Last night I went to Supply Chain Management at the Blochain event at Markit University. Session recording available. The theme is to use Blockchain to manage the supply source along with the supply chain. This is about the general topic of the supply chain, not specific health care or more precise examples of parts of health care medicines. However, the general concept of using the blockchain supply chain is directly implemented in the supply of drugs. I have argued that the supply of drugs is more likely to benefit from the block chain, and there are more resources available to fund this type of research that leads to implementation.
Blockchain, busy operators, do not bother with others
The talk is mainly about the general concept and the general need, and more generally how to help Blockchain. Not surprisingly, but it is useful to know the people who made it. The committee members are dr. Mark Kotler of Deloitte, Chris Kirchner of Slync and Paul Biwier of Biwer & Associates. Spoken speakers are from organizations involved in the actual (experimental) use of food supply chains and delivery of parcels.
The first warning is that the larger the supply chain network, the more complex it is. The more complex it is, the more difficult it is to create a business system. And then the approach to using Case of Case Submission is very strict to track the package under its control. In this case, the speaker said that there are about 5 participants, so I think they will be some transportation sources or manipulators.
What data should go to Blockchain? Classic management?
Later, I talked to them. Because of his experience, he asked if the pattern was formed in terms of actually receiving data block chains, compared with managed data in traditional ways. In search of experience patterns. I received a very strong answer: “As long as you can go to the block chain.” One reason is that the more you phrase it, the more sensitive it is to improving. Once the data is in the blockchain there will be forever. It’s easier to add an item that has not been released yet. But once there is one thing, it’s permanent there.
Blockchains with license
The same use licensed chain in which a small subset is delegated to add the chain, has a subset of it’s verification and signature authority. Verification requirements are related to the state of particular use and access to particular data. If the data in the chain is low, little can be tested. If this data is not close to anything, the only date / time stamp check to freeze these data at the time. This is clearly a chain balancing task to confirm their value, but the solutions can not be broken or dangerous.
Public access risk
Then I went to the negatives. This means that the condition of the block chain works fantastically when things are fixed and everyone is doing their job well. But the reason for using a block chain is someday someone slips and something bad happens. At this point, the chain of blocks is used to determine what is happening and back to what has caused this bad thing. If not needed, no blockchain is required. Therefore, it will happen in terms of meaning.
When this research is conducted in public, all participants are extremely nervous and may decide to stop participation. It is pointed out that the Food and Drug Administration has conducted this type of investigation and has always done it secretly. This is because the wrong actor is usually mistaken and has no harm. A United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sanctions change his attitude, without fear. Or scare the whole public. The FDA selects several cases to publish, often for ill-intentioned purposes or as a “role model” of a major actor. At Blockchain, especially the public, everyone can take on the task of identifying who is a bad actor. Then it will be very public knowledge … All the wonderful actors will wonder if they should join while everyone knows that they finally escape …