To be accepted by the rest of the network, a new block must contain a proof-of-work (PoW).[75] The system used is based on Adam Back's 1997 anti-spam scheme, Hashcash.[85][4] The PoW requires miners to find a number called a nonce, such that when the block content is hashed along with the nonce, the result is numerically smaller than the network's difficulty target.[7]:ch. 8 This proof is easy for any node in the network to verify, but extremely time-consuming to generate, as for a secure cryptographic hash, miners must try many different nonce values (usually the sequence of tested values is the ascending natural numbers: 0, 1, 2, 3, ...[7]:ch. 8) before meeting the difficulty target.


Network nodes can validate transactions, add them to their copy of the ledger, and then broadcast these ledger additions to other nodes. To achieve independent verification of the chain of ownership each network node stores its own copy of the blockchain.[76] About every 10 minutes, a new group of accepted transactions, called a block, is created, added to the blockchain, and quickly published to all nodes, without requiring central oversight. This allows bitcoin software to determine when a particular bitcoin was spent, which is needed to prevent double-spending. A conventional ledger records the transfers of actual bills or promissory notes that exist apart from it, but the blockchain is the only place that bitcoins can be said to exist in the form of unspent outputs of transactions.[7]:ch. 5
In Charles Stross' 2013 science fiction novel, Neptune's Brood, the universal interstellar payment system is known as "bitcoin" and operates using cryptography.[227] Stross later blogged that the reference was intentional, saying "I wrote Neptune's Brood in 2011. Bitcoin was obscure back then, and I figured had just enough name recognition to be a useful term for an interstellar currency: it'd clue people in that it was a networked digital currency."[228]
Blockchain analysts estimate that Nakamoto had mined about one million bitcoins[28] before disappearing in 2010, when he handed the network alert key and control of the code repository over to Gavin Andresen. Andresen later became lead developer at the Bitcoin Foundation.[29][30] Andresen then sought to decentralize control. This left opportunity for controversy to develop over the future development path of bitcoin, in contrast to the perceived authority of Nakamoto's contributions.[31][30]

