|
|
|
|
|
by darawk
2313 days ago
|
|
There is a difference between deciding all transactions will be published and making them public by design constraint. Blockchains make transactions public by design, and this design cannot be easily subverted by the people running it. |
|
In a "blockchain" with a centralized validator set, there's no constraint forcing transactions to be public. The network will keep running even if the validators decide to stop publishing transactions. It's very much still a social contract.
Tampering (adding false transactions) is the only thing that could be hampered thanks to the requirement of client signatures: transaction/partial information censoring will still be possible. But in reality such a system will have the design constraint that funds must be seizable by the government, which in turn negates the only remaining technical advantage of a "centralized blockchain".
All that's left is the now empty word "blockchain". It's going to fit perfectly next to "democracy".