2 ms·
I don't think the argument has to go both ways. Blockchains can be indebted to some prior art in distributed version control systems without being similar or id
by abalashov 4y ago
I don't think the argument has to go both ways. Blockchains can be indebted to some prior art in distributed version control systems without being similar or identical to them, and without those DVCSs being blockchains.
- em-bee 4y agothe innovation with blockchain is that it adds a feature that git doesn't have, namely to make it expensive to add new entries and very difficult to fork the chain. on the other hand, i believe blockchain is used for many projects that don't need that new feature, where something similar to git would suffice. in other words a lot of blockchain uses are not innovative in that they don't enable something that would not have been possible without blockchain.
- abalashov 4y agoBlockchain for blockchain's sake, in other words...
- em-bee 4y agopart of the problem is that many people don't know that it is possible to build an immutable history without blockchain. that's why compariosns to git, like this one are useful. another part is that there are no general purpose libraries that are decoupled from file based version control (that i am aware of) that could be used. so people turn to blockchain because it is the most obvious thing to use. just like people use kubernetes even when in many cases that is overkill and unnecessary to solve a particular problem.