4 ms·
Not necessarily. Maybe the scanners have a key that only it's creators can derive from some master key. The hash could come signed and all the public verificati
by mempko 5y ago
Not necessarily. Maybe the scanners have a key that only it's creators can derive from some master key. The hash could come signed and all the public verification has to do is match against a public key. You don't need a database of hashes and you don't need a centralized db of source scans. Each scan hash could even chain with a previous scan hash and you can limit the number of times a key is good for, hence limiting number of scans a device can have. Only way to fake this would be to have the master key.
- teraflop 5y agoWhich, as always, raises the question of why a blockchain is necessary. If the creators' master key can be trusted with the power to decide who gets new coins, why don't the creators just store everyone's account balance in a database, and get rid of the enormous performance and energy costs of a distributed ledger?
- mempko 5y agoExactly!
- _jal 5y ago> raises the question of why a blockchain is necessary For marketing, of course. Blockchains are magic, the rubes won't flock otherwise.
- tlrobinson 5y agoI don't know anything about Worldcoin specifically, but you could argue a case for an initial period of semi-centralized "fair" distribution, after which the protocol would (verifiably) cease to allow minting of new coins.