bsvfan
20 hours ago
penalizes = no use
bsvfan
20 hours ago
I would have liked to benefit from my BCH/BSV fork but my funds are still blocked on the Cryptopia exchange that disappeared with all the forks, I wonder what they did with all the private keys giving access to the forks? Knowing that it remains until November 2020 to be able to "split BCH/BSV" I am afraid I will never see the color of my 70.84 BCH nor the return of my 0.88 BTC nor my other crypto 7047 ADA and 2877 TRX bought at the high price at the time, I lost all my savings and assets long accumulated for several decades. All I have left is my eyes to cry. So I got liquidated, I even lost my house, my car, my possessions and all my material comfort, the work contract was not renewed, my life suddenly stopped, not having paid the alimony to my ex I had other troubles that came to accumulate then it's like an infernal spiral, bad places, bad times, I had dark ideas a little while ago, but it's ok, today I don't live on the street anymore at least temporarily. In spite of this I am positive, life is beautiful, I hope to be reborn, to pay my debts and to find a certain freedom, a certain security, a certain comfort even minimum. Without a job, without stability, it becomes more difficult to reintegrate into society, but the good thing is that my friend who temporarily hosts me lets me use his computer so I take advantage of it to train as much as possible, I take breaks and I come here on powping, my friend has a whole stock of funny images so I share them here, hoping to create and share, emotion, a smile, a brief escape as a breath of fresh air not to make me forget that sometimes humans can be good and pure in their feelings.
bsvfan
21 hours ago
bsvfan
21 hours ago
🤣
bsvfan
21 hours ago
Here is the last updated data 2020 Alibaba ( Alipay ) cumulated 2344 patents, covering 16 countries. For the whole of 2019, Alipay ranked first in the number of public patent applications for the third year, with Tencent and Ping An ranked second and third. The West represented by nChain (BitcoinSV or BSV) moved up to 4th position with 402 active patents + 875 = 1277
bsvfan
1 day ago
Scaling is essential for any crypto that can make possible an adoption by the mass of users and systems such as Iot for example, spv (technology) are a good compromise (BSV, DASH etc...). ) as for BTC and the Lightning Network overlayer (which remains an experiment) for Bitcoin BTC suffers from some very important flaws, it does not register small transactions in the blockchain, there is a serious design flaw that I will not mention here. Another observation 'it would be enough to "open 20 payment channels" in an intelligent way to paralyze nearly "80% of the transactions of the LN network". Thus, to block almost all transactions less than or equal to 100$ (a value already significant today on the LN), it would be enough to open "20 channels with each 100$ allocated per channel, so that it would be enough to mobilize 2000$" the cost remains higher than the competitors previously mentioned and especially Bitcoin is not at all oriented for global scaling because of the block limitation imposed by Blockstream and some fanatical developers to "sell updates" these facts are unfortunately concrete, if currently 7 billion users had to use Bitcoin it would take more than 37 years to validate a transaction (because of the bottleneck) BCH had started to explore functional solutions but insufficient in terms of transaction costs, then the BSV team Steve Shader, Unwriter, Dan Connolly and other talented developers have released the compatible version for scaling (big block = several million tx) many people don't care because the bsv blocks are full of meteo data but what he doesn't understand is that it's active testing for the IoT and it's super stable and there's a lot of space available for an ultra cheaper cost so in short.
bsvfan
1 day ago
"Greed makes you blind... but sometimes liquidation makes him restore your sight".
bsvfan
1 day ago
Pur Malt
bsvfan
1 day ago
Testimony of BlockEclair: "This morning @cryptocom announces that the $MCO will disappear, and that the $CRO will now be the only token in the ecosystem. It is now the CRO that we will have to block for VISA cards. Here is why I think MCO holders are getting screwed in the story 👇🏻 The MCO funded their entire project. The CRO was advertised as a secondary crypto, necessary to provide a crypto payment method for blah, blah, blah merchants. It was supposed to be AirDrop to MCO holders! And it was, I got some for a few months. Then, the aidrop stops for no reason, ah if "for reasons related to the regulations in the US that prevent us from continuing". The mess begins. Little by little the MCO is more and more neglected, it doesn't even appear on the Twitter bio, the CRO takes the name CryptoCom. Between the MCO and the CRO, it is the CRO who arranges them because they have a much higher proportion of the total supply. On top of all this, some people have noticed when analyzing their wallets that in recent months, while the number of users has been skyrocketing, and the number of blocked MCOs and order cards also increases, the price of the MCO is further destroyed. Illogical! How is this possible? The team has been mass-selling MCO on the exchanges, destroying the value of this token for months. In addition to depleting their reserves. They are suspected to have even used the MCOs that are supposed to be blocked by users on the app to trade (=sell, the amount in the wallet has only decreased). These are not even suspicions anymore, it can be seen on the ETHEREUM blockchain. Another proof that tokens "blocked" etc. on wallets custodials is bullshit, the tokens should be locked with a smart contract, what is the use of the blockchain otherwise? That's why EVERYTHING should be transparent and on the blockchain, so you can't trust it. And end up getting ripped off. In short, they completely destroyed the price of the MCO, and took advantage of a CRO that had pumped well, to force to make a swap at a really bad rate for the MCO (it is very low vs BTC, ETH, CRO...). It's like selling it, after a huge drop. Many people, including my friend, thought they were doing this to keep the price of cards low, and that the $MCO was bound to bounce back once the team was dry. What a joke, now the number of $CRO required to get the cards is a $ HIGHER amount than before! My friend didn't even notice while making the swap that his swap "bonuses" are locked in for 6 months. Then I couldn't withdraw the OLS to sell on Binance".
bsvfan
1 day ago
1.00000000 BSV is called: "Uni" .00000001 BSV is called: "1 UniToshi" .00000010 BSV is called: "10 UniSitoshi" .00000100 BSV is called: "1 UniSotoshi " .00001000 BSV is called: "1 UniHutoshi" .00010000 BSV is called: "10 UniHotoshi" .00100000 BSV is called: "100 UniHatoshi" .01000000 BSV is called: "1 UniGotoshi" .100000000 BSV is called: "UniDotoshi"
bsvfan
1 day ago
#GameOfThrones new season?
bsvfan
1 day ago
bsvfan
1 day ago
The current number of unconfirmed transactions in Ethereum is 142284. http://Etherscan.io data shows that there are 142,284 unconfirmed transactions on Ethereum. The total computing power of Ethereum is 199.96 TH / s, the current extraction difficulty is 2524.16 TH and the transaction processing capacity is 10.1 TPS.
bsvfan
2 days ago
I was having a really good Saturday until I found out that it's already Sunday 😥
bsvfan
2 days ago
Hello PowPing ♥
bsvfan
2 days ago
The banning of Trump on TikTok has once again made it clear to every content creator that centralized platforms (or their regulators) can deprive someone of their livelihood in an instant. This is another catalyst for decentralization.
bsvfan
3 days ago
Don't wait until you have everything to enjoy life. You already have the life to enjoy everything!
bsvfan
3 days ago
Never let the sadness of your past and the fear of the future ruin the happiness of the present !😉
bsvfan
3 days ago
bsvfan
3 days ago
The identity of the model for The Origin of the World, the famous nude by Gustave Courbet (1819-1877) exhibited at the Musée d'Orsay in Paris, France since 1995, has just been discovered... by chance. The young woman's name was Constance Quéniaux.
