我是Andreas,任何关于比特币的问题,本周六晚8点欢迎来问!

作者:Andreas_8btc

时间:2016年7月30日

来源:链节点

本次活动特别感谢钟隐(cnLedger)的联系协调,感谢Andreas接受邀请,欢迎大家积极提问!


Andreas M. Antonopoulos 是一位著名的技术专家和连续创业企业家,比特币界最著名和倍受尊敬的人物之一。身为一名迷人的公共演说家、教师和作家,他善于把复杂的问题变得简单而易于理解。

他被称为“bitcoin guru”,被认为是比特币社区十大最著名和最具影响力的人物之一;
他被看做分布式系统专家,他认为没有比特币,也就没有区块链;
他写作了Mastering Bitcoin点击在线阅读),是第一本从技术角度全面详细的介绍比特币和区块链原理以及实操的书籍;

Andreas M. Antonopoulos 的成长和互联网密不可分,青少年时期,他便在自己希腊的家中创办了他的首家公司——一个早期电子信息服务系统和原始的互联网服务提供商。他取得了伦敦大学学院的电脑科学学位、数据通信学位以及分布式系统学位,该学校最近跻身于全球大学排名前十。移居美国后,Andreas M. Antonopoulos 和别人合办了一家成功的技术研究公司,管理公司的他,在网络、安全、数据中心和云计算方面,为许多世界五百强公司的首席执行者提供建议。他撰写了200多篇关于安全、云计算和数据中心的文章,已经在世界范围内被印制出版,并在多家报刊发表。此外,他还持有两项网络和安全领域的专利权。

1990年,Andreas M. Antonopoulos 开始在私人、专业和学术等诸多场合讲授IT话题。从五名企业高管的会议室,到千人参与的大型会议,他不断磨练着自己的演讲水平。超过400次的锻炼,不仅使他成为了为人津津乐道的教授,还铸就了他世界级演讲大师的美名。2014年,第一所授予数字货币学士学位的尼科西亚大学邀请他来校任教。上任后,他与别人合作开设了这门课程。他还参与讲授了数字货币导论,后者成了为尼科西亚大学的一门大型网络公开课(MOOC)。

作为一名比特币企业家,Andreas M. Antonopoulos 已成立了不少比特币企业,并推出了一些社区开源项目。他担任好几家比特币和加密货币公司的顾问。他既是一名出版作家,发表了大量关于比特币的文章和博文;也是一档流行博客“Let’s Talk Bitcoin”的固定主持人;还是在全球各地的技术安全会议上演说的常客。

北京时间7月30日晚8点,Andreas M. Antonopoulos 做客巴比特,解答一切有关比特币的问题,欢迎来问!
Xseraph2
 队长 船龄 5.7年
这个才是真大神,精通比特币就是这哥们的大作。
2016-07-20
satoshi
 版主 船龄 6.9年
感谢Andreas接受我们的邀请! Andreas一直以来为不遗余力地在世界各国推广比特币,享有盛誉。他曾接受加拿大国会议员的邀请,为政府首脑介绍比特币相关技术。他可能是目前在国际上拥有粉丝数量最多的比特币大V。
2016-07-23
asian
 船员 船龄 5年
如果Core不能发布2M硬分叉代码,否定了硬分叉扩容,您认为比特币社区应该怎么办?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 asian
It depends on what other scaling solutions Core releases. Scaling will be solved by many different solutions, not just a hard-fork. If Core fails to provide good solutions for scaling, they will lose power to alternative implementations. Until now, the community and market is accepting Core’s roadmap and following their code. 这取决于Core会发布哪些其它扩容解决方案。扩容可以通过多种方式解决,并不一定要硬分叉。如果Core不能提供好的扩容方案,他们将不得不让位于更好的替代选项。截止目前,社区和市场都接受了Core的路线图,并拥护了他们的代码。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-24 0
asian
 船员 船龄 5年
闪电网络会不会造成的比特币中心化危险呢?比如政府如果以不合规为由,要求LN运营商封禁用户,而主链上交易费很高,这样不是限制了一些用户使用比特币?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 asian
LN operators cannot be shutdown, any more than bitcoin nodes can be shutdown. The details for LN routing are still being developed, but it is quite possible to create an LN network that is almost impossible to shutdown by distributing the LN nodes in many different countries. Like bitcoin, an LN transaction can be routed in a way that makes it difficult to see where it is coming from and therefore resistant to censorship. 闪电网络的运营商不能被关闭,就像比特币节点无法被关闭一样。闪电网络路径的细节正在开发当中,但很有可能的是,我们可以建设一个完全无法被关闭的闪电网络——将节点分散到全球多个国家。就如同比特币一样,一笔闪电网络交易的源头难以被察觉,因此对审查制度是有抵抗力的。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-24
jb9802
 副船长 船龄 6.6年
比特币区块已经满了,在闪电网络技术还没有可以商用之前,一次2M分叉对比特币是非常有利的,Core一直非常排斥你觉得这是为什么?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 jb9802
Full blocks have created a situation where wallet software has to be developed to make correct calculations of transaction fees. This in itself makes the bitcoin network more secure against DDoS attack. Even though a 2MB HF seems like an “easy” solution, it is not easy. As we have seen in Ethereum, a HF can cause enormous disruption to exchanges and other services. Bitcoin’s economy is MUCH larger and we need to be much more careful with a HF. Before planning a 2MB HF, we need to fix several other issues which can be fixed by Segregated Witness (for example, scaling of signature verification). I think the current plan is good: to do segwit first, improve the relay network, implement compact blocks and other small changes followed by a carefully planned HF to 2MB in the next 18 months. 区块爆满已经导致钱包软件必须能够正确地计算交易手续费。这本身使得比特币网络面对DDoS攻击的时候更加安全。即便2MB硬分叉似乎是“简单”的解决方案,但它其实并不简单。如同我们在以太坊的案例中看到的那样,硬分叉会给交易所和其它服务商造成严重的困难。比特币的经济体系要(比以太坊)大得多,对于硬分叉,我们必须格外小心。在进行2MB硬分叉之前,我们需要解决数个其它问题,这些问题可以用隔离见证来解决(比如,签名验证扩容)。我认为目前的计划是好的:先搞隔离见证,改进中继网络,部署紧凑区块和其它小改动,最后再在未来的18个月中实施2MB硬分叉。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-24
lb9188
 队长 船龄 5.1年
btc目前是否遇到了发展的瓶颈?对于现在社区关于扩容问题的矛盾和分歧,是否会影响btc的长远价值和投资者信心?大神对扩容,持什么看法?谢谢!
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 lb9188
Development of bitcoin is accelerating. The number of new features, improvements and innovations is increasing all the time. Scaling is just one issue and it does not define bitcoin. Scaling will continue to be an issue as long as bitcoin is growing. 比特币正在经历加速发展。新功能、改进和创新正在加速涌现。扩容只是其中一个问题,并不是比特币的全部。随着比特币的不断发展,扩容问题只会持续存在。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-24
MissCherry!
 副船长 船龄 6.1年
您怎么看待以太硬分叉这件事?您认为以太硬分叉对比特币有什么参考或者借鉴意义吗?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 MissCherry!
