Breaking Down the Actants in the Blockchain Ecosystem
Once again digging into my 2018 thesis in digestible posts!
This section is intended to be a short list of different actants identified within the blockchain space. Aligning with Mol’s concept of multiplicity and the idea of “more than one, but less than many”, there are many different actants enacted or participating in enactment within the space. This list is also not meant to be exhaustive, as there may be many more actants that simply were not revealed to me through my research, and is intended to be simply the first block of what could be built upon in a more in-depth study of human and non-human actants within the blockchain space.
Blockchain Code (Open Source)
Discussion of the blockchain code as an actant must take into account the attributes of open source code. The aspect of code being open source already has certain qualities and ideological aspects tied to it as a concept, but the ability for the original Bitcoin code to be repurposed and adapted into many different platforms and tools has been a very important factor for the continued development and interest within the space. The aspect of having the code as open source also has important implications for political motivations behind chain forks, as well as the multitude of end results that the concept of open source code allows for and fosters.
Wallets (Interfaces)
Wallets and other technological interfaces as actants play a role in this system by inscribing through code what is possible and what is excluded for the user of particular wallets. An example might be the comparison of a simple Bitcoin core wallet that gives a wide range of flexibility and options to the user, while a more user friendly focused wallet like Exodus may not offer the same flexibility — in this example, the ability to change transaction fees is removed in Exodus, but is available for user adjustment in other wallets. Within Exodus, the fees are dynamically set to achieve a reasonable confirmation time for the transaction. This is simply one way in which interfaces as an actant can define and withhold certain possibilities for the user.
Ideology
Ideology as an actant plays a role in interactions by providing a frame from which to build out aspects of the open source code, by providing reasoning and justifications for individuals to use particular systems, and also play a role in continued involvement throughout the blockchain space. These ideologies need not be overtly political, though many have ties to political ideology in one way or another. Ideologies here can refer to other concepts such as the hacker ethic, convictions about environmentalism, openness of information and accessibility, data politics, or other.
Miners
Miners are individuals that are actively engaged in maintaining nodes and computational infrastructure connected to the blockchain network that they are mining on. The miners have a great deal of influence, particularly in proof of work (PoW) systems, as the computational power provides security to the blockchain, protecting it from a 51% attack, in which a single entity controls more than half of the network power and can fraudulently produce blocks. Many discussions around chain forks and platform development and evolution of the governing code and algorithms often include a combination of human actants, miners being one of the groups. It is also important to note that mining is not present in all blockchain applications, but it is a characteristic of many blockchains.
Nodes
Nodes in the blockchain system are often closely related to miners, as they sometimes function in similar ways. Nodes retain a copy of the ledger of interest to the network, and are connected to allow peers to verify their version of the ledger with the stored version. Nodes do not necessarily mine in a blockchain system, but the same computer can be both a miner and hosting the ledger to remain a node within the network.
Consensus Algorithms
Consensus algorithms are a non-human actant in the blockchain space, but are very important to the operation of blockchain technology. The algorithms (often) provide security through cryptographic techniques, and also coordinate the mining function throughout the network to ensure that the timestamping of blocks in the chain are produced at regular intervals, and that the results of this timestamping is regularly broadcast across the network for active nodes to update their ledgers. These algorithms can also be changed over time, with one example being the Monero decision to fork the algorithm in order to make any developed ASICs obsolete for mining Monero. This was done explicitly to reduce centralization within their mining network.
Cryptocurrency Markets and Exchanges
In the current system, markets and exchanges are the locations of fiat trading into and out of the blockchain and/or cryptocurrency sphere. This also tends to be a tempting target for hackers, as it is one location in the blockchain space that is set up to interface with traditional markets, and has to be in some ways, centralized. The targeting of exchanges and various high value hacks over the years have provided much fodder for negative or scary articles to be written about the nefarious side of cryptocurrency, but in actuality highlights the need for better data security practices, the development of safer storage of client assets in locations where they must be centralized for one reason or another, the importance of continuing development of decentralized exchanges, and the benefits of retaining personal control over digital assets and tools that give users control over them, like private keys or recovery phrases. In any case, given that it is one of few options currently in place for fiat to cryptocurrency translation outside of finding someone that already owns digital assets or mining it yourself, it is an important actant within the space.
