85 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. We are devoted blockchain app to design and assemble better programming to introduce over the significant brilliant gadget. Consequently, it conveys better solace to deal with whenever without meeting any danger of it. Our app gives the correct clarification, in the event of any issue; emerge at the season of utilizing such the blockchain programming. In this way, businessmen can build a blockchain app and get a to z business programming with every fundamental element.

  2. Mar 2019
  3. Feb 2019
    1. 現在比特幣區塊鏈大小已經來到了220 GB,或許大家會認為這是一個不大的數字,但假設在比特幣運作的那一年開始區塊鏈一直保持在滿載的狀況下,以每十分鐘增加1MB計算到滿十週年的今天,應當要超過525.6 GB,十年前的525.6 GB 是一種奢侈,當今的社會一人1TB、2TB 的硬碟或許是一件很正常的事情。 對我而言,「這是中本聰跟儲存和計算成本的對賭」,他在賭硬碟空間的製作工藝促使的單位空間的成本降低這件事的速度比較快,還是區塊鏈成長的速度比較快,倘若區塊鏈的成長速度較快的話,我相信這世界上不存在儲存完整區塊鏈的硬碟,這使得去中心的區塊鏈更難以被實現出來。 所以對我而言,如果要再創造一個新的區塊鏈的應用,必須要尋找一個低訊息產出速度,也就是低 TPS,且單位訊息的大小不能太大,越小越好。以降低頻率、降低單位訊息大小的方式抑制區塊鏈大小的成長速度,屆時巡找的目標或許就是一個低頻率高單價的應用場景。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>在中国人的习武观里,讲究「天下武功,唯快不破」。快,即应变迅速,无论是在追求高 TPS 的技术环境,还是在需要快速迭代的商业世界,「快」都不失为一计上策。 <br/> <br/> 但是要如何才能保使自己在迅速登上高度的同时,不失风度?中本聪给出的答案从侧面应证了日式「侘寂」(wabi-sabi)美学对此问题的态度——「接受短暂和不完美」。中国人能否在自己的哲学智慧里寻到一个类似解呢?我看是有的,所谓「上善若水,以柔克刚」。

    1. 若先不論這些國家實踐國家數字貨幣的可能性,比特幣這種無主權的貨幣背後的區塊鏈技術,確實勾起了這些反美國家的興趣。 在數位化時代下,透過分散式帳本技術,它賦予了國家發行具有主權性質的密碼貨幣的能力,這也讓國際政治之間的糾紛多添了一些變數。 一方想要透過區塊鏈自建金融體系,一方想要強烈抵制這樣的行為,區塊鏈作為達到開放性金融(Open Finance)的一種「手段」,而美國作為目前世界的霸權,反美政權有機會挑戰該國對於世界經濟的「完全主導權」?還是對於透過區塊鏈創造金融壁壘的想像只是曇花一現?值得關注。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/> 「比特币这种无主权货币背后的区块链技术,赋予了国家发行具有主权性质的密码货币的能力」,此番境遇,放到加密货币市场遇冷的 2019 年初来看,着实有股「有心栽花花不开,无心插柳柳成荫」的意味。分布式账本技术真的能在国际政坛间再度搅起波澜吗?区块链技术真能引导现有体系走向开放性金融(Open Finance)吗?或许,人类自身的求生欲会给予上述提问一个肯定的答复,但是这种充满跳跃性的惊喜感赖以维系的前提在于——比特币是一种无主权的货币,信息技术能够自由流动。

  4. Jan 2019
    1. 计算机领域在分布式处理过程中追求高效、一致。对错误数据记录的修复和更正,通常会另行设计一套机制来保证。相对传统数据库,区块链由于需要保证事后数据的不可篡改,引入了共识机制,为错误的出现和修复提供更多的容忍度。这一重要思想通常被许多区块链设计者所忽略,众多项目纷纷追求提高短交易及确认速度,这会导致弱化甚至牺牲其他节点对数据的验证过程。同时,更早更快的确认也会带来问题。参与生成数据的节点需要满足生成数据不能出错等更严苛要求,导致现在很多区块链项目的在落地过程中出现困难。因为系统使用方会背上了数据必须一次性正确输入的包袱,需要非常保守和谨慎地选择上链数据。最终,区块链落地应用范围的狭窄,许多存在出错可能性的数据难以结合区块链的优点参与业务升级改造。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/> 传统数据库与区块链式处理,哪个才是更佳的业务模式?这个问题的回答早已在我们的日常工作中得以体现,但却迫于某种难以逾越的权力边界而成了难言之隐。「事中容错,事后一致」是一种颇为崇高的境界,甚至可以从中一窥理想社会的光耀图景,但人们目前尚未能大规模应用这套 workflow,究其原因,并非目标遥远,而是由于决策权被少部分人掌控着,和数据打交道的主体只是把数据当作本职工作,并未主动贡献、积极参与。系统使用方背上的不是「数据必须一次性正确输入」的包袱,他们直面的,是将权利拱手让人后的自责,是与民主开放的理想世界背道而驰的困惑。

