3 ms·

I will answer the question that is always asked in every post regarding blockchains on HN: "Why blockchain? Can't this be done with a database?" Blockchains a

I will answer the question that is always asked in every post regarding blockchains on HN: "Why blockchain? Can't this be done with a database?" Blockchains are databases. They are distributed, append-only, tamper-proof databases. You could call them that, or instead you could just say "blockchain" as that is what type of database the word blockchain has come to be understood as. The reason to use a blockchain rather than a centralized database is because the properties described - distributed and tamper-proof - are crucial to the application. In Libra's case, centralized entities that control financial services (banks) have high fees, are slow, and are not trusted in some respects (financial bailout) while being highly trusted in others (not waking up and losing your money). A blockchain can provide solutions to the problems of centralized financial entities with the benefits of distributed ones.

alangibson 7y ago
Libra is explicitly centralized. The protocol depends entirely on Validators, of which there are few, and the Libra Association controls who's a Validator. If Libra is decentralized, then so is the Fed because it's distributed across 12 regional banks.
chewbacha 7y ago
One minor correction, centralized databases are faster than distributed databases. By choosing blockchain, they are choosing a slower db.
rawoke083600 7y ago
One semi-related thing is automation. When i receive a forex payment to my bank(south africa) it has to go to some human controller etc. If i can transact 24/7 without human intervention thats a big plus
thefounder 7y ago
I believe only facebook and few others will have access to the blockchain(i.e transaction history etc) so it really brings nothing to the user/clients or developers outside of libra association
xorcist 7y ago
Haven't you got it the other way around? This looks very much like what people usually mean with "can't this be done with a database?". Singular data view, high capacity, permissioned. The strange thing here is the hand waving about transitioning to PoS in the future. How would that work, exactly? And, in that case, why not use a more traditional database?

alangibson 7y ago

Libra is explicitly centralized. The protocol depends entirely on Validators, of which there are few, and the Libra Association controls who's a Validator. If Libra is decentralized, then so is the Fed because it's distributed across 12 regional banks.

chewbacha 7y ago

One minor correction, centralized databases are faster than distributed databases. By choosing blockchain, they are choosing a slower db.

rawoke083600 7y ago

One semi-related thing is automation. When i receive a forex payment to my bank(south africa) it has to go to some human controller etc. If i can transact 24/7 without human intervention thats a big plus

thefounder 7y ago

I believe only facebook and few others will have access to the blockchain(i.e transaction history etc) so it really brings nothing to the user/clients or developers outside of libra association

xorcist 7y ago

Haven't you got it the other way around? This looks very much like what people usually mean with "can't this be done with a database?". Singular data view, high capacity, permissioned. The strange thing here is the hand waving about transitioning to PoS in the future. How would that work, exactly? And, in that case, why not use a more traditional database?