Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments

[Freefactomizer]

What would be more interesting is to be able to decide how you can trust a witness. A high level green trust Bitcointalk used could work, but also exchange Bittrex could decide to run a public witness.

What we need is a mix of witnesses from different kinds. Dev, enthousiasts or business witnesses, we need them all. This way we are sure they won't share a common interest that would make them act dishonestly.

[1713581931]

1713581931

[1713581931]

1713581931

[1713581931]

1713581931

[lmnhfx]

Battle between SatoNatomato and Come-from-Beyond begin again  Roll Eyes Place your bets ladies and gentlemens.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Battle between SatoNatomato and Come-from-Beyond begin again  Roll Eyes Place your bets ladies and gentlemens.

It's on hold, it's devs turn now.

[ByteFan]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

[SatoNatomato]

Battle between SatoNatomato and Come-from-Beyond begin again  Roll Eyes Place your bets ladies and gentlemens.

It's on hold, it's devs turn now.

Pathetic lies from you again.

You were given links to source code for posting your message and making transactions.

Other people have already posted messages, many in fact. The fact that you cant even find your way around source code, let alone mount any "send many messages" attack - reveals your incompetence.

But its okay 1000usd is too expensive for you, you are just avoiding a bet like a coward.

[SatoNatomato]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

what the fuck.

The whole point of witness is that you have to be trusted.

Yes you can wreck havoc as a witness, especially attempting to be first, you set a precedent. You can attempt double spends on your own.

The risk is huge for Byteball if anyone uses your witness, after what you have shown and said so far.

[D3m0nKinGx]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

It goes hand-in-hand to not trust the operator is to not trust the witness 

[yvv]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

what the fuck.

The whole point of witness is that you have to be trusted.

Yes you can wreck havoc as a witness, especially attempting to be first, you set a precedent. You can attempt double spends on your own.

The risk is huge for Byteball if anyone uses your witness, after what you have shown and said so far.

Actually, ByteFan is right. All we need to care is that the majority of witnesses don't collude. All 12 witnesses belonging to one person (event if it is tonych) is a bigger threat to the network than 12 witnesses belonging to 12 random guys.

[ByteFan]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

It goes hand-in-hand to not trust the operator is to not trust the witness 

Sure, I understand. While we all trust in Tonych' (and we do) that is not a problem but keep in mind that the project will be mature only when true witnesses diversity will exist. That's why MEJGDND55XNON7UU3ZKERJIZMMXJTVCV is posting, just for thoses who want to use it.

[zuqka]

Covering entire south/east Europe with my hub at home

wss://byteball.zuqka.info/bb

https://screenshot.net/e1kv6ad

Plus these other 2 on paid vps. Giving back

wss://byteball.me/bb
wss://blackbytes.me/bb

Better than a partial screen shot. The full byteball world map is here :

https://byteball.fr/byteballworldmap.php

Oh my   Point of screenshot was to show the location and the link. Yes it's your map and I find it pretty cool. And that's all about all I like about it. You guys have to change the way on how to gain trust.

[Come-from-Beyond]

The whole point of witness is that you have to be trusted.

You are wrong. Looks like you don't know the basic concept of Byteball...

EDIT: ...and I'm not surprised.

[ZenFr]

For the monthly free distibution :
Can we have multiple btc accounts linked to the same byteball account ?

For example :
------------------
BTC account A -> btc address A -> x btc linked to GBYTE account "SMITH"
BTC account B -> btc address B -> y btc linked to GBYTE account "SMITH"
BTC account C -> btc address C -> z btc linked to GBYTE account "SMITH"
And finally, GBYTE account "SMITH" is linked to x + y + z btc ?

[TronQuix]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

It goes hand-in-hand to not trust the operator is to not trust the witness 

Sure, I understand. While we all trust in Tonych' (and we do) that is not a problem but keep in mind that the project will be mature only when true witnesses diversity will exist. That's why MEJGDND55XNON7UU3ZKERJIZMMXJTVCV is posting, just for thoses who want to use it.

I think to piggy back onto what you are saying, until there is further adoption, there cannot be true diversity. If theoretically only the members of this thread were using ByteBalls then there has to be some level of overlap within the group. Unless of course every person on here was a poweruser and each person wanted to be a witness and etc.

