Current currency economics: distribution of the distinctive, ownership symbol and market decentralization
Links table
Abstract and 1. Introduction
2 methodology
3 devices
4 programs
5 network
6 consensus
7 Economies of Crusher Currency
8 applications interface customer
9 Judgment
10 geography
11 case studies
12 discussion and references
A. Decentralization and policy making
Software test
C. Get brief reviews for each layer
D. Decentralization
E. It carries the error and decentralization
7 Economies of Crusher Currency
The main component of the professor’s book systems is the original distinctive symbol. Symbols compensation for system maintenance and assimilation of valuable transfers. They are treated as a currency or assets by its users, thus forming a market economy. To record data on the professor’s book, for example, payments or interactions with applications, users get icons to pay the corresponding fees. The system supervisors are compensated in the symbols to compensate for their costs. Several studies in the distribution and availability of symbols (for example, on stock exchanges) were considered as an integral part of Blockchain and their final drawing of decentralization [157,42,153,129]. According to this section, we explore decentralization in Blockchain economies, in terms of initial symbolic distribution, ownership of the distinctive symbol, and secondary markets.
Distribution of the first distinctive symbol. To pave the system, the Blockchain protocol determines two parameters: 1) Distribution of symbols in system launch, and II) How new symbols are created and distributed with the development of the system. Thus, the codes generated constitute the resource of attention, while the relevant parties are the owners of the distinctive symbol.
As with other aspects, Bitcoin led the road and other systems explored alternatives. In Bitcoin, there were no metal currencies before their beginning, that is, there was no “pre -mine”. From Genesis, each mass establishes a pre -specific amount of coins, based on a rate of approximately 21 million existing symbols [131]. New coins, along with transactions, are granted to the mining factor that produces each mass. Therefore, to gain new symbols, the user collects enough computing power to produce a block. In other Blockchain systems, some symbols were sold across the traditional markets before the posting of Blockchain. This approach, called “ICO”, enabled the project financing with the future revenues of symbolic investment. On the other hand, investors had a pre -release amount of symbols, which were recorded in the first block of the series. Regarding symbolic generation, most systems are used as a contrast in the Bitcoin mechanism, for example, that ETHEREUM blocks give two new rumors, while others, such as Cardano, use detailed mechanisms to stimulate assembly around a number of targeted complexes [28].
The first distinctive symbol distribution is especially important in POS systems, as it depends on the elasticity of SYBIL on it (see Section 6). If it is central to a few parties, for example, through pre -representation (or “pre -coloring”), the first investors must maintain the system in its early stages, while receiving early block rewards as well. Less number of participants in consensus during this time reduces the acquisition threshold, threatening the safety of the regime and its animal. In both POD and POS systems, new users are operated if the first investors sell codes on secondary markets. Consequently, the first investors control the expansion and evaluation of the system, which affects stability.
Finally, the process of distributing the initial symbols of privacy systems may be. Such projects are usually used as a zero -dependent knowledge protocols that depend on a safe construction of a common reference chain (CRS). If the CRS building is central, the party that creates it can lead to distinguishing all transactions or violating health. To avoid such risks, various celebration protocols were proposed to build CRS in a distributed way [141,103,136,110].
Symbolic ownership. The diverse code ownership plays a major role in the ability to use and Blockchain. Consequently, the symbols circulating the system are the source of attention, while the relevant parties are: 1) the main managers, and 2) with legal assets. This discrimination arises due to the presence of the guardian, who control assets on behalf of other stakeholders, and users who control multiple addresses.
If most symbols are owned by some parties, many risks arise. First, the security of POS Systems, that is, safety and animal, depends directly on a variety of symbolic ownership, which makes the victory over the parties sufficient to control the majority of symbols more threatening. Second, the distinctive symbol may be manipulated, which is a risk to the stability of the system, indirectly, in both POS and Pow systems. Specifically, the cost of participation, for example, for mining or electricity equipment, is based on FIAT. However, the income of mines of mass bonuses comes in symbols. Thus, miners need to sell part of the rewards (for FIAT) to pay for operational costs. If the market is volatile, the profitability will be more dangerous and mine workers may be less inclined to participate, which may affect the integrity of the system or its movement by reducing the threshold to conduct an attack of 51 %.
Various factors pay the ownership of the distinctive central symbol. Central primary codes are often customized (see above). System incentives, for example, fixed symbolic supplies, generally prefer storing distinctive symbols rather than spending. Finally, the wealthy participants may accumulate faster than small capital, which is inevitable in borrowed systems where the redistribution of the landfill is impossible. [99].
Secondary markets. The symbols are distributed to a large number of population mostly on the secondary markets. The symbolic production rate is usually slow, depending on mass production, and new symbols are often distributed to existing users. Therefore, new users are operated through central exchanges, and to a lesser extent, face -to -face transactions. The distinctive symbols that are purchased and sold through these markets constitute the source of attention, when it comes to measuring decentralization in secondary markets, while the relevant parties are) the assets that are purchased and sold (“trading pairs”),)[12]And II) exchanges that host these deals.
Many risks arise when symbols are available in the limited markets. First, the stock exchanges provide few privacy guarantees, so their operators have full access to user data, following KYC regulations. Second, exchange exchanges are not largely organized by the financial authorities and may participate in the manipulation of the market. Third, the markets often lead to liquidity. Consequently, the code price processing threshold with some percentage, by selling or buying symbols, also reduces. Likewise, if most of the distinctive symbol liquidity is allocated to a few trading pairs, they are exposed to symbols of the other end of husbands (for example, the collapse of one of these systems may lead to huge liquidity loss). All of these events threaten the stability of the system, while the profitability of mining decreases due to the reduction of the value of the distinctive symbol, its safety and movement indirectly.
[12] In our context, the liquidity of the trading pair is measured on all stocks.