The Ethereum HF demonstrated a couple of important issues: Ethereum is not the same as bitcoin. In bitcoin it would be much more difficult to simply roll-back the balance of a set of addresses. Ethereum does not use UTXO based accounting Forks can introduce unexpected denial-of-service vectors and cause disruption to exchanges and the economy. They create very high risks especially for exchanges. Even for a coin with less value, this was very risky and it was done too fast. 以太坊硬分叉向我们展示了数个重要问题的存在: 1,以太坊和比特币不一样。对于比特币而言,要简单地对一系列地址进行余额回滚是非常困难的。而以太坊不使用基于UTXO的记账方案。 2,分叉会带来意料之外的拒绝服务情形,对交易所和整个经济体系造成冲击。交易所面临的风险尤其高。即便是对于一个价值较低的币种,这其中的风险都太大了,何况执行地过于仓促。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-25
ETHman
 副船长 船龄 6.4年
请问大神,比特币区块链在本质上是否不适合部署智能合约? 另外以太坊和rootstock,你觉得两者的优势、劣势在哪里?谢谢
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 ETHman
I disagree. Bitcoin is suitable for many smart contracts. Multisignature is a smart contract. With a combination of CheckLockTime, MultiSignature, HTLC and other bitcoin scripts, developers can build some very sophisticated and useful smart contracts. Lightning Network (state channes) are just one example of a system of smart-contract based channels. So bitcoin may be able to do 75% of the smart contracts that are needed by the market – at least what is needed now. Ethereum and Rootstock have many other uses, of course. There is an enormous unexplored space in the remaining market for smart contracts that are much more complex than what can be done with bitcoin script. It is still too early to know what the market needs and what can be built. 我不这么认为,比特币能够适用很多智能合约。多重签名就是一种智能合约。通过结合CheckLock Time、多重签名、HTLC和其他比特币脚本,开发者可以创建一些非常复杂和有用的智能合约。闪电网络(状态通道)只是基于智能合约的通道的系统的一个例子。所以,比特币可以拥有75%的市场需要的智能合约——至少如今需要的。 当然,以太坊和Rootstock拥有很多其他用途。如今智能合约在剩余市场中还有很多未探索的领域,这些领域要比比特币脚本应用的领域更加复杂。目前要知道市场需要什么以及能够创建什么还为时过早。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-25
IOT
 队长 船龄 5.9年
请问A神有没有参与什么区块链项目? 对于物联网区块链有什么看法?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 IOT
I am not convinced that there is a need for “blockchain” in IoT. It seems to me that IoT is a security nightmare, especially if the “things” are controlled by corporations and governments (and hackers who break them). That is a good way to have surveillance installed in your home and car that someone else controls. A blockchain is a good way to have PUBLIC ledgers. I do not see how that helps. Perhaps in 10-20 years we may see useful applications of blockchain in IoT 我不认为物联网需要“区块链”。在我看来,物联网会是一场安全噩梦,特别是,如果“物“是由企业和政府控制的话(并且黑客可以攻破它们)。这样可以很好地实施监控计划,将其安装在你家里、车里,并由他人来控制。区块链适合于部署公共账本。我不认为区块链有助于物联网。也许10到20年后,我们会看到区块链在物联网上有好的应用。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-25
Byzantine
 船员 船龄 5.1年
你好,Andreas,现在关于区块链的定义,有两种观点,一种认为区块链数据神圣不可修改,区块链就像是一部启动便不可停机与不可逆转的信用机器,另外有一种观点,认为区块链就是要保障数字资产持有者的权益,应该由开发者或项目官方来监督,某种事故发生后,区块链这部机器可以逆转,并修改一些数据记录。你怎么看?哪一种区块链最终会成为主流?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 Byzantine
Blockchain is a word that doesn’t offer a detailed definition. Most of the interesting characteristics (like immutability) depend on the algorithms used for consensus, the degree of decentralization, whether the network is open or not and the economic factors that it the “blockchain” supports. Blockchain is as generic as “network database” and is therefore not a useful term. The question is whether immutability is an important characteristic. Bitcoin has strong (thermodynamically guaranteed) immutability, because of expensive energy-dependent proof-of-work. Most other “blockchains” do not have that. Is that useful? I think it is very very useful, very valuable for some applications. It is so valuable as a feature that it is “worth” spending all this energy to have it. But it is also so expensive that it is not worth building 2 of them. Most other “blockchains” that needs strong immutability will probably use checkpointing, or some other mechanism to link to the bitcoin blockchain. This way, other chains “import” immutability without consuming extra energy. But not all applications need historical immutability. There will be many chains and applications that do not need that capability. The market will find uses for all different levels of immutability (from “strong” to “none”). 区块链一词并无详细的定义。它最为有趣的特性(如不可篡改性)取决于共识算法种类、去中心化程度、网络是否公开、经济因素是否支撑。区块链和“网络数据库”一样都是通用名词,因此它本身不是什么很特殊的词汇。 问题在于,不可篡改性是否是一个重要的必备特性。比特币有着强大的(按热力学定义得到保证的)不可篡改性,因为昂贵的、需要大量能源的工作证明算法的存在。大多数其它“区块链”并不适用这一点。那么这有用吗? 我认为非常非常有用,区块链对某些应用非常有益。它如此珍贵,价值如此高,值得花费非常多的能源去拥有它。但并不需要建立两个如此昂贵的系统。大多数其它“区块链”,如果需要不可篡改性,会选择使用检查点机制或是其它机制,来实现对比特币区块链的连接。这样一来,其它链就可以在不需要消耗大量额外能源的情况下“进口”这种不可篡改性。 但并非所有的应用都必须要有历史不可篡改性。许多链、许多应用,都不需要这一特性。市场自会挑选出拥有不同层级不可篡改性的应用(从强不可篡改到可篡改)。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-25
qming
 船员 船龄 5.7年
图灵完备是毒药?还素灵丹?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 qming
It depends on the application. Software engineering is about tradeoffs. Some applications require very very strong security. To achieve that it is best to have a very simple scripting language that is not Turing complete. For other applications, the balance is better with more flexibility even if that means the level of security is a bit lower. The market will decide which applications need which type of security. Sometimes the wrong level of security will be used and those applications will get attacked. Then the market will learn from that mistake and use more security and less flexibility. There is no “best” chain. There is only “best for X” chain and it depends on what X you are trying to do. 这要取决于图灵完备怎么应用。软件工程就是关于如何权衡。一些应用需要非常非常高的安全性。所以为了获得这种安全性,最好有一种非常简单的脚本语言,而不是图灵完备。对于一些应用,最好在灵活性上实现平衡,即使这意味着安全水平有点低。市场将会决定应用需要哪种类型的安全性。有时候,使用错误的安全级别将会导致这些应用被攻击。然后,市场将会从错误中吸取教训,使用更高的安全性和较低的灵活性。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-25
asian
 船员 船龄 5年
您怎么评价以太的硬分叉分裂成两个币的情况?比特币需要硬分叉吗,如果也和以太一样分叉成两个币,会不会造成混乱,让比特币的价值受到影响?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 asian
