In 2026, we will continue our in-depth reading of AA's masterpiece, *Mastering Bitcoin*. Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the introduction outline the Bitcoin system and protocol. First, let's read paragraph 4. It reads as follows: Bitcoin is a distributed peer-to-peer system, meaning it has no central server or controlling node. Bitcoin units are generated through a process called "mining," which requires continuously performing a computational task that references a list of recent Bitcoin transactions. Any participant in the Bitcoin network can become a miner, using computing devices to help secure transactions. On average, every ten minutes, a Bitcoin miner successfully strengthens the security of past transaction records and receives a reward of new Bitcoins and recent transaction fees. Essentially, Bitcoin mining decentralizes the central bank's currency issuance and clearing functions, eliminating the need for dependence on any central bank. The first sentence uses two terms: distributed and peer-to-peer (P2P). Distributed means the network has many nodes spread across the globe. Peer-to-peer means these nodes are directly interconnected, without needing a central server or control node to relay data (data plane P2P) or coordinate commands (control plane P2P). The second sentence discusses the creation of BTC from scratch. As is well known, Satoshi Nakamoto did not pre-mint any BTC for himself. When Satoshi Nakamoto launched the Bitcoin network in 2009, the initial issuance of BTC was 0. So, where did the BTC circulating in the market today come from? Traditionally, any currency or similar product requires an institution or enterprise to first manufacture and issue it through the production process, and then distribute it in the market through the sales process. This creates a monopoly for the institution or enterprise that possesses the rights to produce and sell it. Monopolies can be policy-driven monopolies achieved through exclusive rights (such as licenses, essentially a form of legal backing) (e.g., tobacco), or natural monopolies achieved through so-called "moats" (such as technological barriers, user loyalty, etc.) (e.g., Nvidia's high-end graphics cards, Google search). Other commodities, where monopolies are not possible, experience fierce market competition. Competitors, while producing similar products, differentiate themselves through branding to facilitate competition. Bottled drinking water, for example, is a fiercely competitive market. Users have little loyalty and can freely switch between different brands. Governments also don't issue monopoly licenses to any single company. As a result, we see numerous brands engaged in production and sales, competing fiercely with each other. This intense competition drives bottled water profits to a minimum, benefiting consumers. BTC differs from both of these models. First, BTC is not produced and sold by a single entity. BTC is produced collectively by all participating nodes. This production involves using computing power to mint new BTC. This process consumes computer computation, primarily electricity, hence the analogy to gold mining, and is called "mining." Everyone can use their own computer (mining rig) to mine, produce BTC, and then sell it on the market. Therefore, Satoshi Nakamoto said that, in this sense, BTC can be said to be produced collectively by everyone. Secondly, all BTC producers don't simply rebrand and compete with each other; they all produce BTC, and their products are all BTC, creating a cooperative yet competitive relationship. Competition arises from the fact that those with greater computing power (capability) have the opportunity to produce more; cooperation stems from the fact that everyone, regardless of their ability, contributes to the security of the Bitcoin network, collectively enhancing its security and thus increasing its value. Thirdly, the initial distribution of BTC, its release into the market, is autonomously carried out by these globally dispersed producers. The market, through an invisible hand, achieves self-coordination, generating the real-time price fluctuations in the secondary market—the so-called spot price of BTC. Returning to the original paragraph, how frequently is BTC produced? On average, a miner successfully creates a "block" every ten minutes. A block is a data set containing the Bitcoin transaction records of the past ten minutes. Miners' mining, or computation, involves searching for an extremely difficult hash value, using this hash value as a lock to secure the block's data and prevent easy tampering. The ability of hash values to prevent tampering is a cryptographic principle. Some people use analogies like fingerprints, seals, or, as in the case of blockchain, locks, but these are inaccurate and misleading. For example, if you imagine a hash value as a lock on the outside of a door, you might wonder, "Can I just break the lock and take the stuff?" Analogical thinking is less effective when dealing with entirely new concepts and can even have negative consequences. ChainTeach asked deepseek: Are there any real-world things that can be used as an analogy for the tamper-proof function of hash values? deepseek gave several analogies as follows. ChainTeach commented on the inaccuracies. * Fingerprint / DNA Each person's fingerprint (or DNA) is almost unique and can represent "this person". A hash value is also a file's unique "digital fingerprint," and any tiny change will produce a completely different hash value. Inaccuracy: A person's cells and atoms are replaced many times throughout their life, but fingerprints and DNA are actually unchanging. * Wax Seals* Important letters in the Middle Ages were sealed with wax and stamped with a unique seal. Anyone wanting to peek at or modify the letter had to break the wax seal. The recipient would know the letter might have been tampered with if the wax seal was broken. *Improperty: Similar to the lock analogy, wax seals only prevent opening and touching the documents inside. This is not the same as altering data to change the hash value. You don't need to change the hash value to access the data.