Link to our website: https://block.co/blockchain-in-the-public-sector-webcast-qa/submitted by BlockDotCo to u/BlockDotCo [link] [comments]
Block.co fourth webcast titled "Digital Transformation of the Public Sector & The Upcoming Legislation of Blockchain Technology in Cyprus” was an immense success. We gathered some of the best experts in the field, Deputy Minister Kyriacos Kokkinos, Jeff Bandman, Steve Tendon, and Christiana Aristidou to share their experience and discuss with us the latest updates regarding Blockchain in the Public Sector.
In its fourth series of webcasts, Block.co gathered 281 people watching the event from 41 different countries, for a two-hour webcast where guests answered participants’ questions. Following the impressive outcome and response we received from the audience, Block.co’s team has done its best to address all the questions for which public information is available.
Below is a list of the questions that were made and were not answered due to time constraints during the webcast. For the remaining questions from our audience, the team will reach out to our distinguished guests to receive their comments and feedback. Please note, that the below information is only for informational purposes!
How can asset tracing be accomplished with bitcoins and cryptocurrency? And how can this be regulated?
Block.co Team Answer:
Digital Asset tracing may be accomplished with cryptocurrency intelligence solutions such as Cipher Trace and the ICE cryptocurrency intelligence program. FATF (Financial Action Task Force) embarked on a program of work from summer 2018 to June 2019 to strengthen and update the provisions dealing with virtual assets and virtual asset service providers. FATF updated Recommendations in October 2018 and Guidance in June 2019 include several new obligations that apply to VASPs. The so-called “Travel Rule” FATF announced in October 2019 agreed on the assessment criteria for how it will assess countries’ compliance with the new global standards. Under the Travel Rule, the transmitter’s financial institutions must include and send information in the transmittal order such as Information about the identity, name, address, and account number of the sender and its financial institution Information about the identity, name, address and account number of the recipient. The ”Travel Rule” is effectively being applied to cryptoasset transfers when there is a virtual asset service provider (VASP) involved. The scope of focus has broadened from “convertible” virtual assets to any virtual asset. Countries should make sure businesses can freeze crypto wallet or exchange accounts for sanctioned individuals.
Which kind of software or technical knowledge is required to develop cryptocurrency?
Block.co Team Answer:
It depends on the type of cryptocurrency you wish to create, as well as the preferred functionality and features, and characteristics of the token or coin (i.e. will it be pre-mined, what type of hashing or cryptographic algorithm will be used (i.e. proof of work (POW) or proof of stake (POS) or a hybrid of both), etc. Likewise, it is useful to utilize a programming language that is broadly used and supported by a vast and active development community; more data could be found here: more information could be found here: top programming languages in 2015/2016, published by IEEE here, and TIOBE. Hypothetically, you can utilize any programming language to make cryptocurrency digital money, however, the most widely recognized are C, C++, Java, Python, Perl. The beauty of cryptocurrencies is that you can literally have access to the entire Bitcoin and Ethereum open-source programming scripts, and create your alternate coin (altcoin).
Hello all, I want to know about the current status of the European Union Blockchain initiative in currency or public identity.
Block.co Team Answer:
Please refer to the European Services Blockchain Infrastructure (EBSI) website.
Mining is also the process of confirmation of transactions in the Bitcoin Blockchain. What is the process of confirmation of transactions in the Blockchain of an Organization? How do we call it?
Block.co Team Answer:
That would depend on the specific consensus algorithm used for the confirmation of transactions. The consensus algorithm is part of the blockchain protocol that defines the rules on how consensus is reached on that blockchain. In order to participate, entities on the blockchain must obey and follow the same consensus algorithm. Make sure to check our glossary for more information.
How does a small business implement blockchain into its current non-blockchain software systems? Who do they hire to install it?
Block.co Team Answer:
It is easy when there are APIs to connect the various software. For more information, you can check Block.co API.
What is your opinion on digitizing developing economies like India by using AI and blockchain?
Block.co Team Answer:
Watch a very interesting webinar on the matter by Mr. Prasanna:
Blockchain technologies have been around since 2008. What would you say has been the biggest obstacle in widespread adoption?
Block.co Team Answer:
In our opinion, the biggest obstacles are volatile cryptoasset prices, complicated UIs, undefined blockchain technology standards. Moreover, the legislation around the technologies is still now being developed and does not offer legal certainty for broader adoption.
Limitations to Blockchain Usability in the Public Sector?
Block.co Team Answer:
Blockchain in the Public Sector, like any other innovative concept with big potential, cannot be a solution to every problem. Users and developers are still figuring out technological and managerial challenges. From a technological perspective, some aspects such as platform scalability, validation methods, data standardization, and systems integration must still be addressed. From a managerial point of view, the questions include business model transformation, incentive structure, and transaction scale, and maturity. Read more here.
How can these blockchain initiatives be practical for the African context
Block.co Team Answer:
As long as the internet infrastructure is in place, these blockchain initiatives may have the same benefits for the African region.
What are some compelling use cases you’ve seen lately, and how do they serve to further legitimize blockchain as a solution?
Block.co Team Answer:
You can see the global trends from all around the world when it comes to further legitimization as a solution, with China leading the way. Read more here.
How does digital currency manage the issue of money laundering?
Block.co Team Answer:
Depends under which context you are looking at the term digital currency. A digital currency usually refers to a balance or a record stored in a distributed database, in an electronic computer database, within digital files or a stored-value card. Some examples of digital currencies are cryptocurrencies, virtual currencies, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and e-Cash. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is an intergovernmental body established in 1989 on the initiative of the G7 to develop policies to fight money laundering. Since 2001 FATF is also looking into terrorism financing. The objectives of FATF are to set standards and promote effective implementation of legal, regulatory and operational measures for combating money laundering, terrorist financing, and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. FATF is a “policy-making body” that works to generate the necessary political will to bring about national legislative and regulatory reforms in these areas. FATF monitors progress in implementing its Recommendations through “peer reviews” (“mutual evaluations”) of member countries. It is the global watchdog for anti-money laundering & counter-terrorist finance. In June 2019, it updated its guidance paper for Virtual Assets Service Providers (VASPs) regarding the transfer of digital assets. There was an insertion of a new interpretive note that sets out the application of the FATF Standards to virtual asset activities and service providers. To apply FATF Recommendations, countries should consider virtual assets as “property,” “proceeds,” “funds,” “funds or other assets,” or other “corresponding value.” Countries should apply the relevant measures under the FATF Recommendations to virtual assets and virtual asset service providers (VASPs). Read more about the FATF recommendations here).
To what extent can blockchain be used to improve the privacy of healthcare?
Block.co team Answer:
Please refer to our previous webcast, blog, and articles for more information.
