0 sats \ 9 replies \ @Fabs 9 Jan \ on: A true blockchain has limited use beyond preserving and transmitting value bitcoin
Could you expand on your stance of how the consensus mechanism doesn't hold any significance?
write
preview
0 sats \ 8 replies \ @r3drun3 OP 9 Jan
Of course! Imagine a blockchain that has point 3 (Secured by Proof of Work) but it is not public, permissionless and all the miners are from a single entity.
reply
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @Fabs 9 Jan
And that's a "no biggie" for you? It'd be a "No-Go" for me.
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @r3drun3 OP 9 Jan
We are saying the same thing... Please re-read my original post.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @Fabs 9 Jan
You state that it doesn't carry any significance (on it's own).
It does, however. You're with me on that, right?
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @nerd2ninja 9 Jan
No, because the other aspects surrounding the blockchain invalidate any value add one might assume it would have.
The consensus mechanism on its own, as in, there is nothing else. The consensus mechanism with friends such as fully sovereign node operators on the other hand matters a lot.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Fabs 9 Jan freebie
Can you explain it to me in a vacuum, as well as in a real world scenario?
PoW Vs PoS, or PoW and PoW in different settings, as you wish.