출처
http://galgitron.net/Post/XRPs-Centralization
내용이 길어 일단 올리고 추후 요약 작업 예정
구글 번역 링크
구글 번역본
XRP의 중앙 집중화
Feb 17, 2018 2018 년 2 월 17 일
You'll hear over and over and over, "Ripple is centralized!!! They must die!! AUGH!!!" 당신은 계속해서 듣게 될 것입니다. "Ripple은 중앙 집중화되어 있습니다 !!! 그들은 죽어야합니다 !! AUGH !!!"
Let's all calm down for a minute and try to figure out what this means exactly. 잠시 모든 것을 진정시키고 정확하게 이것이 무엇을 의미하는지 알아 내려고합시다.
Centralization is a very broad term that encompasses a number of concepts, so to say something is "centralized", isn't saying much at all, but I do think the ultimate subtext of these accusations is the fear of being defrauded of your funds because of the misperception that there is "trust" required. 중앙 집중화는 여러 개념을 포괄하는 매우 광범위한 용어입니다. 그래서 어떤 것이 "중앙 집중화 된"것이라고 말하면, 전혀 말하지 않지만, 이러한 비난의 궁극적 인 부름은 자금의 사기에 대한 두려움이라고 생각합니다. "신뢰"가 필요하다는 오해를 This cannot be further from the truth; 이것은 진실에서 더 멀어 질 수는 없습니다. I'll explain: 나는 설명 할 것이다 :
Here's how I see the variations in intent of using that word: 다음은 그 단어를 사용하려는 의도의 변형을 보는 방법입니다.
1) Centralized meaning: Concentration of control over the immutability of the ledger (aka possible double-spending, or spend reversals) because XRP uses distributed validators instead of full decentralization 1) 중앙 집중화 된 의미 : XRP가 완전 분산화 대신 분산 유효성 검사기를 사용하기 때문에 원장의 불변성에 대한 통제 집중 (일회성 가능 지출 또는 역 분개)
Before I get into my response to this, I'd like to highlight that there are three primary configurations for all types of ledgers (not just blockchain ledgers): 이 질문에 대한 답변을 받기 전에 모든 유형의 원장 (블록 체인 원장이 아님)에 대해 세 가지 기본 구성이 있다는 것을 강조하고자합니다.
Centralized (one entity ensures the data integrity). 중앙 집중식 (하나의 엔터티가 데이터 무결성 보장) Obviously, centralized configurations are easily modified and aren't easy to trust (think Mt. Gox, banks, your accounting spreadsheet). 물론 중앙 집중식 구성은 쉽게 수정할 수 있으며 신뢰할 수 없습니다 (Gox, 은행, 회계 스프레드 시트를 생각하십시오).
Distributed (many trusted entities ensuring data integrity). 분산 (데이터 무결성을 보장하는 많은 신뢰할 수있는 엔터티) Distributed configurations become exponentially increasingly trustworthy the larger they get because fraud requires all to participate, to the point where collusion of ALL validators to commit fraud becomes virtually impossible. 분산 된 구성은 사기가 모든 참여자를 필요로하기 때문에 사기에 대한 모든 유효성 검사기의 공모가 사실상 불가능 해지기 때문에 기하 급수적으로 점점 커질 수 있습니다.
Fully decentralized (all users participate in ensuring the data integrity). 완전 분권화 (모든 사용자가 데이터 무결성 보장에 참여). Decentralized configurations are probably the most trustworthy in its difficult-to-realize idealistic form, but are very inefficient at achieving consensus. 분산 된 구성은 실현하기 어려운 이상적인 형태에서 가장 신뢰할 수 있지만 컨센서스를 달성하는 데는 대단히 비효율적입니다.
Now that that's out of the way. 이제 그건 비켜입니다. There are many rumors persisting even now that the XRP ledger is something controlled by and easily altered by Ripple. XRP 원장이 Ripple에 의해 제어되고 Ripple에 의해 쉽게 변경된 무언가이기는하지만 지금도 많은 소문이 계속됩니다. Not true at all. 전혀 사실이 아닙니다. XRP is an open-source "distributed" ledger. XRP는 오픈 소스 "분산"원장입니다. While not utilizing a "decentralized" configuration like Bitcoin, control of the data in the XRP ledger is also not "centralized" into Ripple, even though Ripple currently has the majority of validators. Bitcoin과 같은 "분산 형"구성을 사용하지는 않지만 Ripple에는 현재 대부분의 유효성 검사기가 있지만 XRP 원장의 데이터를 Ripple에 "중앙 집중식"으로 제어 할 수는 없습니다. The most important aspect of comparing "centralization" versus "not being centralized".. is the possibility of fraud. "중앙 집중화"대 "중앙화되지 않는"비교의 가장 중요한 측면은 사기의 가능성입니다. I hope to demonstrate that XRP being "distributed" versus "decentralized" doesn't intrinsically increase or decrease the possibility of fraud. XRP가 "분산 형"대 "분산 형"이라는 것은 본질적으로 사기의 가능성을 높이거나 낮추지 않는다는 것을 보여주기를 희망합니다.
Anyone can download and run an XRP ledger node, and the XRP ledger can survive even if Ripple collapses as a company. 누구나 XRP 원장 노드를 다운로드하여 실행할 수 있으며 XRP 원장은 Ripple이 회사로 붕괴 되더라도 생존 할 수 있습니다. That's the first part of being "distributed". 그것은 "분산"되는 첫 번째 부분입니다. And while it's true that Ripple currently represents and hosts the majority of trusted validator nodes, they've mandated to become completely "distributed" by adding many more trusted partner validators until Ripple is a minority validator. Ripple은 현재 대부분의 신뢰할 수있는 유효성 검사기 노드를 대표하고 호스팅하지만, Ripple은 소수의 유효성 검사기가 될 때까지 더 많은 신뢰할 수있는 파트너 유효성 검사기를 추가하여 완전히 "분산"되어야합니다. Even the way things are at this moment (early 2018) with Ripple as the majority validator, for Ripple to change the ledger would be impossible to do without getting caught, all the partners would know and would have to cooperate in order for Ripple to succeed in this fraud! 대부분의 유효성 검사기로 Ripple이있는 순간 (2018 년 초)에도 Ripple이 원장을 변경하는 것은 잡히지 않고 불가능했을 것입니다. 모든 파트너는 알고 있어야하며 Ripple을 성공시키기 위해서는 협조해야합니다. 이 사기에!