[ByteFan]

Covering entire south/east Europe with my hub at home

wss://byteball.zuqka.info/bb

https://screenshot.net/e1kv6ad

Plus these other 2 on paid vps. Giving back

wss://byteball.me/bb
wss://blackbytes.me/bb

Better than a partial screen shot. The full byteball world map is here :

https://byteball.fr/byteballworldmap.php

Oh my   Point of screenshot was to show the location and the link. Yes it's your map and I find it pretty cool. And that's all about all I like about it. You guys have to change the way on how to gain trust.

I am pleased war is over. Have a nice day zuqka.

[ByteFan]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

It goes hand-in-hand to not trust the operator is to not trust the witness 

Sure, I understand. While we all trust in Tonych' (and we do) that is not a problem but keep in mind that the project will be mature only when true witnesses diversity will exist. That's why MEJGDND55XNON7UU3ZKERJIZMMXJTVCV is posting, just for thoses who want to use it.

I think to piggy back onto what you are saying, until there is further adoption, there cannot be true diversity. If theoretically only the members of this thread were using ByteBalls then there has to be some level of overlap within the group. Unless of course every person on here was a poweruser and each person wanted to be a witness and etc.

One could imagine a system where all wallets would be potential witnesses such forming a permanent "pool of anonymous witnesses" and each wallet posting a units would pick 12 (or more) among the pool at random but it is not Byteball anymore...would be a fork.

[kola-schaar]

For the monthly free distibution :
Can we have multiple btc accounts linked to the same byteball account ?
...

Yes, that is possible. (You can link as many addresses as you like)
example:


But you have to make sure that at the time of the snapshot your BTC (to receive Bytes) and your Bytes (to receive Blackbytes) are consolidated on the linked addresses (linked addresses are the red ones).

To make this clear: Linking one adress from a BTC- or a BB-wallet doesn’t mean you link the whole wallet.
You link only adresses. And thus also only the amount present thereon (at time of snapshot).

It is important to understand this, because the amounts on the addresses are changed for each transaction.
It is therefore absolutely necessary to check before the snapshot whether the BTCs and bytes are on the linked addresses (Bot tells you).

[shillfudder]

I wonder how the recent BTC TX backlog will affect future byte distributions.

[Vaccinus]

i have two questions, when the next distribution will be? and can i link the same bitcoin address to another byteball address for the next distribution or i need more bitcoin linked with new address?

[SatoNatomato]

It could be he's just a honest enthousiast, but I can't know for sure.

I am. But you dont' have to trust me anyway. The only thing you have to trust is that 6 witnesses (that is to say a majority of the 12) does not collude together.

There is no risk using our witness.

what the fuck.

The whole point of witness is that you have to be trusted.

Yes you can wreck havoc as a witness, especially attempting to be first, you set a precedent. You can attempt double spends on your own.

The risk is huge for Byteball if anyone uses your witness, after what you have shown and said so far.

Actually, ByteFan is right. All we need to care is that the majority of witnesses don't collude. All 12 witnesses belonging to one person (event if it is tonych) is a bigger threat to the network than 12 witnesses belonging to 12 random guys.

What I meant with "have to be trusted" above is exactly the point that the witnesses should not collude. Trusted in the social sense, especially because it is an attempt to snatch the first witness, it sets a precedent for others to follow. Technically of course anyone can start a witness and anyone can spend their own bytes to post transactions using that witness and seemingly inflating any "% of units using the witness in last 1000 transactions" - big deal. As long as majority is honest, network is good.

I, for one, do not for a second doubt that ByteFan would be the first to collude with other witnesses, or make more of them behind different personas, given a chance.

Would you honestly trust that 12 anonymous random guys are actually 12 random real persons and not sockpuppets of ByteFan?
This is why witnesses have to be known in the real world, as the whitepaper says, reputable business or persons,
to whom we place the trust that they wouldnt collude with others and post frequently enough.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Would you honestly trust that 12 anonymous random guys are actually 12 random real persons and not sockpuppets of ByteFan?

Yes, if measures against Sybil attack are used.