The Wild, Distributed World: Radical Infrastructure Changes From Blockchains to the Interplanetary File System to DAOs
“Beyond the Wild Wood comes the wild world,” said the Rat. “And that’s something that doesn’t matter, either to you or to me. I’ve never been there, and I’m never going’ nor you either, if you’ve got any sense at all. Don’t ever refer to it again, please.”
― Kenneth Grahame, The Wind in the Willows
By Lance Koonce
More frequently now than ever before, we are treated to a deluge of media stories telling us why some new technology will change our lives. Recently, the thundering drumbeat of technology topics has included artificial intelligence, robotics, and virtual reality, to name just a few. Each of these waves of development is worthy of close attention because — as much as some of us may want to ignore these changes — they are coming, and they promise to affect all of our lives significantly over the coming decades.
As we’ve discussed time and again on this blog, another development that has received a good deal of attention over the past year is blockchain technology, the convection engine that powers Bitcoin and which is now finding its way into other systems.
However, to me, perhaps the most interesting thing about the blockchain tempest recently is that it does not just involve blockchains. In remarkable ways, the discussion around blockchains appears to be leading to a new mode of thinking about the architecture of our digital world generally. This involves rethinking much of the existing infrastructure. As a result, energizing discussions about first principles are now arising in many different areas. We’ve alluded to this in prior posts.
So what does this mean as a practical matter? It means that a wide range of industries stands to be disrupted and reinvented, and that the winds of change are going to blow in from every quadrant. But let’s start with some brief background (those with a good grounding in distributed and peer-to-peer computing can skip ahead to the next section).
Distributed, Decentralized and Disrupted
Distributed computing has been around since at least the 1970s. At their core, distributed systems are networks of computers where each node can act on its own and has its own storage, but where the nodes also can work together to handle tasks by passing messages back and forth. For many years, computer networks were typically controlled by central servers. Decentralized computing broke through in the late 1990s with the introduction of peer-to-peer networks such as Napster. Under these systems, centralized infrastructures are unnecessary, as software is distributed to all of the nodes, and then the nodes then communicate directly with each other.
The primary breakthrough introduced by Bitcoin in 2009 was that it made use of a decentralized, peer-to-peer structure to validate and record transactions between computers. In other words, it created a distributed database that does not require any centralized arbiters of trust, plus a transaction system for moving data (value). Thus value, in the form of Bitcoins, can move swiftly between parties without middlemen. This creates enormous efficiencies.
Transactions facilitated by blockchain technology are automatically verified by a multitude of computers, and the transactions are recorded in a digital ledger that exists on all of those computers simultaneously. The ledger grows with each additional transaction, and thus can be used to confirm not just the most recent transaction but all of those on the chain. Thus blockchains are, theoretically, both transparent and secure (in practice, like everything in life, these competing tensions have no perfect solution, but blockchains appear to be a reasonable good one that allow trade-offs in each direction depending on which aspect is paramount for a given application).
As the underlying blockchain technology has been adopted for systems not related to Bitcoin, the advantages of the technology have become even clearer. The potential to eliminate intermediaries and thereby create market efficiencies has generated a massive storm surge of investment in companies building blockchain solutions. Further, the blocks of data that are verified and recorded in the distributed ledger of a blockchain can contain virtually any type of information, permitting a variety of digital assets to be securely exchanged, and making the records of those exchanges virtually immutable.
For this reason, blockchain solutions are being proposed in numerous industries, from media to advertising to e-commerce.
Tearing Down and Building Up
Blockchains appear to be just the starting point, however. Ethereum has created a robust programming platform built upon a blockchain structure, which allows the creation of much more complex solutions. In particular, the Ethereum blockchain is designed to facilitate smart contracts, which as we’ve discussed here before are peer-to-peer agreements that parties can set up to execute automatically on the occurrence of a predetermined event or the input of specific data. For example, an export company in one country could agree with an import company in another country to automatically send instructions to a shipper to send products to the importer when a certain amount of money is received. All of this would execute automatically without the need for third parties.
