Once the vote is in, and the ledger state is decided upon, the ONLY state that endorsed nodes can now vote on is the next. There is nothing D could do to force a re-vote, and even if he could, all the other endorsed nodes would vote exactly the same as they did before.
Now this bit is important.....the set of endorsed nodes that may vote is deterministic and the vote result for each node is deterministic from the data they have. The determinism is seeded by the transactions for which some resource has been expended to create (fee & challenges).
This is basically the same way that instant-X and zerotime work; there are a set of deterministically selected nodes which vote at the same time on 0 confirmation transactions, majority vote wins. But of course, this fails completely under sybil attack (I know you said not to mention it, but unfortunately we cannot talk about consensus without it). If I own a majority of validating nodes I can do anything I like: come to a majority consensus on transaction A, then double spend with transaction B by dropping all record of A from my nodes and coming to a 2nd consensus. Or I can completely freeze the chain by censoring all transactions, etc. Now lets talk about the cost of this attack - in instant-x and zerotime, this cost is a simple constant in the amount of stake you own. In emunie, afair, this cost is completely zero, because of the long con attack. But is it really that easy to own the majority of nodes ? You don't just need the majority of nodes but the majority of nodes that are voting in any given round and to be eligible to vote in the first place also costs, stake or PoW (I think zerotime is PoW/Pos right ?). So it's not that easy is it ? I hope you guys don't mind me chiming in here from time to time  |
|
|
|
...
Periodically B, C and D are presented with a challenge from A, if they provide the correct solution, they are honest. You can classify this as a POW, and it makes up the 1st part of resource expenditure.
...
Maybe this falls into the category of information you don't want to be pulic yet but I'll ask anyway. Could you go into more detail on what such challanges might look like ? To me - obviously no expert in any sense of the word - it would seem difficult to make sure nodes aren't acting good-natured when answering challenges while acting evil when it comes to forming consensus. |
|
|
|
I agree that checkpoints in POW fail the trustlessness goal. It seems you also agree that POW/POS are never both append-only and trustless. But based on my reading of the consensus algo of eMunie, its possible to have a ledger system that is all three important qualities: trustless, append-only, and resourceless (meaning doesn't waste resources). Is there another crypto with those three?
The last thing I read (months ago) was that eMunie was trust based, and followed a similar security model to POS, but things may have changed since then. Fusilier is supposed to be writing up his consensus summary when he gets a moment in this thread. Are you refering to this http://blog.emunie.com/?p=53 ? Where do you see the similarities to POS ? |
|
|
|
How about this...  How easy it is to accuse someone, but how hard it is to prove you are right... With kind regards Goldmaxx So let's just assume it works and potentially jeopardize privacy / money instead of the author writing a proper whitepaper ? Sounds like a plan. I honestly don't care about the project and I don't mean to offend anyone but the attitude to just trust john connor when he says it works is just absurd. |
|
|
|
My main grip with John Conner is he doesn't put all the technical details in a white paper, because he is apparently wants to avoid peer review.