What is Blockchain technology in Shipping?
Block.co team Answer:
The shipping sector has been in the hold of phony maritime institutes charging exorbitant fees via agents, issuing certificates to candidates who do not have the imperative attendance, or those candidates who just pay the fees for the course and ask for the certificate. In view of these fake accreditations, the possibility exists that someone could be harmed or killed, and we could face any number of potential ecological disasters. Having the option to easily verify the genuine origin of a certificate by an approved maritime center is foremost for shipping companies to fast-track their operation and streamline their labor.
Different uses of blockchain other than cryptocurrency?
Block.co team Answer:
Please refer to our blog and glossary.
Upcoming trends in Blockchain concerning Advertising, Marketing, and Public Relations in the Public and Private sectors.
Block.co Team Answer:
Regarding the application of blockchain technology to media copyrights, please see Block.co use case proposal during the Bloomen Ideathon.
How to create a decentralized blockchain?
Block.co Team Answer:
An excessive number of individuals feel that blockchain is some supernatural innovation that makes up a decentralized system. In truth, this innovation only enables decentralization. Which means, it permits cryptocurrency to work in a decentralized way. Yet, it doesn’t give any guarantees that it will work that way. Along these lines, it’s really, some outer variables that decide genuine decentralization. Technology, itself never really guarantees it. That is the reason it’s a mistake to expect that if it’s a blockchain — it’s decentralized. From a technical perspective, both blockchains, centralized, and decentralized are comparative, as they take work on distributed peer to peer to network. This implies every node is individually responsible to verify and store the shared ledger. Both Blockchains utilize either a proof-of-work or proof-of-stake mechanisms to make a solitary record and they have to give upper and lower limits on the security and productivity of the system. For more information please refer to our infographic.
Dubai government Blockchain implementation progress?
Block.co Team Answer:
You can see more information here.
How Blockchain and IoT can be integrated to secure data being transmitted through IoT devices.
Block.co Team Answer:
You can read more about it here.
How can the Nigerian government use Blockchain to effectively implement its existing launched eGovernment master plan?
Block.co Team Answer:
Perhaps it can draw its attention to the initiatives of Dubai, Estonia, and Malta to prepare an implementation framework.
What impact is blockchain going to have in today world of business especially in the financial sector
Block.co Team Answer:
Please refer to our recent article titled Benefits of Blockchain Technology in the Banking Industry.
Is Blockchain Technology affect individuals?
Block.co Team Answer:
The social effect of blockchain innovation has just started to be acknowledged and this may simply be a hint of something larger. Cryptocurrencies have raised questions over financial services through digital wallets, and while considering that there are in excess of 3,5 billion individuals on the planet today without access to banking, such a move is surely impactful. Maybe the move for cryptocurrencies will be simpler for developing nations than the process of fiat cash and credit cards. It is like the transformation that developing nations had with mobile phones. It was simpler to acquire mass amounts of mobile phones than to supply another infrastructure for landlines telephones. In addition to giving the underprivileged access to banking services, greater transparency could also raise the profile and effectiveness of charities working in developing countries that fall under corrupt or manipulative governments.
An expanded degree of trust in where the cash goes and whose advantages would without a doubt lead to expanded commitments and backing for the poor in parts of the world that are in urgent need of help. Blockchain technology is well placed to remove the possibility of vote-apparatus and the entirety of different negatives related to the current democratic procedure. Obviously, with new innovation, there are new obstacles and issues that will arise, yet the cycle goes on and those new issues will be comprehended with progressively modern arrangements. A decentralized record would give the entirety of the fundamental information to precisely record votes on an anonymous basis, and check the exactness and whether there had been any manipulation of the voting procedure.
As Andreas Antonopoulos often says in his MOOC: ”is a blockchain even needed?” Ie. Are there better methods?
Block.co Team Answer:
In combination with nascent technologies, IoT, distributed computing, and distributed ledger technologies, governments can provide inventive services and answers for the citizens and local municipalities. Blockchain can provide the component to create a safe framework to deal with these functions. In particular, it can provide a safe interoperable infrastructure that permits all smart city services and capacities to work past presently imagined levels. On the off chance that there were better techniques, they would be researched.
Would any of this be also applicable to the educational sector (as part of the general public sector), and if so in which way?
Block.co Team Answer:
Yes, please refer to our Webcast on Education and our blog post.
Will we be able to get a hold of this recording upon completion of the meeting?
Block.co Team Answer:
Yes, here is a link to the recording of our webcast Blockchain in the Public Sector.
Was wondering if there are any existing universal framework in governing the blockchain technology?
Block.co Team Answer:
The short answer is NO, as this framework is currently being prepared in collaboration with the various Member States.
We would like to thank everyone for attending our webcast and hoping to interact with you in future webinars. If you would like to watch the webinar again, then click here!
For more info, contact Block.co directly or email at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]).
Tel +357 70007828
Get the latest from Block.co, like and follow us on social media:
|submitted by Argo_ to Bitcoin [link] [comments]|
submitted by bolyus21 to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]
Fake news. Misinformation. Disinformation. Whatever you choose to call it and however serious the problem may be, it goes without saying that public perception of the media is at an all time low.
A survey conducted by the European Commission between November 13, 2017 and February 23, 2018 found that 99% of those surveyed claimed to have been exposed to fake news, mostly through social media platforms such as Facebook. A separate 2018 survey conducted by the PEW Research Center found that while more than two-thirds of US adults at least occasionally get news from social media platforms, a majority (57%) of these consumers say they expect the news they see to be largely inaccurate.
Facebook has taken steps to crack down on bad actors responsible for fake news within its ecosystem, but there’s only so much one can do in this age of unfettered permissionless publishing.
PUBLISHprotocol as a solutionInstead of trying to fight fake news at its source, PUBLISHprotocol offers a trusted platform for legitimate publishers as a means of restoring confidence in quality journalism and mitigating the influence of bad actors.
Through PUBLISHsoft, our proprietary blockchain-based content management system, publishers will have the option of publishing content in blockchain transaction comments, thereby rendering the content immutable and tamper-evident.
We’ve identified the FLO blockchain as a preferred blockchain for this because of its metadata feature and integration with the Open Index Protocol, which provides a standard for uploading content to the FLO blockchain.
In the beginning, the comments will include the article’s content, the time and date of submission, and the name of the writer. They will also include a hash of the article as stored on a distributed storage system (e.g., the IPFS), along with any files (e.g. pictures, videos) included in the original submission but deemed too unwieldy for blockchain transaction comments.
