Around the Block With Jefferson Nunn – Interview With Roberto Capodieci of DecBC.com

Jefferson Nunn  0:02 

Live from crypto news global headquarters. This is around the block with Jefferson none. I’m here today with special guest, Roberto Capodieci. Welcome to the show how you doing?

Roberto Capodieci  0:16 

I’m doing great. Thank you for having me.

Jefferson Nunn  0:20 

Great. Great. So I’ve been looking at your website DecBC.com, can you tell me more about your decentralized platform application platform and how it works?

Roberto Capodieci  0:32 

Sure, um, after implementing many customized blockchain solution, specific customization of transaction types, for several clients many years, I really, I like to the pin point of what the blockchain should not have a security issue where there so put a few million dollars, a large team of developers and start implementing a new protocol there is much more secure based on the participation can the capital the cryptocurrencies from the security aspect of a blockchain. And we implemented this protocol with the blockchain has many different functionalities in transaction time, so we deployed it live, but people don’t get very excited for new technology if there is now a good money-making machine attached to it. So, we are now debating real cross chain Dow, which means you send bitcoin in the Bitcoin Blockchain, you receive Ethereum, Ethereum blockchain, so is all cross chain is an exchange, it was converted with an internal ecosystem, as well. And we’re working on that. That is cross chain in the URL is exchanged attack. And that’s where the technology implemented for the BBC and the BBC news allowing these really decentralized, really autonomous exchanges to exist.

Jefferson Nunn  2:09 

Very interesting. So yeah, I see that this is based on the proof of participation. Is that right?

Roberto Capodieci  2:20 

That’s correct. This is a different take on security protocol from for blockchain compared to the classic proof of work or proof of steak or many other kinds of proof that are out there.

Jefferson Nunn  2:34 

Yeah, that’s really interesting, because I know there’s been a lot of talk about, you know, proof of work, proof of stake, and so forth. Could you provide an opinion about how proof of work is perhaps not the best way to go or a better way to go or tell me more about that?

Roberto Capodieci 2:56 

Absolutely. I actually lecture the Singapore University, the social science, about consensus mechanics, and is really a topic that is hard for me. Well, proof of work is become a little bit of a religion for certain people which they are defending it above the rationality of an analysis or technical analysis of it. But unfortunately, proof of work is not a safe protocol, mostly for small and new blockchain.

Many people say only Bitcoin should be the only blockchain exists and proof of work is good for that. Blockchain. I will say is okay, it’s true Bitcoin, it’s very hard to perform a 51% attack, but many miners blockchain, for example, Ethereum classic, if not many other miners, being several times attacked, simply because the consents to security come from an external source, which is the machine power put the tool chain, the blocks of which can be rented, they can be purchased. And they can easily bring a user from nothing to the majority of hashing power overnight. That’s why people is able to do double spending, which means they can rewrite the last part of the blockchain and make ordinary nod of the network except the derivation compared to the actual conservation of blockchains.

Jefferson Nunn  4:31 

So, yeah, that makes sense. But, you know, one of the things I’m wondering about, you know, the proof of work, you know, for example, can be attacked, you know, that 51% attack and so forth. What are some of the other attack vectors that people should wait should be worried about?

Roberto Capodieci  4:53 

Well, I mean, consider that the action power is what command who can design the new blocks in the blockchain and the company with the majority are in power between pools and large mining operations at about 1012. So, it’s really simple people that can sit around the table and decide to censor somebody, for example, they don’t want a large wave, there’s a lot to be going in a certain account to spend them, they will just agree to program the system. So, the block is designed with never include any transaction coming from this specific address. So, it’s not really decentralized the way that new blocks are created. In between a blockchain like Bitcoin and the application of proof of work. In minor blockchain is subject to double spending double spending work in the simple way. Because the consensus system in the blockchain is the part of code the of the node software that tells what decision to make to a node.

The word consensus is a little bit misleading because between human a consensus is achieved by sitting around the table discussing and coming to a common decision. While in a peer-to-peer network nodes cannot really sitting around the table and discuss so they have a preprogrammed rules on front of which a choice based on the fact that the rules are all the same as should be the same for all the nodes. But if these rules can be gamed, people can force the older nodes in a network to make the choice that they want. And this is how the double spending happen. For example, in Ethereum, classic is happened one year ago Sirica.

There’s somebody put Chase $1 million of Ethereum classic coins, the positives in exchanges, withdraw Bitcoins, in then rent a lot of hashing power to rewrite the last part of the blockchain with a higher difficulty to the competitor, the one existed, and remove the transaction of all his deposits into exchanges. He publishes the piece of blockchain, all the nodes see that based on the rule that they have these blockchain has a higher difficulty, so is better than the one that they have and replace the last piece of the blockchain with the one created by the attacker, which means then the attacker still has the $1 million Ethereum classic because all the transaction will be the positive m&a exchanges as being removed by a seal also has the $1 million of it, Bitcoin has withdrawn from the exchanges before performing the attack. So, this is a double spending, explaining to people they don’t know and proof of work, don’t guarantee small blockchain protection against this kind of attacks. Proof of stake, which is a different kind of consensus mechanics, it doesn’t use an external source of information, like the hashing power for protection, but use the past history of the blockchain itself to protect the new action. So, proof of stake looks where the stakes are made on which accounts and then allow these accounts to create the new block.

