博文
区块链记录中国历史【第一例】
|||
大约 20小时之前(Apr-23-2018 07:02:20 AM +UTC)，一位以太坊（Ethereum）用户（地址：0x44938b01da1feb3f6fa1cf38870ee564e25d9bf3）在以太坊的区块链上花了0.0007787 Ether（当前大约3.3元RMB），用Input Data记录了北大最近发生的事，是我所知道的在区块链上较为详细记录中国历史事件的第一例。看起来是一个简要版的自述（需要点击Input Data的“Convert To Ascii”按钮阅读，英文中有部分乱码，不影响阅读）：
虽然各类区块链平台一直可以记录一些简讯和数据，但这次应该是中国第一件公开记载在区块链上的事情，值得关注和纪念。
区块链记录历史事件的意义在于：基于区块链技术，一旦发布在链上，那么地球上每个节点都能同步到记录的数据，从此也无法更改。
期待有一天这类技术能流行，并且得到权威的支持。
该区块链记录发布之后，清华大学的匿名以太坊用户通过类似的方式表达了支持：
还有其他人对此表达了关注：
该以太坊用户也做了回应：
这，就是区块链的应用之一。
=========================== 15:50更新 ===========================
在链讨论越来越多，清华、UCLA两所名校的以太坊用户也出现在链，赞；毕竟在链发布ascii点评还是需要一定区块链基础技术，有一定门槛的。
甚至有人在链做了一个小结：
0xThe event gives an initial demo of how a blockchain based decentralized reputation system works.
Due to the popularity of blockchain and Ethereum, it gains higher attention than it might have.
It has some obvious advantages over traditional such systems in that:
1. It will always be available to the public, which means there will never be a 404 time as long as Ethereum system is running.
Note that even etherscan.io is dead, people still have other methods to extract the information.
2. It is immutable and can not be manipulated or revised by any one, not sender or receiver or owner, as long as it is there, it is there, done.
The main concern of such a system is malicious attack. The attacker may publish misleading information about someone or an organization.
Bear in mind this article should be recorded "forever", I am very cautious about what I am saying and I shall be as objective as possible, only from the perspective
of building a decentralized reputation system.
The first several blocks in the transactions history is as follows,
1. Block 5490366, Transaction hash:0xf2ed73666103ecd1d489eaa01cf389efe8fb8698d5e6e04f37974934e9d4a3bb Apr-23-2018 06:54:27 AM +UTC , first transaction happened from 0x01cf9c288692ed1b1197af1453995a0a3109a022 to 0x44938b01da1feb3f6fa1cf38870ee564e25d9bf3 the information publisher.
The transaction transferred 0.0011 Ether, the from another account. Whether the from and the to accounts are controlled by the same person is super
difficult to track. The purpose of this first transaction is to fund the publisher enough ether to publish the extra data included in the next transaction the publisher
transferred to his/her own account.
2. Block 5490403, Transaction hash:0x2d6a7b0f6adeff38423d4c62cd8b6ccb708ddad85da5d3d06756ad4d8a04a6a2 Apr-23-2018 07:02:20 AM +UTC, Yueluo, according to <utf-8> format data, wrote an article to Peking University teachers and classmates, describing his/her suffering after submitting
Information Disclosure Application Form to Peking University on the morning of April 9, and ask for responses from Peking University. The extra data revealed who the author is, so anyone who is suspicious about
this information have the opportunity to ask the author for an validation.
3. Block 5492770, Transaction hash: 0x548f15260c1f67af26cff021d993f600256c75e34b619f6b86e8a724d20bb097 Apr-23-2018 04:56:44 PM +UTC, About 10 hours later, a guy from Tsinghua leave a message "Disappointed by the official statement of Peking University, hope PKU will not stand on the wrong side of this issue. Keep strong! --Anonymous, in Tsinghua University"
4. Block 5494757, Transaction hash:0xd331f34d0a816906ae881e20145345ed5c19da529b621774daee59c6d92e45bb Apr-24-2018 01:04:22 AM +UTC, Someone send a transaction with nothing included, but from the record, we can see this sender, was interacting with some smart contracts.
5. Block 5494829, Transaction hash:0x5724a82946a8342b493d6dea3558423965d3fb81cca988f6e2232ebcab83b375 Apr-24-2018 01:27:35 AM +UTC, an anonymous message "Are you Yuexin or a close friend? If yes, please take care. I want to make a donation. We do care!" sent from 0x99a8eBdFd2101daCad6313eba309620FB5f8dd37, who seems to be involved in Ethereum for sometime according to his/her transaction records.
6. Block 5495077, Transaction hash: 0xcbef194168de1fd7b76615decbfaa7daf702b9e45d792ce917a9bfc4cca4b5db Apr-24-2018 02:31:07 AM +UTC, the publisher 0x44938b01da1feb3f6fa1cf38870ee564e25d9bf3 replies "No"
If you are interested, you may check the rest of the transactions and see what's going on there.
Now let's illustrate how malicious attacks can be avoided in a fully de-centralized reputation system with extra evidence.
You may use the methodology to validate any statement including the one published in 0x2d6a7b0f6adeff38423d4c62cd8b6ccb708ddad85da5d3d06756ad4d8a04a6a2
For example, the other day I heard a guy complaining about [ https://www.regus.com/] and their terrible services.
let's first suppose the message is a malicious attack before we have any further evidence to support the argument.
The best practice is to
(buy regus's services yourself and then decide whether the complaints are true or not, but the cost is too high.)
Then you may want to
(check the comments and reputations of regus.)
If you search the key word regus on google, bing or baidu(the mainstream search engines),the first page is almost all about regus advertisement,
little information can support the statement that "regus is terrible". Do remember the search engines are all profit driven.
However, when search for "regus complaints", a website called [http://regus-sucks.com/ ] suddenly pops up in the first page of searching results.
This might also be a malicious attack website that regus competitors build, so let's check the [update frequency] and [whether people are willing
to share their real identity or contact information. Remember, any malicious attack will have the feature that the attackers
are not willing to share their personal information]. So when it comes to regus case, we can be 99.9% sure that regus services
are really terrible and should never subscribe.
We are at a turning point where the disadvantages of adopting a third party dominated information release system is gradually outweighing the advantages of embracing it.
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-1750-1110641.html
上一篇：【借刀自杀】+【金蝉脱壳】
下一篇：教师遇到朽木学生放弃较明智
