Bitcoin Forum
September 28, 2016, 01:43:51 AM *
News: Due to DDoS attacks, there may be periodic downtime.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: BitDNS and Generalizing Bitcoin  (Read 89113 times)
em3rgentOrdr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


youtube.com/ericfontainejazz now accepts bitcoin


View Profile WWW
January 06, 2011, 09:12:42 AM
 #341

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko
Apparently this topic is now dead...  Huh

interesting.  didn't know it was possible.

"We will not find a solution to political problems in cryptography, but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years.

Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks, but pure P2P networks are holding their own."
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1475027031
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475027031

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475027031
Reply with quote  #2

1475027031
Report to moderator
1475027031
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475027031

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475027031
Reply with quote  #2

1475027031
Report to moderator
1475027031
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475027031

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475027031
Reply with quote  #2

1475027031
Report to moderator
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
January 06, 2011, 03:16:01 PM
 #342

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko
Apparently this topic is now dead...  Huh

So is BitDNS officially dead ?
Is somebody doing anything at all in here ?

FreddyFender
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 215


Shamantastic!


View Profile
January 06, 2011, 03:55:15 PM
 #343

From what I can tell, the proposal located on domainchain: (see http://domainchain.org/wiki/doku.php?id=start#proposal ) goes against Satoshi's wishes to keep the bitcoin blockchain unencumbered and ties domain assignments directly to bitcoin.
Many community members have stated that this is impractical and will leave bitcoin if attempts continue to include domainchain into bitcoin directly.
Satoshi asked that a new tree be created with a separate currency that floats its value according to demand with the bitcoin service.

I think it would be possible for BitDNS to be a completely separate network and separate block chain, yet share CPU power with Bitcoin.  The only overlap is to make it so miners can search for proof-of-work for both networks simultaneously.

The networks wouldn't need any coordination.  Miners would subscribe to both networks in parallel.  They would scan SHA such that if they get a hit, they potentially solve both at once.  A solution may be for just one of the networks if one network has a lower difficulty.

What we have here are dedicated coders/hackers that are racing ahead of theorists. The theory must be bulletproof before any proposals are launched.
I think we need mathematical theorists to begin the process and then hand off to coders the basic structure while pointing out weaknesses.

A new chain with grassroot development should excite the miners and coders and calm the fears of the thinkers/theorists among the community.
The funny thing is, once the theory is solid the porting of a new BitDNS(Domainchain?) will be very simple. All the stumbling blocks appear to be centered around including Domainchain into the Bitcoin structure instead of branching it into its own chain.

Domainchain is dead, long live Domainchain!
 Smiley

kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
January 06, 2011, 05:13:34 PM
 #344


What we have here are dedicated coders/hackers that are racing ahead of theorists. The theory must be bulletproof before any proposals are launched.
I think we need mathematical theorists to begin the process and then hand off to coders the basic structure while pointing out weaknesses.


Satoshi proposed a brilliant solution to the chain problem long ago in the thread.(As well as appamatto but Satoshi's solution is much simpler) We don't need to worry about integrating those information in the bitcoin chain since we can use the same miners to generate 50 BTC and domain name coin.

Only execution will give us something to work with. Theorists are just that, theorists. If the ideas don't get implemented, the idea of BitDNS is simply worthless.

da2ce7
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1216


Live and Let Live


View Profile
January 06, 2011, 10:23:26 PM
 #345

Satoshi proposed a brilliant solution to the chain problem long ago in the thread.(As well as appamatto but Satoshi's solution is much simpler) We don't need to worry about integrating those information in the bitcoin chain since we can use the same miners to generate 50 BTC and domain name coin.

Only execution will give us something to work with. Theorists are just that, theorists. If the ideas don't get implemented, the idea of BitDNS is simply worthless.

The problem with 'domain name coin' is that it doesn't make economic sense. There should be no 'restriction of supply' of domain names. The cost of a domain name should be directly related to the network cost in supporting that domain.  Transaction fees make much more economic scene than a new 'domain coin' as the network compensation mechanism.

