Oasis and Meta AMA Highlights: Privacy AI, Meeting the Future

Author: Oasis Chinese Channel

On August 9, 2022, at 19:30, the Oasis Network held a Twitter Space event themed "Oasis and Meta: Privacy AI Meets the Future."

Recently, Oasis Labs announced its partnership with the renowned tech company Meta (formerly Facebook), and the two will engage in deep collaboration to promote AI development through privacy technology. This significant news sparked widespread discussion within the community. What positive impacts and potential competition will top internet giants like Meta bring to the entire blockchain industry? Is the combination of decentralized and transparent blockchain + privacy computing technology a feasible solution for the transition from the Web2 world to Web3? How can the value of data be further unleashed? Could it be PriFi?

In this event, we were fortunate to invite three guests: He Yifan, CEO of Hongzao Technology and Executive Director of the BSN Development Alliance; Gao Chengshi, PhD in Cryptography and the first author of "Cryptographic Techniques in Blockchain"; and Gavin, a researcher at Consensus Lab, to discuss related topics with the host, William, the Ecosystem Product Manager for Oasis China.

This article is a review of the highlights from this AMA event, with some content edited.

Self-Introduction Segment

First, let us welcome all the guests and please introduce yourselves.

He Yifan:

Hello everyone, I am He Yifan, CEO of Hongzao Technology and Executive Director of the BSN Development Alliance. Hongzao Technology is a cutting-edge tech company dedicated to the development, construction, and operation of information infrastructure platforms for China's digital economy and smart city development, including two major projects: the Blockchain Service Network (BSN) and the Smart City Wuyuan Plan. We have always collaborated with Oasis, and I am very happy to participate in this event today.

Gao Chengshi:

Hello everyone, I am Gao Chengshi, a PhD in Cryptography and the first author of "Cryptographic Techniques in Blockchain." My entire educational background has been in military academies, where I spent a total of 21 years from studying to graduating. After that, I worked for two years at the Zhengzhou Commodity Exchange, focusing on futures market research and managing a postdoctoral workstation. Later, I briefly served as the director of the research institute at Dagong International. I entered the blockchain space in 2018.

Our team's focus and core technology are in secure multi-party computation and blockchain system architecture and application implementation. In the second half of this year, we are considering conducting investment research and post-investment management for overseas Web3 projects.

Gavin:

Hello everyone, I am Gavin, a researcher at Consensus Lab. Consensus Lab is an investment institution established in 2018, and we have been paying attention to and laying out the privacy track for a long time. Additionally, we tend to invest in Web3 infrastructure as well as NFT and metaverse tracks.

Q&A Sharing Segment

Question 1:

What positive impacts and potential competition will top internet giants like Meta bring to the entire blockchain industry?

He Yifan:

When any company holds 2 to 3 billion pieces of personal privacy data, its entire business model must align with user privacy, as this is its only or one of its few competitive advantages. This applies not only to Meta but to any enterprise.

From the current perspective of the internet structure or privatized systems, unless Meta contributes its entire system and establishes a large governance framework with multi-party cross-supervision, it will still be tempted to "do evil." However, if that happens, Meta would essentially be donating its most valuable assets, which is unrealistic.

I believe that Meta's collaboration with Oasis is also an attempt at business transformation, exploring how to utilize blockchain technology, public chain technology, or Web3 technology to achieve healthier competition for the enterprise. I think the pressure and demand on Meta are very clear, and it will continue to experiment over the next 3 to 5 years, or even 10 years, until it forms a more socially recognized positive business model.

What BSN is currently doing is gradually transitioning the backend database from being controlled by one entity to being managed by multiple entities. In addition to multi-party management, another aspect is allowing users to manage their own data. I believe this is the ultimate goal, and the medium for managing data cannot be a backend system.

Gao Chengshi:

This question involves several keywords, including privacy, AI, blockchain, Web3, and Meta. I would like to share my thoughts from two perspectives. The first is purely from a technical standpoint. AI and privacy are two different matters, and privacy and blockchain/Web3 are also two different matters. These can intersect or not.

Many large companies in the blockchain space are working on privacy computing, leading many to assume that privacy computing is an important aspect of blockchain development. In reality, privacy computing is a unique application in cryptography that has been researched since the early 1980s with the development of cryptography and computer technology.

With the rising awareness of personal rights and the frequent occurrence of privacy breaches, privacy protection has become a very urgent issue. The combination of privacy computing and AI has its practical significance, but how to integrate them on a technical level still requires in-depth research. For example, how can we achieve both privacy protection and the use of AI technology? These are issues that need further consideration.