Bitcoin will have a hard-fork, eventually, I think. When bitcoin has a HF, there will be 2 chains after the fork and there will be 2 coins. It is almost guaranteed that some people will refuse the new chain and will remain on the old chain. There are enough people with significant amounts of bitcoin who will never agree to a fork and can afford to keep mining the old chain. Ethereum demonstrated this issue very well. In bitcoin it will be much bigger, because the “old” bitcoin may be worth as much as all of ethereum (1 billion USD). It will not undermine bitcoin’s value very much, but it will cause some chaos with users, wallets and exchanges. This is why a HF needs to be very carefully planned and executed with plenty of advance notice. We also need to learn from Ethereum and consider adding some anti-replay defenses to help users maintain separation of the two chains in their wallets. 我认为比特币最终会有一次硬分叉的。当比特币硬分叉之后,会有两条链,两种币。且肯定有人会拒绝新链,留在旧链上。有足够多人的、足够多的比特币存量会选择拒绝分叉,且能够继续在旧链上挖矿。以太坊就很好地说明了这一情况。如果是比特币,一切只会影响更大,因为“旧”的比特币本身可能就等同以太坊整个的市值了(10亿美元)。这并不能很大地伤害到比特币的价值,但会对用户、钱包和交易所带来一些困扰。这就是为什么硬分叉必须被格外小心地对待,要小心计划、执行,要有足够多的预先提示。我们也需要从以太坊身上学习,考虑添加某种反-重演防御机制,帮助用户能在钱包里分开使用两条链。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-26
asian
 船员 船龄 5年
比特币的后续行情您怎么看?中短期还能再涨吗?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 asian
The price will go up. Then it will go down. Then up, down, down, up, down, up, up, down and finally up. The timing of these movements will vary from one minute to one decade. Good luck. 价格会上涨。然后又下降,然后反复这一过程,最终是上涨的。这些涨跌的时间点可能是1分钟,可能是10年。祝好运。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-26
trumpking
 船员 船龄 4.9年
图灵非完备性 Andreas,你好,看过您写的《精通比特币》,很多收获。尤其是您的
“比特币脚本语言包含许多操作,但都故意限定为一种重要的方式——没有循环或者复杂流控制功能以外的其他条件的流控制。这样就保证了脚本语言的图灵非完备性,这意味着脚本的复杂性有限,交易可执行的次数也可预见。脚本并不是一种通用语言,施加的这些限制确保该语言不被用于创造无限循环或其它类型的逻辑炸弹,这样的炸弹可以植入在一笔交易中,通过引起拒绝服务的方式攻击比特币网络。受限制的语言能防止交易激活机制被人当作薄弱环节而加以利用。”
一段论述,有惊人的预见性,现在DAO事件的发生似乎在验证你当初的判断。您怎样评估以太坊平台的安全性,开放的智能合约编写权限是否存在潜在安全隐患?以及现在硬分叉与Ethereum Classic的存在,是否会对以太坊平台构成威胁?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 trumpking
The “visionary” in this case was Satoshi Nakamoto. I was only explaining the reasoning behind her decision to keep the scripting language limited. Ethereum makes different tradeoffs between security/immutability and flexbility. We will see what applications will emerge that are better for Ethereum rather than bitcoin. I’m sure there will be many applications that need Ethereum level of flexibility. I am sure there will be many applications that need Bitcoin level of security. Both chains will be successful, in different domains. “惊人的预见性”,这要感谢中本聪。我只是解释清楚了她决定限制Script语言背后的理由,以太坊在安全、不可篡改和灵活性之间有与比特币不同的利弊权衡,我们将会看到与比特币相比更适合于以太坊的应用,我确信有很多应用会需要以太坊这种水平的灵活性,我也确信很多应用需要比特币这种水平的安全性。两种区块链分别会在不同领域取得成功。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-26
江卓尔
 版主 船龄 5.4年
1、很多人对Core在社区中有着集中且巨大的权力感到担忧,认为这将破坏比特币的去中心化, 支持Classic等其他开发团队,不是因为他们的技术或者路线一定比Core好,而是他比Core更加开放和公平。 请问您怎么看待Core集中的开发权力,对比特币去中心化的影响呢? 2、Core在路线图中不扩容主链,准备将来把绝大部分交易都移动到闪电网络等侧链上,主链只用来结算, 请问您对这种改变比特币传统架构,激进的修改行为有什么评价?
江卓尔 江卓尔 回复 Andreas_8btc
本帖最后由 江卓尔 于 2016-7-31 02:47 编辑
这不是事实。Core的路线图包含扩容主链(隔离见证、紧凑区块、中继网络、Schnorr签名、MAST等等)
隔离见证(segwit) 不是扩容主链,只是因为core给出的对签名数据的特定优惠(除以4),导致超过1MB的区块计算时会小于1MB,间接达到了微弱的扩容效果, 紧凑区块(compact blocks)中继网络(relay networks) 目的是对区块传输进行削峰填谷,使得在带宽不变的情况下可以支持更大区块,和主链扩容完全无关, Schnorr签名,MASTs(Merkelized Abstract Syntax Trees) 都是试图优化签名和数据结构,压缩交易的大小,在相同的区块内塞进更多的交易,同样没有进行主链扩容。 也就是说,你也承认Core没有进行任何主链扩容,只是试图在1MB区内挖掘更多潜力,但不主链扩容,并没有多少潜力可挖。 而不允许主链扩容,只允许开发两层协议(CLTV、CSV、LN等等)正是我所担忧的,
Core在路线图中不扩容主链,准备将来把绝大部分交易都移动到闪电网络等侧链上,主链只用来结算, 请问您对这种改变比特币传统架构,激进的修改行为有什么评价?
2016-07-31 0
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 江卓尔
1.Core has power only as long as they are providing and maintaining the software that the market needs. If they are not providing good software they have no power and the users can switch to other software very easily. That is not power. That is an open market. The market has decided to strongly support Core. A few loud voices without any financial stake are not representative of the market. The market has clearly chosen Core as the team that delivers the software that miners want to run, that exchanges want to run, that wallets want to run. If Core fails to provide good software they will be replaced. The reason they have not been replaced is because the value of software maintenance and careful development is greater than the risk of “full blocks” at the moment. 只有当Core提供和维护市场需要的软件时,Core才会有权力。如果他们不提供好的软件,那么他们就没有权力,用户很容易就能转向其他的软件。这与权力无关,是由开放的市场决定的。市场决定强烈支持Core。一些没有经济利益相关的声音并不能代表市场。市场很明显选择了Core团队提供旷工,交易所和钱包想要运行的软件。如果Core无法提供好的软件,那么他们将会被取代。他们如今之所以未被取代就是因为Core在软件维护上的价值,以及目前小心的发展要比‘节点爆满’更重要。 2.This is untrue. The Core roadmap includes scaling the main chain (segwit, compact blocks, relay networks, schnorr sigs, MAST etc) and providing opportunities for development of layer-2 protocols (CLTV, CSV, LN etc). 这不是事实。Core的路线图包含扩容主链(隔离见证、紧凑区块、中继网络、Schnorr签名、MAST等等)且允许开发两层协议(CLTV、CSV、LN等等)。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-26
jb9802
 副船长 船龄 6.6年
还有一个问题,Core的核心开发者说,如果不扩容在闪电网络结算时可能因为手续费太高而无法结算,引起闪电网络结算失败,你认为这个问题大不大,该如何解决?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 jb9802
I don’t see this as a problem. Scaling is not a boolean issue (True/False). It is a continuous range and it is constantly redefined by new applications. [Note: I would like my video about Scaling (Prague March 2016) to be translated, as it shows exaclty this issue. If anyone want to write subtitles, the video is open for contributions. ] 我觉得这不是个问题。扩容不是二元问题(是/否)。它持续不断地存在,也不断被新的应用重新定义。 [注:我有一个关于扩容的视频(2016年5月,在布拉格摄制),谈论的正是这个问题,希望有人能够翻译成中文。这个视频是开放的,如果有人想为它编写字幕也是完全可以的]
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-26
查理
 副船长 船龄 5.7年
如果比特币让你重新设计,你会修改什么地方?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 查理
I would have included Segwit from the beginning. I would have included CoinJoin and confidential transactions in the reference wallet and recommended that every wallet implements them automatically. 我希望一开始就将隔离见证囊括在内。我希望在参考钱包中加入CoinJoin和保密交易功能,并建议每个钱包都自动应用这些功能。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-26
