5 ms·

id say because it’s a tool purpose built to provide a distributed ledger between untrusted (or in this case semi trusted maybe) parties... git is not a tool tha

id say because it’s a tool purpose built to provide a distributed ledger between untrusted (or in this case semi trusted maybe) parties... git is not a tool thats built for that. if you reverse the argument, explain why git is a better solution for a write only, transactionally consistent, distributed, trustless ledger. i’m sure you could make something akin to a blockchain with git, but why would you when we have a perfectly viable solution that’s prebuilt for the purpose. they both might be able to perform similar functions with enough customisation, but a blockchain is fit for purpose out of the box. note: i’m thinking here a blockchain with POA where tokens are distributed between known parties, so no overhead of POW. POW has very obvious down sides

Moodles 8y ago
Git with public/private keys is literally that. I don't understand why there's hype around blockchains. Besides, how can people say a private blockchain is "trustless"? You just said "POA" ( = proof of authority). The conversations I often got into at my job were like this. It was so incredibly difficult to pin down exactly why they even wanted a blockchain. Or what a blockchain even was in their heads.
- berkes 8y ago
  It's only a little more than that: Git (or a DAG) + priv/pub keys + Proof of Work = blockchain If you remove "PoW" it is just "signing in git". Which is an interesing and complex thing. And it being private removes all the need for PoW or removes the function that PoW fulfills. So a "private blockchain with PoW" is really stupid and (even more so) a waste of energy. Whereas a "private blockchain without PoW" is "just git".
  - Moodles 8y ago
    Haha yeah, it's comical how crazy the hype is. 1. Blockchain was this clever solution related to money. Anonymous person invented it. Some news about crime around it. Lots of money around it. So blockchain is this money thing and technology thing? Sounds kinda sexy. 2. Business people heard about it, thought it might be The Next Big Thing. Ask boffins to investigate. 3. Other business people heard their rivals think blockchains are The Next Big Thing so they need to get on it too. 4. hmmmm, turns out a business is mostly all about being centralized which is at odds with a boockchain. hmmm it's actually kinda uselsss? Maybe we can get rid of all the bits we don't like about it? oops we just reinvented the wheel. A "private blockchain with proof of authority" is like cutting the hump of a camel and calling it a horse. Just use Git.
    - dboreham 8y ago
      There is much hype. However, as someone who was at least as skeptical (and cynical) as you a few months ago, but (somewhat accidentally) has ended up working this this space, and for cognitive dissonance-reduction reasons, has had to figure out what's real and what's hype (or just plain lies), I have to say that I don't think it is all as bogus as you perceive. >A "private blockchain with proof of authority" is like cutting the hump of a camel and calling it a horse. Just use Git. This sounds clever, but it isn't right: Git has no equivalent to consensus for transaction correctness, for example. It has no equivalent to smart contracts. It has no peer discovery mechanism. It has no automatic transaction propagation mechanism. And on... Executive summary : "there may be a pony in there somewhere"
      - Moodles 8y ago
        We sound quite similar. I also accidentally ended up working in this space a few months ago and started off incredibly cynical (my first meeting telling everyone there I don't think there are any useful applications relevant to the business whatsoever). Looks like I went one way (getting out and doing something else) and you stuck around :-) I hope you are right and the technology is actually useful for humanity. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. I conjecture that blockchains have no applications beyond cryptocurrency. I hope someone can give me a very simple counterexample. I've seen blockchains for the music industry, for porn, for university, for bananas in Laos, for weed, for voting, for "supply chain" something or other. I've never seen an application explained simply that makes sense. I am highly skeptical of the field.
  - dboreham 8y ago
    imho the thing you're missing is that "consensus" is more than just "which txn followed which in time". For example : in Bitcoin a txn is not valid unless the sending address has sufficient funds. So nodes are checking not only the things you're thinking about, but also "is there enough money for this?". Git does not do this. It would be as if Git not only took whatever commit you sent it, but also checked that your commit compiled and passed tests, before it accepted it.
    - berkes 8y ago
      But that part has little to do with "a blockchain" and everything with how that blockchain is implemented in a specific currency. The storage part of the transactions is suprisingly simple and is what makes up the blockchain: the PoW, DAG and signatures of all that: PoW + git + pub/priv signatures.

