Blockchain Papers

Hans C. Schmidt

No abstract is available for this record.

Changsong Yang, Xiaofeng Chen, Yang Xiang

No abstract is available for this record.

Enbo Chen

Nowadays, the modern supply chain is facing the new threats and opportunities due to quality, safety, ethics, environmental impact and other serious problems aroused by the opacity of supply chain. On the contrary, a transparent and traceable supply chain can help suppliers minimize fraud and errors, enhance inventory management, reduce courier costs, lower waste and delay. Consequently, transparency and traceability are essential to the sustainable development of industrial supply chain in the future.
\n
\n
\nDriven by growing demand for transparency and traceability from consumers, companies, and governments, some fundamental labeling technologies (e.g. RFID, QR code, NFC tag, etc.) have been already combined with web technology and applied in logistics system to identify a product with origin information. Even though, those traditional technologies fail to provide a trusted and cost-efficient system to record provenance and share information.
\n
\n
\nThis thesis aims to find an approach to improve transparency and traceability of supply chain in a secure and cost-efficient way. To achieve this goal, an approach with an emerging technology is presented in this thesis: blockchain, a shared, distributed and permissioned ledger that records every transaction information associated with asset through supply chain, which is synchronized and verified in real time with all entities in the supply chain but can be accessed only by authorized participants.
\n
\n
\nThe result of this research work not only provides in-depth research of blockchain technology but also proposes a concrete solution with an implementation of blockchain technology to shape a transparent and traceable supply chain network. This solution can track provenance and trajectory of an asset through the complex supply chain in real time, at the same time, provides unprecedented visibility and confidentiality. Finally, this thesis also shows a possibility to integrate the blockchain system with other web service and traditional enterprise resource planning system.

Yaohao Peng, Pedro Henrique Melo Albuquerque, Jader Martins Camboim de Sá, ANA JULIA AKAISHI PADULA · 5 authors

No abstract is available for this record.

Xiaojun Liu, Wenbo Wang, Dusit Niyato, Narisa Zhao · 5 authors

In blockchain networks adopting the proof-of-work schemes, the monetary incentive is introduced by the Nakamoto consensus protocol to guide the behaviors of the full nodes (i.e., block miners) in the process of maintaining the consensus about the blockchain state. The block miners have to devote their computation power measured in hash rate in a crypto-puzzle solving competition to win the reward of publishing (a.k.a., mining) new blocks. Due to the exponentially increasing difficulty of the crypto-puzzle, individual block miners tends to join mining pools, i.e., the coalitions of miners, in order to reduce the income variance and earn stable profits. In this paper, we study the dynamics of mining pool selection in a blockchain network, where mining pools may choose arbitrary block mining strategies. We identify the hash rate and the block propagation delay as two major factors determining the outcomes of mining competition, and then model the strategy evolution of the individual miners as an evolutionary game. We provide the theoretical analysis of the evolutionary stability for the pool selection dynamics in a case study of two mining pools. The numerical simulations provide the evidence to support our theoretical discoveries as well as demonstrating the stability in the evolution of miners' strategies in a general case.

James L. McDonagh, Arnaldo F. Silva, Mark A. Vincent, Paul L. A. Popelier

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide We present an innovative method for predicting the dynamic electron correlation energy of an atom or a bond in a molecule utilizing topological atoms. Our approach uses the machine learning method Kriging (Gaussian Process Regression with a non-zero mean function) to predict these dynamic electron correlation energy contributions. The true energy values are calculated by partitioning the MP2 two-particle density-matrix via the Interacting Quantum Atoms (IQA) procedure. To our knowledge, this is the first time such energies have been predicted by a machine learning technique. We present here three important proof-of-concept cases: the water monomer, the water dimer, and the van der Waals complex H 2 ···He. These cases represent the final step toward the design of a full IQA potential for molecular simulation. This final piece will enable us to consider situations in which dispersion is the dominant intermolecular interaction. The results from these examples suggest a new method by which dispersion potentials for molecular simulation can be generated.

Domenico De Matteis, Alessio Ishizaka, Giuliano Resce

No abstract is available for this record.

