October 1, 2026

Capitalizations Index – B ∞/21M

Corda is More Like Bitcoin Than Ethereum

Corda is more like bitcoin than ethereum

Corda is More Like Bitcoin Than Ethereum

Corda is more like bitcoin than ethereum

By CCN: “Corda is more like bitcoin,” says Mike Hearn, lead engineer for Corda, the open source blockchain of the industry consortium R3.

“It owes more of its intellectual history to bitcoin than Ethereum in a way. Its’ data model is similar to bitcoin, which enables you to have privacy because you don’t see transactions on your critical path.”

Early bitcoin adopters knew the risk they were taking, he says, despite infamously stating bitcoin had failed in early 2016 upon leaving as a core developer. “They had money on their device and if the software wasn’t good or had bugs, then that is the cost of being a part of the global revolution,” said Hearn.

But, he warns, Corda is no global revolution. “We are optimizing existing economies in effect,” he says. “We aren’t here to overthrow any systems. As a consequence, people’s standards are much higher. People’s tolerance for sharp edges is much lower.”

At the community level, Corda is an open-source project like bitcoin. It is funded by R3. There are a mailing list and a Slack channel where you can talk to the employees and even make suggestions.

So, how is Corda’s data model similar to bitcoin’s?

“They both use what’s called the ‘UTXO model’,” he replies. “[T]hat is, they see the ledger as a set of unchanging entries representing value or facts, that are deleted and created but never altered. In contrast, Ethereum sees the ledger as a set of programs that send messages to each other. It’s a very different way of looking at the world.”

While bitcoin uses the programming languages C++ and Satoshi-designed, yet limited, bitcoin Script, and Ethereum developed ‘Solidity’ (designed to look like Javascript) for development, Corda has not created its own programming languages.  

Mike Hearn was a former bitcoin core developer who has been critical of the cryptocurrency. Image Source: Facebook/Coinone

“We are not inventing our own custom programming language or environments,” said Hearn. “We are using Java and Kotlin, but you can use regular Java or Scala, as well. Any of the languages that run on the JVM. These are much more professionally built languages and tools. They are very mature, they’ve been around decades, and the people who build them know what they are doing, and took their time. You don’t get the same surprising glitches you see in a little Solidity development on Ethereum.” JVM refers to Java virtual machine, which enables a computer to run Java-related programs.

“Kotlin is developed by JetBrains,” Mr. Hearn adds. “It targets the JVM and JavaScript. It’s similar to C# and is designed for developer productivity.” What are people designing on Corda?

“People are mostly designing financial apps today,” he said of Corda developers. “But, people are starting to explore more with healthcare and logistics, and so on.”

bitcoin is not designed for such feats. “bitcoin’s feature set is designed for tracking a single currency, and that’s about it,” explains Mr. Hearn. “To the extent, it can be extended by developers, it’s to impose flexible controls on that currency, but it doesn’t go beyond that.” As a simple example, entries in the bitcoin database consist of a value (amount of coins) plus the script that controls who can claim that value.

“But there’s no way to encode, for instance, a ledger entry for barrels of oil that records the type of crude oil, the origin of extraction, the shipment dates, etc.,” he says. “bitcoin doesn’t know about any of that.”

Both Corda and other platforms use the term “smart contracts” in a more expansive way than Satoshi did. “We want to be able to manage any kind of data, not just amounts of a single currency,” says Mr. Hearn.

He notes that when he wrote Lighthouse, a bitcoin crowdfunding management app, he had to do a lot of things himself that Corda would handle for him. “It’d have been much faster to implement it on Corda,” he says.

A Different Programming Language with Corda Than bitcoin

Corda developers chose not to develop on C++, as Satoshi did, because the high-level programming language has a number of problems. “[I]t’s very complex and hard to learn, it’s easy to make security errors that Java/Kotlin would automatically block, and the business world doesn’t use much of it anymore for these reasons,” said Hearn. “‘Script’ was invented for bitcoin but is far too limited to do even the things Satoshi imagined, let alone the much more complicated things our users want to do.”

