消防做ccc去那个网站,模板建站排版跟没缓存好似的,现在哪个公司家庭网络好用,产品展示网站系统区块链去中心化分布式by Arthur Camara通过亚瑟卡马拉(Arthur Camara) 为什么渐进式去中心化是区块链的最大希望 (Why Progressive Decentralization is blockchain’s best hope) 不变性是区块链的最大优势和最大障碍。 逐步分权可能是答案。 (Immutability is blockchain’s…区块链去中心化分布式by Arthur Camara 通过亚瑟·卡马拉(Arthur Camara) 为什么渐进式去中心化是区块链的最大希望 (Why Progressive Decentralization is blockchain’s best hope) 不变性是区块链的最大优势和最大障碍。 逐步分权可能是答案。 (Immutability is blockchain’s greatest strength and biggest barrier. Progressive decentralization could be the answer.) When we released CryptoKitties a year ago, we opted not to fund it up front with an ICO but instead build it on a sustainable revenue model. That model is this: we collect a fee of 3.75% from every transaction in the game. Given that we’d be unable to change the fee once we launched — CryptoKitties is built on the Ethereum blockchain — people often ask how we arrived at that number. 一年前当我们发布CryptoKitties时 我们选择不通过ICO 预先为其提供资金而是选择以可持续的收入模型为基础。 这种模式是这样的我们从游戏中的每笔交易中收取3.75的费用。 鉴于一旦启动我们便无法更改费用-CryptoKitties建立在以太坊区块链上-人们经常问我们如何得出该数字。 It sounds like a smart, well-reasoned choice. I could spin a compelling story about how we ran simulations with advanced prediction models to find the fee that would yield optimal returns. 这听起来像是明智的选择。 我可以讲一个引人入胜的故事说明我们如何使用高级预测模型运行模拟以找到可以产生最佳回报的费用。 But that’s not true. 但这不是事实。 The truth is we made an educated guess. We picked a number that felt fair and we committed to it. 事实是我们做出了有根据的猜测。 我们选择了一个公平的数字并致力于这一工作。 不变性真棒又可怕 (Immutability is awesome and scary) We easily could have chosen wrong, and since you can’t change something once you add it to the blockchain, that would have been cat-astrophic. Fortunately for CryptoKitties, our community is so passionate and the Kitties are so adorable that 3.75% worked just fine. 我们很容易选择了错误并且由于一旦将某些内容添加到区块链中就无法更改那将是灾难性的 。 幸运的是对于CryptoKitties我们的社区充满热情而Kitties非常可爱以3.75的表现不错。 Immutability, the inability to be edited, is at once the blockchain’s greatest strength and its largest barrier to meaningful adoption. The pressures of immortal code paralyze developers: you can tinker in a test environment forever, but there will always be real-world variables you can’t anticipate. Covering your eyes and hitting launch is no way to make breakthroughs. It’s more likely to produce breakdowns. 不变性即无法编辑是区块链的最大优势也是实现有意义采用的最大障碍。 永生代码的压力使开发人员陷于瘫痪您可以永远在测试环境中进行修补但是总会有一些您无法预期的实际变量。 遮住眼睛并击中发射台是无法取得突破的。 产生故障的可能性更大。 Our fee was just one decision among many: how long should breeding a Kitty take? At what rate should their breeding cooldowns slow? How much should a Gen 0 cat cost? On blockchain, even a seemingly minor choice can pose serious, even critical, consequences. 我们的费用只是众多决定中的一个繁殖一只小猫要花多长时间 他们的繁殖冷却应该以多大的速度减慢 Gen 0猫要花多少钱 在区块链上即使是看似微小的选择也可能造成严重甚至严重的后果。 Decentralization offers everyday people immense benefits: the fairness of permanent and universal rules and the transparency of code and behavior which, combined, create security. However, because it’s often implemented with all-or-nothing immutability, blockchain makes agile development impossible and slows teams to a crawl. 分权为每天的人们带来了巨大的好处永久性和普遍性规则的公平性以及代码和行为的透明性共同创造了安全性。 但是由于通常使用全有或全无的不可变性来实现因此区块链使敏捷开发变得不可能并拖慢了团队的爬行速度。 Agility requires iteration. Iterating quickly is key to building the best products, and the best products spark mass adoption. 敏捷性需要迭代。 快速迭代是构建最佳产品的关键并且最佳产品可以激发大量采用。 进入渐进式权力下放 (Enter Progressive Decentralization) We encountered these barriers ourselves building CryptoKitties, which forced us to negotiate including decentralized features while building something that, ya know, works. Since then, we’ve started exploring progressive decentralization in development, an idea we briefly introduced a while ago. 