How good is Decred?

[dbt1033]

You always know when someone has lost when they resort to name calling.  Have a nice day brother.

Tell that to the girls by the xerox machine.

Meanwhile those who understand math and game theory know that the adjective (not name) prescribed to you is accurate.

You guys are faking some level of competency that you don't have.

There is no free lunch in consensus designs. You don't go merging PoS and PoW without introducing crazy game theory weaknesses. You guys are just lazy to actually find the weaknesses. And you even deny the math that was presented in the PoA paper. Pretending that pools aren't a form of centralization.

They are a form of centralization... that was never denied.  We would like better decentralization of pools / better distribution of pool users.

I'm not sure why you are so angry man.  I'm not arguing with your math; you're obviously not a fool. 

However, it is prohibitively expensive to do what you describe.  Can we agree on that?

[iamnotback]

However, it is prohibitively expensive to do what you describe.  Can we agree on that?

No we can't agree, because if you took the time to actually analyze deeply what happens with selfish mining strategies and stake combined, the PoW is going to become rapidly centralized but you will have no way to actually know it.

I am not really concerned about double-spending. More so I am concerned about attacks when it comes time to make protocol change decisions. Also the controlling stake+PoW will extract the maximum fees and they will monopolize everything.

It is really about milking the thing to extract all the value out of it. The system is designed to establish cartels which are rent seekers. Which goes against everything we hope to achieve with blockchains.

I hate shit like this, so it is difficult for me to agree. Sorry.

[dbt1033]

However, it is prohibitively expensive to do what you describe.  Can we agree on that?

No we can't agree, because if you took the time to actually analyze deeply what happens with selfish mining strategies and stake combined, the PoW is going to become rapidly centralized but you will have no way to actually know it.

I am not really concerned about double-spending. More so I am concerned about attacks when it comes time to make protocol designs. The controlling stake+PoW will extract the maximum fees and they will monopolize everything.

It is really about milking the thing to take all the value out of it.

I hate shit like this, so it is difficult for me to agree. Sorry.

Well $18+ million dollars is a lot of money to attack a $50 million dollar network... come on.

You are 100% correct though, Decred, like bitcoin, relies on a majority of honest hash power and stakers.

[iamnotback]

Well $18+ million dollars is a lot of money to attack a $50 million dollar network... come on.

You are not looking at it properly. The economics and design forces it to centralization so you'll have a few big whales running the whole thing eventually. And $18 million is nothing because they paid nearly nothing for it by the time they have it. They extract it over time for free due to the game theory.

[dbt1033]

Well $18+ million dollars is a lot of money to attack a $50 million dollar network... come on.

You are not looking at it properly. The economics and design forces it to centralization so you'll have a few big whales running the whole thing eventually. And $18 million is nothing because they paid nearly nothing for it by the time they have it. They extract it over time for free due to the game theory.

Correct, but you are making a lot of assumptions here.

[iamnotback]

What I am saying is that mixing PoW and PoS sounds very cool. But if you actually do a very deep analysis of all the game theory, you'll realize it is really much worse than PoW alone.

PoW is also centralizing too, so it is not like we really have any solution. At least PoW is a stalemate w.r.t. to protocol immutability as we see now with Bitcoin.

[dbt1033]

What I am saying is that mixing PoW and PoS sounds very cool. But if you actually do a very deep analysis of all the game theory, you'll realize it is really much worse than PoW alone.

Do you have a whitepaper or other published work discussing this?  I'd be interested to read more.

[maku]

Just how good is Decred? Does it have what it takes to hit the big time?

Are you interested because we have Decred's pump right now?

This altcoin might be labeled as 'experimental' on so many levels that I would be scared to hold it long term.
Good advice: better wait when the pump will be over, don't try to catch the rising wave - it will crash soon.

[dbt1033]

What I am saying is that mixing PoW and PoS sounds very cool. But if you actually do a very deep analysis of all the game theory, you'll realize it is really much worse than PoW alone.

PoW is also centralizing too, so it is not like we really have any solution. At least PoW is a stalemate w.r.t. to protocol immutability as we see now with Bitcoin.

You are obviously in slack... why don't you come by?  Our development team is willing to have a more technical discussion with you if you are interested.

