`

blockchain

The Weekend Read: Jan 10

Welcome to 2016, which has already proved itself to be an odd duck: market meltdowns, Kim Jong-Strangelove and Sean Penn as an accidental undercover agent...and we are only 10 days in!

Secret Agent Penn infiltrating the El Chapo stronghold

Secret Agent Penn infiltrating the El Chapo stronghold

1. Link Catch-up: 2016 Predictions

Four articles caught my eye when wading thru the flurry of year end/starting prediction pieces. First, Euromoney's poll of 151 financial actors found that "more than half think that [blockchain] will transform banking fundamentally." Second, Andrew Keys of Consensys gives 16 blockchain predictions in this Medium post. While there is inevitable book-talking in the post, on balance I sympathize with a lot of the predictions. Third, the Deloitte blockchain team lays out their 2016 predictions, centered around three themes: (1) Leave the labs, (2) Age of consortiums, alliances and governance and (3) Next-gen platforms. Last, professional tweeter Preston Byrne of Eris penned my favorite prognosto-thinkpiece in his CoinDesk article 4 Hype-Free Predictions for Private Blockchains in 2016:

Where 2015 was the year everyone talked about blockchain, 2016 is going to be the year everyone builds on it.
There’s a lot of experimentation, improvement and optimisation left to do. In my personal opinion, we’re two budget cycles away from the first production systems in finance, and I agree with Chris Skinner, chair of the Financial Services Club, that we’re probably 10 years away from mainstream use. [snip] What this means for any financial institution or other business looking to use the tech is that the ball is entirely in your court. It’s cheap as chips to get started and there’s much to be learned, so there’s simply no excuse not to allocate budget and let your developers loose on this for a year – especially considering that your competitors already are.

2. Blockchain in the Developing World

Vice has a lengthy but important run down on how Bitcoin has accidentally enabled those who see Africa as "a playground for Western adventurers" in The Western Myth of Bitcoin in Kenya:

Africa presents real opportunities for growth in digital currency, but top-down narratives may not be the best way to find these opportunities. It fact, it’s a good way to create a bubble. People on the ground in Africa are busy working to adapt the promise of digital currencies to their own needs, on their own timelines and without outside direction by the ideas of well-meaning Westerners.

One thing that slipped my attention last year was the Reserve Bank of India's comments on the possible benefits of blockchain tech. For the relevant section, please see this link:

Regulators and authorities need to keep pace with developments as many of the world’s largest banks are said to be supporting a joint effort for setting up of ‘private blockchain’ and building an industry-wide platform for standardising the use of the technology, which has the potential to transform the functioning of the back offices of banks, increase the speed and cost efficiency in payment systems and trade finance.

3. Blockchain: Hope & Hype

The well-known legal/political activist and erstwhile Presidential candidate Lawrence Lessig spoke at last month's Sydney Blockchain Workshop. The video of his full talk can be found here. If you prefer it in tweetable form, click this link. His money quote can be found in this article when he states that blockchain is "the most important innovation in fundamental architecture since the tubes of the internet were first developed"

William Mougayar, the Flava Flav hype man of blockchain, stayed busy over the holidays with multiple postings, including a many-slided deck on the blockchain space. He followed this up with a one-two punch on blockchain innovation within banks: Blockchain Inside Regulations Is NOT Innovation and Why I’m Being Tough on the Banks Re: Blockchain

It is a lot easier to start innovating out of the regulatory boxes, both figuratively and explicitly. Some banks are starting to doing it.
Simon Taylor, head of the blockchain innovation group at Barclays and someone whose views I respect, summed it up well by leaving a comment on my previous post. He said: “I don’t disagree the best use cases will be outside regulated financial services. Much like the best users of cloud and big data are not the incumbent blue chip organisations. Still their curiosity is valuable for funding and driving forward the entire space.” I very much agree with that point, which is why I have hope some banks will contribute to the innovation potential of the blockchain in significant ways, as they mature their understanding and experiences with this new technology.

An indirect yet interesting counterpoint can be found in the American Banker piece Does Nature Want to Evolve a Bank?

The cycle of unbundling and rebundling is driven by regulation at least as much as by market forces. Nonbanks prosper in areas where banks cannot compete, often because regulations prevent the banks from doing so. "Regulation is one of those facts you have to deal with, just like in nature you have to deal with the fact that there's a mountain range there or a desert," says [Lowell L.] Bryan.

