority of the nodes to alter the data which isn’t going to happen unless a government wants to steal a container.
It doesn’t matter that it’s expensive either. It currently costs more to transfer the claims papers than it costs to ship the actual container, so the cost-benefit is easily obtainable.
IMO there is a difference between “blockchain” and “blockchain technology”. The latter means taking parts of or inspiration from how blockchains are built.
Even if the technology is not be specific to the blockchain originally, blockchain still helped bring these ideas into the minds of the masses and so I think it is fair to characterize some of these things as “blockchain technology” when that is how some people came to know of them.
>Even if the technology is not be specific to the blockchain originally, blockchain still helped bring these ideas into the minds of the masses and so I think it is fair to characterize some of these things as “blockchain technology” when that is how some people came to know of them.
What you just described here, when done to obtain money or publicity - is often referred to as "charlatanism".
If someone was introduced to a steamboat and they’d never seen a boat before (perhaps a far fetched example but stick with me here), and they made a rowboat and they said that they had built it on steamboat technology (because of the boat part) I think that would not be entirely unreasonable.
A charlatan on the other hand would be someone that sold you a steamboat and then gave you something that was not a steamboat, like for example a big rock or something.
A charlatan decieves people for fame or for money. Someone that sells something as “blockchain” when it’s not is a charlatan. Someone that was inspired to build something by blockchain and describes it as using “blockchain technology” should not deserve to be called a charlatan IMO.
It is still fair to point out that they are not actually using a blockchain, but calling them a charlatan is disingenuous because then what kinds of words should we use to describe the actual charlatans?
The idea of an immutable log has been around far longer than any blockchain though, so referring to it as "blockchain technology" sounds a bit silly.