    1. Freedom to organizeAragon lets you freely organize and collaborate without borders or intermediaries. Create global, bureaucracy-free organizations, companies, and communities.
    2. The world’s first digital jurisdictionAragon organizations are not only great because they are decentralized, global and unstoppable. They will also benefit from the Aragon Network, the world’s first digital jurisdiction.

      "digital jurisdiction"

    1. 援引《彭博社》消息,華爾街證券研究公司 Fundstrat Global Advisors 的聯合創辦人 Tom Lee 12 月 13 日向客戶發電郵時透露,已經厭倦人們不斷詢問目標價格,有鑑於加密貨幣的內在波動性,該公司將停止提供任何「實現公允價格」的時程表。 換句話說,這表示華爾街最著名的比特幣預言家,已經決定放棄對其價格進行預測。 原因很簡單,若回顧 Tom Lee 過去的研究報告,我們會發現他曾預測比特幣的價格將在 2018 年終達到 20,000 美元的目標價格;而年終的預測價格則為 25,000 美元。到了 11 月,他將目標價格削減至 15,000 美元,但比特幣當時的交易價格僅為 5,500 美元,隨後更跌至 4,000 美元左右。總體而言,比特幣價格全年下降超過 70%,而 Tom Lee 最近一次預測的「公允價格」範圍在 13,800 美元到 14,800 美元之間。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>出于加密货币与生俱来的独特性,其价格走势本不应该被人为地解读,而场外观众们也无需矫情地揣测低迷熊市与失守分析师之间的暧昧联系。比特币可谓区块链世界第一个广为人知的创业项目,考虑到它对现有金融体系的颠覆性冲击,这些华尔街拥趸们的「洋相」或许不失为一种班门弄斧式的保身明哲。

    1. Blockchains are NOT about cutting computational costs (at least relative to centralized servers). Blockchains are about incurring a sacrifice in the form of INCREASED computational costs to achieve a *decrease* in *social costs*.

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>「区块链以增加计算成本为代价来降低社会成本」,这样的论断让人联想到前几年有关新能源汽车的讨论。新能源汽车的 per unit actual consumption 不一定比内燃机车辆低,但人们寄厚望于它的 social benefit。<br/><br/>我们现在已经知道,区块链会把人类带向一个新世界。试追问:区块链就是这个「世界」本身吗?又或者只是新世界的运行规则?大脑在变得更加聪明,而思维在变得更加固化,已然练就了一种表述:每个世界都要有自己的运行法则。<br/><br/>在上述疑问尚无共识之前,我们不妨先关注一下特斯拉的股价?

    1. 区块链技术仍然能在解决移民问题方面发挥不可替代的作用,这项神秘的无政府主义者和密码朋克们创造出的去中心化技术,赋予了民众挑战国际政治与金融体系的权利,而这些权利本来就是人民赋予的。 区块链技术能够帮助难民保存本就应是属于他们的、不可篡改的身份信息,帮助他们获得本就应该送到他们手里的国际援助,帮助他们在新国家尽快开始正常人的生活。或者简单来说,为他们所承受的痛苦和对新生活的憧憬之间,搭起一条希望的桥梁。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>技术在为人们勾画远景宏图的同时,也引人深思——发明技术的人类,已经演化到了其自身权利得由技术赋予的状态了吗?想必最激进的技术主义者也不会否认,教会他识字表达的不是命令行,而是活生生的人。廿一世纪的我们已经知道,「天赋人权」不过是句颇具浪漫主义色彩的政治标语,那些被我们珍视的权利其实是人类自己争取而来的。谈论区块链落地场景时更富批判性的靶向在于技术文化与身份认同之间的张力,可参见评论文章《新时代新气象,个体式激进与集体式自律》

    1. I respect the idealism of blockchain developers who, I believe, are sincere in their faith that they are building a better world. But I am confounded by their inability to see that they are falling victim to exactly the same fallacies their hacker forebears embraced: this notion that we can code ourselves out of the deep holes we’ve dug; that we are building utopias in our virtualities that will finesse away the imperfections of human character.

