[ad_1]
Blockchain attracted public attention with the birth of Bitcoin in 2009 and has since reached the fore. This new technology, based on existing information and communication technology, was rebuilt and became a new autonomous technology. With their financial attributes, Bitcoin and various other cryptocurrencies have brought about a paradigm shift and independently developed into a new economic field. Indeed, the changes in economic modeling caused by cryptocurrencies have far outstripped their impressive technological achievements. Fierce believers claim that the revolutionary significance of blockchain far exceeds that of the internet and may even trigger a new industrial revolution.
A new industrial revolution must, at least, be marked by the birth of a new type of productivity. Looking back on history, the first industrial revolution was marked by the improvement of steam engines, the second by the widespread application of electricity, and the third by the invention and use of computers. Several years ago, Jack Ma famously said that data is a new source of energy. This can be considered a continuation of the industrial revolution triggered by computers.
In other words, it can be seen that every industrial revolution is ultimately the liberation of human labor. Computers have replaced much of the work that was previously the domain of the human brain. Data is one of the sources of energy that drives this productivity. As the economic dividends brought about by population growth continue to shrink, the need for computers to replace labor has become increasingly relevant, especially with artificial intelligence and other technologies showing the promise of completing tasks humans cannot perform. .
Therefore, in our opinion, the blockchain is still only a continuation of the Third Industrial Revolution. Under the governance model of the blockchain, computers can actually replace the functions of many people, but this is not because people cannot complete these tasks, but rather because the cost of communication is substantially reduced to zero.
In essence, most of the meat behind modern economic management theory can be distilled down to the question of interpersonal collaboration. The cost of collaboration is one of the major cost components in modern economic activities. This can be easily seen by the large number of executives in large multinationals. Why interpersonal collaboration costs so much can be explained by the simple fact that humans have the ability to think logically.
Language and writing enable knowledge to be recorded and transmitted, guiding the development of human communities. Language and writing are the products of the human mind. Circuit diagrams can simulate the thought of the human mind as closely as possible (although there are still some behaviors in the human brain that cannot be explained and therefore expressed with circuit diagrams). In any case, humans “lie”, but circuit diagrams don’t, and this is something that is easily verifiable.
A 2014 study showed that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in the brain may be the “gateway” to honesty. Once this area of the brain is damaged, people tend to lie for self-interest. Research on prefrontal lobe injury cases has shown that the prefrontal lobe also plays an important inhibitory role in the vocabulary access process of bilingual language production and bilingual language understanding. Research shows that people without brain injuries tend to be more willing to tell the truth. People with a damaged dorsolateral prefrontal cortex have different behavior patterns. Once honesty and self-interest contradict each other, they make more dishonest choices.
However, the activities of the prefrontal lobes are not observable in daily life. The interpersonal collaboration problems caused by the prefrontal lobes are not all caused by “dishonesty”. The essence of interpersonal collaboration is to treat each individual as responsible. As information passes through each “processor”, it is processed and then passed to the next “processor”. Regardless of the dishonesty problem, sometimes people can’t control their processing logic 100% of the time – the problem is that processing this information is not demonstrable, so there is a cost of collaboration.
The process of calculating the CPU in computers is closed, so the network formed by the centralized system is very similar to the current form of human collaboration. The transmission of information on each node of the network can be processed without testing, so although the traditional Internet network can transmit the results of information processing at high speed, it cannot solve the problem of the credibility of the processed information and therefore cannot reduce the main cost of interpersonal collaboration.
This is the most fundamental role of the blockchain. The processing of information in the Bitcoin network has only one function: that of accounting, while the Ethereum smart contract is complete with Turing. Through contract programming, the blockchain can almost completely mimic the brain’s activity in processing all information. Once implemented, the smart contract faithfully fulfills its information processing obligations and this process is completely transparent, with all miners able to assist you.
While all of this was technologically revolutionary, a new problem arose. Since all blockchain networks such as Bitcoin / Ethereum must verify information processing under the premise that the information is completely symmetrical, this information is transmitted and synchronized in an open network. As a result, a lot of private information was leaked. It is for this reason that new public blockchain protocols have emerged to support data privacy. These chains allow information to be processed and transmitted faithfully, while ensuring that public access to information is restricted.
There are huge differences between the features of blockchain and centralized systems. It can be said that the blockchain has three main advantages:
- The resource records on the chain cannot be tampered with and will not disappear. Conversely, in centralized systems, asset data can be changed at will.
- The resources are on the chain, which means that users have absolute and unique ownership of the resources. Conversely, in centralized systems the administrator has the right to manage all resources like a god.
- The path from the birth of each asset in the chain is clearly traceable. When you see the existence of a bitcoin, you have exactly the computing power paid by a miner. If the digital asset is a contract-issued asset (for example, a debt asset on the chain), you know exactly what triggered the contract for issuing the asset. Conversely, in centralized systems there is no such transparent audit mechanism, so it is difficult to say whether or not the data on such a centralized system can be understood as a real asset.
From the point of view of commercial applications, currently, real assets are confirmed on the chain through an interface to digital assets with associated legal significance. This is already a technological reality and most of the commercial work is carried out through the elaboration of logics at the contractual level. If the problem of data and asset privacy can be solved, the last piece of the technology puzzle will be put in place for widespread adoption in the commercial world.
So what kind of businesses have resources that can be optimized through blockchain technology? How can we distinguish real digital assets from other digital information? And how do we define the standards for these digital assets?
The logic of value behind many so-called “digital assets” in the market is questionable. Nowadays, most crypto exchanges have rejected token listing with the nature of the securities. There is an essential difference between assets and securitized assets. Basically, the latter has a clear investment value. If digital assets cannot support securitized assets, the importance of blockchain will be reduced by more than half. However, if the anchoring relationship between real assets and securitized digital assets on the chain cannot be established, it will be difficult for securitized digital assets to become a reality.
In summary, we are seeing an opportunity for blockchain to usher in a paradigm shift in finance and commerce, and governments of various countries have initiated substantial consultation and legislation on resource compliance on the chain. With positive political changes fast approaching, the market is in urgent need of a tool to provide solutions for digital asset securitization.
Of all the solutions to this problem, I found POFID (Privacy-Oriented Financial Instrument Distribution Framework & DAO) to be a particularly strong solution. A trusted digital asset conversion channel that supports privacy protection through smart contract technology, POFID is a platform where real assets are mapped into quantifiable digital assets on the chain. At the same time, POFID supports different asset classes and provides support for these assets to be used as collateral to generate other financial products and thus provide better liquidity.
POFID provides an Oracle interface for evaluating the value of real assets behind digital assets. This reliably obtains data on asset price fluctuations in real time, providing strong data support for the underlying control engine. In addition, POFID also fulfills the role of a stand-alone fiduciary asset management institution, providing digital asset custody and investment channels.
It can be said that the emergence of this platform offers the opportunity to break the original function of financial institutions, enabling truly transformative financial activities.
[ad_2]Source link
