|
|
|
|
|
|
by PeterisP
3236 days ago
|
|
|
Private blockchains have a use case where you have a central authority coordinating many participants that don't trust each other - if the central authority periodically publishes the signed blockchain ledger/update, it enables "shared truth" that every participant can use, and each of them can verify that noone has "altered history", that particular constraints have been met, etc. In essence, it can be used as a versioning + signing mechanism for a shared database that ensures authenticity and non-repudiation even in the absence of trust. |
|
|
In other words, something like http://ledger-cli.org/ stored in a git repository with some input validation and signed commits would suffice.
Proponents call this "blockchain technology" because it sounds advanced. They can because nobody has a definition of what "blockchain technology" is. In my mind, if it could have been designed by any competent engineer prior to Bitcoin, then it isn't "blockchain technology". But that's just me.