我们自己在构建CryptoKitties时遇到了这些障碍这迫使我们进行谈判包括去中心化功能同时构建了可以使用的东西。 从那时起我们就开始探索开发中的渐进式分权这是我们不久前简要介绍的一个想法。 Let’s take a deeper dive now. 现在让我们更深入地潜水。 Simply put, progressive decentralization advocates easing into decentralization in stages rather than diving in headfirst. What that looks like is building mechanisms into smart contracts that confer special powers to the creators up front, then incrementally lock those powers away in a transparent and systematic way. 简而言之渐进式分权提倡分阶段放松分权而不是先潜水。 看起来是在智能合约中建立机制这些机制预先向创建者授予特殊权力然后以透明系统的方式逐步锁定这些权力。 The critical condition is that the locking mechanisms must be public and immutable from the start. The creator can’t decide to tweak the terms later and indefinitely extend their power. That balance is vital: done correctly, progressive decentralization allows creators the flexibility to repair their code without compromising the decentralized features of the contract. 关键条件是锁定机制从一开始就必须是公开的且不可更改。 创建者无法决定稍后调整条款并无限期地扩展其权力。 这种平衡是至关重要的正确地进行渐进式去中心化可以使创建者灵活地修复其代码而不会损害合同的去中心化功能。 渐进式分权可以采取多种形式 (Progressive decentralization can take many forms) There’s no one right way to implement progressive decentralization. There are dozens of variables to consider, and the best approach will vary from project to project. 没有实现逐步分权的正确方法。 有数十个变量需要考虑最佳方法因项目而异。 Here are a couple ways developers could approach progressive decentralization: 开发人员可以采用以下几种方式逐步进行权力下放 Author multiple contracts with appropriate separation of concerns and the ability to replace some of those contracts. Some decentralized apps (“dapps”) like Decentraland, which features upgradable contracts, are already using this. 编写多个合同并适当分离关注点并具有替换其中一些合同的能力。 一些分散的应用程序(“dapps”)像Decentraland 其特点可升级的合同已经在使用此。 Configurable variables and permissions to change those values independently. Etheremon, for instance, grants special permissions to groups of users who become moderators. 可配置变量和权限可以独立更改这些值。 例如 Etheremon向成为主持人的用户组授予特殊权限 。 Incorporate a predefined set of ascending levels in the contract, each allowing the creators certain capabilities. The levels can only be increased, never decreased, so backtracking isn’t an option. On level 1, for example, the contract owners can play around with all gameplay variables. At level 2, their capability to modify core variables ends. At the final level, the contract revokes all their special privileges. 在合同中包含一组预定义的升序级别每个级别都允许创建者某些功能。 只能增加级别而不能减少级别因此不能选择回溯。 例如在级别1上合同所有者可以使用所有游戏变量。 在级别2他们修改核心变量的能力结束。 在最后一级合同撤销其所有特殊特权。 To die-hard decentralists, some of this probably sounds too centralized. But this is just the starting point. There are further measures to balance decentralization with iteration. The solution combines transparency of the purpose and the conditions and constraints in the contracts. These constraints could include: 对于顽固的权力下放者来说其中有些听起来太集中了。 但这仅仅是起点。 还有其他措施可以在分散与迭代之间取得平衡。 该解决方案结合了目标的透明性以及合同中的条件和约束。 这些限制可能包括 Selection: Not everything can be modified, only the specific items that we need to iterate. 选择并非所有内容都可以修改只有我们需要迭代的特定项目可以修改。 Range: For many of the questions around game economies, we may have a general idea but not know the precise answer. Limiting configuration to a certain range guarantees users that the iteration will land within a reasonable scope. 范围对于许多有关游戏经济性的问题我们可能有一个总体思路但不知道确切的答案。 将配置限制在一定范围内可确保用户迭代将落在合理范围内。 Direction: Similar to the “levels” concept above, allow certain variables to move only in one direction, decreasing or increasing but never backtracking. 方向类似于上面的“级别”概念允许某些变量仅在一个方向上移动减小或增大但永不回溯。 追究创作者的责任 (Holding creators accountable) All this sounds great in theory. But how do we ensure creators stay true to their roadmap and reach the fully decentralized version of their contracts? How can users opt-in early with the guarantee that the system is an application of progressive decentralization? How can we know we won’t end up with just another flawed, centralized system? 