Call it approval voting, call it DPoS, call it delegates, we use different names for it but it is the same in essence.
approval voting is an actual type of voting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting. bitshares and nxt do not use the same voting algo so they do not use the same consensus algo. yes they both use delegated proof of stake (i think nxt calls it leasing) but the way active delegates/ active forgers are determined is different. originally bitshares was going to use up and down votes for delegates. i don't know the specifics of how forgers are chosen in nxt. |
|
|
|
I believe perhaps this is the same table referenced. It has been changed and updated. It has NXT/Bitshares vs other networks. I think some of the accuracy concerns have been addressed ?
Well, as long as it's impossible to include features specific to NXT into that table, which would show in red for BitShares, and as long as all the features showing in green for BitShares already work, I would say the accuracy concerns have been addressed  This table shows future features, right? Because BitShare is not alive, yet. If so, you need to mark the red cells for Nxt also green. As I said, with the next major feature release, Nxt will provide all of them (except Cross-Chain Trading - that will be addressed in the feature release after next) No the only "future" feature of bitshares is market pegged. Everything has been public tested for the past 2 months. You can join the test at bitsharestalk.org. When is this next major feature release for nxt? |
|
|
|
BitShares X if it eventually is able to do what it says on the tin, will have a system that's more decentralised but with enough trust (knowing who will produce next block) that they can handle MasterCard/Visa volumes and process them incredibly rapidly. More importantly you will 'hopefully' be able to hold BitUSD or BitGold on a blockchain. So it's not a shitcoin, more like the - 'could change everything coin' so I guess actually you could call it 'the shit' coin Did you confuse something? This actually sounds like Nxt.   Yeah sure, choose NXT - If you like a system that's >10X slower, >10X more expensive with <1/2 the features  http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/Why_choose_Bitshares%3F Check out the comparison chart - it's still a work in progress but I think BitShares' new DPOS Blockchain is superior. (NXT is actually my third biggest holding after Bitcoin & BitShares related stuff though...) Haha, you know that this table is of course in favor of BitShares? Well, obviously if considering the URI of the wiki. It only lists features that exists BitShares but not those only available on Nxt. Recommended confirmation time is of course the same as both use the same underlying technology. Here, I stick to the original. About the other features: for Nxt: Anonymous Transactions - next major feature release Profit Sharing - next major feature release Market Pegged Assets - next major feature release for BitShares: well, no release yet; we will see if they deliver => actually the table should show a big red NO when are these features to be released? are they already implemented and being used on active test nets? also, recommended confirmation time is not the same. even if you use one block confirmation, nxt blocks are produced every minutes as apposed to 15 seconds. there is very little latency in block production on the test net. block production could be sped up to 2 second interval. |
|
|
|
I never had to serve my country. I was lucky. I do however serve Bitshares. Til death does us apart. Onward and forward. The world doesn't get it, but we do. Sometimes I sit around wondering. What can I do to wise up the masses about what is the greatest crypto 2.0 project in existence ? I'll post on bitcointalk ! A bastion of freedom ! Everyone do yourself a favor and read about bitshares. Right now donating has a lot of benefit and you are enabling freedom. Freedom through DACs. Lets see how far this stuff can take us. It is a new world out there and Bitshares is on the next level in that regard. http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/A_Philosophy_of_Freedom has some quotes from the head dev of Bitshares. So donating to this gives *you* Angelshares while also supporting Bitshares. Seriously. Do yourself a favor peeps !! You're a real fanboy. Funny .. but still a fanboy. Why do you think Bitshares is such a great project ? Why shouldn't I invest in NXT instead ? Transactions speed (reduced to 15 second blocks and 1 block confirmation - will be reduced to 10 perhaps 5 second blocks). Transactions load (10 tps initially). Scalablity (can scale to size of visa). Stabile assets (bitAssets allow people to pass on volatility to those with higher risk tolerance). Name registration and anonymous transacitons (referred to as TITAN or Transfer Invisibly To Any Name - automated stealth address creation). Fastest and most active development team in the business. |
|
|
|
BitShares X if it eventually is able to do what it says on the tin, will have a system that's more decentralised but with enough trust (knowing who will produce next block) that they can handle MasterCard/Visa volumes and process them incredibly rapidly. More importantly you will 'hopefully' be able to hold BitUSD or BitGold on a blockchain. So it's not a shitcoin, more like the - 'could change everything coin' so I guess actually you could call it 'the shit' coin Did you confuse something? This actually sounds like Nxt. No it doesnt sound like Nxt. Nxt is coded in java, not c++, which is a liability in and of itself. It cannot scale to Visa volumes... the transactions are both two large and the delegation of block production is not as streamlined as BitShares. It is simply not as scalable of a system. And you do not have market pegged assets that are properly collateralized. It seems that you guys are half way there but not quite. If Nxt were the "could change everything coin" its market cap would have already surpassed litecoin... but i guess in the end we will see what the market consensus demonstrates |
|
|
|
BitShares X is going to be made liquid in the next two weeks.
