0

If we are designing a new project or application whatever it is, and you can trust all nodes, should we still consider blockchains in the architecture?

I saw this video of IBM and I was wondering why choosing blockchain as a solution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdhpYQCWnCw&lc=z23mitvo0ki5sgplm2hd0syvq1wb1yadphkj5vl0mj00u00c2.151904784581

Wouldn't regular database solve the problem either way?

Could somebody explain?

  • Yes. As a large service provider for assurances and banks, IBM precisely know the requirements. And if a customer wants to pay for a blockchain (for whatever reason), she should have it. Efficiency is then less a problem... – pebwindkraft Feb 26 '18 at 21:17
1

By design, a blockchain is inherently resistant to modification of the data, so if you own or trust the nodes and you can modify that data anytime, so blockchain is ineffective.

If you were trying to use the blockchain technology just for storing data and for the highest availability, A regular database with some extra connected nodes would do the job.

0

1) In future, if you want to collaborate with some other organization then you will not have to trust their nodes.

2) If you want a database that deals with asset transfers and you want records to be immutable then you can use blockchain with optimization done for a known set of validators.

Trustlessness, Transparency and Anonymity/Pseudonymity are the properties Blockchain provides. If we don't need any then we should better use conventional databases.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.