Could someone develop a competitor to bitcoin on Corda? Indeed, says Hearn. R3 programmers have done thought experiments about building a bitcoin-style cryptocurrency on top of the enterprise-focused platform.

“It is not the goal of the organization,” Mr. Hearn said. “A few others and I think it’d be cool. It certainly should be possible. We have worked out how you could do it with Corda more as an intellectual exercise. But, most of our customers want to use existing currencies.”

Most enterprise blockchains start from Ethereum as their design base, Mr. Hearn says. “It’s unusual to go back to the start and pledge allegiance to Satoshi’s thinking and designs,” he notes. “We were familiar with both designs and felt bitcoin’s would work better.”

Published at Sun, 12 May 2019 10:06:42 +0000

Previous Article

Bitcoin [BTC] being banned will actually lead to more adoption, says Morgan Creek Digital’s Anthony Pompliano

Next Article

CHALLENGES FACING MIGRATION SYSTEM

You might be interested in …

Bad News Bears: Cryptocurrency Stories of 2017 That Brought Us Down

Bad News Bears: Cryptocurrency Stories of 2017 That Brought Us Down

2017 has seen its spate of both good and bad stories for all sides of the cryptocurrency space. Whether you believe in dutch tulips or you worship at the altar of Satoshi Nakamoto, there were reaffirming and disheartening stories for evcxzxeryone. Below are five of the stories that darkened an otherwise positive year for the industry.

Segwit2x vs. #No2x

bitcoin supporters and detractors alike acknowledged that scalability was an issue in the cryptocurrency. It triggered stakeholders in the currency and surrounding ecosystem to come together on May 23, 2017, and announce a scaling agreement before
the Consensus 2017 Meeting in New York  (sometimes called the “New York Agreement”). The agreement dictated parallel upgrades to the bitcoin protocol, activating a Segregated Witness at a 80% hash power threshold and activating a hard fork to
double the block weight limit within six months. Here’s some analysis on
the implication of the forks.

That hard fork, also referred to as Segwit2x, was meant to occur on November 16, 2017, but was cancelled on November 8, 2017. While the first half of the agreement was carried out successfully in August, support for Segwit2x fell through for a number of reasons.

Recently, there was a supposed “implementation” of
the now defunct Segwit2x fork, but the development team related to this new Segwit2x is unknown and there is no association to those that were behind the New York Agreement.

Ransomware Hacks Remind Public of Criminals’ Preference for bitcoin

Although Ransomware hacks have been around for years, 2017 was particularly nasty (see our article here for
four things you should know about the viruses). In May, a ransomware called WannaCry shocked
the world by holding Microsoft computers hostage using an operating system exploit, encrypting the files on infected computers and demanding a $300 payment in bitcoin for their release. The hack had debilititating implications for users running
outdated Microsoft operating systems around the world, striking particularly hard at the United Kingdom’s government healthcare provider, the NHS.

The choice of payment in bitcoin seemingly caused a negative shock to the price.
Finally on August 3, 2017, the wallets belonging to the hackers were emptied. All
told, those responsible jettisoned $143,000 worth of bitcoin, leaving a much larger amount of damage in their wake.

This wasn’t the only major ransomware attack of the year of course: On June 27, 2017, one ransomware attack using a variant of the ransomware known as “Petya” took down computers in over 80 companies. Some notable victims of the attack included British Media Advertising Conglomerate WPP plc,
global law firm DLA Piper, international commercial shipping company Maersk,
pharmaceutical juggernaut Merck and FedEx.
While this ransomware attack also demanded $300 in bitcoin, they received far less than
the WannaCry hackers, roughly $10,000 USD (almost 4 BTC at the time of the attack). However, the damage done to the affected companies far outstripped the gains of the hackers, with Merck, Maersk and FedEx all announcing estimated
revenues lost due to the hack at $300 million for each company.