bsvfan
3 days ago
What is more worrying is that there is such a diversity of crypto which has the effect of "squandering" and "spreading out" a large part of the funds which become decentralized, the cash is then transformed into dematerialized "Token" while the fiduciary money is converted into Gold, Platinum, Lithium and a large majority goes to Asia and the USA. Why do you think Elon Musk "plays" with Dogecoin and indicates the outflow of funds via Lithium, nothing happens for nothing. Another concrete example with Tether, who just printed new USDT, last week they printed 5 times, totaling 810 million USDT ... 240 million will be issued on Ethereum and 570 million will be issued on TRON. This is a mass technological robbery and it is unstoppable the world economy must technologically adapt or perish. Hyperinflation is a decoy, while the wise man points to the moon the fool looks at the finger. It is the whole system that is gangrenous with middlemen and taxes galore. How many people work just to pay all their bills, taxes and then often don't even have half their salary left.
bsvfan
3 days ago
The Bitcoin SV ecosystem continues to see sustained growth and development, as the number of known active projects and ventures for its blockchain now tops more than 400. Blockchain iGaming company Peergame maintains an ongoing list of the entities, which now consists of 320 companies & services, 28 protocol layers, as well as 80 developer resources, bringing the current count to 428. As the only blockchain protocol which adheres to the original design of Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin SV is an ideal platform for developers to work with, offering unbounded scaling, greater data capacity, very low transaction fees, and true micropayment capabilities. These different features combine to unlock a host of new functionalities and economic opportunities, illustrated by the diversity of the projects that comprise the list, with projects and solutions built for payments, iGaming, social media, and eSports to name just a few. https://blog.peergame.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/0626-BSV-Ecosystem.pdf
bsvfan
3 days ago
Fully agree cheers!
bsvfan
3 days ago
📢 One of Stonehenge's enduring mysteries: solved! Origins of the giant sarsens have been revealed as West Woods, 15 miles north of Stonehenge, following analysis of a sarsen core by Prof David Nash@davidjnash https://twitter.com/davidjnash
bsvfan
3 days ago
bsvfan
3 days ago
🔥 Bloomberg: Americans are abandoning the US dollar to invest in equities and Bitcoin. Bloomberg said in a July 31 article that lower interest rates are causing some Americans to abandon the safety of the US dollar and inject their savings into assets such as equities and Bitcoin. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-31/the-dollar-s-leading-rivals-all-have-their-own-drawbacks
bsvfan
3 days ago
No requests pending. There's nothing to test at the moment 😞
bsvfan
3 days ago
bsvfan
4 days ago
i suggest to you enable translation option in you video for that all the non-English-speaking world can understand 🙂
bsvfan
4 days ago
Blockchain technology will play a decisive role in building the future "super-connected economy". Blockchain has the following six advantages: leading distributed data sharing, consensus-based trust mechanism, immutability, hash security, intelligent contracting and flexible authorisation (or unauthorised) system.
bsvfan
4 days ago
The three major problems of the Internet economy are information security (information leakage, identity theft); information monopoly (monopoly by giants); and islands of information (corporate isolation, patent isolation, sovereign isolation). It also gave rise to the nascent development of the cryptographic consensus.
bsvfan
4 days ago
In the last seven days, Tether has recently printed 5 times, totaling $810 million USDT... According to Tokenview Block Explorer data, Tether has printed 5 times in the last 7 days, for a total of 810 million USDT. Of these, 240 million will be issued on Ethereum and 570 million will be issued on TRON. USDT trading activity on Ethereum and TRON has also started to increase. On July 28th, USDT on Ethereum generated a total of 264,700 transactions, with a trading volume of 3.401 billion, and a record level of one-day chain trading was achieved. Now you know where (country) your liquid funds go when you buy a USDT.
bsvfan
4 days ago
bsvfan
5 days ago
bsvfan
5 days ago
bsvfan
5 days ago
bsvfan
6 days ago
Did you know that X-XSS breaches always active on +90% of the world websites? So it would be possible to re-route a user to a fake website and retrieve his information, since many of them don't even have DNSSEC deployed. How to protect yourself and your users even without DNSSEC? The webmaster of a website could add (or the equivalent) in an Apache server (in the .htaccess file) this line: <ifModule mod_headers.c> Header set x-xss-protection "1; mode=block". Header set x-content-type-options "nosniff" </ifModule>
bsvfan
6 days ago
I have a recipe for you. It's zucchini and tomato pie. You have to make a shortcrust pastry express first. Ingredients for the dough : - 250 g flour - 1/2 teaspoon curry (optional) - 1/2 bag of yeast (or 3 g of baking soda) - 1 teaspoon salt - 8 cl of hot water - 10 cl olive oil Preparation: Put all the ingredients in a bowl, mix them all together and make a ball. Flour the worktop, place the dough on it, spread it out and fill a tart tin with it. then Ingredients for 6 persons : - an express shortcrust pastry (that you have just made) - 2 medium courgettes - 3 tomatoes - 2 onions - 10 cl milk - 1 egg white Preparation: Peel then mince the onions and fry them for a few minutes in a pan. In the meantime, wash the courgettes and dice them. Add them to the onions and continue cooking, stirring from time to time. Wash the tomatoes, dice them and add them to the courgette - onion mixture. Mix. Sauté the vegetables over a low heat for a long time until the juice has completely evaporated. Preheat the oven to 180°C (th. 6) or 356 degrees Fahrenheit. Roll out the shortcrust pastry and fill a tart mould with it. Place a sheet of baking paper on top with ceramic balls (or something else) and put in the oven for about 15 to 20 minutes. Remove the vegetables from the heat, add the milk, mix and then add the egg white and mix well without delay. As soon as the pie dough is finished pre-baking, remove the ceramic balls and baking paper and spread the vegetables over the pie crust. Return to the oven for about 20 to 25 minutes at 210°C (th. 7) or 410 degrees Fahrenheit. You can serve it immediately or let it cool down to eat it fresh with a salad. Bon' Appétit !
bsvfan
1 week ago
This asset outlines the capabilities high tech companies can adopt to provide digital services to customers by transforming into an #intelligententerprise
bsvfan
1 week ago
How can I help you more?
bsvfan
1 week ago
Definition of an Oracle blockchain. In blockchain technology, an Oracle is a source of information that enables real-world variables to be integrated into intelligent contracts. Indeed, the blockchain does not allow the collection of data from external sources (outside world). This model is not viable because the external content would have to be downloaded into a block via a third party. Thus, each time the blockchain would be downloaded, the external data would be called up. If the external data is no longer available, it would compromise the blockchain. Self-executing contracts (or smart-contracts in English) are contracts that are executed only if conditions, which are set out in advance, are met. This triggers an event in the block chain, such as a value transfer. The Oracle is responsible for providing external data that enables, or does not enable, the operation of dApps (decentralized applications) via the execution of smart-contracts. What is the purpose of an Oracle? The Oracle allows to add data from the outside world in a blockchain network. These oracles are third party services that provide a lot of data such as temperatures, sports results, flight delays... They act as authority and truth. Depending on the information provided by the Oracles, the intelligent contract will be triggered or not. Remember that the blockchain cannot access data stored outside its network. There are different types of oracles : Software Oracles: they manage information available on the internet. Their sources are mostly websites. They collect data such as temperatures, flight delays, product prices... Physical Oracles: they send information directly from the real world. Examples include motion sensors or RFID chips that can be used to track the location of an object. Both physical and software Oracles are called inbound Oracles. They allow data from the outside world to be integrated into the blockchain, especially through intelligent contracts. Other types of oracles exist : Outgoing Oracles: They are used to send data from the blockchain to the outside world. For example, a value transfer takes place on the blockchain, allowing a lock to be unlocked in the real world. Predictive Oracles : Augur and Gnosis are the precursors. They allow to confirm future results, thanks to the wisdom of the crowds. Reliability and security Why trust an Oracle? To trust Oracles it is necessary not to select only one data source. Imagine if this source was wrong (hacking, error, manipulation...), then the blockchain would be based on wrong data too. On the contrary, it is preferable to select several Oracles so that the sources overlap between them. The information reported by the largest number of Oracles will be the one selected and added to the blockchain. It is then necessary to choose, during the creation of the intelligent contract, which Oracles will be taken into account. Example: if we want Oracles to integrate the results of a football match into the blockchain, we will ask them to retrieve the information from 30 reliable websites in the field of sports news. This is why meteorological data is transmitted in the big BSV blocks, this is an example of an application. It thus provides flawless reliability, security and above all a drastic reduction in the cost of routing information to the BSV block time stamps.
