All* Of Your Blockchain Questions Answered

Author's note: The original version of this story was not approved for publication because it contained "graphic material". According to the small black box containing my rejection notice I need to make the following changes before submitting again. "Vocal does not publish slurs or epithets. Please remove derogatory language and resubmit." This will be quite a challenge because the original piece does not contain any slurs or epithets or derogatory language that I am aware of. Perhaps I need to refresh my memory on the definition of those terms and then review the text. Let's give it a shot and see if we can discover together what the moderators of this find publication found objectionable. So we are all on the same page let's start with the definitions of the terms in question. check.

Slur

1. an insinuation or allegation about someone that is likely to insult them or damage their reputation.

2. an act of speaking indistinctly so that sounds or words run into one another or a tendency to speak in such a way.

I am going to have to assume they are referring to definition number 1 above. It pretty much looks like the definition I remember. Now, let me check through the ole story below for any slurs. OOOhh. I think I may see the problem. I called bitcoin gay. I guess that would be considered a slur. But wait a second? The definition of slur says the insinuation or allegation must be about some"one" (aka a person or persons) not something, and further that it is likely to insult them or damage their reputation. Bitcoin is definitely not a someone, it is a something, and thus cannot be insulted, and, despite my massive fan base and online influence, I am afraid my opinion one way or the other about Bitcoin has zero chance of damaging its reputation. Phew. I am good on that one. It must be the epithets that are referring to. OK. Let me get the definition of that.

Epithet

1a: a characterizing word or phrase accompanying or occurring in place of the name of a person or thing

b: a disparaging or abusive word or phrase

c: the part of a taxonomic name identifying a subordinate unit within a genus

I am going to assume Vocal is referring to definition 1b.

Let's check the story for any disparaging or abusive words or phrases

What is blockchain pops?

Well hey there little Timster, it sure has been a while since you asked me anything. I can’t even remember what we talked about last time or even when that was.

Nothing disparaging or abusive in the above. Let's keep going.

It was bitcoin pops and you called me a freakin idiot. It was in July of last year. Remember you passed out? Boredom or something.

Oddly enough I do not, however bitcoin is gay.

Hmm. We already determined that calling bitcoin gay can't be the problem since it is a thing and not a person. Freakin idiot is pretty mild as abusive language goes so I doubt that is the problem. Let's keep going.

You know you can’t say that right? That something is gay. Gay people, who are a friendly and fine community of persons of a different sexual persuasion than the majority will take offense.

Well they shouldn’t because strangely enough gay people are not gay, by and large they are pretty cool, bitcoin however is gay.

Lot's of bitcoin is gay stuff in the above, but again remember since bitcoin is a thing and not a person calling it gay cannot be considered a slur so we are still OK. It certainly is not abusive or disparaging against anyone in fact it is actually highly complementary of a certain group of people so we OK there. Let's keep going.

Fine, gay people are not gay but bitcoin is, what about blockchain, gay or not?

So gay.

See above. No problem here. Let's keep going.

But what is it?

Uggh, do I have to do this boring shit again. According to something or other blockchain or “a blockchain” is a continuously growing list of records, called blocks, which are linked and secured using cryptography. Each block typically contains a link to a previous block, a timestamp, and transaction data. They are inherently resistant to modification of the data by design and can record transactions between two parties efficiently and in a verifiable and permanent way. Once recorded, the data in any given block cannot be altered retroactively without the alteration of all subsequent blocks, which requires collusion of the network majority. They are quite secure and have what is referred to as high Byzantine fault tolerance. Basically they are resistant to a common distributed computing systems failure mode whereby it is not possible to determine if a particular component is faulty or not. Long story short it is gay.

Lot's of gay stuff again. That joke sure has gotten old already and only about halfway through the story. Bad writing, definitely, funny, I think so, abusive or disparaging, nope. On we go...

Wait a second I just looked up blockchain in Wikipedia and you appear to have copy pasted and then reworded and edited entries for both blockchain and byzantine fault tolerance into your reply.

So sue me. Please, please, for the love of all that is good and pure, do not sue me.

No problemo.

Why is blockchain a thing?

Because of bitcoin which as I already mentioned is extremely gay. Also because of money which a person can make a shit ton with using blockchain in some way or other.

Again with the gay thing, but again nothing disparaging or abusive. "Shit" is a curse word but I think that is probably allowed.

What does blockchain have to do with bitcoin?

What does the beach have to do with summer, snow with winter, falling leaves with autumn?

Makes no sense, but not disparaging or abusive.

I give up, what?

Simple dummy, you see blockchain was implemented as a core component of bitcoin by an anonymous person or group known as Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009 where it serves as the public ledger for all transactions. You remember S. Naka don’t you? I read you that abstract from that paper back in July. It sounded super technical and cool but was actually super gay and dumb.

Calling someone a dummy is not very nice, but I don't think it qualifies as abusive or disparaging. Of course, I had to get a gay joke in again, but to remind the moderators and readers again, calling a thing gay is not a slur, nor is it an epithet.

But that doesn’t make any sense. How does your answer in any way relate to beaches in summer and all that jazz? Plus you said you didn’t remember anything about that bitcoin stuff.

But who is to say what is sense and what nonsense in this topsy turvy world in which we live? Surely not I, and most absolutely, definitely not you Timmy. Also I lied about the bitcoin stuff, how could I possibly forget something that gay?

See above for discussion of why nothing in this last part qualifies as a slur or epithet either.

Author's Postscript:

Dear homosexual reader,

The preceding was a work of (so called) “humor” and biting social commentary. I am certain you recognize it’s brilliance and admire my ability to convey complex technical issues of great importance to our modern society in a way that is understandable to the common man. No doubt you also found the sarcasm, irony, and whatnot amazing and some of the best use of whatever you have ever read. However, you may have also noticed that I seemed to be using the term “gay” in a derogatory fashion throughout. Rest assured, as I noted in the piece, that although certain things are clearly and absolutely gay, you are not. Thus my use of the term was not intended as a slight against homosexual persons but rather as a way to highlight the inherent gayness of the phenomenon/activity/thing in question. I realize this suggests that I think that things that are gay have negative connotations. I do in fact believe that but gay people are not gay and thus do not have any such negative connotations. In fact I would never call any person gay for that could be considered a slur or an epithet. Luckily, calling things gay cannot be considered that for the reasons I described above. Hopefully that clears up any possible misunderstandings and thx for reading!

Author's Post(post) script:

You see, that was sort of the point of the entire story. By repeatedly calling things, including bitcoin, gay, I was trying to point out the absurdity of our language and through the lens of humor cause the reader to reflect on their own.....nah, I was just pointing out that bitcoin is gay, because it is.