Can we trust blockchain?


Blockchain should be without trust, which means that it does not require a third party, such as a bank, to validate payments and other transfers of resources. As Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator (s) of bitcoin (who actually launched the blockchain technology) said: "We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust."

via Twenty20.

Nakamoto was successful? No. Blockchain changes the place of trust, but not the need for trust.

Let me explain why and provide some proof.

What are the technologies in question?

I will focus on two technologies. One is blockchain itself. For those who are not familiar with the technology, AEI provides a short tutorial here.

The second technology is smart contracts, which are software that performs an action, such as a transfer of money or other resources (even if it could do other things) based on a trigger. For example, your credit card may be automatically charged for a hotel room when you use an electronic key to enter the room. Smart contracts are not intelligent – there is no learning or thought in progress – nor are contracts in the common use of the term: they do not necessarily have all the elements of a contract, including the offer, the 39. acceptance, a legal commitment agreement to perform a legal act, an exchange of valuable things and parts of legal capacity (for example, not minor)

Why not trust the technologies?

Not easily understood by the general public For example, according to the bitcoin website, one of the reasons people should trust bitcoin blockchain is:

Bitcoin protocol and software are openly published and any developer anywhere in the world can review the code or make their own modified version of the Bitcoin Software.

But to make this opening useful, users need to understand the coding or trust the programmers. Here is a bitcoin code change from the week of July 30, 2018:

- export PATH = $ (echo $ PATH | tr & # 39;: & # 39; " n" | sed & # 39; /  / opt  / python / d & # 39; | tr " n" ": "| sed" s | :: |: | g ")
- BEGIN_FOLD () {echo ""; CURRENT_FOLD_NAME = $ 1; echo "travis_fold: start: $ {CURRENT_FOLD_NAME}"; }
- END_FOLD () {RET = $?; echo "travis_fold: end: $ {CURRENT_FOLD_NAME}"; return $ RET; }
to install:
- The travis_retry mobile window loads $ DOCKER_NAME_TAG
- env ​​| grep -E & # 39; ^ (CCACHE_ | WINEDEBUG | BOOST_TEST_RANDOM | CONFIG_SHELL) & # 39; | tee / tmp / env
- if [[ $HOST = *-mingw32 ]]; then DOCKER_ADMIN = "- cap-add SYS_ADMIN"; fi 

If Gilda Radner's Saturday Night Live character, Emily Litella, tried to verify it, I'm sure she would quickly say "It does not matter". Most of us have been trusted by the programmers or the wary bitcoin. (The above is not the complete change, but you get the point.)

Many blockchains were found to be defective

The need to trust the programmers was evidenced by a recent study of the fifty initial offers of initial coins (ICO). The researchers analyzed "how the software code of such projects reflected (or did not reflect) their contractual promises." Our survey reveals that many Icos failed even to promise that they would protect investors against self-dealing with information. privileged, even less were these contracts in the code. "

How far was the real code from what the ICOs had promised? For vesting requirements – which are intended to protect investors from the threat of the founders leaving the company – of the 30 ICOs who promised vesting, only 7 actually included promises in the computer code.

Some blockchain are inherently unreliable?

Some probably are. Imagine if Venezuela managed to launch the state-issued digital currency, the petro, or if China became a crypt as suspicious. Some observers believe the petro is a scam. Both of these countries scored close to the Freedom House index of political freedom. What would prevent them from using their blockchain to keep track of everyone's business? It would perhaps be one of the greatest ironies in history if the blockchain – which was partly created to reduce or eliminate government controls – becomes an instrument of choice for authoritarian regimes.

Is the blockchain bad? [19659004] Absolutely not. Technology has many advantageous applications, such as bringing unpaid money into modern economies, distributing aid to refugees, managing inventories and transactions and managing elections. But it needs a reliable government. For example, companies in this space should develop standards of conduct and ways to enforce them. And companies should standardize some aspects of the technologies. This would reduce development and verification costs.

[ad_2]Source link