Sami Ahmed

New technologies, such as blockchain, cryptocurrency (e.g., Bitcoin), and artificial intelligence are rapidly changing how transactions occur in the United States. While scholars have started to examine how a number of areas of law should adapt, very little work has been done on what these changes mean for taxation. Yet these developments could have a huge impact on tax revenues. For example, some approaches to taxing transactions using cryptocurrency could result in these transactions being conducted abroad, beyond the reach of the U.S. taxing authorities. And if robots replace large segments of the labor force, this could drastically shrink federal and state income tax bases. The approach to taxing new technologies is a careful balance of capturing value and not disincentivizing growth. For example, if governments decide to levy a “robot tax” to replace revenues the income tax is no longer generating, they may accidentally stifle innovation in that jurisdiction. At the same time, these new technologies also provide tools that governments can harness to levy taxes far more effectively than they currently do. For example, using blockchain technology to track the history of income and company shares allows for the potential of an integrated tax system, which combines the currently separate corporate and personal taxes into one unified taxation regime. The effects of this transition are a removal of many distortions and behavioral inefficiencies. Just because technology can be used to levy taxes far more creatively does not mean that it should be. But given the rapid rate at which technological change is occurring, governments cannot afford to sit back and make these decisions by inertia. Rather, the main argument of this is that governments should: (i) recognize and adapt to shifting tax bases; and (ii) use technology such as blockchain to better target the populations and behaviors desired to be taxed. The paper recommends specific examples of how to better tax and use technologies, such as blockchain, to reform current taxation schemes. There is also ample discussion of whether cryptocurrency will be regulated as a security (as per the Howey test and recent SEC enforcement actions), a discussion of foreign jurisdictions' approaches to cryptocurrency regulation and taxation, and recommendations to the SEC and IRS on how they should adjust their taxation of cryptocurrency.