Do you really think Ripple could get away with that? 리플이 그렇게 생각할 수 있다고 생각하니? It would require the collusion of so many big name companies to join the conspiracy in order to make the fraud a success, that the conspiracy required is nothing short of fantasy. 사기를 성공시키기 위해 음모에 합류하기 위해 많은 유명 회사들이 모일 것을 요구할 것이며, 요구되는 음모는 판타지에 미치지 못할 것입니다. It's not like when ethereum rammed a fork down everyone's throat to recover some money, there was nobody that would stop them. ethereum이 돈을 되찾기 위해 모든 사람의 목구멍을 때려 눕혔을 때와 같지 않았습니다. 아무도 그들을 막을 사람이 없었습니다. That's not an option for XRP, simply because no partner validator would want to be in the middle of that controversy. 이는 파트너 유효성 검사기가 논쟁의 한가운데 있기를 원하지 않기 때문에 XRP의 옵션이 아닙니다.
You have to realize that for these partner validators, their buy-in IS the credibility of the concept; 이 파트너 유효성 검사기의 경우 구매자는 개념의 신뢰성이 있음을 인식해야합니다. there's no way they'd be a party to a scam. 사기에 빠질 수있는 방법이 없습니다. In other words, Ripple could never change the ledger because it would require all the validators' cooperation, and that's not remotely possible. 즉, Ripple은 모든 유효성 검사기의 협력이 필요하므로 원장을 변경할 수 없으며 원격으로 가능하지 않습니다. So get it out of your head that Ripple is risky because the ledger isn't YET fully distributed (soon though), even now it's as effectively immutable as what Bitcoin is thought to be. 원장이 아직 완전히 배포되지 않았기 때문에 Rickle이 위험하다는 것을 머리에서 꺼내십시오. Bitcoin이 생각하는 것만 큼 효과적이지는 않습니다.
Which takes us to the notion of Bitcoin being immutable; Bitcoin이 불변이라는 개념으로 우리를 안내합니다. or is it? 그렇지 않습니까? If you study it enough, you'll understand it takes just over 50% of the total mining power to create the possibility of 'double-spending'. 충분히 공부하면 '이중 지출'가능성을 창출하기 위해 총 광산 권력의 50 % 이상을 차지한다는 것을 알게 될 것입니다. Right now, 5 of the top mining pools represents well over 50% of the total global hashrate, or put another way, the 5 people that control these mining pools, could conceivably collude to corrupt Bitcoin and attempt to double-spend. 현재 최고의 채광 웅덩이 중 5 개가 전체 세계 해시 률의 50 %를 훨씬 상회하는 것으로 나타났습니다. 다른 말로하면,이 채굴 웅덩이를 통제하는 5 명의 사람들이 Bitcoin을 부패시키고 이중 지출을 시도 할 수 있습니다.
As unlikely as it seems, what would seem more likely to you? 보기 드문 것 같지만 당신에게 더 많은 가능성이있는 것으로 보입니까? 5 relatively obscure shifty mining pool operators colluding?, or dozens of very large corporations colluding to falsify the XRP ledger in plain sight which would immediately destroy XRP? XRP 원장을 XRP를 즉시 파괴 할 수있는 명백한 시각으로 위조하기 위해 결탁을 맺고있는 수십개의 대기업이나 공무원, Exactly. 정확하게. Bitcoin is FAR FAR more exposed to corruption due to its effective lack of meaningful decentralization than Ripple CURRENTLY is, and that gap will widen enormously as more and more XRP partner validators come online and XRP becomes truly distributed. Bitcoin은 Ripple CURRENTLY보다 의미있는 분권화가 효과적이지 않아 부패에 훨씬 더 노출되어 있으며, XRP 파트너 유효성 검사기가 점점 더 많이 제공되고 XRP가 진정으로 배포됨에 따라 격차가 더욱 커질 것입니다. Bitcoin will never again be as secure a ledger as XRP is and will be in the future. Bitcoin은 앞으로 XRP가 될 것이며 앞으로도 계속 유지 될 것입니다.
I've also read often from people, if Ripple controls who's in the trusted validator network, then they effectively control XRP! Ripple이 신뢰할 수있는 유효성 검사기 네트워크에있는 사람을 제어한다면 XRP를 효과적으로 제어 할 수 있습니다. ?? ?? What does that mean exactly? 그게 정확히 무슨 뜻입니까? They control who's in the validators list, yes, which indirectly allows them to control the evolution of the code, yes, and that's a great thing that avoids forked doppleganger XRPs (like the endless Bitcoin clones), and also gives us the quickest feature-adding path. 이들은 유효성 검사기 목록에있는 사람을 제어합니다. 예를 들어 간접적으로 코드의 진화를 제어 할 수 있습니다 (예 : 끝없는 Bitcoin 클론과 같은). 도플러 기의 XRP를 피하는 것이 가장 좋습니다. 또한, 경로를 추가합니다. However, this doesn't make XRP more exposed to fraud whatsoever because, quite simply, fraud is usually performed with some profit-oriented agenda, but any attempt to manipulate the ledger would be publicly visible and immediately destroy all trust in it. 그러나 이것은 XRP를 사기에 더 많이 노출시키지 않습니다. 사기는 일반적으로 이익 지향적 인 의제로 수행되기 때문에 원장을 조작하려는 시도는 공개적으로 볼 수 있으며 즉시 모든 신뢰를 파괴 할 수 있습니다.
Why would they do that? 왜 그들은 그렇게 할 것인가? They already have BILLIONS of legitimate dollars worth in XRP holdings. 그들은 이미 XRP 보유에 합당한 달러의 가치가 있습니다. Why why why would they fuck with the ledger and destroy their golden cashcow??? 왜 왜 그들은 원장과 섹스를하고 황금색 금화를 파괴하겠습니까? What could they possibly gain?? 그들은 무엇을 얻을 수 있 었는가 ?? The mere fact that they DO have so much invested in XRP should be evidence enough that they'd never do anything to destroy any trust in their precious asset, which means that because they have such control over who's in the network, you better believe it's with the intent of preserving and increasing the value of XRP. 그들이 XRP에 많은 돈을 투자했다는 단순한 사실은 자신의 소중한 자산에 대한 신뢰를 파괴하기위한 어떠한 조치도 결코 취하지 않을만큼 충분한 증거가되어야한다는 것입니다. 즉, 네트워크에 누가 누가 있는지를 제어 할 수 있기 때문에 XRP의 가치를 보존하고 증대시키는 것을 목적으로합니다. To think Ripple would do anything other than help XRP is really really stupid. Ripple이 XRP를 도와주는 것 이외의 다른 일을한다고 생각하는 것은 정말 바보입니다.
