Each user is allowed to make 1 change of the 12 witnesses.  The topic has been discussed in this thread and the Whitepaper is a very good source. You should read it. And cry, that your own design is so complicated and shitty compared to this. As I said you are a clinical case but if you are willing to put your money where your mouth is - let's do it. So? |
|
|
|
What I like about Byteball is that the users have so much power. Just by selecting what to use, which witness we trust. Simple.
You can't live an hour without saying a lie. If every user selects own witnesses then the network will stop working properly. You are a clinical case, it seems... |
|
|
|
yet storage efficiency can be improved later.
But not via compression, right? |
|
|
|
1. You fail to understand how Byteball works and especially the witnessing. People have tried to explain, a few pages back. Not our problem you have a weak mind.
Right, I don't understand everything, but it can be a sign of a conceptual flaw, not of my "weak mind".
2) Addressed in the whitepaper, compression works well today, price of data to store is price payed in bytes.
So what is the solution to the problem explained here: So what? With a fee of 50$ someone can make DAG twice as big overnight? With a fee 500$ can make it 10 gb more? There is people who can do this just for fun. Is there some prunning mechanism what will allow to cut old transactions from database?
There isn't. I'm pointing this out for a long time but nobody is listening. Byteball has the same scalability problem like any other blockchain with adjustable blocksize limit. Database grows indefinitely and hardware and bandwith are the limiting factors. Moreover if somebody wants to attack byteball by sending huge data to the database it''s pretty easy and cheap at the current price. 8 years old Bitcoin blockchain nears 100 GB and you can make byteball database that big in 1 day for just $6700.
3) Quantum-proof is non-issue for hash-based signatures, when Bitcoin breaks, Byteball may break, the code supports different signature curve to be used even today, Whitepaper especially mentions NRU for this reason.
I know, I'd like to know how the conversion of old addresses will be done.
4) Whitepaper mentions the defined constants, 1 of which sets this limit, which is 100 I believe.
Thx, I'll check that part.
5) Organically, like is mentioned in the whitepaper and by many people in this thread.
What will happen during the transition? The network can't function in normal mode if several witnesses differ between transacting nodes. |
|
|
|
All of these have been refuted, even by tonych himself for 3, yet as a troll you continue to spam this thread. Poor form very weak.
I probably missed something said by tonych. Let's check everything one by one? 1) that Byteball doesnt scale and has low transactions per second
The latest info I have is this: What TPS limit do you expect to see in the real world (order of magnitude)?
You know, there is no architectural limit in the DAGs. Regarding the practical limits, I don't buy into this race to Visa tps. The most pressing issue of crypto is not tps, it is adoption (which we address in the first place). Tps will come second after the first is solved. Am I the only one who thinks that the answer is pretty vague because it assumes that Byteball is DAG which is not obvious? Technically he said that there is no a limit, so it would be handy to see how Byteball behaves at 10 TPS, 100 TPS and 1000 TPS. I believe there is no a problem to run a stress-test with plain transfers on the testnet. So I suggest to do such the stress-test and then we'll move to point 2 and so on... |
|
|
|
Offtopic flooding is fucking embarrassing. All started from a simple announcement of bitcoin oracle. Can we get back on topic?
Agree. I suggest to focus on the following: 1. Demonstration that necessity to pick the main chain won't become a bottleneck 2. Revelation of the plan how the bloating issue will be solved 3. Revelation of the plan how a migration to a quantum-proof signature scheme will be done 4. Stress-testing of smart contracts execution, if contracts can invoke other contracts then this part should be stress-tested too 5. Explanation how all witnesses could be replaced (even if it's a long process) I believe none of the points is an offtopic. |
|
|
|
What a lie, since you can be in this thread posting bullshit and FUD, and now even with pictures.
Very poor form. Embarrassing for IOTA.
I keep an eye on this thread to make sure you won't scam newbies. I already provided 3 cases when you lied, there will be more, I'm sure. |
|
|
|
you can at any time unban me from the IOTA thread and we will talk there
I don't longer read that thread nor moderate it, feel free to post there, but don't expect me to answer. BTT was good for bootstrapping but now it only slows IOTA down. I can't longer dedicate my time to reading majority of posts in this thread for moderating. If anyone has questions to me, please, use PMs or go to http://slack.iota.org. If moderation is required - there are still few alive board moderators. |
|
|
|
You claimed you were highlighting my lies, in fact the opposite was true.
Your lies, among others is using the phrase "Byteball blockchain", when in fact Byteball has no blockchain in its design anywhere. Pure FUD.
No, I and others do not want more of your FUD, kindly leave this thread and go to your own coin and its thread.
If on the other hand you are so in love with arguing with me, and you wish to protect gullible people from my scam-attempts, you can at any time unban me from the IOTA thread and we will talk there, and you can protect people in that thread from my scam-attempts. Deal?
