4 ms·
> signing every block, to create a collaborative system that is perfectly suited for the same task. Indeed you can! We even have a name for that! Its called
by stale2002 1y ago
> signing every block, to create a collaborative system that is perfectly suited for the same task.
Indeed you can! We even have a name for that! Its called a blockchain.
> This maintains many benefits of the blockchain and lacks many issues (fast, simple, near zero cost, controllable to a given extent -- no takeover possible, ...).
Blockchains can do all of these things.
Perhaps you are thinking of "bitcoin", instead of "blockchains"? Bitcoin, something that was created a whole 17 years ago, indeed has many drawbacks compared to modern blockchains.
- fruitworks 1y agosuch modern blockchains as "classical consensus"
- antirez 1y agoNo bizantine distributed agreement (work / stake), no blockchain. Otherwise we can name everything as everything.
- stale2002 1y ago> No bizantine distributed agreement (work / stake), no blockchain. Actually yes there is a blockchain. The word you are looking for is "Federated Blockchain". https://101blockchains.com/federated-blockchain/ https://101blockchains.com/federated-blockchain/ > Otherwise we can name everything No, because we literally have a word for this already. Federated Blockchain. It is a well known concept.
- woah 1y agoThere is no bright line difference between proof of stake and any other type of consensus, committee or voting body. Proof of work of course is very different.
- antirez 1y agoThe difference is enormous: in one case, you don't need any centralized N entities, just a big percentage of the network, whoever wants to participate, runs the protocol and there are no 50 institutions / companies that can block it without reaching the majority of work / stake. In the other case, you are delegating the consensus to a fixed amount of parties. Now, we against the crypto / blockchain shitstorm advertised the alternative of old-style federated consensus with N trusted organizations for years and years. And now, no: you can't say, this is a form of blockchain. You admit failure and acknowledge that classical consensus was good enough and even better in most cases.