this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2024
1300 points (94.2% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26824 readers
2815 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

You could do literally the same thing with a series of private key signed envelopes containing the prior chain of signed content. Boom, verifiable chain of custody without any rainforests being burned down.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No, because it would be trivial to make a change and regenerate the entire chain.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, you would only need to have every single private key for all nodes that follow you in the supply chain. Super trivial.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

OK. So you are proposing a private blockchain with minimal data validation rules.

How do you decide who gets to add the next record?

You would also need some protection against all nodes sharing their keys.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's not a blockchain. It's closer to a series of forwarded emails with certificate signing. Who gets to add the next record? How about the party that is doing that step of processing in the supply chain. And I have a great idea for protecting the keys. It's called asymmetric key pairs. You can verify a signature using a public key without having the private key required to be able to generate that signature.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

It's not a blockchain. It's closer to a series of forwarded emails with certificate signing.

You've got hash linked data, signatures, verification procedures, distributed storage. It's not very sophisticated, but you are definitely on the path to reinventing the blockchain.

Who gets to add the next record? How about the party that is doing that step of processing in the supply chain.

Oh, so you want a new database for every item. Let's have one database handling lots of items and validated in sequence.

And I have a great idea for protecting the keys. It's called asymmetric key pairs.

Brilliant. And how is your invention different from a private permissioned blockchain?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Blockchain is the shitty reinvention of PGP, my dude. I don't agree to this silly retronym for nearly 50 year old cryptographic methods. Yes, if you remove all the supposed advancements and advantages of blockchain, you're left with the cryptographic foundation which was the only thing that had merit. Congratulations.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yes. Blockchain is PGP + Hash linked lists + Distributed validation. They hadn't been combined until 2008.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm hoping you're being hyperbolic about burning rainforests because not every blockchain is power hungry like Bitcoin or the old the POW Ethereum.

Besides, the rainforest is being burned down to make way for more cattle to provide more beef. Not sure why you chose the rainforest as example of intense computational power.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

It's somewhat hyperbolic, but in relative terms, it is pretty wasteful to implement it with a blockchain over what I just suggested. Cryptographic consensus doesn't solve anything for the given example that the verifiable chain of custody in my proposed alternative does not and there's zero way it's less expensive than a bunch of asymmetric signatures that can be verified offline on demand. If anything, it's better than a blockchain since it would only require a majority of parties to be complicit in a lie to rewrite history in a blockchain full of parties that have no business with any given transaction other than to enforce immutability whereas it would require every single node in the chain of custody before you to be complicit in my proposal.

And I'm surprised that the rainforest thing confuses you. It and burning tires are the go-to colloquialisms for complaining about things that are unnecessarily environmentally hostile, particularly when talking about crypto crap. But yeah, blockchains are a solution in search of a problem, so the derision is intentional. There's no legitimate problem that can be solved with blockchain that can't be solved in a better way. Cryptocurrency only in theory and this supply chain problem are the closest it gets to blockchain making sense and it still fails to be better than non-blockchain alternatives.