[adeptus]

Actually, I'm pretty sure most people don't have a clue when it comes to blockchain. Amazon can't claim it is both centralized and immutable. That's complete nonsense. Also WTF is the point of a blockchain if you need to entrust your ledger data to a third party? Amazon puts out some spectacular products and innovation, but this one is laugh out loud material.

[davepeck]

> Amazon can't claim it is both centralized and immutable.

Amazon can claim it is both centralized and immutable, provided you trust Amazon.

> Also WTF is the point of a blockchain if you need to entrust your ledger data to a third party?

Maybe none? I might be willing to bet that 99% of blockchains in use today could in fact just use AQLD or similar.

And this is what it comes down to: most of us live in a world where trust can, and does, have to root out somewhere. So much of our society is built around this. Blockchains feel sort of alien in this world.

[adeptus]

>Amazon can claim it is both centralized and immutable, provided you trust Amazon.

No it can't. The second it is hacked and somebody alters the ledger, it is no longer immutable. Centralized security models eventually all get hacked. What you could however say is that the application you need to have immutable isn't super mission critical, and thus you can afford a very low probability - but not 0% of getting hacked.

>And this is what it comes down to: most of us live in a world where trust can, and does, have to root out somewhere. So much of our society is built around this.

And this is where you might be a bit out of touch. From China hacking US IP, from Banks world wide manipulating markets, gold, Libor, frequent global election fraud, government mis-spending of funds, corporate & government accounting fraud, Fukushima lies, Fakenews etc. The trust people have in institutions and governments world wide is in an accelerated decline. We are constantly asked to trust, and we are constantly let down. Properly decentralized blockchains are 'Trust machines'. They aren't alone going to solve all the issues I mentioned, but they do have the potential to increase trust in many processes related to these various issues. The key requirement is decentralization though. A blockchain managed by a single entity is nothing more than a dumbed down over-marketed database with limited use cases.

Google: Decline in trust: https://www.google.com/search?ei=WEv_W6DfIe2x0PEPxe6AmA4&q=D...

[cthalupa]

>Centralized security models eventually all get hacked.

This is an incredibly strong assertion and not one that you have proven. Nor do I believe it is something that you, or anyone, could prove.

[aeijdenberg]

You can certainly claim something is centralized and tamper-evident. ie demonstrate proof that something has not been mutated over time.

See RFC6962 Certificate Transparency logs and their consistency proofs for a widely used example.