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>将区块链与互联网发展史作同类比较,的确能发现相似的轨迹,但也难逃倚老卖老的嫌疑。从何时起,我们给自己立下了「后来者无论成功与失败,始终跑在前人滑破的气流里」这一金科玉律?值得一提的是,见证时代前沿发展的进步主义者,在世界观上大多并不前沿,甚至很前现代。<br/><br/>试问:你渴望完美无缺的人设吗?若是,那你又可否期待「能加速该进程」的技术横空出世?自渡与普渡,向来是技术社群必须直面的哲学迷思。

    1. 项目参与者报告称,通过应用区块链技术,可确保地籍数据更高的透明度,并可在房地产登记期间避免未经授权的变更。此外,参与者一致认为,通过区块链技术创建单一登记处的所有好处将对乌兹别克斯坦的投资环境产生积极影响。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>如果没有区块链的加持,公权力是否会想到采用类似分布式技术等颇为 geek 的手段来维护现有体系?就算这只是个早晚会实现的时间问题,那民众也应该保留不停追问的权利。要知道,公权力与 geek 在精神上互为对立——回顾一下当年快播王欣案上公诉方那贻笑大方的审问吧——「(针对媒体类大文件的分布式存储)你为什么要粉碎文件?你到底有何企图?」<br/><br/>同样令密码学社群捉摸不透的企图是,区块链确权被运用在现实资产上。高度透明、单一登记,这与现在的互联网秩序在目标上又有何区别?真可谓理想主义者的又一次溃败。

    1. 在整个过程中,中心化交易所不但是现实世界与区块链世界的出入口,还是不同区块链网络的连接器。简单来说,交易所决定了一个新的 Token 是否有资格接入其他 Token 以及法币共同构成的清算网络。很多区块链项目的发展在被扭曲为满足交易所需求的方向上越走越远。区块链经济网络急需分布式的清算机制加入,其意义不在于要迅速替代中心化的交易所,而是带来一种新的选择与制衡,让区块链的真正价值被再次发掘,让用分布式的方式解决分布式的问题成为可能。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>至今为止我们还没有遇到完美的币种,可能以后也不会有。哪怕是久居排行榜单之首的比特币,也难以自视清高,不加入这首群雄逐鹿的协奏曲,但是契合乐谱精神的指挥家想必不是中心化的交易所。倘若让这曲华章无限延伸,我们或终将寻到一位让乐迷们心悦诚服的意中人。</br></br>然而,总有些东西是永恒的。不妨就让他们在此演奏,直到永远。

    1. 塔塔首席數字官C.R. Srinivasan表示:「《發展周期》像是對企業發出的警告,提出了由於革新的出現組織中不同層面開始浮現的『理想與現實』間的差距,他還表示:「這種差距表明,企業決策者和各個部門主管應該主動向企業 CEO提出其面對物聯網和人工智能技術時遇到的困難。」

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>Tata 释出的这份调查报告《发展周期(The Cycle of Progress)》枚举了企业在区块链应用上面临的主要障碍,但这并非警告——我们有必要正视不同层面的差距。事实上无论是在公司内部还是在更广的社会层面,这种异步感早已存在,甚至可以说,恰恰是这种异步感造成了人们认知上的差别,庞大的生态体系因此得以建立、维系。<br/><br/>如今,这些巨型组织的内部孵化出了一股新生力量——他们面对新技术的诱惑蠢蠢欲动,又无法轻松甩掉旧资产的包袱,还要和那些持不同意见的高管和股东们做对抗。但这样的拉扯并不一定是零和游戏,在这争斗中不同派别也能射出良性互动的微光,亦向现状抛出问题——既然我们做好了迎接新技术到来的外部战略准备,为何不改变自下而上的内部交互方式?

    1. Contrary to mainstream thinking that this new technology is unregulated, it’s really quite the opposite. These systems apply the strictest of rules under highly deterministic and predictable models that are regulated through mathematics. In the future, industry will be regulated not just by institutions and committees but by algorithms and mathematics. The new technology will gradually out-regulate the regulators and, in many cases, make them obsolete because the new system offers more certainty. Antonopoulos explains that “the opposite of authoritarianism is not chaos, but autonomy.”

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>1933 年德国包豪斯设计学院被纳粹关闭,大部分师生移民到美国,他们同时也把自己的建筑风格带到了美利坚。尽管人们在严格的几何造型上感受到了冷漠感,但是包豪斯主义致力于美术和工业化社会之间的调和,力图探索艺术与技术的新统一,促使公众思考——「如何成为更完备的人」?而这一点间接影响到了我们现在所熟知的美国式人格。<br/><br/>区块链最终会超越「人治」、达到「算法自治」的状态吗?类似的讨论声在人工智能领域同样不绝于耳。「绝对理性」站到了完备人格的对立面,这种冰冷的特质标志着人类与机器交手后的败退。过去有怀疑论者担心,算法的背后实际上由人操控,但随着「由算法生成」的算法,甚至「爷孙代自承袭」算法的出现,这样的担忧逐渐变得苍白无力——我们有了更大的焦虑:是否会出现 “blockchain-based authoritarianism”?

