3 ms·
2 reasons 1) Accountability - I believe users should know when I mint coins. They should also be able to verify that no double spend is possible 2) Extensibil
by flurly 6y ago
2 reasons
1) Accountability - I believe users should know when I mint coins. They should also be able to verify that no double spend is possible
2) Extensibility - By having all transactions public, it's much easier to build integrations on top of CC
- doggosphere 6y agoAccountability - I believe users should know when I mint coins. They should also be able to verify that no double spend is possible Your structure isn't a blockchain though. Transaction 0 does not indicate where the original coin value came from (there was no "minting" transaction). So users can't actually verify double spends.
- flurly 6y agoIf you assume that 9447ffe1633c73206d9e775762fae7c5e6f3a926ba83f862c2774491d53a3a4b has infinity coins (which it effectively does) Then you can verify double spends
- doggosphere 6y agoYou can only verify double spends if the integrity of the chain is intact. Since its not a decentralized database, and your service can "go down" at any time and "pop up" with amended transaction history, its just the illusion of transparency. If you know that, and your users know that, why not just keep transactions private like PayPal.
- flurly 6y agoIn the same way that the bitcoin ledger is decentralized because nodes keep copies, you can similarly have people keep copies of this central chain. It's no different than when the NYT changes their article. People have screenshots and can show the discrepancies.