If you are a DLT researcher, then you have most probably dreamt of a consensus mechanism:
- without miners
- that doesn't require nodes to query each other
- where nodes "magically" reach consensus in less than a second without wasting network throughput on voting
- that supports an unlimited amount of nodes and validators
- works equally well with a small permissioned set of validators
- that is compatible with PoS, PoW, VDF's and so on ...
- where you can reach finality in 1-2 seconds
- where the chance for an agreement failure is 0
- that doesn't need reattachment or reorganization of the underlying data structure
- where sending a transaction just requires you to gossip your transaction and be done
- where nodes collaboratively validate transactions instead of only the highest weight nodes making decisions
Join on me on a live coding session on the 12th of febuary, where I implement "multiverse consensus", as part of a simulator that will allow us to study this new consensus family.
It is time for payments on DLTss to becomes as easy, reliable and efficient as sending and email.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
IOTA (much like the universe) doesn't have a total order of events. But in the same way as the universe still allows you to have a total order of events within a "frame of reference" IOTA also allows you to have a total ...
@facemrook@Adrian_Midas@IOTAFanClub@Vrom14286662 ... order of events when it comes to a particular chain of spends. Colored coins allow you to create a traceable and non-forkable chain of spends which creates something like a "frame of reference" in which total order can exist.
Ich möchte mich hiermit öffentlich dafür Entschuldigen dass mein letzter Tweet etwas provokant klang. Ich hatte weder die Absicht @blocktrainer öffentlich anzugreifen noch in irgendeiner Weise bloß zustellen.
Crypto ist ein unglaublich komplexes Thema und man kann nicht ...
... erwarten dass eine einzelne Person über alle Details eines jeden Projektes bescheid weiß. Gerade wenn man über mögliche Auswirkungen von gewissen Unterschieden in der Funktionsweise philosophiert kann es durchaus sein, dass man mal etwas sagt was diskussionswürdig ist.
Roman spricht in seinen Videos frei und ohne Skript und aus eigener Erfahrung weiß ich das Dinge manchmal einfach anders rüber kommen als man sie meint oder man vlt. im Eifer des Gefechts einfach nicht die richtigen Worte findet.
@blocktrainer Ich habe mir gestern mal dein neuestes Video angeguckt und ich muss sagen, dass du da ein paar Sachen erzählt hast die totaler Blödsinn sind.
1. Ein DAG-based DLT bewahrt Daten genauso global auf wie eine Blockchain (inklusiver voller Historie und aller Balances).
Sharding und Snapshotting sind unabhängig davon ob du einen DAG benutzt und das von dir diskutierte NANO hat keins von Beidem.
2. Niemand zahlt in Bitcoin jemals dafür Daten für immer aufzubewahren. Die gesamten Fees gehen an die Miner und nicht an die Nodebetreiber.
Das Netzwerk bezahlt sich also nicht selbst und sorgt dafür dass die Kosten der Nodebetreiber gedeckt sind und in der Tat nutzen Miner ASICS ohne Festplatten, die weder Daten für andere Nodes zur Verfügung stellen noch in irgendeiner Weise die "Infrastruktur" unterstützen.
One that is collaboratively validated by the economic actors of the world (coporations, companies, foundations, states, people) or one that is validated by an anonymous group of wealthy crypto holders?
The problem with current DLTs is that we use protection mechanisms like Proof of Work and Proof of Stake that are inherently hard to shard.
The more shards you have, the more you have to distribute your hashing power and your stake and the less secure the system becomes.
Real world identities (i.e. all the big economic actors) however could shard into as many shards as necessary without making the system less secure.
Todays DLTs waste trust in the same way as PoW wastes energy.
Colored coins are the most misunderstood upcoming feature of the IOTA protocol.
A lot of people see them just as a competitor to ERC-20 tokens on ETH and therefore a way of tokenizing things on IOTA, but they are much more important because they enable "consensus on data".
By creating a single uniquely colored coin that you can spend over and over to yourself, you can create a chain of spends that is secured by consensus.
By submitting data with these spends, everybody in the network will not only agree on the order of the published data but ...
... would even agree on which data to use if conflicting information where published. This is incredibly important for several use cases beyond tokenization.
In fact, IOTAs upcoming smart contracts will heavily use this new ability to build "private unforkable blockchains" ...
@multifolio@durerus@kabizses 1\ IOTA will not use the same FIFO mechanism as a tie breaker in times of congestion as ETH, where we just use mana instead of fees to decide which transactions to process.
Instead, we will use an agent-centric sharding approach where we use the "distance" of transactions to ...
@multifolio@durerus@kabizses 2\ ... the corresponding nodes to dynamically react to differences in supply and demand.
If nodes can not process enough transactions anymore, then they will reduce their observation radius until they are able to keep up again.
@multifolio@durerus@kabizses 3\ This mechanism alone is however not enough as this would allow an attacker to just randomly spam a certain shard, forcing the nodes to shrink their observation radius and reducing the security in the network.
We therefore still have a mana-based rate control mechanism on ...