Thank all for the comments. Really I didn't tried to measure myself Bitcoin speed, because that would mean to establish a reference computer for all tests which I cannot do (I didn't implement MAVEPAY and I try to analyze its theoretical capabilities). As stated in the paper, I used Crypto++ benchmarks ( http://www.cryptopp.com/benchmarks.html). Maybe Crypto++ implementation of ECDSA is slow (is takes 8.53 msec to do a ECDSA256 verification) on a AMD Opteron 8354 2.2 GHz. But anyway, as DeathAndTaxes pointed out, I'm using the same benchmarks to estimate MAVEPAY performance. I've also assumed a very slow Internet connection (1 Mbps), but that is the average Internet bandwidth in the U.S., as of 2011. How many transactions can Bitcoin validate per second in my a Intel CORE2 CPU 4300 @ 1.80 Ghz ? Has someone posted statistics? Maybe Gavin can release a simple benchmark application so we can make a poll. Keep in mind that transactions are verified twice in Bitcoin, and the average inputs per transaction is around 2. So that makes 4x decrease in performance. (which puts Etlase2 68 verfications/second down to 17 transactions/second ) MAVEPAY has none of those problems since: It requires 3 hash evaluations per payment, transactions are verified once, transactions cannot have more than 1 input (this artificial restriction favors scalability and penalizes anonymity) Sergio. |
|
|
|
As I promised, I’m publishing the preliminary paper on how to apply MAVE-3 to P2P cryptocurrency. I spent some time re-thinking everything and meanwhile (at 2 a.m.) I designed a new one-time digital signature algorithm with 320 bits signatures, and 80 bit public keys, that is faster than RSA. Better than Lamport’s but probably not better than Merkle-Winternitz. Every time I think I’ve finished something, I start a new thing… Apart from the description of the new protocol, you’ll find interesting proposals for Bitcoin evolution such as: - Combining Multiple Digital Signature Algorithms into a single P2P currency
- Protection from Miners selfishness
- Adding a Proof-of-work for every Bitcoin transaction, and how the network can deal with this.
- Free market and the principle of Least Required Security (LRS) to optimize network resource usage.
- How to achieve more advanced transaction fee rates.
- Hybrid systems
- The hidden costs of maintaining a Bitcoin client.
Download the paper from: http://bitslog.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/mavepay-a-new-lightweight-payment-scheme-for-peer-to-peer-currency-networks/ Enjoy it! |
|
|
|
I´l like the term "proof-of-poker", whatever that mean!  Note: MAVEPAY is not about poker, but It could be used for paying bets, since payments are really lightweight. (comment: though confirmation time is an issue) There are two fast-tracks for bootstrapping a p2p coin: 1. Black market. 2. unregulated but secure poker gambling. The remaining uses can also bootstrap a cryptocoin, but much slowly. Doing (2) is quite challenging, but it can be done. I spent a year (before Bitcoin was created) to research on a new method to solve the mental poker problem. I´ll post the paper afterwards, so you can check it (it´s almost 70 pages long though) But I would prefer MAVEPAY to some time in the future be included in Bitcoin and to form an hybrid, and in the paper I describe how to do it. It could be done in such a way that it don´t break older clients, but older clients won´t see the money going back and forth between Bitcoin and MAVEPAY (only money going out of Bitcoin). Anyway, instead of talking and talking about it, I should go to TeXnicCenter and finish the damn paper! Bye! |
|
|
|
Thanks Mike for the feedback related the typos and for the patience to reach page 6. Have you finished it? I want to point out that the concept of MAVE is very simple. If the paper is complicated, then is my fault in explaining it (my native language is not English). Regarding finway questions: 1) MAVE, as a new cryptographic algorithm, is it safe? In the paper I sketch of a proof of resistance for three types of attackers I can identify. As my humble opinion, is it secure. Please review the paper and try to break it! The underlining security of the scheme is the impossibility of inverting a one-way hash function, which is the same assumption Bitcoin relies on for mining. 2) Are you a Cryptographer ? I´d like to think myself as one. But probably I´m not, since I don´t like writing proofs. Though my graduate thesis was about new developments in cryptography, and I was a teacher assistance on cryptography in university, and I have spent many years doing computer security, and I have a few of patents on crypto. Make your own mind. 3) I think we should stop reinventing wheels. Tell that to Satoshi  We should start reinventing, re-engineering, and re-thinking, all time. The moment you think a problem is "solved", the moment you cannot innovate. Best regards, Sergio. P.S: Today or tomorrow I´m publishing the MAVEPAY paper. |
|
|
|
|
If your interest is purely economical, I recommend you to skip MAVE-3 paper and wait a few days more until I publish MAVEPAY paper, where I apply MAVE to define a p2p currency.
