Home - Stay N Alive

The Blockchain and the "All for One, One for All" Demise of the Centralized Server

Posted on November 26, 2013 by jessestay

It’s amazing how history repeats itself. Internet history began with the conception of room-filled mainframe computers and “nodes” that would connect directly to the mainframes relying solely on the power of the central mainframe to get their signal and perform various tasks sent to the mainframe. Then came the PC era – an era where every person could have their own computer, and the processing power occurred on the same machine as the display and input device. Following that came the Internet, or World Wide Web, which combined mainframes and servers with personal computers. With the internet, mainframes and servers could be used to connect PCs, all over the world, in a distributed network of various servers all communicating with each other, and relaying information back to the client, the PC.

With the Cloud, we’re back to relying on servers, and we’re relying more on central data storage and processing more than ever before, just like the days of the mainframe. The only difference is our current “dumb terminals” can also cache pieces of information and perform mini processes to reduce the need for internet bandwidth in the process. All of that is about to change though with “The Chain” era as I call it, cryptocurrencies, and blockchain type infrastructure. In this era, we’re moving from lots and lots of servers all over the world, to one single server, distributed across multiple clients (or terminals) all doing their fair share of the processing.

With Bitcoin, I’ve talked previously about the power of “The Blockchain”, a global, worldwide accounting ledger that gets audited over and over again by a massive network of peer-to-peer computers, or “miners” to verify the chain has not been corrupted in any way. This network, as I stated earlier, when put together as a whole, is more powerful than the top 500 supercomputers in the world, combined. The network was designed this way.

In Satoshi’s whitepaper where he proposed the Bitcoin protocol, he suggests “as
long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to
attack the network, they’ll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers”. As a result, it’s to Bitcoin’s benefit to have a very large pool of honest miners, preventing the possibility of another majority outnumbering the honest miners and providing a false version of the blockchain. This makes for a very, very large public “server”, with lots and lots of computing power, that anyone, and anybody can rely on without the need for central companies, corporations, and even governments in many cases to provide that service with their own powerful servers. In many ways it means it’s near impossible to “lie” or “spoof” inside this type of network!

Imagine the opportunities this opens up. Server resources, DNS, hosting, and even storage servers are no longer a necessity. Instead we can all rely on “The Chain” to access this information. If I own a domain, that record exists on the Chain and the Chain can verify I own it, and any IP information that comes with it when a browser makes a request for that domain. Perhaps IP addresses will no longer be needed at all with the Chain – after all, servers won’t be necessary and I really believe this massive network could be used for storage as well. So maybe your browser also gets knowledge of another key on the chain that contains the content of the webpage.

Of course, all this is theory, but the implications are evident. I’m still weeding out how a lot of this could work in my mind, and so are many, many others. The potential is there though, and we already have the largest supercomputer on the planet that we could be using – the Blockchain used by Bitcoin – we just need to come up with new ways of using it (and many are), and identify the flaws so that we can either fix them, or come up with a new protocol without those flaws. One thing’s for sure in my mind – centrally-controlled servers, in the future, will no longer be necessary. Instead, we will all rely on a massive, P2P network of some sort – be it Bitcoin and the Blockchain itself, or some other open and distributed cryptocurrency model adapted to allow this stuff.

The collaborative economy doesn’t apply just to goods and services. It also applies to technology. The future will be less of a “one-to-one” or “one-to-many”, and more of an “all-for-one”, “one-for-all” model where everyone benefits that participates, and there is no fraud in the process. In the coming weeks and days I’ll share some potential use-cases for this Chain to further show some of its potential. What other use-cases can you come up with using the Chain?

Like this article? It’s freely shareable and can be copied and distributed (or linked to) via Creative Commons Attribution license. Or, just send a tip via Bitcoin!:

Address: 19AdCAbjshRuEFhx4py1Ny7i48s1d6RFi

First the PC. Second the Web. Third the Cloud. And Now…The Chain – Why Bitcoin is Not Just a Currency – It’s a Platform!

