2 ms·
> a permissioned block chain Permission by who? Under what authority? Who is hosting the servers this thing sits on? Who has voting rights on it? As soon as y
by XorNot 2y ago
> a permissioned block chain
Permission by who? Under what authority? Who is hosting the servers this thing sits on? Who has voting rights on it?
As soon as your proposing a scenario like:
> a sufficiently coordinated cabal of media people could just lie to the rest of us about the election result
then why would they not also be able to partition the network links to ensure updates don't propagate? And do you even still have a government if it can't exercise any significant control over it's territory (short answer: no).
- __MatrixMan__ 2y agoYou can look up how a permissioned blockchain works, it's a whole thing. They're typically restricted access, but they could easily be restricted write, public read, and any member of the public who wants to facilitate propagation and keep an eye on things could run a node. > then why would they not also be able to partition the network links to ensure updates don't propagate? Perhaps they can. Maybe you have to sneak a thumb drive with valid signatures across the network boundary in order to facilitate convergence. But at least your adversaries can't masquerade as you. > And do you even still have a government if it can't exercise any significant control over it's territory Most governments we have today at one point fit that description. The utility of resilience in the face of adversaries that can tamper with your ability to coordinate is not diminished if you're losing the fight.