Bitcoin Forum
July 30, 2024, 03:23:46 AM *
News: Help 1Dq create 15th anniversary forum artwork.
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Achain’s Fork Theory —— what do you think? on: November 24, 2017, 06:22:13 AM
I saw some valueable questions under the same posting in the Chinese Board (Chinse version), I did the translate.


Someone asked:

Any investigations on Lisk sidechains?

I suggest to look at the following techniques:
1. To solve the scalability problem with a Layer 2 protocol. (e.g. Lightning Network, Cross-chain)
2. To implement Ethereum's Sharding  - to avoid the seizing of transaction performance between contracts
3. A more expanded version of Lisk's design of sidechains
4. Achain's fork theory

Pros and cons? Who's better than others?


Very good question, hope to hear more here...
Thanks for the thought. When we compare the four solutions we'll have to keep the following criteria in mind: security level, scalability, decentralizing level, and performance rate. So here we go on a scale of 1 to 10:
1. Lightning Network only works when relying on the Bitcoin main chain. It's good for transactions of smaller amount and higher frequency. It also lifts restrictions of performance of transaction authentication. But it does so at the expense of security level. Rating: 3 (security), 3 (scalability), 10 (decentralization), 8 (performance rate).
2. Ethereum's Sharding technique assigns different nodes to authenticate different transactions, thereby logically distinguishing out subsections of the chain. Like Lightning Network, it boosts performance rate. But it does so at the expense of its degree of decentralization. Rating: 8, 5, 3, 10.
3. Lisk has all of its applications built on its sidechains, which makes it more scalable. But it does so at the expense of security and decentralization. And as to what extent can the sidechains interact with each other, we are yet to find out through more research. Rating: 3, 7, 5, 5.
4. In Achain's Fork Theory, all sub-chains are equally independent (self-governed), and every one of them is free to decide to split into further forking. The ultimate mutual and reciprocal bond is the VEP (Value Exchange Protocol) for all to obey. It requires high technical commitment, which we will try our best to fulfill. Comparatively, Achain opts for the most balanced strategy. Rating: 6, 8, 7, 5.
2  Local / 中文 (Chinese) / Re: 关于Achain分叉理论的设想 on: November 24, 2017, 06:05:27 AM
团队研究过 Lisk的子链技术吗?
期望对如下几种技术进行对比:

1. 通过Layer 2 协议,解决scalable问题。如闪电网络、跨链。
2. 类似以太坊分片机制,解决合约间对交易性能的抢占。
3. 类似Lisk的子链机制进行扩展。
4. Achain的分叉理论。

孰优孰劣?
评价需要多个维度去比较,可以从安全性、扩展性、去中心化程度、交易性能分别打分,各项满分为10分
1. 闪电网络依托于比特币主链才能工作,优点是支持小额和高频的交易,避免验证的性能瓶颈,但是以牺牲安全为代价的,分数:3,3,10,8
2. 分片技术的本质是让节点验证不同的交易,从而在逻辑上区分出不同的sub-chain,优点依然是提高交易性能,但牺牲了去中心化特质,分数:8,5,3,10
3. Lisk将应用承载于侧链,优点是有较好的可扩展性,但牺牲了安全性和去中心化程度,至于主子链能否关联,我们持续关注,分数:3,7,5,5
4. Achain提出分叉网络,所有sub-chain地位平等,而且每个链可以自由定制和分叉,最终通过VEP关联起来,VEP实现会是个难点,但我们会努力去做。相比较而言,Achain选择更均衡的策略,不可能做到每一项都完美,打分我给:6,8,7,5
3  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Achain’s Fork Theory —— what do you think? on: November 23, 2017, 09:49:29 AM
Hi all,

I’m Tony Cui from the Achain and I plan to present my recent theory on blockchain’s chain-split at our upcoming Blockshow on November 29. For now, I would like to share with you folks where my framework comes from and how the theory works- in just a couple of bullet points:

1.   Our current elitist blockchain technology faces the challenge of opening up to the larger general communities. Creating new systems for various application purposes usually demands too much from new developers having just entered the game. How could they quickly develop secure blockchain applications? And where could they even start to find their first customers?

2.   Keeping those questions in mind, we now look to the variety of newly derived forked cryptocurrencies in the market. Bitcoin Gold, for example. It is, of course, made for the goal of better profiting, but that’s not enough. The blockchain industry can use the idea of forking to meeting a better end – the end of innovation that can lower the standard of the technology to include participation of all.

3.   This is how Achain’s Fork Theory functions: Achain splits into a main chain and several sub-chains. All information can be shared among all chains, and value can exchange freely in avoidingdisruptions of communications.

4.   The main chain is committed to the basic blockchain infrastructure, while its sub-chains can be customized to the various needs of their applications.

5.   Since the sub-chains are split from the main, they inherit the main’s basic stable structure, which also contains all of the main chain’s existing users. This serves as the initial reservoir of users and solves the new developers’ concern of their insufficient customer markets.

6.   We will update our smart contracts, announce the plan, and obtain the community’s general consensus. Different types of forking (whether soft fork or hard fork) will be implemented according to the need of specific applications.

7.   We will provide a standardized Value Exchange Protocol and a detailed instruction to forking. Stay tuned!

Any thoughts/questions/advice? Looking forward to hearing them out!

Thanks for your attention.

Tony
Founder of Achain
4  Local / 中文 (Chinese) / 关于Achain分叉理论的设想 on: November 23, 2017, 08:02:41 AM
大家好,我是Achain创始人崔萌,今天想跟大家分享最近的一些思考,希望获得大家的反馈。这些想法我会在11月29日新加坡的Blockshow大会上为大家做更详细的诠释

1.圈外团队建设一条真正的区块链有一定门槛。就新团队快速搭建自己的区块链这一愿景来说,既有区块链安全稳定的问题,又有早期缺少第一波用户的问题。

2.比特币的多次分叉带来了一些启示。大家分叉更大的动机是利益驱使,而非创新驱使。我们需要回归分叉的本质,寻求分叉正确的打开方式。

3.所以Achain的分叉理论是这样的:通过对网络的启动,从Achain主链分叉出一个支链。主链和子链之间信息相关,并实现价值交换,以此来解决区块链无限膨胀的问题、避免出现“信息孤岛”的风险。

4.因为是分叉生成的新链,所以对Achain的数据也是全部继承的,这样可以继承Achain之前所有的用户资源,解决第一波用户的问题。

5.Achain专注于区块链底层的建设,而各子链可以根据自己的应用场景做调整、适配甚至删改。以解决问题为导向。

6.通过对合约进行升级、向社区申请分叉,按照申请结果来决定实现硬分叉还是软分叉。

7.我们会提供标准的价值交换协议(VEP1.0)以及分叉操作方法。


大家有任何想法,建议和疑问吗?给我留言。

打造区块链的时间,我们在努力。 衷心感谢大家的关注和支持!


崔萌
Pages: [1]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!