28 research outputs found
Scalability Analysis of Blockchains Through Blockchain Simulation
The past decade has witnessed a surge of cryptocurrencies such as bitcoins, litecoin, dogecoin, peercoin, bitcoin being the most popular amongst them. Enthusiasts and skeptics have debated and come up with disparate opinions to contest both the success and failures of such currencies. However, the veracity of such opinions can only be derived after true analysis of the technological breakthroughs that have occurred in this domain. Blockchains being the backbone of such currencies is a broad subject that encompasses economics, law, cryptography and software engineering. Most of these technologies are decentralized and are open source algorithms. Blockchains popularity is largely based on its tremendous potential of carrying huge amount of data securely over a peer to peer network. This feature of blockchains has leveraged its value in the market for many companies who want to use blockchains for enterprise goals and profit making. For a more comprehensive understanding of blockchains and how the block generation algorithm works , how transactions are included in a block we must understand the genesis of the blockchain technology, what exactly it represents and its relevance to the real world. Despite its advantages, blockchains still remain a novel technology and their remains areas of concerns that can be bettered for attaining ideal efficiency. This research delves into the scalability issue of blockchains and provides a comparative analysis of several blockchain parameters with real time data . It delves into the factors that make block chains largely non-scalable. This is done by the simulation of blockchain. It then addresses the various mechanisms that can be employed to resolve this limitation through measuring the differences between the simulator and real time scenarios
ΠΠ΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ»Π° ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π² ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΌ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π΅
The issue of secure data exchange and performing external transactions between robust distributed ledgers has recently been among the most significant in the sphere of designing and implementing decentralized technologies. Several approaches have been proposed to speed up the process of verifying transactions on adjacent blockchains. The problem of search has not been under research yet. The paper contains security evaluation of data exchange between independent robust distributed ledgers inside multidimensional blockchain. Main principles, basic steps of the protocol and major requirements for it are observed: centralized approach, subset principle and robust SVP. An equivalence of centralized approach and ideal search and verification functionality is proven. The probability of successful verification in case of using fully connected network graph or equivalent approach with fully connected graph between parent and child blockchain is shown. The insecurity of approach with one-to-one links between child and parent ledgers or with a subset principle is proven. A robust search and verification protocol for blocks and transactions based on the features of robust distributed ledgers is presented. The probability of attack on this protocol is mostly defined by the probability of attack on verification and not on search. An approach to protection against an attacker with 50% of nodes in the network is given. It is based on combination of various search and verification techniques.ΠΡΠΎΠ±Π»Π΅ΠΌΠ° Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΎΠ±ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° ΠΈΠ½ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΡΡΠΎΠΉΡΠΈΠ²ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ°ΡΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈΠ· Π½Π°ΠΈΠ±ΠΎΠ»Π΅Π΅ Π°ΠΊΡΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΡ
Π² ΡΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΡΠΎΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ Π΄Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΡ
ΡΠ΅Ρ
Π½ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΉ. ΠΠΎ Π½Π°ΡΡΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎ Π²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΈ Π±ΡΠ»ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Ρ, ΠΎΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΠ΅ Π½Π° ΡΡΠΊΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ²Π΅ΡΠΊΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΡΠΊΠΈ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ² Π΄Π»Ρ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ Π² ΡΠΎΡΠ΅Π΄Π½ΠΈΡ
Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π°Ρ
. ΠΡΠΈ ΡΡΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ±Π»Π΅ΠΌΠ° ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΡΠ°Π½Π΅Π΅ Π½Π΅ Π·Π°ΡΡΠ°Π³ΠΈΠ²Π°Π»Π°ΡΡ. Π ΡΠ°Π±ΠΎΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΌΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π½ Π²ΠΎΠΏΡΠΎΡ Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΎΡΡΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΡΡΠΎΠΉΡΠΈΠ²ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ°ΡΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ Π² ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΊΠ°Ρ
ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π°. ΠΠΏΠΈΡΠ°Π½Ρ ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠΈΠΏΡ ΠΈ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π½ΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠ°ΠΏΡ ΡΠ°Π±ΠΎΡΡ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ»Π°, Π° ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ Π±Π°Π·ΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠ΅Π±ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ, ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡΠ΅ ΠΊ Π½Π΅ΠΌΡ. ΠΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½Ρ ΡΠΏΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Ρ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΡΠΎΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ»Π° ΠΎΠ±ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° ΡΠΎΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠΌΠΈ Π΄Π»Ρ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π²Π½Π΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΡ
ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ: ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΠΉ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄, ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠΈΠΏ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π° ΠΈ ΡΡΠΎΠΉΠΊΠΈΠΉ SVP. ΠΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½Π° ΡΠΊΠ²ΠΈΠ²Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π° ΠΈΠ΄Π΅Π°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΌΡ ΡΡΠ½ΠΊΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°Π»Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π² GUC-ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΡΡ
. ΠΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½Π° Π²Π΅ΡΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΡΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π² ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°Π΅ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π°, ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π½Π° ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π°Ρ
, ΠΏΡΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠ° ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈ ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΡΠΊΠ²ΠΈΠ²Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π° Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½ΡΠΌ Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠΎΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π°ΠΌΠΈ. ΠΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½Π° Π½Π΅Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°Ρ ΡΠΎ ΡΠ²ΡΠ·ΡΡ 1 ΠΊ 1 ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠΎΠΌ, Π° ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ Π½Π΅Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π°, ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π½Π° ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅ ΡΠ·Π»ΠΎΠ² ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ½Π΅Π³ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠΎΠ². ΠΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ ΡΡΠΎΠΉΠΊΠΈΠΉ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ» ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ² ΠΈ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ, ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π½Π° ΡΠ²ΠΎΠΉΡΡΠ²Π°Ρ
ΡΡΠΎΠΉΠΊΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΡΡΡΠΎΠΉΡΠΈΠ²ΡΡ
ΡΠ°ΡΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΡ
ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠΎΠ². Π Π·Π½Π°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΡΠ΅ΠΏΠ΅Π½ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ Π°ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΈ ΠΎΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ Π²Π΅ΡΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡΡ Π°ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΈ Π½Π° ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ, Π° Π½Π΅ Π½Π° ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ°. ΠΡΠΈ Π½Π΅ΠΎΠ±Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΡΠΈ Π·Π°ΡΠΈΡΡ ΠΎΡ Π°ΡΠ°ΠΊΡΡΡΠΈΡ
, ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΡΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΡΡΡΠΈΡ
Π΄ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠ½Ρ ΡΠ·Π»ΠΎΠ² Π² ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈ, ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠ±ΠΈΠ½Π°ΡΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ² Π΄Π»Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ² ΠΈ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ
ΠΠ΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ»Π° ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π² ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΌ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π΅
ΠΡΠΎΠ±Π»Π΅ΠΌΠ° Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΎΠ±ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° ΠΈΠ½ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΡΡΠΎΠΉΡΠΈΠ²ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ°ΡΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈΠ· Π½Π°ΠΈΠ±ΠΎΠ»Π΅Π΅ Π°ΠΊΡΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΡ
Π² ΡΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΡΠΎΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ Π΄Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΡ
ΡΠ΅Ρ
Π½ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΉ. ΠΠΎ Π½Π°ΡΡΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎ Π²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΈ Π±ΡΠ»ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Ρ, ΠΎΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΠ΅ Π½Π° ΡΡΠΊΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ²Π΅ΡΠΊΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΡΠΊΠΈ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ² Π΄Π»Ρ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ Π² ΡΠΎΡΠ΅Π΄Π½ΠΈΡ
Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π°Ρ
. ΠΡΠΈ ΡΡΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ±Π»Π΅ΠΌΠ° ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΡΠ°Π½Π΅Π΅ Π½Π΅ Π·Π°ΡΡΠ°Π³ΠΈΠ²Π°Π»Π°ΡΡ. Π ΡΠ°Π±ΠΎΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΌΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π½ Π²ΠΎΠΏΡΠΎΡ Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΎΡΡΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΡΡΠΎΠΉΡΠΈΠ²ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ°ΡΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ Π² ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΊΠ°Ρ
ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π°. ΠΠΏΠΈΡΠ°Π½Ρ ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠΈΠΏΡ ΠΈ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π½ΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠ°ΠΏΡ ΡΠ°Π±ΠΎΡΡ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ»Π°, Π° ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ Π±Π°Π·ΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠ΅Π±ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ, ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡΠ΅ ΠΊ Π½Π΅ΠΌΡ. ΠΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½Ρ ΡΠΏΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Ρ ΠΏΠΎΡΡΡΠΎΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ»Π° ΠΎΠ±ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° ΡΠΎΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠΌΠΈ Π΄Π»Ρ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π²Π½Π΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΡ
ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ: ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΠΉ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄, ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠΈΠΏ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π° ΠΈ ΡΡΠΎΠΉΠΊΠΈΠΉ SVP. ΠΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½Π° ΡΠΊΠ²ΠΈΠ²Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΡΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π° ΠΈΠ΄Π΅Π°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΌΡ ΡΡΠ½ΠΊΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°Π»Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π² GUC-ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΡΡ
. ΠΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½Π° Π²Π΅ΡΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΡΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π² ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°Π΅ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π°, ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π½Π° ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π°Ρ
, ΠΏΡΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠ° ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈ ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΡΠΊΠ²ΠΈΠ²Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π° Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½ΡΠΌ Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠΎΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΉΠ½Π°ΠΌΠΈ. ΠΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½Π° Π½Π΅Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°Ρ ΡΠΎ ΡΠ²ΡΠ·ΡΡ 1 ΠΊ 1 ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠΎΠΌ, Π° ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ Π½Π΅Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄Π°, ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π½Π° ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅ ΡΠ·Π»ΠΎΠ² ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ½Π΅Π³ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠΎΠ². ΠΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ ΡΡΠΎΠΉΠΊΠΈΠΉ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ» ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ² ΠΈ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ, ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΠΉ Π½Π° ΡΠ²ΠΎΠΉΡΡΠ²Π°Ρ
ΡΡΠΎΠΉΠΊΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΡΡΡΠΎΠΉΡΠΈΠ²ΡΡ
ΡΠ°ΡΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½Π½ΡΡ
ΡΠ΅Π΅ΡΡΡΠΎΠ². Π Π·Π½Π°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΡΠ΅ΠΏΠ΅Π½ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ Π°ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΈ ΠΎΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ Π²Π΅ΡΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡΡ Π°ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΈ Π½Π° ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ, Π° Π½Π΅ Π½Π° ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ°. ΠΡΠΈ Π½Π΅ΠΎΠ±Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠΌΠΎΡΡΠΈ Π·Π°ΡΠΈΡΡ ΠΎΡ Π°ΡΠ°ΠΊΡΡΡΠΈΡ
, ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΡΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΡΡΡΠΈΡ
Π΄ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠ½Ρ ΡΠ·Π»ΠΎΠ² Π² ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈ, ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠ±ΠΈΠ½Π°ΡΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ² Π΄Π»Ρ ΠΏΠΎΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΈ Π²Π΅ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π±Π»ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ² ΠΈ ΡΡΠ°Π½Π·Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ
The Ontological Sociology of Cryptocurrency: A Theoretical Exploration of Bitcoin
For millennia, money has been a basal element of everyday life reality in market-organized societies. Albeit money has changed extrinsically (e.g., form, use, utility) countless of times, some intrinsic characteristics remain the same, i.e., money is reified value. But why? What gives money value? Even more crucial, what is money in the first place? This exploratory study delves into the intricacies of money, in particular the revolutionary 21st century pecuniary techno-phenomenon, a cryptocurrency called Bitcoin. Though cryptocurrencies have been the topic of several financial and legal scholarly publications for a few years, we rather focus our analysis on Bitcoin\u27s ontological characteristics under a schema of overlapping theoretical layers: Social Exchange Theory, Marxian Dialectics, and Social Construction of Reality. Our intention is to dissect Bitcoin sociologically and empirically examine its global exchange, consumption, and institutionalization. Consequently, we venture to ask, can Bitcoin redefine the meaning of money and how we relate to it? Reformulate the role of banking? Disrupt the universally accepted objective reality of currency value attached to sensorial experience? Transfer trust from ambivalent human relations to an incorruptible algorithm? Or even become the Internet of money
Blockchain-based Perfect Sharing Project Platform based on the Proof of Atomicity Consensus Algorithm
The Korean government funded 12.8 billion USD to 652 research and development (R&D) projects supported by 20 ministries in 2019. Every year, various organizations are supported to conduct R&D projects focusing on selected core technologies by evaluating emerging technologies which industries are planning to develop. To manage the whole cycle of national R&D projects, information sharing on national R&D projects is very essential. The blockchain technology is considered as a core solution to share information reliably and prevent forgery in various fields. For efficient management of national R&D projects, we enhance and analyse the Perfect Sharing Project (PSP)-Platform based on a new blockchain-based platform for information sharing and forgery prevention. It is a shared platform for national ICT R&D projects
management with excellent performance in preventing counterfeiting. As a consensus algorithm is very important to prevent forgery in blockchain, we survey not only architectural aspects and examples of the platform but also the consensus algorithms. Considering characteristics of the PSP-Platform, we adopt an atomic proof (POA)
consensus algorithm as a new consensus algorithm in this paper. To prove the validity of the POA consensus algorithm, we have conducted experiments. The experiment results show the outstanding performance of the POA consensus algorithm used in the PSP-Platform in terms of block generation delay and block propagation time
A P2P Networking Simulation Framework For Blockchain Studies
Recently, blockchain becomes a disruptive technology of building distributed applications (DApps). Many researchers and institutions have devoted their resources to the development of more effective blockchain technologies and innovative applications. However, with the limitation of computing power and financial resources, it is hard for researchers to deploy and test their blockchain innovations in a large-scape physical network.
