5 ms·

Virtually every application of blockchain is better off as an old fashioned RDBMS

by eli 7y ago

zozbot234 7y ago
Except git, of course.
- dilutedh2o 7y ago
  Git is a Blockchain? Did I miss a meeting?
  - api 7y ago
    Sort of. It's a similar cryptographic hash chain type structure. I believe it's a DAG. Block chain skepticism has gotten as silly as block chain hype. A block chain is a perfectly valid and sometimes useful structure with some very interesting properties, but it won't cure cancer and make a unicorn fly out of every nose.
    - ownagefool 7y ago
      > Block chain skepticism has gotten as silly as block chain hype. Is it though? My admittedly simple understanding is that blockchain is a distributed ledger that suffers from consensus based attacks; as in it's pretty much useless unless the cluster is massive and shared between lots of parties that couldn't really out-compute each other. Thus the criticisms aren't really "this can never work" but simply, this is usually a waste of compute power and energy compared to a non-distributed version, especially when it's one of these singular company examples. Would be interested in hearing what's the use cases are.
      - mifreewil 7y ago
        > especially when it's one of these singular company examples. Blockchain is most useful in situations where there is a lack of trust between parties. Seems like a lot of people on HN distrust PayPal because of being bitten by frozen accounts or having their earned money revoked. That’s why money is a good use case for blockchain. Voting is another - maybe you don’t trust that your vote for the radical will be counted correctly. Smart contracts are another. If the other party decides they don’t like the current state of affairs (they are losing) then it’s much easier and less expensive to have the contract auto-enforced than using a army of law enforcement and lawyers. If HSBC is actually using this to create an immutable record of transactions that ensures integrity of the logs then it would be a good use case, but I have my doubts.
        nloladze 7y ago
        The trust issue is far overblown. Blockchain is much more about digital ownership of assets. You own your Facebook, your Google search results, etc, etc. You may not physically host it, but own the data that is generated from it and can decide to co-opt it into a larger tray for money if you wish or to remain private. It's much more about freedom on a conceptual level if we zoom out then about simple immutable ledgers; which are just shared key-value pair databases across many nodes, nothing special.
        mifreewil 7y ago
        The immutable ledger and consensus algorithm is the basis for allowing ownership of digital assets and freedom. Solving the trust issue is what an immutable ledger and consensus algorithm is all about. Without a way to agree on who owns what and a way to enforce that then there is no way to have digital ownership or freedom without an army of lawyers and law enforcement, or trust. You probably already have ownership of digital assets without blockchain: it’s called a bank account, equities, bonds, and maybe a title or deed to a car or home. But that ownership is all enforced by an entire system of laws, attorneys, law enforcement, and other fallible human beings. If you remove the reliance on that system and fallible human beings, you then begin to enable a greater amount of ownership and freedom than previously possible.
        perl4ever 7y ago
        "If you remove the reliance on that system and fallible human beings" If you throw away a crutch, you've removed your reliance on it, indisputably. But that doesn't cure a broken leg.
        mifreewil 7y ago
        I don’t follow your analogy
        perl4ever 7y ago
      - mirekrusin 7y ago
        There are many consensus algorithms available and nobody is using proof-of-work you're mentioning in enterprise setting.
    - spookthesunset 7y ago
      > Block chain skepticism has gotten as silly as block chain hype. Naw. Technologies that are ecological disasters whose only purpose in the last 10+ years is to serve as a platform for fraud and enrichment of early adopters.... they deserve heaps of criticism.
      - TomMarius 7y ago
        You are missing which "technology" is causing that. Is OVB[0] a reason to abandon insurance? [0] https://www.echo24.cz/a/wmYCb/kvuli-skandalu-padaji-v-ovb-hlavy-konci-tri-zemsti-reditele https://www.echo24.cz/a/wmYCb/kvuli-skandalu-padaji-v-ovb-hl...