"Well what if the government steps in and tells Ripple to self-destruct? They couldn't stop Bitcoin like that!" "정부가 개입하여 Ripple에게 자멸을 명령하면 Bitcoin을 그렇게 막을 수 없었을 것입니다." Believe me, if the governments wanted to shut down crypto, they could and would've done it a long time ago, for all coins, yes even Bitcoin. 저를 믿으십시오, 정부가 암호를 끄고 싶었던 경우에, 모든 동전을 위해, 오래 전에 그것을 할 수 있고 할 것입니다, 그렇습니다 Bitcoin. Don't think they couldn't make it damn near impossible to work with crypto when they can control all the portals of converting to cash; 현금으로 변환하는 모든 포털을 제어 할 수있을 때 암호로 작업하는 것이 거의 불가능하다는 사실을 그들은 생각할 수 없습니다. forcing every aspect of crypto underground, far far out of the reaches of the average person's willingness to participate. 일반인의 참여 의지에서 멀어지는 지하 공간의 모든면을 강요합니다. If they made all of today's exchanges illegal, how much would a Bitcoin be worth then? 그들이 오늘의 모든 거래를 불법으로 만든다면, Bitcoin은 얼마나 가치가 있을까요? Almost nothing. 거의 아무것도. Think decentralized exchanges might save crypto? 분산 된 Exchange가 암호화를 저장할 수 있다고 생각하십니까? I don't know, I think a similar economic model can be found in drug cartels. 나도 몰라, 비슷한 경제 모델이 마약 카르텔에서 발견 될 수 있다고 생각해. Probably not your dream of crypto realized in that capacity, right? 아마도 그 용량에서 깨달은 꿈의 꿈이 아니 겠지?
It doesn't matter if the Bitcoin ledger can't be eliminated, it's the value of Bitcoin that CAN be if the governments really put the hammer down. Bitcoin 원장을 제거 할 수 없다면 중요하지 않습니다. 정부가 실제로 망치를 내려 놓는다면 Bitcoin의 가치가 될 수 있습니다. Therefore, the fact that the ripple validator nodes can all be easily isolated and shut down by the government, simply means that war was declared on crypto as a whole, and no coin will be safe, making Ripple's exposure in this capacity moot. 따라서 리플 검증기 노드가 모두 쉽게 격리되고 정부에 의해 종료 될 수 있다는 사실은 단순히 암호가 전체적으로 선언되고 동전이 안전하지 않으므로 Ripple의 노출이 부적절하다는 것을 의미합니다. If the governments stepped in, crypto would go back to the dark ages, and stay there, so who cares if Ripple's got an obvious self-destruct button that the government can hit, all coins have that button in some form or another; 정부가 들어서 자마자 암호가 암흑 시대로 돌아가서 거기에 머무르면 Ripple이 정부가 명중 할 수있는 명백한 자기 파괴 버튼을 가지고 있다면 모든 동전에 어떤 형태로든 버튼이 있습니다. no coin lives in a vacuum. 동전은 진공 상태로 존재하지 않습니다.
In summary, this definition of "centralized" as some form of compromising of the immutability of the ledger, not only doesn't apply to Ripple or XRP (XRP is distributed, not centralized), but is actually blind faith that decentralization somehow escapes these same nefarious forces; 요약하면 원장의 불변성에 대한 타협의 일부 형태 인 "중앙 집중화 된"에 대한이 정의는 Ripple 또는 XRP (XRP는 중앙 집중식이 아닌 분산되어 있음)에 적용되지 않을뿐만 아니라 실제로 지방 분권이 어떻게 도피하여 같은 사악한 세력; and that's a myth. 그것은 신화입니다.
2) Centralized meaning: Concentration of control over the evolution of the coin 2) 집중화 된 의미 : 동전의 진화에 대한 통제의 집중
This definition of centralization should hopefully be perceived as a positive thing by this point in the evolution of crypto. 중앙 집중화에 대한 이러한 정의는 암호화의 진화에있어 현 시점에서 긍정적 인 것으로 인식되어야합니다. Simply look at the mess created every time Bitcoin forks. Bitcoin 포크마다 매번 생성되는 혼란을보십시오. Segwit, Segwit 2, trust-required Lightning network appendage, fewer full nodes, all this in-fighting, a new "Bitcoin" every fork.. No this one's the real one, no this one, no this one!! Segwit, Segwit 2, 신뢰할 수있는 라이트닝 네트워크 부속 장치, 전체 노드 수 줄이기,이 모든 전투 중, 모든 "Bitcoin"모든 포크 .. 이건 진짜가 아니야, 이건 아니야!
The Bitcoin project has run its course. Bitcoin 프로젝트가 진행되었습니다. It's blowing up at the seams and every fix comes with a glut of consequences that just further confuses the investor pool, making it scary to put your money into any variation of Bitcoin lest it be deprecated and you're left holding the bag. 그것은 솔기에서 날아 오르고 모든 수정은 투자자 풀을 더 혼란스럽게하는 결과를 가져옵니다. Bitcoin의 변형에 돈을 넣는 것이 무섭기 때문에, 비워 두지 않아야합니다.