One off NP-Hard.
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
January 06, 2011, 11:10:33 PM
 #346


The problem with 'domain name coin' is that it doesn't make economic sense. There should be no 'restriction of supply' of domain names. The cost of a domain name should be directly related to the network cost in supporting that domain.  Transaction fees make much more economic scene than a new 'domain coin' as the network compensation mechanism.

We're going around in circles. All this arguments had been exhausted and now we're just repeating them ad nauseum.

Still, the correct protocol that been derived by argumentation is meaningless without an execution to work with.

RHorning
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
January 07, 2011, 12:20:08 PM
 #347

Satoshi proposed a brilliant solution to the chain problem long ago in the thread.(As well as appamatto but Satoshi's solution is much simpler) We don't need to worry about integrating those information in the bitcoin chain since we can use the same miners to generate 50 BTC and domain name coin.

Only execution will give us something to work with. Theorists are just that, theorists. If the ideas don't get implemented, the idea of BitDNS is simply worthless.

The problem with Satoshi's "solution" is that it is only half a solution and doesn't address the key sticking point.  The problem is the desire to use Bitcoins, as we currently use bitcoins, to pay the "fees" for conducting "transactions" with the DNS system or other similar systems and to give that payment some sort of meaning in terms of that payment being something other than a purely voluntary and optional donation system.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my interpretation, but that is the real issue at hand right now.  I've outlined my ideas clearly, and furthermore Satoshi's "solution" only addresses the issue of forking the mining effort or trying to keep that at least somewhat unified.  Essentially he was suggesting that alternate "currencies" could put together some sort of networking protocol to share the mining effort.  On that point I completely agree, but the unstated elephant in the room, the one thing that everybody wants to avoid but isn't being stated, is the need to create a parallel currency to Bitcoin because Bitcoin itself is inadequate to accomplishing the task at hand.

At the moment I'm working at trying to re-implement the Bitcoin specification as an alternate implementation... for my own benefit and use but I do have some reasons for that as well.  That is a huge hurdle to accomplish, and that is one of the reasons why you also don't see anything happening with this concept at the moment because such an effort takes time.  My goal, as such as it is, that once I create a working alternate client to Bitcoin that I can then make a "fork" to do other things with it such as BitDNS.  We could also fork the main Bitcoin client flat out, but regardless what is needed is to fork the protocol itself.  It is something that most developers involved are trying desperately not to do either, as evidenced by the Nanotube/Theymos effort and the work of others.

1FLK3uUT3Vup5JtkGJVXKHAoS3AZWPcKdv
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
January 07, 2011, 04:27:43 PM
 #348

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my interpretation, but that is the real issue at hand right now. 


Wrong. The real problem is that there are no execution to work with. Concepts and ideas doesn't matter if we have nothing to work with.

RHorning
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
January 07, 2011, 05:34:08 PM
 #349

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my interpretation, but that is the real issue at hand right now. 


Wrong. The real problem is that there are no execution to work with. Concepts and ideas doesn't matter if we have nothing to work with.

If the concept is flawed, there will be no execution of the idea.  That is what I'm suggesting.

1FLK3uUT3Vup5JtkGJVXKHAoS3AZWPcKdv
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
January 07, 2011, 06:02:40 PM
 #350


If the concept is flawed, there will be no execution of the idea.  That is what I'm suggesting.

The concepts have nothing to do with the execution. The execution will make reality a a flawed concept, but we can alway fix the code.

But if there is no code to fix, there is nothing to work with.

Write crappy code that demonstrate said concept. Fix said concept if it doesn't work the way people like. Then fix said code. Repeat this process.

Then write correct and clean code. Make it fast. Then, make the interface good.

kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
January 19, 2011, 04:12:07 AM
 #351

* kiba pokes.

joe
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 64


View Profile
January 27, 2011, 10:09:36 AM
 #352

Satoshi proposed a brilliant solution to the chain problem long ago in the thread.(As well as appamatto but Satoshi's solution is much simpler) We don't need to worry about integrating those information in the bitcoin chain since we can use the same miners to generate 50 BTC and domain name coin.

Only execution will give us something to work with. Theorists are just that, theorists. If the ideas don't get implemented, the idea of BitDNS is simply worthless.