  - zitterbewegung 7y ago
    A VCS is a database. A blockchain is a database . If you use git as intended having a single source of truth (a branch that represents master / deployment) and allows others to submit patches that are then approved to master the data model is very similar to a blockchain.
    - dilutedh2o 7y ago
      No doubt, but there's no consensus algo like PoW right?
      - 0xname 7y ago
        One could say it’s PoA (Proof of Authority) which is basically saying there are specific authorities that choose to validate it. In github, for example, it would be whoever controls the master branch. Of course, this is needlessly complicating things since 99% of software today is this authority model except its implicit.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
  - 75dvtwin 7y ago
    no. but it uses Merkle tree, therefore, the often mentioned analogy. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9436847 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9436847
- semiotagonal 7y ago
  Git uses hashes to identify commits, but does it actually chain them, i.e. include the previous hash as an input to the current hash?
  - dijit 7y ago
    It does indeed. https://gist.github.com/masak/2415865 https://gist.github.com/masak/2415865
- eli 7y ago
  I only ever use git with a central server providing the source of truth.
ignoramous 7y ago
Amazon's QLDB makes for a viable Blockchain DBMS alternative esp with its support for partiQL. It apparently is Route53 and EC2 [0] source of truth. [0] https://twitter.com/colmmacc/status/1067832198059970561 https://twitter.com/colmmacc/status/1067832198059970561
nloladze 7y ago
Who pays you guys to say this? https://miro.medium.com/max/888/1*WPnv_6sG9k4oG3S1A09MDA.jpeg https://miro.medium.com/max/888/1*WPnv_6sG9k4oG3S1A09MDA.jpe... Cap-theorem. Blockchain allows for far greater partitions not available to any other database model. In terms of consistency, while I disagree with everything many crypto companies are doing, when it comes to consistency, blockchain allows far larger scabability in terms of consistency over a larger partition than traditional corporate servers running Hadoop or Spark. The availability is surprisingly quick as well. If we're talking maximum scale of big data and their operating methodology, we're going to be talking about blockchain and how to partition the the data between different clusters and how to achieve consensus between nodes. Financial data belongs on the blockchain, outside of corporatocracy control and central bank control.
- spookthesunset 7y ago
  > Who pays you guys to say this? The only set people with a financial incentive to “shill” are bitcoin/cryptocurrency supporters. More Shilling == higher prices == more lambos for those on the top of the pyramid. To think there is some dark force out there shilling for big banks to scare us from adopting a technology that supports a few transactions a second and requires more energy than several small nations combined.... pretty naive.
  - nloladze 7y ago
    >>The only set people with a financial incentive to “shill” are bitcoin/cryptocurrency supporters. More Shilling == higher prices == more lambos for those on the top of the pyramid. Strawman. I won't answer it. >>To think there is some dark force out there shilling for big banks to scare us from adopting a technology that supports a few transactions a second and requires more energy than several small nations combined.... pretty naive. But central banks, bankers, big time capitalists and the federal government would never do anything outside of public interests? https://cointelegraph.com/news/shark-tanks-kevin-oleary-bitcoin-is-garbage-a-useless-currency https://cointelegraph.com/news/shark-tanks-kevin-oleary-bitc... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-12/jpmorgan-s-ceo-says-he-d-fire-traders-who-bet-on-fraud-bitcoin https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-12/jpmorgan-... https://www.coindesk.com/former-fed-chair-janet-yellen-is-not-a-fan-of-bitcoin https://www.coindesk.com/former-fed-chair-janet-yellen-is-no... https://www.coindesk.com/us-president-donald-trump-says-hes-not-a-fan-of-bitcoin https://www.coindesk.com/us-president-donald-trump-says-hes-... For the record I don't own any cryptocurrency and never will because I don't believe in it's merits like you, but I am not so naive to think that private interests wouldn't collude against a digital asset highly risky to their profitable margins.

