Consensus refers to how all participants reach an agreement on a specific issue.
Historically, consensus that propelled the advancement of human civilization primarily relied on human subjectivity, such as the Hundred Schools of Thought, religions, and Marxism. However, in the information age, with the explosion of data, the limited processing capacity of the human brain struggles to cope with increasingly complex situations and form effective consensus through traditional social discourse.
This is where "Mechanical Consensus" emerges. It doesn't rely on direct human participation but instead utilizes automated machine game theory to form a consensus that addresses the needs of human civilization. The Bitcoin network is a successful example of mechanical consensus, demonstrating its ability to adapt, grow, and become more stable and secure.
This self-evolving mechanical consensus, capable of adapting to the information age, is hailed as the "Great Consensus of the Information Age," poised to lead future societal development. The ever-increasing torrent of information necessitates the creation of a great mechanical consensus to guide humanity in addressing the consensus challenges brought about by the explosive growth of technology.
The essence of Bitcoin lies in its adaptive mechanical consensus, akin to the human "heart," serving as the core of its control and operation. Drawing an analogy between human functions and the Bitcoin system:
- Heart: Equates to the adaptive mechanical consensus, the core controlling the system's operation.
- Brain: Equates to the smart contract platform, responsible for computation and execution.
- Senses: Equates to the communication mechanism, responsible for information transmission.
Past public blockchains have overemphasized the pursuit of computational power, neglecting the central role of the consensus mechanism. Just like in humans, the "heart" is the key to determining direction and action, not just the computational power of the "brain."
Although Satoshi Nakamoto has disappeared, the Bitcoin system he proposed, with its core "Mechanical Heart" – the adaptive mechanical consensus – continues to operate and evolve, guiding the development of the entire crypto industry.
In early human history, people gathered for survival, forming a primitive consensus based on collective defense, food distribution, and the division of labor. As society developed, the emergence of the social contract theory attributed the formation of consensus to individual rationality, the spirit of contract, and the constraints of rules, laying the foundation for modern social systems.
However, the advent of the information age brought an unprecedented flood of information, rendering traditional consensus methodologies obsolete. Consequently, Mechanical Consensus emerged, which doesn't rely on humans but instead allows machines to independently form consensus based on complex information. For instance, the Bitcoin network utilizes a computational power competition to maintain system security.
As an emerging form of consensus, Mechanical Consensus will play a crucial role in the information age and deserves our in-depth research.
- Whether it's social consensus or machine consensus, both require an "initial agreement" as a starting point.
- The "initial agreement" of social consensus is often implicit and cultural, while the "initial agreement" of machine consensus is explicit and technical.
- The "initial agreement" provides the foundation and direction for the formation of consensus, prompting individuals or machines to move towards a common goal.
The formation of social consensus is a dynamic and interactive process, influenced by values, social norms, social influence, and other factors.
The formation of machine consensus is the result of a combination of preset rules and adaptive regulation. Preset rules and algorithms provide the basic framework, while adaptive regulation mechanisms enable the system to cope with complex environments and maintain stable operation.
Code:
- Consensus Code: Defines the underlying rules of the blockchain, such as consensus algorithms (PoW, PoS, etc.), block structure, transaction verification rules, etc. For example, Bitcoin's consensus code stipulates mining difficulty, block rewards, etc.
- Business Code: Defines the application logic of the blockchain, such as token issuance, transfer, smart contract execution, etc. For example, Ethereum's business code supports the ERC-20 token standard and smart contract functionality.
Data:
- Primarily refers to transaction data (TX), but also includes block data, state data, etc. Transaction data is the core of the blockchain, recording information about value transfer and state changes.
Client (Computation):
- Each node runs client software, responsible for verifying transactions, packaging blocks, broadcasting information, etc. The client software contains the implementation of the consensus code and business code.
Feedback System:
- The economic incentive system is the key to maintaining consensus in a public chain. Through economic means such as token rewards and transaction fees, nodes are incentivized to participate in the consensus process and maintain network security. For example, Bitcoin's mining reward mechanism encourages miners to compete for bookkeeping rights, ensuring the security and stability of the network.