Publishers will nonetheless retain the ability to add, edit or delete content in the interest of maintaining their own voice. However, any modifications or retractions will remain visible for all to see via a blockchain explorer, thereby serving as a stamp of integrity and helping to restore trust among publishers that commit a certain percentage of news articles to the blockchain.
Looking forwardIn the future, blockchain transaction comments will become more standardized in an effort to build a global database of articles that can be easily indexed, searched, and distributed. To achieve this, PUBLISHprotocol has entered into a strategic partnership with Alexandria and joined the IPTC to develop the world’s first standard for news dissemination using blockchain technology.
Did you know?The idea of time-stamping digital documents using blockchain technology is not new. In his 2008 white paper ‘Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System,’ Satoshi Nakamoto includes references to three works by cryptographers Stuart Haber and W. Scott Stornetta, the earliest of which dates back to 1991 and describes a procedure for time-stamping digital documents.
The duo, regarded by some as the co-inventors of blockchain technology, wanted to implement a system whereby a digital file (e.g., text, picture, video) could be rendered tamper-evident. In 1994 — 14 years before the conception of the Bitcoin network — they launched an information assurance software and services company called Surety along with its flagship service, AbsoluteProof.
According to its website, AbsoluteProof is “a cryptographic timestamping service that enables organizations or individuals to apply tamper-evident digital ‘Seals’ to all forms of digital information, providing long-term and independent proof that the information existed at a particular point in time and has not been altered since.” Similar to Bitcoin, the mechanism uses hash chain linking to attest to the authenticity of a document.
About PUBLISH, Inc.PUBLISH, Inc. is blockchain-based software solutions provider for newspaper businesses. Its mission is to secure the editorial and financial independence of newspaper businesses using blockchain technology. Its initiatives include PUBLISHprotocol, an open source blockchain media protocol that promotes a participatory mode of news production and consumption; PUBLISHalliance, a consortium of media enterprises, technology providers, and academic institutions tasked with the development and proliferation of PUBLISHprotocol; and PUBLISHsoft, a proprietary content management system for newspaper newsrooms that facilitates the launch and management of a PUBLISHprotocol-based cryptographic token.
Original Korean article https://www.jinse.com/bitcoin/284405.html published 4th December 2018. The article has been translated via Google translate. Prof. Songjie's credentials are listed at the bottom of this post.submitted by Yayowam to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]
How To Use The Blockchain To Protect The Trillion-Dollar Intelligent Import And Export Logistics BusinessOn November 22nd, the 2018 Global Smart Container Industry Alliance Annual Meeting and Smart Container Standards Publicity Training Conference was held in Shenzhen. Waltonchain CTO Wei Songjie delivered a speech at the scene. Professor Wei expounded the origin and development of blockchain and proposed the solution of blockchain technology applied in intelligent import and export logistics for the first time. He said that compared with the traditional way of shipping, the application blockchain can improve the time efficiency of more than 50% in the intelligent logistics industry and reduce the management cost by more than 30%.
The following is the full text of the speech:
Good afternoon everyone, I am Wei Songjie. Today, the theme I gave to everyone is "blockchain: data container, pass-through transport line, trust notary". Because today's conference theme is a smart container, I also borrowed a topic called a "data container." In fact, in our information security industry, we call this a data package or a package called data. They are actually quite similar in nature, and data is also goods. For us, data is something of value.
In today's speech, I mainly talk about three parts: blockchain + digital certificate capability, blockchain + port cargo application scenarios, blockchain + intelligent import and export logistics solutions. Some of these contents are exchanged with some experts in the logistics industry. Some of the things may not be too mature and accurate. I am as a layman in this swearing, and I would like to ask you.
The blockchain has been a hot word in recent years. In my opinion, the biggest use of the blockchain is not "speculation", "sell one", "sip", these are their superficial articles. The biggest feature of this technology is its digital passability.
Dr. Zhou’s speech just said that what is the core in the container-based goods circulation industry? He said that documents are the core. For the circulation of goods, we need a list to prove. In the field of our blockchain, we call this core a pass.
Let me talk to you quickly, what is the blockchain?
In fact, this year happens to be the tenth anniversary of the blockchain. As for its origin, at the earliest, it came out as the underlying technology of Bitcoin, and its data structure is a chain structure. So what is it used for? It is used to book bitcoin. For example, who transferred to whom, how to turn, and so on. It is a distributed ledger, a public ledger, distributed meaning that there is no central bank, not a single individual has the final say. It has a wide range of applications, but most of the current applications still revolve around its financial transaction attributes.
In our field of computer science, we have used the term blockchain for less than a decade, but we have used this technology for decades. What do we use it for? In fact, we used to call it a distributed database a long time ago. That is to say, the database that everyone uses now has (several) servers. That distributed data means that instead of having a centralized server to store data, it means that the data is distributed in many different places, so we call it a distributed database.
Of course you have a database, you always have software, but also have a system. So in fact we have studied more accurate nouns. For example, let me study the distributed system for more than ten years. At the same time, we also use the blockchain-related things to achieve the measurement and circulation of this value. This has actually been used since, for example, QQ has Q coins, many games have points or coins, so this is not new. Of course, we study from the perspective of how the entire process, including the value of commodity services, is measured and quantified.
In the end, what is the main feature of the blockchain and what is it used for? Be an endorsement of trust. Therefore, we often hear people say that I can't change the data on the blockchain. You can't lie to me. It can't be fake forged, can't be lost, and so on. In fact, its core is, if you believe it or not, you believe it, if you don’t believe it.
In fact, long ago we were able to do trust-based or data-based trust and verification. But what did we call it at that time? We call cryptography. So I often talk to my students during the exchange, the blockchain thing, now it can not be said to be a gimmick. Again, we rely on it to do research, write papers, and then do projects. In fact, it is more like an application innovation—that is, combining existing technologies in a new way and using them in newer ways. Broad application scenarios.
Which combination of technologies? The core of distributed systems, peer-to-peer networks, and cryptography is these. Therefore, those people say that the blockchain is very important, or very useful, and its elements are summed up in fact. Then what effect does it use to achieve these effects? I think it is the effect of interconnection, interoperability, mutual trust, mutual benefit and mutual integration.
The Internet is easy to understand. In fact, our current information systems, including our devices, are rarely fragmented or run independently. Most of them are networked, including your mobile phone and computer. If you can't access the Internet, the mobile phone is not yet available. It’s a brick, right. No use. Now everyone can't do without the network. In fact, the blockchain is the same. Its underlying core is that it can be networked and does not depend on a specific or specific network. It does not depend on a specific server and does not depend on a specific SP (network service provider). I was able to connect to the Internet. This time we called P2P (peer-to-peer network), this is no stranger. Because a long time ago, I remember that I went to the movies and songs. The eDonkey used in that year was P2P. What it wants to achieve is interconnection, which means that you are not an individual, you are not separated, P2P technology is how to connect with others.
