3 ms·
The owner of a Bitcoin node could rewrite the history of their chain, too. (After all, it's just a file on a hard disk.) This would, however, make their node i
by wolfgang42 8y ago
The owner of a Bitcoin node could rewrite the history of their chain, too. (After all, it's just a file on a hard disk.)
This would, however, make their node incompatible with everyone else's, in exactly the same way that rewriting the history of a Git repository makes that repository not able to automatically pull from or push to any other non-rewritten repos.
You seem to be thinking of 'git' as a thing which gets stored on GitHub, but it's entirely possible to run a repository with no central copy, based only on consensus. (I've actually done this--in an area without an internet connection, we spent a day coding and passing around copies on flash drives and merging until everyone had the same code. I don't recommend doing this on a regular basis, but there's no technical differences preventing it.)
- calibas 8y agoI'm well aware of how git works, and the consensus mechanism you just pointed out is one of the fundamental differences between git and what's normally referred to as a blockchain. I think the confusion is people are equating merkle trees with blockchains.