[ANN][COS] COSMOS, internet of blockchains

[Sam123]

Then they need to explain why they have stolen verbatim the work / words of the blocknet devs.

I believe they will soon 

[1713854339]

1713854339

[1713854339]

1713854339

[moroseneng]

Then they need to explain why they have stolen verbatim the work / words of the blocknet devs.

I believe they will soon  

still waiting for more information, i just bookmark this thread

[Xaltotun]

Is it true Donald Trump backs this coin?

[Conic]

This project looks really nice. One question for you dev. How do you think about the future of Naut/Par?

[tulipbubble]

PLAGIARISM IS USUALLY AN INDICATOR OF A PROJECT BEING A SCAM.

Not so quick. Devs are very legit. I don't beleive it's a SCAM

http://tendermint.com/about/
many presentations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfFVh1DIKds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYX7VIVz578
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9krAQzN6tbc
and much more ...

PS: I'm not involve in any way on this project.

We need their info to know more about the team, anonymity of this project is not good. I don't believe them

[electronicash]

PLAGIARISM IS USUALLY AN INDICATOR OF A PROJECT BEING A SCAM.

Not so quick. Devs are very legit. I don't beleive it's a SCAM

http://tendermint.com/about/
many presentations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfFVh1DIKds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYX7VIVz578
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9krAQzN6tbc
and much more ...

PS: I'm not involve in any way on this project.

We need their info to know more about the team, anonymity of this project is not good. I don't believe them

True. its much safer to see how real the devs are. there are more projects better than this so they might as well try to publish themselves to gain trust from investors, else they may never get much funds for the project. 

To whom did they allegedly copy this project?

[truxton]

The blocknet: http://blocknet.co/

[digaran2]

Interesting project, keeping an eye on this

[MoneyJ]

Any new development here ?  It is kinda silent from a potential crypto game-changer.

[truxton]

I think their silence speaks volumes with regards to not answering why they ripped of other devs without credit.

[jaekwon]

Then they need to explain why they have stolen verbatim the work / words of the blocknet devs.

We didn't steal or copy, though the tagline is coincidentally the same.  We arrived at that tagline because that's literally what we're creating -- and I like to call things for what they are.

In Cosmos, blockchains are light-clients of each other, where the light-client-SPV datastructure is included in another blockchain as a transaction, thereby allowing two blockchains to establish a virtual communication channel between each other.  It's a network of sidechains.

http://cosmos.network/whitepaper#inter-blockchain-communication-ibc

Looking into it, the best thing that I could find on what makes BlockNet an "internet of blockchains" is their XBridge, which I don't see much activity on.  It seems that BlockNet's "internet of blockchains" is about an intelligent wallet crawling blockchain nodes to coordinate cross-chain transactions.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.msg16240226#msg16240226
https://github.com/atcsecure/xbridge-old/blob/master/p2p.scm

Is there anything more to the "internet"-ness of BlockNet than what is above?  Because from what I can see, the way Cosmos is an "internet of blockchains" is completely different than how BlockNet does it.  Cosmos is a network of sidechains.

We're happy to change the tagline if BlockNet asks us to, but it's unfair to say that we copied anyone else's work.  Our work is original.  Our specification is unique, and provides uniquely competitive properties.

Also, sorry, been busy with the prefunding plan.  We'll post another update soon.

[jaekwon]

I heard about you. So cosmos is basically a DEX or decentralized shapeshift? Seems like a novel idea, but who is doing the front end/UX for your group? Also, is it DPoS and are you still part of BlockchainOS?

We're not "part" of BlockchainOS.  We advise them on blockchain architecture.

[jaekwon]

Wow what a rip off of Blocknet. Even using the same tag line:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.0

  "the internet of blockchains".  

They even quote one of the Blocknet devs directly: "An ideal solution is one that allows multiple parallel blockchains to interoperate while retaining their security properties"   Shameless.

Those are my words.  You'll have to post the Blocknet dev's words so we can compare the meaning behind them.  But if we're speaking of ideals, and these ideals are true, then it's not surprising that two different people describe the same thing.

