One blockchain-related thing I do with my TiddlyWiki is stamp the Git repo containing the wiki with OpenTimestamps <https://opentimestamps.org>. It piggybacks on PGP signing, adding a timestamp on top of the signature. Whenever a commit is made, it calculates hashes for all the blobs in the commit and (through a Merkle tree calculated by an OpenTimestamps server, to reduce the number of blockchain transactions required to a manageable level) submits proof of that hash to the Bitcoin blockchain within a couple of hours. (Bitcoin only right now, but the protocol is flexible enough to support other options.)
This can prove that a particular version of the wiki existed as of a specific time in the Git logs. So if I ever had a plagiarism or copyright dispute, or ended up in court in a situation where some of my notes were relevant, I would be able to prove that I had the notes no later than a specific date. $ git log --show-signature commit d9aead06217e377ef3e45da3a430566aec2f2d5b ots: Got 3 attestation(s) from cache ots: Success! Bitcoin block 679274 attests existence as of 2021-04-14 CDT ots: Good timestamp gpg: Signature made Wed 14 Apr 2021 10:01:08 PM CDT gpg: using RSA key 0AFBDCFD915DD0AE5B0FF14D3DE2F7C1129828AC gpg: Good signature from "Soren I. Bjornstad (Zettelkasten Signing) <[email protected]>" [ultimate] There's also a *ots git-extract* command that can extract the signature for just a particular file (tiddler) at a particular commit – that way you don't have to share your whole Git repository with someone who wants to verify. I've never had to use this, but it's free, not hard to set up, and could come in handy someday. It is definitely something that cannot be done without either blockchain or a central authority that all parties trust, including parties you may not know about yet. On Sunday, May 9, 2021 at 4:26:17 AM UTC-5 Mat wrote: > @inmysocks > > That's a very sober approach - but/and which I don't think anyone has > contradicted. My question is; *could *blockchain somehow be of value for > TW? I would not be surprised if it could, especially for aspects that we > currently disregard or dismiss for TW. After all, TW is very generic so one > way of looking at the question is if there are non-TW use cases that where > blockchain is advantagous or even critical, and only *then* ask if TW > could be incorporated and bring value in that context. > > Interestingly, you question the value of blockchain tech per se and > identify a single use case (NFT's for collectable toys). I didn't intend > for this thread to go there but I guess it's run its course so: > > I can see many use cases where blockchains make sense: One general area is > "traceability". For example a *car blockchain* that tracks ownership of > cars, their mileage, repairs etc. Or a housing registry. Makes a lot of > sense to me. I can also see how central banks / nations would want full > control over their money flows. Here's > <https://www.winnesota.com/blockchain>a use general case for "logistics" > and explanation for why blockchain tech supposedly is perfect for it. If > nothing else, the article should make it clear (at least to me) that it can > be difficult to see the use of blockchain if one doesn't actually know of > the needs for the particular business. Other than traceability, blockchains > also bring the smart contract aspect that cuts out middle men for > transactions. A pretty big deal and potentially an enormous money saver. > And, if nothing else, at least the potential for decentralized control of > things should resonate with TW folks. > > Disclaimer: I know very little about blockchain tech but it is becoming a > mature technology and there's billions USD poured into it... so there has > to be *something *to it, I figure... > > <:-) > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/bd301dcb-ae53-4294-889a-7fddf9b5dee5n%40googlegroups.com.