Another issue that I find is discussed less is: whose privacy is it? In the future, more data will not be viewed by people but by machines or codes. If data is private to the code, can the code still perform corresponding computations on the data? These are all technical issues that we need to explore further.

Another point that needs attention on the technical level is Web3. Different people may have different understandings of Web3. Since the Bitcoin system, on-chain data has been public and transparent, which has become a natural assumption of blockchain systems. To ensure user identity security and privacy, users will naturally demand anonymity. Since the Bitcoin system deals with transaction data, which is extremely sensitive for everyone, if the Bitcoin system requires real-name registration, no one would use it. Therefore, the design here has a series of tightly interrelated logical connections.

On the basis of public chains, we need to ensure user privacy while also ensuring that transaction data can be verified for authenticity. This can technically be achieved, but it will affect the overall efficiency of the system. Whether this is one of the future development directions of Web3 is something that needs serious consideration.

Next, I will discuss the second perspective, the non-technical aspect. The impact that internet giants like Meta can bring to the blockchain or Web3 space remains to be seen. Many internet giants from the Web2 era may face the possibility of being eliminated in the Web3 era. However, some companies can survive multiple economic cycles and become century-old enterprises. Whether Web2 giants can navigate different economic cycles from Web1 to Web2 and then to Web3 is still worth observing.

Gavin:

From an investor's perspective, in the early stages of any industry, there is often a tendency for startup teams or small teams to have an advantage. This is because when large companies enter a new industry, their approach is generally to test the waters first, then follow up, and finally decide whether to fully enter based on the situation. By rebranding, we have already seen Meta's determination to enter Web3, and now its collaboration with Oasis also indirectly indicates that it is time for many internet giants to deeply engage in blockchain.

Firstly, because the internet has a massive user base, it will make it easier for the blockchain industry to break out of its niche. Many people previously did not understand blockchain, privacy technology, or the metaverse, but internet giants can attract these outsiders.

Moreover, with the direct involvement of internet giants, it will inevitably stimulate the emergence of many applications with millions of users in this industry. Although we do not see this happening yet, with the influx of capital, talent, and resources, it is only a matter of time. These internet giants will first leverage their user base to achieve industry consensus, providing a relatively stable and acceptable development environment for our application developers.

I believe that collaboration between internet giants and external foundational technologies like Oasis will not only accelerate the implementation of technology but also promote its improvement and optimization. In the future, whether for Meta, Oasis, or other foundational technologies, there will be a greater focus on commercial implementations.

Question 2:

In the Web2 world, companies have been criticized for infringing on user privacy, and it seems that traditional internet giants are accelerating their transition to Web3. Is the combination of decentralized and transparent blockchain + privacy computing technology a feasible solution for the transition from Web2 to Web3?

He Yifan:

Everyone has checked user agreements and knows that their data is in someone else's backend while continuing to use these services. I think this only indicates that the current entire technical system of the internet cannot protect personal privacy data because that is how the system is designed.

In the future, the entire transformation of their data, in my opinion, is from what we define as Web2 to Web3, which faces enormous resistance. The collaboration between Meta and Oasis is undoubtedly positive, but I personally believe this is a reaction under pressure.

In fact, at some point, I believe that all governments will support Web3 much more than large companies. Without considering tokens, we do not call it Web3; we still refer to it as a public information system, which has three major benefits.

First, everyone is in control and co-management, meaning this is not a backend system; it becomes a public system. Second, in this public space, I can have my own fully controlled small database. This means that I can migrate the data I currently have with these large companies. In the future, these large companies should no longer read their own databases; they should read my database when they need my information, but my database is not built on any system; it is in a public distributed system, and I have absolute control over it.

Another aspect is transparency. Data in any aspect can threaten these large companies. This transparent platform will never be given to you. From their own exploration and pursuit of future technology, including their belief that the situation is not irreversible, they must prepare from now on, just like many banks do now, where central bank digital currency is irreversible. They must now study central bank digital currency and adjust their business models accordingly. So the entire context should be relatively clear.

Gao Chengshi:

The first perspective is still on the technical level. Since the on-chain data of the Bitcoin system is public, transparent, and immutable, based on this, we attempt to make Bitcoin or blockchain systems applicable to more fields, including currency and finance, so privacy naturally comes to mind.

Including the "Security Specifications for Financial Distributed Ledger Technology" released by the People's Bank of China, although it uses the term "financial distributed ledger" instead of blockchain, it actually refers to the same thing. The specification requires that financial distributed ledgers must protect user privacy while ensuring that transactions can be verified.

