By Bitcoin Časopis - pred 6 mesiacmi - Čas na čítanie: 6 minúty
Reclaiming The Crypto Title: The Primacy Of PoW And Cryptography
The term "crypto" has become a buzzword, encompassing a wide range of digital assets. Amongst Bitcoiners, it has also become a derogatory term used to refer to altcoins, as seen in the oft-repeated phrase “Bitcoin, Not Crypto.” However, not everything in the crypto world is truly "crypto," at least not in the literal sense of the name.
Skutočná podstata kryptomeny spočíva v jej spoliehaní sa na kryptografiu a nič iné na zabezpečenie svojej siete. To nás privádza k základnému rozdielu: iba proof-of-work coiny možno skutočne považovať za „krypto“. Toto rozlíšenie nie je len sémantické, ale aj zásadne dôležité, pretože podčiarkuje, čo presne posilňuje účtovnú knihu.
"Cryptocurrency" combines two critical components: "crypto," referring to cryptography, and "currency," denoting a medium of exchange and monetary unit. Cryptography is the art of communicating in code, and the logical underpinning of cryptography is a discipline of mathematics. Translating human language into ciphertext and back in a sensible and orderly fashion requires advanced math. From this discipline was born two key elements which came together to make Bitcoin work: hashing in the form of SHA-256 and asymmetric cryptography in the form of digital signatures.
Mena samozrejme zahŕňa prostriedok výmeny. Meny nie sú úročené, ani neudeľujú „úžitky“ mimo menových úžitkov a práv „riadenia“. Po pravde, už len tento fakt by mal okamžite ukončiť diskusiu o tom, čo vlastne kryptomena je a čo nie: „riadenie“ a „úžitkové“ tokeny sa nepočítajú.
The Cryptography in Bitcoin
PoW secures and powers true cryptocurrencies. In Bitcoin’s PoW, miners use SHA-256 to write on the ledger. Full nodes use SHA-256 to validate the accumulated work of the ledger. Merkle proofs, which also require SHA-256, are used by SPV to check whether transactions have been processed without looking at the whole ledger. Digital signatures are used by everyone to ensure non-repudiation of transactions. Newer features like Taproot have given us Schnorr Signatures and MAST to create other spending conditions, all of which are rooted in cryptography.
It’s important to note that PoW can work without computers. The decentralized ledger can still be maintained to a degree even if the math was done by hand and the proofs were carried by horseback to a public square and inscribed onto a mural for all to see. The only thing that is absolutely required by Bitcoin operators to ensure the ledger’s integrity is cryptography.
There are no shortcuts or alternative means to process and validate transactions in PoW. This purity in the application of cryptography – requiring cryptography and absolutely nothing else – is what makes Bitcoin true “crypto.”
Proof-of-Stake a iné mechanizmy
In contrast, many of the digital assets commonly referred to as “cryptocurrencies” – the same ones Bitcoiners have derogated as “crypto” when they say “Bitcoin, Not Crypto” – operate on different mechanisms, such as proof-of-stake (PoS), proof-of-authority (PoA), or other hybrid models.
While these mechanisms also use some form of cryptography, they introduce additional elements like ownership and reputation to secure the network. These additions dilute the role of pure cryptography in maintaining the network's integrity.
A v tom spočíva fatálna chyba PoS a iných súvisiacich podvodov.
Even to this day, 14 years after the Bitcoin genesis block, PoS is yet to resolve the long-range attack without reliance on a centralized and trusted source. A long-range attack is when PoS validators take back their stake and start creating an alternative chain of events privately. Since this phony alternative chain would have been using the same consensus rules as the “true” chain, there is no way for new users of the blockchain to tell which chain is the correct one after this phony chain is made public. Under PoW, it is trivial to tell the fakes from the real one – the arbiter is the easily verifiable metric of accumulated work. Therefore, PoS users must trust a checkpoint outside of the blockchain to let them know which one is correct.
Oh, and I lied just now. Over these 14 years, there has been one solution for PoS chains to bypass the long-range attack without a centralized and trusted source. The Babylon protocol is a Cosmos chain that helps resolve the long-range attack by aggregating the checkpoints of PoS chains by (hold your applause!) publishing these checkpoints to the truly decentralized and trustless proof-of-work Bitcoin timechain!