tan90d
 副船长 船龄 6.1年
1.有core dev的成员说比特币从未发生过硬分叉。这是真的吗? 2.如果您是中本聪,您会将区块大小限制在1M吗?为什么? 3.您现在支持继续将区块限制在1M吗?如果您支持链上扩容,那您认为就现在来说应该扩到几M,或者说你是支持classic,还是unlimited,还是XT?为什么? 4.您认为bitcointalk和reddit/bitcoin两个论坛的管理者经常删不符合他们意见的帖子是对的吗?如果您有更高级的管理权限,您会做出恢复他们删除的帖子还是默认他们这样做? 5.您认为比特币的用户量能超过facebook的用户量吗? 6.您认为隔离见证的升级方式是应该采用硬分叉,还是应该用软分叉? 7.互联网的根域名服务器一共也就只有13台。如果未来比特币的完整节点最少可以少到多少? 谢谢。
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 tan90d
4.I do not agree with the moderation policies of /r/bitcoin. I do not support censorship. Moderating a large community is very difficult task. There is a very fine line between moderation and censorship. For me the difference is that moderation is control of “tone” and censorship is control of “topic or content”. However, it is diffucult to find the difference between moderation and censorship on issues like whether a topic is relevant to a community or not. I think /r/bitcoin made a bad choice in that area by trying to control the topic of conversation too heavily and removing content about the different clients and HF options. This resulted in inflaming the debate and splitting the community. However, I see that /r/btc has also failed to moderate the community. In the case of /r/btc the moderators have failed to moderate trolling and personal attacks, allowing a toxic environment. I have limited interactions on reddit because of these failures of moderation. 我并不同意/r/bitcoin的节制政策,我不支持审查制度。要节制一个大社区是一件很艰巨的任务。节制和审查的之间的界限很微妙。对于我来说,两者的不同点在于节制是一种‘语调’掌控,而审查是对‘话题或者内容’的控制。然而,在一些问题上很难找到节制和审查之间的区别,比如一个话题是否与社区有关。我认为/r/bitcoin在通过讨论主题掌控的太严以及删除与不同的客户端和硬分叉选择相关的内容方面,做了很糟糕的选择。这结果刺激了争论并分裂了社区。然而,我认为 /r/btc也未能节制社区。/r/bitcoin的版主未能适度控制和人身攻击,促使了一种有害的环境。因为这些节制失败,我已经对自己在reddit上的交流进行了限制。 5.If you count “users” as anyone who depends on bitcoin in direct or indirect way, yes. I think bitcoin will be used by many people who will not know they are using bitcoin. It will support other applications and be invisible. 如果你所说的“用户”是指直接的或者间接的,我认为比特币将会被很多的人使用,他们甚至不会意识到自己在使用比特币,我将会支持其他的应用,无形中使用比特币的应用。 6.Soft-fork first, hard-fork later to clean up the coinbase commitment and a few other issues. 应该首先采用软分叉,之后的硬分叉将用来解决coinbase承担和其它问题。 7.Soft-fork first, hard-fork later to clean up the coinbase commitment and a few other issues. 应该首先采用软分叉,之后的硬分叉将用来解决coinbase承担和其它问题。
2016-07-30 0
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 tan90d
1.Bitcoin has not had an intentional HF – I don’t think so. Bitcoin has had an unintentional hard fork. I think twice: Once in April of 2013 due to the BDB bug in switching from 0.7 to 0.8. I think it also did an unplanned HF when there was a bug in the coinbase amount for one block, but I’m not sure about that one. 比特币并未有过刻意的硬分叉——我是这么认为的。比特币曾经有过一次非刻意的硬分叉。我认为有两次:一次在13年4月,因为BDB从0.7升级到0.8时出现的的BUG问题。应该还有一次计划外的硬分叉,当时某个区块的币数出现了bug,但我不是很清楚具体情况。 2.Yes, I would set some block size limit. But only temporarily. In the long term I think that miners will adjust dynamically. For now, however, there are too many risks to an unlimited block size. It allows denial of service attacks and consensus attacks. 是的,我会设定区块大小限制。但是这个限制是暂时的。从长远看,我认为旷工将会进行动态调整。然而,对于目前来说,无限制的区块大小存在太多的风险。这将会导致很多服务攻击和共识攻击。 3.I expect the limit will be increased. Scaling will be on-chain, off-chain and every other solution we can find. Scaling is not a choice between on-chain and off-chain, every possible option will be applied. The question is “in which chronological order”. I do not support unlimited block size at this time. 我认为限制会提升。扩容会onchain进行,也会offchain进行,以及使用我们能找到的所有方案。扩容并非是在onchain和offline之间进行选择,每个可能的选项都会得到应用。问题是“按怎样的时间顺序”进行。我目前不支持对区块大小不做限制。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-27
yjzll
 船员 船龄 6.6年
请问,你认为虚拟货币行业最重要的是什么?比如:是不是“信任”问题。
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 yjzll
Trust in the network, not specific people or organizations. 网络中的信任是最重要的,而不是特定的某些人或者组织。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-27
23971052
 船员 船龄 4.9年
如果要参与到区块链行业当中,请问有什么建议?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 23971052
For the next several years, the most important applications are “infrastructure” applications. That means: exchanges, wallets, ATMs, bill payment, salary payment, online merchants, debit cards, etc. Getting people in and out of bitcoin easily, in every language, in every currency, in every country. 未来几年,最重要的应用是‘基础设施’应用,也就是:交易所,钱包,ATM,账单支付,薪水支付,在线商务,借记卡等等。让人们以每一种语言,每一种货币和每一个国家轻松进出比特币。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-27
pangcong
 副船长 船龄 7.7年
对于扩容,您怎么看?对于core开发者违背香港共识,您怎么看?您觉得Greg Maxwell是一个什么样的人?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 pangcong
Scaling is difficult and will take many many efforts over many many years. There is no simple or easy solution, so if someone is telling you that it is easy, they either lying or do not understand the complexity of the problem. I don’t know the details of the HK consensus, but I think Core is proceeding with the roadmap, more or less on schedule. If they had failed to deliver, the market would switch to another implementation. That has clearly not happened, so for now the market is clearly in support of Core. I think it is important to implement Segwit first and I think segwit is close to implementation. I have studied the implementation of segwit and it is a very important, well developed and well tested change to bitcoin. 比特币扩展不是一件容易的事情,这将需要多年的努力来完成,没有简单或轻松的解决方案,所以如果有人对你说这是简单的事情,那么此人不是撒谎就是不理解这个问题的复杂度。我不了解香港共识的具体内容,但是我认为Core团队在按照他们的开发路线图向前推进,或快或慢的按照时间表进行着。如果他们失败了,市场会选择其它解决方案。很明显,这样的事情未发生,到目前来说,市场是支持Core的。首先实施隔离见证是很重要的,我认为见证已经接近完工,我深入了解过隔离见证的实施,它非常重要,要经过慎重开发和良好测试融入比特币。 Greg is a brilliant cryptographer and a very very strong and principled advocate for privacy and decentralization. He is also a very very good programmer. I think we are lucky that he has chosen to work on bitcoin. But Greg is one person in a very broad and very diverse team of developers, with more than 25 very active participants and more than 100 additional participants who offer testing, support, documentation and other functions. Bitcoin has an amazing development team, one that is unparalleled in any other “blockchain” and a team that is producing an incredible amount of innovation and engineering. Greg 是一个很有才华的密码学家,他是一个非常有原则并强烈支持隐私和去中心化的倡导者。同时他还是一个很棒的程序员,我认为我们非常幸运这样一个人为比特币工作。然而,Greg是非常多样化、范围很大的比特币开发团队的一员,这个团队有25位活跃的参与者,100多位参与测试、支持、文档和提供其他功能的人员。比特币拥有一个很棒的开发团队,相对于其他”区块链“来说,比特币开发团队是无与伦比的,贡献了很多不可思议的创新和工程。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-28