From the public and transparent on-chain data of the Bitcoin system to the subsequent majority of blockchain companies starting to work on privacy computing, attempting to make breakthroughs in this direction seems to be a natural progression, including Meta now doing this. But from a technical perspective, is there another possibility? Instead of trying to solve existing problems by layering other technologies on the original technical architecture, could we reconstruct another system from the ground up to achieve our current goals? Therefore, in my view, blockchain + privacy may only be one of the feasible solutions for the transition from Web2 to Web3, not necessarily the only solution.

The second perspective I want to discuss is from an economic standpoint. What is the economic model of Web3? We see that whether it is Bitcoin's POW mining or Ethereum's staking liquidity mining, it is actually maintaining the decentralized operation of the system through different mining mechanisms.

In the Web3 field, we have made some technological advancements and enhancements in functionality across more scenarios. However, we cannot say that just because technology can achieve certain functions, we believe the world will inevitably develop in that direction. After using this technology, will the efficiency in economics improve? These are all issues that need to be explored in depth across multiple disciplines.

Gavin:

Everyone knows how many assets a person has after the public key of the public chain is revealed, and how many transactions they have made. In traditional terms, for example, in banking, we do not know other people's transactions or transaction data. Does this count as privacy?

In fact, Web2 companies hold data in the hands of these large companies, and users cannot retrieve their information or monetize it.

However, one of the differences between Web3 and Web2 is that Web3 allows users to benefit from their own data. This is also the original intention of Oasis: to allow users to share their privacy data and gain benefits while further achieving privacy protection.

Web2 companies have also done a lot for privacy protection, such as Apple supporting users to revoke app data permissions, which is one example, and there are also some laws. Previously, Meta had many issues regarding data protection.

The collaboration between Meta and Oasis also aims to protect user data and utilize it after entering the Web3 world.

Thus, in terms of blockchain technology, privacy technology can protect privacy while also obtaining the desired data capabilities. I believe privacy is an essential component of Web3 and one of the necessary functions of on-chain databases. User data can have different levels of privacy, and different users can have different privacy permissions for the same data.

Question 3:

Traditional internet giants have a large user base and mature business operation models. In the current context where public chains are seeking application implementation, will collaboration with traditional internet giants be a good entry point for the development of public chains?

He Yifan:

From the perspective of public chains, especially those involving virtual currencies, regardless of who collaborates, it must involve gas fees or require holding on-chain tokens. This actually conflicts with the current traditional information systems because they are completely two different systems. If it is just about using our technology, I think that is very positive. However, to truly break through, we need to find information systems outside the crypto sphere or business in real life.

If we cannot break through, I believe that even this collaboration with Meta will not allow Oasis's native token to be directly embedded into their business flow. Compliance issues must be considered, including compliance in the United States.

So technically, it is certainly meaningful. From the perspective of the technical logic and exploration that Gao mentioned earlier, and even in the future, the exploration of business models, I think it is definitely positive. However, from the perspective of business logic, it may not provide substantial help to some of our supply chain's business objectives.

In terms of truly integrating our core values and concepts with traditional businesses, I believe the significance will not be great. If this happens multiple times, and everyone finds that it is unrelated to the token, it may actually create a negative impact on public chains. Many users may indeed see the collaboration with Meta, but in the end, the token was not embedded into others' business flows, which could gradually become a negative influence.

Gao Chengshi:

I agree with He Yifan's remarks on this question. In my view, public chains already have good application scenarios; it is just that these scenarios have not yet closely linked or bound with our real physical financial systems. If we introduce DeFi from public chains into the existing financial and monetary systems, along with appropriate privacy computing, we can enhance efficiency while protecting privacy. We can see that based on the complete digitization of blockchain, through open-source code and the immutability of on-chain data, as well as decentralized local operations, it will bring much higher efficiency than our traditional physical financial systems.

On this premise, the cooperation between public chains and traditional internet giants involves the question of why to cooperate. From an economic perspective, cooperation between A and B must be a win-win situation. A feels that it has gained benefits from the cooperation, and B also feels that it has gained benefits; otherwise, such cooperation would not occur.

Of course, the premise of this question is that traditional internet companies have a large user base. Is it possible for applications in the blockchain world to quickly build a large user base? I believe this is entirely possible, especially with the inherent economic self-incentive model that blockchain applications possess.

Whether blockchain companies can convert traditional internet users into blockchain users is a question mark. If the user traffic of traditional internet companies can be converted, is it cheaper to convert through traditional internet companies' user traffic or through the economic self-incentive model of public chain systems? This needs to be calculated. Personally, I believe the latter's cost may be lower.