Is BitShares X the one that was snapshot on Feb 28, initially called Protoshares? I am confused with all the terminology The terminology can be confusing as BitShares is more than just a single platform. BitShares X is the bank and exchange, the snapshot of which took place on Feb 28. BitShares PTS was formally called protoshares, but there was a trademark conflict that required a rebranding of the name. BitShares PTS is simply a clone of bitcoin that uses momentum proof of work to make it asic resistant. PTS holders are preallocated at least 10% shares in future DACs. |
|
|
|
Top 10 reasons to be excited about BitShares right now
Reason 6: Next PTS Snapshots
Next PTS Snapshots for new DACS? That's what you get by donating to PTS now? Any idea what those new DACS those will be? Yes the three main ones I'm focusing on are the BitShares.p2p domain system, a lottery DAC called BitShares Lotto & BitShares Music. But there's more in the pipeline at various stages. (I noticed a third party is putting this site together Bitsharesmarket.com which covers a lot of the DAC's.) To be honest the tough part is valuing their effect on PTS. Say I estimate those three DAC's are probably worth a combined 50 mil. BitShares only commits to give PTS a minimum of 10% of the equity. (However in BitShares X which should be trading in a week or two they gave PTS 50%) So personally I'm hoping for more average equity. Either way PTS is undervalued in my opinion and will jump to reflect the value of whatever the announcements are. BitShares X is going to be trading where? Sorry, for all the questions. This seems promising. I'm just not exactly sure where the best entry is? Donating to AGS in the next few days you get a higher share value of the other DACS. PTS is undervalued and could double/triple in value. Bitshares-X has an amazing potential and is almost ready to launch. BitShares X is going to be made liquid in the next two weeks. It will probably be picked up by every major exchange. Currently pts is traded on bter and crypsty and i would expect xts (bitshares x symbol) to be traded on these exchanges initially and then traded on other exchanges. the api is very simple there is good documentation on how to compare its uses with use of the bitcoin api. since blocktimes are 15 seconds and confirmation takes 1 block i would expect as many exchanges as possible will adopt its use. I would say of the three possible investment vehicles ags, pts and xts, xts will probably provide the best return although there is the minor possibility of the network being reset given some unforeseen bugs. bitshares x is in active alfa testing and the probability of a reset is minimal but there is always that risk. pts is a good strategy since you can get equity in new dacs while still maintaining a liquid asset. pts is going to get upgrade to the dpos blockchain, so that in and of itself can lead to a great value proposition. ags shares are not liquid but they are probably more undervalued by the market than even pts. in terms of the three different investment vehicles xts has the greatest possible return, ags has the second greatest and pts comes in third. it is all about preferences and risks. |
|
|
|
Top 10 reasons to be excited about BitShares right now
Reason 6: Next PTS Snapshots
Next PTS Snapshots for new DACS? That's what you get by donating to PTS now? Any idea what those new DACS those will be? BitShares Me - user issued assets and exchange (this is already implemented on BitShares X so I'm not too sure how they will be making the distinction) BitShares DNS (.p2p) BitShares Lotto BitShares Vote BitShares Music BitShares Insurance you can find specific information at bitsharestalk.org or wiki.bitshares.org |
|
|
|
I just have to say that i would love some coin to replace BTC , some times i fucken hate it , im waiting to transfer 3 btc from crapsy to mint and its stuck after 2 conf over a fucken 1 hour , its bullshit!!!!!!!