The second is interoperability. The reason for interoperability is because everyone wants to communicate. For example, everyone here is Chinese. If I speak a foreign language here, everyone knows English, and Japanese may understand it. But for example, Burmese and Vietnamese, you may not understand. At this time, what I said is still human, you are all human, but everyone does not understand, why is this? Because it does not have a valid specification. There is no rule that this field can only speak Chinese, or that this field can only say what you and I can understand, and this is the reason for interoperability. The blockchain, which defines a set of interworking rules or norms. Just like the (national container) standard we set here today, why should this standard be? Because if the standards are different, for example, the container you are ten meters high, my two or three meters high, then you said how to pull this truck? How can I store this warehouse? How do I load the goods? Right. This is the standard use.
The third is mutual trust. I just said, what is data? What is useful is the data. What kind of data is useful? Real is useful. Then how is it true? You have to be able to verify, or you have to be able to prove it. Therefore, the blockchain uses cryptography to achieve mutual trust. Think about it, the information system we use now, or the computer and related equipment, what is the most valuable, that is, data. In fact, if I lose a mobile phone now, I don't feel bad at all. Thousands of dollars can buy one back. But what is the pain? It's the address book, chat history, and photos inside, maybe there are sensitive photos. This kind of data is the most valuable.
The fourth is reciprocity. Blockchain It is the circulation or value sharing that can achieve this value. Of course, there is a lot of value in this system. In fact, it is a number. Just like we have mobile payments now, we rarely use money. Credit cards are not very useful, so money is a symbol for us, and the symbol is a number. It's the same, but this number is valuable, or the back of the number is money, and the blockchain can achieve this effect. Of course, if there are benefits, some people will suffer and some will take advantage of it. This is reciprocity. Our best effect is to achieve the Pareto improvement in economics. If I take advantage of it, you will not suffer. This is a win-win situation or a win-win situation. The blockchain can do this.
The fifth is called mutual integration. In other words, since everyone is living together in an ecological environment to live together, coexist, agree, and work together, then everyone must have a way to achieve consensus. For example, today, who should we listen to? Of course, we should listen to the organizer and listen to the host, because I recognize you as the host, right. But if there is a spoiler, he will not recognize it. He has not reached this consensus, and this matter is troublesome. So, inside the blockchain it has a series of algorithms and methods to achieve consensus. For us, the simplest consensus or the easiest to understand is that everyone votes. Who do you think is the moderator, who has the most votes, and who is the moderator, but the simplest (fairness) is often the hardest to achieve. But in fact, these (consensus) are the core elements of the blockchain, and what effect can be achieved with these elements, and what is the use of these effects, this is its definition. Now our country is working on the relevant standards for the blockchain, but before this appearance, whether it is the corporate or academic world, or our Internet enthusiasts or blockchain enthusiasts, they do not have a standard definition. Some people call it a distributed system, someone calls it a chain, and someone calls it a mesh structure. I have a little bit inserted here, although it is called a blockchain, but in fact, in terms of chain structure, the chain is one-dimensional, but it is a form, and the chain really has two-dimensional or even multi-dimensional structure, two Dimension is a mesh structure, multidimensional. We call it a complex mesh system. So the definition of it is really just a statement or two words.
Since I am not coming to invest, this is not a preaching. You can't just say its benefits, let's be honest, let's talk about some interesting things in this technology.
The first one is that many people say that the blockchain is very good and decentralized, but is it decentralized? This is really debatable. Absolute centralization or absolute centralization is definitely not good. After all, I am not the "center", right. If anyone is the "center", who will definitely say it. Therefore, everyone must be hoping to be able to be equal, to be able to disperse, to be able to participate in and to make decisions without their own centralization. But the blockchain, it is not really decentralized, he is not without a center, he just turned a center into a lot.
Who has the final say? Everyone has the final say. How do you say it? A lot of ways. For example, the easiest way to vote, one person, one vote, is now very popular is the calculation power, who counts fast, who has the final say. There is another way, that is, whose shares are large. One person, one vote is the same situation for everyone's shares. Based on POS (consensus mechanism), it is actually to look at the rights and interests, to see who owns the shares, and the big one he said is more than me. In addition to this, there are many other ways. So we say that the blockchain is actually multi-centered, and there is a problem with true decentralization. For example, one problem we often face now is its efficiency problem. Well, take Bitcoin as an example. Everyone often says that I can get money by buying coins. But you have to know that you are actually launching a transaction on the Bitcoin network or system, or I will transfer you a sum of money, you have to wait a long time to receive it - this is not a few minutes, a few seconds, but maybe a few Ten minutes, a few hours, or even a few days. Therefore, decentralization will have efficiency problems.
Many of the so-called public chain or blockchain systems we have seen now have this efficiency problem. In other words, he may have a process, the algorithm is correct, the technical line is right, there will be too many people, especially in China, because the most important thing in China is the user, the most important thing is the user. Scale, efficiency will have problems. So our current research direction, including our application scenarios, is mostly multi-centered. Therefore, we call this multi-centered, not a center, that is not good, it is the original system, not the real center.
The second one is called the virtual and real of trust. In fact, the data is placed on the blockchain, can you really believe it? Put the blockchain, is it true? Of course it is not the case. I put a bunch of garbage into the safe, it is still rubbish, it is not worth it. Therefore, it depends on the entire ecology of the data or the entire life cycle, especially the stage of data perception or acquisition.
We now use the blockchain, including our company, some of our projects. In fact, we use a combination of software and hardware to solve how to ensure that the data you get is first-hand data, no noise, no errors, no interference. There is no such forgery, and then put it on the blockchain immediately, so that I can guarantee that the next life cycle of this data is real and verifiable. So this is why many people think blockchain data is true. However, if you put it true, it is true. If you are on vacation, it is fake. It guarantees that this data has not been altered and can be verified, but does not guarantee its original authenticity.
The third is the truth and falsehood of our consensus. The fact is that the consensus reached by the blockchain algorithm is the correct consensus? The correct consensus is that the American president is Trump. Is he really getting a 50% (vote) +1 vote? No, everyone knows that Hillary’s votes are higher and they get the same amount of votes. It was only because of the rules of their electoral college that Trump was elected. What does this show? Explain that our consensus mechanism can actually determine whether our final consensus is a general consensus, a relative consensus, or a professional consensus, and it depends on the scenario. So, you should first think about using the blockchain, and then design a consensus mechanism. After all, there is no universal technology that is universally applicable.
