> distributed ledgers are not blockchains. Author here. Thanks for your criticism. I think you are making my point too. And you do touch on the reason why I f

> distributed ledgers are not blockchains. Author here. Thanks for your criticism. I think you are making my point too. And you do touch on the reason why I focused so heavily on the "terminology part". What irritates me, is that anything "crypto" is suddenly called "blockchain". Signing transactions and including a pointer to a predecessor is not a blockchain, it's a DAG and we use it daily (git). "Distributing your data" maybe even using merkle trees, is not a blockchain. Its "distribution". An interesting and broad subject in itself. Distributing a ledger is hardly new, though still a field very much in motion. All the things you describe are really very interesting fields often tremendously complex. They all usepieces of tech found in a blockchain too. But then again: the whole basis of bitcoin is really just a combination of existing tech put together in a novel architecture. Many of the things you describe (like distributed ledgers) require quite novel concepts and most of all leaning heavily on cryptography. But none are "blockchain".