Finally, Dave Hudson's end of year meditation on the true meaning of the word blockchain ends with a very impressive passage that would serve well as a rallying cry for 2016:

We have looked at what a blockchain might or might not be, and perhaps seen some hints of what it might enable. The technology that underpins Bitcoin can be used to build many things, and Bitcoin's legacy should not just be Bitcoin itself, but that is has shown the viability of something far more fundamental. The debate over what constitutes a blockchain won't end here, but we need to move the discussion forward and we need to resist the urge to allow it be just another marketing buzzword.
To make that happen we need both clear terminology, and well reasoned usage. We need to avoid conflating many different ideas, and we need technology claims to be realistic and achievable. If we fail then, eventually, the term blockchain will be meaningless and have to be replaced. This seems like the wrong outcome. If we succeed then the idea of a blockchain will not be the end of the story. Instead it will take its place as a layer upon which better and ever-more useful systems can be built.

Happy New Year to all.

The Weekend Read (Year in Review): Dec 20

Gratuitous Star Wars reference

Gratuitous Star Wars reference

1. Blockchain Collaboration: Open Source and more

The Linux Foundation this week announced a collaborative open source effort focused on delivering an enterprise grade blockchain base layer fit for purpose for business. We at R3 are pleased to participate, as both a founding member and key voice in the formation group, as this Linux-led collaboration fits well within our wider open source strategy.

McKinsey this week released a report entitled Beyond the hype: Blockchains in capital markets

Distributed ledgers, or blockchains, have the potential to dramatically reshape the capital markets industry, with significant impact on business models, reductions in risk and savings of cost and capital.

The full report can be requested here. The main take away was that the potential for shared ledgers will only be unlocked when they are shared widely "through cooperation among market participants, regulators and technologists." To that end, we have announced 12 additional banks to our group and our intention to expand our engagement to other financial markets sectors.

2. (Some) Weekend Read Highlights from 2015

As this will be our final post of 2015, I decided to take a quick look back at some of the favorite articles that we shared in our (mostly) weekly postings. The review itself reminded me once again how quickly things move and, honestly, how little we know collectively on where it all will end up. Enjoy the below, have a great holiday and thanks for reading. -Todd

General Blockchain Articles

Fedcoin et al.

Other Required Readings



The Weekend Read: Nov 22

1. Identity

I have just returned from a week in London, where I had the pleasure of participating in the KPMG/HSBC Business Innovation Summit. I also got the chance to spend time with the newer members of the R3 technology team. Yet the main topic of my trip turned out to be identity. Perhaps a reflective mood was brought on by my airplane reading (Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari, highly recommended), but it struck me that the struggle with identity, both analog and digital, has been a key driver behind recent events. The conflict of both state and religious identity as reflected in the recent horrible events in Paris. The nascent 'tribal' identity in the ham-handed student protests on US college campuses. The fight over one's rights to self-sovereign digital identity. We will explore this theme a lot more in the months ahead, both in defining the problem space and in looking for the right partners to experiment with in the realm of financial institution identity.

2. The Week's Links

The bearded bard of blockchain at Barclays, Simon Taylor, does my job for me with his post 10 Things You Should Know About Blockchains:

Transformational ROI from blockchain for corporates will take a good number of years. Smaller bits of ROI can be achieved tomorrow if you have the right buy in and strategy and partners.
There are strategies for:
a) Educating a large organisation
b) Delivering quick wins
c) Building a blockchain strategy
But they require understanding it first.

Nice to see that three of the four folks "who can make sense of this stuff" work with us.

Tim Swanson released his latest research paper on Watermarked Tokens (aka Colored Coins) this week. The paper can be downloaded here or here. For the TL;DR, IBTimes gives a quick overview of the main points, along with some interesting observations from a few of the earliest adopters of colored coins. The response from Flavien Charlon (inventor of Open Assets, featured in Nasdaq's Linq platform) was especially interesting:

As the interest for Blockchain technology in the finance sector grew, and as we started to talk to a number of financial institutions and corporations about their use cases for Blockchain technology, we realised that watermarking systems were often not a good fit for what they were trying to do. This is why we started to build Openchain early 2015. Openchain solves the same problems as watermarking protocols, but with a much lighter use of the Bitcoin Blockchain. This way we can achieve a much higher scale, and handle compliance in a much better way. I don't think Coinprism and R3 are the only two companies in the space to have realised this. There has been a noticeable turning point in the industry around mid-2015, and more companies are now building permissioned ledgers.

