• enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    Distributed blockchains are useful when all of the below are fulfilled:

    • Need for distributed ledger
    • Peers are adversarial w.r.t. contents of transactions in the ledger
    • Enough peers exist so that no group can become a majority and thus assume control
    • No trusted central authority exists

    Here, we have a single peer creating entries in a ledger. We can get away with a copy of the ledger and one or more trusted timestamping authorities.

    • Adalast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I didn’t say distributed. You are absolutely correct though. I was more observing that of all the BS tech bro babble that our Oligarch in Chief could spew into the universe, blockchain would be one that could be implemented reasonably.

        • Adalast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          There are actually other comments on this thread that provide other benefits besides trust, like modification tracing. There is more to it than just trust.

          • enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            You mean a transparency log? Just sign and publish. Or if it’s confidential, have a timestamp authority sign it, but what’s the point of a confidential blockchain? Sure, we han have a string of hashes chained together á la git, but that’s just an implementation detail. Where does the trust come from, who does the audit? That’s the interesting part.