Now, this is in a way more secure, but some people say can be censored, because the bigger owner will never give the token to all others. So, there is no equal distribution among all the accounts. And the difference is that those who perform an attack need to own the majority of the economy ending after to damage themselves at the end of the day. So, it wouldn’t make sense to do such kind of attack. But if I use a proof of stake blockchain let’s say with a market cap of a million dollars to manage a set like realistic data sets rather than warehouse receipts or other things for the worth of a billion dollar, then working to perform an attacker can become viable because the return of investment is there right that 10 million market caps against a few billion dollar of transaction that can be deleted. So also, that there is a sort of weakness but everybody stopped doing these two main kinds of consensus mechanics because there is a lot to do with defy with the old application that being implemented the very few people go down to the bottom of the blockchain to the right, a new consensus mechanics there is more secure. So, there are several out there. The what we are proposing has the characteristic that we believe makes it one of the safest out there at the moment.

Jefferson Nunn  9:46 

Yeah, really, really interesting. So yeah, I can see you I you know, it’d be better hat to have a proper participation, to have more stability but then You know, along the same lines, I see a lot of emphasis now on web three. And there’s a huge amount of, you know, focus on that. All the big players, you know, even Twitter and so forth. What do you think about web three?

Roberto Capodieci  10:19 

Well, absolutely is an accessory evolution of how things work. So the idea of moving the control of digital assets, from centralized places to the use of himself through the centralized systems, is something that has a lot of power. I’m not talking only about the selling of arts to NFT’s and other things. But let’s think about, for example, Twitter, they need to ban the President of the United States from his platform, and censor the freedom of speech, they should have had the right of, by removing his content or censoring is content. And I think it’s never been done in a happy mood by the CEO, which the ex-CEO because he’s resigning when he is investing a lot of money in making a content management system. Okay, a CDN that is fully decentralized. In this case, the Twitter of the situation can no more say, Okay, we remove the content by our governor applied to the authority.

Look, I have no control over the content, the content is in a decentralized platform, I only provide an interface to access it and to view it. And so, I have no power to censor my users. And this is a big advantage for the users themselves, and for the platform that provide access to the content. So, the shifting toward the centralizing in the shifted over the giving the control of the assets to the user. With all the consequences of having ownership of your word in the video game rather than avatar. You know, there are games rather than the prize in a Metaverse where you all the peaceful line of the building. Thanks to the marriage of over 3d virtual world the way the blockchain with all this technology that we use only for remittance, but actually have a much higher power so they can control the content. Possible user is securely one absolute direction the evolution of these is going so inevitable. I will say there is a lot of work to do though.

Jefferson Nunn  12:47 

Yeah, very interesting. So yeah, I learned a lot just in the last 20 minutes just talking with you. So, this has been incredible. So, what’s what’s next for the CBC and your various projects there what what’s going to be the next exciting thing that will happen?

Roberto Capodieci  13:07 

Oh, there are two three different things going on. One is the idea that all the defy word that should be either fully regulated the sewing the handle license corporation that can protect the consumer, the government is there to make sure that everything is okay. Or fully decentralized. If it’s fully decentralized, then there is nobody to blame by but the only the users themselves when there are hybrid this so there are defined smart contracts that they still have a one administrative account they can take all the money run away rather than other things. And those are not regulated, then we are in a little bit of a dangerous zone. So, I am extremist on both directions either fully regulated the super compliant and upsell decentralize or really 100% Tao fully this fully decentralized we nobody with the power to do anything if not by voted for by the by the user. So, this is the two I will say direction that things are going to develop in relation to Metaverse digital assets.

I think that is what is happening is interesting. I know the Gucci; the fashion brand is selling the baggy in Roblox so avatar in Roblox can spend the real money to buy a virtual Gucci bag. This is indication of a huge direction we’re going. We are opening in a partnership between blockchain zoo that is my company and a larger company in in Europe. We are opening a partnership and we’re opening the office in the metaverse and that is offices designed by a very famous architect this so he will start to bring the branding, let’s say are the names, they usually are used in the real world. Also, just before word, the guarantee by the cryptography, where the design or the piece or the item in the metadata is cryptographically, linked to the author, the creator and the owner, in order to be able to guarantee the authenticity, which is a very interesting evolution also.

Jefferson Nunn  15:31 

Yeah, that’s it’s been really, really interesting and informative. So, alright, well, if people want to find out more about your project and to participate, where can they go?

Roberto Capodieci  15:45 

Well, my personal website can be reached at the Capodieci.com, Cabodieci.com. My decentralize Dao project is rich bow to Xchain.tech. And I think that’s more than enough. Somebody wants to, they can download the nice PDF book. I sent you the link properly, you can then share it together with the comments of your podcast with your listeners. Yeah.

Jefferson Nunn  16:23 

Yeah, absolutely yet, on the homepage of the podcast for the show, there’ll be the link present there. And that’s fantastic. Well, thank you for Boto for coming on our show. I’m really looking forward to learning more about your project as it progresses throughout the year. And I think go on, I’d love to have you back on the show maybe about six months from now so we can get a progress report.

Roberto Capodieci  16:50 

I will please to do so. And thank you for having me as a guest in your podcast.

Jefferson Nunn  16:57 

Thank you see you Around the block.

Roberto Capodieci  16:59 

Bye