Virtually every application of blockchain is better off as an old fashioned RDBMS

by eli 7y ago

Virtually every application of blockchain is better off as an old fashioned RDBMS

zozbot234 7y ago

Except git, of course.

dilutedh2o 7y ago
Git is a Blockchain? Did I miss a meeting?
- api 7y ago
  Sort of. It's a similar cryptographic hash chain type structure. I believe it's a DAG. Block chain skepticism has gotten as silly as block chain hype. A block chain is a perfectly valid and sometimes useful structure with some very interesting properties, but it won't cure cancer and make a unicorn fly out of every nose.
  - ownagefool 7y ago
    > Block chain skepticism has gotten as silly as block chain hype. Is it though? My admittedly simple understanding is that blockchain is a distributed ledger that suffers from consensus based attacks; as in it's pretty much useless unless the cluster is massive and shared between lots of parties that couldn't really out-compute each other. Thus the criticisms aren't really "this can never work" but simply, this is usually a waste of compute power and energy compared to a non-distributed version, especially when it's one of these singular company examples. Would be interested in hearing what's the use cases are.
    - mifreewil 7y ago
      > especially when it's one of these singular company examples. Blockchain is most useful in situations where there is a lack of trust between parties. Seems like a lot of people on HN distrust PayPal because of being bitten by frozen accounts or having their earned money revoked. That’s why money is a good use case for blockchain. Voting is another - maybe you don’t trust that your vote for the radical will be counted correctly. Smart contracts are another. If the other party decides they don’t like the current state of affairs (they are losing) then it’s much easier and less expensive to have the contract auto-enforced than using a army of law enforcement and lawyers. If HSBC is actually using this to create an immutable record of transactions that ensures integrity of the logs then it would be a good use case, but I have my doubts.
      - nloladze 7y ago
        The trust issue is far overblown. Blockchain is much more about digital ownership of assets. You own your Facebook, your Google search results, etc, etc. You may not physically host it, but own the data that is generated from it and can decide to co-opt it into a larger tray for money if you wish or to remain private. It's much more about freedom on a conceptual level if we zoom out then about simple immutable ledgers; which are just shared key-value pair databases across many nodes, nothing special.
        mifreewil 7y ago
        The immutable ledger and consensus algorithm is the basis for allowing ownership of digital assets and freedom. Solving the trust issue is what an immutable ledger and consensus algorithm is all about. Without a way to agree on who owns what and a way to enforce that then there is no way to have digital ownership or freedom without an army of lawyers and law enforcement, or trust. You probably already have ownership of digital assets without blockchain: it’s called a bank account, equities, bonds, and maybe a title or deed to a car or home. But that ownership is all enforced by an entire system of laws, attorneys, law enforcement, and other fallible human beings. If you remove the reliance on that system and fallible human beings, you then begin to enable a greater amount of ownership and freedom than previously possible.
        perl4ever 7y ago
        "If you remove the reliance on that system and fallible human beings" If you throw away a crutch, you've removed your reliance on it, indisputably. But that doesn't cure a broken leg.
        mifreewil 7y ago
        I don’t follow your analogy
        perl4ever 7y ago
    - mirekrusin 7y ago
      There are many consensus algorithms available and nobody is using proof-of-work you're mentioning in enterprise setting.
  - spookthesunset 7y ago
    > Block chain skepticism has gotten as silly as block chain hype. Naw. Technologies that are ecological disasters whose only purpose in the last 10+ years is to serve as a platform for fraud and enrichment of early adopters.... they deserve heaps of criticism.
    - TomMarius 7y ago
      You are missing which "technology" is causing that. Is OVB[0] a reason to abandon insurance? [0] https://www.echo24.cz/a/wmYCb/kvuli-skandalu-padaji-v-ovb-hlavy-konci-tri-zemsti-reditele https://www.echo24.cz/a/wmYCb/kvuli-skandalu-padaji-v-ovb-hl...
- zitterbewegung 7y ago
  A VCS is a database. A blockchain is a database . If you use git as intended having a single source of truth (a branch that represents master / deployment) and allows others to submit patches that are then approved to master the data model is very similar to a blockchain.
  - dilutedh2o 7y ago
    No doubt, but there's no consensus algo like PoW right?
    - 0xname 7y ago
      One could say it’s PoA (Proof of Authority) which is basically saying there are specific authorities that choose to validate it. In github, for example, it would be whoever controls the master branch. Of course, this is needlessly complicating things since 99% of software today is this authority model except its implicit.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- 75dvtwin 7y ago
  no. but it uses Merkle tree, therefore, the often mentioned analogy. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9436847 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9436847
semiotagonal 7y ago
Git uses hashes to identify commits, but does it actually chain them, i.e. include the previous hash as an input to the current hash?
- dijit 7y ago
  It does indeed. https://gist.github.com/masak/2415865 https://gist.github.com/masak/2415865
eli 7y ago
I only ever use git with a central server providing the source of truth.