Could it be John doesn't put all the technical details in his whitepaper because people would just shameless copy-paste his technology? I saw the same accusations when zerotime was released...but 5 months after zerotime's release, we haven't seen one single double spent, and the accusators all went silent, because they can't prove what they were claiming (zerotime would fail)... regards Goldmaxx Did you ever think that that might be because noone has tried ? You can't claim something is impossible just because it hasn't happend yet. The reason noone has tried is prob because few have the knowledge to do so and those few have better things todo than crack a platform where the author isn't willing to at least put out a decent paper on how stuff is supposed to work. |
|
|
|
Great news! Good to see the progress of NEM. I am really curious about the Mosaics and Namespaces features coming up with next version. The price is also going up. Keep up the great work  When can we expect some new updates concerning NEM?  Right now my favorite project  There is a fork coming in at 440,000 for Mosaics and Namespaces. There was also a new light wallet released that runs in a single html file so in the future website builders will be able to add NEM to their website (and not through a third party centralized plugin, but directly). I am also hoping to make an announcement about an initial alpha testing round of Supernodes, a program where users will get rewards (not during the test round though) for running a node. Just to clarify: Mosaic and Namespaces don't come with a next version. They come with a hard fork that is happening at block 400k wether there has been another version change or not. |
|
|
|
I also am thinking along the lines of the last three posts and I also still want to reply to CoinHoarder's post upthread. But before I respond to your 4 posts, I want to first discuss what are the real threats or problems with pools, because I think analysing this helps to understand how my idea for improving Bitcoin might play right into the theme of your 4 posts. Thus it does appear we are making some progress on mutual understanding. Thank you for the very thoughtful discussion. Afaics the biggest flaw of pooled mining is that there is always an economic incentive to mine with a pool (in Satoshi's design) that has a double-digit percentage of the network hash rate, because otherwise revenue for miners declines (in scenarios). This is fundamental mathematics. Miners can in theory move their hashrate away from pools who are doing malfeasance, but it remains that 50% of the hashrate will always be concentrated into roughly less than a dozen or so pools. Thus pools are an easy target for government regulation and takeover control of the mining of Bitcoin. Or the natural mathematical tendency is for pools to form an oligarchy. But more than that is that miners aren't users. They are people who invest in specialized hardware for a return on the investment. Thus their interests are not aligned to the interests of permissionless commerce economically (even though it might be ideologically, the fact is that over time mining will concentrate to those who maximize economic return from mining). Thus miners really don't have an incentive to fight government takeover. They will acquiesce because economically (mathematically) they must. Whereas if users were the ones submitting at least 50% of the proof-of-work (and not doing so for profit but because they must with every transaction), then in theory their interests are aligned with permission less commerce so one would hope they would move away from pools that are doing malfeasance. But even then we know most of the masses are apathetic and clueless (e.g. will let Coinbase, MtGox, and Cryptsy store their coins), and thus they could maybe still be fooled, but at least then the issue isn't economically doomed but rather an education issue. Also it can also be possible that the smartest minority forks away from the dumb masses and any malfeasance they might be doing on destroying permissionless commerce. For example, supporting Lightning Networks is dumb as shit if you want permissionless commerce because it can only work reasonably smoothly if run by an oligarchy of corporate providers. So I am contemplating that the real threat to permissionless commerce are fundamental problems with Satoshi's design that would make forking away from it mathematically implausible: [...]that doesn't really solve the fundamental problems such as: Iota has attempted to go down this route and eliminated pools and mining for profit. But as I said, I think they introduced a Byzantine fault. I think miners insterests are more aligned with users interests than you think. Afterall if the currency they are mining becomes worthless their operation becomes worthless as well. So anything that hurts the value of their currency is neither in the interest of the miners nore in the interest of users. Of course there are other subjects where their interests do not align. |
|
|
|
when we can change the language on the website to german? in Germany lives more than 80 million people so i think it is necessary when nem wanted to grow.
Jabo38 should be able to help. Im sure they would be open to give a bounty to someone to translate the site to German, and other languages for that matter. Remember we are all on Telegram and Slack guys.....if you have more to contribute.. where i can find telegram? Make an account and then contact jabo38 so he can add you to the group. If telegram isn't your thing (e.g. you don't wanna hand out your phone#) you can also join slack which is interconnected with telegram so you're entering the same conversation from a different platform. If you want to use slack you can join here: http://blockexplore.in/search/join-slack/Telegram is ok, no need to give the phone number, because users can have a @Username I'll join. Patmast3r is paranoid. He doesn't want Telegram to know his telephone number. They are saying they want to enable privacy. They don't need my phone# to provide their service yet they are asking for it and give no alternative eventhough it would be trivial. They are hypocrites and that is why i don't use telegram. It's a question of principles. |
|
|
|
when we can change the language on the website to german? in Germany lives more than 80 million people so i think it is necessary when nem wanted to grow.