从理论上讲所有这些听起来都很不错。 但是我们如何确保创作者忠于自己的路线图并达成合同的完全去中心化版本 用户如何在保证系统是渐进式分散化应用的前提下尽早选择加入 我们怎么知道我们不会仅仅拥有另一个有缺陷的集中式系统 Progressive decentralization includes tenets to keep creators accountable: 渐进式权力下放包括旨在使创作者负责的原则 基于时间或基于块的成熟度 (Time- or block-based maturity) Lock certain configuration values, revoke the owner’s capabilities or move to the next level of maturity past a certain time or block number. Once that point is reached, the contract automatically changes. 锁定某些配置值撤消所有者的功能或在特定时间或块编号之后移至下一个成熟度级别。 一旦达到这一点合同就会自动更改。 Imagine, for example, that CryptoKitties had a runway of 360,000 blocks (around 60 days’ time) from the moment it launched to adjust the Kitties’ breeding cooldown variables. We could tweak the cooldown mechanics until that point, giving ourselves the breathing room to perfect the balance, while still guaranteeing players that we wouldn’t have that power indefinitely. 例如想象一下自从CryptoKitties推出以调整Kitty繁殖冷却时间变量的那一刻起它就拥有360,000个区块(大约60天的时间)。 在此之前我们可以调整冷却机制为自己提供喘息的空间以达到完美的平衡同时仍向玩家保证我们不会无限期地拥有这种力量。 基于使用情况的成熟度 (Usage-based maturity) Lock those capabilities once a certain number of users or transactions are completed. This option needs to be carefully thought out to avoid exploits, but we could have, for example, built configurable fees into CryptoKitties that would lock in after 10,000 transactions. 一旦一定数量的用户或交易完成就锁定这些功能。 需要仔细考虑此选项以免受到攻击但是例如我们可以在CryptoKitties中内置可配置的费用该费用将在10,000次交易后锁定。 经济激励 (Economic incentive) Align the creator’s incentives with increased decentralization. In this scenario, the creators profit more when the contract becomes more decentralized. Perhaps the fee rises with each level the developer ascends, locking in at the maximum fee when they reach full decentralization. Or, alternatively, perhaps they make no money at all until full decentralization is in place. This financial reward motivates the developer to reach decentralization at a reasonable pace. 使创作者的激励与权力下放更加协调。 在这种情况下当合同变得更加分散时创建者会获利更多。 费用可能会随着开发人员的提升而上升并在完全下放时锁定在最高费用上。 或者或者在完全放权之前他们根本不赚钱。 这种经济上的激励促使开发商以合理的步伐实现权力下放。 没有在区块链上构建的最佳方法 (There’s no best approach to building on the blockchain) “Progressive decentralization” is really an umbrella encompassing many strategies, mechanisms, and tools to make building on the blockchain more viable. The best way to apply progressive decentralization will always depend on the project and use a mix of the concepts outlined above. “渐进式去中心化”实际上是一个涵盖许多策略机制和工具的保护伞以使在区块链上的构建更加可行。 进行渐进式权力下放的最佳方法将始终取决于项目并使用上述概念的混合。 Progressive decentralization is not perfect. The ideal smart contract is simple and straightforward, and these measures add complexity. How and how much to incorporate it is a trade-off that needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 渐进式权力下放并不完美。 理想的智能合约简单明了这些措施增加了复杂性。 合并的方式和程度是一个折衷方案需要根据具体情况进行评估。 Although it may anger hardline decentralists, we believe progressive decentralization is far better for users in the long run: by giving developers the flexibility to adjust, the consumer gets a more useful product. That means they’ll actually use it, and once it brings value to their lives, they’ll sing its praises to the people around them. That’s how mass adoption starts. 尽管这可能激怒强硬的权力下放者但从长远来看我们认为渐进式权力下放对用户而言要好得多通过为开发人员提供调整的灵活性消费者可以获得更有用的产品。 这意味着他们将实际使用它一旦它为生活带来了价值他们就会向周围的人表示赞赏。 这就是开始大规模采用的方式。 Authors: Arthur Camara, Dieter Shirley, and Grady Mitchell 作者 亚瑟·卡玛拉 ( Arthur Camara) Dieter Shirley和Grady Mitchell 翻译自: https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/why-progressive-decentralization-is-blockchains-best-hope-31a497f2673b/区块链去中心化分布式