* * Tamper-evident Labels on Supermarket Goods* Some high-priced goods (such as electronics) have tamper-evident labels on their packaging. Once torn, they leave a "VOID" mark or a broken pattern. A complete label represents that the product has not been tampered with. The hash value is that "complete pattern of the label," and recalculating the hash is equivalent to checking whether the label is still the original. * **Chemical Reaction Test Strips** For example, pH test strips, which detect acidity and alkalinity, will undergo a specific color change upon contact with a liquid. The final "color" is uniquely determined by the "original liquid composition." If the liquid is secretly replaced or adulterated, the resulting color will be completely different. The hash value is this "final color," which is the result of a chemical reaction with the original data (liquid). * **Improperty:** This detection concept is closer to the tamper-proof logic of hash values. However, pH test strips are less effective because sulfuric acid and hydrochloric acid will produce the same result if the acidity or alkalinity is the same. Hash values, on the other hand, will change their calculation result with any change in the data, thus being detected. The ChainTeacher sent the above annotation back to DeepSeek. It agreed, saying the annotation was very accurate, capturing the subtle discrepancies in the core logic of these common analogies. The root of these discrepancies lies in the fact that the tamper-proofing of hash values essentially detects changes in the data content, rather than physical "touch" or "access." Finally, deepseek imagined something that doesn't exist in our real world to draw an analogy to the tamper-proof concept of hash algorithms: "Imagine a super-universal test strip. It can not only detect acidity and alkalinity, but also simultaneously and uniquely detect the type, quantity, arrangement, and even quantum state of every molecule and atom in the liquid, and combine this information to generate an extremely complex and unique holographic color spectrum. You test the original liquid and get spectrum S1. Then, even if someone adds a water molecule to the liquid, or replaces an atom with an isotope, retesting with this test strip will produce a spectrum S2 that is completely different from S1." Hash algorithms are precisely this kind of "super universal test paper." They possess an avalanche-like sensitivity to any tiny, global change in the input data, ensuring the uniqueness of the result. In summary: The essence of hash anti-tampering is not adding a physical lock to the data, nor is it attaching an easily forged static label. It is a public, deterministic, and extremely sensitive "content reproduction-comparison" mechanism. It doesn't prevent you from seeing or copying, but it allows you to discover without a doubt whether the copy you have is 100% identical in content to the original that was initially verified. Your initial comments hit the nail on the head, helping us peel away inaccurate surface features, thus gaining a deeper understanding of the true role of hash functions as "content integrity verifiers" rather than "access controllers." Therefore, it's clear that the claim that hash algorithms prevent tampering is misleading. Tamper-proofing is easily misunderstood as preventing tampering altogether, and further, as stopping tampering. In reality, hash algorithms don't prevent you from doing anything to the data. They simply make your modifications easier to detect. The original paragraph also mentions that miners, in addition to receiving newly mined BTC rewards, also receive transaction fees (in BTC) from all the transactions included in their blocks. This part is too complex to cover in detail here; we'll study it in more detail later when we read the chapter on transaction fees. The paragraph concludes by saying that through this ingenious design of everyone mining together, the Bitcoin system achieves financial decentralization through technological decentralization. This financial decentralization encompasses two key aspects: decentralized currency issuance—it's not issued by a central bank, but by everyone; and decentralized clearing and settlement of transactions—it's not handled by a clearinghouse, but by miners distributed globally. It's worth noting that the Bitcoin system's clearing and settlement efficiency is faster and more efficient than almost all existing centralized clearing and settlement systems. Centralized systems often require T+1, or overnight, clearing and settlement (every 24 hours) (while domestic interbank transfers are instantaneous, the underlying netting isn't instantaneous, though consumers generally don't perceive it), while the Bitcoin system reduces this time interval to 10 minutes.
Brian
Kikyo
Joy
Alex