Jabo38 should be able to help. Im sure they would be open to give a bounty to someone to translate the site to German, and other languages for that matter. Remember we are all on Telegram and Slack guys.....if you have more to contribute.. where i can find telegram? Make an account and then contact jabo38 so he can add you to the group. If telegram isn't your thing (e.g. you don't wanna hand out your phone#) you can also join slack which is interconnected with telegram so you're entering the same conversation from a different platform. If you want to use slack you can join here: http://blockexplore.in/search/join-slack/ |
|
|
|
Hello Nem community, i started delegated harvesting today, it seems to work as it should I chose a public node from www.nodeexplorer.com. Now i would like to contact the node admin for providing my remote´s account private key, so that in case of a node reboot i would not get kicked out of the POI process. Where can i contact these persons? I cannot find any information. Do i contact them on the nem forum? Where do i find any kind of contact information? Thanks! Yes, you're gonna need to ask on the forum who is running that node and wether or not they're willing to add you to the "auto harvesters". You could try your louck here but many people don't visit btt that often anymore. |
|
|
|
Any idea on what price we might be looking at when zaif starts trading?
500-600 sats would be my guess. I mean we all want to see 5000+ sats. 500 -600??? is that not a little bit to high?? of course it is. people get a little to optimistic sometimes. |
|
|
|
Any idea on what price we might be looking at when zaif starts trading?
500-600 sats would be my guess. I mean we all want to see 5000+ sats. With a 8,999,999,999 XEM supply as per coinmarketcap 5000+ sats is impossible, so I believe. Does coinmarketcap have info on Japanese exchanges? Seems all trading is on PoloniEx still. I think they'll add any exchange as lons as it provides an api and is decently established. |
|
|
|
It is a good coin, I like it
xem price in 2016: 50 sats to 150 sats 150 sats to 500 sats 500 sats to 1500 sats It would certainly be nice, the 500 sats is certainly within reach. that's very, very optimistic imho. I'd already be very satisfied with establishing a bottom at 50. |
|
|
|
I can't get my nis to get synchronised, anyone know how to solve this issue please?
You're gonna need to be a lot more specific. here's the message I get at the top of the window : "NIS is synchronizing. At block 221896, est. 126 days behind. (at block 221896)" and it's been same message for 24h now... I restarted eveything 3 times and it doesn't change Anyway to get a direct download of the blockchain? Try deleting the db or just use a remote NIS. The only direct download i see is pretty old so that won't do you any good. |
|
|
|
I can't get my nis to get synchronised, anyone know how to solve this issue please?
You're gonna need to be a lot more specific. |
|
|
|
that's the same logo just with a globe. Are you suggesting the globe should be part of the logo ? |
|
|
|
here I am experimenting with ligthwallet, all work fine - all functions are available in full and is not observed any failures, but there has been no new translations
I have a few questions for security - was taken an account that is already stored coins when creating lightwallet requested privat key, password from the main account and the name will this or can this information in a secure store and you will not get if especially with regards to the privat key? now with regards to the proposed nodes , but also provided in a further node not a developer?
thank you
NEM devs are always concerned about security. NEM has many security features that no other chain has. In fact the Lightwallet itself is a security feature. NEM has two-tiered architecture designed in it from day 1 that this is taking advantage of. thanks, correctly realizing and making the conclusion - the password privat key remain on the computer, but not uploaded to the server, thanks again Yes, but do notice the security advice that gimre posted. You should still only use a trusted NIS for as long as the lightwallet is served by NIS and not a standalone application you can download. Anyone could just adapt the lightwallet that their NIS serves to steal your priv-key. |
|
|
|
here I am experimenting with ligthwallet, all work fine - all functions are available in full and is not observed any failures, but there has been no new translations
I have a few questions for security - was taken an account that is already stored coins when creating lightwallet requested privat key, password from the main account and the name will this or can this information in a secure store and you will not get if especially with regards to the privat key? now with regards to the proposed nodes , but also provided in a further node not a developer?
thank you
I'm sorry but noone will be able to decipher this. Please use google translate. I think the last part is about wether there will be nodes that aren't by developers ? The answer is yes. Any NIS serves the lightwallet. However people could adapt the code of the lightwallet in order to steal your info so you should only use a NIS that you trust. |
|
|
|
The old version worked.
I have uninstalled it and installed the new.
Now I get this message and do not know what to do:
NIS needs to be booted. Please open your wallet and boot a local node via the popup dialog or configure the auto-boot setting. (at block 396489). Any help?
Try this from the dropdown:  I am not logged in. Before the surface to login this yellow bar comes with the text above. So there is no dropdown or menu. Ignore it. Open the wallet. Then boot it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
