3 ms·
if you treat the blockchain as an event-sourced datastore, you could publish amendment updates. Then you can rebuild the original record and all the amendments
by beaconstudios 8y ago
if you treat the blockchain as an event-sourced datastore, you could publish amendment updates. Then you can rebuild the original record and all the amendments into a latest-accurate record.
- ben_w 8y agoHow do you know which “death” records are accurate? Or if such records are complete?
- beaconstudios 8y agoIt's impossible to know without eg signing the record with the person's key, but you can at least see the history of modifications so information can't be hidden by overwriting or deleting it.
- ben_w 8y agoOverwriting and deleting are not the only ways to hide things. Truth can be hidden if buried under a randomised pile of noise, of “corrections” and counter-corrections - who would rely on a database which needs to be cleaned up against deliberate hostile damage?
- beaconstudios 8y agopresumably you would want to restrict writing anyway. I thought that was implicit - any open-write platform is going to go to shit if it's immutable.
- ben_w 8y agoThen you (still, but this time explicitly) remove the only benefit blockchain really provides — of not needing to trust anyone involved.
- beaconstudios 8y agoI'm not arguing that using a blockchain makes sense here - I'm firmly in the anti-blockchain-overuse camp. I was making a point about how you could provide a mutable record within an immutable event chain.
- ben_w 8y agoThen we are in agreement — I was mistaken about your position mainly because of your “implicit”-ness argument.