Then, regarding the business operation model, traditional internet companies have formed relatively mature business operation models, but these models are not entirely the same as the operation models of applications in the blockchain world. Traditional internet companies are centralized systems that bear risks and build themselves to gain profits. In contrast, blockchain and applications in the blockchain field rely on a consensus where everyone invests in construction, contributes, and shares profits. The internal logic of the two is different. Of course, it is not entirely impossible for the two to combine, but I am relatively pessimistic about the possibility and prospects of this combination.

Gavin:

In fact, we all know that Meta previously prepared to create a public chain called Libra, which we can compare to Ethereum. However, it also involves significant legal risks.

I believe that Meta's collaboration with Oasis is because Oasis is more specific, focusing on the public chain in the privacy track, and Meta needs this technology or data, which is why they collaborate.

Additionally, why not collaborate with other public alliance chains or other public chains? First, collaboration with alliance chains tends to be relatively closed.

Secondly, I think collaborating with public chains that already have technology and personnel in Web3 is necessary, as it requires some technical support and participation from Web3 personnel. We can review the entire crypto market; every bull market sees the emergence of new public chains, indicating that the current major public chains have not yet fully stabilized.

I believe it is quite necessary for internet giants to collaborate with public chains like ours that can bridge Web2 to Web3. As for whether it can be executed, I think we should execute first and discuss later.

Question 4:

Today's guests include many ecological partners who have established deep cooperation with Oasis, so I would like to invite everyone to share: besides the current collaboration with Meta (formerly Facebook) in AI, what other application scenarios do you think privacy can have?

Gao Chengshi:

Any technology must be applied to create value and achieve effectiveness. How can technology be applied? It depends on three aspects. The first aspect is our deep understanding of the essence of technology, the second aspect is our in-depth understanding of business scenarios, and the third aspect is the eruption of our imagination. This may sound abstract, so let me give an example.

For instance, electricity was originally a natural phenomenon, and people like Franklin attempted to bring electricity down to the ground through various methods. Later, scientists like Maxwell artificially created electricity through electromagnetic conversion. These achievements were remarkable, but at that time, no one knew what electricity could be used for. It was only after Edison invented the light bulb that people found a use for electricity.

Note that there are two English words here: the word for electricity itself is "electronic," but when we talk about electricity today, we generally use "power." I believe this process reflects the deepening of human understanding of the essence of electricity and the expansion of human recognition of its application scenarios. Of course, this process must be accompanied by a significant enrichment of human imagination and cognitive abilities. For example, with the current 5G and the upcoming 6G/7G, everyone knows it will be faster than 4G, but what uses and how to use 5G or 6G/7G still need further exploration.

He Yifan:

To this day, I still do not know what data is worth. This may slightly conflict with Oasis's philosophy. For anyone, only a very small amount of data in this world is useful to you, whether you are an individual or a company. The government is another matter, but the government never pays for data.

I personally believe that this logic is something I have not figured out. It is like we often say that everyone's personal data is valuable, and therefore these large companies should pay you for using your data. I also cannot understand this logic.

Because I believe that your data is valuable only if it allows sellers to find you after they sell it. If your data is given to a certain seller and they do not buy, then your data is essentially worthless. Not only do they not make money, but they also lose money. Generally speaking, when it comes to personal data, many people may generate all their data throughout their lives, including their bank transactions and everything they write, and that may have a total value of zero, or even if you give it to someone else, they may not want it.

Gavin:

In the long term, with the development of distributed storage and on-chain databases, there will be more and more on-chain data, and the types of data will become richer, leading to a greater demand for privacy. As a public chain, in the medium to short term, Oasis can support users' asset-level privacy needs, and in the long term, it can support distributed database projects, providing data privacy services or serving as the computing layer for these databases in the future.

We may be able to explore some unique applications that leverage the characteristics of privacy computing, such as advertising platforms in the Web2 space that have been criticized.

I believe the biggest feature of blockchain technology is that its addresses and a series of operations can be queried. However, currently, many large holders or hackers do not want their entire transaction data to be queried. We can clean these transaction data and perform some data analysis, which I think is feasible. As for how to stimulate this industry, especially in the privacy track, I think we still lack an application that everyone can use.

Thank you to the guests for their answers, leading us to further understand the details of Oasis Labs' collaboration with the renowned tech company Meta (formerly Facebook) and the future development trends in the privacy track. Thus, this Space session comes to an end. Thank you to the guests for their wonderful speeches, to everyone present for their active participation, and to the media partners for their strong support.

We look forward to the next event; see you then.