Roles:
- Developers: Write and maintain consensus code and business code, continuously improving and upgrading the blockchain system.
- Consensus Guardians (Miners/Validators): Run clients, participate in the consensus process, and maintain network security.
- Data Participants: Initiate transactions, create smart contracts, and participate in applications on the blockchain.
- External Regulators: POS token holders can adjust system parameters through their role as data participants. Consensus guardians can adjust the code through their role as data participants or through soft/hard forks.
Code:
- Incentive Code: Defines the incentive mechanism within the DApp, such as token distribution, reward rules, governance mechanisms, etc. The goal of the incentive code is to encourage users to participate in the ecological construction and development of the DApp.
- Business Code: Defines the specific functions and logic of the DApp, such as game rules, transaction processes, social interaction, etc.
Data:
- DApp's business-related data, such as character status in the game, transaction records, user behavior data, etc.
VM (Computation):
- The virtual machine is the execution environment of the DApp, such as the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). The VM is responsible for executing the DApp's code, processing data, and maintaining the DApp's state.
Feedback System:
- The economic incentive system of the DApp, through token rewards, fee sharing, etc., incentivizes user participation and contribution. The design of the feedback system will affect the ecological development and user behavior of the DApp.
Roles:
- Developers: Design and develop DApps, write incentive code and business code.
- Trusted VM Platform: Provides a safe and reliable virtual machine environment to ensure the normal operation of the DApp.
- Data Participants: Use the DApp, participate in various activities of the DApp, and contribute data and value.
- External Regulators: Token holders can govern and adjust the feedback mechanism parameters and code through their role as data participants.
Through laws, contracts, rules and regulations, ideologies, etc.
Consensus assetization
Machine to Human: Converting machine operating data or status information into trusted digital assets.
Human to Machine: Asset holders participate in the feedback of machine consensus through staking/governance and other means.
- 1.1 Sharing Consensus in Cognito: For example, SPV nodes on-chain in State Channel or Taproot Consensus. Lightning Network or Polkadot parachains.
- 1.2 Sharing Compute in Cognito: For example, VMs that are not directly controlled by consensus. ERC20.
- 1.3 Sharing Communication in Cognito: For example, UTXOs in Bitcoin with only communication functions. BRC20.
The assets of two machine consensuses are adaptively converted to each other.
For example: The coded consensus of Bittensor/Tao is transmitted between the mainnet and the adaptively incentivized subnet through Tao assets.
Bitcoin's consensus mechanism ingeniously combines a computational power competition with economic incentives, achieving self-reinforcement and continuous growth. Miners, driven by the reward of Bitcoin, continuously invest computational power in mining, creating a never-ending competition. This is akin to an "infinite computational power race game," where miners fiercely compete, striving to win rewards by outperforming each other in computational power.
To maintain network stability, the Bitcoin network dynamically adjusts mining difficulty based on the total network computational power. The higher the computational power, the greater the mining difficulty, implying more miners participating in the competition, greater computational power invested, higher network security, and thus stronger Bitcoin consensus.
This mechanism forms a virtuous cycle:
more miners participate -> increased network computational power -> increased mining difficulty -> enhanced consensus -> increased Bitcoin value -> attracting more miners to participate...
This cycle repeats endlessly, ensuring the security, stability, and sustainable development of the Bitcoin network.
More importantly, the Bitcoin network pioneered "Mechanical Consensus," which does not rely on any centralized institution or human intervention. It operates entirely based on code and algorithms, automatically achieving and maintaining consensus. This is the first self-growing mechanical consensus in human civilization, marking the most revolutionary innovation of blockchain technology.
Essentially, Bitcoin's consensus mechanism is a never-ending computational power race. Miners are forced to continuously invest computational power to compete for Bitcoin rewards, making Bitcoin's consensus increasingly robust.
Cybernetics studies the control and communication of systems (such as machines, organisms, or societies), with feedback as its core concept. This means the system adjusts itself based on the results of its actions, ultimately achieving goals or maintaining stability.
Mechanical consensus can be seen as a branch of cybernetics, studying how machine systems achieve consistency through interaction. For example, how multiple robots collaborate to complete a task, or how a distributed computer network reaches consensus on a particular issue, all fall under the scope of mechanical consensus research.