    1. “You cannot look at ‘web 3.0’ without looking at blockchain or without looking at AI (Artificial Intelligence),” he said. “So, our hope is that through this discussion of these various digital domains, the business models, the opportunities and the risks and the unintended consequences in terms of human rights, in terms of privacy, in terms of subversion of democracy, we are able to come out with some common principles...of strengthening cooperation across borders.”

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>联合国数字合作高级小组联合组长 Amandeep Gill 的上述观点,如同 TED Talks 讲者们勾勒的世界理想那般,昭示出强烈的国际公民精神。民众们可以为这些机构在数字化转型方面做出的努力而感到欣慰,但同时也得警惕,此刻听到的甜言蜜语,其实和总统们在电视前的新年致辞并无大异。<br/><br/>举个令国际主义者们略感沮丧的例子——联合国长期以来一直在探索区块链的多项人道主义用途,比如使用以太坊区块链将基于加密货币的代金券发放给叙利亚难民、利用虹膜等生物识别技术追踪消费情况。机构付出的努力值得肯定,但这样的技术运用其实是对历史发展轨迹的重复和既得利益体系的维护。何时,我们对技术落地场景的讨论才能从参与者的价值判断转到渠道本身?Gill 的 “strengthening cooperation across borders” 也许暗示着,在旧的世界秩序下,这就是道无解难题。

  5. Dec 2018
    1. Blockstream announced through a press release that they have added a fifth satellite to their network. Their broadcast can now reach most of the world. Their previous satellite formation allowed them to share their blockchain broadcasts to most of North and South America, Europe and Africa. Company’s fifth satellite allows them to reach the Asia-Pacific region, including China, India, Japan, the Korean Peninsula, and Australia.

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>战争,灾害,外来星体撞击——人类对未知的恐惧迫使科技在人文主义的荫蔽下谨小慎微地拓展边界,如履薄冰。假设最糟糕的情况下,地球上所有节点同时离线,所有无线沟通渠道中断,届时比特币网络会荡然无存吗?<br/><br/>发射卫星来同步比特币网络的做法在许多人看来是不可理喻的,甚至有点病入膏肓的可笑,但这艘「诺亚方舟」所承载的纯朴愿景,足以破封我们现世所面临的诸多困境。没有什么是永垂不朽的,如果有,那将是太阳系最后一个比特币区块,以射线的形态在浩瀚银河里砥砺前行。

    1. 区块链社群的玩法可能会向传统领域的社群靠近。有文章指出:“社群经济就是将满足于用户生活的不同形态需求圈层化,牢牢锁定老用户,实现持续的转介绍拉新和复购,从而不断支撑企业发展的经营模式”。其实这样的理念也与区块链行业有一些交叉点,资深的意见领袖应该带领新成员学习正向的区块链知识,而不是仅仅将注意力集中在炒币方面;针对不同知识基础和不同诉求的社群成员,也应该认真分层,在内容、激励方式等层面进行差别对待。比如年内某多多的社群玩法就很成功,区块链社群在原有模式下已然“前途渺渺路茫茫”,从传统社群模式中汲取经验或许才能有一些新进展。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/>某拼单电商在社群经济上的成功,引得拥趸们直呼「长尾理论」的胜利,更有甚者将其与「供给侧」等概念扯上关系,把那些所谓的「只专注前 20% 用户」的头部企业们拉出来数落一番,颇带莎翁悲剧意味地称之为「精英主义的溃败」。 <br/><br/>实际上,倘若拨开利益布局的云雾,你我足以探见,商业公司从未考虑只专注于特定的用户群体或阶层文化,过去是这样,未来也会是。例如,区别于 Uber 商业模式的 Airbnb,这几年虽然在营销上大谈社区文化的多元和共享,背后却承受着股东的持续施压。<br/><br/>我们是否该在区块链新世界继续沿用旧的组织范式?如果我们不愿反复看到一轮又一轮对精英主义的追逐和声讨,do something different, pls.

    1. It's called Decenturion, and, if its representatives at Consensus are to be believed, it's a decentralized society backed by real people buying up real property and opening physical embassies around the globe with the stated goal of creating a community of "innovators." 
  6. Nov 2018
    1. This is Colony.A platform foropen organizations.

      a platform for cooperative open communities

    1. Blockchains, for instance, enable permissionless entry, data storage, and computing, but with a propensity to concentration with respect to interfaces, governance, and wealth.

      How blockchain is decentralized and not.