wikileaks
 船员 船龄 4.9年
你好,我曾看你在一篇文章中说过,没有比特币或者工作量证明的区块链根本没法工作,但事实上,目前存在PoS、DPoS等多种非工作量证明的共识机制,您怎么评价它们?有人说安全、环保、去中心化是一个不可能三角,你认可这种观点吗?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 wikileaks
I have not said that non-PoW blockchains are infeasible. I have said that we do not have any large-scale examples to see how they scale. Security, efficiency and decentralization are likely to be tradeoffs (an impossible trinity). The real question is what is the best combination of those characteristics for different applications? I don’t think there is a perfect answer. Each application may have a slightly different answer 我没有说过没有POW的区块链是不可行的。我是说,我们没有一些具有规模的例子来说明他们怎样扩展。安全性,效率和去中心化都可能需要进行折中(不可能达到三位一体)。真正的问题是不同应用之间最佳的共同特点是什么?我不认为能够得到一个完美的答案。每一种应用都可能有一个轻微不同的答案。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-28
nodouble
 副船长 船龄 5.9年
请问你怎么看待r/bitcoin和bitcointalk.org的审查制度?这是不是阻碍了比特币的发展?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 nodouble
I think that the centralization of discussion is bad for the community. The moderators of r/bitcoin and bitcointalk have taken a very strong approach to controlling the discussion and this has had a negative effect on the community by splitting the debate and creating even more drama. As bitcoin becomes more mainstream I think we will see that the “old” forums which are contolled by a handful of people are gradually replaced by many many more areas for discussion with many different approaches to moderation and community development. I haven’t used bitcointalk for almost 2 years and I rarely use reddit to discuss bitcoin. 我认为讨论的中心化对社区不利。r/bitcoin和Bitcointalk版主已经采取了强硬措施来对讨论进行掌控。通过对争论进行剥离以及创造一些更加戏剧性的事件,这对社区产生了负面影响。随着比特币变得更加主流,我认为我们将会看到一些由一小部分人掌控的‘旧’论坛会逐渐被那些以不同方式进行节制和发展社区的领域所替代。我已经近2年未用bitcointalk了,并且也很少在reddit上讨论比特币。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-28
遥望天下
 船员 船龄 5.2年
Andreas,您好!请问您为何认为区块链的发展离不开比特币呢?目前来看,似乎区块链本身更受欢迎
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 遥望天下
I think that a blockchain without a “native asset”, meaning a currency that exists on the blockchain has limited uses. It is not impossible, but it is not as useful as a blockchain with a native currency. I also think that Proof-of-Work with rewards based on a native currency allows for an open and global blockchain, which is the most useful kind of blockchain. It also allows for censorship resistance and immutability, which are very useful characteristics. The focus on “blockchain” to me is misguided. The most useful blockchain is the open, global, transnational, decentralized, uncensorable, open-to-all, immutable, innovation-without-permission blockchain. For now, we have only one of those at very large scale and that is bitcoin. 我认为,没有“原生资产”的区块链,也就是没有一种货币的区块链,应用非常有限。 这样的区块链并非不可能存在,但不如有原生货币的区块链有用。我还认为,有原生货币作经济激励的工作证明机制可以带来更公开、更全球化的区块链,这也是区块链最有用的存在形式。它也能带来对审查制度的抵抗力和不可篡改性,这些都是非常有益的特性。我认为,目前对于“区块链”的热衷是一种误导。最好的区块链,是公开、全球化、跨国界、去中心化、不可审查、向所有人都公开、不可篡改、具有无需批准特性创新的区块链。目前来说,我们有一个这样的区块链,那就是比特币区块链。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-28
遥望天下
 船员 船龄 5.2年
另外,请问您怎么看待以太坊的?有些人认为它有潜力超越比特币成为未来的通用平台
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 遥望天下
I am very interested in Ethereum. It may have a very broad range of applications and many useful applications. But those applications are different from bitcoin. It cannot do the same thing as bitcoin and bitcoin cannot do the same thing as Ethereum. For one to “overtake” the other they would have to be in a race for the same applications and I do not think they are. Like a shark and a lion, they can both be “king” but in a different domain. What makes each powerful in their own domain makes them weak in the other domain. There is no “lion shark” that can succeed in land and water and compete against either a lion or a shark. Each choice and tradeoff is achoice to be better at one thing, automatically is a choice to be worse at something else. 我对以太坊非常感兴趣。它可能会有很广泛的应用以及很多有用的应用。但是这些应用与比特币不同。以太坊不可能做与比特币完全相同的事,比特币也不可能做与以太坊完全相同的事。 对于有人认为他们在相同的应用上必须一个超过另外一个,我并不这么认为。这就像是鲨鱼和狮子,他们能够在不同地域同时为王。他们在自己领域都是非常强大的,但是在对方领域就非常弱小了。不存在什么‘狮子鲨鱼’这种能够同时在陆地和水里与鲨鱼或者狮子对抗的东西。每一种选择和折中都只能选择在一件事上做的更好,而在其他事情上较差。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-28
超级星
 船员 船龄 5.1年
您认为如果比特币硬分叉后出现算力小的分叉,应该及时攻击灭掉这个分叉吗
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 超级星
No. 不。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-29
超级星
 船员 船龄 5.1年
您认为比特币会无法进入正循环,成为世界语那种不死不活的情况吗?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 超级星
I think Bitcoin is already more successful than Esperanto. More importantly, bitcoin has utility. It solves actual problems that are not solved by other systems of money and that CANNOT be solved by other systems of money. Immutability, censorship resistance, transanational access, etc. All these are very useful characteristics and I think bitcoin will continue to grow for many many years. 我认为比特币早就比世界语更成功了。更重要的是,比特币有实用性。它可以解决其它货币系统没有解决或不能解决的实际问题。不可篡改性、审查抵抗力、跨国可用等等。这些都是非常有用的特性,而且我认为比特币会继续成长很多很多年。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-29
玉王大帝
 副船长 船龄 6.6年
请问竞争币的质素币你知道吗,就是寻找最大的质数,比特币的POW算法,未来会改变吗,对人类有贡献的算法,而不是单单的能源消耗的浪费。运营到实际用处中,当来可能这个需要很长时间才可行。 唉其实我最关心的是,怎么样能赚取比特币!比方推广啦,什么的,
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 510685947