The Bitcoin network is a prime example of mechanical consensus. It consists of a large number of independently operating computer nodes that communicate with each other through preset rules and protocols, jointly maintaining a secure and decentralized ledger. The operating mechanism of the Bitcoin network embodies the following characteristics of mechanical consensus:
- Decentralization: No central authority; all nodes participate in the decision-making process.
- Autonomy: The system operates automatically based on preset rules, without human intervention.
- Consistency: All nodes ultimately reach consensus on the state of the ledger.
Specific mechanisms within the Bitcoin network, such as Proof of Work (PoW) and the difficulty adjustment mechanism, are designed to achieve mechanical consensus. These mechanisms ensure that the Bitcoin network can operate securely and stably without central coordination.
In conclusion, mechanical consensus is an important branch of cybernetics, and Bitcoin is a successful application of it. It demonstrates how machine systems can achieve self-organization and collaboration without central control.
The core ideas of Wiener's cybernetics - self-organizing systems, nonlinear systems, and the exploration of the essence of life - are closely linked to the operating mechanism of Bitcoin. Bitcoin's decentralization, consensus mechanism, and adaptability embody the characteristics of self-organizing systems. Its network effects and emergent behavior also exhibit the complexity of nonlinear systems.
Furthermore, "Mechanical Consensus" is precisely the mechanical expression of the unity of the three concepts proposed by Wiener. The operating mechanism of the Bitcoin network perfectly embodies the high degree of unity among self-organizing systems, nonlinear systems, and the exploration of the essence of life.
Viewing Bitcoin as "mechanical life" implies that the Bitcoin network, with "mechanical consensus" as its soul, possesses self-awareness and evolutionary capabilities similar to living organisms. It pioneers a decentralized, transparent, and secure way of transferring value, holding profound significance for the development of human information civilization.
Bitcoin's consensus mechanism has a unique adaptive growth characteristic, meaning its security dynamically increases with the growth of computational power. This contrasts sharply with the consensus mechanisms of other cryptocurrencies:
- PoS Mechanism: Like Ethereum, its security relies on the number of staked tokens. Due to the limited total amount of tokens, there is an upper limit to its security.
- Other PoW Mechanisms: Under BTC-type PoW mechanisms, the strong get stronger. Bitcoin, with its first-mover advantage and network effects, wins the computational power competition, making its PoW mechanism more adaptive. Other altcoins lack this advantage, their computational power is squeezed by Bitcoin, and they struggle to achieve the full "adaptability" of the PoW mechanism.
Bitcoin's adaptive growth characteristics stem from the following factors:
- Dynamic Adjustment of Computational Power and Difficulty: Difficulty adjusts according to changes in computational power, ensuring network security and stability.
- Profit-Seeking Nature of Miners: Higher computational power brings higher returns, incentivizing miners to continuously invest.
- Halving Mechanism: Controls Bitcoin output, pushing up prices, and further incentivizing miner participation.
Satoshi Nakamoto's combination of Moore's Law and the halving mechanism may be aimed at achieving long-term sustainability and ensuring network security and decentralization.
- UTXO Carrier: Unspent Transaction Output, the fundamental unit of Bitcoin ownership.
- Script: Stack-based language for expressing transaction conditions.
- State Change: The process of updating the Bitcoin ledger through transactions.
Case 1: Satoshi Nakamoto's Timestamp System
Designed for recording and verifying transactions to prevent double-spending, this system relies on Bitcoin's consensus mechanism for security and holds the potential for broader applications in the future.
Case 2: Satoshi Nakamoto's BTC Cash Incentive System
This is the widely known BTC.
More Cases:
Combining Bitcoin's UTXO account model, sharing BTC consensus security to expand applications.
The purpose of mechanical consensus is to solve the problem of distributed trust.
The core value of blockchain technology lies in "mechanical consensus," which can solve the distributed trust problem.
Applications of Mechanical Consensus:
- Securing Assets: Guaranteeing asset security through decentralization.
- Decentralized Governance: Building decentralized governance systems, such as DAOs, to manage and operate various projects and organizations.
