|
Title: Consensus based on the network latency and fully distributed voting mechanism. Post by: yj1190590 on August 22, 2018, 01:00:00 AM Hi:
I have been working on this consense mechanism since I posted it last time. This is a new version of research paper after struggling with the language expression skills. Let me introduce the protocol in brief. 1)This study aims to determine a pow-like protocol with less energy consumption. 2)The ability "Nertwork dispersity" is defined as Quote As a greater number of dispersed online terminals work together, the faster they can acquire And it is involved into the system along with the "Stake" property to avoid the common problems of PoS like "Nothing at stake" and wealth concentration issue. So the protocol can be seemed as a kind of PoS mechanism.randomly distributed information in the network due to network latency. This type of “ability” is referred to as “network dispersity,” 3)Block can be finalized. 4)It's a fully discentralized system and doesn't need any special nodes like "Validators". The process of deposit and authentication are not needed either. We can think it in this way: it achieves the main purpose of "Casper", but it's much simpler and more effective. The full paper is shown here(disabled). If there are any questions, please let me know. Thank you. Title: Re: Network Dispersity-based Consensus Protocol 2.0 Post by: domob on August 22, 2018, 05:46:29 AM That sounds interesting - however, if I understand your proposal correctly, then the equivalent of hash rate is the ability to control networking nodes around the globe, right? My gut feeling is that this makes it much easier for likes of the NSA or other nation states to perform a 51% attack than if they have to obtain and spend massive energy for PoW.
Title: Re: Network Dispersity-based Consensus Protocol 2.0 Post by: yj1190590 on August 22, 2018, 07:23:34 AM That sounds interesting - however, if I understand your proposal correctly, then the equivalent of hash rate is the ability to control networking nodes around the globe, right? My gut feeling is that this makes it much easier for likes of the NSA or other nation states to perform a 51% attack than if they have to obtain and spend massive energy for PoW. Yes, you can say it's an ability to "control" the network. But the ability of network dispersity is not the only ability involved in the competition. Actually there will be three types of competitor with three types of abilities. The risk that attackers will control the network by dominating one type of ability, like you mentioned, will be reduced. You could refer to the section "4. Compete for Voters" for more details. |