Moodles 8y ago

Git with public/private keys is literally that. I don't understand why there's hype around blockchains. Besides, how can people say a private blockchain is "trustless"? You just said "POA" ( = proof of authority). The conversations I often got into at my job were like this. It was so incredibly difficult to pin down exactly why they even wanted a blockchain. Or what a blockchain even was in their heads.

berkes 8y ago
It's only a little more than that: Git (or a DAG) + priv/pub keys + Proof of Work = blockchain If you remove "PoW" it is just "signing in git". Which is an interesing and complex thing. And it being private removes all the need for PoW or removes the function that PoW fulfills. So a "private blockchain with PoW" is really stupid and (even more so) a waste of energy. Whereas a "private blockchain without PoW" is "just git".
- Moodles 8y ago
  Haha yeah, it's comical how crazy the hype is. 1. Blockchain was this clever solution related to money. Anonymous person invented it. Some news about crime around it. Lots of money around it. So blockchain is this money thing and technology thing? Sounds kinda sexy. 2. Business people heard about it, thought it might be The Next Big Thing. Ask boffins to investigate. 3. Other business people heard their rivals think blockchains are The Next Big Thing so they need to get on it too. 4. hmmmm, turns out a business is mostly all about being centralized which is at odds with a boockchain. hmmm it's actually kinda uselsss? Maybe we can get rid of all the bits we don't like about it? oops we just reinvented the wheel. A "private blockchain with proof of authority" is like cutting the hump of a camel and calling it a horse. Just use Git.
  - dboreham 8y ago
    There is much hype. However, as someone who was at least as skeptical (and cynical) as you a few months ago, but (somewhat accidentally) has ended up working this this space, and for cognitive dissonance-reduction reasons, has had to figure out what's real and what's hype (or just plain lies), I have to say that I don't think it is all as bogus as you perceive. >A "private blockchain with proof of authority" is like cutting the hump of a camel and calling it a horse. Just use Git. This sounds clever, but it isn't right: Git has no equivalent to consensus for transaction correctness, for example. It has no equivalent to smart contracts. It has no peer discovery mechanism. It has no automatic transaction propagation mechanism. And on... Executive summary : "there may be a pony in there somewhere"
    - Moodles 8y ago
      We sound quite similar. I also accidentally ended up working in this space a few months ago and started off incredibly cynical (my first meeting telling everyone there I don't think there are any useful applications relevant to the business whatsoever). Looks like I went one way (getting out and doing something else) and you stuck around :-) I hope you are right and the technology is actually useful for humanity. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. I conjecture that blockchains have no applications beyond cryptocurrency. I hope someone can give me a very simple counterexample. I've seen blockchains for the music industry, for porn, for university, for bananas in Laos, for weed, for voting, for "supply chain" something or other. I've never seen an application explained simply that makes sense. I am highly skeptical of the field.
- dboreham 8y ago
  imho the thing you're missing is that "consensus" is more than just "which txn followed which in time". For example : in Bitcoin a txn is not valid unless the sending address has sufficient funds. So nodes are checking not only the things you're thinking about, but also "is there enough money for this?". Git does not do this. It would be as if Git not only took whatever commit you sent it, but also checked that your commit compiled and passed tests, before it accepted it.
  - berkes 8y ago
    But that part has little to do with "a blockchain" and everything with how that blockchain is implemented in a specific currency. The storage part of the transactions is suprisingly simple and is what makes up the blockchain: the PoW, DAG and signatures of all that: PoW + git + pub/priv signatures.