What's the point of having private blockchain?

Why does Libra need to run on blockchain if it’s aimed to stay private?

5 Likes

You could just issue Libra tokens on bitcoin(sv) and get massive scaling and security out of the box.
Why not just using a working protocol? See tokenized.com

4 Likes

You lost me at mentioning bitcoin (sv) and “massive scaling” in one sentence.

13 Likes

Last time I checked 128MB blocks were successfully mined on bsv. If 20k transactions per second is not scaling to you then you have wrong definition of the word “scaling”

1 Like

The purpose of blockchain is the exact opposite of control. Nobody controls it, the consensus is achieved via public proof of work, thus doesn’t require trust.

But with Libra, we have to trust nodes of “founding members”. It’s just another shade of proof of stake system

1 Like

Yet the problem is that in PoS system the nodes are not incentivized to grow their network because they lose voting power. Actually this was already covered by satoshi himself, it’s sad that tech companies are so illiterate about blockchain

It appears their plan is to move from permissioned to permissionless over time. The Libra project’s governance structure and path to decentralization are very similar to Hedera Hashgraph’s (https://www.hedera.com)

1 Like

The bc is used to avoid eventual problems between partners of the network, who are themselves backers of the currency.

BTC is most secure, proven, and least influenced. BSV sacrifices security for on-chain scaling making it a layer 2 tech to BTC. While BTC, as an asset, can scale to unlimited capacity since tech upgrades are built on top, BSV is limited to on-chain scaling which has no chance of competing with better tech options, capping a coin’s scalability with only on-chain upgrades makes it a replaceable technology not a digital asset.

That’s completely untrue. BSV preserves original protocol, restores op_codes and removes artificial blocksize cap. BSV is the original protocol that can scale on chain while BTC introduced irreversible hacks like SegWit and RBF which killed 0conf transactions. BTC is less secure and more expensive to move.

Many things contribute to a secure SoV such as proven history and influence. BSV is a layer two option for transactions supporting the main, more secure, less influenced and original SoV - BTC. BSV is nothing more than a utility token that compliments BTC at this point and soon will become obsolete due to a cap on scaling.

From that perspective, all Blockchain initiatives are private.
It is only participation over time that encourages them to portray semi-private or public outlook.
What matters most to me is the usability criterion that Facebook sets for Libra.

2 Likes

Both BSV and BTC are forks. They both have same blockchain until Aug 1 2017. What you are saying is absolute bs.
BTC decided to tweak the protocol thus breaking instant transactions and creating mempool congestion.
BSV didn’t touch anything, because it just works.
Time will tell which fork succeeds. So far only BSV follows the whitepaper which clearly states it is a PEER TO PEER ELECTRONIC CASH SYSTEM. Not utility token as you stated.

What I’m saying is not bs and yes we will see.

You stating that BSV transactions support main chain BTC which is absolute nonsense.
They are completely separate chains and operate separately.
I advise you to learn more about bitcoin to understand it

If you are saying BSV can remain secure with on-chain scaling then maybe it can be a L1 as well. I’m just not personally convinced.

We can both agree PoS is L2, right? :wink:

Also, I am not stating they are directly connected. I am stating people will hold their assets in what they consider the safest option (least influence and most secure) and only use other options for smaller transactions with less risk.

What was the point of the intranet? History repeats itself.

1 Like

That’s not accurate. Look at Peercoin, the original PoS. Say you have 1.3% of all total coins and inflation/minting reward per year is 1%. You maintain your 1.3% share of the network because total supply increases by 1% as well as your holdings. You only lose voting power if you are not involved in minting blocks.

1 Like

The point is … you looking to blockchain technology wrongly!
Example: https://polys.me/ just a voting system built on blockchain
( to answer the main question above… )