5 ms·

Here are some points to consider as to whether blockchain is appropriate for your application: Data on blockchains is by default, unencrypted, especially data

Here are some points to consider as to whether blockchain is appropriate for your application: Data on blockchains is by default, unencrypted, especially data that needs to be validated by the nodes. Blockchains do not have inherent security against read access. You can control read access to some degree by encrypting certain elements on your blockchain but this can be compromised. Not all information on the blockchain is true; data still needs to be checked and uploaded correctly and as such is open to human error. No amount of time guarantees something will stay in the ledger. It is also difficult to remove data if required by law. It’s not secure because it depends on the assumption that the blockchain community has more compute than the rest of the world. It’s absurdly expensive to mine blocks to store data indefinitely. Lack of government regulations for blockchain could impede growth.

dorfsmay 9y ago
"It’s absurdly expensive to mine blocks to store data indefinitely." Is this true of all block chains or specific to bitcoin?
- TheDong 9y ago
  If you don't have mining, or a similar way to decide between various possible forks, what you have is a cryptographically secured append-only ledger (such as what the git data-format resembles). That's not a blockchain and that idea has existed for decades already. I think that idea is now being called a "blockchain" since in reality the trustless/proof-of-work nature of a true blockchain is largely wasted for specific companies.
  - tscs37 9y ago
    It's a blockchain if you have a directed linked list of blocks. Even git is to some extent blockchain.
    - TheDong 9y ago
      That's a redefinition of what a blockchain is IMO. That's definitely the definition some companies are operating under.. but really? WALs and journals have existed for ages and both fit the definition of a directed list of blocks. Hell, ext2 and FAT fit that definition (inodes forming a directed list of block-references). I guess we all store our data on something that's technically a blockchain by your definition.
      - tscs37 9y ago
        It's not a redefinition, it's a definition that has been around since the 1990's [0], the only requirement for a blockchain is A) directed linked list (block points to previous block) and B) cryptographic security (use hashes as block index) Bitcoin is merely the first application to use Blockchain in a decentralized proof-of-work manner.
        jacquesm 9y ago
        A git repository is a Merkle tree. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree A bitcoin blockchain is also a Merlke tree. But a git repository is not a blockchain.
        tscs37 9y ago
        It is a blockchain is you don't merge since you have a commit pointing at a previous commit, (block points to block), merges point to two parents but Ethereum has that almost with uncle blocks. The commit log of a repo is almost certainly a blockchain, which is why I mentioned "to some extend"
        jacquesm 9y ago
        You are simply wrong. Think of a blockchain as only one strand (say, the leftmost strand, from a leaf all the way to the root) of a Merkle tree. Think of a git repository as the whole tree. So no, they are not equivalent. If they were there would never be a way to have more than one branch depend on a previous one.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ThrustVectoring 9y ago
>It is also difficult to remove data if required by law. How difficult is it to introduce illegal data into, say, Bitcoin's blockchain?
- duskwuff 9y ago
  The same as it'd cost to store any other data -- roughly 380 satoshis (~6.4 cents) per byte, plus various overheads to make it into a a valid transaction.

dorfsmay 9y ago

"It’s absurdly expensive to mine blocks to store data indefinitely." Is this true of all block chains or specific to bitcoin?

TheDong 9y ago
If you don't have mining, or a similar way to decide between various possible forks, what you have is a cryptographically secured append-only ledger (such as what the git data-format resembles). That's not a blockchain and that idea has existed for decades already. I think that idea is now being called a "blockchain" since in reality the trustless/proof-of-work nature of a true blockchain is largely wasted for specific companies.
- tscs37 9y ago
  It's a blockchain if you have a directed linked list of blocks. Even git is to some extent blockchain.
  - TheDong 9y ago
    That's a redefinition of what a blockchain is IMO. That's definitely the definition some companies are operating under.. but really? WALs and journals have existed for ages and both fit the definition of a directed list of blocks. Hell, ext2 and FAT fit that definition (inodes forming a directed list of block-references). I guess we all store our data on something that's technically a blockchain by your definition.
    - tscs37 9y ago
      It's not a redefinition, it's a definition that has been around since the 1990's [0], the only requirement for a blockchain is A) directed linked list (block points to previous block) and B) cryptographic security (use hashes as block index) Bitcoin is merely the first application to use Blockchain in a decentralized proof-of-work manner.
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        A git repository is a Merkle tree. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree A bitcoin blockchain is also a Merlke tree. But a git repository is not a blockchain.
        tscs37 9y ago
        It is a blockchain is you don't merge since you have a commit pointing at a previous commit, (block points to block), merges point to two parents but Ethereum has that almost with uncle blocks. The commit log of a repo is almost certainly a blockchain, which is why I mentioned "to some extend"
        jacquesm 9y ago
        You are simply wrong. Think of a blockchain as only one strand (say, the leftmost strand, from a leaf all the way to the root) of a Merkle tree. Think of a git repository as the whole tree. So no, they are not equivalent. If they were there would never be a way to have more than one branch depend on a previous one.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

ThrustVectoring 9y ago

>It is also difficult to remove data if required by law. How difficult is it to introduce illegal data into, say, Bitcoin's blockchain?

duskwuff 9y ago
The same as it'd cost to store any other data -- roughly 380 satoshis (~6.4 cents) per byte, plus various overheads to make it into a a valid transaction.