Georgina Morley, Jonathan Ives

Critical care is one of the most ethically complex health care specialties. Nurses working in this highly intense setting face additional stressors of high-tech interventions, resource scarcity, and increased workloads. Evidence from the United Kingdom and the United States suggests that these stressors are affecting patient safety and mortality, and nurses are feeling dissatisfied with their job and are burning out.1–4 Although we are able to keep patients alive longer, a growing body of research suggests that in many cases the life-sustaining treatments carried out in critical care settings are perceived by health care professionals to conflict with the patient’s best interests, creating moral distress among health care professionals.5,6 Nurses are often left out of decision-making processes, yet they are responsible for enacting the decisions made. This situation, according to Liaschenko,7 reduces nurses to artificial persons—persons who speak or act for others but whose priorities and concerns are subordinate to others. To navigate this complex environment, nurses need to be taught how to recognize and respond to a range of challenging ethical situations.Whereas ethics training for nurses can vary widely depending on the institution (and country), in this article we explore a common approach to clinical ethics education used in the United Kingdom. We do so because this method promotes a particular approach to understanding and framing ethical issues that arguably engenders misunderstanding about expected solutions, as we will discuss. Toby’s case, describing an ethical issue arising in critical care, is used to exemplify this argument and is referred to throughout the article to illustrate key points.Ethics education in nursing tends to be practical: the focus is on the identification of challenging ethical situations and developing and defending a resolution. Our experience of clinical ethics education (in the United Kingdom) reflects this focus; the aim is to enable the student and/or clinician to use ethical theory to identify and understand the ethical issues, begin to resolve the issues, and find acceptable solutions. In the process, students develop as competent moral agents and effective advocates. The development of the moral agent tends to be described in terms of developing an appropriate character, enabling students and/or clinicians to challenge the “silent curriculum” that might habituate clinicians into unethical practice. Rhodes and Cohen8(p50) argue thatA common pedagogic approach is to teach some theory (eg, consequentialist, deontological, virtue, principlist approaches) and then encourage students and clinicians to identify cases from their own practice, apply their theoretical knowledge, and develop their practical ethical skills through reflection. As described by Roff and Preece,9(p487)For students, assessment of this style of learning typically will comprise some form of written case study (given to them or drawn from their own experience) in which students identify the key ethical issues drawing on theory and then show, in a limited number of words, how they would resolve the case—justifying their resolution with reference to ethical theory. Our assumption is that how clinical students, excepting those who go on to specialist study in ethics, are taught about ethics will frame their approach to ethical deliberation throughout their clinical careers.Many practicing clinicians are encouraged to document discussions of ethical issues, agreed solutions, and supporting reasons in their clinical notes—something that the models of assessment they encountered as students seem to have prepared them for. Whereas there are advantages to this approach, one risk is that this strategy encourages students and clinicians to equate their development as competent moral agents with their ability to reduce a complex ethical problem to a series of concisely articulated ethical issues and tidy, theoretically neat, solutions—leading to a single satisfactory solution.The problem with this model in clinical ethics education (both before and after certification) is that it risks encouraging a simplistic understanding of ethical analysis and offers little scope to explore complexity and uncertainty. This approach does not prepare students for dealing with real-life ethical problems; instead, it primes students to believe that identifying and resolving an ethical issue should be easy and encourages the belief that (1) if they cannot articulate and resolve a problem concisely and neatly, then they are doing something wrong and may lack the apposite moral character; and (2) there is a correct resolution that, if found, ought to be satisfying. Promoting these beliefs has substantial problems, which we will discuss briefly.Ethical reflection permeates everyday clinical practice; for example, deciding whether to follow protocol and reposition a patient now or delay for half an hour to take a much-needed lunch break requires such reflection. A person might overlook the ethical nature of this sort of decision because no complex ethical reflection is required. The challenge lies in finding the motivation to do the right thing—to put one’s hunger aside for a few more minutes and reposition the patient. This sort of ethical issue can be articulated and resolved neatly and concisely because it is a simple case; although we might want to do one thing, we clearly ought to do another.The everyday nature of ethics—the microethics10 woven into the fabric of all our personal and professional interactions—is important and should not be ignored; however, we want to focus on more challenging and complex situations involving dilemmas, restricted options, or disagreement (sometimes referred to as conflicts) among moral agents that cannot be articulated or resolved simply or concisely.A dilemma occurs when one must choose between 2 mutually incompatible and similarly weighted obligations (eg, a perceived obligation to save and preserve Toby’s life vs a perceived obligation to minimize his suffering when the only way to do so is not compatible with preserving life).A restricted option problem occurs when one feels there is a right course of action, but for some reason that course of action is not available and is a nonoption. Thus, the range of options left to choose from are less desirable, and none seem morally optimal (eg, the health care team ideally would like to offer Toby a heart transplant but due to his necrotic lung he is not eligible).A disagreement problem occurs when 2 or more agents who have a stake in the decision disagree over the right course of action, and action cannot be taken until a resolution is found. In Toby’s case, the medical team does not want to offer VV-ECMO if he shows signs of