From writing books to integrating knowledge and action - Thoughts after reading "Blockchain from Digital Currency to Credit Society"

Chapter 0 Introduction

The concept of blockchain has been hyped by the media, but blockchain itself is not a simple concept. It is a technology composed of a system of concepts and technologies. Because we humans always seek some simple and general way to explain the observed phenomena, this also leads to the fact that blockchain is rarely introduced clearly and completely. However, the book "Blockchain from Digital Currency to Credit Society" (hereinafter referred to as "Blockchain") is a book that can let you know its details.

Chapter 1 Is blockchain an invention or a discovery?

I heard a seemingly ridiculous question in the column where Boss Zhuo talks about technology: Was gravity discovered or invented by Newton?

The obvious answer to this question is discovery. But Mr. Zhuo’s answer is invention, because gravity is not actually a property of an object. In general relativity, the effect of gravity can be explained by the distortion of space and time. In other words, gravity is not an objective fact, but a concept given by Newton. There are many similar explanations, at least Einstein gave one.

The first volume of District begins with a brief history of the invention of Bitcoin written by Babbitt CEO Chang Qia, followed by an introduction to currency. In the currency chapter, Chang Qia describes the currency form in the economic life of Yap, a Pacific island. Surprisingly, the currency used in this extremely primitive social form actually has the same underlying logic as Bitcoin and blockchain, which we are talking about so much now.

After reading the beginning, I began to ponder, was Bitcoin invented or discovered by Satoshi Nakamoto? Of course, the answer to this question is obvious in practical terms.

Bitcoin is undoubtedly branded by Satoshi Nakamoto. If Satoshi Nakamoto wants to register a patent, no patent office can find a reason to refuse. So it must be an invention. But from a philosophical perspective, do we evaluate the concept of blockchain as an invention or a discovery? The logic of blockchain should exist objectively. This set of thinking logic even exists in the economic life of island residents in a primitive society. In addition, we cannot find a person like Bitcoin to Satoshi Nakamoto to blockchain. Blockchain is like an ownerless object, or more like a word of "crowd creation". A word created by everyone around a set of thinking and logic to describe this set of objective facts. Therefore, it is more logical to say that blockchain is discovered.

But what's the point of dwelling on this boring question? I think it is a little useful. Inventing an object is a process from nothing to something. To understand an invention, we need an inclusive mindset, less questioning and more trying. But when facing "discoveries", we need a more questioning mindset. Is this description correct? Does it really conform to objective facts?

In order to understand and apply "discoveries", we need to use more inference evolution from the known to the unknown. This is also the most commonly used writing idea in the book "District".

For a concept as unfamiliar and complex as blockchain, it actually takes a lot of effort for anyone to understand it. If you want to write a book to accurately and thoroughly introduce this technology, it must be more than 500 pages. The book "District" strives to be written into a booklet, and the meaning conveyed is accurate and easy to understand.

Because blockchain itself is unfamiliar and complex, when reading this book, don’t try to find a short and clear concept, or summarize a highly condensed golden sentence, so as to absorb the essence of blockchain in one fell swoop. This is impossible. We need to deduce slowly to understand.

Chapter 2 Who is fooling around and who is integrating knowledge and action

In fact, new content is being added to the blockchain every day. If you follow blockchain news, you will see a lot of very magical and exciting reports, such as the combination of blockchain and finance, the Internet of Things, medical care, etc. If we believe these reports without questioning, we will really think that the world will be so beautiful and the whole human race will be completely renewed. However, these reports may not be serious interpretations of science and technology, and many of them are fantasy descriptions. Some reports are either exaggerated or even deliberately deceiving people and cheating them out of money.

So how do you judge?

My judgment standard is "unity of knowledge and action". I look at what the protagonist of the report really did. In the cryptocurrency circle, Li Xiaolai is a person who is criticized a lot, but I have always liked him very much. Because within my perception, Li has indeed achieved unity of knowledge and action. Li has made his life public online and done more than ordinary people. I have observed that a large proportion of people have achieved unity of knowledge and action.

In the book "District", it is inevitable to talk about the future of blockchain, such as imagining the future blockchain as a core technology for protecting intellectual property rights, identity verification, and code as law. To be honest, as a reader, I may not believe it all. Because it involves imagination of the future, and the randomness of the real world is too great. If you believe it easily, you will be stupid.

The best way to predict the future is to create it. So how credible are those descriptions of future blockchain applications? First, I look at the logic of the author, and second, I look at whether the author is consistent in his knowledge and practice.

Tao Rongqi of Ant described the economics of blockchain in his book District, which used more logical reasoning rather than piling up technical concepts. What is even more commendable is that Ant itself is working hard to promote the practical application of blockchain. This is what I think is the unity of knowledge and action.

The future application of blockchain is indeed very imaginative. It may create huge wealth, but it may also make many people's assets disappear into thin air. Even Bitcoin still has the probability of failure, not to mention the blockchain application which is still in the pioneering stage. So don't trust the book easily. What's more important is to see whether it is consistent with what it says. The authors of the book "District" are all practitioners in the Bitcoin and blockchain industry. What they write is much higher in quality than those who are good at knowing only a little and then use all kinds of dazzling high-tech words to attract attention.

Chapter 3 From Outputting Values ​​to Practicing Them

As we all know, Bitcoin and blockchain have been subject to a lot of criticism. Many critics will point to articles in the industry and make "high-level" comments, such as "The author is too self-righteous! The government will not leave Bitcoin alone..."

In fact, what I want to say is that when writing articles or books, it is definitely because the author wants to express some "self-righteous" content. If the author does not believe it, then what is the point of writing it? The reason why the author wants to output these knowledge or values ​​is that he is deeply "self-righteous", unless the author is a liar. In order to break the ridiculous behavior of those who deny the author's articles on the Internet with "self-righteousness", it is even more valuable for the author to achieve unity of knowledge and action and then promote the implementation of the "content" he wrote.

Han Feng, a doctoral student at Tsinghua University, described in his book "District" how blockchain is integrated with reality, and he has also worked hard to promote many blockchain projects in reality. This is a reasonable logic from outputting values ​​to practicing them.

Looking at the whole book, the content is more about judgments and logical reasoning about the future rather than descriptions of established rules and objective facts. These require everyone to practice, and it is gratifying that the author of "District" is indeed practicing them.

Chapter 4 Conclusion

Blockchain is a complex thing composed of a series of concepts and technologies. It is best to describe it from the concepts known to the public, rather than using a lot of high-tech words. More importantly, the future form of blockchain may not necessarily be presented as many speeches today, but more needs to be put into practice. In this process, the unity of knowledge and action becomes more precious.