- Controlling New Technologies like AI: Preventing AI and other new technologies from being controlled by a few, ensuring human safety.
- Solving Information Trust Issues: Addressing all information trust issues in the age of information explosion, such as information authenticity and reliability.
The application scope of mechanical consensus extends far beyond asset security, potentially safeguarding human destiny and civilizational security.
How to Create More Adaptive (Bitcoin-like Consensus) Mechanical Consensus (A Question I and Some Good Friends Are Pondering)
Both "3-4-5 Right Triangle" and the "Pythagorean Theorem" describe the relationship between the sides of a right triangle, but the former is merely a specific instance of the latter. "3-4-5 Right Triangle" uses specific numbers and is an empirical rule, while the Pythagorean Theorem uses a mathematical formula, representing a universal law with rigorous mathematical proof. The Pythagorean Theorem has broader applications, serving as a foundation of geometry and influencing the development of algebra and trigonometry.
Discovering the "Pythagorean Theorem" of Adaptive Mechanical Consensus by Studying the "Special Case" of Bitcoin
We can analogize Bitcoin's PoW consensus mechanism to a specific set of Pythagorean numbers, with its "adaptive" characteristic being the hidden rule behind these numbers. By studying the "special case" of Bitcoin, we hope to discover the "Pythagorean Theorem" of a more general adaptive mechanical consensus. In other words, we aim to find a universal function or mechanism that can guide us in designing more decentralized consensus systems with adaptability. This will help us better understand and apply blockchain technology, build more secure, reliable, and efficient decentralized applications, and promote the innovation and development of blockchain technology in various fields.
-
Dual-Token PoS Drive Model: Aims to solve the problem of limited computational power growth in traditional PoS systems. It introduces Bitcoin as a source of computational power, forming a dual-token system with BEVM tokens. Through state channel technology, Bitcoin is connected to PoS mining pool nodes, realizing computational power growth. Compared to traditional PoS models, it makes two major improvements:
- Breaking the Computational Power Bottleneck: Utilizing the continuous growth characteristic of Bitcoin to provide unlimited computational power for the system.
- Enhancing System Security: Leveraging the security of the Bitcoin network to improve the system's security level.
-
Probabilistic PoS Consensus Mechanism: To address the issue of uneven income distribution in traditional PoS systems, this solution proposes a probabilistic PoS consensus mechanism.
- Core Idea: Borrowing from Bitcoin's PoW probability model, it introduces a "lottery" mechanism, allowing all participants, regardless of their staked token quantity, to have a chance to obtain block rewards.
- Advantages:
- Fairer: Breaks the "richer get richer" Matthew effect, providing more opportunities for small stakeholders.
- Incentivizes Participation: Encourages more users to participate in staking, increasing the network's decentralization.
- Challenges:
- Unstable Returns: The randomness of reward distribution may lead to significant income fluctuations.
- Security: Requires designing a secure random number generation mechanism to prevent manipulation.
- Summary: Probabilistic PoS provides a new approach to solve the PoS income distribution problem, contributing to the construction of fairer blockchain networks.
Comparison of Traditional PoS and Probabilistic PoS
| Mechanism | Description | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Traditional PoS | Staking rewards are distributed proportionally to the number of staked tokens; the more staked, the more rewards received. | Rewards are predictable and stable. | The system favors users with more tokens, leading to wealth concentration. |
| Probabilistic PoS | Staking rewards are distributed based on a probability model, similar to PoW, even with a small amount of staked tokens, there's a chance to receive rewards. | The system is fairer and more equitable; everyone has a chance to get rewards. | Rewards are less predictable and may be less stable. |
By introducing a BTC consumption model, the dual-token PoS model can be closer to the PoW mechanism and, to a certain extent, improve the system's sustainability and the value of BTC. While BTC staking provides computational power, a consumption mechanism is introduced, and the BTC consumption rate is adjusted through a BTC and BEVM automatic swap computational power regulator.
(Further elaboration needed on specific improvement methods for PoW)
(Further elaboration needed on exploring and designing new consensus mechanisms)
Internet products primarily satisfy humanity's basic functional needs, while adaptive mechanical consensus addresses our need for security and trust. For example, Bitcoin's consensus mechanism ensures the security of funds.
