Proof of Legacy offers freelance blogging and copywriting services for blockchain and cryptocurrency companies. Companies that are looking for a professional freelance writer for their website or marketing materials can expect high-quality results with each project. The name was chosen based on a play on words with "Proof" being used as a term in the writing industry and "Proof of" used in the blockchain industry for varying consensus algorithms. The word Legacy was chosen because I want my work to leave a long-lasting imprint on the world. Inquires for freelance writing for your next project can currently be directed to ken@proofoflegacy.com. The website, proofoflegacy.com is currently being updated and will be ready soon for release.

Hindsight is 20/20 and foresight is riddled with uncertainty. In 20 years time, I would expect that people will be writing about other types of revolutionary new technologies that will be addressing the biggest challenges of that era -- such as manufactured particle space clouds to reflect sunlight and cool our planet; or clean nuclear fission powering self contained under-ground human habitats (called Muskvilles); or genome sequenced med-machines that are the “3D printers” of the era which can bypass expensive drug development processes … and the list of potential innovations goes on. 

Currently, I think Blockchain tech (or Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), is fundamentally misunderstood by most people, in part, because it’s so closely associated with crypto-currency (also misunderstood). The casino-boom era of cryptocurrency brought a lot of energy, enthusiasm, and attention to Blockchain technologies and perhaps that has led to a period of inflated expectations. Also, too many people attempt to overlay a “blockchain solution” over problems that can be handled perfectly well by a good ole’ database. Having said all this, the ability to create decentralized, immutable ledgers will disrupt many industries and sectors and they’ll be re-organized and reconfigured across global borders in very exciting ways. But it will happen gradually because adoption of enabling technology doesn’t happen over night. 

Eventually, as blockchain technologies become pervasive, they will just be part of the technology landscape lexicon like wifi, routers, java, the internet, and smartphones are today. Private social media communities, like the ones powered by Brainsy, will use blockchain technologies to ensure that contributions into knowledge ecosystems are rewarded equitably -- but most people that benefit from it won’t know (or care) what makes up the underlying enabling technology. And in some ways, that may be the ultimate irony. The more successful blockchain becomes, the less people will care to write about it in 20 years because it’s just another one of those things that makes the world work better than it did before and in the future, these DLT technologies will just seem so obvious.

But hey, only hindsight is 20/20 so I could be totally wrong on all this! 

"The blockchain" won't make "the supply chain more transparent for consumers" but there are blockchains that can be structured in such a way that the public can access supply chain information in a permissioned manner. The organizations building out the individual blockchain networks will have to choose blockchains with the appropriate infrastructure or build layers on top of the blockchain to facilitate such access.  The real questions here may be, with blockchain implementations, will we see which companies want to keep their supply chains obscure and what will we do about it as consumers?  

As people will be looking at the CREBACO report as a resource to know which exchanges are high quality and safe and which are not, there is a big responsibility in this choice.  To be globally relevant, the list needs to include the exchanges that have ease of access for citizens of countries around the world.  Unless the list is going to be only "best of", there would be a value to the community in taking 3-5 of the top exchanges by volume and doing an analysis on them that includes any evidence of wash trading, price manipulation, evidence of pay to play, etc.    For the remaining slots, you could come up with categories like "best UX/UI", "best customer service", "best track record", "best for a beginner", "lowest fees" etc. to give the community a focus point when selecting an exchange... Just a few thoughts. Hope this is helpful.  

With emerging technology such as blockchain you may need to keep the door open for a while, as the most value-added projects are still yet to come.  Value-add may be difficult to gauge for many early-stage projects.  It may be a good idea to monitor the progress of individuals (members) on their projects and ask for regular reporting to ensure they are on track, committed, and engaged in the community - and move them off if they don't make acceptable progress/contribution over a certain period of time.  Sponsors may be a bit different....depending on their contribution.

Not a bad idea.  But speaking fees are driven largely by celebrity/publications status more than anything else.  If they don't fall into one of those two categories then compensation may need to be reconsidered.  I recently chaired a conference for IEEE and we had some high profile speakers, but paid no speaking fees at all and only compensated travel for a couple of them due to distance.  It is the policy of IEEE and many other organizations to NEVER pay speakers!  Adopt the same policy and you'll level the playing field pretty quick!  There's always someone else just as good - unless a certain speaker is needed for a strategic/marketing reason.