The last one is called the right and wrong of the data. What does it mean? Here is to say that the data is placed on the blockchain, we can say that it can not be tampered, can not be forged, can not be changed, it will not be lost, but can this really achieve this effect? In this (blockchain) industry, we often hear news that a word is called a fork. In fact, this is to say that the original chain grows in a single item, and it grows more and more in a while. When it grows long, it splits. Why is it forked? Because there is no consensus. Because some people think that it should grow like this, some people think that they should grow into that, and then there are people on both sides to support, so they fork. So this shows that the right and wrong of the data depends on who? Depending on the user, it depends on the consensus results of the user. So these are relative, in fact nothing is absolute. Including our cryptography, are you absolutely safe, definitely not. As long as I can live long enough, then I will try hard, and one day I will be able to try it out, right. The only absolute thing in us (information technology) is that it is the quantum code, which is absolutely safe. But this is a bit of a problem.
So now, in less than a decade, the blockchain has evolved in three different phases.
We have phases 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0, but it doesn't make sense to say that the specific technology is too boring. What we have to say is that 1.0 solves the problem that is too simple, that is, to record the account or to use it as a book; 2.0 can only fulfill the contract, can we say what we say, we write the program people like to write Some conditions are judged and looped. Actually, these conditions can be written in 2.0. What is the use of this condition? We will see it later. The direction that is currently developing is 3.0, 3.0 is to do things, that is to say, you This technology can not land, this is the third point. So, we are now between 2.0 and 3.0, almost the same period from 2.4 to 2.5.
Next, we make an analogy, an analogy between blockchain and data containers.
In fact, our blockchain really has blocks. Our data is really piece by piece. Each piece is called data encapsulation. This is a bit like we put a lot of goods in this container, and then lock the container, this is called a box of goods. For us, we are called a piece of data, and then we will lock this data. The lock on us is not an electronic lock. We call it a digital lock. In fact, it is a string of numbers used for verification to be used for signature. . This is one of our forms. This is not one-dimensional, but linear and two-dimensional. Containers, there are so many boxes, or so many pieces, they are also ordered, organized, we call Organize. Just like your box is to be numbered, then your box is to be neatly tidy, you can check it when you need it, and you can find it when you need it. So this is an analogy, for a bit more fun, a little fun.
The blockchain actually has many institutions now, and many countries are also used in the logistics industry, including import and export. For example, many countries in the United States, South Korea, and the Netherlands are doing it. Headed by IBM, they have a super-books alliance, and they also offer a range of solutions that can be used by everyone. Because their technology wants to be more versatile, there are actually a lot of data inconsistencies here.
So what does it do in the field of (container)? Or, what good is it? It has to solve the problem. One is inefficiency. Dr. Zhou also said that there are too many links, and then the people involved or the roles are too many and inefficient. The other is risky because this thing is not shipped. It is risky to pay, lose or lose money, pay taxes, and clear customs.
Then if we want to use it, for example, I want to use the blockchain to try it in this field, how can we try it? I think I can make three articles around my title, the first one is for data; the second is for value; the third is for trust.
In our blockchain, first, we can do the data bearer and ensure the integrity of the data. Second, we can quantify the data, especially the quantity and value of many such goods. Our measurability; the third is that we can trust, for example, authenticity, you remember so much, remember so many words, and then so many single-sub-services, using blockchain-related techniques to ensure that it can be accepted But it is really unrealistic because people will not accept it. In fact, Dr. Zhou said that the core of this industry, we are called documents. We can e-mail the documents. This technology is very ready-made, just saying how to use it. We are also doing application innovation, so we can use this framework of distributed architecture to achieve this electronic issuance of such notes or documents. But why is it not purely distributed or purely decentralized? Because of efficiency issues. Centralization efficiency is good, so he still has a data center placed there, and then the index of the data, the summary of the data, the keywords of the data, the hash of the data on the chain, so that people can be very fast, very Efficiently find the relevant data above, and then go to the original data center to get the original data.
At the same time, we can use the blockchain to implement this digitized sequence of processes. So you will look at the picture just now. The original picture has a lot of small arrows. It is actually talking about a sequence, just the picture. It's actually talking about the order, you can take the next step to do the next step, we call it timing. In fact, the blockchain can record and string these steps, and then tell you, now the entire business or the whole of our logistics is going to where it is, where is it stuck, and then how to go in the next step? Conditional judgment. How do the blockchain judge the conditions? Blockchain 2.0, support contract, right. So what is the contract? It is the program. I can write the program, what to do next, the blockchain can do this. In other words, in fact, many times we are concerned about timing, order. Where is the difference here? For example, this is what happened in a few months, and when the matter happened, this is absolute time. But many times, we are concerned about the relative time, who is who develops before and who is after whom, this logic or this real transaction makes sense. Just like you have to work first and then get paid, this is generally normal, but it is abnormal after working first. So this order is very important.
In addition, we can implement the submission and inspection of documents based on blockchain. Because you have data to always give people a home, you can find it when you need it, the blockchain can be done very quickly. In our words, the quick meaning is that its time is not exponential growth, not linear growth, we are talking about the size of the data (to grow). And when it comes to constant time, it means that no matter how much data you have, I can find the required data between the constants, and then check and verify that it is very efficient to submit and check the data. He has an ID and then has an electronic signature, and also checks the information. This blockchain is readily available.
The last one is that we can use the blockchain to implement this kind of supervision and management service for multiple roles, which means that you may be the owner. You may be a buyer, a seller, you may be a transit broker, you may be a carrier, you may be a customs officer, you may be in any role. So how can you have so many roles in the system? Because these roles are called users in our entire system, then the users actually have different ID addresses, ready-made. Just like the currency now, what is your wallet address? How do we ensure that different users have different permissions? We actually use certificates, we call Certificate, e-Cert. The more popular ones are passwords. Of course, now we often use multi-word authentication, which means that in addition to the password, you have to have a verification code or what character you have to identify, in fact, we use a certificate here. Certificates can be used to implement the setting and probability of this privilege for different roles.
Then all these things are put together, in fact we can transform the original process into a blockchain-based process. But this picture I just said, borrowed from a document. This may be just a general or a typical existing process, in fact, all of us or all of the roles can be in different blocks or different stages, with different blocks of blockchain. Is the data package to deal with, to achieve the whole process, to achieve the whole around the goods or around the entity, you are a box or a bag, we have to surround the virtual and electronic around the entity Data management and query verification This is a whole, we call it a typical system solution.
But this system is actually in use now, but it is not used for container management or for doing this import and export. What are we actually doing with this system? We are doing traceability of some of these items, such as typical clothing or food, where is it produced, and then through which links, then who is the wholesaler, who is the retailer, where is it, and then Have you ever retired or sold it to someone, and then did you go back to repair or have a return? In fact, our system is doing this. But this is no different because for us, these are all data. In fact, the data itself does not know what it means. The data itself is a character and a binary. So now we are running some of the green systems below, but it is a layman for this product.