Posted on November 23, 2013 by jessestay

What if you could transfer stock to another individual, without a stock broker or stock certificate? What if you could sell your home, without a real estate broker or deed? What if you could sell your car without need for a title or vehicle registration? That’s the concept of the technology behind Bitcoin, and why you need to be paying attention to why this is so much more than just a currency or investment, and why your brand could be disrupted soon if it does not adapt.

The technology behind Bitcoin, the currency that is making little-known software developers millionaires as the price has gone from less than $1 per Bitcoin to $800 per Bitcoin in just a couple years, has the potential to revolutionize the way the world authenticates human-to-human transactions within a matter of years. The technology, or protocol, is called “The Blockchain”, and it has the potential to be so much more than just a currency-driven protocol. It’s an entirely new platform. “The Chain”, as I’m now calling this platform, is incredibly powerful, and I truly think it is a paradigm shift on par with the shift from the mainframe to the PC, the PC to the Web, and more recently the Web to The Cloud.

“Colored Coins”

I had the chance to sit down with some of these Bitcoin millionaires and soon-to-be-millionaires (I’m not exaggerating!) at a local event in Provo, Utah (organized by my friends from the upcoming documentary, “Life on Bitcoin“) called a “Bitmob”. The idea is this (in a nutshell): a group of Bitcoiners approach a local business and tell them they will bring x number of people willing to pay with Bitcoin if the business will be willing to accept it. It’s a great way to get businesses to start accepting Bitcoin as a currency, brings a lot of new customers to those businesses, and overall improves the economy of Bitcoin as a whole.

It was at this meeting that my mind was enlightened that Bitcoin is not just a revolutionary, worldwide currency without central control, but it is so much more than that. A group of developers in the Bitcoin community have proposed an addition to the Bitcoin protocol (introduced by a pseudonomous developer named “Satoshi Nakamoto” in 2008, but with precedence in other standards and technologies prior to that), which allows each Bitcoin transfer to contain a payload of text. They call these “Colored Coins“. This payload of text could be synonymous with writing on a $1 bill the words, “I’ll give anyone who gives me this bill a car”. Then, that person would be held to giving each person that gave them that $1 bill a car. However, attaching this to an encrypted digital transaction that can be guaranteed as authentic, traced between the sender and recipient (by code, not necessarily ID of a human – one fatal flaw in Bitcoin IMO), now you have an even more certain guarantee of that agreement that the entire world can audit and ensure took place. If it is dishonored, the entire world knows (instead of just the people that gave the individual the $1 bill). See this video to get a better idea of how their proposal works – it does a much better job explaining:

Bitcoin is Just One Implementation of The Platform (The Chain)

The power of why this is possible lies in a worldwide “ledger” called “The Blockchain“, basically a ledger similar to an accounting ledger, that each bitcoin client has access to, can’t delete, and proves the transaction takes place. Because the entire world has access to this ledger, there is no mistake in the transaction, and anyone can prove that the owners of the 2 sides of the transaction are in agreement with each other.

The power of Bitcoin is in a vast, worldwide network of connected computers that can all authenticate what agreements were made from which parties. Each of these computers performs computer algorithms to ensure the strength of encryption on each transaction, further ensuring its authenticity. I’m told that if you added all this computing power worldwide, it would equal the power of more than 500 of the world’s top super computers. The number of trades on the network, today alone, outnumbered the number of transactions on Paypal, and are soon to outnumber the number of transactions by Discover Card.

The sheer number of participants in this worldwide peer-to-peer network, the value attached to each transaction (in Bitcoin – the Bitcoin-to-Dollar ration today is approximately 1/$700 and growing), and most importantly the openness of the network, the Blockchain, and the protocol behind it make this new network designed for commerce as scalable as the Internet, and perhaps even more valuable. As you can see, it can also be used for more than just monetary trade. One individual is using it for authentic transfer of files between individuals, for instance.

