Diese Seite wurde seit 2 Jahren inhaltlich nicht mehr aktualisiert.
Unter Umständen ist sie nicht mehr aktuell.
Zusammenfassungen
The history described here offers rich (and
complementary) lessons for practitioners and academics.
Practitioners should be skeptical of claims of revolutionary
technology. As shown
here, most of the ideas
in bitcoin that have
generated excitement in
the enterprise, such as
distributed ledgers and
Byzantine agreement,
actually date back
20 years or more.
Recognize that your
problem may not require
any breakthroughs—
there may be longforgotten
solutions in
research papers.
Von Arvind Narayanan, Jeremy Clark im Text Bitcoin's Academic Pedigree (2017) If you've read about bitcoin in the press and have some familiarity with academic research in the field of cryptography, you might reasonably come away with the following impression: Several decades' worth of research on digital cash, beginning with David Chaum, did not lead to commercial success because it required a centralized, banklike server controlling the system, and no banks wanted to sign on. Along came bitcoin, a radically different proposal for a decentralized cryptocurrency that didn't need the banks, and digital cash finally succeeded. Its inventor, the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto, was an academic outsider, and bitcoin bears no resemblance to earlier academic proposals.
This article challenges that view by showing that nearly all of the technical components of bitcoin originated in the academic literature of the 1980s and '90s. This is not to diminish Nakamoto's achievement but to point out that he stood on the shoulders of giants. Indeed, by tracing the origins of the ideas in bitcoin, we can zero in on Nakamoto's true leap of insight—the specific, complex way in which the underlying components are put together. This helps explain why bitcoin took so long to be invented. Readers already familiar with how bitcoin works may gain a deeper understanding from this historical presentation. (For an introduction, see Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies by Arvind Narayanan et al.) Bitcoin's intellectual history also serves as a case study demonstrating the relationships among academia, outside researchers, and practitioners, and offers lessons on how these groups can benefit from one another.
Von Arvind Narayanan, Jeremy Clark im Text Bitcoin's Academic Pedigree (2017) This article challenges that view by showing that nearly all of the technical components of bitcoin originated in the academic literature of the 1980s and '90s. This is not to diminish Nakamoto's achievement but to point out that he stood on the shoulders of giants. Indeed, by tracing the origins of the ideas in bitcoin, we can zero in on Nakamoto's true leap of insight—the specific, complex way in which the underlying components are put together. This helps explain why bitcoin took so long to be invented. Readers already familiar with how bitcoin works may gain a deeper understanding from this historical presentation. (For an introduction, see Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies by Arvind Narayanan et al.) Bitcoin's intellectual history also serves as a case study demonstrating the relationships among academia, outside researchers, and practitioners, and offers lessons on how these groups can benefit from one another.
Dieser wissenschaftliche Zeitschriftenartikel erwähnt ...
Begriffe KB IB clear | Anonymitätanonymity , bitcoin , blockchain , Ethereum , Internetinternet , Kryptographiecryptography , Vertrauentrust |
Tagcloud
Volltext dieses Dokuments
Bitcoin's Academic Pedigree: Artikel als Volltext (: , 2461 kByte; : 2020-11-28) |
Anderswo suchen
Beat und dieser wissenschaftliche Zeitschriftenartikel
Beat hat Dieser wissenschaftliche Zeitschriftenartikel während seiner Zeit am Institut für Medien und Schule (IMS) ins Biblionetz aufgenommen. Beat besitzt kein physisches, aber ein digitales Exemplar. Eine digitale Version ist auf dem Internet verfügbar (s.o.). Aufgrund der wenigen Einträge im Biblionetz scheint er es nicht wirklich gelesen zu haben. Es gibt bisher auch nur wenige Objekte im Biblionetz, die dieses Werk zitieren.