ignoramous 7y ago

Amazon's QLDB makes for a viable Blockchain DBMS alternative esp with its support for partiQL. It apparently is Route53 and EC2 [0] source of truth. [0] https://twitter.com/colmmacc/status/1067832198059970561 https://twitter.com/colmmacc/status/1067832198059970561

nloladze 7y ago

Who pays you guys to say this? https://miro.medium.com/max/888/1*WPnv_6sG9k4oG3S1A09MDA.jpeg https://miro.medium.com/max/888/1*WPnv_6sG9k4oG3S1A09MDA.jpe... Cap-theorem. Blockchain allows for far greater partitions not available to any other database model. In terms of consistency, while I disagree with everything many crypto companies are doing, when it comes to consistency, blockchain allows far larger scabability in terms of consistency over a larger partition than traditional corporate servers running Hadoop or Spark. The availability is surprisingly quick as well. If we're talking maximum scale of big data and their operating methodology, we're going to be talking about blockchain and how to partition the the data between different clusters and how to achieve consensus between nodes. Financial data belongs on the blockchain, outside of corporatocracy control and central bank control.

spookthesunset 7y ago
> Who pays you guys to say this? The only set people with a financial incentive to “shill” are bitcoin/cryptocurrency supporters. More Shilling == higher prices == more lambos for those on the top of the pyramid. To think there is some dark force out there shilling for big banks to scare us from adopting a technology that supports a few transactions a second and requires more energy than several small nations combined.... pretty naive.
- nloladze 7y ago
  >>The only set people with a financial incentive to “shill” are bitcoin/cryptocurrency supporters. More Shilling == higher prices == more lambos for those on the top of the pyramid. Strawman. I won't answer it. >>To think there is some dark force out there shilling for big banks to scare us from adopting a technology that supports a few transactions a second and requires more energy than several small nations combined.... pretty naive. But central banks, bankers, big time capitalists and the federal government would never do anything outside of public interests? https://cointelegraph.com/news/shark-tanks-kevin-oleary-bitcoin-is-garbage-a-useless-currency https://cointelegraph.com/news/shark-tanks-kevin-oleary-bitc... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-12/jpmorgan-s-ceo-says-he-d-fire-traders-who-bet-on-fraud-bitcoin https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-12/jpmorgan-... https://www.coindesk.com/former-fed-chair-janet-yellen-is-not-a-fan-of-bitcoin https://www.coindesk.com/former-fed-chair-janet-yellen-is-no... https://www.coindesk.com/us-president-donald-trump-says-hes-not-a-fan-of-bitcoin https://www.coindesk.com/us-president-donald-trump-says-hes-... For the record I don't own any cryptocurrency and never will because I don't believe in it's merits like you, but I am not so naive to think that private interests wouldn't collude against a digital asset highly risky to their profitable margins.