create account

RE: Blockchain State Representation should be Abstract and not part of Consensus by clayboyn

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com

Viewing a response to: @dantheman/blockchain-state-representation-should-be-abstract-and-not-part-of-consensus

· @clayboyn ·
$0.28
I'll be honest, I am not one of the fanboys that followed you to steem and I honestly didn't have any idea what your stances were on blockchain development.  That being said, I tend to agree with you.  I have felt for a while that the actual blockchain aspect of cryptocurrencies is redundant and useless.  It's not like we need to physically go out and mine gold to make gold valuable.  Witness and staking serve the same function to decentralize the network if upheld properly.  I'm not sure if you know or are aware of Douglas Pike or his stances on development, but I feel like you two would get along well.  I have my own personal concerns about Vericoin and Verium, but his core beliefs and philosophy are what keep me watching the development process.  I also really like Stratis Platform's approach to the business and enterprise focused aspects of blockchain development.   I guess I shall now be following your future projects as well.  Thanks for the interesting read.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorclayboyn
permlinkre-dantheman-blockchain-state-representation-should-be-abstract-and-not-part-of-consensus-20170327t213752306z
categoryetheruem
json_metadata{"tags":["etheruem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-27 21:37:48
last_update2017-03-27 21:37:48
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-27 23:55:57
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.219 HBD
curator_payout_value0.059 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length979
author_reputation367,928,946,800,906
root_title"Blockchain State Representation should be Abstract and not part of Consensus"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,868,390
net_rshares599,074,698,311
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)