What Bitcoin's white paper got right, wrong, and what we still don't know

https://www.coindesk.com/what-bitcoins-white-paper-got-right-wrong-and-what-we-still-dont-know

Ran across this article. First time I've ever seen someone suggest that the BTC whitepaper isn't flawless. Worth at read

Tagged:

Comments

    madexcelmadexcel Reputation: 50
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    Great article thanks for posting this. Many, many interesting points including:


    Simplistic attack analysis. The Bitcoin white paper devotes a relatively large amount of space (about a quarter of the text) to analyzing the chances of a miner with less than 51% mining power successfully launching a fork by getting lucky. Subsequent analysis has identified many other attack vectors (such as selfish mining) and this analysis now looks dated.


    4d3ff374988da61a09e32c55956e5862
    NodyNody Reputation: 103
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    This is the best argument I've seen for the case that Bitcoin is a prototype, a brilliant prototype, but a prototype. The next generation of asset-backed stable coins are going to iron out the majority of these issues, and will have a real-world use beyond speculation.

    9927033ab4501874836bb1a3cd9539ca
    HopeHKHopeHK Reputation: 6
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    New coins in the future might solve some inherent problems with Bitcoin. But it will be a really long time, if ever before BTC is replaced as the predominant cryptocurrency. There are loads of cases throughout history where a lesser product dominated simply because of band recognition and a head start in the marketplace.

    9baa2da5b67335929cce3d9a8335b35b
    Hans2000Hans2000 Reputation: 0
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    would be interesting to run the bitcoin white paper through the BLX accreditation process just to see what the bounty hunters find

    2ac82a4bba9be019d442b24f48546c38
    RosiRosi Reputation: 1
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    @hans2000 put a bounty) But seriously, Bitcoin can be improved upon obviously but the whitepaper was written before we had a decade of experience. It wouldn't be fair to pick it apart at this point.

    e78e96a4ea45b43cedbd6c68ffcafff8
    DNXDNX Reputation: 14
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    Looks like there is a new copyright claim on the BTC whitepaper:

    https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-whitepaper-second-copyright-craig-wright/

    4ea7d2263e5205313e1642a4f742196c
    cubanoBHloungecubanoBHlounge Reputation: 53
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    @Jdav19 why just post a link and not give more why we should read it

    d4b5785efa2b29ef3a0144a5040c4e50
    JDav19JDav19 Reputation: 1
    Status: Bounty Hunter
    Send Message

    @cubanoBHlounge for me the article was most useful in its analysis of what Bitcoin got wrong. Of course hindsight is 20/20 but this breakdown gives us an idea of what to look for in the next generation of digital currencies. None of this is probably news to serious developers, but for those of us that are enthusiasts its pretty interesting. The article states as below (quoted from article) with paraphrased comments after dashes (--)

    What Bitcoin Whitepaper Got Right (remember this is obviously the first (well known?) crypto:
    1) Incentives for miners
    2) Light Clients -- support for both full and light (SPV) nodes
    3) Scripting -- enabling features like multi-signature accounts and payment networks
    4) Recognizing long-term incentives

    What Bitcoin Whitepaper Got Wrong
    1) ECDSA -- an inferior algorithm
    2) Transaction malleability -- this one is over my head but appears to be a security issue
    3) Features since added -- things like pay-to-script-hash that have been added and turned out to be popular
    4) Limited divisibility of coins -- there will not enough Satoshis for BTC to be the main global payment system
    5) Blocks in a simple chain -- not arranging blocks in a tree has proven inefficient
    6) No state commitments -- makes it hard for light clients to confirm the state of the system
    7) Simplistic attack analysis -- does not identify many attack vectors
    8) One-CPU-one-vote -- did not anticipate dedicated mining hardware

    What we still don't know
    1) SHA-256 puzzles -- relates to excessive energy consumption for POW
    2) The block size and other parameter limits -- some think larger more frequent blocks would be helpful
    3) Anonymity -- not completely anonymous if the right (or wrong) people are looking for you
    4) Inflation -- doesn't account for lost keys and could be deflationary
    5) The switch to transaction fees -- could cause instability in the future
    6) Limited programmability -- could be a handicap moving forward, with ETH being more programmable

    Whew! I didn't intend to go on and on like that, there is a lot more info in the article but this should provide an overview if you have limited time.

    Cheers!!

    2044cb2cc52355d681378f5a5fc4ea16

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Attach a file you can also drag-and-drop into the text area below:
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file