paint-brush
Why I Forked OpenBazaarby@TheLoneroFoundation
178 reads

Why I Forked OpenBazaar

by Andrew Magdy KamalDecember 5th, 2024
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

OpenBazaar 3.0 is expected to embody the ideals of decentralization. The software is designed to leverage Bitcoin within a transactional framework built on Tor and a decentralized architecture.
featured image - Why I Forked OpenBazaar
Andrew Magdy Kamal HackerNoon profile picture

The anticipated return of OpenBazaar, an open-source e-commerce client designed for Bitcoin, has been eagerly awaited. The forthcoming OpenBazaar 3.0 is expected to embody the ideals of decentralization, appealing to both cyberpunk enthusiasts and Bitcoin maximalists. OpenBazaar aims to achieve what Bisq has sought to accomplish in the realm of exchanges, promoting the concept of open peering for e-commerce. This technology, which gained traction among Bitcoin advocates following the infamous Silk Road, is rooted in open-source principles.

Open peering is facilitated through the Tor network, enabling transactions to be conducted via Bitcoin, allowing users to engage in peer-to-peer exchanges without reliance on a centralized banking system. OpenBazaar presents a versatile platform that can be applied to various use cases, including localized bike or car-sharing services, local barter exchanges, and anonymized or pseudonymous e-delivery systems.

A common misconception is that open peering can't be scaled both horizontally and vertically, at local and global levels. For instance, the decentralized-internet SDK exemplifies this potential. The ultimate objective is for developers to integrate this SDK into applications, ensuring that users who download the application are in close proximity to one another. This could lead to the creation of a widely adopted application that forms a decentralized grid, aligning with the principles of grid computing.

What is very telling, is that distributed data sharding is similar to what proof of work was supposed to be as opposed to what proof of work has become. Bitcoin for example, should be utilizing Proof of Verifiable Computing or Proof of Computation as opposed to the Hashcash algorithm. This was the whole point for my Hackernoon article on the Bitcoin Efficient proposal. Bitcoin's objective was to establish a decentralized, peer-to-peer electronic cash system. However, large mining corporations such as Bitmain, financial entities like Gemini and Microstrategy, technology firms such as Nvidia and AMD, along with nations like China, have significantly benefited from consolidating their power within the market.

Bitcoin represents a groundbreaking technology designed to be open source and to promote individual freedom. Nevertheless, it has inadvertently fostered a market where the ultra-wealthy maintain significant control, allowing a select group of mining operations, corporations, and individuals to dominate block production, transaction processing, and governance. This situation has not transformed finance in the same manner that BOINC revolutionized the computing sector, which is a notable shortcoming. Conversely, software such as OpenBazaar seeks to leverage Bitcoin within a transactional framework built on Tor and a decentralized data architecture. This software is also open source. I have forked OpenBazaar; will you consider doing the same?