  7. Oct 2018
    1. Australia's Digital Transformation Agency has been researching potential government uses for blockchain.

      “Our position today, and this is an early write-up, is that blockchain is an interesting technology that would be well worth being observed, but without standardisation and a lot more work, for every use of blockchain that you would consider today there is a better technology,” Mr Alexander told the hearing.

      . . .

      “We’re not saying that blockchain doesn’t have potential but today, without standardisation, there is the challenge of blockchain becoming a little fragmented. When we get to the standardised blockchain then the opportunities for it will grow.”

    1. We must be careful to distinguish between blockchain ledgers and proof-of-work, because they are separate things that just happen to have been combined to make Bitcoin. There are energy-efficient ways of managing blockchain ledgers, such as proof-of-stake algorithms. Some of these algorithms are already being implemented by rival cryptocurrency schemes

      . . .

      PoW is obscenely wasteful, consuming more electricity than all of Ireland to generate an endless stream of mathematical garbage.

  8. Sep 2018
    1. John wants to upload a PDF file to IPFS but only give Mary accessHe puts his PDF file in his working directory and encrypts it with Mary’s public keyHe tells IPFS he wants to add this encrypted file, which generates a hash of the encrypted fileHis encrypted file is available on the IPFS networkMary can retrieve it and decrypt the file since she owns the associated private key of the public key that was used to encrypt the fileA malicious party cannot decrypt the file because they lack Mary’s private key
    1. A peer-to-peer hypermedia protocol to make the web faster, safer, and more open.
  9. Jul 2018
    1. Approachable consumer experience. If you’ve ever tried to make a dApp transaction, you know how painful the process is. You need to set up an account to purchase coins, make the purchase, create a MetaMask account, send the coins to MetaMask, and, finally, verify the transaction. This is too much friction for the mainstream user.

      This is so true. Still looking for an application that can benefit from this concept.

  10. May 2018
    1. The hype cycle for the technology known as Blockchain has reached a fever pitch, but it remains misunderstood by many. What is blockchain? What value could it bring to information management and library services? And, why should information professionals be interested? Jason Griffey will discuss the potentials and pitfalls of blockchain, focusing on its ability to decentralize and upend a number of assumptions about the way digital goods and services are implemented. He will also look at the problems of blockchain technologies; give some guidelines on separating hype from reality; and talk through what libraries should be watching for – and helping to build – over the next several years.
    1. In theory, photographers will be able to upload their images to a platform called KodakOne, create a blockchain-based license for each image, and use web-crawling software to scour the internet looking for copyright violations. Instead of using dollars, photographers can have clients pay them in KodakCoins.
  11. Jan 2018
    1. 有別於比特幣、以太幣之公開交易特性,Hyperledger屬於認許制區塊鏈(permissioned blockchain),透過建置共享式帳本與共同系統,節省共識機制運作的時間與工作量,同時兼顧安全性,讓參與者能在單一社群中共享資料,並能即刻處理迫在眉睫的問題。 (來源: IBM )

      私有鏈技術:關鍵問題是怎麼獲得共識才結鏈?

  12. Dec 2017
    1. The number of transactions the blockchain can process can never exceed that of a single node that is participating in the network.

      Not sure if I understand this correctly. Does this mean the number of transactions that a blockchain-powered network can process is equivalent to the number of transactions that the slowest node in the network can process? If so, I haven't heard such limitation.

    1. Although language seems to us so obviously useful that its cost is hard to discern, there is some truth to Thomas Hobbes’s explanation of why humans find it so much more difficult to cooperate than ants do. Ants don’t require a tyrannical monster to enforce cooperation, Hobbes argued in Leviathan (1651), mainly because they don’t talk. They can be harmed but not offended; they can’t make agreements and therefore cannot break them; and they don’t ‘strive to reform and innovate’ – all of which spares them quarrels, disagreements and generally bad feelings.
  13. Nov 2017
    1. Bitcoin mining uses a lot of electricity -- currently as much as Ecuador.

      The cryptocurrency network Ethereum recently announced that it will try "proof of stake" rather than "proof of work".

  14. Sep 2017
  15. May 2017
    1. Ian O’Byrne, an assistant professor of literacy education at the College of Charleston, replied, “In the future we’ll see more opportunities for online, personalized learning. This will include open, online learning experiences (e.g., MOOCs) where individuals can lurk and build up capacity or quench interests. I also believe that we’ll see a rise in the offering of premium or pay content that creates a space where one-to-one learning and interaction will allow mentors to guide learners while providing critical feedback. We will identify opportunities to build a digital version of the apprenticeship learning models that have existed in the past. Alternative credentials and digital badges will provide more granular opportunities to document and archive learning over time from traditional and nontraditional learning sources. Through evolving technologies (e.g., blockchain), this may provide opportunities for learners to document and frame their own learning pathways.”
  16. Apr 2017
  17. Jan 2017
    1. Ethereum,

      Ethereum is the way the internet should have been. I absolutely feel they are the forerunners of the future. Would love to see mozilla spearhead ethereum related projects.

