What exactly is included in the concept of "blockchain"
The author of the article is Alexey Malanov, an expert in the development of anti-virus technologies at Kaspersky Lab.
The question of what is meant by blockchain is not idle. Even blockchain specialists will issue different definitions and different frontiers of technology, what can we say about people far from technology. And now blockchain is being discussed even by politicians and big investors, what is it like?
Let's figure it out.
')
I warn you right away, a philosophical article with extensive reasoning and demagogy. Want specifics, read another . Want to understand - read the third .
Illustration from the book by Melanie Swan “ Blockchain. Scheme of the new economy "
Let's start with a simple point of view. Blockchain is all technologies that are used or will be used in cryptocurrencies . Including not yet invented and not implemented.
What is included in the concept of cryptocurrency , fades into the background. In order not to be distracted, for simplicity, we will assume that cryptocurrencies are currencies from the list https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ .
Top cryptocurrency by capitalization ( Source )
On the one hand, this definition is convenient because it allows you to make any statements. For example:
It’s hard to argue that in fifty years cash will be out of circulation and we will pay with some kind of digital money. Surely in this digital money some technologies that are currently used or will be used in cryptocurrencies will play a role. So, it turns out, blockchain-money will replace ordinary money, right?
Does the blockchain allow for better genetic and medical research? Well, does not interfere for sure.
On the other hand, such a maximalist definition makes it possible to say a lot about the blockchain, but it does not allow us to have a substantive conversation and to assert something concrete . Look at the examples:
They all become false. After all, you never know what will come up? For example, in the IOTA cryptocurrency, directed acyclic graphs are already invented and used for organizing transactions - there is no chain of blocks there. Or, for example, someday, Plasma will probably work, and then the blockchain will become scalable.
Let's continue at least a simple point of view. Blockchain is simply an incremental record database . Everything. If we can only add to the end or throw it away from the end and write again, then we have a blockchain. You can always throw out the logic, just real blockchain solutions try to use this opportunity only in exceptional cases (for example, in the case of 92 billion bitcoins ). Neither distribution, nor consensus, nor blocks, nor references to previous blocks — nothing is required.
This definition is convenient because all cryptocurrencies known to me actually work on such a blockchain .
But such a definition is even more absurd and useless than the previous one. Moreover, such a “blockchain” is known for about 100 years and is called a stack.
We’ll finish with the degenerate definitions, make up the minimum reasonable package of what many experts can call a blockchain.
The blockchain assumes that:
1. The data are decorated in blocks, whatever that block is.
2. The block is either a genesis block or refers to the previous one.
a. Blocks are added to the end.
b. It is forbidden to throw blocks out during normal operation.
3. Blocks fly in a communication environment independently - you can load an arbitrary block.
4. Blockchain is read by at least two participants.
5. At least one member writes to the blockchain.
6. All writers reach consensus - the blocks correspond to a single set of rules.
a. The obvious consequence is that the blockchain is the same for all participants after reaching a consensus.
b. If there is a soft fork in the network, then the “common” rules are obviously more stringent.
Cheat Sheet on the concept of software-fork. A source
Have something to add?
And now let's see what remains of such a definition.
What follows from our definition? It follows that a blockchain solution can be centralized, efficient, and even scalable. After all, we have rejected all the "extra": distribution, mistrust, slow consensus - and got candy, which is still the blockchain.
By the way, such a candy is called a private blockchain (private / permissioned), and it is on such blockchains that some companies (and even government agencies) now rely. This is a special case of long-known distributed registries (not to be confused with a distributed database ), but not every distributed registry is obviously a blockchain.
But in order for the blockchain to attribute its popular advantages (and at the same time its disadvantages), it is necessary to add new conditions to the definition.
First, we define the properties of the “real” blockchain:
The fact that a blockchain solution must be with a currency is, of course, an optional property. But without a currency, it is not so easy to motivate participants to serve the network, which means that it is not so easy to ensure decentralization - a mandatory feature of the “real” blockchain.
To obtain the described properties, we will additionally include the following in the “present” blockchain:
A couple of properties (not requirements):
A blockchain with the properties we specified in the beginning of the section is often called an open blockchain (open / public / permissionless). The prospects for the use of such blockchains outside the framework of cryptocurrency to the author seem to be much more modest than it is now considered. There must be good reasons for doing something decentralized, if nothing prevents you from doing it centrally. But this is only the personal opinion of the author.
There is another convenient concept - “blockchain technology”. These are technologies that are not blockchain at all, but are directly related to it - either they are add-ons or improvements to the usual blockchain (in any definition). Half of them can be used without a blockchain, just the need does not arise.
For example, the Lightning Network is a familiar clearing , but only built on trust derived from an already deployed blockchain.