It's good that you brought this topic. This is still left not answered/commented by someone knowing Byteball internals: I'm still not convinced that Byteball is a pure DAG coin, to prove my position I would need to generate a lot of transactions on Byteball network to show that in certain conditions (related to DAG topology) TPS growth is negatively impacted by necessity to pick the main chain. If you compared Ethereum (which calls itself block chain) and Byteball you would see that they don't differ much:  If you looked at IOTA you would see this:  I'm not interested enough to make sure that my assumption is correct, but you could help by generating a lot of transactions and posting here the topology of the resulting Byteball DAG. Try 10 TPS on the testnet maybe? Not that it's urgent, but still... |
|
|
|
Except you didnt highlight any of my "lies", but instead spread your own misguided opinions which are FUD. Exhibits Such oracles are an overkill. If we trust witnesses then we can trust data published by them. And no Merkle magic needed for that.
Stating something as an overkill can be interpreted as a subjective opinion. Being more constructive in your comments might lead people to believe differently in your intentions
...This is overengineering,...more fud and shit. I hope I explained why I called BTC-oracle "an overkill". I tried to be as ELI5 as possible. I can explain this issue, if you didn't get the idea. Should I? |
|
|
|
Honestly man, if you want to have a dick waving contest with satonatomoto go do it in your own thread or in the altcoin discussion section.
No, thx, I'll just keep reading this thread highlighting SatoNatomato's lies. |
|
|
|
No...
...my department...
I think at this point everyone understands that you lie. I bet in few weeks you'll be saying "my company". What about this? So, once again, what do you "respectfully disagree" with?
Its not my own department, I am merely a Principal Developer in a department. Stop embarrassing yourself, and go back to your Iota coin. Ok, I assume I won't get an answer on what you respectfully disagreed with. I suspect the others are tired reading our convo, we'll continue after your next fuckup. I'm sure this will happen. |
|
|
|
Can you now imagine how awesome!
I can, unlike you (personally), we do work on that. |
|
|
|
No...
...my department...
I think at this point everyone understands that you lie. I bet in few weeks you'll be saying "my company". What about this? So, once again, what do you "respectfully disagree" with?
|
|
|
|
To make sure you see this: We could find a 3rd party agent who will act as an escrow and will verify your claim without giving any information to me. How much are you willing to bet?
|
|
|
|
We could find a 3rd party agent who will act as an escrow and will verify your claim without giving any information to me. How much are you willing to bet? |
|
|
|
2. Anybody in here can grab todays copy of Byteball database which is around 1.4GB and it compresses with gzip -9 down to 300MB.
Here we go: How much hdd space do I need to download full DAG today? Is DAG somehow limited in size, or someone can make billions of transactions and bloat it?
Please read the OP: The fees paid for storing one’s transactions (or any other data) in the Byteball database are equal to the size of the data being stored. If the size of your transaction data is 500 bytes, you pay exactly 500 bytes (the native currency of Byteball) in fees. So what? With a fee of 50$ someone can make DAG twice as big overnight? With a fee 500$ can make it 10 gb more? There is people who can do this just for fun. Is there some prunning mechanism what will allow to cut old transactions from database?
There isn't. I'm pointing this out for a long time but nobody is listening. Byteball has the same scalability problem like any other blockchain with adjustable blocksize limit. Database grows indefinitely and hardware and bandwith are the limiting factors. Moreover if somebody wants to attack byteball by sending huge data to the database it''s pretty easy and cheap at the current price. 8 years old Bitcoin blockchain nears 100 GB and you can make byteball database that big in 1 day for just $6700.
we definitely need an explanation from dev about it.
I dont think the problem exists today, of too fast growth too big load on nodes, hence low priority task. 100GB for bitcoin database is small anyway, compare with how much storage a random bank requires to run its business? Byteball database does grow fast, it can compress well, there can be other implementations to make it even smaller.
It's quite obvious that once people start to care about their GBs they'll do everything to spend as less them on fees as possible. It's a no-brainer to compress data before pushing them to Byteball storage. As the result most of data in Byteball DB will already have near-max entropy. At this point lossless compressing won't give noticeable benefit.
I hope you get now why that your post was misleading...
|
|
|
|
1. No you moved yours, really mature argument you have there.
Let's recall how it was: Id say the blackbytes + Tor support makes Byteball more secure and anonymous than even Monero or Zcash.
I hope noone will really believe the quoted words, or they may find themselves in serious troubles...
Now you are just trolling and spreading fear with only these three dots ... to back it up, because your own shit coin iota is worthless.
@tonych, do you support the claim of SatoNatomato the Expert?
I think the privacy features of all 3 coins are more or less the same for most practical purposes. What differs, and what matters most for regular users, is usability.
Thx, I'll use this together with other fuckups of SatoNatomato (which he will, of course, make in the future) to show the real level of his "competence".
Another appeal to authority argument.  I still stand by my words, regardless what tonych thinks, respectfully disagree. PS: I'll prepare the answer for #2, you can start making excuses for the above in the meanwhile. |
|
|
|
Of course, if a principal developer (me) at Big Enterprise, is tasked with selecting a decentralized IoT marketplace and transfer-of-value for our next line of IoT-products...
Of course, no proofs of this statement? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