Also I calculate the cost of handling 1000 tps for 5 million users at aprox. 10 USD per user/month. (this figure includes electricity, hardware amortization, bandwidth usage, etc.)
Bye!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, MAVE adapts well to the proof-of-stake model (but implementation really matters).
Note: MAVE REQUIRES checkpoints (or user defined limits in transaction amounts) in order to reduce the incentive to revert payments accumulated from the last checkpoint.
Bye!
|
|
|
|
|
1) Bitcoin does not scale well (this has been discussed, refuted and debated, so this is just my opinion)
2) With an alternate digital signature system, it can scale upto 1000 tps (transactions per second) with an average computer, and some idle CPU time. Periodic balance sheets are required though.
A cryptocurrency based only on MAVE has the drawback that confirmation times are higher. So I would propose a hybrid system, using MAVE for low valued transactions and ECDSA for high value payments.
In a couple of days I'm posting a second paper with implementation details...
Best regards,
Sergio.
|
|
|
|
|
The patent was applied to sell the technology to some online casinos.
I would issue a unlimited license for the open source network that solves the p2p poker problem right.
But it can't be GPL because GPL has some issues regarding patents..
The MAVE protocol is unpatented (and, anyway, it's no big deal)
Sorry for the out-of-topic response.
Sergio.
|
|
|
|
Two years ago, back in 2010, I thought deeply about all this interesting things. And I thought much needed to be done. At that time, I designed the first mental poker protocol that is both realtime and have drop out tolerance (that is required for p2p playing). By drop out tolerance I mean that if a player drops out (accidentally or intentionally) the remaining players are able to keep playing without problem. (the quitting player cards get automatically shuffled in the deck). This is important because, if not present, a colluding player can drop out (and block the protocol) to "save" another player from loosing money. At that time I did my thesis and wrote a patent, and both documents are online (check US patent 13086208). The main problem that I found was the requirement for a time server or better, some timestamped message exchange service to prove a message has been delivered. Since Bitcoin blockchain is not fast enough to serve as a distributed time server, I thought the the technology was not mature enough. Recently I developed a new p2p signature protocol called MAVE (for MAssive VErifications) and a new P2P currency based on it (yes, yet another blockchain!) which can process thousands of transactions per second with an average personal computer, using 50% of the average PC resources (CPU and RAM) and almost no hard disk space. But still is not suitable as a time server, because it still need "confirmations". I'll be publishing the preliminary paper in my cryptocurrencies blog late this week ( http://bitslog.wordpress.com) and I'll post an update here so everybody can see it and check it. I'd like to implement the whole platform, but I have no time. Maybe crowd-funding it? I really don't want to mess up with regulation and get notices from government agencies, so I won't host any of this work myself. But I'd love to see it working... I'd be glad to license the patent if someone works out the rest! BTW, I think we should standardize the block chain, so that single mined block works for different block chains of different p2p networks, something like a Meta-blockchain. Did anyone posted about it? Sergio. |
|
|
|
I've been following Bitcoin since its creation. I helped Gavin Andresen solve a DoS bug in versión 0.6 (see special thanks in http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.6.0/) I've developed a Mental Poker protocol (my thesis and US patent 20110087885) that allows peer-to-peer poker over P2P currencies that I'd like see implemented for any Bitcoin o alike currencies. And I hope someone else makes a good business with it. Also I have a blog specially for Bitcoin and related currencies: http://bitslog.wordpress.com. I talk about a lot of improvement proposals there. I'm writing two papers on peer to peer signatures (MAVE) and virtual currencies (HBOW) that are strongly related to Bitcoin. Oh, what else... so many things one have done in life.... That's why I'd like to be member of this nice community.... Best regards, Sergio. |
|
|
|
I've been following Bitcoin since its creation. I helped Gavin Andresen solve a DoS bug in versión 0.6 (see special thanks in http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.6.0/) I've developed a Mental Poker protocol (my thesis and US patent 20110087885) that allows peer-to-peer poker over P2P currencies that I'd like see implemented for any Bitcoin o alike currencies. And I hope someone else makes a good business with it. Also I have a blog specially for Bitcoin and related currencies: http://bitslog.wordpress.com. I talk about a lot of improvement proposals there. I'm writing two papers on peer to peer signatures (MAVE) and virtual currencies (HBOW) that are strongly related to Bitcoin. Oh, what else... so many things one have done in life.... Best regards, Sergio. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