3. Ethereum: DevCon1 continued

This week saw a few additional features and stories related to the previous week's DevCon1. William Mougayar highlights bank enthusiasm for the Ethereum protocol:

Mougayar said banks know their business better than anybody from the outside and it is therefore their own responsibility to understand what the blockchain does. "It's easier for them to understand the blockchain than for a blockchain person to understand their business." He added: "The onus is on them to do these small projects so they can build the expertise and they can come up with insights."

The article attempts to paint the Ethereum experimentation as a potential "contentious issue" with two "camps" emerging: Ethereum blue sky experimenting vs R3 standards building on top of legacy systems. Yet it is very safe to say that our current and future work covers both of these "camps." A good illustration of this is another IBTimes article featuring, among others, R3 partners Barclays and UBS. The following quote from Lee Braine of Barclays captures the benefit of this dual approach:

You mentioned one particular avenue of experimentation. If we look at multiple avenues, then we can actually see them cross-pollinating. Effectively you have experimentation: you have Ethereum and other technologies that we can play with, we can experiment, and we can explore the functional and non-functional behaviours.
But in parallel with that, we also need a structured design method: architecture, design, and engineering. This is a common theme that we have been encountering over the past six months or so, that it's necessary to interplay both of these avenues so that the two can learn from each other.

Tim Swanson Paper: Watermarked tokens and pseudonymity on public blockchains

DOWNLOAD THE PAPER

Public blockchains including cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum were designed around specific security assumptions, namely that the validating nodes called miners -- the participants that validate transactions and create blocks -- were unknown and untrusted.  To make it economically costly for these validators to unilaterally reorganize history and double-spend transactions, a process called proof-of-work was integrated such that any participant that wanted to change the transaction record (the ledger) would need to expend real capital to do so.

These pseudonymous networks were designed with the goal of securely moving a native currency (bitcoins and ether) which were themselves effectively sealed off and exogenous to the physical off-chain world.  Over the past 18 months, several efforts have attempted to link off-chain assets to public blockchains such as Bitcoin.  That is to say, the ownership and title to off-chain assets would be managed vis-a-vis pseudonymous mining participants.

To do this, a handful technology startups have applied two types of watermarking methods to cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin; one is called "colored coins" and the other is "metacoins."  Together these "watermarked tokens" attempt to secure virtual representations of off-chain assets with Bitcoin mining equipment.

Recall these two networks above, Bitcoin and Ethereum, were designed with different participants and security assumptions in mind relative to the world of regulated finance.  Namely, the enablement of interaction between unknown, untrusted and ungated pseudonymous validators. 

Yet if a network is comprised of known and trusted entities with legal, off-chain obligations to fulfill, then you have a set of different security assumptions to build around.  And in the case of financial institutions, a feature such as proof-of-work via mining, which is currently core to public blockchains is an unnecessary and even redundant.

This paper explores several of the drawbacks and challenges of using public blockchains for securing off-chain titles and concludes that these types of networks are not fit-for-purpose for globally regulated financial institutions.

The Weekend Read: Oct 3

R3 has its own meme...

R3 has its own meme...

1. R3 Announcement

We were proud to announce an 13 additional global banks joining our initiative. For additional coverage you can visit our newsroom page.

2. Blockchains for Banks

Anthemis Group's David Galbraith had this week's must read with this post on why banks are so interested in distributed ledgers. In short, if Marc Andreessen is correct that software is eating the world, then banks have realized that blockchains and their ilk could potentially 'eat' the need for third party bank infrastructure:

This updated model can be done much more efficiently with blockchains, which could replace 3rd party consortium entities with software alone. By removing a middle man from doing this, the constraint (that the consortium cannot threaten the banks) that ringfences the consortia from not encroaching outside of their designated territories disappears and would allow blockchain based systems software to fulfil their potential to innovate and do more than existing cooperatives like SWIFT can.
As a side note, the Napster or Bitcoin style model of truly decentralized systems with no entity in overall control of any portion will probably not happen in Financial Services unless there is a fundamental shift in how societies work, triggered by them.
Who knows, maybe this could happen, but not in the short term. The reasons for this are that decentralized systems can’t be governed by anyone, so they end up being either compromised or outlawed and secondly, they decentralize revenue. It’s difficult (not impossible) to imagine a decentralized Facebook usurping them because Facebook centralizes revenue and therefore may be able to compete more effectively. Both of these reasons are why the last wave of decentralization faded.
In summary, the ‘multiple entities tied together by software only consortia’ model will be where banking innovation for back end processes and infrastructure happens, and blockchain technology will certainly be the initial focus.