deteriorating, but wants to continue other life-sustaining treatments such as continued invasive ventilation; the nursing team believes that they are prolonging Toby’s inevitable death, contributing to his continued suffering, and believes that all life-sustaining treatments are futile; whereas Jenna has requested VV-ECMO and wants to continue all life-sustaining treatments.These kinds of decisions are never simple, nor can their ethical complexity be summarized or resolved in a short piece of written work or by rote ethical analysis. By definition, a challenging ethical issue is complex and requires a great deal of thought and analysis. To assess competency as a moral agent and/or moral character based on a student’s or clinician’s ability to reduce and articulate a response in a short written assignment or verbal analysis sends the wrong message and communicates unrealistic success criteria.Most ethics educators likely are aware of this complexity and are aware that not all clinical ethics education follows this model. However, we are less sure that students or clinicians are aware of the shortcoming of this model; thus, their own measure of success in dealing with ethical issues becomes associated with a concise and relatively sanitized written summary or analysis that demonstrates understanding and clear resolution, which seems unrealistic. Furthermore, as clinical curricula become more crowded and resources become increasingly competitive, pressure increases to reduce ethics assessments to simple “pass or fail” and multiple-choice and short-answer questions to assess ethics competency. This pressure makes it important to reflect on the problems associated with this kind of assessment and to consolidate counterarguments so that such simple assessments might be resisted.Moral dilemmas, restricted options, and disagreement features include the following: (1) perhaps not having a clearly discernible correct course of action, and (2) even if a course of action is identified and morally preferable, moral residue may still be felt after taking the preferable path. These 2 points can be seen in Toby’s case because it illustrates a moral reason to withdraw treatment and a moral reason to continue treatment. What ought to be done for Toby is not clear, and no theoretical approach provides an answer. Arguments for either course of action could be made from any theoretical perspective—many courses of action could be argued as ethically defensible and reasonable. In a situation like Toby’s, no solution is unequivocally correct, and it seems unlikely that we can select a course of action without also feeling we have done something wrong.The term moral residue often is used to refer, in the context of moral distress, to the build-up of negative emotions that occurs after we allow ourselves to be morally compromised. Webster and Baylis11(p208) characterize moral residue asEpstein and Hamric12 describe moral residue as the painful feeling that remains after a morally distressing event that, unless satisfactorily resolved, builds up over time and amplifies negative responses to subsequent morally distressing events, creating a “moral residue crescendo.” Moral residue arises in these types of arguments when the agent feels a wrong has been done; thus, negative feelings are associated with a perceived moral failure and the logically necessary assumption that moral success was possible.We, however, will be using the term moral residue as it was used originally: to refer to the lingering feeling of having done wrong even when one has made a decision that feels right.13,14 This concept was used to argue for the existence of genuine moral dilemma—the special case of moral conflict in which an agent recognizes that (1) moral reason can be used to perform 2 or more actions, (2) not all actions can be performed, and (3) there is no reason to choose one action over another. In such a situation, avoiding moral failure seems impossible because by choosing one course of correct action we fail to perform another correct course of action.The term unavoidable moral failure15 derives from the fact that we must choose between 2 conflicting moral requirements, violating one for the sake of the other. The presence of moral residue after having made a moral decision could be evidence that the agent faced a genuine moral dilemma. Furthermore, this moral residue is an appropriate response to this situation.In Toby’s case, the health care team could feel justified making the decision to withdraw ECMO altogether and yet feel they have wronged Toby and his wife, especially if the decision results in Toby’s death. A wrong has been done, even though the wrong occurred during the process of doing something right. The same could be said of the decision to continue to treat Toby. The decision is ethically defensible and arguably correct, yet in making the decision to continue treatment a wrong seems to have been done because of the real possibility that it might only prolong Toby’s dying process and associated suffering.Debate continues over whether moral residue can be used as proof of the existence of genuine moral dilemmas. One might argue that it is nonsensical to suggest that someone can do wrong while doing right, since choosing option A over option B means that one has decided that A is the right course of action; thus, by definition, all other actions would be wrong.Feeling guilt after having made such a decision could be thought of as irrational.15 Tessman,15 however, argues that labeling this guilt irrational assumes that all perceived wrongs can be compensated for by having done right overall. This viewpoint requires a hyperrational agent who can endorse a conception of “the right” such that the perception of having done right renders any contributing action or consequence similarly “right,” thereby avoiding feeling any regret or loss because of unfulfilled values.People rarely, however, display that kind of rationality. Tessman15 argues that because we often encounter impossible, nonnegotiable moral requirements, we ought to accept that we will unavoidably experience moral failure. In a dilemmatic situation, ethically sensitive people will always be cognizant that in choosing one moral requirement they have failed to perform another. Even when a decision is made that is inclusive, fair, and considered, rarely can a person be certain that the decision was correct and may continue to have feelings of doubt or regret. Doubt is a constant feature of ethical decision making in complex cases. In fact, certainty in the face of ethical complexity may suggest a failure to understand that complexity and may indicate a lack of moral character.We need not resolve the debate about moral failure to learn something important from it. There are 3 key learning