Discussion on Blockchain and Non-Cooperative Game Theory

When studying blockchain technology, we often focus on how it changes various fields in real life, such as healthcare, government affairs, and supply chains. While this perspective is reasonable, from a more macro viewpoint, blockchain technology, especially the emergence of Bitcoin, has brought a brand new social experiment to human society. This is not just about applying old concepts to new technologies, but rather about gradually exploring and establishing an entirely new ecosystem and theoretical system.

Overview of Non-Cooperative Game Theory

Non-cooperative game theory emphasizes individual autonomous decision-making in strategic environments. In this type of game, each participant's actions are viewed as independent, and their strategies mutually influence each other's interests. This game includes not only conflicting elements but also cooperative elements.

A key concept in non-cooperative games is Nash equilibrium. Nash equilibrium is achieved when all participants choose the optimal strategy while other players' strategies remain fixed, and no one can gain a higher payoff by unilaterally changing their strategy.

Bitcoin System: A Model of Non-Cooperative Game

The Bitcoin system is an excellent example of non-cooperative game theory. From its underlying mining protocol, the output of each Bitcoin is derived from miners engaging in non-cooperative games. The strategy of one miner affects all participants, and when a certain strategy is proven to be more effective, other players will imitate it, thereby promoting the development of the entire ecosystem.

The core of the Bitcoin system lies in its decentralized philosophy. It aims to overcome the weaknesses of the "trust-based model" by emphasizing the importance of individual verification, rather than relying on any third party. This model provides a practical platform for non-cooperative game theory.

Assessing Non-Cooperative Game Systems

Early assessments of Bitcoin's value were primarily based on its level of decentralization, including metrics such as the number of nodes, the number of holding addresses and their amounts, and mining hash power. Bitcoin not only solves the problem of data immutability but also provides a solution to combat inflation.

However, the current development trend of blockchain projects seems to be deviating from this original concept, increasingly leaning towards a "trust-based" model and placing greater emphasis on usability. Project valuations also rely more on metrics such as throughput, transaction speed, and user numbers, rather than the degree of decentralization and the application of game theory.

Conclusion

Bitcoin, as a non-cooperative game system, addresses problems that centralized or cooperative game systems cannot solve, creating an entirely new ecosystem. In contrast, many current Blockchain projects merely transfer already mature centralized technologies to the Blockchain without truly addressing fundamental issues.

The assessment of non-cooperative game systems should start from aspects such as their degree of decentralization, the number and quality of players participating in the game, the derivative ecosystem, and the ability to create native assets and information. Importantly, we need to evaluate non-cooperative game systems and open financial products using different criteria, as they are fundamentally different entities.

When researching and evaluating blockchain projects, we should delve into which projects truly embody the characteristics of non-cooperative game systems and rationally apply different criteria to assess different types of projects. This distinction is crucial for the correct understanding and development of blockchain technology.