bsvfan
1 week ago
Alipay blockchain's global patent applications totaled 2344, ranking first. The Chinese authorities published (last April) the World Intellectual Property Organization's IPRdaily block chain patent report, as of April 17 of this year, the Alibaba ( Alipay ) block chain accumulated 2344 patents, covering 16 countries. For the full year 2019, Alipay ranked first in the number of public patent applications for the third year, with Tencent and Ping An ranked second and third. The Occident represented by nChain (BitcoinSV or BSV) moved up to 4th position with +875 active patents. https://www.chinaz.com/2020/0424/1129891.shtml
bsvfan
1 week ago
What is an SPV wallet? SPV (Simplified Payment Verification) wallets are the most popular Bitcoin clients. They allow you to send and receive Bitcoins without having a complete copy of the blockchain on your hard drive or phone. To do this they simply download the block headers and the transactions involved. They therefore do not have the same level of security as a complete node and above all do not contribute to the security of the network but remain very practical for transferring funds or Op_Return data very quickly (smart contracts, NFT, Oracles etc ... ) That's why when you make a transaction with for example BSV your funds are instantly credited with a network fee of a few dozen satoshis (the smallest unit of a Bitcoin. 1 sat = 0.00000001). https://en.bitcoinwiki.org/wiki/Simplified_Payment_Verification and see SPV technology for BSV wallet https://electrumsv.io/
bsvfan
1 week ago
bsvfan
1 week ago
bsvfan
1 week ago
bsvfan
1 week ago
I couldn't resist 🤣
bsvfan
1 week ago
If 7 billion people were to use Bitcoin at the same time then it would take 37 years to confirm a transaction........
bsvfan
1 week ago
Blockchains (chains of blocks) are secured by various mechanisms, including advanced cryptographic techniques and mathematical models of behaviour and decision making. Blockchain technology is the basic structure of most crypto-money systems and prevents this type of digital currency from being duplicated or destroyed. The use of blockchain technology is also being investigated in other areas where data immutability and security are extremely valuable. Some examples include the recording and tracking of charitable donations, medical databases and supply chain management (traceability). However, security is far from being a simple matter. Therefore, it is important to understand the basic concepts and mechanisms that ensure effective protection of these innovative systems. The concepts of immutability and consensus Although many features play on the security associated with the blockchain, two of the most important are the concepts of consensus and immutability. Consensus refers to the ability of nodes in a distributed blockchain network to agree on the actual state of the network and the validity of transactions. Generally, the process of reaching consensus depends on so-called consensus algorithms. Immutability, on the other hand, refers to the ability of block chains to prevent the alteration of already confirmed transactions. Although these transactions often involve the transfer of cryptocurrency, they may also refer to the recording of other forms of non-monetary digital data. The combination of consensus and immutability provides the framework for data security in blockchain networks. While consensus algorithms ensure that system rules are followed and that all parties involved agree on the current state of the network, immutability ensures the integrity of data and transaction records after confirmation of the validity of each new data block. The Role of Cryptography in Block Security Blockchains rely heavily on cryptography to ensure the security of their data. An extremely important cryptographic function in such a context is that of hashing. Hash is a process by which an algorithm called a hash function receives a data input (of any size) and returns a specified output containing a fixed length value. Regardless of the size of the input, the output will always be of the same length. If the input changes, the output will be completely different. However, if the input does not change, the resulting hash will always be the same, no matter how many times you execute the hash function. In blockchains, these output values, therefore called hashes, are used as unique identifiers for the data blocks. The hash of each block is generated relative to the hash of the previous block, and this is what links the blocks together, forming a block chain. In addition, the block hash is dependent on the data contained in that block, meaning that any changes to the data will also require a change to the block hash. Therefore, the block hash for each block is generated based on the data contained in that block and the hash of the previous block. These hash identifiers play a key role in the security and immutability of blockchains. The hash is also exploited by the consensus algorithms used to validate transactions. On the Bitcoin blockchain, for example, the Proof of Work (PoW) algorithm used to obtain consensus and extract new corners uses a hash function called SHA-256. As its name implies, SHA-256 takes a data entry and returns a 256-bit or 64-character hash. In addition to ensuring the protection of transaction records on registries, cryptography also plays a role in the security of wallets used to store encryption units. The coupled public and private keys that allow users to receive and send payments respectively are then created through the use of public-key or asymmetric cryptography. The private keys are used to generate digital signatures for transactions, which can be used to authenticate the ownership of the coins being sent. Although these specificities are beyond the scope of this article, the nature of asymmetric cryptography prevents any holder other than the holder of the private key from accessing the funds stored in a wallet of crypto-money, thus keeping these funds safe until the owner decides to spend them (as long as the key is not shared or compromised). Crypto-economics In addition to cryptography, a relatively new concept called cryptoeconomics also plays a role in maintaining the security of blockchain networks. It is related to a field of study called game theory, which mathematically models decision making by rational actors in situations with predefined rules and rewards. While traditional game theory can be widely applied to a large number of cases, cryptoeconomics specifically models and describes the behaviour of nodes on distributed blockchain systems. In summary, cryptoeconomics is the study of the economics within blockchain protocols and the possible results that their model can provide depending on the behavior of its participants. Cryptosecurity through cryptoeconomics is based on the notion that blockchain systems provide more incentives for nodes to act honestly rather than to engage in malicious or faulty behavior. Again, the Proof of Work consensus algorithm used in Bitcoin mining provides a good example of this incentive structure. When Satoshi Nakamoto created the framework for Bitcoin mining, he intentionally designed it to be an expensive and resource-intensive process. Because of its complexity and the computational requirements of its calculation, PoW mining involves a considerable investment of money and time, regardless of the location and location of the mining node. Therefore, such a structure strongly deters malicious activity and provides a significant incentive for honest mining activities. Dishonest or inefficient nodes will be quickly expelled from the blockchain network, while honest and efficient miners will have the opportunity to earn large block rewards. In addition, this balance of risks and rewards also protects against potential attacks that could compromise consensus by placing a majority hash rate of a blockchain network in the hands of a single group or entity. Such attacks, referred to as 51% attacks, could be extremely damaging if successfully executed. But due to the competitiveness of Proof of Work mining and the scale of the Bitcoin network, the probability of a malicious actor taking control of a majority of nodes is extremely minimal. Furthermore, the cost in computing power required to gain 51% control of such a large blockchain network would be astronomical, which immediately deters people from making such an investment for a relatively small potential reward. This aspect highlights a characteristic of block chains known as the "Byzantine Generals Problem" or Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT), which is essentially the ability of a distributed system to continue to function normally even if some of its nodes are compromised or act in a malicious manner. As long as the cost of implementing a majority of malicious nodes remains prohibitive and there are better incentives for honest activity, the system will be able to thrive without significant disruption. It should be noted, however, that smaller blockchain networks are certainly more susceptible to majority attacks, as the total hash rate devoted to these systems is considerably lower than Bitcoin's. To conclude Through the combined use of game theory and cryptography, blockchains are able to achieve high levels of security as distributed systems. As with almost all systems, however, it is essential that these two areas of expertise are properly integrated. A delicate balance between decentralization and security is indeed essential for the implementation of a reliable and efficient crypto-money network. As the uses of the blockchain continue to evolve, their security systems will also adapt to meet the needs of different uses. Private blockchains being developed for companies, for example, rely much more on security via access control than on the game theory (or crypto-economics) mechanisms that are essential to the security of most public blockchains.
