The first blockchain, Bitcoin, was designed to be consensus-based: all its nodes (miners of Bitcoin) had to agree on a transaction. This meant that transactions were trustworthy, but slow. Today, Bitcoin can only handle up to 10 transactions per second. This is unacceptable for a global payment system, or for a high-performance data network.
Blockchain and Holochain
The ‘scalability’ problem of blockchain has given rise to many different solutions, usually within the blockchain framework. However, a few have started to look beyond the blockchain paradigm to devise alternative solutions that would be much more scalable.
Holochain is one such proposed solution. It is radical in that it does away with the idea of one chain altogether. Albeit, there are blockchain solutions that propose more than one chain, they maintain the main chain along the lines drawn by the founder of Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. Instead of one chain, Holochain proposes that each ‘agent’ (computer, cloud etc) owns its own chain. Consequently, there would theoretically be millions and millions of chains that would interact with each other. The transactions would be carried out between two chains and recorded in each. Given that transactions are peer-to-peer and not recorded on a blockchain after consensus, they would take place a great deal faster than legacy blockchains.
This also means that Holochain is also much more decentralized than legacy blockchains. Basically, agents keep their data and identity on their own chains and are also paid for by developers to host decentralized applications (called hApps). Currently, Holochain is introducing Holo, a marketplace for allows for applications to be hosted by agents called HoloHosts. The fees paid by developers to agents are currently called Holotokens or HOT, but once the Holochain will materialize they will be swapped for Holo Fuel.
This is a very simple answer to the difference between blockchain and Holochain. If you want to learn more about Holochain contact me.