[iamnotback]

What I am saying is that mixing PoW and PoS sounds very cool. But if you actually do a very deep analysis of all the game theory, you'll realize it is really much worse than PoW alone.

Do you have a whitepaper or other published work discussing this?  I'd be interested to read more.

I do but it is not published yet.

If I have some time, I'll try to extract some analysis on the selfish mining aspect of PoA (which isn't actually the precise variant I studied in my paper), but the problem is the market won't listen. And I have more important work to do.

Really you guys should spend some $ to actually dig deep into the game theory. You have money now. You should hire someone impartial and pay them regardless of what they find out. If you guys aren't afraid. Any way you've already pocketed a lot of money. So why not try to research more. Spend your money on valuable activity.

[dbt1033]

What I am saying is that mixing PoW and PoS sounds very cool. But if you actually do a very deep analysis of all the game theory, you'll realize it is really much worse than PoW alone.

Do you have a whitepaper or other published work discussing this?  I'd be interested to read more.

I do but it is not published yet.

If I have some time, I'll try to present some analysis on the selfish mining aspect of PoA, but the problem is the market won't listen. And I have more important work to do.

Really you guys should spend some $ to actually dig deep into the game theory. You have money now. You should hire someone impartial and pay them regardless of what they find out. If you guys aren't afraid. Any way you've already pocketed a lot of money. So why not try to research more. Spend your money on valuable activity.

Cool!  It will be an interesting read, I'm sure.  When do you plan on publishing?

edit to add:  This isn't a bad idea... something we will consider.

I know you think that we are a bunch of Bozos at Decred, but I think that if you found the time to come by and hang out, you would find that we are quite open to intellectual discourse / suggestions.

[iamnotback]

No ETA. And I welcome all criticism.

Again I hope you guys hire some independent researchers such as the guys from hackingdistributed to analyze deeply the selfish mining game theory and math.

[iamnotback]

@dbt1033 seems like a nice guy. Apologies for being so hard on you. I am just tired of all the scammy coins like Dash and PIVX.

Any way, you can prove you guys are really serious by hiring some serious researchers to analyze it. I don't trust your white paper. You guys are no doubt very good programmers. But being a good programmer doesn't necessarily mean you are an expert at this particular area of game theory and economics. There is no math backing up the claims in your white paper about selfish mining. It is just a claim with no proofs.

[dbt1033]

@dbt1033 seems like a nice guy. Apologies for being so hard on you. I am just tired of all the scammy coins like Dash and PIVX.

Any way, you can prove you guys are really serious by hiring some serious researchers to analyze it. I don't trust your white paper. You guys are no doubt very good programmers. But being a good programmer doesn't necessarily mean you are an expert at this particular area of game theory and economics. There is no math backing up the claims in your white paper about selfish mining. It is just a claim with no proofs.

Never stop questioning man; that's how we will change the world.  I really do hope you take me up on my offer to come by slack (if you're an IRC type, we are bridged). 

Decred isn't going anywhere, and we would love to have more people like you in our community as we continue to push forward.

[irukandji]

Just how good is Decred? Does it have what it takes to hit the big time?

Are you interested because we have Decred's pump right now?

Kindof. Although when I started this thread the main part of the pump had not happened. I remember the beginning of the coin, and thought it was good, then it went through a period where it drifted down. When it started to pick up again I wondered about it.

This altcoins might be labeled as 'experimental' on so many levels that I would be scared for long term holding.
Good advice: better wait when the pump will be over, don't try to catch the rising wave - it will crash soon.

Too late. I caught the pump and did quite well. It may not crash..or it may. I'll probably keep some now. Because although this coin may have issues it may be better than most...or it may be able to present itself as such. So it can still double triple ...or whatever. Or it can crash. As i don't know, I'll probably hold some until the Mr Market tells me to sell  

[iamnotback]

This altcoins might be labeled as 'experimental' on so many levels that I would be scared for long term holding.
Good advice: better wait when the pump will be over, don't try to catch the rising wave - it will crash soon.