This capability is even more crucial for human life than for property. In the future, adaptive mechanical consensus can be applied to medical data, organ donation, AI, and other fields, guaranteeing data security and reliability, thereby better protecting human life.
Adaptive mechanical consensus can satisfy humanity's need for security and trust and holds immense potential for safeguarding human life.
The security of a blockchain is directly related to its adaptive mechanical consensus capability. The stronger the consensus capability, the higher the security. The degree of decentralization is also determined by this capability; the stronger the capability, the more decentralized the system. The absence of mechanical consensus implies centralization.
Therefore, Layer 2 products lacking mechanical consensus are essentially centralized commercial products, such as Coinbase's Base chain. These products must rely on the strategies of centralized products to achieve traditional commercial success.
Bitcoin possesses the strongest adaptive mechanical consensus capability, making it the most decentralized and secure blockchain.
Reason: All the parameters designed for Bitcoin are decimal, not binary. Decimal is the most easily recognizable form of numerical expression for humans.
- Block time: 10 minutes
- Halving cycle: 4 years
- Difficulty adjustment: 2 weeks
- Total BTC supply: 21 million
The genesis block of the Bitcoin blockchain contains a hidden text message: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks." This message seems to imply that the birth of Bitcoin is related to the financial crisis at that time, suggesting Satoshi Nakamoto might be someone concerned with social and economic issues, which are closely related to society and life.
(This gossip is purely for entertainment and a lighthearted moment.)
Satoshi Nakamoto might have designed Bitcoin and its incentive mechanism with a "paranoid" desire to change the world, aiming to build a robust decentralized adaptive consensus system to ultimately solve the problem of social consensus.
Satoshi Nakamoto's famous quote, "We are not going to find a solution to political problems in cryptography, but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several 1 years," reveals his deep motivation for creating Bitcoin: to use cryptography to build a decentralized consensus system to address the centralized drawbacks of traditional financial and political systems.
Bitcoin is not just a digital currency, but a social experiment. Satoshi Nakamoto likened mining to an "arms race," cleverly using economic incentives to guide miners to maintain network security, forming a powerful and adaptive mechanical consensus mechanism. He hoped to solve the problem of social consensus through this mechanism, even touching on the political realm, providing new possibilities for human social governance.
3. Satoshi Nakamoto Created Bitcoin to Solve the Distributed Trust Problem Brought by the Internet Information Explosion
Explanation:
-
Information Explosion and Trust Crisis: The rapid development of the internet has led to an information explosion, with massive amounts of information flooding the network, making it difficult to distinguish truth from falsehood. People struggle to determine the source, authenticity, and reliability of information, leading to a trust crisis. Traditional centralized institutions, such as governments and banks, are inefficient and costly in maintaining trust and struggle to cope with the challenges brought by the information explosion.
-
The Need for Distributed Trust: In the age of information explosion, a decentralized trust mechanism that does not rely on third-party institutions is needed to ensure the authenticity and reliability of information. This mechanism needs to be able to establish consensus in a distributed network, ensuring that all participants agree on the authenticity of information.
-
Bitcoin and Mechanical Consensus: Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin precisely to solve this problem. By building a "decentralized adaptive mechanical consensus" mechanism and utilizing principles of cryptography and game theory, Bitcoin achieves distributed trust without relying on centralized institutions.
- Decentralization: The Bitcoin network has no centralized control authority; all nodes are equal and participate in maintaining the network's operation.
- Adaptability: Bitcoin's mechanical consensus can self-adjust according to network conditions, such as dynamically adjusting mining difficulty to maintain network stability and security.
- Mechanical Consensus: Through miners' computational power competition and consensus algorithms, it ensures that all nodes agree on transaction information, guaranteeing the authenticity and immutability of information.
- BTC as Incentive: To encourage more people to participate in building and maintaining this decentralized consensus system, Satoshi Nakamoto designed BTC as a reward. The value of BTC increases with the number of participants, forming a positive feedback loop that promotes the continuous strengthening of mechanical consensus.
