4 ms·

For context, Accenture has been criticizing blockchains for their immutability. [1] [2] [3] So I would not take anything coming from them seriously. [1] Downsi

by josu 10y ago

For context, Accenture has been criticizing blockchains for their immutability. [1] [2] [3] So I would not take anything coming from them seriously. [1] Downside of Bitcoin: A Ledger That Can’t Be Corrected: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/10/business/dealbook/downside-of-virtual-currencies-a-ledger-that-cant-be-corrected.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/10/business/dealbook/downside... [2] EDITING THE UNEDITABLE BLOCKCHAIN (PDF) https://www.accenture.com/t20160927T033514__w__/us-en/_acnmedia/PDF-33/Accenture-Editing-Uneditable-Blockchain.pdf https://www.accenture.com/t20160927T033514__w__/us-en/_acnme... [3] Accenture Launches A Way To Edit Blockchains: http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomgroenfeldt/2016/10/06/accenture-launches-a-way-to-edit-blockchains/#4f27c765373b http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomgroenfeldt/2016/10/06/accentu...

petertodd 10y ago
What I found especially amazing by that is traditional accounting is based on immutability already: you never delete a ledger entry, you add a correction. The same concept for a blockchain is trivial. Equally, if you _really_ do need to delete something, just insert a record into the blockchain instructing all nodes to delete that record. Sure, you won't be able to verify the chain 100% after you delete the data, but you'll have a auditable record of why that's the case.
- unknownsavage 10y ago
  Actually their view point is perfectly consistent. They criticized _bitcoin_ not the blockchain. While a blockchain could support some of the regulatory required undo stuff (by appending a record that it's been undone), bitcoin itself certainly doesn't won't let you roll back a bunch of transactions.
  - petertodd 10y ago
    Read the PDF: they're working on a chameleon hash scheme so that their blockchain can be undetectably modified, not unlike making an accounting ledger with dry erase markers. That's going way beyond disagreeing with Bitcoin; what they're doing doesn't have the strong auditability that you'd expect from a "blockchain" solution. It's closer to a bog standard database really.

by josu 10y ago

petertodd 10y ago

What I found especially amazing by that is traditional accounting is based on immutability already: you never delete a ledger entry, you add a correction. The same concept for a blockchain is trivial. Equally, if you _really_ do need to delete something, just insert a record into the blockchain instructing all nodes to delete that record. Sure, you won't be able to verify the chain 100% after you delete the data, but you'll have a auditable record of why that's the case.

unknownsavage 10y ago
Actually their view point is perfectly consistent. They criticized _bitcoin_ not the blockchain. While a blockchain could support some of the regulatory required undo stuff (by appending a record that it's been undone), bitcoin itself certainly doesn't won't let you roll back a bunch of transactions.
- petertodd 10y ago
  Read the PDF: they're working on a chameleon hash scheme so that their blockchain can be undetectably modified, not unlike making an accounting ledger with dry erase markers. That's going way beyond disagreeing with Bitcoin; what they're doing doesn't have the strong auditability that you'd expect from a "blockchain" solution. It's closer to a bog standard database really.