Another example is a mixer . Washing “dirty” money by mixing with “clean” money has been known for a long time, but with respect to cryptocurrency it has changed and has become a separate technology with different implementation options.
Ring signatures or evidence with zero disclosure - known cryptographic protocols, which, when applied in the cryptocurrency sphere, also become “blockchain technologies”.
The concept of “blockchain technology” essentially means the same thing as the maximalist approach to defining blockchain in the first section. But only I like this concept more - it is more correct. If blockchain technologies are mentioned, this does not mean that there is a blockchain in general.
We tried to determine what is included in the concept of “blockchain” and what is not. We considered several options, from absurd to quite suitable. They described those properties that flow from different boundaries of technology or, on the contrary, that define these boundaries.
It remains the case for small things - just to clearly understand what is meant in each specific use case.
The question of what is meant by blockchain is not idle. Even blockchain specialists will issue different definitions and different frontiers of technology, what can we say about people far from technology. And now blockchain is being discussed even by politicians and big investors, what is it like?
Let's figure it out.
')
I warn you right away, a philosophical article with extensive reasoning and demagogy. Want specifics, read another . Want to understand - read the third .
Illustration from the book by Melanie Swan “ Blockchain. Scheme of the new economy "
Blockchain in terms of maximalists
Let's start with a simple point of view. Blockchain is all technologies that are used or will be used in cryptocurrencies . Including not yet invented and not implemented.
What is included in the concept of cryptocurrency , fades into the background. In order not to be distracted, for simplicity, we will assume that cryptocurrencies are currencies from the list https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ .
Top cryptocurrency by capitalization ( Source )
On the one hand, this definition is convenient because it allows you to make any statements. For example:
- Blockchain: New Russian oil.
- The blockchain technology, in my opinion, is the new Internet. This is the idea of ​​the same level as the Internet.
- Be that as it may, the blockchain ecosystem opens up many new opportunities in many different areas and allows large-scale calculations of genetic sequences using the concepts of decentralization.
- The aggregation of personal medical data in the blockchain, that is, storing the pointers to external data in chains of blocks, makes medical research generally more efficient.
- And many others.
It’s hard to argue that in fifty years cash will be out of circulation and we will pay with some kind of digital money. Surely in this digital money some technologies that are currently used or will be used in cryptocurrencies will play a role. So, it turns out, blockchain-money will replace ordinary money, right?
Does the blockchain allow for better genetic and medical research? Well, does not interfere for sure.
On the other hand, such a maximalist definition makes it possible to say a lot about the blockchain, but it does not allow us to have a substantive conversation and to assert something concrete . Look at the examples:
- Solutions on the blockchain do not scale.
- Solutions on the blockchain are slower than centralized counterparts.
- Decisions on the blockchain do not require trust between the participants.
- Solutions on the blockchain are open and validated.
- Blockchain is a chain of blocks.
They all become false. After all, you never know what will come up? For example, in the IOTA cryptocurrency, directed acyclic graphs are already invented and used for organizing transactions - there is no chain of blocks there. Or, for example, someday, Plasma will probably work, and then the blockchain will become scalable.
Blockchain from the point of view of minimalists
Let's continue at least a simple point of view. Blockchain is simply an incremental record database . Everything. If we can only add to the end or throw it away from the end and write again, then we have a blockchain. You can always throw out the logic, just real blockchain solutions try to use this opportunity only in exceptional cases (for example, in the case of 92 billion bitcoins ). Neither distribution, nor consensus, nor blocks, nor references to previous blocks — nothing is required.
This definition is convenient because all cryptocurrencies known to me actually work on such a blockchain .
But such a definition is even more absurd and useless than the previous one. Moreover, such a “blockchain” is known for about 100 years and is called a stack.
Basic equipment
We’ll finish with the degenerate definitions, make up the minimum reasonable package of what many experts can call a blockchain.
The blockchain assumes that:
1. The data are decorated in blocks, whatever that block is.
2. The block is either a genesis block or refers to the previous one.
a. Blocks are added to the end.
b. It is forbidden to throw blocks out during normal operation.
3. Blocks fly in a communication environment independently - you can load an arbitrary block.
4. Blockchain is read by at least two participants.
5. At least one member writes to the blockchain.
6. All writers reach consensus - the blocks correspond to a single set of rules.
a. The obvious consequence is that the blockchain is the same for all participants after reaching a consensus.
b. If there is a soft fork in the network, then the “common” rules are obviously more stringent.
Cheat Sheet on the concept of software-fork. A source
Have something to add?
And now let's see what remains of such a definition.
- The concept of “blockchain” does not include principles for achieving consensus : Proof-of-Work, Proof-of-Stake, Proof-of-Authority, and others. But in the Proof-of-Work is just the lion's share of Bitcoin innovation, the ancestor of the blockchain.