Je zábavné, ako sa podvody, ktoré urobili veľké kompromisy v oblasti bezpečnosti, dôvery a decentralizácie tým, že zahrnuli faktory ako povesť a podiel, uzavreli späť k tomu, čo v skutočnosti vytvára bezpečné, nedôveryhodné a decentralizované systémy: čistá kryptografia.
“Cryptography” Narrows Our Focus to PoW, but “Currency” Narrows Our Focus to Bitcoin
Matematika je nadradená vlastníctvu a reputácii, pretože matematiku nemožno zmeniť. Aktíva zabezpečené vlastníctvom a reputáciou sú bližšie k fiatu alebo cenným papierom ako ku kryptomenám alebo komoditám. A teraz to urobím o krok ďalej.
If the “cryptography” part narrows the scope to PoW, then “currency” should narrow our focus to Bitcoin alone. A currency is a tangible instantiation of the abstract concept called money. Money is the most liquid good, the most saleable commodity, the good which produces the lowest diminishing marginal utility, and the asset that wins the barter system by making all barter about itself. There ultimately can only be one money.
There are a few different cryptography-backed currencies: XMR, BCH, LTC, DOGE, etc. But they are not the most liquid goods in this space by far, as their individual market caps added together aren't anywhere near Bitcoin’s market cap alone. So, if there can only be one “most liquid good” then we should focus on that singular instantiation of money that is the most liquid.
Myslite na to takto. Existuje veľa fiat mien, ale počas medzinárodného obchodu a medzinárodných finančných transakcií sa najvýraznejšie používa iba americký dolár. Keď si ľudia vymieňajú veci v globálnom kontexte, automaticky používajú USD na označenie svojich podmienok. Všetky ostatné fiaty je možné vymeniť za USD, ale nie nevyhnutne za iné fiaty bez USD (bez toho, aby ste museli najprv prejsť dolármi). Takže aj keď existuje technicky veľa fiat mien, v skutočnosti existuje len jedna, ktorá je skutočne široko používaná. Keď spomenieme „fiat menu“, naše následné chvály, chvály, analýzy, horúce pohľady atď. sa často týkajú len amerického dolára.
Takže ak uvažujeme o fiat abstraktne, evidentne existuje jednotiaci rámec; fiat je v prvom rade americký dolár a v druhom rade ide o zlúčenie iných vecí. Je čas, aby sme začali uvažovať o kryptomenách rovnakým spôsobom.
Prečo na rozdiele záleží
Reclaiming the term "crypto" to refer exclusively to Bitcoin is not a matter of pedantry; it's a matter of principle. Labeling all digital assets as "cryptocurrencies" and using the term “crypto” as a pejorative for lesser assets is spitting in the face of the profound and significant cryptographic foundation that Satoshi laid through Bitcoin.
The strength of a true cryptocurrency lies in its reliance on the immutable laws of mathematics. There are no "what-ifs" or "buts" when it comes to the security of PoW; it is as robust as the cryptographic algorithms it employs. We ought to prefer the permanence of mathematics over the ephemerality of ownership and reputation. Not trusting in the math behind Bitcoin’s robustness is effectively as illogical as not trusting in the Pythagorean Theorem or that 2x2=4. It is the flat-earthism of the modern day.
Names have power, and the name "crypto" is no exception. True “crypto” pays homage to the fact that mathematics alone can power a system so secure and transparent that it needs no central authority or additional layers of complexity to function. Should we attach this name to things that require “stake” and “authority” to run?
záver
As the world of digital assets continues to evolve, it's crucial to remember the roots and original intentions behind this technology. Let's reclaim that name and appropriately honor the mathematical robustness that only Bitcoin ponúka.
Instead of “Bitcoin, Not Crypto” perhaps we should say “Crypto, Meaning Bitcoin. "
Toto je príspevok hosťa používateľa Allard Peng. Vyjadrené názory sú úplne ich vlastné a nemusia nevyhnutne odrážať názory BTC Inc alebo Bitcoin Magazine.
Originálny zdroj: Bitcoin časopis