points that we can take away that should inform approaches to teaching and learning about clinical ethics: (1) resolution, (2) compromise, and (3) incorporation of concepts.Feelings of guilt, remorse, or regret may be unavoidable features of being in an ethically complex situation. Even when we feel we have done the right thing we still might have negative feelings about our decision; thus, finding an ethical resolution is not the same as finding personal satisfaction or personal resolution.Arriving at a solution that one is completely happy with is not a marker of ethical success or competency. Rather, accepting these feelings as part of being a moral agent may mitigate the feelings that are associated with the accumulation of negative emotions and moral distress. Whereas one may feel guilt or regret because of unavoidable moral failure, unless that person is culpable, he or she is not blameworthy.15 For example, culpability might flow from having failed to deliberate properly, listen to all relevant voices, or create spaces for respectful discussion.There are, then, 2 kinds of moral failure: culpable and nonculpable. Culpable moral failure might arise when one has reached a decision that one regrets or feels guilty about due to not deliberating properly. Moral residue, as defined in this article, is always non-culpable because moral residue follows from having engaged in proper deliberation but nonetheless feeling one has done wrong.When faced with having to choose a course of action in response to a complex and uncertain ethical problem, sometimes the only way to move forward may be to find principled (ie, integrity-preserving) compromise. As Huxtable16(p140,141) argues,Thus, even though the clinical team feels they should withdraw care from Toby, they might nonetheless try other options to enable them to meet their obligations of beneficence to his wife. Such a compromise may not represent a perfect solution, but may be the best arrangement that can be achieved; it might be too much to expect to find a perfect solution to such a complex problem.The problem with compromise, however, is that the concept often is used and understood in a pejorative sense; for example, when Webster and Baylis talk about moral residue occurring after allowing oneself to be “compromised.”11 Although compromise may not always be desirable, it may sometimes be necessary. According to Benjamin,17 compromise makes the “best of a bad situation.” Ives18(p310) also argues thatA potential problem arises from attempting to combine compromise with the goal of coherence. Both might focus on the value of the process of deliberation over the outcome such that (1) the compromise position might not matter as long as a compromise is achieved and all stakeholders are willing to sign up to the compromise, and/or (2) that knowledge of having undertaken a rigorous process of ethical deliberation might, in part or in total, alleviate feelings of moral residue, because participants in the decision can have confidence that they have done the best they could.We would be wary of a focus on process as a justification for outcome. Whereas process is important for many reasons, such as transparency, agency, and accountability, it is difficult to see how the process of ethical deliberation and agreement can confer justification for the decision. Huxtable’s endorsement of compromise is not just a call for decision makers to reach agreement16; the plea is for “principled compromise,” wherein agents are required to make compromises that can be justified by principles external to the process of compromise itself (ie, the compromise position is not legitimate just because it is agreed to).A person who is not part of a robust process of deliberation and has not experienced moral residue may have misplaced faith in the justificatory power of process. Moral residue would survive any feeling that the decision is justified, whether by process or principle. If, conversely, one is unsatisfied with the process, one is unlikely to feel the decision was correct, and so the conditions for moral residue would not have been met. For these reasons, we are wary of drawing the conclusion that a focus on robust processes might be a panacea. Although ethics education can and should facilitate learning about how ethical deliberation can occur, too much emphasis on process runs the risk of leading to empty proceduralism, wherein the process of deliberation comes to replace justification.However, process still has significant value, which is derived from being able to distinguish culpable moral failure (about which we ought to feel bad) and nonculpable moral failure (about which we have no need to berate ourselves). Having confidence in a robust process can help guide us in determining whether we are experiencing nonculpable moral residue or culpable guilt.Clinical ethics educators should incorporate the concepts of moral failure and moral residue into teaching and learning—not to encourage indifferent or immoral behavior, but to better prepare clinicians for the realities of the experience of having to make difficult ethical decisions in the face of the complex and challenging ethical situations and to better understand what a solution might look like.Real-life ethical decision making does not mimic the sanitized assessments clinicians are often required to undertake in a teaching environment, and that expectations of what success might look like need to be adjusted to something more realistic.As illustrated by Toby’s case, a complex, challenging clinical situation will often have multiple justifiable solutions; it is unlikely that any single solution will feel completely satisfactory. Whatever the outcome, the participants would likely experience some form of moral residue. Assuming that decision makers have deliberated properly and arrived at a solution they believe to be correct, they may still feel they have done something wrong. Health care clinicians need to understand that this feeling is moral residue, which is an unavoidable consequence of trying to manage the often-impossible demands of morality within critical care rather than a culpable moral failure. Moral residue is a failure to reconcile the irreconcilable and not a failure of moral character or a sign that one is an moral believe that clinical ethics education should prepare nurses and other clinicians for the experience of moral residue and such education should use this concept to distinguish between moral that are culpable and nonculpable. This learning strategy should better enable nurses and other clinicians to and respond to negative feelings that after they have made a decision in an ethically challenging such a clinicians can better manage expectations about what an acceptable ethical solution might look and feel

