If I say “blockchain” enough, I will generate a use case. Believe!https://twitter.com/GeneXusUSA/status/869695178508046336 …
-
-
-
Replying to @gregory_kramer
This is interesting but also wrong on some very key points. For example, private blockchain controlled by one entity sure are reversible.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @esjewett @gregory_kramer
but it's irreversible because the work done mining the blocks is lost... not a simple rewind.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr @gregory_kramer
For a centrally controlled chain, you just rebuild it as it was save for that thing you changed. Merkel trees buy you next to nothing.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
It’s publishing the transaction record that makes it verifiable and that’s more what matters. The crypto is fairly irrelevant.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
For public chains with distributed consensus and proof of work it’s different. But transactions there are necessarily expensive.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
okay I'll have to dig in a bit deeper and possibly change that bit in the article
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.