bitshares has 15 second blocks and 1 block for confirmation. it is in active alfa testing. soon you wont have to wait for deposits to exchanges. i feel your pain. |
|
|
|
relevant information can be found here hi thank u but i read that site. its too long to read and extremely user unfriendly, too complicated thanks tiger5056 ~CfA~ we must be viewing different sites. this is all the key information on how to acquire pts and ags. it doesn't really get more simple than the explanation provided there. |
|
|
|
relevant information can be found here |
|
|
|
|
my mistake, bter uses 10 confirmations as well
|
|
|
|
you guys are right to say that 6 block confirmations for bitcoin does not make an immutable transaction. it says here that 10 confirmations are recommended for nxt. i don't know if there is any analysis of the recommendation that would make it easier to compare to bitcoin confirmations. also bter is a chinese exchange that has 70% nxt trading volume. |
|
|
|
if 51% of the delegates are compromised - that is more than 51% of delegates are not producing blocks - then the network would require greater confirmation time. delegate participation on the test network has rebounded from 30% to 90% after the fork i referred to.
'Compromised' can mean much more than just 'not producing blocks'. And even in that scenario, that would signify some damage to the network. Anyway, BitShares seems like a system designed to function well in normal conditions. It hasn't been tested in battle conditions yet, only time will tell if it's good enough for those. No you have misunderstood. Compromised does not mean anything more than not producing a block. That is the only way a delegate can be comprised. Delegates don't have any role other than producing blocks. If a delegate filters transactions they will automatically lose approval as each client can detect this action and each subsequent transaction will remove approval until the delegated is ultimately voted out of his or her position. And the next capable delegate will include the transactions. |
|
|
|
I am actively editing the wiki. I am pretty sure those facts are correct.
Oh cool. Let me explain: Not sure what "confirmation time" here means, but 6 blocks of Bitcoin are a recommendation like 10 blocks is for Nxt. Maybe, the semantics of "confirmation time" is not what I think it is. After careful consideration, Nxt also use that what you call DPoS. We have also delegates. However, we call it different. I think it would be better to have TF (Transparent Forging) in there. It is the official term for consensus finding in Nxt. I am not sure if this row is used for concrete implementations or for classes of consensus mechanisms. E.g. DPoS is the name of the concrete name of the consensus mechanism in BitShares whereas PoW and PoS however are classes of algorithms. I would be glad if you could harmonize this row. Maybe, two rows would be helpful for users: Consensus Base: PoS/PoW Consensus Mechanism: DPoS, TF, Consensus, Scrypt can you provide a source for the 10 blocks confirmation time for nxt being comparable for 6 blocks for btc. as i know, 6 blocks is immutable for bitcoin and the wiki says that 1440 blocks is immutable for nxt. what is deemed as "acceptable" for btc is 1 to 3 blocks. I was under the impression that 10 blocks was more like 1 block for bitcoin. when i use bter i think it takes 20 confirmations to go through so i would assume 10 blocks for nxt is not comparable to 6 blocks for bitcoin. i understand that this will change with TF and new release. I will use your suggestion of splitting consensus into base and mechanism. thanks for the information! |
|
|
|
What if 51% of BitShares delegate nodes are compromised or some other large enough number? Wouldn't that cause disruption to the network? Not even temporary?