On the other hand, if you have XRP, despite nearly 100 code updates to improve every aspect of it, and probably 100s more updates to add even more incredible features (eg Codius? Watch out Ethereum, clock is ticking), there will only ever be one XRP coin. 반면 XRP를 사용하는 경우 거의 100 가지 코드 업데이트가 있어도 모든 측면을 개선하고 100s 이상의 업데이트를 추가하여 놀라운 기능을 추가 할 수 있습니다 (예 : Codius , Ethereum 조심해, 시계는 똑딱 거림 ). XRP 동전 하나. The XRP coin you buy today will be the same one you have 100 versions from now. 오늘 구매하는 XRP 동전은 지금부터 100 가지 버전을 가진 동일한 동전입니다. Now try and tell me that centralized development of a coin is a bad thing. 이제 동전의 중앙 집중식 개발이 나쁜 것임을 말해보십시오. Moreover, Ripple will never have to beg a greedy mining pool to upgrade its rippled software, that's the beauty of the trusted validator nodes, one unified evolution. 또한, Ripple은 탐욕스러운 소프트웨어를 업그레이드하기 위해 탐욕스러운 광산 채굴장을 구걸 할 필요가 없습니다. 이는 신뢰할 수있는 유효성 검사기 노드의 아름다움, 하나의 통합 된 진화입니다.
Let's also not forget that Bitcoin is predominantly developed by a consistent small group of developers, and the Bitcoind app is published from one website. Bitcoin은 일관된 소규모 개발자 그룹에 의해 주로 개발되고 Bitcoind 앱은 하나의 웹 사이트에서 발행된다는 점도 잊지 마십시오. That also sounds like centralized development to me. 그것은 나에게 중앙 집중식 개발처럼 들린다. I doubt I could contribute some code to Bitcoin without bearing the scrutiny of the Bitcoin portal owners, dig? Bitcoin 포털 소유자의 조사없이 Bitcoin에 코드를 제공 할 수 있을지 의심 스럽습니까? Same for Ethereum, you're not getting anything past Vitalek. 에테 리움 (Ethereum)과 동일하게, 당신은 비탈 렉을 지나서 아무것도 얻지 못하고 있습니다. All coins are centralized in development. 모든 동전은 개발 과정에서 중앙 집중화되어 있습니다.
In summary, yes Ripple's control over the XRP ledger codebase is centralized, and that's proven to be a great thing. 요약하면 XRP 원장 코드베이스에 대한 예 Ripple의 통제가 중앙 집중화되며 이는 큰 일임이 입증되었습니다.
3) Centralized meaning: Concentration of percentage of coins in Ripple's possession 3) 중앙 집중식 의미 : 리플의 소유에있는 동전의 비율 집중
In this context, the primary difference to Bitcoin is solely the inability to mine XRP. 이 맥락에서 Bitcoin과의 가장 큰 차이점은 XRP를 광산에 넣을 수 없다는 것입니다. This does not matter. 이것은 중요하지 않습니다. Assuming Bitcoin doesn't disintegrate, in approximately 100 years, you will also not be able to mine Bitcoin AND there will STILL be large majority holders of Bitcoin even then. Bitcoin이 분해되지 않는다고 가정하면 약 100 년 후에 Bitcoin을 채굴 할 수 없으며 그때도 Bitcoin의 대규모 대주주가 될 것입니다. Would it make sense to hate on Bitcoin when you can't mine it either? Bitcoin을 싫어할 때 Bitcoin을 미워하는 것이 합리적일까요? Of course not, that would be stupid. 물론, 그것은 어리 석다. I'd even go so far as to say that Satoshi and friends' mining hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin the first year in total isolation is as near to pre-mining as it needs to get to make the distinction irrelevant. 나는 사토시와 친구들이 비트 코인을 수백만 달러에 달하는 광물을 완전히 고립시킨 첫 해가 광산업에 가까운 것이 구별을 무의미하게 만들 필요가 있다고 말하기까지했다.
What's more important than just the fact that the creators of any coin have a lot of them, is what these premined coins are destined for. 어떤 동전의 제작자가 많은 것을 가지고 있다는 사실보다 더 중요한 것은,이 미리 만들어진 동전이 예정된 것입니다. Let's ask Satoshi.. I see, hookers and blackjack, excellent. 사토시 한테 물어 보자. 나는 창녀와 블랙 잭을 볼 수있다. Let's ask Ripple.. Building out a globally disruptive technology that will open access to the global economic playing field for every person on Earth. Ripple에게 물어 봅시다. 지구상에있는 모든 사람들을위한 세계 경제 경기장에 대한 액세스를 열어주는 전 세계적으로 파괴적인 기술을 개발하십시오. Hmm. 흠. Ok, Brad might have some left over for hookers and blackjack as well, but at least he's not sketchily hiding in..fear? 좋아, 브래드는 매춘부와 블랙 잭을 위해 남겨 뒀을 수도 있지만 적어도 그는 스케치로 숨어 있지 않다. 두려운가? Shame? 부끄러움? Vegas? 베가스?
There's also this persistent irrational fearmongering that because Ripple has so many XRP, that they could drop a pile on the exchanges and destroy the price of XRP. Ripple에는 XRP가 너무 많아서 XRP의 가격을 떨어 뜨리고 교환기에 더미를 떨어 뜨릴 수 있기 때문에이 불합리한 비합법적 인 두려움이 있습니다. Ok, here's an experiment for you. 좋습니다, 여기 실험이 있습니다. Take a knife, and stab yourself in the eye... waiting... still waiting.. No? 칼을 가지고 눈에 찔러 ... 기다리는 중 .. 기다리는 중 .. 안돼? Why didn't you do it? 왜 안했어? Let's think this through shall we? 우리가 이것을 통해 생각해 봅시다. Stabbing yourself in the eye is INSANE. 눈에 찔리는 것은 미친 짓입니다. You are not capable of willfully hurting yourself to this capacity. 당신은 고의적으로이 능력에 상처를 줄 수 없습니다. Likewise, you probably wouldn't starve yourself to death, nor pull all your life savings out of your bank and throw it out the car window at top speed. 마찬가지로, 당신은 아마도 자신을 굶어 죽지 않을 것이고, 당신의 모든 생명을 당신의 은행에서 뽑아 내고 그것을 차안창에서 최고 속도로 버릴 수도 없을 것입니다.
