5 ms·
HTTP isn't trying to maintain a consistent, decentralised database. Bitcoin is. HTTP doesn't have a problem maintaining data consistency because that's outside
by weavejester 13y ago
HTTP isn't trying to maintain a consistent, decentralised database. Bitcoin is. HTTP doesn't have a problem maintaining data consistency because that's outside the scope of the protocol.
You're suggesting the Bitcoin protocol is badly designed because it's had problems that HTTP hasn't had. But this is like saying aeroplanes are poorly designed compared to cars because the latter don't fall out of the sky when their engines die. Planes have to deal with problems cars don't, not because of poor design, but because of the nature of what they're made to do.
Bitcoin concerns itself with providing data integrity across a distributed system. The only way of doing this, without a centralised server, is to ensure that all the clients are performing the same calculations. If it turns out a significant proportion of clients are performing the wrong calculation, then you have a problem. This isn't a problem inherent to Bitcoin; it's a problem with any distributed system trying to maintain a consistent database.
- drewblaisdell 13y agoPatrick is a very smart guy, which is part of the reason I (like you) am so confused as to why he thinks HTTP makes for a good analogy.
- yeahbutbut 13y agoI'm pretty sure that by HTTP client he meant rendering engines. And in this analogy the data integrity is "whatever crap I have to send to the client to get the expected output on all client machines". So it's somewhat fair to say that if you have wildly divergent interpretations of HTML rendering then you have a data integrity problem, since you can't guarantee that the same data will be interpreted the same way by all clients. None of that has to do with HTTP the protocol though... so I'm confused as to why HTTP the protocol was mentioned instead of HTML and rendering engines.
- saurik 13y agoI can't tell if you meant for this statement to be as insulting to Patick as it seems at first glance. If you did, I will point out that an alternative outlook is to realize that as Patrick is a very smart guy you may have simply misunderstood, misinterpreted, or misapplied his analogy.