bsvfan
1 week ago
bsvfan
1 week ago
😉
bsvfan
1 week ago
bsvfan
1 week ago
"To understand why the blockchain is important, look beyond the wild speculation about what is built underneath. The Internet bubble of the 1990s is generally considered to be a period of wild excess that ended in the destruction of hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth. What is less often discussed is how all the cheap capital of the boom years was used to finance the infrastructure on which the most important Internet innovations would be built after the bubble burst. It financed the roll-out of fibre optic cable, R&D on 3G networks and the construction of giant server farms. All this would make possible the technologies that are now the foundation of the world's most powerful societies: algorithmic research, social media, mobile computing, cloud services, analysis of large data sets, artificial intelligence and so on. We believe that something similar is happening behind the wild volatility and hype in the stratosphere of the crypto-money and blockbuster boom. Blockchain skeptics have grumbled with joy as cryptographic prices have fallen from last year's dizzying highs, but they are making the same mistake as the crypto fanatics they mock: they associate price with intrinsic value. We cannot yet predict what cutting-edge industries based on blockchain technology will be like, but we are confident that they will exist, because technology itself is about creating a priceless asset: trust. To understand why, we have to go back to the 14th century. It was then that Italian merchants and bankers began to use the double-entry method of accounting. This method, made possible by the adoption of Arabic numerals, provided merchants with a more reliable record-keeping tool and allowed bankers to assume a new and powerful role as an intermediary in the international payment system. Yet it is not only the tool itself that has paved the way for modern finance. It was how it was inserted into the culture of the day. In 1494, Luca Pacioli, a Franciscan and mathematician, codified his practices by publishing a textbook on mathematics and accounting that presented double-entry accounting not only as a means of keeping track of accounts, but also as a moral obligation. In the manner of Pacioli, for everything that merchants or bankers had of value, they had to give something back. Hence the use of offsetting entries to record separate balancing values: a debit coupled with a credit, an asset with a liability. Pacioli's morally honest accounting gave a form of religious blessing to these previously decried professions. Over the following centuries, clean books were seen as a sign of honesty and piety, enabling bankers to become payment intermediaries and speed up the flow of money. This financed the Renaissance and paved the way for the capitalist explosion that was to change the world. Yet the system was not immune to fraud. Bankers and other financial players often failed in their moral duty to keep honest accounts, and they still do: just ask Bernie Madoff's clients or Enron's shareholders. Moreover, even honesty comes at a price. We have allowed centralized trust managers, such as banks, stock exchanges and other financial intermediaries, to become indispensable, turning them from intermediaries into gatekeepers. They charge fees and restrict access, create friction, limit innovation and reinforce their market dominance. So the real promise of blockchain technology is not to make you a billionaire overnight or to give you the means to protect your financial activities from inquisitive governments. It could significantly reduce the cost of trust through a radical, decentralized accounting approach - and, by extension, create a new way of structuring economic organizations. The need for trust and intermediaries allows giants such as Google, Facebook and Amazon to turn economies of scale and network effects into de facto monopolies. A new form of accounting might seem like a boring accomplishment. Yet for thousands of years, since Hammurabi's Babylon, ledgers have been the foundation of civilization. Indeed, the exchange of values on which society is based forces us to trust each other's claims to what we own, what we have and what we owe. To build that trust, we need a common system for monitoring our transactions, a system that gives definition and order to society itself. How else would we know that Jeff Bezos is the richest human being in the world, that Argentina's GDP is USD 620 billion, that 71% of the world's population lives on less than USD 10 a day, or that Apple shares trade at a multiple of the company's earnings per share? A blockchain (although the term is vaguely used and often misapplied to things that are not really blockchains) is an electronic ledger, a list of transactions. These transactions can in principle represent almost anything. They could be real exchanges of money, as is the case with the block chains underlying crypto-currencies such as Bitcoin. They could mark exchanges of other assets, such as digital stock certificates. They may represent instructions, such as orders to buy or sell shares. They could include smart contracts, which are computerized instructions to do something (for example, buy a stock) if something is true (the price of the stock has fallen below $10). A blockchain is a special type of ledger, in that instead of being managed by a single centralized institution, such as a bank or a government agency, it is stored in multiple copies on several independent computers within a decentralized network. No single entity controls the general ledger. All computers on the network can make changes to the general ledger, but only by following the rules dictated by a "consensus protocol," a mathematical algorithm that requires the majority of the other computers on the network to agree to the change. Once the consensus generated by this algorithm has been reached, all computers on the network update their copies of the ledger simultaneously. If one of them attempts to add an entry to the ledger without this consensus or to modify an entry retroactively, the rest of the network automatically rejects the entry as invalid. Typically, transactions are grouped into blocks of a certain size that are chained (hence "blockchained") by cryptographic locks, themselves a product of the consensus algorithm. This produces an immutable and shared record of the "truth", a record which, if properly prepared, cannot be altered. Within this general framework, there are many variations. There are different types of consensus protocols, for example, and often disagreement about which type is the safest. There are public registries "without permission", to which anyone can in principle attach a computer and be part of the network; this is what Bitcoin and most other crypto-currencies belong to. There are also "authorized" private ledger systems that do not include any digital currency. These can be used by a group of organizations that need a common record-keeping system, but are independent of each other and may not have complete confidence in themselves - a manufacturer and its suppliers, for example. The common denominator is that it is mathematical rules and impenetrable cryptography, rather than trust in fallible humans or institutions, that guarantee the integrity of the registry. It is a version of what cryptographer Ian Grigg has described as "a three-entry bookkeeping system": one entry on the debit side, another on the credit side, and a third in an unchanging, uncontested shared ledger. The advantages of this decentralized model become apparent when comparing the cost of trust in the current economic system. Consider this: In 2007, Lehman Brothers posted record profits and revenues, all approved by its auditor, Ernst & Young. Nine months later, a fall in these same assets led the 158-year-old company to bankruptcy and triggered the biggest financial crisis in the last 80 years. Clearly, the valuations quoted in the books of previous years were very bad. And we later learned that Lehman's ledger was not the only one with questionable data. American and European banks have paid hundreds of billions of dollars in fines and settlements to cover losses caused by inflated balance sheets. This was a stark reminder of the high price we often pay for trusting numbers designed in-house by centralized entities. The crisis was an extreme example of the cost of trust. But we also see that this cost is rooted in most other sectors of the economy. Think of all the accountants whose firms fill the world's skyscrapers. Their work, which reconciles their firm's books with those of their professional counterparts, exists because neither party trusts the other's track record. It's a long, expensive, but necessary process. The other manifestations of the cost of trust are not in what we do, but in what we cannot do. Two billion people are being denied bank accounts, taking them away from the global economy because banks do not trust records of their assets and identities. In the meantime, the Internet of Things, which it is hoped will contain billions of autonomous, efficiency-enhancing interacting devices, will not be possible if gadget-to-gadget microtransactions require the prohibitively expensive intermediation of centrally controlled ledgers. There are many other examples of how this problem limits innovation. Economists rarely recognize or analyze these costs, perhaps because practices such as account reconciliation