- Applications Beyond Asset Security: Although Bitcoin is currently mainly used to ensure asset security, its underlying "mechanical consensus" mechanism has broader application prospects. As mentioned in the material, mechanical consensus can be used for decentralized governance, controlling new technologies like AI, and even solving all information trust problems, safeguarding human civilization.
Summary:
Satoshi Nakamoto's original intention for creating Bitcoin was to address the distributed trust problem brought by the internet information explosion. Bitcoin's "mechanical consensus" mechanism provides a feasible solution to this problem. Its application prospects extend far beyond asset security, and it is expected to play a role in a wider range of fields in the future, building a more trustworthy and secure information society.
Viewing the Crypto Industry Dialectically and Exploring the Entire Information Industry with a "Knowing and Doing" Attitude
Today, while reading the Bitcoin whitepaper at Satoshi Nakamoto University, I noticed that Satoshi Nakamoto described using CPU computational power competition to maintain a timestamp system. In this regard, Satoshi Nakamoto was wrong: due to the limitations of the time, the context was insufficient, which is why he wrote about fair CPU computational power competition in the whitepaper. This conflicts with the current context in at least two ways:
- The computational power for BTC mining is mostly not from CPUs.
- It's not a peer-to-peer CPU mining competition, but rather a vertically integrated mining pool model with centralized proxy computing power.
The reason Satoshi Nakamoto didn't understand this is due to the lack of context. If Satoshi Nakamoto were still around today, he would definitely make more revisions to the original whitepaper.
This leads me to wonder why the entire crypto industry entrepreneurial circle has fallen into the cryptocurrency financial trap of @VitalikButerin. Because the entire industry is stuck in the directions set by VB since 2014, such as switching to PoS and Sharding, the entire industry has seen a large number of PoS chains and Layer 2 solutions. However, once implemented and understood, many things are proven false. For example:
-
Current PoS, even the robust ETH PoS, cannot achieve self-growth. ETH PoS relies on staking ETH to maintain network security, but the amount of ETH that can be staked to maintain network security is limited. This logic cannot create a sustainable, self-growing, adaptive consensus system. In other words, the price cannot keep rising indefinitely.
-
Currently, the state calculation and changes of ETH and ETH Layer 2 are all on the L1 on-chain global state tree. Sharding based on a global state tree where all state calculations/changes are on L1 is essentially a dead end, and the Layer 2 approach only distracts from the core issue of the chain. The core problem lies not in the Layer 2 technology, but in the ETH network itself: its global state calculation and Account Nonce++ model limit sharding.
-
Gavin Wood's Polkadot provides the best solution to the ETH sharding problem. Because Gavin Wood and VB entered the crypto space around the same time, he didn't completely fall into the VB trap. He used shared consensus security to transform the ETH world state tree calculation for parallel sharding. Although this model hasn't achieved great success, it is at least better than the current Layer 2 solution for scaling ETH, as it is closer to the key point of the ETH sharding problem: transforming the world state tree.
-
However, Gavin Wood's context was still insufficient, resulting in Polkadot's performance improvement only being a multiple of the Ethereum network, without a qualitative leap. If he had stood on the context of Satoshi Nakamoto when creating Bitcoin to do sharding, he wouldn't have encountered this problem. Bitcoin's stateless UTXO account model allows for unlimited concurrency because the calculation is off-chain. The implementation of the Lightning Network is a practical example of the unlimited concurrency capability under Bitcoin's stateless UTXO model.
The emergence of such problems is due to the entire crypto industry falling into the ideological misunderstanding brought by VB (i.e., the VB trap, where the industry's exploration starts with VB as the starting point). There was no context before VB, the context of the crypto race had already begun long before VB entered the scene. With a little more thought, going back to the context of Satoshi Nakamoto, or even back to the era of Turing's computer theory and Shannon's information theory during World War II, the context would be more sufficient.
Therefore, context is the core of cognitive level. Wang Yangming's "unity of knowledge and action" is an attitude of execution, an attitude of striving to obtain more context to enrich oneself and improve cognition.
The emergence of Satoshi Nakamoto and Bitcoin not only disrupted finance but also brought about a cognitive revolution. It transformed time from an authoritative definition to a decentralized consensus, liberating truth from the hands of "prophets" and returning it to objective laws.
