Translated material
7 years Bitcoin: how cryptocurrency changes control methods
Cryptocurrencies, the most famous of which is Bitcoin, became not only an experiment within the framework of the global financial system, but also an example of abandoning the functions of a unified central government or governing body.
Politicians consider the idea of decentralization and an invariable management system of uncomfortable and unrealized. However, the seven years of the existence of the bitcoins made it possible to draw conclusions about how the state system may look without a single management center.
What happens if you cannot force the rest to obey, and the one who is responsible for everything is simply not? This is discussed by Ariel Deschapell (Ariel Deschapell), the content manager of the UBITQUITY blockchain startup, on the pages of the Coindesk portal.
Bitcoin is based on the Peer-2-Peer network, consisting of miners, those who installed software in their own and supports the work of blockchain chains . Above this chain is a multi -layer ecosystem of steikolders. It can be both companies and ordinary users who own virtual currency.
The architecture of the blockchain is such that those who make a contribution to maintaining the system itself receive rewards in the form of bitcoins. The number of bitcoins is limited, so the more people participate in the system, the more valuable are bitcoins. The Bitcoin system is similar to a company in which there are shareholders, but there are no directors, and least of all it is similar to a simple payment system.
This is a decentralized autonomous organization (Decentralized Autonomous Organization-DAO), which has successfully has been working for more than seven years without any delegation of authority to a certain central governing body.
The absence of a central government or directive body in this system may seem a significant drawback. But, as the blockchain, this is a feature, not a mistake (it's not a bug, it's a feature). The absence of a central figure within the framework of the management system is not equal to the lack of leaders.
On the contrary, this means that anyone can take on the leadership. The difference is that different ideas and solutions should openly compete with each other. You cannot force you to use any service if you do not like it. As a result of such competition, a large number of solutions for different problems appear. The user can choose what is most suitable for him, and vote with bitcoins.
The consensus around the bitcoin protocol is a public contract, a unanimous decision. All participants agree to play according to his rules and no one forces anyone. All participants in the process do this in their interests and at any moment are free to leave.
In order for the Bitcoin Protocol system to work, it must meet the needs and desires of all interested parties, so the development of bitcoin requires a single opinion, a true consensus.
In the summer of 2016, bitcoins survived the call associated with this. A group of developers made an attempt to create an alternative blockchain historia. For a significant part of the representatives of the bitcoin emission, this was unacceptable. They decided to continue to adhere to the rule that underlies the idea of blockchain, - the invariability of the information chain.
In such an environment, all stakeholders can independently interact with each other to achieve any agreed goals without a single management center. This means that they are included in the system where the development of bitcoin can serve the best.
Another topic: Bitcoin and a chain of blocks: from anarchy to mainstream
None of these actions requires permission from above. This method of thinking is very different from the usual search for a representative of the authorities, who has the functions of issuing permits or punishment. The short story of Bitcoin showed that it is time to stop looking for leaders and instead starting to look for associates.