Paper ledgers are on their way out of existence. Electronic database storage of financial data is more efficient, more easy, and more in step with the current phenomenon of globalization. Individuals will be able to access the data from anywhere in the world.
Centralized ledger databases, on the other hand, have the disadvantage of being open to hacker assaults. It is also possible that the data will be misused. Illegal alterations to the system’s essential data will bring the whole system crashing down. This may be accomplished via the use of distributed ledger technology (DLTs).
The information databases of the twenty-first century have undergone dramatic changes. Distributed ledgers enable for the sharing and synchronization of transactions over a large network of users in a decentralized manner, allowing for greater efficiency. The distributed ledgers are derived from the blockchain technology, which is essential for the operation of Bitcoin. This implies that every node in the network has easy accessibility to all of the information accessible in the system.
Blockchain is an immutable distributed ledger of transactions that may be written to record not just financial transactions, but any transaction that has monetary value as well as other types of transactions.
Virtual currencies are resistant to government examination because of blockchain technology, which allows people and organizations to preserve financial anonymity, evade taxes, and deal in illegal goods while remaining anonymous in the process. Nevertheless, it is possible that the greatest danger to blockchain may not come from authorities seeking to regain control, but from hashgraph, a data structure based on the Swirlds algorithm.
As a Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) with a peer-to-peer architecture, this algorithm corrects the genetic defects of blockchain, such as latency, energy waste and cost.
The hashgraph is anticipated to provide high-quality performance at a cheap cost, with no single point of failure. When compared to Bitcoin and Ethereum, low-cost, high-quality performance equals reduced usage of electricity. In addition, Hashgraph is 50,000 times quicker than Bitcoin and can handle up to 250,000 transactions per second. This new technology has come up which may challenge Blockchain for the throne.
Hashgraph Vs Blockchain
Starting with Centralization vs. Decentralization
Although Hashgraph’s goal is to be completely decentralized, doing it properly isn’t simple. Bitcoin and Ethereum began out as decentralized networks from the outset, allowing anybody to enter and participate in the network through mining. However, as time went on, a concentration of pools arose where energy was cheap and whales who got in early made up significantly too much of the majority, causing the network to become more and more centralized, exposing it to assaults and giving those individuals control over the network. Hashgraph intended to prevent precisely this situation. They are experimenting with a new technique in which they will start centralized and gradually open it up to the public, eventually getting increasingly decentralized.
DLT: Forkable vs. Unforkable
Because of the way blockchain works, the sequence in which transactions are completed is determined by the sequence in which miners process information and contribute to the block. Miners have the ability to influence the sequence in which transactions are incorporated to the block, making it subject to forking and causing delays.
Hashgraph, on the other hand, is a consensus-based system that processes transactions more quickly and in chronological sequence according to the timestamp. Hedera Hashgraph, for the benefit of the community, makes its code available for review so that everyone can grasp what the code is doing, confidence can be built, and ideas for modifications to the code can be made. However, it is restricted to open review, which means it will not be used to fork or divide the network unless it is specifically requested. As a means of assuring that the ledger will remain stable, it will not be forked or divided.
A New Approach to Reaching a Consensus
Consensus methods for blockchain-based distributed ledger technologies (DLTs) are various. Each has its own set of advantages and disadvantages, each suited to a certain use scenario. Bitcoin’s proof of work algorithm is the most well-known use of this technique. In a blockchain, if two miners generate two conflicting blocks, the proof-of-work is examined and one block is deleted as a result of the examination.
Blockchains are unable to sustain the rapid sprouting of new branches since each branch can only contribute to the development of the block in one direction. As a result, proof-of-work or another technique is required to unnaturally slow down the development of the network, resulting in delay when authenticating transactions.
Hashgraphs, on the other hand, maintain all of the containers (events), and they are used in the process of reaching a consensus. It makes use of a consensus mechanism known as “virtual voting,” which avoids the majority of Proof of Work difficulties and bottlenecks, enabling it to give low-cost and high-performance without error at a low cost. There is no need for a large amount of processing power or electricity supply.
Non-permitted
Open source is shared by both blockchain and hashgraph, although only blockchain is a distributed ledger system (DS). A non-permissioned system is one in which only members who have earned the confidence of the system may participate. By guaranteeing that only trustworthy members are permitted into the network, the hashgraph eliminates the time and processing resources necessary for proof-of-work. Whilst hashgraph is resistant to Denial of Service (DoS) assaults and other dissimilar behavior on the part of participating members, it makes concessions on the openness front.