I cannot quote the article enough in this post to do it justice, so please read the whole thing. His thoughts on distributed ledgers being "Consortia-as-a-service" strongly echo a lot of our thinking internally.

Another read-in-full piece is this post by Dwolla CEO Ben Milne, giving his views on when and where a blockchain-ish ledger would be the best fit for financial services. His views are especially insightful, since he and his company began hands-on work in the fintech and ledger field well before everyone caught the blockchain bug:

I personally feel that a blockchain as a ledger is the irrefutably best form of storage when:
  • A view-all permission is best.
  • Speed of the ledger is not a major concern.
  • Confirmation of the ledger information is used as the source of truth only after some time has passed.
Blockchains are fascinating but have inherent limitations like any technology. [snip]
When applying new ledger technologies to banking there are banking specific concerns to deal with and these are just some of them. Solving for short/long term memory, compliance, and providing the necessary interface to regulated entities are all problems third parties have solved in many cases with different ledgers. The intricacies of understanding how all this stuff works is kind of confusing but banks are just trying to solve a problem, not create a whole bunch of new ones for themselves.

3. Ethereum Project is Vibrant and/or Broke

Ethereum Godfather Vitalik Buterin gave a lengthy and informative update on the Ethereum platform earlier this week. The post employs the tried and true "sandwich" technique, leading and ending with many of the recent successes for the Ethereum platform and community. Yet the "meat" of the post describes the less-than-positive state of finances for the Ethereum Foundation:

First of all, it is indeed true that the foundation’s finances are limited, and a large part of this was the result of our failure to sell nearly as much of our BTC holdings as we were planning to before the price dropped to $220; as a result, we suffered roughly $9m in lost potential capital [ed. note: the "lost potential" equals half the funds raised in the quasi-IPO], and a hiring schedule that was meant to last over three years ended up lasting a little under two (although bolstered by a “second wind” from our ETH holdings).
The foundation and its subsidiaries alone simply do not have the manpower to push the entirety of this vision through to its ultimate completion...although the foundation and its subsidiaries can, and will, continue to be the primary driver of technology at the core, a highly community-driven model is necessary and essential, both to help the Ethereum ecosystem maximally grow and flourish and to establish Ethereum as a decentralized project which is ultimately owned by all of humanity, and not any one group.

4. Fintech Ledger Startups in the News

This week's article Meet the new kids on the blockchain does a very good albeit brief job reviewing four startups focused on bringing ledger solutions to financial institutions: Symbiont, Clearmatics, SETL and Eris. Worth a read, if only to get a peak at the Eris team posing in a London back alley:

Which Eris team member is Brick Tamland?

Which Eris team member is Brick Tamland?

Speaking of Anchorman-style alley fights, Symbiont CEO Mark Smith took the gloves off regarding his competition in the article Smart securities issuer Symbiont fires shots in the private blockchain arms race:

"But from a business standpoint we are way ahead of [Digital Asset Holdings]. They are probably a year behind us on all fronts." Referring to Digital Asset Holdings' recent issuance for Pivit, Smith said: "We had done something substantially more difficult over a month prior. So we were the first to do it and we are the only firm to do it with a smart contract. So again, they are behind us and then what they did wasn't even really that impressive." Smith said DAH is very skillful in the media and has a big budget and can scale quickly from a company standpoint. "But there is no substitute for experience in the market and that's really what we have," he added.

In the words of Ron Burgundy: "Boy, that escalated quickly."

The Weekend Read: Sep 26

Mike Tyson thinks all alt-coins are ludacrisp

Mike Tyson thinks all alt-coins are ludacrisp

1. Barclays wants to help blockchain startups understand investment banking requirements

This lengthy interview with Dr Lee Braine of Barclay's Investment Bank CTO Office clearly highlights the opportunities (and challenges) for the application of shared ledgers and smart contracts within financial markets. The piece is well worth a careful read, as Dr. Braine's overview of the essential requirements for shared ledgers echoes what we hear at many of our partner banks. Yet he goes a bit further, intimating that we should not take as a given the need for global distributed consensus in all cases:

"If there is potential from greater sharing of data, we then need to consider the range of architecture options. For example, what if you consider fully-replicated shared copies, so every bank has its own copy of the entire set?

