If you don’t understand that the process of reconciling 2 chains of blocks is for the sake of consensus on 1 ledger, maybe you just don’t understand distributed

If you don’t understand that the process of reconciling 2 chains of blocks is for the sake of consensus on 1 ledger, maybe you just don’t understand distributed systems ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Because if you did, you would understand that when your values (in this case, transactions) get modified unexpectedly even if they’ve been consistent for an arbitrarily long time, you cannot claim that your database is immutable. The fact that the individual attempts at consensus are immutable is irrelevant because the user only cares about the resulting ledger, which as I have proven to you over and over again is mutable. I see what you did though, you defined “blockchain” as just an individual chain, not as the encompassing consensus-finding system... which to me is not a useful definition because it leads to misunderstandings like yours (ie. “the database is immutable”). Picture this: Exchange: “Why did the Bitcoin I received vanish? I thought Bitcoin was immutable??!!!” You: “Oh lol you’re terribly misinformed, it’s the data structures that are immutable, silly, not the actual database. Obviously the database consensus can fail and that can make you lose money, unless it’s controlled by trustworthy and honest people of course... who made you believe otherwise?”