As blockchain technology continues to grow in popularity, many people are confused about what exactly constitutes a public blockchain. In this article, we will explore the various components of a public blockchain and identify which one is not.
Public Blockchains: An Overview
A public blockchain is a decentralized network that allows anyone to participate in the verification of transactions and the creation of new blocks. The most well-known examples of public blockchains are Bitcoin, Ethereum, and EOS.
The main components of a public blockchain include:
-
Ledger: A public ledger is a shared database that contains all the transactions on the network. It is maintained by participants called nodes, who validate new transactions and add them to the ledger.
-
Consensus mechanism: The consensus mechanism is a process used by the network to ensure that all participants agree on which transactions should be added to the ledger. Some common consensus mechanisms include proof of work (PoW), proof of stake (PoS), and delegated proof of stake (DPoS).
-
Smart contracts: Smart contracts are self-executing programs that run on the blockchain. They can be used to automate complex processes, such as buying and selling assets or issuing tokens.
-
Nodes: Nodes are participants in the network who validate new transactions and maintain the ledger. They can be individuals or organizations.
Which Component is Not a Part of a Public Blockchain?
The answer to this question is subjective, as it depends on how you define “public blockchain.” However, one component that is not commonly associated with public blockchains is the centralized authority.
A centralized authority is an entity or organization that has control over the network. It can be responsible for issuing new tokens, setting transaction fees, or making other decisions about the network. Centralized authorities are often used in private blockchains, where the participants are all known to each other and trust each other.
Case Studies: Centralized Authorities in Public Blockchains
While centralized authorities are not typically found in public blockchains, there are some examples of networks that have used centralized authorities in the past. One such example is Bitcoin Cash, a fork of the original Bitcoin blockchain that was launched in 2018.
Bitcoin Cash was created by a group of miners who were dissatisfied with the slow transaction speeds and high fees on the original Bitcoin network. They proposed a hard fork of the protocol, which would increase the block size limit and allow for faster transactions. However, the hard fork was controversial, and not all Bitcoin miners supported it.
In response, the group created a new network called Bitcoin Cash SV (Bitcoin Cash Satoshi Vision), which implemented their proposed changes. They also established a centralized authority known as the “Bitcoin Association,” which would oversee the development and maintenance of the network. The Bitcoin Association was led by Roger Ver, one of the original investors in Bitcoin.
While Bitcoin Cash SV is no longer widely used or recognized as a legitimate version of Bitcoin, it does illustrate how a centralized authority can be used to make decisions about a public blockchain.
Comparing Centralized vs Decentralized Blockchains
Centralized and decentralized blockchains have their own unique advantages and disadvantages.
Centralized blockchains are often faster and more scalable than decentralized ones, as they can process transactions more quickly and with less overhead. They also tend to be more secure, as the central authority has more control over the network and can take action to prevent attacks or fraud.
However, centralized blockchains are also more vulnerable to censorship and manipulation by the central authority. This can lead to a lack of transparency and accountability, as well as a loss of decentralization.
Decentralized blockchains, on the other hand, offer greater transparency and decentralization. They allow anyone to participate in the network and make decisions about its operation. However, they may be slower and less scalable than centralized networks, and they can be more vulnerable to attacks and fraud.