So today, I am also grateful to all the invitations, and I will take the courage to take our set of things and put them in a new scene. This is called application innovation. The purpose of our 3.0 is to use it in more scenarios, and to use the effects, use the performance, and then use such an impressive, or acceptable, result.
In the end, we return to our title, because my title says, the blockchain data container usually has a trusted notary, and each of these is actually meaningful. For example, the data container, which is actually implemented or for a specific scenario, such as the production and sales scene of the clothing we just mentioned, is actually the electronic standardization and intelligence of the data. This involves a lot of existing and popular technologies. For example, if there is more data, how do you analyze it? Here we will use data analysis, data mining and even data modeling methods. Data modeling that you may hear often is machine learning or deep learning, so this is part of intelligence. Standardization you are all experts. The pass-through transport line actually implements this automatic persistence and metering, but these three words have been discussed in general. Finally, trusting the notary, it realizes that around the authenticity, anti-counterfeiting and traceability of the data, it is not only reliable but also usable to build such a thing, not only usable, but also usable, not only usable, but also It is a system that is easy to use.
Finally, I am very grateful to everyone for spending more than 20 minutes. I am listening to my own industry or my own circle as a layman in this industry. I think we have to make the entire smart container to establish its industrial chain, ecological chain, value chain, etc. I think this is completely inseparable or impossible to leave information technology. Because a while ago our country strongly advocated that we call internet+, Internet+, in fact, it is now more accurate and accurate. It should be called information technology+. Otherwise, the internet+ you said may be artificial intelligence+, and then the future is Big data +, but they are all called information technology in our business, that is, Information Technology. Therefore, we are very eager to have the opportunity to use our knowledge in the field of information technology, and the meager ability to make a combination with everyone in the industry, including the specific and typical application scenarios, to truly realize our industry. A transformational upgrade of our industry. Then we realize the industrialization of our entire country called the industry 2.0 or the country we call the information age. Ok, thank you all.
Profile of Prof. Wei Songjie:
Doctor of Engineering (graduated from the University of Delaware), Associate Professor of Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Core Member and Master Supervisor of Network Space Security Engineering Research Institute, Block Chain Technology expert in the field of computer network protocol and application, network and information security. Has published more than 20 papers and applied for 7 invention patents. Previously worked at Google, Qualcomm, Bloomberg and many other high-tech companies in the United States, served as R&D engineer and technical expert; has a wealth of experience in computer system design, product development and project management.
I was planning to submit a pull request to the 0.11 release of Bitcoin Core that will allow miners to create blocks bigger than one megabyte, starting a little less than a year from now. But this process of peer review turned up a technical issue that needs to get addressed, and I don’t think it can be fixed in time for the first 0.11 release.In other words, Gavin proposed a hard fork via a series of blog posts, bypassing all developer communication channels altogether and asking for personal, private emails from anyone interested in discussing the proposal further.
I will be writing a series of blog posts, each addressing one argument against raising the maximum block size, or against scheduling a raise right now... please send me an email ([email protected]) if I am missing any arguments
A common argument for letting Bitcoin blocks fill up is that the outcome won’t be so bad: just a market for fees... this is wrong. I don’t believe fees will become high and stable if Bitcoin runs out of capacity. Instead, I believe Bitcoin will crash.He also, in the latter article, explained that he disagreed with Satoshi's vision for how Bitcoin would mature:
...a permanent backlog would start to build up... as the backlog grows, nodes will start running out of memory and dying... as Core will accept any transaction that’s valid without any limit a node crash is eventually inevitable.
Neither me nor Gavin believe a fee market will work as a substitute for the inflation subsidy.Gavin continued to publish the series of blog posts he had announced while Hearn made these predictions. 
Recently there has been a flurry of posts by Gavin at http://gavinandresen.svbtle.com/ which advocate strongly for increasing the maximum block size. However, there hasnt been any discussion on this mailing list in several years as far as I can tell...Shortly thereafter, Corallo explained further:
So, at the risk of starting a flamewar, I'll provide a little bait to get some responses and hope the discussion opens up into an honest comparison of the tradeoffs here. Certainly a consensus in this kind of technical community should be a basic requirement for any serious commitment to blocksize increase.
Personally, I'm rather strongly against any commitment to a block size increase in the near future. Long-term incentive compatibility requires that there be some fee pressure, and that blocks be relatively consistently full or very nearly full. What we see today are transactions enjoying next-block confirmations with nearly zero pressure to include any fee at all (though many do because it makes wallet code simpler).
This allows the well-funded Bitcoin ecosystem to continue building systems which rely on transactions moving quickly into blocks while pretending these systems scale. Thus, instead of working on technologies which bring Bitcoin's trustlessness to systems which scale beyond a blockchain's necessarily slow and (compared to updating numbers in a database) expensive settlement, the ecosystem as a whole continues to focus on building centralized platforms and advocate for changes to Bitcoin which allow them to maintain the status quo
The point of the hard block size limit is exactly because giving miners free rule to do anything they like with their blocks would allow them to do any number of crazy attacks. The incentives for miners to pick block sizes are no where near compatible with what allows the network to continue to run in a decentralized manner.Tier Nolan considered possible extensions and modifications that might improve Gavin's proposal and argued that soft caps could be used to mitigate against the dangers of a blocksize increase. Tom Harding voiced support for Gavin's proposal
explore all the complexities involved with deployment of hard forks. Let’s not just do a one-off ad-hoc thing.Matt Whitlock voiced his opinion:
I'm not so much opposed to a block size increase as I am opposed to a hard fork... I strongly fear that the hard fork itself will become an excuse to change other aspects of the system in ways that will have unintended and possibly disastrous consequences.Bryan Bishop strongly opposed Gavin's proposal, and offered a philosophical perspective on the matter:
there has been significant public discussion... about why increasing the max block size is kicking the can down the road while possibly compromising blockchain security. There were many excellent objections that were raised that, sadly, I see are not referenced at all in the recent media blitz. Frankly I can't help but feel that if contributions, like those from #bitcoin-wizards, have been ignored in lieu of technical analysis, and the absence of discussion on this mailing list, that I feel perhaps there are other subtle and extremely important technical details that are completely absent from this--and other-- proposals.Gregory Maxwell echoed and extended that perspective:
Secured decentralization is the most important and most interesting property of bitcoin. Everything else is rather trivial and could be achieved millions of times more efficiently with conventional technology. Our technical work should be informed by the technical nature of the system we have constructed.