The thing is it’s the idea of Bitcoin and the Blockchain that makes all this so powerful. There will be numerous additions to the protocol over time, and I’m sure other versions, making this concept more and more powerful. What’s powerful isn’t that Bitcoin exists – it’s that this is the direction it is taking us as a society, and the technology exists today. For that reason this is a very large platform that will have many components to it, just like the web has HTTP and TCP/IP and MAC addresses, and even OAuth, and OpenID that all work together in one. We’ll see the same with cryptocurrency and online commerce in ways that transform commerce and corporate structure as we know today. There are already other cryptocurrencies like Litecoin and Namecoin. Devs and businesses will create their own currency exchanges (I’ll explain that in another post).

Bitcoin is Much More Than Just a Currency

For that reason I see Bitcoin as much more than just a currency. Bitcoin is an open platform designed for commerce. It is the architecture and Infrastructure for all transactions that Jeremiah Owyang mentions in the Collaborative Economy philosophy. Whether in “colored coins”, or another standard, Bitcoin, and cryptocurrency in general, are the platforms that will power every guaranteed human-to-human transaction on the planet. It’s already globally recognized. Each transaction has an intrinsic value (Bitcoin itself is limited in number, giving it rarity, similar to Gold). Each transaction can be proved, with 100% accuracy. And it’s near impossible to forge, unlike traditional currency. And what’s even better is this is all a platform which will evolve and grow, just like the internet.

Bitcoin is what happens when you apply digital and cryptographic principles to accounting. This is as big a change in technology to come to the world as the PC, the Web, and most recently the Cloud. We are entering a new era of human-to-human commerce where the brand, and the government is no longer “the middle man” in these agreements. Is your business ready to handle it? Are we pushing our governments to adapt? I’ll do some articles shortly on ways brands can adapt, and what I’m telling my clients.

Want to know more about Bitcoin? This video will get you started!:

Like this article? It’s freely shareable and can be copied and distributed (or linked to) via Creative Commons Attribution license. Or, just send a tip via Bitcoin!:

Address: 19AdCAbjshRuEFhx4py1Ny7i48s1d6RFi

Pornography and Choice – The Dilemma Over the Future of Open

Posted on May 17, 2010 by jessestay

I’ve been following the Ryan Tate late-night rant (language) over Steve Jobs’ desire for a world “free from porn” and his objections therein (while still not completely sure the purpose for his rant). While pornography was only one of the things Jobs highlighted, Tate, who has no children of his own, seemed to focus on it, considering a world “free from porn” an infringement on his own privacies. I’d like to take a different angle and share my own views, as a parent of 4 children, and how I really feel the web as we know it infringes my own freedom as a parent. It also infringes on my children’s own freedom, in the the native choices technology-wise that I have access to in order to protect my children and my family from pornography. That’s right, I said it (well, I’ve said it before) – the web, while open, is not entirely free. Let me explain.

Let me start with the point that, while outside this blog I may have my own opinions and beliefs, I am not saying in any way or form whether porn is “evil”, or “not evil”, or whether it is “good”, or “bad” for society. That is not the purpose of this article, and I’ll leave that for you to decide. One thing I think we can all agree on however is that, for good or for bad, pornography affects us all, and, as an individual, or father of 4 children, I don’t have much choice in the matter. Let’s face it – whether I want it or not, my children are going to see porn, probably many, many times in their life, perhaps way before they are old enough to even know what it is. As a parent, at least the way the open web works, at a native level I don’t have any choice in that matter. Is that freedom?

Right now we live on a very open web. It’s a vast web, linked together from website to website, which enables sites like Google and MSN and others to index that content and provide answers to many questions. We have a whole lot more knowledge because of that. At the same time it’s a very wild west atmosphere – the very “Net Neutrality” we are all fighting for is keeping any sort of control that parents and families so desperately want for their children from accidentally stumbling on things they don’t want to see. This is probably why much more closed environments like Facebook are thriving – we’re being given some level of control, as parents and individuals, over this very open atmosphere. We need an open way to fix this problem. Or maybe closed is the only solution…

Let me share an example: My daughter, who is 9 (not even starting puberty yet), told us the story of her friends at school talking about various sexual topics. She told us about one friend, a boy, who wanted to know what sex was, so he Googled “sex” on the internet, something he knew how to do from school when he had a question about how something works or what something was. Needless to say, as parents, at age 9, we were fortunate enough to have our daughter ask about this before Googling herself, but we were now forced to give “the talk” to a 9 year old. I can only imagine that boy’s parents – I hope he talked with them about what he found.