"Well, there are challenges around that in terms of duplicate storage, duplicate processing, etc. And then there are alternatives, such as partitioning the data so participants have only the data that is relevant to them; that could have efficiencies in terms of storage and processing and it may also mitigate challenges around data sharing and privacy for example.

"There is a variety of views in the industry around the pros and cons in each of those design points. And the industry needs to take account of those as it comes up with open standards and open protocols – and heads towards the future state...

"Whether you are looking at permissioned or permissionless ledgers, it's obviously necessary to ensure security, reliability, performance, etc. I think experimentation will explore all those options. There are clearly tremendous opportunities for startups in the blockchain space. For investment banking, blockchain-inspired solutions such as shared ledgers and smart contracts should aim to meet the enterprise-scale architectural non-functional requirements."

2. Blockchain on Wall Street

MIT Technology Review has a nice run down this week about Wall Street's recent firm embrace of all things blockchain, entitled Banks Embrace Bitcoin’s Heart but Not Its Soul:

One such project became public last week, when New York City startup R3 announced that it was partnering with nine banks including Goldman Sachs, UBS, and JP Morgan to develop blockchain software that could ease the transfer of financial assets between institutions. If an asset’s ownership is recorded by cryptographic software in a blockchain recognized by multiple banks, it can be transferred between them more rapidly than today, says Richard Gendal Brown, R3’s head of technology.
In theory, a system like that could be built on top of Bitcoin. But some of its features are not a good fit for the financial industry, such as how its blockchain is public, says Brown. “Customers tend not to want their private financial transactions visible to everybody.”

Richard gets another shout out in an interview with Dr. Gideon Greenspan, founder of Multichain: (ed. note: Dear IB Times: PLEASE stop embedding auto-playing video in your stories, it is driving me mad...)

Greenspan compared this to work that was done decades ago in laying the theoretical foundations for the relational databases that run the world today. He added: "I wouldn't say that either banks or startups were intrinsically qualified or otherwise to work out these fundamentals. Rather, I think this is work that should be done by experienced computer scientists and system architects, wherever they might happen to be. The hiring of Richard Gendal Brown by R3 is I think a recognition of this fact, and a very positive step."

3. CFTC loves/hates Bitcoin

Following up from last week's announcement on Bitcoin-as-commodity, the CFTC announced that they had filed and settled charges against Tera Exchange, accusing the exchange of performing a wash trade during their first (only?) BTC SEF transaction last year. Meanwhile, the recently departed Commissioner Wetjen has joined exchange-in-waiting LedgerX as a board member.

4. The Internet loves/hates on Coinbase and 21

Coinbase stoked the ire of Redditors everywhere with their announcement that they have filed 9 patent applications on business processes related to the Bitcoin protocol. Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase, tried to lay out the case for Coinbase as one of necessity:

Our ultimate goal in obtaining bitcoin related patents is to keep them out of the hands of bad people, use them defensively to protect Coinbase from patent trolls, and help ensure the bitcoin ecosystem continues to grow.

Bank of America also got into the patent game, filing a patent related to cross-border transfers that may involve cryptocurrency rails. (Full patent here).

Yet no story this week produced a hotter internet flame war than the Amazon pre-sale of 21.co's 21 Bitcoin Computer (or Energy-Arb-as-a-Service for the snarky). 21's CEO Balaji Srinivasan describes the device as a 'devkit' that is the first step in returning "economic power to the individual" by making Bitcoin micro-payments embedded into digital workflow.

One excited blogger compares this release to the Altair 8800 and the dawn of a new internet:

Next, link unforgeable bitcoin private keys with biometric identification. And… *waves hands vigorously* You just killed:
  • Passwords…
  • sign-ups…
  • e-mail confirmation…
  • login screens.
And removed a ton of hassle and frustration and waste.

While others weren't so complimentary...The most eloquent take-down came from Izabella Kaminska of the FT, calling the 21 RPi+ASIC "a machine built to burn your real world money." She also weaves in Colombian drug trade, Kennedy Airport and the phrase "Keynesian coal mine" in the very entertaining blog post:

Which brings us back to our original point about 21 grammes being the weight of your soul.
What 21 Inc is really doing is recasting the classic story of the Faustian bargain for the digital age. In this retelling of the narrative, however, 21 grammes is the weight of your digital data, $0.03 is the value the digital economy wishes you to get per day and the true breadth and scope of the contract you sign with Balaji Srinivasan, 21 Inc’s CEO, is revealed in the terms and conditions outlined above, and is definitely worth more than $399.99 to 21.