J.A. Gómez-Hernández, L. Álvarez-González, Pedro García‐Teodoro

No abstract is available for this record.

K.W. Yeow, Abdullah Gani, Raja Wasim Ahmad, Joel J. P. C. Rodrigues · 5 authors

With the exponential rise in the number of devices, the Internet of Things (IoT) is geared toward edge-centric computing to offer high bandwidth, low latency, and improved connectivity. In contrast, legacy cloud-centric platforms offer deteriorated bandwidth and connectivity that affect the quality of service. Edge-centric Internet of Things-based technologies, such as fog and mist computing, offer distributed and decentralized solutions to resolve the drawbacks of cloud-centric models. However, to foster distributed edge-centric models, a decentralized consensus system is necessary to incentivize all participants to share their edge resources. This paper is motivated by the shortage of comprehensive reviews on decentralized consensus systems for edge-centric Internet of Things that elucidates myriad of consensus facets, such as data structure, scalable consensus ledgers, and transaction models. Decentralized consensus systems adopt either blockchain or blockchainless directed acyclic graph technologies, which serve as immutable public ledgers for transactions. This paper scrutinizes the pros and cons of state-of-the-art decentralized consensus systems. With an extensive literature review and categorization based on existing decentralized consensus systems, we propose a thematic taxonomy. The pivotal features and characteristics associated with existing decentralized consensus systems are analyzed via a comprehensive qualitative investigation. The commonalities and variances among these systems are analyzed using key criteria derived from the presented literature. Finally, several open research issues on decentralized consensus for edge-centric IoT are presented, which should be highlighted regarding centralization risk and deficiencies in blockchain/blockchainless solutions.

Benjamin Verheye

No abstract is available for this record.

Johan Pouwelse, André de Kok, Joost Fleuren, Peter Hoogendoorn · 6 authors

Abstract Humanity’s notion of trust is shaped by new platforms operating in the emerging sharing economy, acting as intermediate matchmaker for ride sharing, housing facilities or freelance labour, effectively creating an environment where strangers trust each other. While millions of people worldwide rely on online sharing activities, such services are often facilitated by a few predatory companies, managing trust relations. This centralization of responsibility raises questions about ethical and political issues like regulatory compliance, data portability and monopolistic behaviour. Recently, blockchain technology has gathered a significant amount of support and adoption, due to its inherent decentralized and tamper-proof structure. We present a blockchain-powered blueprint for a shared and public programmable economy . The focus of our architecture is on four essential primitives: digital identities, blockchain-based trust, programmable money and marketplaces. Trust is established using only historical interactions between strangers to estimate trustworthiness. Every component of our proposed technology stack is designed according to the defining principles of the Internet itself: self-governance, autonomy and shared ownership. Real-world viability of each component is demonstrated with a functional prototype or running code. Our vision is that the highlighted technology stack devises trust, new acts, principles and rules beyond the possibilities in current economic, legal and political systems.

Antonio Ramón Bartolomé Pina, Carles Bellver Torlà, Linda Castañeda, Jordi Adell Segura

La tecnología de las cadenas de bloques (blockchain) abandonan el terreno de la moneda digital para invadir otros campos. También en Educación, aunque muy tímidamente, aparecen aplicaciones todavía con un carácter piloto. Pero las expectativas que están levantando llevan a plantearse qué es esa tecnología, para qué se usa, cómo podría aprovecharse en Educación y que oportunidades y qué amenazas puede suponer. El análisis del estado de la cuestión aprovecha para proporcionar numerosas referencias y enlaces que deben llevar a conocer y reflexionar sobre esta nueva tecnología

Richard-Marc Lacasse, Berthe Lambert, Nida Khan

peer reviewed

Nicolás Nogueroles Peiró, Eduardo J. Martinez García

No abstract is available for this record.

Abdul Ghafoor Abbasi, Zaheer Khan

Blockchain and verifiable identities have a lot of potential in future distributed software applications e.g. smart cities, eHealth, autonomous vehicles, networks, etc. In this paper, we proposed a novel technique, namely VeidBlock, to generate verifiable identities by following a reliable authentication process. These entities are managed by using the concepts of blockchain ledger and distributed through an advance mechanism to protect them against tampering. All identities created using VeidBlock approach are verifiable and anonymous therefore it preserves user's privacy in verification and authentication phase. As a proof of concept, we implemented and tested the VeidBlock protocols by integrating it in a SDN based infrastructure. Analysis of the test results yield that all components successfully and autonomously performed initial authentication and locally verified all the identities of connected components.

Victoria L. Lemieux

No abstract is available for this record.

