4 ms·
That's not a block chain, though. A distributed ledger is one thing. A block chain is a specific technology to implement a distributed ledger. A block chain is
by ralusek 5y ago
That's not a block chain, though. A distributed ledger is one thing. A block chain is a specific technology to implement a distributed ledger. A block chain is specifically a linked-list-esque data structure with immutability through some irreproducible "cost," e.g. proof of work, proof of stake, etc, which in turn serves as the mechanism for arriving at a distributed consensus. Git histories are fully mutable, and adding to the ledger is still controlled by gatekeepers. I guess you could argue that forks allow it to bypass gatekeepers, but it really just moves gatekeepers from one place to another.
- WorldMaker 5y agoGit histories are only as immutable as the signatures applied to them. There are plenty of git repositories that follow rebase only "linked-list" history policies and require commits to be signed and through distributed consensus agree on what is the most recent commit to next commit against to keep the history a straight line. On the other side, forks happen in block chains all the time and it is an illusion that a block chain is only ever a "linked-list". It's just as much of a DAG at a technical level. The "cost" mechanics create a marketplace distinction between forks (branches in the DAG) far more than any technical distinction between them can possibly exist.
- atonse 5y agoWell you cannot change a git history without completely changing the hashes. Which is similar to blockchain. I see it as similar to CBC in crypto, where the previous block’s value plays a huge role in the next block’s encrypted value. Change one and you change the entire chain after that “block”