Future cryptocurrencies founded on the hashgraph algorithm will be required to register with Hedera Hashgraph and also seek tokens from it for use by merchants that accept virtual currencies built on the hashgraph method. While it is a more robust form of blockchain that may offer regulators cause to rejoice since it falls underneath the jurisdiction of a registered business, it needs to be seen if the practical benefits of hashgraph will outweigh the risks associated with its non-permissioned nature, which may deter transactions in the underground economy.
aBFT security Vs Cryptographic hashing
Whenever we hear the term “decentralized ledger,” the very first thing that springs to mind is the protected means of conducting transactions. Despite the fact that the security settings for both blockchain and hashgraph are the same, both are very resistant to tampering with transaction data.
However, the methodologies are not the same. Blockchain, makes use of time-stamped cryptographic technologies to assure the security of the data stored and sent throughout the network.
Hashgraph provides asynchronous Byzantine Fault Tolerance (aBFT), which is the maximum level of security that a consensus method can offer. Hashgraph is a Byzantine algorithm that is completely asynchronous. aBFT is predicated on the assumption that bad actors emerge in every community. It ensures that a consensus is reached and that it is safe as long as less than one-third of the members are malevolent.
This word refers to the fact that no one individual can prevent the community from establishing a consensus. It also prevents the disruption of the existing consensus. The most significant benefit that hashgraphs have over blockchains is that they ensure Byzantine agreement between two parties.
When it comes to blockchain design, miners are divided into categories and the development of a block is reliant on the processing capacity of those who are part of the network. In such a case, miners may make use of their hardware supremacy to steer or hinder the development of the block in question.
Hacker assaults, DDoS attacks, botnets, and firewalls of the communication network and network nodes, if any, are no match for ABFT.
Patented Vs Open-source
The blockchain platform, which is being discussed in the context of the Hashgraph platform sources, is an open-source distributed ledger technology (DLT) platform that has contributed to the development of cryptocurrencies and utility tokens.
Â
In recent years, several blockchain supporters have established their credibility and earned the confidence of institutions by embracing the decentralized character of the blockchain. Hashgraph, on the other hand, is based on a patented algorithm that is held by Swirlds. As a result, any new entries will be needed to pass via Swirlds.
Minted Coins Vs Mined Coins
Creating a new block containing hashes and uploading it to the blockchain is the process of mining new blocks of information. Any present computer could generate any hash for a set of bitcoin transactions, therefore the bitcoin network creates “work” by increasing the “difficulty” of the process. Mining can be understood as a puzzle in which a collection of computers makes guesses at a number until one of the guesses proves correct. The person who makes the correct guess gets to contribute a block to the blockchain and is rewarded with a Bitcoin.
On average, this occurs about every ten minutes or so. It does this for a variety of reasons, including progressively making the challenge more difficult and halving the payout every four years. This seemed to be a good idea at the time, but as it turns out, it prevents the bitcoin network from scaling to the level required to completely replace Visa since the network progressively becomes slower and more costly, which is done purposely to avoid splits and for other reasons.
The Hashgraph avoids this scalability issue totally by eliminating mining entirely and replacing it with a whole new ledger structure, the Hashgraph. That is why all of the Hbar have already been created. They have been confined and will be gradually freed for a variety of reasons. However, Hashgraph is still in the process of becoming a decentralized network, and in order for it to verify transactions, it needs computers.
Despite the fact that the Hashgraph native currency (Hbar) cannot be mined since all coins were minted from the beginning, there is still an incentive to invest your time and resources in your computer and power. You won’t be able to mine any more Hbar, but you will be able to set up a node and earn transaction fees from it in the near future. Alternatively, you might hold Hbar and lend them to nodes in exchange for a transaction fee.
Conclusion
Similarly to Blockchain, hashgraph technology is a remarkable and exciting technology that has a lot of potential. Even while we recognize the value of this technology, we should not forget about the underlying technology, which is Blockchain, which laid the groundwork for this new technology. However, much as Blockchain has matured over the past several years, and many of its limits have been identified and addressed, Hashgraph would need to go through a similar period of maturation before its entire potential could be realized.
A large number of enthusiasts from all over the globe believe that hashgraph technology has the potential to solve all of the current challenges associated with blockchain technology. Several ardent blockchain proponents, on the other hand, argue that equating the blockchain to the Hashgraph is like matching tomatoes with cucumbers since each has its own distinct flavor.
What can be stated, though, is that the technology that underpins Hashgraph is really exciting to study. It remains to be seen how successful the public, non-permissioned version of this technology will prove to be in the long run.
