[milansuk]

Why first thing people think about blockchain is storage? I like ownership and transparency. Let me give you one example. Many HN readers complain about App store centralization, but what if there was decentralize app store, where code and data live on the blockchain and anyone can propose code changes, and then thousands or millions of users vote for what they like. If you think this can be done with a centralized server it can not because those who control the server have most of the votes no matter what. But it can be done with a transparent blockchain network.

[qsort]

That's just a very complicated way to say "git". There's no blockchain in sight anywhere.

[drdeca]

Hey, it’s a chain (or, DAG really, but kinda close) of commits, right?

[qsort]

I mean yeah, but that reminds me of when Facebook launched Libra and they claimed it operated on a blockchain because the core algorithm involved a "chain" of "blocks"...

If you want to call git a blockchain I guess that's fine, but it's not what most people have in mind when they think of "blockchain".

[drdeca]

Yeah, it's a stretch and I'm partially joking.

[nephanth]

You can have a decentralized datastore without blockchain, if you want a decentralized rating system without central authority, you might just want a web of trust. In this usecase, using blockchain would just put the voting power in the hands of those with computational power...

[edgyquant]

This would hilariously slow if it used a blockchain.