最有看点的互联网金融门户

最有看点的互联网金融门户
专栏区块链国际资讯

不同架构的区块链越来越多,正常么?

专栏区块链国际资讯

不同架构的区块链越来越多,正常么?

这世界上,并没有哪种区块链优于其他,反而是随着技术演进,涌现许多不同架构的区块链,对应不同的应用场景。这种情况非常像信息通讯行业历史上的互联网协议——TCP和UDP:两者都是通信协议,但两者具有独特且截然不同的特征。

如果您认为中本聪提出的比特币区块链是纯粹和理想的区块链架构,那么您可能会质疑其他区块链的可行性,并且可能还会希望在未来的某个时刻,将这些区块链整合成公有的区块链架构和协议。

举个例子,我们从区块链的可访问性和透明度(非常基础的层面)来看目前不同类型的区块链:毫无疑问,比特币区块链是可公开寻址和高度透明的。但是,在某些商业模式和应用场景下,区块链模型通常被要求是私有的,需要由管理者这个角色组织和决定其透明度。

因此,人们又通过公有链和私有链来区别区块链类型,分别对应“非许可”和“许可”的商业模型和变量。很快,人们就开始设想完全不同的架构:比特币区块链是非许可的公有链,但如果从区块链的维护需求出发,例如任何人都可以访问和查看,但只有少数的人可以进行添加和扩展,对应这些情景下,比特币区块链架构应该是许可的公有链。

在其他实例中,为比特币区块链开发的“工作证明”共识机制已被修改,或者已完全被替代性的机制所代替。人们已提出、试验并选择性地采用诸如 “重要证明”、 “重要性证明”等许多其他模型。这些共识机制的逻辑是各种各样的,因此相应协议的关注点也是五花八门,例如区块链费用、集中化程度、区块链性能等等。

工作证明机制(以及其他因素)也会影响代币的属性:这些代币是否会增值?代币是否需要支持架构和协议?因此,构建区块链时的变量之一是代币的存在 - 尽管可以发行大量的代币,但事实是,并非所有区块链都需要或者使用代币!

这些差异和变量大多是由区块链的不同标准(安全性,确定性,透明度)或不同属性(规模,性能,整体状况)造成的。其中,区块链的规模是一个特别重要和有意思的属性,针对不同的情景会有不同的结果,因为它通常是对区块链的其他属性和标准进行各种权衡后的结果,例如共识机制的类型,是集中化还是去中心化,是维持不变性还是保留节点足迹等。

乍一看,目前市面上充斥着各种区块链解决方案,它们之间通常具有根本性的差异,这些差异来源于不同的业务功能和属性。其实,我们认为实用性的建议,是我们并不一定要无休止地讨论这些区块链架构,得出一个明确的答案;反而,目前阶段的重点,应该是从具体应用需求出发,深入了解所要解决的业务问题以及具体情况下不同属性的价值。

综上所述:目前阶段,少一些哪种区块链架构“正宗”的讨论,具体情况具体分析,尽早建立针对不同业务场景需求的一系列的使用区块链技术形成的“工具包”。

(作者:Michael Cooper,BT Radianz首席技术官;李泉博士,BT Radianz主任研究员。由区块科技研究与监管编译。)

There is no single “Blockchain”. There is however a number of Blockchain architectures emerging as this nascent technology evolves and is exposed to more and different use cases. This variation might be likened to the emergence of TCP and UDP for the Internet Protocol – both are communications protocols, each has unique and very different characteristics.

If you subscribe to the view that the Satoshi inspired Bitcoin Blockchain is the original and the ideal, then you might also debate the validity of these alternatives – you may also anticipate consolidation on a common architecture and protocol at some point in the future.

An example (at a very fundamental level) of these developments concerns the accessibility of the Blockchain and entry transparency: the Bitcoin Blockchain is, of course, publicly addressable and highly transparent. But, some business models and applications preclude this – and the adoption of Blockchain in these contexts has seen models emerge where the Blockchain is private, often curated and where transparency is managed.

So there’s a “public | private” contrast, alongside of which sits “permissioned | non-permissioned” models and variants. Very quickly you can start to conceive of very different architectures: the Bitcoin Blockchain is public, non-permissioned, but there are also instances which are public, permissioned from a Blockchain maintenance perspective e.g. anyone can access and see, few can add and extend.

Elsewhere, the “proof of work” consensus model developed for the Bitcoin Blockchain has been modified or, in some instances, entirely replaced with alternatives. “Proof of stake”, “proof of importance” and many other models have been proposed, experimented with and sometimes adopted. The logic for these changes are diverse and the protocols are diverse consequentially e.g. concerns with expense, centralisation, performance and more.

Proof of work models (and other elements) also affects the crypto currency and token attribute: do these add value? Are they necessary to support the architecture and protocol? So one of the other architectural variants is with regards the existence of a crypto currency or token – and despite the plethora of coins and tokens: not all Blockchains require or use them!

Many of these differences and variations are a consequence, or a response to different criteria (security, certainty, transparency) or different attributes (scale, performance profile, throughout). Where scale is a particularly interesting and important attribute that is interpretable in a number of contexts and – as has always been the case – is often a function of trade-offs e.g. type of consensus model, centralisation | decentralisation, immutability | nodal footprint.

It seems clear then, that at this point in time there are a number of Blockchain solutions – with often very fundamental differences, that will enable or disable particular business function and attributes. As ever, the pragmatic response is not necessarily to debate these ad infinitum: but to understand the specific use case, the business problem you are addressing and the value of different attributes in that context.

So: no “single” Blockchain, but a set of tools that use Blockchain technology different guises to address and solve different business problems.

本文系未央网专栏作者区块科技研究与监管发表,属作者个人观点,不代表网站观点,未经许可严禁转载,违者必究!


用微信扫描可以分享至好友和朋友圈

扫描二维码或搜索微信号“iweiyangx”
关注未央网官方微信公众号,获取互联网金融领域前沿资讯。

发表评论

发表评论

您的评论提交后会进行审核,审核通过的留言会展示在下方留言区域,请耐心等待。

评论

您的个人信息不会被公开,请放心填写! 标记为的是必填项

取消

区块科技研究与监管未央青年

31
总文章数

清华大学金融科技研究院旗下公众号(ID:BlockchainDirect)

蚂蚁上链:阿里的区块链野望

周峰 | 新浪科技 3小时前

激烈争辩的美国听证会:区块链到底有无价值?

区块科技研究与监管 3小时前

索尼公司开发基于区块链的数字版权管理系统

William Su... | 巴比特资讯 1天前

伦敦区块链金融创企Clearmatics获1200万美元A轮融资

Ian Alliso... | 鸵鸟创投媒... 1天前

首单区块链信贷资产证券化项目发布

朝阳 | 证券日报 2天前

版权所有 © 清华大学五道口金融学院互联网金融实验室 | 京ICP备17044750号-1