There's no doubt in my mind that bitcoin will always see the most extreme campaigns and the most extreme misunderstandings... for development purposes we must hold ourselves to extremely high standards before proposing changes, especially to the public, that have the potential to be unsafe and economically unsafe.
There are many potential technical solutions for aggregating millions (trillions?) of transactions into tiny bundles. As a small proof-of-concept, imagine two parties sending transactions back and forth 100 million times. Instead of recording every transaction, you could record the start state and the end state, and end up with two transactions or less. That's a 100 million fold, without modifying max block size and without potentially compromising secured decentralization.
The MIT group should listen up and get to work figuring out how to measure decentralization and its security.. Getting this measurement right would be really beneficial because we would have a more academic and technical understanding to work with.
When Bitcoin is changed fundamentally, via a hard fork, to have different properties, the change can create winners or losers...Peter Todd also summarized some academic findings on the subject:
There are non-trivial number of people who hold extremes on any of these general belief patterns; Even among the core developers there is not a consensus on Bitcoin's optimal role in society and the commercial marketplace.
there is a at least a two fold concern on this particular ("Long term Mining incentives") front:
One is that the long-held argument is that security of the Bitcoin system in the long term depends on fee income funding autonomous, anonymous, decentralized miners profitably applying enough hash-power to make reorganizations infeasible.
For fees to achieve this purpose, there seemingly must be an effective scarcity of capacity.
The second is that when subsidy has fallen well below fees, the incentive to move the blockchain forward goes away. An optimal rational miner would be best off forking off the current best block in order to capture its fees, rather than moving the blockchain forward...
tools like the Lightning network proposal could well allow us to hit a greater spectrum of demands at once--including secure zero-confirmation (something that larger blocksizes reduce if anything), which is important for many applications. With the right technology I believe we can have our cake and eat it too, but there needs to be a reason to build it; the security and decentralization level of Bitcoin imposes a hard upper limit on anything that can be based on it.
Another key point here is that the small bumps in blocksize which wouldn't clearly knock the system into a largely centralized mode--small constants--are small enough that they don't quantitatively change the operation of the system; they don't open up new applications that aren't possible today
the procedure I'd prefer would be something like this: if there is a standing backlog, we-the-community of users look to indicators to gauge if the network is losing decentralization and then double the hard limit with proper controls to allow smooth adjustment without fees going to zero (see the past proposals for automatic block size controls that let miners increase up to a hard maximum over the median if they mine at quadratically harder difficulty), and we don't increase if it appears it would be at a substantial increase in centralization risk. Hardfork changes should only be made if they're almost completely uncontroversial--where virtually everyone can look at the available data and say "yea, that isn't undermining my property rights or future use of Bitcoin; it's no big deal". Unfortunately, every indicator I can think of except fee totals has been going in the wrong direction almost monotonically along with the blockchain size increase since 2012 when we started hitting full blocks and responded by increasing the default soft target. This is frustrating
many people--myself included--have been working feverishly hard behind the scenes on Bitcoin Core to increase the scalability. This work isn't small-potatoes boring software engineering stuff; I mean even my personal contributions include things like inventing a wholly new generic algebraic optimization applicable to all EC signature schemes that increases performance by 4%, and that is before getting into the R&D stuff that hasn't really borne fruit yet, like fraud proofs. Today Bitcoin Core is easily >100 times faster to synchronize and relay than when I first got involved on the same hardware, but these improvements have been swallowed by the growth. The ironic thing is that our frantic efforts to keep ahead and not lose decentralization have both not been enough (by the best measures, full node usage is the lowest its been since 2011 even though the user base is huge now) and yet also so much that people could seriously talk about increasing the block size to something gigantic like 20MB. This sounds less reasonable when you realize that even at 1MB we'd likely have a smoking hole in the ground if not for existing enormous efforts to make scaling not come at a loss of decentralization.
In short, without either a fixed blocksize or fixed fee per transaction Bitcoin will will not survive as there is no viable way to pay for PoW security. The latter option - fixed fee per transaction - is non-trivial to implement in a way that's actually meaningful - it's easy to give miners "kickbacks" - leaving us with a fixed blocksize.Some developers (e.g. Aaron Voisine) voiced support for Gavin's proposal which repeated Mike Hearn's "crash landing" arguments.
Even a relatively small increase to 20MB will greatly reduce the number of people who can participate fully in Bitcoin, creating an environment where the next increase requires the consent of an even smaller portion of the Bitcoin ecosystem. Where does that stop? What's the proposed mechanism that'll create an incentive and social consensus to not just 'kick the can down the road'(3) and further centralize but actually scale up Bitcoin the hard way?
I am - in general - in favor of increasing the size blocks...Mike Hearn responded:
Controversial hard forks. I hope the mailing list here today already proves it is a controversial issue. Independent of personal opinions pro or against, I don't think we can do a hard fork that is controversial in nature. Either the result is effectively a fork, and pre-existing coins can be spent once on both sides (effectively failing Bitcoin's primary purpose), or the result is one side forced to upgrade to something they dislike - effectively giving a power to developers they should never have. Quoting someone: "I did not sign up to be part of a central banker's committee".
The reason for increasing is "need". If "we need more space in blocks" is the reason to do an upgrade, it won't stop after 20 MB. There is nothing fundamental possible with 20 MB blocks that isn't with 1 MB blocks.
Misrepresentation of the trade-offs. You can argue all you want that none of the effects of larger blocks are particularly damaging, so everything is fine. They will damage something (see below for details), and we should analyze these effects, and be honest about them, and present them as a trade-off made we choose to make to scale the system better. If you just ask people if they want more transactions, of course you'll hear yes. If you ask people if they want to pay less taxes, I'm sure the vast majority will agree as well.
Miner centralization. There is currently, as far as I know, no technology that can relay and validate 20 MB blocks across the planet, in a manner fast enough to avoid very significant costs to mining. There is work in progress on this (including Gavin's IBLT-based relay, or Greg's block network coding), but I don't think we should be basing the future of the economics of the system on undemonstrated ideas. Without those (or even with), the result may be that miners self-limit the size of their blocks to propagate faster, but if this happens, larger, better-connected, and more centrally-located groups of miners gain a competitive advantage by being able to produce larger blocks. I would like to point out that there is nothing evil about this - a simple feedback to determine an optimal block size for an individual miner will result in larger blocks for better connected hash power. If we do not want miners to have this ability, "we" (as in: those using full nodes) should demand limitations that prevent it. One such limitation is a block size limit (whatever it is).
Ability to use a full node.
Skewed incentives for improvements... without actual pressure to work on these, I doubt much will change. Increasing the size of blocks now will simply make it cheap enough to continue business as usual for a while - while forcing a massive cost increase (and not just a monetary one) on the entire ecosystem.