So, if you can sit there and rationalize all the ways you aren't going to destroy your life, why is it so hard for you to see that Ripple has no desire to slaughter XRP by dumping all their coins on the market?? 당신이 거기에 앉아서 인생을 파괴하지 않을 모든 방법을 합리적으로 할 수 있다면, Ripple은 시장에 모든 동전을 버려서 XRP를 도살하려는 욕망이 없다는 것을 당신이보기에는 왜 그렇게 어렵습니까? It just wouldn't make sense! 그것은 단지 이해가 안 될 것입니다! Even if they consistently sold just enough to not drop the price but prevent it from growing, it would become uninteresting to investors eventually, and still it would crash. 비록 그들이 가격을 떨어 뜨리지 않고 성장하지 못하도록 일관되게 팔았다 고하더라도 결국에는 투자자들에게는별로 흥미롭지 않을 것이고 여전히 충돌 할 것입니다. So you see, they can't barely sell any of it (relatively speaking) without hurting themselves in the process. 보시다시피, 그들은 그 과정에서 스스로를 해치지 않으면 서 (상대적으로 말하면) 어떤 것도 간신히 팔 수 없습니다. Ripple does not want to stab their eyes out for the same reasons you don't; 리플은 당신이하지 않은 것과 같은 이유로 그들의 눈을 찔 리기를 원하지 않습니다; just trust in survival instincts, ok? 생존 본능을 믿어, 알았지?
In summary, centralization of so much XRP assets in the hands of Ripple does not in any way represent a threat, and if anything, gives Ripple the ability to magnify the value of XRP through constructive distribution and redemption. 요약하면, Ripple의 손에있는 많은 XRP 자산의 중앙 집중화는 어떤 식 으로든 위협을 나타내지 않으며, 무엇보다도 Ripple에게 건설적인 분배 및 구제를 통해 XRP의 가치를 확대 할 수있는 능력을 부여합니다.
4) Centralized meaning: Concentration of wealth 4) 집중된 의미 : 부의 집중
Bitcoin, Ethereum (public chain), and all the other shitcoins have already proven that blockchains and whitepapers alone do not unlock the quintillions of dollars flowing in our global economy. Bitcoin, Ethereum (공개 사슬) 및 다른 모든 shitcoins는 블록 체인과 백서만으로는 세계 경제에서 흐르는 달러의 얽힘을 열지 못한다는 것을 이미 입증했습니다. That takes productization far beyond the mere simple existence of a coin, it takes thousands of compelling macroeconomics, software, encryption, business, etc. experts all working under strong leadership in a unified direction. 이는 단순히 동전의 단순한 존재를 넘어서는 제품화를 요구하며 강력한 거시 경제학, 소프트웨어, 암호화, 비즈니스 등 전문가 모두가 통일 된 방향으로 강력한 리더십 아래에서 일하고 있습니다. A blockchain is the smallest piece of the puzzle, the rest is hard work and TONS of cash to pay for salaries and business expenses. 블록 체인 (blockchain)은 수수께끼의 가장 작은 조각이며, 나머지는 열심히하고 월급과 사업비를 지불하는 현금입니다. This is why so much XRP remains "centralized" in Ripple's possession (sorta, it's escrowed just out of reach), to be able to get Ripple adoption to the point of critical mass. 이것이 Ripple의 소유로 인해 많은 XRP가 "중앙 집중화 된"상태로 유지되는 이유입니다. 즉, Ripple 채택을 임계 질량 지점까지 가져올 수 있기 때문입니다. Penetration into mainstream economics could never happen any other way. 주류 경제로의 침투는 결코 다른 어떤 방법으로도 발생할 수 없습니다.
Ripple needs the ability to seed the world's influential financial institutions with XRP capital, they want to have the clout to subdue the malevolent whales on the markets, and they want to steward the health and viability of their product line. Ripple은 세계의 영향력있는 금융 기관에 XRP 자본을 뿌릴 수있는 능력이 필요합니다. 시장에 악의적 인 고래를 정복하려고 영향력을 행사하고 싶어합니다. 그들은 제품 라인의 건강과 생존 능력을 관리하기를 원합니다. This is "smart business", and centralization in this regard is the key to success. 이것은 "똑똑한 사업"이며, 이와 관련하여 중앙 집중화가 성공의 열쇠입니다. If you think they have too much money, then you probably think Microsoft, Apple, Buffet, Rockefellers, and pretty much anybody that has more than you, is unjustifiably rich. 돈이 너무 많다고 생각한다면 마이크로 소프트, 애플, 뷔페, 록펠러, 그리고 당신보다 더 많은 사람은 부자가 될 수 있다고 생각할 것입니다. And while that's great philosophical topic fodder, it's not unique to Ripple, so stop demonizing Ripple for being a successful company just like any other successful company; 그리고 그것이 철학적 인 주제의 훌륭한 사료이지만, 그것은 Ripple만의 독특한 것이 아니므로 Ripple은 다른 성공적인 회사와 마찬가지로 성공적인 회사라는 데에 악의적 인 태도를 취하지 마십시오. it does not illegitimize or immoralize XRP. 그것은 XRP를 불법화하거나 부도덕하게하지 않습니다.
My absolute favorite is the notion of the founders getting TOO rich because they hold so much personal reserves of XRP! 나의 절대적으로 가장 좋아하는 것은 그들이 XRP의 많은 개인적 준비금을 보유하고 있기 때문에 TOO가 풍부 해지는 창립자의 개념이다! Lol. Lol. Cmon, this topic is so broad in nature that to single-out Ripple is just fanatical. Cmon,이 주제는 본질적으로 광범위하여 단일 출력 Ripple은 광신적입니다. There are so many billionaires on this planet, some of which affect our daily lives, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, and I'm sure Buffet has tentacles into many of your daily experiences one way or another. 이 행성에는 너무 많은 억만 장자가 있습니다. 그 중 일부는 우리의 일상 생활에 영향을 미칩니다. 빌 게이츠 (Bill Gates), 늦은 스티브 잡스 (Steve Jobs)입니다. 나는 뷔페가 매일 매일의 경험에 촉각을 곤두 세우고 있음을 확신합니다. Point is, Ripple is a very successful company and the founders made it big. 요점은, 리플은 매우 성공적인 회사이며 창립자는 그것을 크게 만들었습니다. Why do you fucking care? 너 왜 신경 쓰냐? Does that affect the quality of the product? 그것은 제품의 품질에 영향을 줍니까? Certainly not; 확실히; the wealth of the founder has zero bearing on how you should be evaluating XRP, seriously. 창업자의 재산은 XRP를 진지하게 평가하는 방법에 대해 전혀 상관이 없습니다.
