You're speaking about an idea that you dislike on pure gut reaction. If you had something to cite you would cite it.
You're appealing to authority to make an argument that an idea for a DAC wouldn't work. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
You say that porting Bitshares toolkit onto smartphones would be difficult but then you say QT has cross platform support? Why would it be difficult? In any case it has to be ported if it's ever to be useful for the masses because most people aren't going to be using their laptops in the future. This is what I mean by future proofing and while we might not have an app right now it's very likely we will.
My idea actually was to turn it into a web app which means you could run the QT client on the backend and just use a web interface but in any case it's eventually going to be ported to Android because I see nothing inherent about the code which would make it difficult. The only reason I could think of as to why it wouldn't could be if the blockchain were to become huge and there is no way to to a lite client.
Think about third world countries where people only have smart phones. Consider that Android is the most used operating system in the world today.
First off, just because I don't care to go look for the post doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just simply means I don't see value in spending my times to find a simple post of Dan's which enumerated "what we have to work with" when creating DACs. It does nothing to prove anything about your DAC. It is just that I don't see why you think your idea is better as a DAC. Decentralization is a wonderful thing, but I don't see it needed when you interact with a doctor.
You are the same guy who denigrates creating technical documentation as "spell checking" when you want to put the idea down.
Put up a wager and I'll find Dan's post. You think way too much of yourself if you think I'm going out of my way to do it for you. It isn't particularly material, it was just a succinct list of the features we have at our disposal when creating of DACs. It doesn't follow that you have to have things out of that list to make a DAC. It is just i would question why would you want to make such a DAC when a website serves the same purpose just as well with significantly simpler coding.
For starters Android = a modified java and Iphone = objective C where you have to get OK from apple for any app. If you make it into a webapp, then it will only work as long as that website is not attacked. You also can't create incoming network connections over a cell network. None of these are idea killers, but you have a long steep hill ahead of you to catch up with where a website could be within a couple months.
BTW I am not appealing to Dan's post, I just put it out there as a starting point for guys like you who just throw out random ideas of services and say "lets plop .dac on the end and we're golden".
There might very well be a market for some variant on what you proposed but I suspect it would be far far down the line and involve far more than what you've suggested.
...... but yes.. a DAC would be futureproof and work with biohacking.. so you can take your 3d printed out arms and have the doctor tell you where to implant them via the DAC you just used. No ?
Topic: AskADoctor.dac (Healthshares) (Read 6828 times)