Fees and long-term incentives.
I don't think 1 MB is optimal. Block size is a compromise between scalability of transactions and verifiability of the system. A system with 10 transactions per day that is verifiable by a pocket calculator is not useful, as it would only serve a few large bank's settlements. A system which can deal with every coffee bought on the planet, but requires a Google-scale data center to verify is also not useful, as it would be trivially out-competed by a VISA-like design. The usefulness needs in a balance, and there is no optimal choice for everyone. We can choose where that balance lies, but we must accept that this is done as a trade-off, and that that trade-off will have costs such as hardware costs, decreasing anonymity, less independence, smaller target audience for people able to fully validate, ...
this list is not a good place for making progress or reaching decisions.Peter Todd then pointed out that, contrary to Mike's claims, developer consensus had been achieved within Core plenty of times recently. Btc-drak asked Mike to "explain where the 12 months timeframe comes from?"
if Bitcoin continues on its current growth trends it will run out of capacity, almost certainly by some time next year. What we need to see right now is leadership and a plan, that fits in the available time window.
I no longer believe this community can reach consensus on anything protocol related.
When the money supply eventually dwindles I doubt it will be fee pressure that funds mining
What I don't see from you yet is a specific and credible plan that fits within the next 12 months and which allows Bitcoin to keep growing.
We've successfully reached consensus for several softfork proposals already. I agree with others that hardfork need to be uncontroversial and there should be consensus about them. If you have other ideas for the criteria for hardfork deployment all I'm ears. I just hope that by "What we need to see right now is leadership" you don't mean something like "when Gaving and Mike agree it's enough to deploy a hardfork" when you go from vague to concrete.Some suspected Gavin/Mike were trying to rush the hard fork for personal reasons.
Oh, so your answer to "bitcoin will eventually need to live on fees and we would like to know more about how it will look like then" it's "no bitcoin long term it's broken long term but that's far away in the future so let's just worry about the present". I agree that it's hard to predict that future, but having some competition for block space would actually help us get more data on a similar situation to be able to predict that future better. What you want to avoid at all cost (the block size actually being used), I see as the best opportunity we have to look into the future.
this is my plan: we wait 12 months... and start having full blocks and people having to wait 2 blocks for their transactions to be confirmed some times. That would be the beginning of a true "fee market", something that Gavin used to say was his #1 priority not so long ago (which seems contradictory with his current efforts to avoid that from happening). Having a true fee market seems clearly an advantage. What are supposedly disastrous negative parts of this plan that make an alternative plan (ie: increasing the block size) so necessary and obvious. I think the advocates of the size increase are failing to explain the disadvantages of maintaining the current size. It feels like the explanation are missing because it should be somehow obvious how the sky will burn if we don't increase the block size soon. But, well, it is not obvious to me, so please elaborate on why having a fee market (instead of just an price estimator for a market that doesn't even really exist) would be a disaster.
No. What I meant is that someone (theoretically Wladimir) needs to make a clear decision. If that decision is "Bitcoin Core will wait and watch the fireworks when blocks get full", that would be showing leadershipJorge Timón responded:
I will write more on the topic of what will happen if we hit the block size limit... I don't believe we will get any useful data out of such an event. I've seen distributed systems run out of capacity before. What will happen instead is technological failure followed by rapid user abandonment...
we need to hear something like that from Wladimir, or whoever has the final say around here.
it is true that "universally uncontroversial" (which is what I think the requirement should be for hard forks) is a vague qualifier that's not formally defined anywhere. I guess we should only consider rational arguments. You cannot just nack something without further explanation. If his explanation was "I will change my mind after we increase block size", I guess the community should say "then we will just ignore your nack because it makes no sense". In the same way, when people use fallacies (purposely or not) we must expose that and say "this fallacy doesn't count as an argument". But yeah, it would probably be good to define better what constitutes a "sensible objection" or something. That doesn't seem simple though.Mike Hearn again asserted the need for a leader:
it seems that some people would like to see that happening before the subsidies are low (not necessarily null), while other people are fine waiting for that but don't want to ever be close to the scale limits anytime soon. I would also like to know for how long we need to prioritize short term adoption in this way. As others have said, if the answer is "forever, adoption is always the most important thing" then we will end up with an improved version of Visa. But yeah, this is progress, I'll wait for your more detailed description of the tragedies that will follow hitting the block limits, assuming for now that it will happen in 12 months. My previous answer to the nervous "we will hit the block limits in 12 months if we don't do anything" was "not sure about 12 months, but whatever, great, I'm waiting for that to observe how fees get affected". But it should have been a question "what's wrong with hitting the block limits in 12 months?"
There must be a single decision maker for any given codebase.Bryan Bishop attempted to explain why this did not make sense with git architecture.
Blockchain is a decentralized transaction and data management technology developed first for Bitcoin cryptocurrency. The interest in Blockchain technology has been increasing since the idea was coined in 2008. The reason for the interest in Blockchain is its central attributes that provide security, anonymity and data integrity without any third party organization in control of the ... Bitcoin Magazine provides news, analysis, information, commentary and price data about Bitcoin through our website, podcasts, research, and events. Bitcoin will still “work in practice” as practices change. We expect external political and economic factors to evolve, the system must change if and when transaction volume scales, and the nature of the monetary rewards for Bitcoin miners will change over time as part of the system design. It is not enough to argue that Bitcoin has worked from 2009– 2014 and will therefore continue ... We collect a total of 253 articles directly related to bitcoin from the Scopus database. In addition to providing basic descriptive statistics of this dataset, we apply co-word analysis to separate the literature into groups. This is done by establishing a network in which articles are nodes and co-usage of the key terms links these articles. The network is then separated into groups based on ... Academic Search Ultimate. Developed to meet the increasing demands of scholarly research, Academic Search Ultimate offers students an unprecedented collection of peer-reviewed, full-text journals, including many journals indexed in leading citation indexes. Applied Science & Technology Source Ultimate. Applied Science & Technology Source Ultimate provides STEM students and researchers with the ...
[index]          
bitcoin is forming the largest bull flag in history but it doesn't mean what you think (price news) - duration: 33:43. Crypto Crew University 40,562 views 33:43 Confused? Why wouldn't you be? This presentation will sort out the difference between articles, journals, and databases. Describes how to get articles from ProQuest Business Databases (a database paid for by the library from ProQuest). File Code: BR11-5. How to research for a paper using academic databases and academic journals. We look at what is an academic journal and a peer-reviewed journal, what search t... Baffled by bitcoin? Confused by the concept of crypto-currencies? Well, fear no more. In 190 seconds we explain what bitcoin actually is, where the idea came...