The idea that PoW can be based on a “useful” activity is misleading. PoW is useful, it creates immutability. The problem with basing PoW on a function, like prime-discovery is in two parts: The problem of prime discovery may have easier solutions that we know today, which may cause a sudden change in “difficulty” of the algorithm. The problem of prime discovery introduces an external form of value in the game-theory of miners. If suddenly prime numbers have a new application that is much more valuable than the rewards of one block, it may lead miners to ignore the security/validation work and switch to finding prime numbers for … the cure for cancer, or whatever. Hashing has no other value, so all the value is in the security/validation and reward, which keeps miners focused on bitcoin and makes their motivation clear and unambiguous. However, this does not mean that Primecoin or other forms of PoW with other algorithms are not useful. It simply means that bitcoin’s PoW is also useful – it provides a very strong form of immutability and censorship resistance for large-scale, global currency and payments. That’s not “waste”, it’s a unique global system that has enormous value. 认为PoW可以基于某种“有用”的活动的说法是一种误导。PoW本身就是有用的,它创造了不可篡改性。就PoW基于某种函数,如质数寻找的问题: 1,寻找质数有更加简单的解决方案,可能会对算法的“难度”带来突然的改变。 2,寻找质数,是在矿工博弈论中引入了一种外部价值体系。如果质数寻找有一个新应用,比找区块更有经济激励的话,那么矿工可能会选择放弃安全\验证工作,转而选择找质数来……治疗癌症什么的。哈希无其它价值,所有价值就在安全\验证和经济激励方面,这使得矿工们可以专注于比特币,使得他们的动机纯粹无干扰。 然而,这并不意味着质数币或其它形式的、用其它算法的PoW没有用。只是要指出,比特币的PoW本身就是有用的——它为一种大规模的全球货币和支付系统提供了非常强大的不可篡改性和审查抵抗力。这不是“浪费”,这是一个价值无可估量的独特的、全球化的系统。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-29
satoshi
 版主 船龄 6.9年
继比特币、以太坊之后,请问您认为加密数字货币的下一个突破点将会出现在哪里? After bitcoin (blockchain) and ethereum (smart contract), what do you think will be the ‘next big thing(s)’ in crypto-currency world?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 satoshi
If I knew that, I’d be building it and premining 99% 😉 如我知道的话,我就先把它给做出来(并预挖99%) ;-)
2016-07-30 1
2016-07-29
gladpay
 副船长 船龄 5.9年
有人认为私链压根就不属于区块链,只是一种分布式账簿。您怎么看?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 gladpay
A private blockchain does not need blocks. It can work with participants signing each transaction. They can be chained together directly. So no blocks, no chain of blocks, not a blockchain. It’s just a word that is used in marketing and making consultants rich. For now, there are no useful applications that have been demonstrated at any real scale with real security and real money. We shall see if they can develop any. 私有链并不需要区块。它可以通过参与者对每一笔交易进行签名来运行。它们能够直接被捆绑在一起。所以没有区块,没有区块的链,没有区块链。私有链只是一个被用于市场和咨询的词语。目前来说,私有链并没有什么有用的应用以实际的规模展示出真正的安全性和利益价值,我们将会观察私有链是否能够发展出来一些。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-29
萌大大
 海盗王 船龄 6.4年
Andreas 已经上线开始回答大家之前的提问,涉及双向翻译每个问题回答周期会相对比较长,感谢大家的耐心等待和持续关注。再次感谢钟隐,以及David、lwvwl、kyle等诸位译者!
活动发布
 版主 船龄 6.9年
智能合约目前有什么已经成形的应用场景?what are the most promising application context for smart contract?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 活动发布
Most of the financial instruments that are used in global markets can be implemented with very simple smart contracts in bitcoin and ethereum. Beyond that, we will see what other applications can be developed. My interest is in using smart contract to develop financial instruments that do not need identity or credit score to allow everyone to participate. 大部分的全球市场上的金融工具都可以用非常简单的比特币或以太坊智能合约来完成,初次之外,我们将会看到其他的应用被开发出来,我比较感兴趣的是使用智能合约开发金融工具,这样就不需要身份ID或者信用评分,让人人都可参与进来。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
zzgm720
 副船长 船龄 5.3年
有一种观点,只要有足够高的手续费,比特币区块就不会拥挤,因此,比特币最好保持现状,1M的区块容量已经足够,没有必要扩容,您怎么看待这种观点?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 zzgm720
This is what is known as a “strawman argument”. You construct a fake quote and then ask me to address it. The answer is that scaling is not as simple as block-size-limit and the solutions to scaling are complex and will continue to be developed for decades as we keep increasing the scale. 这是偷换概念。你用虚假引述提问,指望我来问答。我只能回答,扩容不仅仅是区块大小限制的问题,扩容的解决方案非常复杂,且随着不断的扩容,我们需要持续多年开发工作。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
jb9802
 副船长 船龄 6.6年
社区吵了1年多,才出了个香港共识,结果等了几个月Core又说香港共识是被逼的,这样公然违反协议的事你决得对不对?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 jb9802
I was not a party to that agreement and have no comment on whether it has been violated or not. However, I see that Core has moved forward on the roadmap and Segwit has been merged into core and is being prepared for soft-fork activation. I think that is a very good development. I think the core developers are doing very good work on many many different features, including many optimizations for scaling. I have not seen any other development teams offer a similar level of development. I think the miners and the broader market are clearly supporting Core, for now. 我并未参与香港共识,所以对它是否被侵犯了也没评价。 不过,我看到Core已经沿着路线图发展,隔离见证已经被合并到core,正在准备软分叉激活。我认为这是一个不错的进展。我认为core开发者在很多功能方面进行的不错,包括对扩容的优化。我还没见过有其他团队取得 相似的成果。我认为很明显矿工和广大市场目前是支持core的。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
zzgm720
 副船长 船龄 5.3年
一种观点:比特币是黄金,因此,比特币的价值不在于使用人数的多,也不在于区块扩大,也不在于使用范围的拓展,相反,使用人数、范围,以及区块越小,越能显示比特币的珍贵;还有一种观点认为:比特币是贝壳,它本身无价值,被选作一般等价物广泛使用了,才显示出它的价值,所以,使用的人越多,区块越大并被迅速填满,比特币应用程度越广,它的价值越大,体现在币价上,能够时不时地迅猛上涨,你比较认同哪种观点?为什么?
kyle kyle 回复 Andreas_8btc
黄金也像是贝壳。它之所以有用是因为它被广泛接受为一种价值形式。两者都是罕见的,都是漂亮的,也都可能是有用的。比特币是稀有的,也是有用的(但并非漂亮的)。我不赞同减少用户和保持系统规模小使其变得有价值这种想法。我也不认为这是黄金的运作方式。更多用户,更多使用,更多应用,更多价值。价格可能会波动很多年,波动性是随着时间的推移不断下降的。
2016-07-30 0
kyle kyle 回复 zzgm720
黄金也像是贝壳。它之所以有用是因为它被广泛接受为一种价值形式。两者都是罕见的,都是漂亮的,也都可能是有用的。比特币是稀有的,也是有用的(但并非漂亮的)。我不赞同减少用户和保持系统规模小使其变得有价值这种想法。我也不认为这是黄金的运作方式。更多用户,更多使用,更多应用,更多价值。价格可能会波动很多年,波动性是随着时间的推移不断下降的。
2016-07-30 0
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 zzgm720
Gold is also like shells. It is only useful because it is widely adopted as a form of value. Both are rare, both are pretty, both may be useful. Bitcoin is rare, it is useful (but it is not pretty). I don’t agree with the idea that reducing users and keeping a system small makes it valuable. I don’t think that is how gold works either. More users, more uses, more applications, more value. The price is likely to be volatile for many more years, but volatility is constantly going down over time.