are assumed to be an integral and unavoidable feature of firms (much as pre-Internet firms assumed that they had no choice but to pay large postage expenses at the post office. monthly bills). Could this blind spot explain why some influential economists have no hesitation in rejecting blockchain technology? Many say they cannot see the justification for its costs. Yet their analyses generally do not compare these costs with the social cost of trust that the new models seek to overcome. However, more and more people understand this. Since Bitcoin's quiet release in January 2009, its supporters have expanded considerably to include former Wall Street professionals, former Wall Street professionals, technology specialists from Silicon Valley, and development and aid experts from organizations such as the World Bank. Many see the rise of technology as a vital new phase in the Internet economy, one that is even more transformative than the first. While the first wave of online disruption saw brick and mortar companies being displaced by leaner digital intermediaries, this movement is challenging the very idea of for-profit intermediaries. The need for trust, its cost and dependence on intermediaries is one of the reasons why giants such as Google, Facebook and Amazon are turning economies of scale and the benefits of network effects into de facto monopolies. These giants are, in fact, centralized ledger keepers, building vast registers of "transactions" in what is arguably the world's most important "currency": our digital data. By controlling these records, they control us. The potential promise of overturning this entrenched, centralized system is an important factor behind the gold rush scene in the crypto-token market, with its rising but also volatile prices. There is no doubt that many investors, perhaps most of them, simply hope to get rich quickly and have little concern about the importance of the technology. But quirks like this one, however irrational they may be, don't come out of nowhere. As with the advent of the transformative platform technologies of the past - railways, for example, or electricity - unbridled speculation is almost inevitable. Indeed, when a great new idea comes along, investors have no framework for estimating the value it will create or destroy, or for deciding which companies will win or lose. Although major obstacles remain to be overcome before block chains can fulfill the promise of a more robust system for recording and storing objective truth, these concepts have already been field-tested. Open and freely accessible source code is the foundation of the future decentralized economy. Companies such as IBM and Foxconn are exploiting the idea of immutability in projects that seek to unlock commercial financing and make supply chains more transparent. Such transparency could also give consumers better information about the sources of what they are buying - if a t-shirt was made with workshop labour, for example. Another important new idea is that of a digital asset. Before Bitcoin, no one could own a digital asset. Because copying digital content is easy to do and hard to stop, suppliers of digital products such as MP3 audio files or e-books never give customers ownership of the content, but rather rent it out and define what users can do with it in a license. This is a very difficult task, with heavy legal penalties if the licence is broken. That's why you can lend your Amazon Kindle book to a friend for 14 days, but you can't sell or give it away as a gift, like a paper book. Bitcoin has shown that something of value can be both digital and unique. Since no one can change the registry and "double the spending", nor duplicate a Bitcoin, it can be conceived as a "thing" or a unique asset. This means that we can now represent any form of value, such as a title deed or a music track, as an entry in a blockchain transaction. And by digitizing different forms of value in this way, we can introduce software to manage the economy around them. As software elements, these new digital assets can be assigned certain "If X, then Y" properties. In other words, money can become programmable. For example, you can pay to rent an electric vehicle with digital tokens that are also used to activate or deactivate its engine, thus fulfilling the coded conditions of an intelligent contract . This is quite different from analog tokens such as banknotes or metal coins, which are agnostic as to their use. What makes these programmable money contracts "smart" is not that they are automated; we already have that when our bank follows our programmed instructions to automatically pay our credit card bill each month. It's that the computers running the contract are monitored by a decentralized blockchain network. This ensures that all signatories to a smart contract are guaranteed that it will be executed fairly. With this technology, the computers of a shipper and an exporter, for example, could automate a transfer of ownership of goods once the decentralized software they both use sends a signal that a digital currency payment - or a cryptographically unbreakable payment undertaking - has been made. Neither party necessarily trusts the other, but they can nevertheless make this automatic transfer without the need for a third party. In this way, intelligent contracts take automation to a new level, enabling a much more open and comprehensive set of relationships. Programmable money and smart contracts are a powerful way for communities to govern themselves in pursuit of common goals. They even offer a potential breakthrough in the "tragedy of communes", the longstanding idea that people cannot simultaneously serve their personal interest and the common good. This was evident in many of the blockbuster proposals of the 100 software engineers who took part in Hack4Climate at last year's UN climate change conference in Bonn. The winning team, with a project called GainForest, is developing a blockchain-based system that allows donors to reward vulnerable tropical forest communities for demonstrable actions to restore the environment. Yet this utopian, frictionless "symbolic economy" is far from reality. Regulators in China, South Korea and the United States have severely cracked down on token issuers and traders, viewing them as speculative schemes to make quick bucks that avoid securities laws rather than changing new business models. They are not entirely wrong: some developers pre-sold tokens in "initial coin offerings" or ICOs, but did not use the money to build and market products. Public or "no-permission" blockchains such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, which offer the best promise of absolute openness and immutability, are facing growth difficulties. Bitcoin still cannot process more than seven transactions per second and transaction fees can sometimes increase, making it expensive to u se. Meanwhile, centralized institutions that should be vulnerable to disruption, such as banks, are getting involved. They are protected by existing regulations, which are ostensibly imposed to keep them honest, but inadvertently constitute a compliance cost for startups. These regulations, such as the burdensome reporting and capital requirements imposed by the New York State Department of Financial Services' "BitLicense" on crypto-money transfer start-ups, become barriers to entry that protect incumbents. But here's the thing: the open-source nature of the blockchain technology, its enthusiasm and the increasing value of the underlying tokens have encouraged a global pool of intelligent, passionate and financially motivated computer scientists to work to overcome these limitations. It is reasonable to assume that they will constantly improve the technology. As we have seen with Internet software, such open and extensible protocols can become powerful platforms for innovation. Block chain technology is evolving far too rapidly for us to assume that later versions will not be improved on the present, whether in Bitcoin's crypto-money-based protocol, Ethereum's smart contract-oriented block chain, or a yet undiscovered platform. The cryptographic bubble, like the Internet bubble, creates the infrastructure to build the technologies of the future. But there is also a key difference. This time, the funds raised are not used to underwrite a physical infrastructure, but a social infrastructure. It creates incentives to form global networks of collaborating developers, beehive minds whose supply of interactive, iterative ideas is codified in lines of open-source software. This freely accessible code will enable the execution of countless ideas that are still unimaginable. It is the foundation on which the decentralized economy of the future will be built. While few people in the mid-1990s were able to predict the emergence of Google, Facebook and Uber, we cannot predict which blockchain-based applications will emerge from the wreckage of this bubble to dominate the decentralized future. But that's what you get with scalable platforms. Whether it's the open protocols of the Internet or the essential components of algorithmic consensus and distributed preservation of blockchain records, their power lies in creating an entirely new paradigm for innovators ready to imagine and deploy world-changing applications. In this case, these applications - in whatever form they take - will be aimed squarely at disrupting many of the control institutions that currently dominate our centralized economy.'.
