• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    18 days ago

    I didn’t say distributed. You are absolutely correct though. I was more observing that of all the BS tech bro babble that our Oligarch in Chief could spew into the universe, blockchain would be one that could be implemented reasonably.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27 days ago

      If your blockchain isn’t distributed, it doesn’t need to be a blockchain, because then you already have trust established.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        17 days ago

        There are actually other comments on this thread that provide other benefits besides trust, like modification tracing. There is more to it than just trust.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          17 days ago

          You mean a transparency log? Just sign and publish. Or if it’s confidential, have a timestamp authority sign it, but what’s the point of a confidential blockchain? Sure, we han have a string of hashes chained together á la git, but that’s just an implementation detail. Where does the trust come from, who does the audit? That’s the interesting part.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            15 days ago

            Obviously all good questions that those much more informed should weigh in on. I know just enough about blockchain to recognize reasonable vs scam uses for, but I also know enough to not Dunning Kruger the topic.