Blockchain technology challenges the centralized model of the traditional world. Its decentralized, transparent, and objective characteristics are incompatible with the traditional world that relies on authority and empirical prediction, which is also why blockchain has difficulty integrating into the traditional world.
But the future of blockchain is full of hope. It encourages us to abandon our reliance on authority, embrace decentralized thinking, actively explore blockchain applications, and participate in the exploration of truth and the reshaping of the world.
Satoshi Nakamoto and Bitcoin have opened the doors to a new world for us. Let us embrace this cognitive revolution and create a better future together!
Bitcoin's interpretation extends far beyond blockchain technology. Blockchain is just one solution to the Byzantine Generals Problem using the Block + Chain data structure. When studying Bitcoin, we should avoid being limited to this and understand its rich connotations from a broader perspective.
Bitcoin is a system designed by Satoshi Nakamoto based on the use case of "coin" while solving the "Satoshi Nakamoto Problem."
The core of the "Satoshi Nakamoto Problem" is exploring the deep motivation and logic behind Satoshi Nakamoto's creation of Bitcoin.
Satoshi Nakamoto did not merely aim to create a digital currency; his goal was far-reaching and profound: to solve the increasingly serious problem of distributed trust in the information age. In this era, we rely on various networks and computer systems for data communication and processing, but these systems are vulnerable to information leakage and tampering, making trust fragile.
Satoshi Nakamoto's initial vision was to establish a decentralized bank or trust system. However, due to the difficulty of implementation, he ultimately chose a more feasible path - creating a decentralized currency, Bitcoin.
The birth of Bitcoin was not accidental; it is rooted in the theory of bits (Bit). All information in the information age is composed of 0s and 1s, and these bits face trust issues during transmission and processing. Satoshi Nakamoto cleverly utilized cryptography and distributed ledger technology to ensure the reliable transmission and storage of bit information, thereby constructing a decentralized trust system.
From a deeper perspective, the Satoshi Nakamoto Problem is also closely related to Wiener's Cybernetics and Information Theory. Wiener pointed out that there is a fundamental difference between machine communication and interpersonal communication. Machine communication is more susceptible to interference and attacks, necessitating the establishment of new trust mechanisms. The emergence of Bitcoin is precisely a response to this problem.
In conclusion, the "Satoshi Nakamoto Problem" concerns the trust crisis in the information age and the security and stability of the bit world. The birth of Bitcoin not only provides a solution to the distributed trust problem but also inspires profound reflections on social organization and governance models in the information age.
Ten years ago, when I was working at Motorola, Huawei proposed a requirement for programmers to write 7 lines of code per day. Based on this, I calculated that the value of one line of code was about 100 yuan. After studying Bitcoin's code, I found that its price per line far exceeded that of code written by traditional internet programmers, so I decided to transition into the field of Bitcoin development.
Today, I find that the price per line of Bitcoin code has reached as high as 20 million US dollars. This has given me a deep understanding of why Bitcoin code is so expensive, while the code of traditional programmers is so cheap.
I believe the fundamental reason lies in the "growth vitality" and "capability" of Bitcoin code. The mechanical consensus it expresses is a self-adaptively growing "capability-type" product with non-replicability. In contrast, traditional internet code is "functional" code, merely simple logic to solve specific needs, easily replicable.
Summary:
- Bitcoin code is valuable due to its inherent "growth vitality" and "capability."
- The mechanical consensus expressed by Bitcoin code is a self-adaptively growing "capability-type" product that is non-replicable.
- Traditional internet code is "functional" code, designed to solve needs with simple logic, highly replicable, and relatively low in value.
Turing, by assuming humans are machines, abstracted the Turing Machine to design computers. Building on Turing's foundation, we further refine the abstraction of humans to guide our design of the new Bitcoin paradigm. We divide human functions into a triad: Human (Heart for cybernetics, Brain for calculation, Senses used for communication). Following the concepts of hardware and software, we further divide human functions into:
- Hardware: Human (Heart, Brain, Senses)
- Software: Human (cybernetics, calculation, communication)
With this logic, we can analyze public blockchains, coins, smart contracts (tokens), and UTXOs (BRC20/RUNES) in the crypto world.