As a father of 4, I’m scared to death what my kids are going to have to go through. I certainly don’t want to shelter them from the world, but at the same time I want to be the one introducing them to the world, not the world getting to them first. We need innovation in this area. I’m worried it’s an area that gets little attention because the innovators in this space either aren’t parents themselves, or have no objections to their children seeing it. The thing is, this isn’t a “good” vs. “bad” battle. This is a battle about true “freedom”. This isn’t about anyone telling you that you can’t watch porn. This is about those on the web that don’t want to watch it or come across it being able to avoid it entirely, as a native component of the web.

Right now all the solutions out there are hacks. Solutions like (my favorite – I’ll be doing a review soon) Net Nanny, Norton Internet Security, and others are great at helping parents to monitor what their kids are doing and even protecting them from things their parents don’t want them to see, but in reality they’re just solving a problem the web should have solved in the first place. Pornography, sexual content, violence, or anything else we, as parents and individuals want a handle over should be elements that are handled at the core of the web. The web needs elements to identify this type of content, and ways to punish those that don’t identify their content, taking away the overall freedom that is inherent to the web. The web should be about choice. It’s not at the moment.

At the same time, operating systems, like Windows, OS X, the iPad, Android, and the iPhone, all need to have layers built in that give parents and individuals more control over the content they want to see. I should note that Facebook, at the moment, has no way for me as a parent to monitor what my child is doing on the site – I can’t let my kids on it until I have that control. Don’t even get me started about Google Chat.

I’m not quite sure what the solution is, but we need innovation in this area. Perhaps XRD or the new JRD and identifiers for content are the solution. Maybe Google and Microsoft and others that index this content could reward sites with higher search rankings that properly identify their data. Maybe a “.xxx” TLD is the solution. At the same time we have to take into account chat, and how people interact online. Maybe verified identity is the solution in this area. On the open web we can’t give up on this effort though, or the more closed solutions, like Jobs inferred with the iPad, are going to win, and rightfully so.

Steve Jobs is right, whether Ryan Tate likes it or not – as a parent I am not free on the web right now. The only freedom I have is to just turn off the computer, keep my kids from learning technology at a young age, and hope they don’t see it at school, or at a friends’ house, or the elsewhere (which they will). Freedom is about choice – we should all have the choice in this matter, and that choice just doesn’t exist on the web at the moment. I hope the Open Web can fix these problems before Apple, or Microsoft, or Facebook do it in a closed environment. Either way, I welcome the extra freedom I will get from it.

From one parent to another: Thank you Steve, for trying to make my life as a parent a little more “free”.

The Web is No Longer Open

Posted on March 3, 2010 by jessestay

“So it can benefit everyone.”

That’s what a Google employee said today as he tried to explain Google’s recent push to have websites use the ‘rel=”me”‘ meta HTML tags to identify pages a user owns on the web. It’s not a bad strategy – index the entire web, know every single website out there, and when they change, and now the web is your network. The thing is, since the “open” web hasn’t had a natural way of identifying websites owned by users, Google, the current controller of this network, needed a way to do it. Why not make people identify their websites to Google’s SocialGraph network, and call it “open” so it benefits everyone? I’m sorry, but the “open” web that we all grew up in is dead now that 2 or 3 entities have indexed it all. This is now their network.

Let’s contrast that to Facebook, the “Walled Garden”, criticized for being closed due to tight privacy controls and not willing to open up to the outside web. Of course, all that is a myth – Facebook too has provided ways for website owners to identify themselves to Facebook on the “open” web, making Facebook itself the controller of that social graph data, thereby giving Facebook a new role in who “owns” the “open” web. Facebook has even made known in its developer roadmap its intention to build an “OpenGraph API”, making every website owner’s site a Facebook Fan Page in the Facebook network. Don’t kid yourself that Facebook wants a role in this as well. They’re a major threat to Google, too because of this.

