[solatic]

> With a blockchain, you simply go back, "fork", apply a fixed transaction, and replay all the rest.

You're handwaving away a LOT of complexity there. How are users supposed to trust that you only fixed the transaction at the point of fork, and didn't alter the other transactions in the replay?

[necovek]

My comment was made in a particular context. If you can go back, it's likely a centralized blockchain, and users are pretty much dependent on trusting you to run it fairly anyway.

With a proper distributed blockchain, forks survive only when there is enough trust between participating parties. And you avoid "editing" past transactions, bit instead add "corrective" transactions on top.