  18. Nov 2016
  19. Oct 2016
    1. Twenty five hundred years ago the pressure of trade forced the minting of the first coins. Eleven hundred years ago the weight of all those coins forced the printing of paper money. Seven hundred years ago the challenges of international trade forced the development of bills of exchange. And fifty years ago the mainframes gave birth to the credit revolution.

      Right now we’re on the cusp of a similar revolution. Because our smartphones want our money. They don’t want to have to talk to a bank for an authorisation. They just want to hand over the cash. But they can’t, because we haven’t got money that fits into a smartphone. Yet.

      Sometime in the next few years, one of these big central banks is going to introduce its own blockchain-based money — blockchain money issued by a government. It’s been nicknamed ‘fedcoin’.

  20. Aug 2016
    1. many visions for blockchain in education seem to advocate writing it all to the blockchain

      This is obviously a mistake as it is sufficient to put the address (or its hash value) on the chain, the data (of any size) being stored on something like IPFS. Blockchains were initially designed to store transactions not content — the discussion about the size of the block was about the number of transactions that could go in a block... Things evolved with new systems like https://www.bigchaindb.com/ and the landscape of blockchain-like technologies will continue to grow and diversify...

    2. blockchain applications are most efficient in dealing with relatively small amounts of structured data. The average transaction (database entry) in the Bitcoin blockchain, e.g., is a mere 500 bytes (give or take) and is highly structured. The structure of the data allows for the development of independent applications to analyze the data on the blockchain.

      Agree! Such structured and shall-be-interoperatable data can plug with recommendation engine for guided learning path. possible?

    3. Unfortunately, such a cavalier approach to ‘throwing it on the blockchain’ flies in the face of the realities of distributed computing

      Agree X 1000.

      I initially thought that it would make sense to have a learner's identity on the chain, and include all of their evidence of work with their credentials. These could be docs, PDFs, videos, audio, apps, games, etc. This of course is an untenable process.

      I think that having identity on a distributed ledger technology, with links out to the domain of the learner, that houses/hosts all of this evidence would possibly make sense.

      I also think that we need to identify ways & means to archive this evidence (which would not live on the chain) so that evidence doesn't disappear.

      If we're using these technologies to address the problem of orphaned badges, what happens when the evidence is orphaned as well?

      Please note that some would suggest that we don't really need the evidence...we only need the documentation of that moment in time the learner was issued the credential as evidence of work that was completed. I see that point...but also think that building up an eportfolio, or domain of one's own and connecting this to a distributed ledger technology with read/write access on the past of the individual would be awesomesauce. :)

    4. Too bad its unlikely to come true.

      I think we still need to look at possibilities to make this blockchain and distributed ledger technologies possible. In my thinking it would be putting your identity on a distributed chain, and then linking out to evidence, credentials, etc. Yes, this will take time, space, and money. Hopefully we can learn from bitcoin, ethereum, and others to develop something that metastasize into a mess.

      I also appreciate the need to allow anyone, regardless of where they live, or means to do so, with the ability to read/write to the ledger.

    5. While the technical know-how to develop a blockchain application is significant, the success of a blockchain is at least as dependent on the continuous social negotiations required to meet the needs of its user base. And, there is little self-executing about that…

      Well stated. One of the narratives that we've heard again and again by ed technologists recently is that blockchain and distributed ledger technologies will take the humans out of the process and replace them with machines. I definitely disagree with this assessment, and think that you're correct that there is (or will be) as need for "continuous social negotiations" that are transparent, and can be audited/revised as well.

    6. Many of the issues that blockchain developers grapple with have profound implications for users and not every user would prioritize future blockchain developments in the same way

      Agreed. I think one of the other concerns embedded in this is that we bring our own value systems into this work as we code, develop, and spread this work. Our individual values might not be the value systems of the collective whole.

    7. blockchains require a system of governance and community engagement to foster continual technical and social development, including a process for communicating with and providing support to users

      Agreed. I think there are also challenges as we work to ensure that we don't reify some of the problems from the past. Just by "putting some blockchain into it" doesn't mean that things will be better. We need discussions and decisions about what we want/need in education, and how blockchain and distributed ledger technologies might address this.