bsvfan
1 week ago
The importance of protocols in Web 3.0 - Today our use of the Internet is limited to the consultation of different applications, each with their own communities, their own functioning and their data centralized in their databases. Some exceptions exist, however, such as e-mails, which are based on the same protocol on which a multitude of applications offer different interfaces and specific functionalities. Today I propose that you take the time to study what open protocols are and the place they occupy in our use of the Internet. It will also be an opportunity to determine how Internet services have evolved towards the centralized applications we are familiar with and whether a second transition is on the horizon. What is an open protocol? The Internet is based on the use of various open and free protocols. They were originally developed by teams primarily in non-profit projects that were fundamentally concerned with serving the interests of the community. Since the end of the 1990s, few protocols have managed to be massively adopted, until the recent emergence of open protocols related to cryptography. These protocols create value by providing an economic incentive for the benefit of users and developers of these protocols. As a result, different applications are emerging in their networks. But how can an open protocol be defined and what are the criteria? A protocol is a set of rules governing data exchanges or the behaviour of the agents making up the network. We will think of the main protocols used in the very functioning of the Internet and the Web, such as TCP/IP or HTTP, but also in the context of cryptomoney such as Bitcoin. There are both private and public or open protocols, which are characterized by different criteria and specificities. To be considered open, the technical specifications of the protocol must be public and there must be no restrictions on access to it. Finally, everyone must be able to reproduce it or develop tools using the protocol. The two eras of the Internet It is possible to discern two periods from the creation of the Internet in the 1980s to the present day, the end of the decade 2010. The various services developed on the Internet were originally built on open protocols. Users and companies could then develop their use and presence on the Web using transparent, immutable systems. Your website/blog could not be arbitrarily deleted by a single entity for example. There were many different alternatives for certain services such as search engines or mailboxes. Some centralized companies did exist like AOL for example. But in the mid-2000s, the Internet has seen the growth of large companies whose services were completely centralized. The rules were set by them, could be changed at will, and anyone who refused them was excluded from these services with no real alternatives. Because of their simplicity and their impressive ability to federate large communities, they have become indispensable, and even more so since the explosion in the use of smartphones in everyday life. Today, web services are still based on open protocols, but we now access them through completely centralized applications. This is the case for end users as well as for companies or organizations that want to expand their presence on the Internet. Gone are the days when a simple blog was the only way to be visible: it is now also essential to be visible on social networks. However, this visibility on social networks depends intrinsically on the managers of these networks and the respect of their rules. Open protocols versus centralized applications As I introduced at the beginning of the article, in order to understand the difference between a protocol and a specific application we need to consider the services we use en masse and daily on the Internet. The aim is not to draw a completely negative picture of applications such as Facebook, Twitter or Instagram, but rather to find interesting points of comparison. Let's take the example of e-mail and social networks, two types of services used daily by many Internet users. The different mailboxes are based on open source protocols and any user with an email address is able to send and receive emails from other users, regardless of their address type. There are two main types of services that are sometimes offered by the same applications, the lending of a specific address and the famous mailboxes. Indeed, to receive and send emails you need an address, which you can configure and host yourself or use a third party service sometimes free of charge. Concerning the choice of the mailbox, which is finally only an interface to the protocol, you have a multitude of possibilities. Between proprietary mailboxes such as Gmail and Outlook or open source services. You thus have choices more or less simple or expensive, but which will not prevent you from communicating with those who have made choices different from yours. Social networks are also a cornerstone of today's Internet. Centralized and free for users, their business model is to capture maximum attention from users in order to sell their interactions to advertisers. The largest social networks have become extremely successful businesses over the last decade. But unlike mailboxes based on the SMTP protocol, social networks are completely closed systems. This makes it extremely difficult to make the transition to decentralized protocols or applications. Indeed the cost to pay for mail would be hosting as well as a reduction in user experience and available functionality. But communication with the rest of the community will still be possible and you are not alone in your open system. Making the transition to open protocols There have been many alternatives to these centralized applications, offering similar or innovative functionalities in a more decentralized, open manner. But none of them have succeeded in attracting large communities, and making the transition as a user to them is very complicated. Indeed, the main value proposition of the giants is their communities and the different contents they produce. Protocols already exist that could form the basis for new applications that are decentralized and more transparent to their users. One will quote ActivityHub but also Mastodonte which are projects that are part of this dynamic. But as we will see later on, it would seem that the latter do not have the necessary advantages to provoke a massive migration from centralized platforms to these open protocols. However, centralized platforms are currently facing extremely critical issues such as the management of hosted content, but also the opacity of their algorithms and the management of their advertising strategies. Regularly singled out and customarily summoned to appear before the US Congress as part of its stablecoin Libra proket, Facebook is the target of strong criticism regarding its crisis management and does not seem to succeed in reacting, or at least sufficiently. Will we see this as a sign of the weakness of these applications, which are no longer as successful as before in moderating their content and advertising? They will potentially have to evolve to other architectures to regain healthier control over their communities. The recent case of Bluesky Image search result for Recently Jack Dorsey, founder and manager of the social network Twitter announced the funding of a small team of 5 people dedicated to the design of an open protocol that could support different social networks: the Bluesky project. The goal is that eventually his own social network will become a simple user of this protocol and that other actors will join him in the project. This is an extremely interesting wager since the transition would be in the other direction as social networks progressively evolve towards more decentralization. In a thread expressing his decision, Jack explains that he does not see centralized organizations succeeding in dealing with the difficulties they face. He takes the example of false information circulating on the networks despite the different verification policies put in place. He also emphasizes that the value brought by these platforms is no longer the content they gather but their algorithms, which only seek to capture the attention of their users. These algorithms are completely opaque and there are no alternatives for the moment. Finally, Jack Dorsey shared his views on distributed registry technology, which in his view could lead to new, more interesting and viable approaches. His experiences with Square and various community research supports this view. The community has particularly welcomed the news and actors such as Firefox have volunteered to help with this initiative. So much for this third article dedicated to Web 3.0 which is slowly starting to take shape before our eyes. If you missed the previous ones, I invite you to read the one on decentralized identities and decentralized websites.
bsvfan
1 week ago
The Emergence of Web 3.0: Decentralized Identity If it is possible today to completely manage our money without any trusted third party if we give ourselves the means to do so, what about our identity on the internet? Let's see together the current uses, the disadvantages to be considered, as well as the answers brought by the actors of the Web 3.0 ecosystem. Our identity on the Internet We do not always use pseudonyms to interact with services or other users on the Internet. Sometimes it is preferable to declare one's identity for practical reasons, but also sometimes for security reasons. Today, it must be agreed that few users deploy good practices in managing their personal data, mainly for the sake of convenience. Indeed, setting up different email addresses and passwords for each service used can be daunting. However, it has been a long time since the distribution of our personal data is no longer limited to a simple email address or a poorly protected password. From now on, complete user profiles are stored somewhere in the cloud, or, to be more precise, in the data centres of one or the other GAFAM. Some users fully assume and accept this counterpart for access to services that are easy to use and generally free of charge. But the problem of funds lies in the monopoly set up by these actors and the lack of interesting alternatives. As is often the case, the equation turns out to be rather simple: sacrificing confidentiality and security to the ergonomics of a supposedly free service, even though everyone knows that this free service has a hidden cost. In order to simplify the registration to a new service on the Internet, different methods have been developed. But today those widely used are the "connect with" buttons that allow you to link existing accounts and transfer the necessary information to your new account. I will deal mainly with the GAFAMs since as Europeans these are the services we use. But the case of the data management of Chinese companies like WeChat is even more worrying... The obtaining and concentration of personal data of the users of these services is indeed far beyond what can be found in the West. The magic buttons of Facebook and Google Search result for images for "google identity Very practical, in one click our account is created. No need to make the effort to remember the password since our Facebook account will open the doors to third party applications. Revolutionary for the user experience, but also for the recovery of our personal data. Indeed, this harmless little button allows Facebook (here, but