I think the IBM plan involves using a block chain as a public record for IoT devices to update their status, query the status of other devices, and interact with each other. I heard mention of them forking ethereum to use for part of it, presumably to use contracts for devices to interact according to fixed rules without a central controller. Its not entirely the same, but there does seem to be some crossover with this.
If I'm not wrong both systems want small devices to share a data storage and therefore be able to make decisions without a central controller. I'm really speculating here and may be way out, but perhaps Adept will have devices with their own simple rules which make decisions individually based on shared information, whereas Jinn's IoT would have devices make decisions collectively based on both shared information and shared processing?
I'd really love more information on how Jinn will work with the IoT.
Blockchain technology solves 2 big problems of distributed systems -
Sybil attack and
consistency of data. While the former can be solved once and forever, the latter can only asymptotically approach the perfect solution, at least CAP theorem states so.
Quorum-based approach proposed in Qubic also solves these problems, but there is a big difference how the consistency is achieved. Blockchain stores all
changes of the state, this is why pruning is a must if you want to have a sustainable system. Qubic stores only
final state and hence doesn't need pruning.
Jinn will provide technical base for Qubic in a way that requires almost nothing to do to get Qubic completed. IoT can be created on top of Jinn in a similar manner - just write a little code and you will get it. I stole architecture of Jinn from the nature, it mimics how macro- and microcosm functions. A side effect of this "piracy" is the ability to implement a lot of things much easier than it would be done on top of classical processors.