The problem with Satoshi's "solution" is that it is only half a solution and doesn't address the key sticking point.  The problem is the desire to use Bitcoins, as we currently use bitcoins, to pay the "fees" for conducting "transactions" with the DNS system or other similar systems and to give that payment some sort of meaning in terms of that payment being something other than a purely voluntary and optional donation system.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my interpretation, but that is the real issue at hand right now.  I've outlined my ideas clearly, and furthermore Satoshi's "solution" only addresses the issue of forking the mining effort or trying to keep that at least somewhat unified.  Essentially he was suggesting that alternate "currencies" could put together some sort of networking protocol to share the mining effort.  On that point I completely agree, but the unstated elephant in the room, the one thing that everybody wants to avoid but isn't being stated, is the need to create a parallel currency to Bitcoin because Bitcoin itself is inadequate to accomplishing the task at hand.


I agree with RHorning on the 3 main problems:
1. Create parallel currency for doing DNS
2. Fork the chains but merge the mining effort to allow miners already working on bitcoin to complete DNS blocks with no additional work.
3. Allow BitDNS miners to be rewarded in bitcoins or any non-voluntary reward system


Here are the solutions to each problem:

1. This is trivial. Start a new chain with a new genesis block and with the network operating on a different port.

2. This was addressed by Satoshi in an earlier post and clarified today in IRC by tcatm. The way bitcoin currently works is we search for a nonce such that, when hashed together with the work (prevhash + merkle tree containing bitcoin transactions) we get a hash with a lot of zeros in front (this makes the difficulty).

The idea is that we create a father merkle tree that contains the work for an arbitrary number of parallel currencies. So miners will use the hash of this tree instead of using the tree of just the bitcoin transactions. Essentially we created a large tree that contains the transactions for many different currencies.

The miner then presents the solution to each parallel currency's network by revealing the specific leaf of the father tree that contains the data specific to that currency, and the rest proceeds as it currently does.

3. The upkeep of the BitDNS network should be paid for either by every domain name owner paying a sort of rent to miners that produce BitDNS blocks, or through DNS transaction fees. Whenever a BitDNS transaction occurs, the recipient will be required to supply a Bitcoin address. Each miner on the BitDNS network will set a block solving fee they feel comfortable with. When a miner works on solving a BitDNS block, he will check the main bitcoin network to verify that domain owners have paid sufficient rent or transaction fees to miners of previous blocks. Any domains that have not paid, the miner will be entitled to make themselves owners of it.


With all of these questions answered, now we can start on the execution and write the code.
Anonymous
Guest

January 27, 2011, 10:45:24 AM
 #353

Nice post Joe.

devrandom
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 26



View Profile WWW
January 31, 2011, 08:39:25 AM
 #354


3. The upkeep of the BitDNS network should be paid for either by every domain name owner paying a sort of rent to miners that produce BitDNS blocks, or through DNS transaction fees. Whenever a BitDNS transaction occurs, the recipient will be required to supply a Bitcoin address. Each miner on the BitDNS network will set a block solving fee they feel comfortable with. When a miner works on solving a BitDNS block, he will check the main bitcoin network to verify that domain owners have paid sufficient rent or transaction fees to miners of previous blocks. Any domains that have not paid, the miner will be entitled to make themselves owners of it.


Rents should be due at specific bitcoin block #s so that any temporary forks on the bitcoin chain won't result in permanent forks on the BitDNS chain.  Once all miners see the same rent payment / non-payment at the said bitcoin block #, the fork will heal by global acceptance or rejection of the take-over block.  Might even want to have a "look-back" of a few hours in the bitcoin chain to eliminate this source of instability.

https://github.com/devrandom
carp
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 82


View Profile
February 02, 2011, 02:15:52 AM
 #355

I agree with RHorning on the 3 main problems:
3. Allow BitDNS miners to be rewarded in bitcoins or any non-voluntary reward system
...
3. The upkeep of the BitDNS network should be paid for either by every domain name owner paying a sort of rent to miners that produce BitDNS blocks, or through DNS transaction fees. Whenever a BitDNS transaction occurs, the recipient will be required to supply a Bitcoin address. Each miner on the BitDNS network will set a block solving fee they feel comfortable with. When a miner works on solving a BitDNS block, he will check the main bitcoin network to verify that domain owners have paid sufficient rent or transaction fees to miners of previous blocks. Any domains that have not paid, the miner will be entitled to make themselves owners of it.

