5 ms·

Yes, but not with Google. This can be done with the Bitcoin blockchain. Before you groan, hear me out. You can submit a transaction which contains a hash of

Yes, but not with Google. This can be done with the Bitcoin blockchain. Before you groan, hear me out. You can submit a transaction which contains a hash of your content. Once it's on the blockchain you can prove that the content was created no later than the date of the transaction.

cheeze 8y ago
.. Which does nothing against a backdated article. What stops me from copying a NYT article and posting it to the blockchain a few hours after, claiming it's mine? What makes the bitcoin blockchain good for this? The bitcoin blockchain is good for posting transactions within the bitcoin network and kind of a shitty solution for "a generic blockchain" Why a blockchain at all? Why not just a merkle tree? Surely there is somewhere better than the bitcoin blockchain for this. CT logging isn't done on the bitcoin blockchain for a reason. So sure, you can prove that something wasn't created after the date of the transaction (assuming you're using a CS hashing function), but for this to work in this specific context, you'd need every publisher to be posting transactions to this log. If I post an article and post a hash to $genericBlockchainWhichIsReallyJustAMerkleTree, what prevents someone from copying, backdating, and saying that I copied them? That they didn't post to the log as well?
- dubhrosa 8y ago
  Agree that bitcoin blockchain is unnecessary, but isn't there some merit in the idea that all major publishers in a juristiction would opt-in to posting to a single chain? Given the potential legal cost savings it would seem to be at least somewhat feasible.
  - cheeze 8y ago
    Oh absolutely. But I don't know how much of a "blockchain" that really is depending on how you define it. When I think blockchain, I think miners/proof of work/etc. Is a CT log a blockchain? Because really what we're talking about here is a signed ledger which may be decentralized but very well may be centralized as well.
- staplers 8y ago
  You should really educate yourself on the bitcoin blockchain and how it records time before making a fool of yourself by trying so desperately to dismiss it.
- jcoffland 8y ago
  > What makes the bitcoin blockchain good for this? I can use it for decentralized time stamping right now.
IncRnd 8y ago
Are you saying that you'd be willing to host such a blockchain on your machine with timestamps and hashes for every article in the Internet?
- Moru 8y ago
  No need to do it yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping
prostoalex 8y ago
Any third-party tool like PasteBin would work in a similar way and incur no transaction fee.
- jcoffland 8y ago
  There is no way to know that someone at PasteBin wasn't paid off.
akavel 8y ago
Problem is, the evil SEOs backdate, therefore he needs to prove that the content was created no earlier - thus IIUC, blockchain/Merkle tree can't help him...
- jobigoud 8y ago
  Depends on who has the burden of proof? The evil SEO cannot prove his version was created earlier than his.

cheeze 8y ago

.. Which does nothing against a backdated article. What stops me from copying a NYT article and posting it to the blockchain a few hours after, claiming it's mine? What makes the bitcoin blockchain good for this? The bitcoin blockchain is good for posting transactions within the bitcoin network and kind of a shitty solution for "a generic blockchain" Why a blockchain at all? Why not just a merkle tree? Surely there is somewhere better than the bitcoin blockchain for this. CT logging isn't done on the bitcoin blockchain for a reason. So sure, you can prove that something wasn't created after the date of the transaction (assuming you're using a CS hashing function), but for this to work in this specific context, you'd need every publisher to be posting transactions to this log. If I post an article and post a hash to $genericBlockchainWhichIsReallyJustAMerkleTree, what prevents someone from copying, backdating, and saying that I copied them? That they didn't post to the log as well?

dubhrosa 8y ago
Agree that bitcoin blockchain is unnecessary, but isn't there some merit in the idea that all major publishers in a juristiction would opt-in to posting to a single chain? Given the potential legal cost savings it would seem to be at least somewhat feasible.
- cheeze 8y ago
  Oh absolutely. But I don't know how much of a "blockchain" that really is depending on how you define it. When I think blockchain, I think miners/proof of work/etc. Is a CT log a blockchain? Because really what we're talking about here is a signed ledger which may be decentralized but very well may be centralized as well.
staplers 8y ago
You should really educate yourself on the bitcoin blockchain and how it records time before making a fool of yourself by trying so desperately to dismiss it.
jcoffland 8y ago
> What makes the bitcoin blockchain good for this? I can use it for decentralized time stamping right now.

IncRnd 8y ago

Are you saying that you'd be willing to host such a blockchain on your machine with timestamps and hashes for every article in the Internet?

Moru 8y ago
No need to do it yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping

prostoalex 8y ago

Any third-party tool like PasteBin would work in a similar way and incur no transaction fee.

jcoffland 8y ago
There is no way to know that someone at PasteBin wasn't paid off.

akavel 8y ago

Problem is, the evil SEOs backdate, therefore he needs to prove that the content was created no earlier - thus IIUC, blockchain/Merkle tree can't help him...

jobigoud 8y ago
Depends on who has the burden of proof? The evil SEO cannot prove his version was created earlier than his.