Goldman Sachs is attempting to make blockchain bonds a reality.

David Solomon (DJ D-Sol if we’re using stage names), chairman and CEO of investment bank Goldman Sachs, demonstrated this week that he’s stuck in the past with a Wall Street Journal opinion piece titled “Blockchain Is Much More Than Crypto.” The article was published shortly after Goldman announced plans to spend “tens of millions” on discounted crypto investments.

Solomon correctly points out in the article that blockchain entered and disrupted heavily regulated industries such as banks. Surprisingly, he then claims that the deafening call for regulation means that young “blockchain organizations” will be unable to meet regulatory requirements. That is especially true of cryptocurrencies, but we must “not lose sight of the forest for the trees,” that is, we must recognize that blockchain can “support responsible innovation across the financial industry” without cryptocurrencies.

“I’m not sure about this bitcoin thing, but there’s got to be some potential in the underlying blockchain technology!”

Solomon used a private blockchain to arrange a 100 million euro two-year digital bond for the European Investment Bank that was settled in 60 seconds rather than the usual five days to defend his position. Thank you, private blockchain!

The takeaway is that Goldman will use a private blockchain to shorten settlement times, lowering costs for all stakeholders.

Except.

The lack of a blockchain is not the reason bonds settle in five days; it is due to Goldman Sachs, regulation, and bureaucratic red tape. Adding a private blockchain will not rid the bond placement process of Goldman Sachs, regulation, and bureaucratic red tape. Particularly when the deafening cry for regulation is answered.

Sure, adding a blockchain could be a solution, but it isn’t for one simple reason: private, permissioned blockchains are worse than useless.

Don’t be misled; blockchains are not a complicated concept. If you understand what a database is (an electronic repository of data), you understand what a blockchain is. Databases are places where data is stored. If the database manager grants you access to the data, you or Goldman Sachs can access it electronically. Otherwise, there will be no data for you or Goldman Sachs.

Blockchains are the same thing, except that all of the data is public and copies of the database are stored in numerous locations. In theory, anyone with access to a computer they know and trust can join and maintain their own copy of the data.

That is because it is a very narrow, low-potential use case with potentially slow technology. There’s no reason to give everyone unrestricted access to every piece of data all the time unless you’re trying to avoid the need for a database manager or another trusted third party to access that data. A good application of this technology could be digital money.

Anything else, a regular database is preferable.

The takeaway here is that blockchains are yet another round of narrow, low-potential-use-case technologies that are being shoved into all sorts of broad applications where they should not be shoved. (Cue the debate about combining artificial intelligence and our drinking water, or whatever.)

Shipping company Maersk and tech behemoth International Business Machines attempted to blockchain-ify supply chains by putting tomatoes, bananas, or whatever on the blockchain via TradeLens, a shipping blockchain (whatever that means). After nearly five years of trying, TradeLens failed and shut down two weeks ago. It failed because it did not achieve “the level of commercial viability required to continue work and meet financial expectations as an independent business” because the concept is simply not viable.

Decentralized money, in my opinion, is the killer app for blockchain. Others believe in decentralized governance. These concepts come to life as unbanked women in Afghanistan seek financial freedom through Bitcoin and crowdfunding campaigns organize to bid on items such as the United States Constitution (a sillier example comparatively, sure, but pretty timely). The best blockchain apps will almost certainly (and already are) built on public, permissionless blockchains.

All of this is to say that the killer app will not come from private, permissioned blockchains used to settle bond placements by massive, multinational investment banks.