Frankfort Online

Image: Bitcoin billionaires, The Winklevoss Twins 

Follow the Money

More than just an alternative business model, blockchain represents ideology – a system in which the individual is no longer at the mercy of dominant institutions that control the flow of power, money, and data. If blockchain deteriorates into another world run by those who control the majority of the assets, it’s intent has been neglected and it has no reason to exist.

Within chains managed by Proof-of-Work and Delegated Proof-of-Stake consensus algorithms, this is the reality. Users tout decentralization, rights of the individual, abandoning banks and more, but then fall into a system promoting the very same values they are rebelling against.

PoW and DPoS are plutocracies in disguise. The former is at the mercy of firms that can afford the most hashing power, and the latter suppressed by those with the most currency.

Whoever can afford to mine the most controls the flow in PoW systems – there’s no room for the individual with a starter setup having a say. Either invest a years salary or get lost. In the DPoS system, the irony is even more baffling: the people with the most currency ultimately get to write history.    

Is this still the blockchain world we want? Trading one system controlled by a ruling minority for another shouldn’t be in the discourse.

Steadying Blockchains Ideological Path

Blockchains growth will remain stunted unless the focus is shifted away from Proof-of-Work and Delegated Proof-of-Stake based consensus algorithms.

The November BCH hashing wars that produced two new chains via hard fork, BCHABC and BSV,  left many speculating over governing issues within the PoW world. Differences in principles have made this side of the blockchain vulnerable – anyone with a large enough following is able to hold everyone else hostage. Chain sustainability isn’t guaranteed due to the ease in which conflicting parties can force a hard fork.

Those that preach DPoS put our future into the hands of 21 supernodes – corruption practically hard coded into the EOS genesis block. Everyone yearns for profit and power, making the have-nots pawns in the game controlled by those at the top.

A Blunt Account of Blockchain Management

Blockchain governance is defined as follows:

“The ways in which collective action can be achieved by public communities and key stakeholders – particularly those regarding the revision of past agreements.“ 

In view of the lack of a decentralized and de-identified digital platform supporting the “one person, one vote system”, the governance of the chain is often seen as a plutocracy – currency and computing power are king.

According to an article written by Vitalik Buterin, blockchain governance systems must be innately anti-plutocratic.

Not only is on-chain coin-based governance inconsistent with user interests, it is also antithetical to the ethos of public blockchains. The blockchain is for the public, to serve the public interest. It isn’t for cryptocurrency whales to get more rich. Cryptocurrency holdings (like wealth in global society) is highly concentrated in the hands of a very small number of people. The blockchain isn’t supposed to be owned by anyone… nevermind by a small group of super rich individuals. – Buterin 

The interests of those who hold the wealth and those who actually use the blockchain are inherently different.

In theory, blockchain could provide an equal playing field where the world isn’t controlled by large institutions only acting for profit and belittling the rights of individuals. When power becomes concentrated by those holding the most currency or with the most hashing power, users who continue to praise these systems are working against their own interests.

The culture of blockchain implies egalitarian management. Anything else must be abandoned.

Either we want it, or we don’t 

The current state of blockchain is a farce. Either we want a new system where power is decentralized, or we don’t. Pushing the ethics of the centralized systems that have shaped our world for the worse within the blockchain space only perpetuates the virus that is elitism – sucking world of its resources and milking the chain for every satoshi it’s got.

The increased amount of ICOs in 2017 gave hope. Surely the competition would have promoted further developments – someone would have realised the bad traits trickling into blockchain- but only disappointment followed.

What should have been the start of a blockchain renaissance, turned into a money grabbing free-for-all, with scams, poorly designed products, and reckless teams becoming the norm.

But we do want it, we really do. We want the system as it was intended to be: quick, decentralized, egalitarian. A  platform on which to build the next era of society.

This stepping stone comes in the form of Bitconch. Backed by Turing and Nobel laureates, offering 120,000TPS, anti-plutocratic governance, and an ecosystem based on egalitarian values, Bitconch has the speed, security, and morals needed warm the Crypto Winter.

Bitconch Solves the Issue of Governance

The Proof-of-Reputation (PoR) consensus algorithm developed by Bitconch creates a quantified reputation value (Bit-R) based on three dimensions: social behavior, currency holding time, and community contribution. Users with reputations within the top 5% then have an opportunity to take part in the consensus. This system more accurately mirrors the natural world – individuals who are more trustworthy, contribute to their communities, and build relationships with those around them are incentivised to continue doing so.

Money and the size of resources are no longer a consideration, which dissolves the power that the elite have over governing the chain and eliminates the possibility of bribery. Instead, there is room for devoted lower and middle class users to take part in the consensus, making the chain maintained by the people and for the people. The conflicting interests of currency holders and chain users, therefore, does not arise.

Reputation makes for a conscientious ecosystem and reduced conflicts of interest supports ecosystem sustainability.

Bitconch Solves the Speed Bottleneck

If the speed of the platform is not scaled to the needs of the users, usage will ultimately fall flat. A blockchain is meant to be used, and chains with slow speeds are simply not practical.

BLAZE (Bitconch Ledger Access Zero-delay Extension) allows for the simultaneous verification of multiple blocks through factoring the operation into five unique yet concurrent phases – fetching data, decoding, hashing, stating the change, and finally writing data.  When BLAZE is coupled with PoR, the Bitconch platform offers 120,000TPS – making it a platform able to support extensive amounts of traffic.

However, the current focus of the blockchain world should not be on pushing TPS speeds as high as possible. Developers and users alike have lost their way, once again falling victim to the very plutocracy that catalyzed the emergence of blockchain.

The ideology producing these platforms urges for the rights of the individual over the concentration of power in a few. It doesn’t matter if the flow of money is controlled by a few institutions in the current global economy or by a few mining firms in the blockchain world – once power is taken from the individual, we must dissolve the system.

Media Contact
Company Name: BITCONCH.PTE.LTD
Contact Person: Leon
Email: Send Email
Country: United States
Website: www.bitconch.io