it also works with Google for example) to link our activities to other applications on our profile. And therefore to offer its advertisers a more accurate catalog of prospects, since it is their business model I'm not telling you anything. The operation is similar for Google, whose ease of connection is less popular than Facebook, but remains present in our daily lives as users. The apple is not the apple we think it is Apple takes a less aggressive stance towards its customers' personal data. This is a widely publicized bias that is now part of the brand's communication. In addition to all the options that give customers more control over who uses their data and when, Apple has developed proprietary connection systems. These are quite different from Facebook or Google as there are many options available to manage what you share with services. For example, you can create a disposable email address (which will look like qwerty1234@apple.com) that will redirect incoming emails to yours. This way you don't have to disclose your personal email address, limiting potential spam. However, if Apple claims today that it does not and will not use your data in the future, the situation remains problematic. Indeed, relying on a trusted actor to guarantee the integrity of your personal data adds a potential vulnerability in your management of these data. It is certainly more comfortable and Apple is rather better than its competitors, but your data remains completely centralized...and not at home. Prove your identity on the Internet Today different methods are used by companies to allow their users to prove their identities. In the past, these methods were mainly based on the email/password combination, but now they are more sophisticated. For example, the reduction in the cost of sending SMS messages and the automation of this method makes it easy to find access to an application. What is a decentralized identity? In order to determine what a so-called decentralized identity is and its use in the context of Web 3.0, it is important to clarify these terms. Indeed, what does our identity on the Internet really consist of and what exactly would its decentralization correspond to? These are two extremely generic terms and everyone can imagine the fields of possibilities for themselves. The DIF (Decentralized Identity Foundation, discussed below), proposes a definition of these terms, which are supposed to be the basis of the very notion of decentralized identity: "Decentralized identities are deployed on databases without control bodies and can be universally linked to an identifier". DIF The aim of these decentralised identities is thus to enable users to store private information locally, while at the same time ensuring full confidence in the veracity of the information when it is disseminated. Keep your data and share the necessary information without going through a trusted third party. Once your profile is deployed and accessible only by you, or rather your private key, applications will connect to it. For example, during registration, compatible applications will request permission to access certain types of data. Similar to what currently exists on our smartphones with requests for access to photos, microphone or camera, you become the manager of these accesses and therefore of the distribution of your data. The actors of decentralized identity If we often describe decentralized sectors as ecosystems, there is a reason for this. Indeed, it is the synergy between the various existing actors and their services that allows us to offer users the best possible experience and the richest possible functionality. This is why it is important to study the different actors carefully, which is not often an easy task since communication is often limited to the early-adopters' niche, in a relative general indifference, until the technology becomes widely accepted. The objective of these actors is therefore to be able to propose to users to regain control over the dissemination of their data. This will also help to reduce the accumulation of data that Google and Facebook make every day. Metamask Search result for images for "metamask That fox means well It's not really in the realm of decentralized identity, but there are interesting similarities in the way Metamask works. Indeed it is not an identity but a wallet that allows you to connect to different applications of the decentralized web. However, I wanted to present this web extension in order to introduce you the functioning of the connection to web 3.0 services. Indeed if you are interested in decentralized applications among which we find video games or financial services, you necessarily had to connect a wallet to them. Often, the simplest option is to click on the "connect with Metamask" button and let this famous fox do the job. But you have to be aware that this harmless click has certain repercussions. First of all, technically, since this connection can create security holes if the developers of the application are not conscientious enough. Indeed, contrary to popular belief or ideal marketing presentations, users of services based on distributed registries are no less subject to the risk of hacking, and paradoxically, it may even be the opposite. Indeed, since Ethereum transactions are public, it is possible to trace all those associated with a user and therefore to draw up a profile of the latter through the applications he uses. Be wary, therefore, of allowing anyone to draw up your digital user behavioural map. DIF The DIF (Decentralized Identity Foundation) is a foundation that aims to develop and democratize decentralized identity services. To do so, it has surrounded itself with actors from all horizons in order to develop a synergy between their services. There are many well-known names in the ecosystem, including but not limited to players in the cryptomoney industry such as uPort, Hyperledger or NEO. Indeed other more traditional companies are also involved such as Mastercard, Microsoft or IBM. The objective is thus to set up working groups around specific functionalities of the decentralized identity sector. You can find the work of these groups on their sites and the source code is - as it should be - obviously open source. The alt attribute of this image is empty, its filename is download-6-1.png. DIDs by the W3C The W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) team is carrying out work on decentralised identity. We can find presentations of this research regularly updated. They present these DIDs (Decentralized IDentifiers) as new types of identifiers allowing the implementation of a true digital and decentralized identity. The difficulty being to set up an identity whose ownership can be proven without the use of centralized databases or control bodies (a bit like the St Graal in fact). Image search result for "DIDs by the W3C". The key to your decentralized identity looks like this. uPort UPort is a company developing different services around decentralized identities. Indeed, the holders of this project wish to bring to their users a new way to connect to various services on the Internet. Their solutions enable them to control digital life by taking back control of their personal information, its security and its distribution to third parties. The operation is quite simple since it will simply be necessary to set up a profile in order to use it on uPort-compatible applications. Search result for images for "Uport uPort thus wishes to become a direct alternative to the famous "connection with Facebook" which is precisely the opposite of the values of web 3.0. Their services are not very interesting on their own, but it is through the adoption of their system to other applications, decentralized or not, that a comfortable and secure experience for users will emerge. As we will see several times in this discovery of the decentralized web, it is from this synergy between different actors that will offer simple navigation while guaranteeing the regaining of control over personal data that new models will emerge. Brickchain Brickchain is also one of the players in the decentralized identity sector, even if it does not use blockchain technology. Indeed, the open source Brickchain protocol allows its users to keep control of their data, without having to resort to the heavy technology of distributed registries. A mobile application is at the heart of the system's use and allows users to use their data in a nomadic way. Brickchain's objective is therefore to set up an interaction layer in which the strict and indispensable consent of the owner is the only way to obtain access to personal data. The Ethereum ERC-725 token standard If there is one platform widely used to build web 3.0 innovations, it is Ethereum's platform. So it's no surprise that we can find a standard of tokens dedicated to decentralized identities or at least going in this direction. Soberly named "Proxy Account" this token embodies an interface allowing to store information about a user but not only. The objective of this standard is to allow a legal entity to exist on the Ethereum network, while giving it the capacity to execute smart-contracts as such. The Ontology network Ontology is a public blockchain network project dedicated to free collaboration between different actors. The goal is to enable data sharing in a secure way by focusing on trust between different users. Search results for "ontology crypto" But what interests us most is one of the features Ontology offers, which is the framework dedicated to user identity called ONT ID. It allows each user to create their own identifier and to link the information of their choice to it. Once set up, only the owner of this ID has total control over the ID and the data stored. Ontology will provide maximum transparency to make it easier to track where the data is going and who is using it. However, introducing this identity within the network facilitates its multi-use. Indeed, it is easy to control the different roles a user can have and the different sources of personal information. Ontology's objective is to build a bridge between service developers and their users without any control bodies such as a state for example. The Future of Decentralized Identity As we saw in our overview of this ecosystem, it is still a niche area today. But just like many innovative ecosystems, it is possible that its democratization will take place quickly, a fortiori for the users of cryptomoney, a particularly sensitive public on this subject. Decentralized identity is a rather particular sector because the object of decentralization, in this case digital identity, is not generalized in a centralized manner. Indeed, there are relatively few systems around digital identity, even if we can observe some progress in this area. However, this does not mean that digital identities have not already been put in place. In Estonia, for example, it is already possible to connect to various digital services via the national identity card. In particular, this has enabled companies to delegate the costly operation of identifying users to the state through this card. But all is not rosy since the centralization of this connection service can lead to real problems in case of vulnerability. Indeed, in 2017, half of Estonians were deprived of these services due to critical security breaches. Search result for images for "Estonian digital identity". Source: Francetvinfo Indeed, as most services are very young or still in the development phase, the risks are very numerous. It is important to find out about a protocol before injecting sensitive or personal information into it. Decentralization may not necessarily solve all the problems related to personal data management, but it could give users more choice. This would unblock the market, which is now closely linked to the GAFA. It would thus be possible to witness the emergence of new players and monetisation models that are more respectful of users, for example. More importantly, it would become possible to clarify the very notion of personal data, as well as their real value. Indeed, at the present time and in the absence of control, it is complex to find out and document them in order to be better informed about their management. These are many points on which the players in this still very young sector must work. And I am convinced that we will hear about this ecosystem much sooner than one might think. In conclusion, we would like to quote the very recent statements of Paypal CEO Dan Schulman who, while explaining that the payment giant is taking its time on the subject of cryptoactives, sees above all the full potential of the blockchain in the field of identity: "Most people think that the blockchain refers to efficiency, but the current system is quite efficient. Sometimes there are unnecessary intermediaries, but the current frameworks are quite strong. So we think a lot of what can happen on the blockchain is related to identity, for example. »