Hence, in this dissertation, we proposed a peer-to-peer (P2P) networking simulation framework, which allows to deploy and test (simulate) a large-scale blockchain system with thousands of nodes in one single computer. We systematically reviewed existing research and techniques of blockchain simulator and evaluated their advantages and disadvantages.
To achieve generality and flexibility, our simulation framework lays the foundation for simulating blockchain network with different scales and protocols. We verified our simulation framework by deploying the most famous three blockchain systems (Bitcoin, Ethereum and IOTA) in our simulation framework.
We demonstrated the effectiveness of our simulation framework with the following three case studies: (a) Improve the performance of blockchain by changing key parameters or deploying new directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure protocol; (b) Test and analyze the attack response of Tangle-based blockchain (IOTA) (c) Establish and deploy a new smart grid bidding system for demand side in our simulation framework.
This dissertation also points out a series of open issues for future research
Recommended from our members
Cryptocurrencies and beyond: using design science research to demonstrate diverse applications of blockchains
This thesis investigates blockchain technology and whether its mutually cooperative topology and commons-based peer production practices have implications for society because, instead of the traditional top-down, centralised model of governance, blockchains represent an alternative way of collaborating. Much of the literature anticipates the vast potential of the permanent and publicly auditable nature of the propagated values of blockchains. Indeed, writers have supposed that the smart contract capabilities of the technology may prove revolutionary for areas beyond that of the economic domain targeted by the cryptocurrency Bitcoin, which is the first successful use-case of a blockchain. However, few advanced use cases beyond that economic realm have materialised; this research demonstrates such usecases. This thesis asks four research questions. The first asks whether blockchains can help reduce energy consumption. The second asks whether blockchains can help digitise the informal sector. The third asks whether blockchains can help counter fake news. The final question asks whether blockchains can help address criticisms of humanitarian aid. Those topics are four amongst many urgent problems currently facing humankind, and therefore, the overarching research question of this thesis becomes whether blockchains can help humanity. This work advances the supposed potential of blockchains proposed by current literature by using design science research to create software artefacts that propose solutions for incentivising energy efficiency, fighting financial fraud, providing digital provenance and adding trust to humanitarian aid reporting. By demonstrating blockchain-based software solutions in those four topic areas, this thesis concludes that blockchains can help humanity. However, if they are to help society address some of its problems, blockchains have significant technological and organisational barriers to overcome. Furthermore, the idea that blockchains can help humanity is a form of techno-determinism and this research concludes that it is impossible to solve every issue by diversifying technical operations; humankind must also change political, economic, and cultural goals, too. Nevertheless, this thesis has implications for regulators, despite the barriers and false solutionism offered by technology because, rather than the trusted lawmakers and experts that nations used to look up to as oracles of truth, now it may be possible to look to blockchains, instead
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN BLOCKCHAIN CONSENSUS PARAMETERS AND NETWORK EXTERNALITIES
48 pagesLarge-scale decentralized networks have many advantageous fault tolerance properties over their centralized counterparts. These properties enable resiliency in the face of faulty, and even adversarial behavior. Consensus protocols are a way to coordinate state across these networks and are what makes them extremely robust to adversaries. This paper investigates the effectiveness of different consensus protocol designs by examining various questions about the relationships between blockchain consensus parameters and network externalities. In this research we develop a linear regression model to estimate which characteristics of blockchains are associated with the highest levels of byzantine fault tolerance. This quantitative research provides evidence for whether there are statistically significant relationships between aspects of blockchain design and voting power centralization. Finally, we explore what key network metrics are used by node operators in the decision making process to participate in the mining process
Uma AnÑlise Competitiva entre as Tecnologias Blockchain e Tangle para o Projeto de Aplicaçáes IoT / A Competitive Analysis between Blockchain and Tangle Technologies for IoT Application Designs
Este artigo tem por objetivo realizar uma anΓ‘lise competitiva entre as tecnologias Blockchain e Tangle, visando principalmente ao projeto de aplicaçáes IoT. Para tanto, inicialmente Γ© feito um estudo teΓ³rico comparativo das estruturas de dados e algoritmos usados para manipular informaçáes sob cada tecnologia. Em seguida, por meio de simulação, diferentes cenΓ‘rios sΓ£o analisados para aferir o nΓvel de seguranΓ§a do sistema em termos da inviolabilidade das informaçáes, considerando o emprego de cada tecnologia. Os resultados finais permitem conjecturar que Tangle Γ© uma alternativa mais promissora, alΓ©m de se constituΓrem em subsΓdios para possΓveis projetos de aplicaçáes IoT. ConclusΓ΅es gerais e trabalhos futuros encerram este artigo