    8. Blockchain misconceptions and the Future of Education

  21. Jun 2016
    1. Not only is decentralization, open protocols, open source, collaborative development and living in the wild a feature of Bitcoin, that’s the whole point
    2. We see plans like the R3 Consortium as a counter-productive grab to maintain centralized control. There are already reports and rumors that things aren't going according to plan.
    3. As a conclusion, it's better to rely on a private blockchain than no cryptographic system at all. It has merits and pushes the blockchain terminology into the corporate world, making truly public blockchains a bit more likely for the future.
    4. Bitcoin Magazine spoke with  some well-known blockchain thinkers on their opinions of what the uses for a private blockchain might be. 

      No use cases, but conflicting opinions from experts

    5. they are totally orthogonal, both can coexist in the same time, and therefore there is no need to oppose them as we can often see it.
    6. The consortium or company running a private blockchain can easily, if desired, change the rules of a blockchain, revert transactions, modify balances, etc. In some cases, e.g. national land registries, this functionality is necessary
    1. DAO, a venture capital fund based on Ethereum cryptocurrency, was hacked, and ether coins valued at about $55M were fraudulently transferred. This article gives some details of the hack.

      http://www.wsj.com/articles/investment-fund-based-on-digital-currency-to-wind-down-after-alleged-hack-1466175033 The account with the stolen ether coins has been frozen, and they plan to undo the fraudulent transactions. But this itself is disturbing to some, as part of the idea behind cryptocurrency is lack of a central authority.

      The creators of DAO proclaimed that the code is the contract. So if no laws were broken in the course of the hack, one could argue that the transfer is legitimate under those terms. https://medium.com/@Swarm/daos-hacks-and-the-law-eb6a33808e3e

      Apparently there are new attacks already. https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ot3z8/dao_is_under_attack_again/

    1. The uncanny mind that built Ethereum - Vitalik Buterin invented the world’s hottest new cryptocurrency and inspired a movement — before he’d turned 20.

    1. Why the Bitcoin Blockchain? Why not Ethereum?

      MIT Media Lab and use of the Bitcoin Blockchain and not Ethereum (or other alternatives) to get it running.

    2. Over the past year, we have been working on a set of tools to issue, display, and verify digital credentials using the Bitcoin blockchain and the Mozilla Open Badges specification. Today we are releasing version 1 of our code under the MIT open-source license to make it easier for others to start experimenting with similar ideas.
    1. electronic coin

      In bitcoin, these coins obviously refer to monetary units. But, it would be interesting to see how these would be adjusted given new information.

      In the case of credentialing, this could be assessments, observations, certifications, credentials, etc.

      The "digital signatures" could come from trusted parties, colleagues, peers, etc. Depending on the framing of the system...it could be anyone. With these signatures, it could link back to their own values and identify more information about the individual/organization offering the signature.

    2. mechanism exists to make paymentsover a communications channel without a trusted party

      Once again, in the initial framing of bitcoin, it appears that the idea is to utilize technology (i.e., blockchain) to make transactions over a digital channel without involving established, trusted parties (e.g., banks).

    3. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads.

      This is interesting. Much of the pushback about blockchain and bitcoin comes from questions about "trust" and issues with auditing/editing/revising information from the past.

      It seems like (at least with the initial framing here by Nakamoto) "they" recognize a need for "reversal" of information/data/values and also an increased need for "trust" in the model.

    4. financial institutions serving astrusted third parties to process electronic payments

      This system may work well for financial transactions, but what happens when we build a "proof-of-work chain" for other information/data?

    5. proof-of-work chain

      At its base, it seems like a "proof-of-work chain" using a database propagated by peer-to-peer technologies.

    6. We

      Questions about who is the "we" in this document.

    1. This post is the third in a series of five blog posts designed to explore, inform, and encourage public discussions about the possibilities, opportunities, and challenges arising at the intersection of Open Badges and blockchain technology.
  22. May 2016
    1. Use of blockchain technology has recently been shown to provide an immutable ledger of every step in a clinical research protocol, and this could easily be adapted to basic and experimental model science. All participants in the peer-to-peer research network have access to all of the time stamped, continuously updated data. It is essentially tamper proof since any change, such as to the prespecified data analysis, would have to be made in every computer (typically thousands) within the distributed network. All of the data would be in a findable, machine readable format. More importantly, with every step of a research path digitised and shared, we have a platform well suited for rapid, independent verification of methods and results.

      This is getting mentioned more and more in an open science context.

    1. Recent posts by Adrian Hope Baille and Sina Motamedi have got me thinking again about the idea of the Federal Reserve (or any other central bank for that matter) adopting bitcoin technology. Here's an older post of mine on the idea, although this post will take a different tack.

      This post seems to have gotten the conversation started across some important sites about the idea of a federal backed cryptocurrency in the US.