Flamur Bunjaku, Olivera Gjorgieva-Trajkovska, Emilija Miteva-Kacarski

Recently, cryptocurrencies and bitcoin have become the main topics in the financial industry. A cryptocurrency is a digital or virtual currency that uses cryptography for security. A cryptocurrency is difficult to counterfeit because of this security feature. A defining feature of a cryptocurrency, and arguably its most endearing allure, is its organic nature; it is not issued by any central authority, rendering it theoretically immune to government interference or manipulation. Cryptocurrencies have their benefits and drawbacks. The paper elaborates different aspects of cryptocurrencies, starting with their early development, challenges and risks, opportunities, advantages and disadvantages, and their future. In addition, the paper covered issues related to the practical and technical function of cryptocurrencies. It was concluded that is not easy to predict the future of cryptocurrencies, since there is a lot to be done especially in the field of formal regulations. However, the banks and other financial institutions should see and consider cryptocurrencies as an alternative for the financial transactions in the future. Key words: cryptocurrencies, development, advantages disadvantages, financial transactions

Ying‐Ying Hsieh, Jean‐Philippe Vergne, Philip C. Anderson, Karim R. Lakhani · 5 authors

Bitcoin represents the first real-world implementation of a “decentralized autonomous organization” (DAO) and offers a new paradigm for organization design. Imagine working for a global business organization whose routine tasks are powered by a software protocol instead of being governed by managers and employees. Task assignments and rewards are randomized by the algorithm. Information is not channeled through a hierarchy but recorded transparently and securely on an immutable public ledger called “blockchain.” Further, the organization decides on design and strategy changes through a democratic voting process involving a previously unseen class of stakeholders called “miners.” Agreements need to be reached at the organizational level for any proposed protocol changes to be approved and activated. How do DAOs solve the universal problem of organizing with such novel solutions? What are the implications? We use Bitcoin as an example to shed light on how a DAO works in the cryptocurrency industry, where it provides a peer-to-peer, decentralized, and disintermediated payment system that can compete against traditional financial institutions. We also invited commentaries from renowned organization scholars to share their views on this intriguing phenomenon.

Daniel Broby, Greig Paul

The internet and digital transfer of money is set to fundamentally change the way financial audits are conducted. This paper critically assesses the way that such assets are currently audited when stored in distributed ledgers, transmitted via a blockchain or whose value is stored in crypto rather than sovereign currency form. In it, we identify the self-verifying nature of such financial data which negates the need for traditional audit methods. Despite the promise of such methods, we highlight the many weaknesses that still exist in the blockchain and how these presents issues for verification. We address distributed transaction and custody records and how these present auditing challenges. We suggest how auditors can use smart contracts to address these and at the same time provide arbitration and oversight. Our contribution is to propose a protocol to audit the movement of blockchain transmitted funds in order to make them more robust going forward.

Ion Dronic

To build a safe system that would replicate and perhaps transcend human-level intelligence, three basic modules: objective, agent, and perception are proposed for development. The objective module would ensure that the system acts in humanity's interest, not against it. It would have two components: a network of machine learning agents to address the problem of value alignment and a distributed ledger to propose a mechanism to mitigate the existential threat. The agent module would further develop the Dyna concept and benefit from a treatise in sociology to build the missing link of artificial general intelligence - a world simulator. The perception module would estimate the state of the world and benefit from existing machine learning algorithms enhanced by a new paradigm in hardware design - a quantum computer. This paper describes a way in which such a system could be built, analyzing the current state of the art and providing alternative directions for research rather than concrete, industry-ready solutions.

Wanitcharakkhakul, Lakkana, Siriluck Rotchanakitumnuai

Blockchain Technology is the advance information technology in medical sector that need secure data sharing among related parties in the network. The investigating factors have impacts on electronic medical record Blockchain technology adoption. Online questionnaire was developed from literature with performance expectation, trust, and risk concepts. Online survey sent to patients and medical personnel. The feedback respondents were 149. The research results showed that the most influential factor affecting the acceptance is performance expectation which includes the recognition of technological benefits and relative advantages. Trust factor has impact on acceptance and low risk has positive impact of the Blockchain technology

Supranee, Sowichaya, Siriluck Rotchanakitumnuai

Blockchain technology is an optional new technologies to manage the supply chain process. This technology helps to improve and solve the issue of transparency as well as monitor operations in the supply chain. The study found that the perceived benefits of Blockchain technology in the automotive industry, inter-organizational trust are the important factors that affect the acceptance of Blockchain in the supply chain process. Inter-organizational relationship has negative impact on Blockchain technology acceptance. The non-mediated power is a key factor that builds inter-organizational trust and leads to success in the technology application in this industry. The results can be used as a guideline for the automotive industry to apply Blockchain technologies to the operations.