bsvfan
1 week ago
The emergence of web 3.0 Hello everyone and welcome to this new article dedicated to observing the emergence of web 3.0. As part of this series, we have already had the opportunity to discuss the importance of protocols, and then to look at the notion of Decentralized Identity. Today we are going to plunge together into the heart of a new continent: the emergence of decentralized websites. Will these incensurable sites embody the standard of interfaces in the future or will they remain a niche for enthusiasts and activists? What is a decentralized website? Before moving on to all these very interesting reflections it is necessary to define what a decentralized website is and what are the issues at stake. Indeed, the principle of decentralization is eminently abstract and, more than for other concepts, each one has its own definition, with variable criteria to judge whether or not a project or service is decentralized. But in the context of the decentralized Internet, also known as Web 3.0, there is a consensus within the ecosystem on a few fundamentals. Thus, decentralization must at least allow a large autonomy vis-à-vis certain usual actors in the framework of the setting up of Internet sites. In other words, a truly decentralized site will be impossible to disappear by the will of its host, for example, or to be deleted from search engines because its domain name will have been censored or bought back. These different criteria make it possible to establish a sort of standard profile of the decentralized website. However, these standards do not necessarily all need to be met in order to validate effective decentralisation. Drawing up a list is not necessarily the most relevant approach, but it has the advantage of providing a nomenclature in the quest for decentralization of a website. As such, there is an essential foundation for the construction of a website aiming at decentralization: its hosting and dissemination should not be centralized in a single point but on the contrary distributed as much as possible through a large number of nodes of the network. At this stage, it is important to stress that there are two types of decentralization: The technical type, which we have just outlined, but also the one that is more political in nature Indeed it is also important to consider who controls, or rather does not control, IT systems and project development. If behind a website distributed on different servers and which uses ENS operates only one manager who totally controls the content of the site, can we still decently speak of a decentralized site? Why use decentralized websites? If the deployment of a website is today quite simple insofar as your host will facilitate most of the processes, the deployment of a decentralized website is a little more complicated, as we will see later on. The question can therefore be asked in these terms: what is the point of setting up a decentralized website when other services are simpler, cheaper and allow a faster deployment? We all know the reason, the more or less confused we are about it. If these services are simpler and cheaper, it is because they come with counterparts of which users have varying degrees of awareness. Indeed, the tendency to centralize Internet services such as calculations or hosting by huge companies such as Amazon or Microsoft may eventually harm the web in the form we know it. The data of many users pass through these servers whose conditions of use remain very opaque and under the jurisdiction of the United States. Unfortunately we must agree: there is no real alternative to these giants today in the context of quality services and low costs, but also scalable for all types of projects. These de facto monopoly situations raise several ethical problems, particularly in relation to the use of these Internet sites but also to their content. Indeed, today a website can be censored, blocked or modified if its content does not meet the cultural or legal standards of certain countries, mainly the USA. Worse, censorship may not "simply" be political but also economic. Indeed, some players have become so powerful that they are in a position to compromise the infrastructure (or their visibility, which amounts to the same thing) of any potential competitor who would try to develop by using some of their services. How to set up a decentralized website? Setting up a decentralised website is no longer as complex as one might imagine. Indeed there are many services that can simplify the process. Let's first of all take an interest in the hosting of these decentralized websites and the way in which they save the data put online in a distributed way. These sites generally use decentralized protocols that offer similar or completely different services from what we are used to. Let's discover together some of these actors that today allow the deployment of decentralized websites. The IPFS protocol Associated image One of the cornerstones of today's decentralized sites is the IPFS (or InterPlanetary File System), a distributed file management protocol. This standard is comparable to the HTTP standard which, according to some actors in the ecosystem, it could replace in the future. On the other hand, IPFS works differently because instead of communicating files to specific servers, it interacts with the network in relation to the file in question. IPFS thus embodies a completely different paradigm that makes it easier to set up websites that no longer need to be hosted on a specific server but distributed over a network. IPFS is therefore potentially an alternative to the current functioning of the web and it is not the only protocol going in this direction. The data deployed on the protocol is stored, not permanently but only to the extent that the backup is useful from a network point of view. Different decentralized applications are already developed using the IPFS protocol such as Steemit or even OpenBazaar which is a decentralized e-commerce platform. Search result for images for "OpenBazaar OpenBazaar, decentralized trade Decentralized domain names ENS, domain names according to Ethereum So far, we have managed to have our site hosted on different servers in a distributed manner. Communication is established through the IPFS protocol. Only a few steps remain before visitors can access our decentralized website. Indeed, in order for Internet users to search - and above all find - our site easily, we now need an associated domain name. This is an indispensable step. Luckily, there are decentralised domain name services. The best known is probably the Ethereum Name Service, which I am going to introduce to you. It is simply a domain name service deployed on Ethereum. You can even use your domain name as an Ethereum address of course to facilitate transfers of cryptomonnages. Currently, the service is not functional for all browsers but it is enough for users to have the Metamask web extension. Even better, it is planned that Opera (the Apple iOS browser) will make it natively functional in the future. Multiply the interfaces There is also another alternative that allows a decentralized site to be set up, or at least allows its decentralization to be strengthened. This involves creating or allowing the creation of different autonomous interfaces linked to the same website. This is one of the particularities of decentralized applications that are deployed on public blockchains and therefore accessible to all. Anyone is thus able to create their own interface to the same application. This is an approach that can be found in the decentralized finance ecosystem (DeFi). Indeed some protocols are directly implemented on existing applications. Encouraging your community to create independent interfaces is an interesting approach that reinforces the immutability of the site in question as much as its decentralization. Decentralized search engines Hard to ignore: today the vast majority of searches on the Internet are done via Google, the ultra-dominant search engine of the sector in recent years. However, there are alternatives from all sides that offer features such as greater privacy protection or the reuse of profits for ecological or solidarity purposes. Unfortunately, none of them are currently able to compete with the Californian giant and its billions of dollars of investment in research and development. This monopoly situation is fraught with consequences. In particular, it goes hand in hand with the problems of indexation and visibility. In other words: who decides what is going to be seen and what is not? Indeed, pleasing Google's algorithm is the Holy Grail for any website that wants to develop its audience. However, changes in the way the algorithm works can arbitrarily harm certain websites or the visibility - or even the very existence - of entire sections of the digital ecosystem. In this respect, one will recall the recent misadventures of the Youtubers of the crypto community, which were "erroneously" wiped off the map by the fault of a capricious algorithm. The development of community-powered search engines with a transparent, community-calibrated algorithm could be the next building block for Web 3.0. Making it public and encouraging the community to be an actor by selecting the criteria for highlighting sites could potentially solve problems that users face today, without always being aware of it. And what about tomorrow? The future of decentralized sites Let's now try to project ourselves to guess what tomorrow's decentralized websites could be. Indeed if today the ecosystem oscillates between more or less successful experiments and projects in development, each day spent on the Internet shows us the need for a new paradigm in Internet sites and applications. After the revolution of the cloud, would we be at the dawn of the revolution of decentralization? Or perhaps decentralization will apply, as it does today, only to a few very specific sectors, with most users finally being satisfied with the golden cage of the current centralized system?