Blockchain is a decentralized database that is shared and synchronized among the nodes of a computer network and operates without the need for a central authority. The network must be open, publicly accessible to multiple users and transparent, and its content must be at hand for validation at any time of the day. Instead of being locked within a single database, as is the case with centralized systems, files and information are diversified across the blockchain and made available to as many computers connected to a common peer-to-peer network as needed. Data stored on the blockchain is virtually immutable, irreplaceable, irrevocable and available for validation at any time of the day. The transfer of data over the blockchain network is called a transaction. A file that contains data related to a transaction is called a transaction file.

Blockchain performance is often directly correlated with the number of active computers (nodes) within the network and the number of validated blocks that hold sets of information. The more blocks, the better the data is protected, because more blocks are harder to forge. This solution may seem stable and sustainable, but it is far from perfect, mainly for the following reasons:

• Inadequate mathematical methods are used to validate transactions, which unnecessarily burden the entire blockchain system and make it more complex and expensive than it should be.
• The validation process is inevitably accompanied by a number of topics open for discussion, such as high costs, inability to record large amounts of data, environmental challenges, huge energy consumption, vulnerability to illegal distribution and sale, and more.
• Any network failure could potentially compromise the security and integrity of the data stored in the blockchain, while the credibility of the blockchain itself would be irreparably damaged.

Let's confront the facts head on and try to find a solution accordingly. We will start with a simple example that illustrates the analogy between blockchain performance and the physical world.

Three neighbors are returning home and want to enter their houses.

• The first neighbor has the key he brought with him, unlocks the door and enters the house normally.
• The second neighbor does not carry the key with him, but finds it under the mat, unlocks the door and enters the house.
• The third neighbor has no key at all and cannot unlock the door. He calls for the help of a locksmith, who breaks the lock and the neighbor can now enter the house.

It is obvious that the first neighbor acts the most prudently, because he has the key that he carries with him. Another neighbor risks leaving the key under the mat, which someone else could find (say, see if he takes the key and where he takes it from) and enter the house. The third neighbor is behaving strangely and irrationally. Not only does he break the lock to enter his house, but he also invites any malevolent people watching him to do the same.

The "house" we want to enter is the data we want to access, and the way we enter the house is the way we protect the data. The "key" we use to enter the house is the app we use to access the data. If we have the key and carry it with us, it means we can use the app to access the data on our own device. If the digital key, which we use to unlock the door and simultaneously digitally lock the data inside the files, could somehow be inserted into the file itself and made available on demand through the same application, that would be a perfect solution. If we have the key, but we don't carry it with us, we'll have to store it elsewhere. In this present case, it will be stored in the blockchain. This is a good solution, but not as good and sustainable as the previous one. If we don't have the key at all, we'll have to "break the lock". In other words, we will have to access data in a much more difficult way. This is the worst case scenario. This leads to an increase in investment costs, introduces uncertainty and mistrust and significantly reduces the chances of making a profit, because the costs are too high.

Just as we need to know how to access data, we also need to know how to protect data from unauthorized access. Even when it comes to data that does not require anonymity, it is necessary to disable changes to the files and preserve the authenticity and integrity of the content. This is, for example, what it takes to create and mint authentic digital assets (ADAs). It makes sense to use software that embeds and cryptographically "locks" data in a file, including security-related data, and that can also retrieve that data and log any changes to the file. And if we don't use the right software, it's like guarding a house that we can't lock (because we don't have the key). We would have to install video surveillance, install multi-layered armored doors, hire security consisting of several tens, hundreds, thousands of guards... In the digital world, the "gatekeepers" would be computers connected to a shared network.

With all of the above known, it remains unclear why blockchain technology relies heavily on the latter, far worse solution. Instead of using a single, simple application to store, secure, and authenticate data, files, and information, most blockchain networks are based on the principle of "the more complex, the more expensive, the better." Higher prices, however, are no guarantee of success, while complexity rarely improves quality. The complexity of the algorithms used in blockchain technology is not a reflection of the mathematical functions underlying these algorithms. It's a fairly simple formula of computing/validating hash values of all transactions in the blockchain, and most developers are familiar with it (a cryptographic hash represents an encrypted fixed-length value that identifies a given amount of data). Complexity arises as a consequence of overexploitation of these calculations. Due to the lack of a suitable software solution, the path of least resistance is chosen and the use of inadequate substitutes is insisted upon. As a result, the effectiveness of algorithms is drastically reduced due to the fact that they are unnecessarily burdened with numerous, still unsolved issues (as mentioned in the first chapter). It is incomprehensible that engineers persistently try to force a solution within one and the same working environment, although it is crystal clear that a disparate concept must be added instead.

Primarily designed for hosting authentic digital assets, DCCT Network is a blockchain system with up to three devices (nodes) connected to a common peer-to-peer (P2P) computer network. The device can be a computer, tablet or smartphone. Data transmission over the network is carried out by exchanging electronic messages in the form of digital telegrams. Compared to other blockchain systems that may involve multiple nodes in the chain (eg voting systems, supply chains, video streaming services, etc.), DCCT Network is a more innovative, productive, transparent and cost-effective solution. As stated above, there are (up to) three nodes that make up DCCT Network. Here's how it works:

• The first node in the queue is the one that initiates the digital telegram transaction (eg bank payment or cryptocurrency transaction, authentication of digital assets, online verification of shared documents, etc.). The transaction data is pre-stored in a file that represents a digital telegram. A digital telegram transaction is not a "black box" where no one knows what's inside, but a real file that can be sent, received, stored and reviewed.
• On other occasions, the second node would be considered the "central authority", but in this case it is only one of the nodes in the common network. In a way, this node can still act as a supervisor and mediator. For example, it can host, even temporarily, an authentic digital asset or a message to be conveyed to the end user. It also serves as a remote database server, providing information about completed transactions at any time through a web app and cloud-based software running in the background.
• The third node is the receiver of the digital telegram. For example, the recipient can be an authentic digital asset (ADA) buyer, a cryptocurrency trader, and so on.

A digital telegram transaction is considered final after all three nodes (devices) in the network have verified the data contained in the digital telegram. Using the same data verification software, the three nodes make decisions completely independently of each other and inform each other of the outcome of the verification. Even if the transaction data from any of the three nodes becomes unavailable for any reason, temporarily or permanently, it is still available for validation in the remaining nodes, even if only one node remains. The stability and functionality of DCCT Network are not subject to external influences, nor do they depend on changes within the system. The files and metadata stored on DCCT Network cannot be altered, forged or removed, which makes this platform suitable for transmitting confidential, encrypted information and guarantees the preservation of the authenticity of the digital assets hosted over there.