Media outlets
The media is likely an obvious actant, as many forms of media are considered ubiquitous in contemporary western society. Media portrayals of Bitcoin and blockchain are important in several ways. For one, the inclusion of Bitcoin is important, because much of the mainstream media portrayal is of Bitcoin, and blockchain technology is often simply described in relation to it. Searching for articles on blockchain often brought up many Bitcoin articles, but few other applications or discussions about other platforms or applications. This is in stark contrast to coverage of the technology and developments in the space from media outlets that are focused on the technology (coindesk, cointelegraph, news.bitcoin.com), use the technology (LBRY, Steemit), or conversations between those developing the technology (Github). While it is expected that those immersed in the technology and focused on it as content would have experts able to craft more in-depth coverage, the difference in media source in the portrayal of the technology is significant.
CPU/GPU/ASIC mining hardware
The mining hardware itself is an actant for several reasons. For one, there are associated levels of commitment required for each stage of mining equipment, which raises barriers to more widespread use of the technology for each step up — in cost, complexity, and in most cases, energy use. The supply of some of the hardware has also caused concern, in both miners themselves and in other groups that use the hardware for other purposes. One of these groups that I encountered was PC gamers, and applies to many groups that use computers for video intensive purposes. During several rushes of people buying up video cards, otherwise referred to as GPU’s, the prices of both new and used stock increased by a large margin. In some cases, popular cards would simply be out of stock for long periods of time. In this case, the mining hardware as an actant reveals several complex relationships with decentralization and accessibility as characteristics of the technology, as well as inciting some reaction from outside groups as a result of hardware shortages and price surges.
Coders/Hackers/Developers
This is one of the most important actant groups, as they are the ones that most directly engage in the creation of code that makes the platforms work, and put ideas into code. At the same time, calling this an actant group hides the aspect that many of those that fit into this group actually act more through individual action and small group action than as a group as a whole. Nonetheless, they share many similar characteristics and are grouped together simply as an actant classification. There are also tight connections to other actants, particularly technical ones such as mining hardware and wallet interfaces, but also to more general actants like ideology. Also depending on any additional involvement taken, individuals from this group may also loosely fit into the miner or investors actant groups based on their actions.
Institutional Interest
The interest from large institutions and business fit into the general actant group of institutional interest. This group is one of the more recent additions into the blockchain space, but are also often the least experienced within the space and tend to be more risk averse. They are likely attempting to move or adapt current practices into the space as opposed to developing entirely new practices. At the same time, institutional interest in the area sends a wider signal of potential and stability, should they become involved. Described potential practices in this group differ significantly from most other groups, as they tend to be interested in immediate translation of cryptocurrency or digital assets into fiat using spot trading as opposed to holding or using the asset. Another example is business that accepts payments in cryptocurrencies, though there are widely varied practices in accepting for goods or services. I have observed some businesses that simply accept the currently trading value of the cryptocurrency or asset, some provide discounts for using certain cryptocurrencies or assets, and some add on a percentage to the final sale price for fear of the volatility in the market, effectively passing risk onto customers.
Investors
Investors are likely the least experienced within the blockchain space, and have become interested for a variety of reasons. These may include the explosion of popularity, hype and value of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in 2017, interesting use-cases being formed using the technology in industry, Initial Public Offerings (IPO) coming to their attention, or simply an interest in trying to make money (fiat) in a new space. This actant group is closely tied and acts in similar ways to institutional interest, as they are interested in a quick recoup of investment and profit in fiat, as opposed to holding or using cryptocurrency or tokens.
Blockchain Investors
This is an actant group that in some ways mirrors the standard Investor actant group, but these are investors that are using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and ether to invest in different companies in the blockchain space, likely through an Initial Coin Offering (ICO) or similar process. These investors tend to be more versed in the blockchain space, as they are utilizing the tokens and cryptocurrencies within the space to bootstrap further development in interesting projects within the blockchain space.
References from this section:
Elbanna, Amany. 2011. “The Theoretical and Analytical Inclusion of Actor Network Theory and its Implications on ICT Research.” Pp. 130–42 in Actor-Network Theory and Technology Innovation: Advancements and New Concepts, edited by Arthur Tatnall. Hershey PA: Information Science Reference.
Hird, Myra. 2012. Sociology of Science: A Critical Canadian Introduction. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.
Latour, Bruno. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc.
Law, John and Vicky Singleton. 2014. “ANT, multiplicity and policy.” Critical Policy Studies 8(4): 379–96.
Mol, Annemarie. 2002. the body multiple: ontology in medical practice. London, UK: Duke University Press.
Wood, David. 2001. Actor-Network Theory and its Potential for the Study of Policy Change: A literature survey and briefing paper.