By "retaining their security properties", I mean PoS allows you to do this.  Not so with a network of PoW chains, where the miners can be bribed on a whim.  Our proposed solution to that problem is BFT PoS, a constitution, and a governance system to amend the constitution.

[jaekwon]

Guys, sorry, but its absolutely indecent of you to just copy another ones work and writings without referring to them. I will not invest in projects that are run by sneaky copycats. Furthermore, just to sum your whitepaper up for all the noobs here: Cosmos tech is essentially inferior to Blocknet. Everyone, please, do your research.

You'll have to justify that.  Yes, everyone, please do your research

[synechist]

Wow what a rip off of Blocknet. Even using the same tag line:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.0

  "the internet of blockchains".  

They even quote one of the Blocknet devs directly: "An ideal solution is one that allows multiple parallel blockchains to interoperate while retaining their security properties"   Shameless.

Those are my words.  You'll have to post the Blocknet dev's words so we can compare the meaning behind them.  But if we're speaking of ideals, and these ideals are true, then it's not surprising that two different people describe the same thing.

By "retaining their security properties", I mean PoS allows you to do this.  Not so with a network of PoW chains, where the miners can be bribed on a whim.  Our proposed solution to that problem is BFT PoS, a constitution, and a governance system to amend the constitution.

Hey hey

Thanks for the response. I tweeted at you guys several times about this, to no avail. Glad to see you're around.

To be clear (to all reading), I'm not accusing you of plagiarism or of copying our code. I'm just engaging you in conversation.

Having read your whitepaper, there's no question of your copying the Blocknet's technical approach. You're using DPoS and sidechains/sharding; we're using an inter-chain network overlay, a blockchain router, p2p messaging and atomic protocols.

However, when it comes to how you represent/market yourselves, there's a striking similarity in both concept and wording.
Consider, for example, the third paragraph of your whitepaper: this echoes, almost verbatim, the following:
- a sentence in the second paragraph of our last blog post
- a sentence in our last radio interview
- many other instances, over the course of at least the past year, in which we've described our goal as preserving the security properties of blockchains in inter-chain scenarios.

The other, more obvious similarity (note I'm intentionally not using the accusatory word "copying"), is "internet of blockchains." That's effectively our slogan or descriptive title. It's been that for the past two years. If there are two "reserved terms" I'd like not to be used for other projects, they would be
- internet of blockchains
- blockchain router


I can't - and I'm not trying to - stop you from using "internet of blockchains" or phrases about "preserving security properties."
I'm not accusing you of plagiarism either.
But I request, as a matter of prior art, that you both (a) find equivalent but different ways of describing your project, and (b) that consider acknowledging - where relevant - that we precede you in pursuing the vision of inter-chain interoperability and were the first in carving out the concepts that you've arrived at.

Cheers

Arlyn

[truxton]

Wow what a rip off of Blocknet. Even using the same tag line:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=829576.0

  "the internet of blockchains".  

They even quote one of the Blocknet devs directly: "An ideal solution is one that allows multiple parallel blockchains to interoperate while retaining their security properties"   Shameless.

Those are my words.  You'll have to post the Blocknet dev's words so we can compare the meaning behind them.  But if we're speaking of ideals, and these ideals are true, then it's not surprising that two different people describe the same thing.

By "retaining their security properties", I mean PoS allows you to do this.  Not so with a network of PoW chains, where the miners can be bribed on a whim.  Our proposed solution to that problem is BFT PoS, a constitution, and a governance system to amend the constitution.

Hey hey

Thanks for the response. I tweeted at you guys several times about this, to no avail. Glad to see you're around.

To be clear (to all reading), I'm not accusing you of plagiarism or of copying our code. I'm just engaging you in conversation.

Having read your whitepaper, there's no question of your copying the Blocknet's technical approach. You're using DPoS and sidechains/sharding; we're using an inter-chain network overlay, a blockchain router, p2p messaging and atomic protocols.