  23. Feb 2016
  24. Jan 2016
    1. Now fintech platform OpenLedger and Danish bitcoin exchange CCEDK are joining forces with MUSE, a music-tailored blockchain, to make monetizing music as easy as new peer-to-peer (P2P) platforms made distributing it 15 years ago.

      PeerTracks, a music streaming and retail platform company, is the first outfit to use the brand new MUSE network, in partnership with CCEDK and OpenLedger.

      http://www.peertracks.com/faq.php<br> https://www.openledger.info/<br> https://www.ccedk.com/about

    1. This has implications far beyond the cryptocurrency

      The concept of trust, in the sociological and economic sense, underlies exchange. In the 15th-17th centuries, the Dutch and English dominance of trade owed much to their early development of instruments of credit that allowed merchants to fund and later to insure commercial shipping without the exchange of hard currency, either silver or by physically transporting the currency of the realm. Credit worked because the English and Dutch economies trusted the issuers of credit.

      Francis Fukuyama, a philosopher and political economist at Stanford, wrote a book in 1995, Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, on the impact of cultures of trust on entrepreneurial growth. Countries of ‘low trust’ have close family culture who limit trust to relations: France, China, S. Italy. Countries of ‘high trust’ have greater ‘spontaneous sociability’ that encourages the formation of intermediate institutions between the state and the family, that encourage greater entrepreneurial growth: Germany, England, the U.S. – I own the book and (shame on me!) haven’t yet read it.

      I thought of this article in those contexts – of the general need for trusted institutions and the power they have in mediating an economy, and the fascinating questions raised when a new facilitator of trust is introduced.

      How do we trust? Across human history, how have we extended the social role of trust to institutions? If a new modality of trust comes available, how does that change institutional structures and correspondingly the power of individuals, of institutions. How would it change the friction to growth and to decline?

      Prior to reading this article, I had dismissed Bitcoin as a temporary aberration, mostly for criminal enterprises and malcontents. I still feel that way. But the underlying technology and it’s implications – now that’s interesting.

    1. the journalistic fetish for ‘impartiality’, which frequently means that anyone who has a strong opinion is ‘biased’, so ‘equal time’ is given to the ‘two sides’, without considering the possibility that if one side is a small minority who the experts are all strongly opposed to it might be because they are, you know, wrong.

      In any reporting on a controversy in science or technology a journalists job is first and foremost to find out whether there’s overwhelming support for one side among experts and if there is to report that straightforwardly.

      I don't know enough about bitcoin to have an opinion about this controversy. Regardless of that, this is a very good point. "Impartial" shouldn't mean giving equal credence and equal time to fringe viewpoints -- unless they are coming from some noteworthy experts with strong evidence.

      Mike Belshe, CEO of BitGo, says they need to increase the blockchain size immediately.<br> http://belshe.com/2016/01/18/bitcoin-blocksize-and-the-future/

    1. http://r3cev.com/s/Watermarked-tokens-and-pseudonymity-on-public-blockchains-Swanson.pdf

      Yet if a network is comprised of known and trusted entities with legal, off-chain obligations to fulfill, then you have a set of different security assumptions to build around. And in the case of financial institutions, a feature such as proof-of-work via mining, which is currently core to public blockchains is an unnecessary and even redundant.

      This paper explores several of the drawbacks and challenges of using public blockchains for securing off-chain titles and concludes that these types of networks are not fit-for-purpose for globally regulated financial institutions.

  25. Dec 2015
  26. Nov 2015
    1. Blockchains can also implement business rules, such as transactions that take place only if two or more parties endorse them, or if another transaction has been completed first.
    2. Blockchains are also the latest example of the unexpected fruits of cryptography. Mathematical scrambling is used to boil down an original piece of information into a code, known as a hash. Any attempt to tamper with any part of the blockchain is apparent immediately—because the new hash will not match the old ones. In this way a science that keeps information secret (vital for encrypting messages and online shopping and banking) is, paradoxically, also a tool for open dealing.
    3. The blockchain is an even more potent technology. In essence it is a shared, trusted, public ledger that everyone can inspect, but which no single user controls. The participants in a blockchain system collectively keep the ledger up to date: it can be amended only according to strict rules and by general agreement. Bitcoin’s blockchain ledger prevents double-spending and keeps track of transactions continuously. It is what makes possible a currency without a central bank.
    4. But most unfair of all is that bitcoin’s shady image causes people to overlook the extraordinary potential of the “blockchain”, the technology that underpins it. This innovation carries a significance stretching far beyond cryptocurrency. The blockchain lets people who have no particular confidence in each other collaborate without having to go through a neutral central authority. Simply put, it is a machine for creating trust.