But what if the founders dump their holdings all at once, like Jed might? 하지만 창업자들이 제드 처럼 모든 것을 한꺼번에 버리면 어떨까요? Well, Jed can't, his coins are contractually meted out to him, he doesn't have them all in his possession. 글쎄, 제드, 그의 동전은 계약 적으로 그를 밖으로 meted 수 없습니다, 그는 자신의 모든 것을 가지고 있지 않습니다. And sure, the possibility exists that Brad or Chris could decide to stab themselves in the eyes, but that seems unlikely right? 그리고 브래드 (Brad) 나 크리스 (Chris) 가 눈을 찔 리기로 결정할 가능성은 있지만, 그렇다고 볼 수는 없다. Even if they did, they're only 5% of the total holdings each, which may shake the ecosystem for a while, but probably wouldn't destroy it. 비록 그들이했다하더라도, 그들은 단지 전체 생태계의 5 %에 불과하여 잠시 동안 생태계를 흔들 수도 있지만 아마도 그것을 파괴하지는 않을 것입니다. They certainly couldn't unilaterally dump Ripple's XRP holdings onto the market, it's all in escrow for that very reason! 그들은 일방적으로 시장에 Ripple의 XRP 지분을 쏟아 부을 수 없었습니다. 바로 그 이유로 에스크로에 전부 있습니다! In other words, Ripple or its founders or its partners will never have access to enough liquid XRP at one time to be able to destroy XRP. 즉, Ripple이나 창립자 또는 파트너는 XRP를 파괴 할 수있을 정도로 한 번에 충분한 액체 XRP에 액세스 할 수 없습니다.
In contrast, there are suspicions that a very few, or even a single whale was responsible for driving the first Bitcoin wave up to and over $1000 so long ago. 대조적으로, 매우 적은 수의, 심지어는 단일 고래조차도 Bitcoin 최초의 파도를 오래 전에 1000 달러 이상까지 운전 한 것에 대한 책임이 있다는 의혹이 있습니다. It's these nefarious whales that exist in every coin, and cause all these wild price fluctuations that are the real problem. 그것은 모든 동전에 존재하는이 사악한 고래 들로,이 모든 야생 가격 변동을 진정한 문제로 만듭니다. If anything, Ripple's massive reserves of XRP can serve as a dampener or even eliminator of the forces of whales. 무엇보다도 Ripple의 방대한 XRP는 고래의 힘을 줄이거 나 없앨 수 있습니다. This strategic war chest will be what separates XRP from the other coins that cannot control their distribution as effectively. 이 전략적 전쟁의 가슴은 XRP를 다른 동전과 구분하여 분배를 효과적으로 통제 할 수없는 것입니다. Also, over 80% of Bitcoin's mining is done in China (at the time of writing), try to tell me that's fulfilling the libertarian dream. 또한 Bitcoin의 광산업 중 80 % 이상이 중국에서 이루어지고 있으며 (필자는 당시) 자유주의적인 꿈을 이룩하고 있음을 말해 주려고합니다.
In summary, hating the rich has nothing to do with the quality of XRP. 요약하면, 부자를 싫어하는 것은 XRP의 품질과 아무 관련이 없습니다. All coins have their millionaires and billionaires, so stop singling out Ripple with this non-issue. 모든 동전에는 백만장 자와 억만 장자가 있으므로이 비공개로 Ripple을 골라서는 안됩니다.
And finally to my XRP friends, fear not, the incessant drumbeat of the FUD factories we are currently swimming in will become imperceptible background noise as the real FI money being poured into XRP accelerates. 그리고 마침내 나의 XRP 친구에게, 두려워하지 마라, 우리가 현재 수영하고있는 FUD 공장의 끊임없는 북소리는 XRP에 쏟게되는 진짜 FI 돈이 가속하는 것에 따라 눈에 보이지 않는 배경 잡음이 될 것이다. If the XRP critics got anything right, it's that XRP is not like the others. XRP 비평가가 옳은 것을 얻은 경우, XRP는 다른 것과 같지 않습니다. Sure, XRP is a cryptocurrency by technical definition, but that's where the similarities to other cryptos end. 물론 XRP는 기술적 인 정의에 의한 암호 해독 (cryptocurrency)이지만 다른 암호와의 유사성이 끝나는 곳입니다. As an integral part of Ripple's utility, XRP will pass through all artificially-imposed FUD-barriers with the methodical and elegant flow of a meandering neutron star, sending countless electrifying tethers into every conceivable nook and cranny of global value exchange. Ripple의 유용성의 핵심 요소 인 XRP는 인위적으로 부과 된 모든 FUD 장벽을 체계적이고 우아한 흐름으로 중계하는 중성자 별을 통과시켜 전 세계의 가치 교환의 모든 구석 구석에 무수한 전기를 연결합니다. I'm just glad to be smart enough to appreciate the unfolding of civilization's greatest evolution yet. 문명의 가장 위대한 진화가 펼쳐지는 것에 감사 할만큼 현명하다는 것은 기쁜 일입니다.
I wonder if aliens will now consider us worthy of communion. 외계인이 지금 우리를 친교에 합당하다고 생각하는지 궁금합니다.
영문 원본
XRP's Centralization
Feb 17, 2018
You'll hear over and over and over, "Ripple is centralized!!! They must die!! AUGH!!!"
Let's all calm down for a minute and try to figure out what this means exactly.
Centralization is a very broad term that encompasses a number of concepts, so to say something is "centralized", isn't saying much at all, but I do think the ultimate subtext of these accusations is the fear of being defrauded of your funds because of the misperception that there is "trust" required. This cannot be further from the truth; I'll explain:
Here's how I see the variations in intent of using that word:
1) Centralized meaning: Concentration of control over the immutability of the ledger (aka possible double-spending, or spend reversals) because XRP uses distributed validators instead of full decentralization
Before I get into my response to this, I'd like to highlight that there are three primary configurations for all types of ledgers (not just blockchain ledgers):
Centralized (one entity ensures the data integrity). Obviously, centralized configurations are easily modified and aren't easy to trust (think Mt. Gox, banks, your accounting spreadsheet).
Distributed (many trusted entities ensuring data integrity). Distributed configurations become exponentially increasingly trustworthy the larger they get because fraud requires all to participate, to the point where collusion of ALL validators to commit fraud becomes virtually impossible.
Fully decentralized (all users participate in ensuring the data integrity). Decentralized configurations are probably the most trustworthy in its difficult-to-realize idealistic form, but are very inefficient at achieving consensus.