Separately, companies building blockchain solutions involving digital content such as music and images have recognized that it may be important to have a database for storage of the content itself (blockchains are not efficient mechanisms for actually transmitting large files — they are instead good at storing and moving cryptographic identifiers for underlying files). Thus there has been a convergence between some blockchain solutions and other decentralized, distributed solutions such as the Interplanetary File System (“IPFS”), which aims to be a global, peer-to-peer database of content files.
In a recent white paper, IBM argued that decentralization is a necessary ingredient for a robust Internet of Things (“IoT”) — the coming vast interactive networks of sensors, appliances, and other distributed devices. While IBM noted that blockchains are a key component, they are only a part of the solution. IBM’s report states that a decentralized IoT will require peer-to-peer messaging, distributed file sharing, and autonomous device coordination. See our discussion of the IoT here.
Other examples of a new distributed and decentralized, global infrastructure are more hypothetical, but are being discussed seriously. There are discussions about Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (or Corporations), which are entities run by a set of business rules, enshrined in in software code and recorded permanently a blockchain. Indeed, just this week it was reported that a DAO has raised over $100 million in crowdfunding. That is an astonishing figure, and certainly indicates a level of interest in a truly radical corporate (non-corporate?) structure that is unprecedented.
When the Internet came into existence and then became ubiquitous, it restructured the way we communicate with each other at a fundamental level. Blockchains and related technologies may have the same type of impact on the way value is transferred and stored. The Internet revolution allowed forward-thinking individuals and companies to reimagine entire industries. Similarly, this new wave of technologies is facilitating profound discussions about long-established principles that underpin many business structures.
One example that we have been following is the music business. Blockchains and related technologies may offer a means of creating a new, global database for music. However, there is a healthy debate occurring among many of those involved in this effort about exactly what the right approach should be. Should we create a new standard for music metadata that everyone must agree upon? Should we create interoperable systems that permit the ingestion of multiple sets of competing metadata? Can we fix the problem of bad metadata for existing music at all, or should we concentrate only on the future? Will tackling the existing problems make things better or worse for musicians and consumers? How will the record labels and music publishers and technology platforms fit within the new structures?
Supply chains may gain significant efficiencies from blockchain-based registries of transactions, and at the same time blockchain technology promises to provide much greater transparency as to each step along the way. Each item passing through the supply chain could conceivably have an indelible record of its precise history — want to know exactly where those apples you’re eating came from (what type of farm, and where), and where they stopped along the way? Some companies will embrace this new transparency, but others may avoid it, and one might expect to see some consumers begin to shift to suppliers who provide more complete information about the history of their products, which could also create radical shifts in the marketplace.
Another example is the problem of unpublished research papers. According to some, unpublished papers and raw research are rich sources of information that remain largely inaccessible. For instance, while publications tend to look for papers describing breakthroughs, often it is important for other researchers to know that a particular approach failed. A decentralized, distributed, global database of scientific research available beyond the walls of particular institutions might help fundamentally change the way science is done.
As mentioned, blockchain and related tech (sometimes referred to as the Internet of Value) may become inextricably linked with the Internet of Things. One branch of the latter is the Industrial IoT, which involves manufacturing components embedded with sensors that “talk” to one another and other system. Many people also are discussing the potential for smart factories where much of the manufacturing process is autonomous. Decentralized networks may play a huge role in facilitating the adoption of these technologies, which in turn will disrupt the entire manufacturing process from bottom to top.
These are just a few possibilities. Virtually any system or network or business structure that relies on centralized authority, or on “trusted intermediaries” to enable transactions, can potentially be the target of the disruptive forces to come (or not: centralized networks continue to be perfect solutions for many situations). Issues such as how existing laws and regulations will apply to these new structures will be of critical importance. The new DAO being formed, discussed above, will pose major questions in this regard, for instance, and is an experiment very much worth watching.
To be fair, focusing on decentralization and distributed, peer-to-peer networks like blockchains may be the equivalent of gazing out of just one narrow window upon what is almost certainly a much larger sea of change. There are a very wide variety of emerging technologies that could be converging to radically alter our world.