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
amo98
 副船长 船龄 7.5年
btc硬分叉已经安全实施过一次,而且中国以外的大交易所和矿场普遍支持大区块和硬分叉。请问你对此有何评论?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 amo98
You have not provided any facts to support your statement. I believe the current network shows that your statement is not correct. The majority of nodes, the majority of mining nodes and the longest-difficulty chain are running Core with a 1MB block-size limit. That is the market choice, for now. It seems clear to me that Classic/Unlimited/XT all failed to show greater value than the core development team and therefore were not widely adopted. 你没有为你所说的结论给出任何证明,我认为当前的网络状况显示你所说的结论是不正确的。目前主要的节点、主要的挖矿节点和最长难度链正在运行着1M区块限制的Core。这是市场的选择,目前来说是这样的。对我来说这是很明显的,Classic/Unlimited/XT都没有呈现出比Core开发团队更大的价值,因此他们未被大范围的采用。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
sgsbtc
 水手 船龄 4.9年
对openbazaar bitsquare bitmarkets等分布电子商务的看法或者前景估计
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 sgsbtc
I am very excited by these technologies. I think that uncensorable, global, decentralized markets are the “killer app” for an uncensorable, global, decentralized currency. 我对这些技术感到兴奋。我认为,不可审查、全球化、去中心化的市场将是同样不可审查、全球化、去中心化的货币的”杀手级应用“。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
amo98
 副船长 船龄 7.5年
请问你认为btc两年内合理的区块容量是多大?硬分叉扩容与隔离验证及闪电网络技术哪个更容易、更安全地在两年内进行实施?请问你认为以后bs是否可能通过闪电网络实现盈利吗?请问你对社区普遍怀疑bs为了实现自身利益而限制btc主链扩容持和看法?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 amo98
I expect we will see a higher blocksize limit in the next 2 years. HF scaling, Segwit and LN network are ALL needed to scale and will all be implemented in the next 2 years. In addition, more scaling solutions will be used (Schnorr signatures, MAST, compact blocks, Xtreme blocks, thin blocks, IBLT block propagation, FIBRE, relay networks etc etc). Blockstream does not profit with LN. LN is not a blockstream product, it is an open protocol with at least four active development teams that are independent and mostly interoperable. I think the idea that Blockstream is limiting the blocksize limit for their own gain and profit is ridiculous conspiracy shit. It has no relation to reality. 未来两年会有更大的区块大小限制。硬分叉扩容、隔离见证和闪电网络都是扩容所需要的,并将在未来两年内得到部署。此外,我们需要更多的扩容解决方案(Schnorr签名、MAST、紧凑区块、极瘦区块、瘦区块、IBLT区块传输、FIBRE、中继网络等等)。 Blockstream不会从LN中获得利润。LN不是一个BS的产品,它是个公开的协议,至少有4个活跃的开发组织,他们都是独立而互通的。我认为,BS限制区块大小为自己谋利的说法是荒谬的阴谋论(ridiculous conspiracy shit)。 这不是事实。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
amo98
 副船长 船龄 7.5年
btc已经诞生7年,除了它自身,我们仍未发现有何令人惊讶的应用。请问你觉得是什么原因导致这样的情况?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 amo98
Because change is difficult. Changing the oldest technology of humanity (money) is very difficult. I think we are seeing many useful applications of bitcoin already and we are growing at a very respectable rate. Be patient, this will change history forever in a big way, but it won’t happen overnight. Most “overnight success” stories have 20+ years of development before anyone notices them. 因为改变是困难的。改变人类(货币)最古老的技术是非常困难的。我认为我们正在看到很多比特币实用的应用,我们的成长速度很快,要有耐心,这可能是用一种前无古人的方式永远的改变了历史,但这不会发生在一夜之间,大多数的“一夜间成功”故事背后,在人们未察觉前都有二十多年的奋斗历程。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
amo98
 副船长 船龄 7.5年
如果一国法币想实施数字化,请问你有哪些建议?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 amo98
All fiat currencies are digital. The vast majority (92%) of money does not exist in paper or coin, it only exists as digital money. I do not know if there is any reason or useful application for a nation-state money to be on a blockchain. If a nation wanted to keep control, they would make it a private/closed blockchain. Then it would be better as a set of connected databases than a blockchain. If a nation wanted to lose control, they could just use bitcoin. 所有的法定货币都是数字的。92%的货币并不以纸或者硬币的形式存在,只作为数字货币存在。我并不知道把一种国家货币放到区块链上是否有理由或具有有用的用途。如果国家想要进行掌控,他们就需要使用私有链或者封闭链。然后,作为一个相互连接的数据库要比一个区块链更好。如果国家想要放掉掌控权,他们使用比特币就行。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
amo98
 副船长 船龄 7.5年
如果一国法币想实施数字化,请问你有哪些建议?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 amo98
All fiat currencies are digital. The vast majority (92%) of money does not exist in paper or coin, it only exists as digital money. I do not know if there is any reason or useful application for a nation-state money to be on a blockchain. If a nation wanted to keep control, they would make it a private/closed blockchain. Then it would be better as a set of connected databases than a blockchain. If a nation wanted to lose control, they could just use bitcoin. 所有的法定货币都是数字的。92%的货币并不以纸或者硬币的形式存在,只作为数字货币存在。我并不知道把一种国家货币放到区块链上是否有理由或具有有用的用途。如果国家想要进行掌控,他们就需要使用私有链或者封闭链。然后,作为一个相互连接的数据库要比一个区块链更好。如果国家想要放掉掌控权,他们使用比特币就行。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
zzgm720
 副船长 船龄 5.3年
您觉得目前区块大小够用吗?如果您觉得目前区块不拥堵,1M的区块大小您预测还能顶多长时间?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 zzgm720
Blocks are in congestion, but the congestion is managed by much much better fee calculation algorithms. These algorithms and the optimization of wallets would not be happening if there wasn’t some congestion. These improvements make bitcoin more robust. For now, the block congestion is not a catastrophic problem. It might become a problem in the future if nothing is changed. However, I expect segwit and other optimizations to offer more capacity in the next year and I expect after that we will see a small increase in the blocksize limit to offer more capacity. 区块如今已经处于拥堵状态,但是更好的手续费计算算法对这种拥堵进行管理。如果没有一些拥堵的话,这些算法和钱包的优化将不会出现。这些改善让比特币更加强大。目前而言。区块拥堵还未成为一个灾难性问题。但是如果什么都不做的话,未来可能会成为一个问题。不过,我期望隔离见证和其他优化在明年提供更高的区块容量,我期待在这之后,我们能够看到区块大小限制能够获得提升,提供更多容量。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
玛_雅
 版主 船龄 6.9年
欢迎大神,很想知道您对脑钱包工具的看法,一般认为脑钱包不适合于新人容易生成脑残包,但是您是否看好粉忠用脑钱包工具来冷存储比特币,例如将用脑残包私钥加入生成脑口令的字串的方式,来生成安全的脑地址。ps:目前我个人的大多数比特币都是这种双脑钱包冷存储的,您认为是否可以。谢谢。
zzgm720 zzgm720 回复 玛_雅