Now that that's out of the way. There are many rumors persisting even now that the XRP ledger is something controlled by and easily altered by Ripple. Not true at all. XRP is an open-source "distributed" ledger. While not utilizing a "decentralized" configuration like Bitcoin, control of the data in the XRP ledger is also not "centralized" into Ripple, even though Ripple currently has the majority of validators. The most important aspect of comparing "centralization" versus "not being centralized".. is the possibility of fraud. I hope to demonstrate that XRP being "distributed" versus "decentralized" doesn't intrinsically increase or decrease the possibility of fraud.
Anyone can download and run an XRP ledger node, and the XRP ledger can survive even if Ripple collapses as a company. That's the first part of being "distributed". And while it's true that Ripple currently represents and hosts the majority of trusted validator nodes, they've mandated to become completely "distributed" by adding many more trusted partner validators until Ripple is a minority validator. Even the way things are at this moment (early 2018) with Ripple as the majority validator, for Ripple to change the ledger would be impossible to do without getting caught, all the partners would know and would have to cooperate in order for Ripple to succeed in this fraud!
Do you really think Ripple could get away with that? It would require the collusion of so many big name companies to join the conspiracy in order to make the fraud a success, that the conspiracy required is nothing short of fantasy. It's not like when ethereum rammed a fork down everyone's throat to recover some money, there was nobody that would stop them. That's not an option for XRP, simply because no partner validator would want to be in the middle of that controversy.
You have to realize that for these partner validators, their buy-in IS the credibility of the concept; there's no way they'd be a party to a scam. In other words, Ripple could never change the ledger because it would require all the validators' cooperation, and that's not remotely possible. So get it out of your head that Ripple is risky because the ledger isn't YET fully distributed (soon though), even now it's as effectively immutable as what Bitcoin is thought to be.
Which takes us to the notion of Bitcoin being immutable; or is it? If you study it enough, you'll understand it takes just over 50% of the total mining power to create the possibility of 'double-spending'. Right now, 5 of the top mining pools represents well over 50% of the total global hashrate, or put another way, the 5 people that control these mining pools, could conceivably collude to corrupt Bitcoin and attempt to double-spend.
As unlikely as it seems, what would seem more likely to you? 5 relatively obscure shifty mining pool operators colluding?, or dozens of very large corporations colluding to falsify the XRP ledger in plain sight which would immediately destroy XRP? Exactly. Bitcoin is FAR FAR more exposed to corruption due to its effective lack of meaningful decentralization than Ripple CURRENTLY is, and that gap will widen enormously as more and more XRP partner validators come online and XRP becomes truly distributed. Bitcoin will never again be as secure a ledger as XRP is and will be in the future.
I've also read often from people, if Ripple controls who's in the trusted validator network, then they effectively control XRP! ?? What does that mean exactly? They control who's in the validators list, yes, which indirectly allows them to control the evolution of the code, yes, and that's a great thing that avoids forked doppleganger XRPs (like the endless Bitcoin clones), and also gives us the quickest feature-adding path. However, this doesn't make XRP more exposed to fraud whatsoever because, quite simply, fraud is usually performed with some profit-oriented agenda, but any attempt to manipulate the ledger would be publicly visible and immediately destroy all trust in it.
Why would they do that? They already have BILLIONS of legitimate dollars worth in XRP holdings. Why why why would they fuck with the ledger and destroy their golden cashcow??? What could they possibly gain?? The mere fact that they DO have so much invested in XRP should be evidence enough that they'd never do anything to destroy any trust in their precious asset, which means that because they have such control over who's in the network, you better believe it's with the intent of preserving and increasing the value of XRP. To think Ripple would do anything other than help XRP is really really stupid.
"Well what if the government steps in and tells Ripple to self-destruct? They couldn't stop Bitcoin like that!" Believe me, if the governments wanted to shut down crypto, they could and would've done it a long time ago, for all coins, yes even Bitcoin. Don't think they couldn't make it damn near impossible to work with crypto when they can control all the portals of converting to cash; forcing every aspect of crypto underground, far far out of the reaches of the average person's willingness to participate. If they made all of today's exchanges illegal, how much would a Bitcoin be worth then? Almost nothing. Think decentralized exchanges might save crypto? I don't know, I think a similar economic model can be found in drug cartels. Probably not your dream of crypto realized in that capacity, right?
It doesn't matter if the Bitcoin ledger can't be eliminated, it's the value of Bitcoin that CAN be if the governments really put the hammer down. Therefore, the fact that the ripple validator nodes can all be easily isolated and shut down by the government, simply means that war was declared on crypto as a whole, and no coin will be safe, making Ripple's exposure in this capacity moot. If the governments stepped in, crypto would go back to the dark ages, and stay there, so who cares if Ripple's got an obvious self-destruct button that the government can hit, all coins have that button in some form or another; no coin lives in a vacuum.
In summary, this definition of "centralized" as some form of compromising of the immutability of the ledger, not only doesn't apply to Ripple or XRP (XRP is distributed, not centralized), but is actually blind faith that decentralization somehow escapes these same nefarious forces; and that's a myth.
2) Centralized meaning: Concentration of control over the evolution of the coin
This definition of centralization should hopefully be perceived as a positive thing by this point in the evolution of crypto. Simply look at the mess created every time Bitcoin forks. Segwit, Segwit 2, trust-required Lightning network appendage, fewer full nodes, all this in-fighting, a new "Bitcoin" every fork.. No this one's the real one, no this one, no this one!!
The Bitcoin project has run its course. It's blowing up at the seams and every fix comes with a glut of consequences that just further confuses the investor pool, making it scary to put your money into any variation of Bitcoin lest it be deprecated and you're left holding the bag.
On the other hand, if you have XRP, despite nearly 100 code updates to improve every aspect of it, and probably 100s more updates to add even more incredible features (e.g. Codius? Watch out Ethereum, clock is ticking), there will only ever be one XRP coin. The XRP coin you buy today will be the same one you have 100 versions from now. Now try and tell me that centralized development of a coin is a bad thing. Moreover, Ripple will never have to beg a greedy mining pool to upgrade its rippled software, that's the beauty of the trusted validator nodes, one unified evolution.
