1805
Comments (143)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
4
gorillachannel 4 points ago +4 / -0

The basic function of a blockchain is to make the data trustless so that anyone can run a node and the data is verified to be untampered. The security of a blockchain depends on a large number of distributed nodes. The effect is essentially to make security a function of hashpower or incentive structure.

Putting the data on a private government blockchain would only guarantee that the data can be manipulated and cannot be publicly verified, which is no better than any website.

1
Sargentpilcher 1 point ago +2 / -1

But if anybody can run a node, that's how you get the wrong side with nodes and claiming fraud where one exists.

1
gorillachannel 1 point ago +1 / -0

A 51% attack is not possible on any of the top blockchains. They are far too large.

1
rootGoose 1 point ago +3 / -2

...make the data trustless...

No. That’s not the purpose of any part of distributed ledgers and blockchains.

1
gorillachannel 1 point ago +1 / -0

No elaboration? I can do this too.

I'm right. You're wrong. QED

1
rootGoose 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trustless is misused, even in blockchains. What a [distributed] blockchain does is:

“...minimize the amount of trust required from any single actor in the system.“

This use of “trustless” doesn’t apply to custom ledgers that assign verifying nodes, that is: are not distributed to anyone who wants to participate, such as Chy-Na would like to when it comes to our voting.

2
gorillachannel 2 points ago +2 / -0

The term is also employed in describing extremely low-trust systems.

https://vitalik.ca/general/2020/08/20/trust.html