Bcash/BCH/bitcoin… What’s in a Name?

The debate over bitcoin Cash will likely be the most controversial topic covered in this
article. Roger Ver has been very vocal in promoting the idea that bitcoin Cash is the real bitcoin. So does the subreddit /r/btc,
which he moderates. This forum is often at odds with /r/bitcoin, and one needs to look no further than to these two
different trending posts on each forum, respectively, to see the animosity. bitcoin Cash is the result of the August 1, 2017, SegWit fork, which allowed holders of BTC to inherit a second cryptocurrency that inherited
the transaction history of bitcoin on that date but allowed all future transactions to be separate.

The enthusiasm behind relative newcomer BCH is obvious as CoinMarketCap cites BCH as currently the fourth largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, sometimes trending as high as 2nd.
While exchanges from Kraken to Bitfinex have adopted BCH into the fold, some, such as Coinbase, have been initially resistant to granting wallet users access to the BCH portion of the fork (Coinbase has since adopted BCH
onto its platform but not without the controversy discussed below).

Whether its advocates are right in the belief that BCH will supplant BTC or anti-BCH proponents are right that a usurper is not in the making, the drama and infighting show no signs of waning for these cryptocurrency stakeholders.

China’s Central Bank Bans ICOs

On September 4, 2017, the Chinese government’s central monetary authority, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC), said “so long” to ICOs.
In a statement released by the PBOC’s Chinese Insurance Regulatory Commission (CIRC), token sales in the country, “should
be stopped immediately,” noting that, “organizations and individuals that have completed the financing of tokens issuance should make arrangements such as clearance to reasonably protect the rights and interests of investors and properly handle
the risks.”

While China has, in the past, had tightly controlled potential exits
for capital leaving the country, ICO entrepreneurs remained optimistic as the country with the largest population of bitcoin
miners sought to crackdown on the new asset class.

Supporters of ICO offerings were dismayed as the world’s 2nd largest economy closed its doors to the new asset class, many cited the actions by the PBOC to be reasonable and
view the news as good for anti-scamming activities and also as temporary. This may be one of those short-term negative/long-term positive stories.

Exchange Woes Plague Coinbase, Bitfinex and Youbit.

Cryptocurrency exchanges found both great success and major setbacks in 2017. Among the setbacks:  

  • In a Northern District of California Federal Court, Coinbase lost a court battle with the IRS which forced
    the company to disclose identifying records of all users who received more than $20,000 in a single year between 2013 and 2015. The November 28, 2017, loss signals a likely attempt by the IRS to collect data on unreported or undisclosed gains
    by U.S. taxpayers and may hint at heightened scrutiny of cryptocurrency investors’ reported returns in future years. Coinbase also closed the year on a sour note when the company disclosed it was investigating possible insider trading claims related to the company’s onboarding of bitcoin Cash for use in its wallet and trading on its subsidiary platform, GDAX.

  • Bitfinex also faced a rollercoaster year, recovering in early 2017 from a $72 million
    hack in August 2016. However, the exchange has since halted services to U.S. investors on November
    9, 2017, and come under scrutiny for its management of its Tether tokens. The company eventually lawyered up in early December to explore potential defamation lawsuits against its more vocal critics.

  • South Korean Exchange Youbit shuttered its doors after a second
    successful hack in 2017 resulted in a loss of 17 percent of its assets. Other exchanges have survived successive hacks in a single year, but the Youbit closure shows that not all exchanges can recover.

These are a few of the dark spots on an otherwise remarkably positive year, so it’s important to keep in mind all the fantastic progress that has been made in the space. Check out our top “Good News” stories of 2017.

The post Bad News Bears: Cryptocurrency Stories of 2017 That Brought Us Down appeared first on Bitcoin Magazine.