Let's also not forget that Bitcoin is predominantly developed by a consistent small group of developers, and the Bitcoind app is published from one website. That also sounds like centralized development to me. I doubt I could contribute some code to Bitcoin without bearing the scrutiny of the Bitcoin portal owners, dig? Same for Ethereum, you're not getting anything past Vitalek. All coins are centralized in development.
In summary, yes Ripple's control over the XRP ledger codebase is centralized, and that's proven to be a great thing.
3) Centralized meaning: Concentration of percentage of coins in Ripple's possession
In this context, the primary difference to Bitcoin is solely the inability to mine XRP. This does not matter. Assuming Bitcoin doesn't disintegrate, in approximately 100 years, you will also not be able to mine Bitcoin AND there will STILL be large majority holders of Bitcoin even then. Would it make sense to hate on Bitcoin when you can't mine it either? Of course not, that would be stupid. I'd even go so far as to say that Satoshi and friends' mining hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin the first year in total isolation is as near to pre-mining as it needs to get to make the distinction irrelevant.
What's more important than just the fact that the creators of any coin have a lot of them, is what these premined coins are destined for. Let's ask Satoshi.. I see, hookers and blackjack, excellent. Let's ask Ripple.. Building out a globally disruptive technology that will open access to the global economic playing field for every person on Earth. Hmm. Ok, Brad might have some left over for hookers and blackjack as well, but at least he's not sketchily hiding in..fear? Shame? Vegas?
There's also this persistent irrational fearmongering that because Ripple has so many XRP, that they could drop a pile on the exchanges and destroy the price of XRP. Ok, here's an experiment for you. Take a knife, and stab yourself in the eye... waiting... still waiting.. No? Why didn't you do it? Let's think this through shall we? Stabbing yourself in the eye is INSANE. You are not capable of willfully hurting yourself to this capacity. Likewise, you probably wouldn't starve yourself to death, nor pull all your life savings out of your bank and throw it out the car window at top speed.
So, if you can sit there and rationalize all the ways you aren't going to destroy your life, why is it so hard for you to see that Ripple has no desire to slaughter XRP by dumping all their coins on the market?? It just wouldn't make sense! Even if they consistently sold just enough to not drop the price but prevent it from growing, it would become uninteresting to investors eventually, and still it would crash. So you see, they can't barely sell any of it (relatively speaking) without hurting themselves in the process. Ripple does not want to stab their eyes out for the same reasons you don't; just trust in survival instincts, ok?
In summary, centralization of so much XRP assets in the hands of Ripple does not in any way represent a threat, and if anything, gives Ripple the ability to magnify the value of XRP through constructive distribution and redemption.
4) Centralized meaning: Concentration of wealth
Bitcoin, Ethereum (public chain), and all the other shitcoins have already proven that blockchains and whitepapers alone do not unlock the quintillions of dollars flowing in our global economy. That takes productization far beyond the mere simple existence of a coin, it takes thousands of compelling macroeconomics, software, encryption, business, etc. experts all working under strong leadership in a unified direction. A blockchain is the smallest piece of the puzzle, the rest is hard work and TONS of cash to pay for salaries and business expenses. This is why so much XRP remains "centralized" in Ripple's possession (sorta, it's escrowed just out of reach), to be able to get Ripple adoption to the point of critical mass. Penetration into mainstream economics could never happen any other way.
Ripple needs the ability to seed the world's influential financial institutions with XRP capital, they want to have the clout to subdue the malevolent whales on the markets, and they want to steward the health and viability of their product line. This is "smart business", and centralization in this regard is the key to success. If you think they have too much money, then you probably think Microsoft, Apple, Buffet, Rockefellers, and pretty much anybody that has more than you, is unjustifiably rich. And while that's great philosophical topic fodder, it's not unique to Ripple, so stop demonizing Ripple for being a successful company just like any other successful company; it does not illegitimize or immoralize XRP.
My absolute favorite is the notion of the founders getting TOO rich because they hold so much personal reserves of XRP! Lol. Cmon, this topic is so broad in nature that to single-out Ripple is just fanatical. There are so many billionaires on this planet, some of which affect our daily lives, Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs, and I'm sure Buffet has tentacles into many of your daily experiences one way or another. Point is, Ripple is a very successful company and the founders made it big. Why do you fucking care? Does that affect the quality of the product? Certainly not; the wealth of the founder has zero bearing on how you should be evaluating XRP, seriously.
But what if the founders dump their holdings all at once, like Jed might? Well, Jed can't, his coins are contractually meted out to him, he doesn't have them all in his possession. And sure, the possibility exists that Brad or Chris could decide to stab themselves in the eyes, but that seems unlikely right? Even if they did, they're only 5% of the total holdings each, which may shake the ecosystem for a while, but probably wouldn't destroy it. They certainly couldn't unilaterally dump Ripple's XRP holdings onto the market, it's all in escrow for that very reason! In other words, Ripple or its founders or its partners will never have access to enough liquid XRP at one time to be able to destroy XRP.
In contrast, there are suspicions that a very few, or even a single whale was responsible for driving the first Bitcoin wave up to and over $1000 so long ago. It's these nefarious whales that exist in every coin, and cause all these wild price fluctuations that are the real problem. If anything, Ripple's massive reserves of XRP can serve as a dampener or even eliminator of the forces of whales. This strategic war chest will be what separates XRP from the other coins that cannot control their distribution as effectively. Also, over 80% of Bitcoin's mining is done in China (at the time of writing), try to tell me that's fulfilling the libertarian dream.
In summary, hating the rich has nothing to do with the quality of XRP. All coins have their millionaires and billionaires, so stop singling out Ripple with this non-issue.
And finally to my XRP friends, fear not, the incessant drumbeat of the FUD factories we are currently swimming in will become imperceptible background noise as the real FI money being poured into XRP accelerates. If the XRP critics got anything right, it's that XRP is not like the others. Sure, XRP is a cryptocurrency by technical definition, but that's where the similarities to other cryptos end. As an integral part of Ripple's utility, XRP will pass through all artificially-imposed FUD-barriers with the methodical and elegant flow of a meandering neutron star, sending countless electrifying tethers into every conceivable nook and cranny of global value exchange. I'm just glad to be smart enough to appreciate the unfolding of civilization's greatest evolution yet.
I wonder if aliens will now consider us worthy of communion.