Then there’s Twitter, just starting to realize how to play in this game, now starting to collect user data for search in their own network. Don’t count them out just yet, as they too will soon be trying to find ways to get you to identify your website on their network.

So we’ll soon have 3 ways of identifying our websites on the “open” web. I can identify my site through Facebook, as you see by the Facebook Connect login buttons scattered around. I can identify myself in the Google SocialGraph APIs, which, if you view the source of this site you’ll see a ‘rel=”me”‘ meta tag identifying my site so Google can search it. Who knows what Twitter will provide to bring my site into its network. Each network is providing its easiest ways of identifying your site within their own Social Graph, and calling it “open” so other developers can bring their stuff into their networks easily, without rewriting code.

I think it’s time we stop tricking ourselves into thinking the web is open at all. Google is in control of the web – they have it all indexed. Now that we are seeing that he who owns the Social Graph has a new way of controlling and indexing the web, which we are seeing by Facebook’s massive growth (400+ million users!), I think Google feels threatened. They’ll play every “open” term in the book to gain that control back. Of course the new meta tags are beneficial – is it really beneficial to “everybody” though? I argue the one entity it benefits most is Google. Yeah, it benefits developers if we can get everyone to agree on what “open” is, but that will never happen. I think it’s time we accept that now that the web is controlled and indexed by only a few large corporations, it is far from “open”. “Open” is nothing more than a marketing term, and I think we can thank Google for that. No, that’s not a bad thing – it’s just reality.

Do these technologies really “benefit everyone” when no other search startup has a remote chance of competing with owning the “open web” network?

Further note:

How do we solve this? I truly believe the only solution to giving the user control of the web again is via client-side, truly user-controlled technologies like what Kynetx offers. Action Cards, Information Cards, Selectors, and browser-side technologies that bring context back in the user’s hands are the only way we’re going to make the web “open” again. The future will be the battle for the client – I hope the user wins that battle.

Image courtesy Leo Reynolds

UPDATE: DeWitt Clinton of Google, who wrote the quote above this post is in response to, issued his own response here. The comments there are interesting, albeit a lot of current and former Google employees trying to defend their case. I still hold that no matter what Google does now, due to the size of their index, any promotion of the “open web” is still to their benefit. I don’t think Google should be denying that.

UPDATE 2: My response to DeWitt’s response is here – why didn’t Google just clone Facebook’s APIs if their intention was to benefit the developer and end-user?

Does Twitter Have An Internal iPhone App?

Posted on November 7, 2009 by jessestay

A while back I was surfing the Twitter developers wiki and noticed 2 interesting images uploaded by Ryan Sarver, Twitter’s Platform Project Manager. One of the images looks like a very rough status message entry screen, with a toggle button for Twitter’s new geolocation feature. This same feature just launched in read-only mode on Seesmic’s new desktop app yesterday. The second image is what looks like a screenshot of an iPhone screen prompting the user to enable Geolocation, taking the user to their Geolocation settings to enable it on a user’s account.

Then, today, Robert Scoble pointed out that you could see the new Geolocation feature launched in Seesmic Desktop in action by viewing Ryan Sarver’s tweets in the Twitter client. This makes me wonder how Ryan is broadcasting his location. Does Twitter have an internal iPhone app they are using, or are these just proof of concept images for other developers to use in their own apps?

Twitter has long been criticized for the lack of a good native mobile client. They have also admitted in the past that a new version of at least the mobile web client is in the roadmap. Could they be taking this a step further and building an entire iPhone app out of it?

Based on current facts the natural assumption would be that this is just an internal app they are using to test out mobile features like geo-location. The roughness of the screenshots and focus on just geolocation that we know of thus far lends to that conclusion. However, it’s important for all developers to be prepared, and be aware that in any market sustained by just Twitter your greatest competitor could just be your supplier of information (a concept I learned in business school), Twitter itself. If you’re developing an iPhone or mobile app for Twitter this is indeed something you should always be prepared for.

Here are the screenshots – you tell me. Is Twitter building an internal iPhone app?