Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 83 posts

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#41

Post by prepend »

JWett wrote: post #8
dnautics wrote: post #3

i don't see evidence that it's really a block-chain since the data are not dependent on the previous block, i.e. it's not a linked list ("chain") data structure.

Hi, ex-CEO of Surety here. The article is not very technical so I can see where you might assume this is not a true blockchain. However, the hash value published in the Times was, in fact, dependent upon every single hash value for every digital "document" ever submitted to the Digital Notary Service. A Digital Notary client application would submit a hash value (which in the early days was a combination of MD5 and S…

Doesn’t this rely on Surety being trusted though? It seems technically possible for Surety to modify documents consistently in and out so the hashes are consistent, but not representative of the submitted documents.

Especially back in the 90s when generating crypto hashes wasn’t as easy for users.

So this is similar to notaries where the trust lies with a different party.

The killer app, I think, that made blockchain blockchain is the trustless nature.

Surety is certainly cool, but just a better version of putting a hash in a bank’s safety deposit box.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#42

Post by Filligree »

sametmax wrote: post #32
0xfffff wrote: post #16

Just a hash chain, pretty sure one can find much older ones. some old checksums might do that too. When someone says blockchain, in my book (and this might differ from others) - its about the consensus algorithm used to prevent tampering, like POW as introduced by Bitcoin.

If you don't have decentralized production and validation of blocks, you don't have a block chain.

Why should it need to be decentralized?

A blockchain is a chain of blocks. Tautological, but the words mean something; it isn't just a name. If you hash blocks that contain hashes of previous blocks, you have a blockchain.

At most it might be argued that a centralized blockchain has no reason to exist, but I doubt that's true.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#43

Post by bittcto »

Filligree wrote: post #42
sametmax wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't have decentralized production and validation of blocks, you don't have a block chain.

Why should it need to be decentralized? A blockchain is a chain of blocks. Tautological, but the words mean something; it isn't just a name. If you hash blocks that contain hashes of previous blocks, you have a blockchain. At most it might be argued that a centralized blockchain has no reason to exist, but I doubt that's true.

Because the term was coined by Nakamoto to describe the technology behind bitcoin. Decentralization, proof of work and other characteristics of bitcoin are intrinsic to making the system work. Otherwise you have an inefficient database that has no reason to exist.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#44

Post by bittcto »

zaarn wrote: post #40
sametmax wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't have decentralized production and validation of blocks, you don't have a block chain.

You don't need decentralization for a blockchain. All you need is 1) a reverse linked list of entries and 2) have the list be cryptographic in nature. Even git can be used for a blockchain since it uses a cryptographic hash for commits and can use GPG signing. Validation, consensus and decentralizations are additional properties that you can add on top that make it useful for certain use cases.

Because the term was coined by Nakamoto to describe the technology behind bitcoin. Decentralization, proof of work and other characteristics of bitcoin are intrinsic to making the system work. Otherwise you have an inefficient database that has no reason to exist.

This is one of the problems with the generic use of “blockchain”. People think you just need Merkle roots including previous blocks, like you do, but that’s useless and pointless without the rest.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#46

Post by bittcto »

phyzome wrote: post #14
Groxx wrote: post #7

Is there actually any chaining going on, or is this a standard "trusted timestamp"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping

The article doesn't make it totally explicit, but it sure sounds like each new hash incorporated the previous one. (It's also possible that each published hash is just a brand new hash of the aggregate, but this seems somewhat less likely based on the wording.) ETA: Looks like it's a chain, or rather a Merkle tree. From the horse's mouth: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17865168

A Merkle root including previous Merkle roots may have been innovative when Surety started, but while its required in bitcoin its not a key feature of what defines a Blockchain.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#47

Post by bittcto »

bigiain wrote: post #20
zadler wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “block” in blockchain is due to it being a byzantine fault tolerant replicated state machine. If it were centralised there would be no need for a block. That may be the main distinguishing characteristic. Git is another example of an application running on a hash chain, but it doesn’t have blocks because it doesn’t require a slow / costly consensus process.

Feels a bit like that's a post-facto argument to me. It sounds like the Surity thing had "blocks" consisting of a week's worth of documents which got chained together and had their hash published irrevocably every week. Without the subsequent invention and popularity of the specific implementation of the bitcoin blockchain - I don't think the slow/costly consensus "feature" could be considered a requirement to distin…

The entire point of Bitcoin is the distributed trustless consensus mechanism. Read the Nakamoto white paper, it’s all about double spending.

A chain of hashed data dates back to Merkle himself, that’s what a Merkle tree is.

The entire point of bitcoin is distributed independent truth and that’s the entire point of a Blockchain.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#48

Post by bittcto »

maxerickson wrote: post #38
zadler wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “block” in blockchain is due to it being a byzantine fault tolerant replicated state machine. If it were centralised there would be no need for a block. That may be the main distinguishing characteristic. Git is another example of an application running on a hash chain, but it doesn’t have blocks because it doesn’t require a slow / costly consensus process.

The bitcoin whitepaper used the word "block" in the sense of "some data under a given hash". https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf It didn't use the word block in the sense of "to stop people from forging history".

The entire point of Bitcoin is the distributed trustless consensus mechanism. Read the Nakamoto white paper, it’s all about double spending.

A chain of hashed data dates back to Merkle himself, that’s what a Merkle tree is.

The entire point of bitcoin is distributed independent truth and that’s the entire point of a Blockchain.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#49

Post by bittcto »

fooker wrote: post #15
api wrote: post #10

Bitcoin's innovation was trust and conflict resolution through proof of work, not linked lists of hashes.

There is difference between bitcoin and blockchain. A blockchain is, by definition, a linked list of hashes.

“By definition” people are just making up “Blockchain” as a desperate technology, usually people who don’t understand how bitcoin works and don’t realize they are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Redefining the nature of the technology to get away from the difficult reality of it isn’t effective in the end.

Re: The World’s Oldest Blockchain Has Been Hiding in the New York Times Since 1995

#50

Post by maxerickson »

bittcto wrote: post #48
maxerickson wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bitcoin whitepaper used the word "block" in the sense of "some data under a given hash". https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf It didn't use the word block in the sense of "to stop people from forging history".

The entire point of Bitcoin is the distributed trustless consensus mechanism. Read the Nakamoto white paper, it’s all about double spending. A chain of hashed data dates back to Merkle himself, that’s what a Merkle tree is. The entire point of bitcoin is distributed independent truth and that’s the entire point of a Blockchain.

Your copy pasta is somewhat less effective when I linked the whitepaper to make my point.
Post reply on HN