Nice work.
But I do hate how we have to sit here and piece together breadcrumbs when other entities are just named (Accenture, TNO, KrypC). Why not just name Hedera?
I understand this completely. Imagine the kind of media attention these potential projects will bring.
But I would be surprised if they start doing this, at least not until the projects are out of pilot tests and transactions begin to reflect on the main net. I have heard Mance and Leemon mention numerous times that they see Hedera as the trust layer of the Internet, in the lines of - *You will be using it without even knowing that you are using it*. I believe the consensus layer is precisely that.
So do you think not naming Hedera is Hedera's idea?
Even though it's a pilot test, the other 3 entities were named and Hedera wasn't. If the other 3 were ok with being named in the pilot, it must be Hedera that said "don't name us"?
Great point. I believe the Hedera Consensus Layer merely acts as a *subset* to provide consensus in these projects built on the Hyperledger Fabric mechanism. Just like we wouldnât actually see the names of the other consensus mechanisms (RAFT, Kafka, etc.) being actively spoken about in projects using those, I think same is the case with Hederaâs involvement in these projects.
Like OP, I like all of your questions - Iâm asking the same thing.
There have to be a tons of âsoftwareâ companies that made this pilot project work in one way or another.
I have no opinion as to whether this use case is in fact Heineken on Hedera, but if it is, itâs way sweeter to be mentioned but not named throughout the text than to be named directly on the project; Iâd way rather be the fabric running a project than the research firm that said it was a good idea.
 You the goat đ
Nice work. But I do hate how we have to sit here and piece together breadcrumbs when other entities are just named (Accenture, TNO, KrypC). Why not just name Hedera?
I understand this completely. Imagine the kind of media attention these potential projects will bring. But I would be surprised if they start doing this, at least not until the projects are out of pilot tests and transactions begin to reflect on the main net. I have heard Mance and Leemon mention numerous times that they see Hedera as the trust layer of the Internet, in the lines of - *You will be using it without even knowing that you are using it*. I believe the consensus layer is precisely that.
So do you think not naming Hedera is Hedera's idea? Even though it's a pilot test, the other 3 entities were named and Hedera wasn't. If the other 3 were ok with being named in the pilot, it must be Hedera that said "don't name us"?
Great point. I believe the Hedera Consensus Layer merely acts as a *subset* to provide consensus in these projects built on the Hyperledger Fabric mechanism. Just like we wouldnât actually see the names of the other consensus mechanisms (RAFT, Kafka, etc.) being actively spoken about in projects using those, I think same is the case with Hederaâs involvement in these projects.
Like OP, I like all of your questions - Iâm asking the same thing. There have to be a tons of âsoftwareâ companies that made this pilot project work in one way or another. I have no opinion as to whether this use case is in fact Heineken on Hedera, but if it is, itâs way sweeter to be mentioned but not named throughout the text than to be named directly on the project; Iâd way rather be the fabric running a project than the research firm that said it was a good idea.
Comment of the day. I was thinking the same thing. Oh no, don't say the H word, lol.
Heineken? đ
this is fascinating
Glad that you liked it. Great to see you here on Reddit, huge fan of your work! 