你的想法很多,但基本上属于小打小闹,不是越奇思异想、越复杂、越天花乱坠的点子就越好。
2016-07-31 0
mkz899 mkz899 回复 copay
有卵用,他一样还会觉得Andreas没道理,还会吃屎一样的顽固
2016-07-30 0
copay copay 回复 Andreas_8btc
玛雅这次被打脸不轻
2016-07-30 0
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 玛_雅
No, I think it is a terrible idea to try to make your own brainwallet or try to make complex security solutions if you are not an expert. Even for an expert, the best security is standardized, peer-reviewed, well-tested security. For cold storage I use BIP39 mnemonic phrases and standardized BIP32/BIP44 wallets built on top of those. I do not try to invent my own and I do not use brainwallets. 不,如果你不是专家的话,最好不要尝试使用复杂的安全解决方案,做自己的脑钱包的想法糟透了。即便对于专家而言,最好的安全策略也是标准化的、同业认证的、广泛测试过的安全策略。就冷储存而言,我使用BIP39记忆词组和标准化的BIP32/BIP44钱包。我不会尝试自己做,我不使用脑钱包。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
大白
 水手 船龄 6年
扩容时还投票么?会不会和以太分叉投票一样,只看投票结果不看投票的参与人数。如果比特币扩容投票的话也像以太这么儿戏可怎样。未来18个月考虑2M扩容怎么可能。方案都不确定。。。区块不满不提扩容。core感觉一点儿都不积极啊。
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 大白
Voting is only part of governance in an open source project. Voting is not very useful unless you also develop good code. If you want a different plan, start coding. Core is delivering multiple scaling solutions with a lot of high quality code and very well tested code. The market validates that choice by continuing to run Core. Opinions are not the same as engineering. I can’t “run” your opinion, but I can run Core or Classic or Unlimited (in fact, I run several nodes of all different flavors). 投票只是开源项目管理的一部分。除非你同时能够开发好的代码,否则投票并不会有很大用途。如果你有不同的管理计划,那就开始编码。Core正在提供多种扩容解决方案,这些方案具有高质量的代码以及经过很好的测试。市场会通过连续运行Core来对选择进行证明。观点看法与工程不同。我无法‘运行’你的观点,但是我能运行Core或者Classic或者Unlimited(事实上,对于这些不同的方式,我都运行了一些节点)
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
zzgm720
 副船长 船龄 5.3年
classic 与core的最根本分歧,是不是在于实施硬分叉与软分叉的的先后秩序产生了严重分歧?为什么复杂难以短时间实施的软分叉必须要在简单易实施的硬分叉之前?是不是出于BS公司以及core团队的商业利益考虑?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 zzgm720
The primary difference in roadmaps is the sequence of scaling solutions. All scaling solutions will be applied, but the question is what to do first. The other very important difference is the development team. Code needs to be maintained and developed. This takes an enormous amount of effort to do on a global security-focused project like bitcoin. Core has a very large, very skilled and very productive global and diverse team of programmers working together. Classic does not. As a result, the market has chosen Core to run the majority of nodes. Blockstream has very little power or influence over core. They are a convenient target for conspiracy theories, but in reality they do not even control the core developers who work for them. They can’t even get them to agree on many issues. Hard forks are difficult, complex and dangerously destabilizing if done wrong. I think a careful, conservative and incremental approach to scaling is the best way to develop a system that supports a $10 billion USD economy. For now, Core is doing that. If they fail to deliver the market will choose other software to continue. The fact that the market continues to support the Core software is proof that Core is currenlty the best at delivering what the market needs. Core与Classic路线图最主要的不同在于扩容解决方案的序列。所有的扩容解决方案将会被应用,但是问题是先用哪一个。另一个重要的不同之处是开发团队。代码需要进行维护和开发。这需要对一个全球性专注于安全性的项目(如比特币)投入大量的工作。Core拥有一个非常大,非常熟练并且非常有成效的全球多样化程序员团队共同努力。Classic则没有。所以,市场选择Core来运行大多数节点。Blockstream对在Core中权力以及对Core的影响力非常小。他们很容易成为阴谋论的目标,但是事实上,他们甚至无法掌控那些为他们工作的core开发者。他们在很多问题上甚至无法得到core的同意。硬分叉非常困难和复杂,如果失败,很容易陷入不稳的危险中。我认为一个谨慎保守且增量的扩容方式是发展一个支持100亿美元经济的系统的最好方式。现在,Core就是这样做的。如果他们未能成功提供扩容方案,市场将会继续选择其他软件。市场继续支持Core软件这个事实证明了Core目前在提供市场所需方面是最好的。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
zzgm720
 副船长 船龄 5.3年
您把把比特币与以太坊的关系比作:“这就像是鲨鱼和狮子,他们能够在不同地域同时为王。他们在自己领域都是非常强大的,但是在对方领域就非常弱小了。不存在什么‘狮子鲨鱼’这种能够同时在陆地和水里与鲨鱼或者狮子对抗的东西。” 那么我的问题是:比特币和以太坊各自擅长于哪些领域?而不擅长于哪些领域?
Andreas_8btc Andreas_8btc 回复 zzgm720
Bitcoin is good at very robust, immutable, uncensorable security. To do that it is not very flexible. Ethereum is much more flexible and can be used for much more complex applications. But to do that it sacrifices some security and immutability. The market will show us what applications each system is best for. I expect bitcoin will be best suited as a global immutable ledger that provides immutability services for many other chains. It will also serve as a very strong global reserve currency with very high resistance to censorship for large transactions and cross-border transactions. Ethereum will be used for a variety of financial instruments, decentralized applications and token applications. Bitcoin will likely be able to gradually expand its flexibility and do many of the things Ethereum does, as Ethereum explands to do even more complex and flexible applications. The boundary between the two will keep moving. 比特币的优势是网络健壮、不可更改、抗审查安全。为了做到这些比特币舍去了一些灵活性。以太坊更加灵活,可以完成更复杂的应用。但是以太坊为了实现灵活性,舍去了一些安全性和不可更改性,市场将会向我们展现,它们分别所擅长的应用。我预计,比特币将会适用于全球不可更改账簿,为其它很多区块链提供不可更改服务。比特币对于较大的交易和跨境交易有很强的抗审查特性,它将被作为强大的全球货币储备。以太坊将会被用于各式各样的金融工具、去中心化应用和代币应用。比特币应该会逐渐地升级它的灵活性,届时实现以太坊的很多功能,而以太坊将会扩展更复杂更灵活的应用。两者的界线将会不断的变化着。
2016-07-30 0
2016-07-30
Andreas_8btc 帖主
 船员 船龄 4.9年
“Mastering Bitcoin” is available in Simplified Chinese, for free, here: bitcoinbook.info Thank you all for participating in this Q&A. I hope to visit China soon and meet many of you in person! Xie xie! “精通比特币”一书有简体中文版,免费,见: bitcoinbook.info https://www.bitcoinbook.info/translations-of-mastering-bitcoin/ 谢谢大家的参与,我希望近期访问中国,和你们亲身见面。 “Xie xie!”
2016-07-30
萌大大
 海盗王 船龄 6.4年
感谢Andreas牺牲了早餐时间回答大家的提问!感谢钟隐、DavidthePangwa、kyle、lwvwl、miner等各位的辛苦付出!本次AMA暂时告一段落,部分问题没有来得及回答,感谢大家热情提问和耐心等待。 本次AMA协作翻译全文可在此链接查看: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BEqEhxJjN05HgAZ_OYvVUJ6kxDvEDxGebLvea7XqP-c/edit?usp=sharing 再次感谢Andreas!
2016-07-30

相关文章:

发表回复

您的电子邮箱地址不会被公开。