Researchers have pointed out at a "trend towards centralization". Although bitcoin can be sent directly from user to user, in practice intermediaries are widely used.[32]:220–222 Bitcoin miners join large mining pools to minimize the variance of their income.[32]:215, 219–222[115]:3[116] Because transactions on the network are confirmed by miners, decentralization of the network requires that no single miner or mining pool obtains 51% of the hashing power, which would allow them to double-spend coins, prevent certain transactions from being verified and prevent other miners from earning income.[117] As of 2013 just six mining pools controlled 75% of overall bitcoin hashing power.[117] In 2014 mining pool Ghash.io obtained 51% hashing power which raised significant controversies about the safety of the network. The pool has voluntarily capped their hashing power at 39.99% and requested other pools to act responsibly for the benefit of the whole network.[118] Between 2017 and 2019 over 70% of the hashing power and 90% of transactions were operating from China.[119]
لضمان صحّة عمليات التحويل، يقوم نظام البيتكوين بالاحتفاظ بسجل حسابات تُسجل فيه جميع الإجراءات التي تتم على الشبكة يُطلق عليه اسم سلسلة الكُتل (بالإنجليزية: block chain). تتشارك جميع العُقد المتواجدة على شبكة البيتكوين هذا السجل عبر نظام يعتمد على بروتوكول بِتكُيِن. تحتوي سلسلة الكُتل على جميع الإجراءات التي تمت باستخدام بِتكُيِن، وهو ما يُمكن من معرفة الرصيد الذي يملكه كل عنوان على هذه الشبكة. يُطلق على هذا المفهوم وصف السلسلة للترابط المتواجد ما بين الكُتل، حيث تحتوي كل كُتلة على هاش الكُتلة التي تسبقها ويتواصل الأمر إلى غاية الوصول إلى الكُتلة الأولى التي يُطلق عليها اسم "كتلة التكوين" (بالإنجليزية: genesis block) . تكوين السلسلة بهذه الطريقة يجعل من مهمة تغيير أي كُتلة بعد مرور مُدة مُعينة على إنشائها في غاية الصعوبة، حيث أن تغيير أي كُتلة يتطلب تغيير كل الكُتل التي تليها بسبب الحاجة إلى إعادة حساب هاش كل كُتلة لتحديث قيمة هاش الكُتلة السابقة فيها. هذه الخاصية هي ما يجعل من مُشكل الإنفاق المُتكرر لنفس العُملات في غاية الصعوبة على بِتكُيِن، بل ويُمكن اعتبار سلسلة الكُتل العمود الفقري الذي لا يُمكن لعُملة بِتكُيِن الوقوف من دونه[10].
Researchers have pointed out at a "trend towards centralization". Although bitcoin can be sent directly from user to user, in practice intermediaries are widely used.[32]:220–222 Bitcoin miners join large mining pools to minimize the variance of their income.[32]:215, 219–222[115]:3[116] Because transactions on the network are confirmed by miners, decentralization of the network requires that no single miner or mining pool obtains 51% of the hashing power, which would allow them to double-spend coins, prevent certain transactions from being verified and prevent other miners from earning income.[117] As of 2013 just six mining pools controlled 75% of overall bitcoin hashing power.[117] In 2014 mining pool Ghash.io obtained 51% hashing power which raised significant controversies about the safety of the network. The pool has voluntarily capped their hashing power at 39.99% and requested other pools to act responsibly for the benefit of the whole network.[118] Between 2017 and 2019 over 70% of the hashing power and 90% of transactions were operating from China.[119]
Despite bringing a number of benefits, decentralized applications aren’t faultless. Because smart contract code is written by humans, smart contracts are only as good as the people who write them. Code bugs or oversights can lead to unintended adverse actions being taken. If a mistake in the code gets exploited, there is no efficient way in which an attack or exploitation can be stopped other than obtaining a network consensus and rewriting the underlying code. This goes against the essence of the blockchain which is meant to be immutable. Also, any action taken by a central party raises serious questions about the decentralized nature of an application.
Until relatively recently, building blockchain applications has required a complex background in coding, cryptography, mathematics as well as significant resources. But times have changed. Previously unimagined applications, from electronic voting & digitally recorded property assets to regulatory compliance & trading are now actively being developed and deployed faster than ever before. By providing developers with the tools to build decentralized applications, Ethereum is making all of this possible.
In 2016 a decentralized autonomous organization called The DAO, a set of smart contracts developed on the platform, raised a record US$150 million in a crowdsale to fund the project.[25] The DAO was exploited in June when US$50 million in ether were taken by an unknown hacker.[26][27] The event sparked a debate in the crypto-community about whether Ethereum should perform a contentious "hard fork" to reappropriate the affected funds.[28] As a result of the dispute, the network split in two. Ethereum (the subject of this article) continued on the forked blockchain, while Ethereum Classic continued on the original blockchain.[29] The hard fork created a rivalry between the two networks. 

بيتكوين ليست العملة الافتراضية الوحيدة المتواجدة حاليًا في الأسواق الافتراضية. فقد برزت بفضل نجاحات ال بيتكوين ، مجموعة متنوعة من ما يسمى ب "altcoins" أو العملات الافتراضية البديلة ذات قيمة جيدة في الأسواق. أهم الفروقات بين البيتكوين وهذه العملات البديلة هي: البتكوين الأصعب في التعدين والأكثر غلاءً بينما العملات البديلة يمكن الحصول عليها عادةً بطريقة أسهل وأرخص، ويمكن أن يكون سعرها أكثر ثباتًا من سعر البتكوين ذات السعر المتقلب، كما أنّ الكثير من هذه العملات تم إنشاؤها لتلافي المشاكل الحاصلة في نظام بتكوين.[20] هذه لائحة بست عملات رقمية بديلة :
^ Jump up to: a b c d "Statement of Jennifer Shasky Calvery, Director Financial Crimes Enforcement Network United States Department of the Treasury Before the United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Subcommittee on National Security and International Trade and Finance Subcommittee on Economic Policy" (PDF). fincen.gov. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. 19 November 2013. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 October 2016. Retrieved 1 June 2014.
Both blockchains have the same features and are identical in every way up to a certain block where the hard-fork was implemented. This means that everything that happened on Ethereum up until the hard-fork is still valid on the Ethereum Classic Blockchain. From the block where the hard fork or change in code was executed onwards, the two blockchains act individually.
×