Something people have not grasped. The word proof refers to evidence. If we take the OED we will see the definition:
Evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement.
‘you will be asked to give proof of your identity’
This differs from the concept of proof in mathematics. Bitcoin is not mathematically or cryptographically founded. You will also note that the paper does not say ownership is granted through keys but that digital signatures and the framework "which provides strong control of ownership".
This is an important distinction that few people understand. Control of ownership is not the same as possession nor of clear ownership of property. Nodes or miners enforce rules and as such should not be involved with the regulation of disputes involving property. Nodes can enforce changes, but to do so it would require that ownership of property must be absolutely clear. Where ownership is in real dispute, nodes should not be involved until the ownership has been established in civil or criminal courts.
The paper talks about proof in the sense of law. It is not a complete and definitive statement of truth, no proof or evidence ever can be. What people do not understand is where it states that there is an ongoing chain of hash based proof of work forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing that work that this does not preclude change. In an honest system, an alteration to the blockchain that is publicly appended does not alter the ongoing proof of work. Altering that so that the changes are secret is the nature of an attack. Honest nodes can enforce changes as required by simply adding a record to update the database, and bitcoin is simply a ledger or database.
CSW
Oct 14, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1571073993158000
Evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement.
‘you will be asked to give proof of your identity’
This differs from the concept of proof in mathematics. Bitcoin is not mathematically or cryptographically founded. You will also note that the paper does not say ownership is granted through keys but that digital signatures and the framework "which provides strong control of ownership".
This is an important distinction that few people understand. Control of ownership is not the same as possession nor of clear ownership of property. Nodes or miners enforce rules and as such should not be involved with the regulation of disputes involving property. Nodes can enforce changes, but to do so it would require that ownership of property must be absolutely clear. Where ownership is in real dispute, nodes should not be involved until the ownership has been established in civil or criminal courts.
The paper talks about proof in the sense of law. It is not a complete and definitive statement of truth, no proof or evidence ever can be. What people do not understand is where it states that there is an ongoing chain of hash based proof of work forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing that work that this does not preclude change. In an honest system, an alteration to the blockchain that is publicly appended does not alter the ongoing proof of work. Altering that so that the changes are secret is the nature of an attack. Honest nodes can enforce changes as required by simply adding a record to update the database, and bitcoin is simply a ledger or database.
CSW
Oct 14, 2019
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1571073993158000
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment