4 ms·
The distributed operation I consider necessary for something to be called blockchain technology. Git is an example of a Merkle tree [1], which definitely is a k
by yaantc 6y ago
The distributed operation I consider necessary for something to be called blockchain technology. Git is an example of a Merkle tree [1], which definitely is a key component of a blockchain but not enough on its own. One also need a distributed consensus mechanism.
The distributed operation is both necessary, and the key challenge for blockchains. There is a heavy cost to secure distributed operations. My personal opinion is that most people don't care so much about distribution, they're fine with a few trusted/regulated actors using more efficient centralized schemes. And this is, in a nutshell, the big challenge of blockchains IMHO. And why some people are tempted to drop the challenging part, put a centralize scheme on top of a Merkle tree and call it a blockchain to ride the hype. I don't think this is correct, both technically and ethically. It's "merklewashing" ;)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle_tree
- jart 6y agoLet's just call it merkle paxos but it's much more fun to read the original paper.
- kd5bjo 6y agoThat makes sense. So, continuing with the git/source control analogy, what’s missing is a distributed mechanism of both publishing new forks and then deciding which of those forks “wins”. It sort of happens now in an ad-hoc way, if you include blogs and such with big fork announcements that sometimes result in an effective change of ownership, but that’s a slow, rare, unreliable process at the moment.