Click on the text to watch the video

Bypassing trust is a great promise, but it is not true. Bitcoin eliminates some trusted intermediaries inherent in other payment systems, such as credit cards. But if you want to use Bitcoin, you have to believe it and everything about it.

A lot of articles about blockchains about how they can replace, reshape or eliminate trust. But when you analyze blockchain and trust, you quickly realize that there is far more hype than value.

Some so-called blockchain solutions tend to be much worse than what they replace. The so-called blockchain, I mean very specific things: the data structures and protocols that make up the public blockchain.

These elements have three basic elements. The first is a distributed (such as multiple copies ) , but centralized (only one) ledger, which is a way to record what happened and the order. This ledger is public, meaning anyone can read it, and it's immutable, meaning no one can change what happened in the past.

The second element is the consensus algorithm. It ensures that all ledgers are the same mechanism. Commonly referred to as mining: a key part of the system is that anyone can participate. Consensus algorithms are also distributed, which means you don't have to trust a particular node. At the same time, in terms of maintaining the energy and data capacity required for the normal operation of this system, the cost of the consensus algorithm is relatively high. So far, Bitcoin has the highest cost consensus algorithm in the world.

The third factor is currency. This is some kind of digital token that has value and can be publicly traded. Currency is an essential element of the blockchain and it can inspire everyone to participate. Transactions containing these tokens are recorded on the ledger. All three elements of the public blockchain are grouped together as a single network, providing new security attributes.

The question is: Is it really any good? This is a matter of trust. Human beings rely on trust to maintain each other. Without trust, society cannot function. The blockchain achieves this trust: for example, we don't know any Bitcoin miners, but we believe they will follow the mining protocol to make the entire system function normally. Most blockchain enthusiasts have an unnaturally narrow definition of trust. They like buzzwords such as "We trust code", "We trust math" and "We trust passwords." The role of the blockchain is to transform trust in people and institutions into trust in technology.

In many ways, trusting technology is harder than trusting others. Would you rather believe in a human legal system or some computer code that you don't have auditing expertise in? Blockchain does not eliminate the need to trust human institutions. There is always a gap in trust, which cannot be solved by technology alone. People still need to take control and always need governance outside the system. This is evident in the ongoing debate about changing the size of Bitcoin blocks, or in the ongoing debate to fix DAO attacks on Ethereum .

There is always a need to rewrite rules, and there is always a need for permanent rule change capabilities. As long as the hard fork has the possibility of happening, that is, the person who controls the blockchain is outside the system to change it, people need to control it. We have also seen attacks on wallets and transactions. We've seen Trojans, phishing, and password cracking. Criminals even use loopholes in the system to steal Bitcoin while people are repairing their phones.

In addition, in any distributed trust system, there are some backdoor methods to make centralization reappear. Too many blockchain enthusiasts focus on this technology and ignore other factors. In a way, people don't use Bitcoin because they don't trust Bitcoin. It has nothing to do with cryptography or consensus protocols.