Github is github, live net is live net. I believe BitShares devs are knowledgeable enough to fix bugs. So, BitShares prevents spamming of the network with enforcing limits on txs in the software. NXT takes a different, fee-based approach to prevent spamming of the network.
transactions have fees in the bitshares network as well. all of these networks use fees to stop spam. if 51% of the delegates are compromised - that is more than 51% of delegates are not producing blocks - then the network would require greater confirmation time. delegate participation on the test network has rebounded from 30% to 90% after the fork i referred to. |
|
|
|
Colluded is less likely than coerced, I admit that. Same argument goes for Bitcoin by the way.
BitShares hasn't launched yet. Test net is so much different than live net. It's too premature to talk about the speed of development of BitShares until they have launched real trading and have been attacked by real hackers who exploit for profit. Not many hackers would exploit the test net, because they can't profit from it.
collusion and coercion have no impact on the delegated system. if a delegate is compromised they will be voted out how is it premature to talk about the speed of development? look at their github . i would say look at the nxt github but they don't have one. this team is more productive than any other team in the space, i encourage you to look at the githubs of other open source crypto-currency projects. i would not argue that the system has to be tested more, but the team has demonstrated that they can improve vulnerabilities quickly and efficiently. on the current test network someone flooded the network with 22 tps and the network forked. the next day the devs fixed the code and attempted to flood the network with 1000 tps to no avail. |
|
|
|
Does anyone know when the next PTS snapshots are taking place and for which DACs?
They have not officially been announced yet. Snapshots for Bitshares Me, Bitshares DNS and Bitshares Lotto will be announced shortly after the launch of the Bitshares X network, which should be sometime this week. Important to note that Bitshares X will not be launched with features for trading BitAssets. The network is being launched to make shares in Bitshares X tradable. |
|
|
|
how is the centralization an issue? i want you to really think hard about that question. the point of the making these systems decentralized is so that there is no one point of failure and no one point of control. with dpos you get that since delegates have an easy task that can be audited by all clients on the network. delegates can not sign two blocks or they will be fired, so the cannot double spend. delegates cannot stop processing transactions or they will get voted out for a delegated that can. delegates are neither a central point of failure or control. the network is secured by the shareholders. as a result of this structure you have a more scalable system.
nxt is adding new features that will make the transaction sizes excessive. while i was generous to leave transactions per second at 3.4. the base transaction size is 160 bytes, but there are transaction types that can be as large as 10KiB, limiting the block to only 3 of these transaction - thats 0.05 tps. the largest transaction size for bitshares is 340 bytes.
both from a design and technical standpoint bitshares is more scalable than nxt. while you can say that nxt is more decentralized, bitshares is more secure.
if the comparison chart assumes anything at all it assumes the worst possible scenario for bitshares and the best possible scenario for competitors. everything in the bitshares column aside from market pegged assets has been tested on public test network.
What if several delegates collude or are coerced? Especially if these several delegates each controls more than 1 node. That makes them a central point of failure. You can't fire old delegates and hire new ones dynamically, it takes time. If they collude or are coerced and do harm to the network, it will take time to recover from the damage. NXT doesn't have this limitation per design, hence NXT is more secure. tx size and the 3.4 limit is temporary. Until TF is implemented, NXT is still in the bootstrapping phase. Until TF is implemented NXT is not what it's designed to eventually be. When TF is implemented, NXT will be more scalable. can you create a plausible scenario for collusion? there is simply no incentive to collude. because this is designed around free market incentives collusion is not economically viable. there is an economic cost to collusion which in a free market economy with out the intervention of government makes it unfavorable for all individuals. who's argument is reliant upon conjecture now? nxt is going to impliment this they are going to implement that. bitshares has already implemented a dividends system, it has already implemented all the features of nxt and is thus far substantially more scalable. bitshares has been in alpha testing for the past month and a half and has had 8 iterations of public test networks. the speed of development for Invictus Innovation and bitshares team is far greater than the speed of development for nxt |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