- The concept of "blockchain" does not include the principle of decentralization . In the degenerate case, it turns out that there is a server, he writes to the database, alone. The rest can read and check, and can not check.
- The concept of "blockchain" does not include the principle of openness : it is not required to be readable to a wide range of people, especially to write.
- The concept of “blockchain” does not include the principle of trust distribution : participants can be exclusively trusted.
- The concept of “blockchain” does not include protection from malicious participants : it may not be.
- The concept of "blockchain" does not include cryptography . It is hardly possible to manage without it, but at what stage and in what form it will be used is not defined.
What follows from our definition? It follows that a blockchain solution can be centralized, efficient, and even scalable. After all, we have rejected all the "extra": distribution, mistrust, slow consensus - and got candy, which is still the blockchain.
By the way, such a candy is called a private blockchain (private / permissioned), and it is on such blockchains that some companies (and even government agencies) now rely. This is a special case of long-known distributed registries (not to be confused with a distributed database ), but not every distributed registry is obviously a blockchain.
Advanced equipment - “real” blockchain
But in order for the blockchain to attribute its popular advantages (and at the same time its disadvantages), it is necessary to add new conditions to the definition.
First, we define the properties of the “real” blockchain:
- Decentralized . This gives non-blocking / stability, but at the same time takes efficiency (throughput per unit of iron) and scalability (throughput increases with increasing amounts of iron).
- Open for reading . This gives validation, but at the same time takes confidentiality (which can be screwed back on top).
- Open to write . This gives accessibility, but also makes recording paid. As a rule, the board is symbolic, but this is enough to sharply limit the list of writers.
- Unchangeable . This gives protection against falsification, but also leads to littering (which is not only written in public blockchains).
- With currency . This amazing property is especially appreciated in blockchain solutions. It provides financial opportunities, but instead introduces uncertainty in the legal status of the project. At the same time, it also opens up cybersecurity risks.
- Trusted Does not require the reputation of the participants.
The fact that a blockchain solution must be with a currency is, of course, an optional property. But without a currency, it is not so easy to motivate participants to serve the network, which means that it is not so easy to ensure decentralization - a mandatory feature of the “real” blockchain.
To obtain the described properties, we will additionally include the following in the “present” blockchain:
- Each block, except the initial one, contains the cryptographic hash of the previous one , and not just refers, as in the basic configuration.
- Consensus among the participants is achieved in such a way as to minimize the risk of rewriting the base by a minority, as a rule, Proof-of-Work or variations of Proof-of-Stake . And this, in my opinion, is the most important. The notion of minority is determined by the chosen method.
- Either a peer-to-peer network is used, or anyone who formally has the right to become a master node.
- For participation in ensuring the smooth operation of the network (the formation of correct blocks), it is necessary to reward in some form. And therefore, probably, every open blockchain has its own “coins”.
- Each participant has a pair of keys and in one form or another certifies their intentions for writing in the blockchain.
A couple of properties (not requirements):
- There is no reward for validating the base correctness. Participants do this for their own safety or do not.
- Each participant has the right to send a transaction to the network that satisfies the rules of the network, and expect that the transaction will be included in the blockchain in a reasonable time with reasonable payment.
A blockchain with the properties we specified in the beginning of the section is often called an open blockchain (open / public / permissionless). The prospects for the use of such blockchains outside the framework of cryptocurrency to the author seem to be much more modest than it is now considered. There must be good reasons for doing something decentralized, if nothing prevents you from doing it centrally. But this is only the personal opinion of the author.
Additional options
There is another convenient concept - “blockchain technology”. These are technologies that are not blockchain at all, but are directly related to it - either they are add-ons or improvements to the usual blockchain (in any definition). Half of them can be used without a blockchain, just the need does not arise.
For example, the Lightning Network is a familiar clearing , but only built on trust derived from an already deployed blockchain.
Another example is a mixer . Washing “dirty” money by mixing with “clean” money has been known for a long time, but with respect to cryptocurrency it has changed and has become a separate technology with different implementation options.
Ring signatures or evidence with zero disclosure - known cryptographic protocols, which, when applied in the cryptocurrency sphere, also become “blockchain technologies”.
The concept of “blockchain technology” essentially means the same thing as the maximalist approach to defining blockchain in the first section. But only I like this concept more - it is more correct. If blockchain technologies are mentioned, this does not mean that there is a blockchain in general.
Conclusion
We tried to determine what is included in the concept of “blockchain” and what is not. We considered several options, from absurd to quite suitable. They described those properties that flow from different boundaries of technology or, on the contrary, that define these boundaries.
It remains the case for small things - just to clearly understand what is meant in each specific use case.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/338320/
All Articles