It sounds like the Surity thing had "blocks" consisting of a week's worth of documents which got chained together and had their hash published irrevocably every week.
Without the subsequent invention and popularity of the specific implementation of the bitcoin blockchain - I don't think the slow/costly consensus "feature" could be considered a requirement to distinguish between "hash chains" and "block chains" like that.
(But I'm regularly on the losing side of nomenclature arguments - I'm still pissed at all the people who've decided they should call my non-autonomous quadcopters "drones"...)
Apparently we should call them quadpters because it's based on helicopter for which the ethymology is not heli + copter, but helico + pter, like in helicoidal and pterodactyl.
"Hey mister! Is that your drone?" "No kid, it's not a drone, it's a spinning dinosaur..."
A chain of hashed data dates back to Merkle himself, that’s what a Merkle tree is.
The entire point of bitcoin is distributed independent truth and that’s the entire point of a Blockchain.
https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
It didn't use the word block in the sense of "to stop people from forging history".
A chain of hashed data dates back to Merkle himself, that’s what a Merkle tree is.
The entire point of bitcoin is distributed independent truth and that’s the entire point of a Blockchain.