We first compare Bitcoin and other public blockchains to humans. Then, we analyze them one by one according to the triad design philosophy of humans we have divided. This is because Bitcoin and other public blockchains can be considered independent "mechanicals." Mechanical is compared to Human. This leads to the mechanical triad, mechanical hardware, and software.
- Hardware: Mechanical (consensus, VM, Input/Output)
- Software: Mechanical (cybernetics, calculation, communication)
We use the above method to analyze and compare Coin, ERC20, and BRC20, the three most intuitive phenomena in the current reality.
- Coin: Possesses all three elements of the mechanical triad: mechanical (cybernetics, calculation, communication).
- ERC20: Possesses two elements of the triad: (calculation, communication). It is not controlled by the consensus used for cybernetics. In other words, ERC20 has no "heart," or ERC20 is not trusted and protected by chain consensus. ERC20 still relies on human and social consensus for protection.
- BRC20: Possesses only one element of the triad: Communication. However, BRC20's Communication is the most secure and trustworthy among all public chains because it is based on the Bitcoin network.
- UTXO: Currently only has the function of Communication.
We name the above Mechanical Heart Triad theory as: Cognito Triad Theory.
Based on the above, the importance of the triad is ranked as follows: cybernetics > calculation > communication. This somewhat references humans: heart control > brain calculation > sensory communication.
ERC20 tokens inherently lack a mechanical heart. Relying solely on the computational capabilities of smart contract platforms, they cannot achieve true autonomy and adaptability. While attempts like the VEE model introduce some mechanical heart functions to ERC20 tokens, their effectiveness remains limited due to the discrete nature of smart contract platforms, making it difficult to build truly robust mechanical consensus.
Compared to rebuilding mechanical consensus on discrete smart contract platforms, continuously conductible consensus can better leverage the blockchain's inherent consensus mechanism, achieving more efficient and stable consensus transfer.
Based on the Cognito Triad theory, we can start from the following aspects:
- Information Perception: Design a perception module that enables the mechanical heart to perceive key data such as on-chain status, transaction information, and network environment in real-time, and translate it into comprehensible information.
- Value Judgment: Establish a value judgment module that evaluates the value and risks of different behaviors based on the perceived information, and makes decisions accordingly.
- Behavior Execution: Design a behavior execution module that translates decisions into specific on-chain operations, such as participating in the consensus process, adjusting incentive parameters, and executing governance rules.
Nash equilibrium game can serve as an important tool for constructing continuously conductible consensus. By designing reasonable game rules and incentive mechanisms, participants are guided to act rationally, ultimately reaching the optimal state of the system and achieving distributed trust.
- Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin Whitepaper and discussions since 2002, including forum posts on the distributed trust problem.
- Turing's Turing Machine: The hypothesis that humans are machines, and thinking is a mechanical process of the brain.
- Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem: The incompleteness of Turing's hypothesis of thinking due to the lack of consideration for the mind.
- Descartes' Mind-Body Dualism: The separation of mind and body.
- Hilbert's 10th Problem: The Entscheidungsproblem (decision problem).
- Wiener's Cybernetics: The study of control and communication in animals and machines.
- Shannon's Information Theory: Focusing on the Bit (0,1) as the unit of information.
- Newton's Calculus and Bishop Berkeley's "Ghosts of Departed Quantities" critique about the concept of limits.
- Abel's work on elliptic functions, which inspired solutions to problems related to limits.
- Gauss's discovery of the angular excess in spherical triangles, where the sum of angles is not 180 degrees.
- Riemann's work on complex manifolds and their application in establishing reasoning logic.
- Russell's Barber Paradox: A paradox in set theory that reveals contradictions in self-referential statements.
- Cantor's work on infinity and the challenges of defining and working with infinite sets.
- The Diamond Sutra: Buddhist text exploring the concepts of emptiness (Śūnyatā) and mind.
- The Platform Sutra: Zen Buddhist text emphasizing sudden enlightenment and direct experience of truth.
- The Role of Nash Equilibrium Game.