4 ms·
But the point is that the blockchain is not a source of truth, the legal system is. So the blockchain is at best an eventually-consistent view. But if that's t
by breischl 5y ago
But the point is that the blockchain is not a source of truth, the legal system is. So the blockchain is at best an eventually-consistent view.
But if that's the case, then why bother with a blockchain at all? Just use a regular database. There are plenty of ways to make that auditable and/or public without bothering with consensus algorithms.
- kwdc 5y agoBlockchain is RECORD of ownership. It is a database with the stipulation it isn't so easy to mess up. Nothing I wrote even asserts the legal system has no power. I'm not an evangelist for blockchain but even I can see a benefit.
- breischl 5y agoCertainly it can be used as a record of ownership. But it's not the real record - that's whatever the legal system holds. So now we're talking about just using it as a view on top of the actual system of record. It being difficult to mess up doesn't even matter, because it's just a view - it it's wrong go back to the source and fix it. Distributed consensus doesn't matter, because no matter what the consensus says the truth is whatever is in the legal system. The main design goals of a blockchain are valuable for a system of record. They are not valuable for things that are just a copy of something else. So while you could use it for that, it's not a good fit.