However, when it comes to how you represent/market yourselves, there's a striking similarity in both concept and wording.
Consider, for example, the third paragraph of your whitepaper: this echoes, almost verbatim, the following:
- a sentence in the second paragraph of our last blog post
- a sentence in our last radio interview
- many other instances, over the course of at least the past year, in which we've described our goal as preserving the security properties of blockchains in inter-chain scenarios.

The other, more obvious similarity (note I'm intentionally not using the accusatory word "copying"), is "internet of blockchains." That's effectively our slogan or descriptive title. It's been that for the past two years. If there are two "reserved terms" I'd like not to be used for other projects, they would be
- internet of blockchains
- blockchain router


I can't - and I'm not trying to - stop you from using "internet of blockchains" or phrases about "preserving security properties."
I'm not accusing you of plagiarism either.
But I request, as a matter of prior art, that you both (a) find equivalent but different ways of describing your project, and (b) that consider acknowledging - where relevant - that we precede you in pursuing the vision of inter-chain interoperability and were the first in carving out the concepts that you've arrived at.

Cheers

Arlyn

I can see how the phrase "internet of blockchains" MIGHT, just MIGHT be a coincidence.  But the other examples of text from the white papers posted above are just stealing. There is zero chance that is coincidence. Its plagiarism.  Its what students do when they need to pad out an essay.

[jaekwon]

Having read your whitepaper, there's no question of your copying the Blocknet's technical approach. You're using DPoS and sidechains/sharding; we're using an inter-chain network overlay, a blockchain router, p2p messaging and atomic protocols.

However, when it comes to how you represent/market yourselves, there's a striking similarity in both concept and wording.
Consider, for example, the third paragraph of your whitepaper: this echoes, almost verbatim, the following:
- a sentence in the second paragraph of our last blog post
- a sentence in our last radio interview
- many other instances, over the course of at least the past year, in which we've described our goal as preserving the security properties of
blockchains in inter-chain scenarios.

Can you please paste the sentence from the second paragraph of your last blog post that you find strikingly similar?  I just want to make sure we're talking about the same parts.

I can't - and I'm not trying to - stop you from using "internet of blockchains" or phrases about "preserving security properties."
I'm not accusing you of plagiarism either.
But I request, as a matter of prior art, that you both (a) find equivalent but different ways of describing your project, and (b) that consider acknowledging - where relevant - that we precede you in pursuing the vision of inter-chain interoperability and were the first in carving out the concepts that you've arrived at.

I have no qualms changing the phrase.  "Network of blockchains"?  We'll take that then
I didn't pursue any vision of blockchains until early 2014.  Well, even before then, if you count the fact that since 2013 I had developed exchange software for a crypto-crypto exchange to compete with Cryptsy.  I abandoned that (https://github.com/jaekwon/ftnox-backend) and started working on Tendermint because it is what enables secure PoS.  And we have to get away from PoW in order for the security of many chains to be independent of each other.

http://tendermint.com/blog/security-of-cryptocurrency-protocols/

Looking at BlockNet's vision, it seems like we're fully aligned.  We're not even competing, we're both developing toward a shared system from different angles.  To call us plagiarizing is a stretch... we've created and proposed solutions to longstanding problems in the crypto space.

Here, I've changed our tagline.  We'll update them on our website too.  I acknowledge that jl777 has had great ideas, inevitable ideas.  I'd like for us to take part in the journey.  The internet of blockchains will not be centralized, or hierarchical.  Like the WorldWideWeb that preceded it, it is connected in every possible way.

[targetmlrd]

Russian translation - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1638305.new#new

[jwiz168]

Network of blockchains tagline seems to be catchy and legit. Nice to see you around . No funfare here but a very huge potential for success. Still waiting for translation assignment. Already done the initial task.

[jaekwon]

Network of blockchains tagline seems to be catchy and legit. Nice to see you around . No funfare here but a very huge potential for success. Still waiting for translation assignment. Already done the initial task.

Thanks.

Sorry about how long its taking about the translation.  We will follow through, but it will take some time to settle all the business.