With all of these questions answered, now we can start on the execution and write the code.


(all that about a generalized merkel tree is fascinating and makes me think that I need to read up more on that, I think its compatible with what I am proposing below)

Excellent, I look forward to seeing the code Smiley

Though, this last exercise in figuring out payment or "rent" makes me think, maybe there is a bit more to flesh out at the base of the ideas. It seems to me that it would make more sense to associate a name with an "account" than with "a coin". I will try to explain what I mean in terms of bitcoin, since its what we all seem to know Smiley

What if we, starting with bitcoin, change the name to dnscoin, or something equally witty, add a couple of transaction types and change a few definitions. What if you were to say, that the value of every account, decreases by 1 unit every block. Then add a new transaction type that allows an account to assign a mapping to any, currently unused name.... 1 per account. The name becomes "unassigned" when the most recent account to map falls to a value of 0.

Obviously, we need to tweak the mining operations to provide more coins per block, or even build in an inflation to account for expanding need for names... but it easily makes "DNS Coins" something that one can trade for bitcoins. Perhaps allow an account to be "unmapped" and not subject to the implicit fee.

That seems easier to me than trying to coordinate bitcoin payments and having miners set fees etc. Just let them mine a the valuable resource, and sell it as they see fit.

So if each block generated 52,000 "dnscoins" then that would be enough to create 2 domains for 6 months a piece, or fund 1 for a year.... or 52,000 for 10 minutes... or however we want to make the numbers work out.

Interestingly, this would also make helping a friend very easy. If I see that your domain is about to run out of bitdns, I just take the address and send it some coin.... then settle up with you later in some other manner, or tell you to have a merry christmass. Hell, maybe I run a service that watches your domains and keeps them topped up from my reserve of dnscoin.

As the account owner, you can still kill the domain by unassigning it.
Mike Hearn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
February 03, 2011, 05:59:39 PM
 #356

If somebody is going to work on the code for this, please consider N alternative chains not just 2. I'm also interested in "BitX" for stuff related to online voting.

The real questions are around how do you cleanly separate the currency parts of BitCoin from the distributed quorum aspects.
phathash
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 75


View Profile
March 08, 2011, 12:07:16 PM
 #357

Would this payload "domainchain" proposes to use be stored in the block chain indefinitely? How big can the payload be and what is it's purpose in the protocol? Can nodes choose to ignore it?



ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
March 08, 2011, 02:29:31 PM
 #358

Would this payload "domainchain" proposes to use be stored in the block chain indefinitely? How big can the payload be and what is it's purpose in the protocol? Can nodes choose to ignore it?

AFAIK, BitDNS data will not be stored in Bitcoin main chain... i thought this is already clear.

jgarzik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


View Profile
March 08, 2011, 05:26:30 PM
 #359

Would this payload "domainchain" proposes to use be stored in the block chain indefinitely? How big can the payload be and what is it's purpose in the protocol? Can nodes choose to ignore it?

AFAIK, BitDNS data will not be stored in Bitcoin main chain... i thought this is already clear.

Under the plan by theymos, it would be stored in the bitcoin main chain.

satoshi suggested an alternative, where there would be multiple bitcoin chains, and the non-currency data such as BitDNS would be stored there instead of the main chain.


Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
ShadowOfHarbringer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952


View Profile
March 08, 2011, 06:15:38 PM
 #360

Would this payload "domainchain" proposes to use be stored in the block chain indefinitely? How big can the payload be and what is it's purpose in the protocol? Can nodes choose to ignore it?

AFAIK, BitDNS data will not be stored in Bitcoin main chain... i thought this is already clear.

Under the plan by theymos, it would be stored in the bitcoin main chain.

satoshi suggested an alternative, where there would be multiple bitcoin chains, and the non-currency data such as BitDNS would be stored there instead of the main chain.

OK, but has any final decision been made ?

Personally i hate bloat and i don't like the idea of storing non-currency data in the chain...

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!