tl;dr; It depends on how you define what a blockchain is. But under more general definitions, yes. And under more restrictive definitions, no. Some definitions are more useful than others.
Get Started for FREE
Sign up with Facebook Sign up with X
I don't have a Facebook or a X account
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
|
|
Clearly I think that there is more to a blockchain than just a linked list at internet scale. And for reasons that I can’t quite articulate I don’t think any old Git repository is a blockchain, but you could retrofit one.
But a good formal definition escapes me at this point. There are several things that don’t belong in this definition. First, blockchain is not a brand name of a particular chain. And it doesn’t need to be a distributed ledger, although we are sorely lacking in interesting examples of this. It also doesn’t require a particular proof of work, or proof of stake, or proof of <insert trendy cause>.
What the definition does need to address beyond the contentedness of the blocks are questions of security, consensus (or lack thereof), distribution, propagation, and generation of blocks. And this definition needs to fit in a tweet.