Too late. I caught the pump and did quite well. It may not crash..or it may. I'll probably keep some now. Because although this coin may have issues it may be better than most...or it may be able to present itself as such. So it can still double triple ...or whatever. Or it can crash. As i don't know, I'll probably hold some until the Mr Market tells me to sell  

They have a solid team so the market will prolly not care about the obtuse security and centralization issues.

The market rationalizes it as they can fix it later if they need to because they have a good team.

And the market thinks they can develop a lot of cool shit on top of a hidden pig. And the development team is strong and proven. I can see from the website that it has an attractive geeky meme, so it appears developer centric.

I investigated it because wanted to think about whether I should buy this dip. But i am waiting on feedback from the guy who does charting analysis.

Unless the charting guy says it looks like a 20X gain ahead, why should I sell LTC when I see a 5 - 8X gain ahead for it. And it has less potential problems (I think). I guess for diversification?

I probably won't buy DCR, because I have enough risk already holding LTC. Although I could buy it because it is on Poloniex.

But you guys will prolly buy it.  

[irukandji]

@dbt1033 seems like a nice guy. Apologies for being so hard on you. I am just tired of all the scammy coins like Dash and PIVX.

Any way, you can prove you guys are really serious by hiring some serious researchers to analyze it. I don't trust your white paper. You guys are no doubt very good programmers. But being a good programmer doesn't necessarily mean you are an expert at this particular area of game theory and economics. There is no math backing up the claims in your white paper about selfish mining. It is just a claim with no proofs.

Interesting discussion. A question Iamnotback if I may. How well does "game theory"hold up when applied to systems...or just in general.

I remember seeing an Adam Curtis documentary where Adam Curtis looked at the way the ideas of Nash were applied to American foreign policy*, . In that case he argued that it the theory did not work very well. So..what can we say about how it might work in this situation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsAcocwBn8c

*added in edit: And other things

[iamnotback]

Interesting discussion. A question Iamnotback if I may. How well does "game theory"hold up when applied to systems...or just in general.

I remember seeing an Adam Curtis documentary where Adam Curtis looked at the way the ideas of Nash were applied to American foreign policy. In that case he argued that it the theory did not work very well. So..what can we say about how it might work in this situation?

Well it is a good point because game theory can be considered in a narrow context wherein there are externalities which change the likelihood.

For example, the security issues I was discussing upthread are long-tail events so you guys speculating on near-term gain overwhelm any relevance of the potential obtuse security issues.

However if you want to take over the world as Bitcoin is attempting to do, then the game theory weaknesses have to be analyzed in every plausible context. Because it will get attacked.

So I would say that American foreign policy is a highly manipulated thing that has externalities we can't even see, so a model of it is prolly intractable to define.



Another issue with Decred may be that it doesn't appear to solve massive TPS scaling and real-time instant transactions. So all the new risky (i.e. not extremely well vetted) changes to consensus algorithm without significant gains at least in those stated areas afaik. So for me it doesn't feel like it could possibly be the next big thing unless I am not fully aware of the possibilities of that PoS+PoW design.

[dbt1033]

Interesting discussion. A question Iamnotback if I may. How well does "game theory"hold up when applied to systems...or just in general.

I remember seeing an Adam Curtis documentary where Adam Curtis looked at the way the ideas of Nash were applied to American foreign policy. In that case he argued that it the theory did not work very well. So..what can we say about how it might work in this situation?

Well it is a good point because game theory can be considered in a narrow context wherein there are externalities which change the likelihood.

For example, the security issues I was discussing upthread are long-tail events so you guys speculating on near-term gain overwhelm any relevance of the potential obtuse security issues.

However if you want to take over the world as Bitcoin is attempting to do, then the game theory weaknesses have to be analyzed in every plausible context. Because it will get attacked.

So I would say that American foreign policy is a highly manipulated thing that has externalities we can't even see, so a model of it is prolly intractable to define.



Another issue with Decred may be that it doesn't appear to solve massive TPS scaling and real-time instant transactions. So all the new risky (i.e. not extremely well vetted) changes to consensus algorithm without any significant gains. So for me it doesn't feel like it could possibly be the next big thing unless I am not fully aware of the possibilities of that PoS+PoW design.

Lightning network implementation is currently on our roadmap for 2017, and we are on track to achieve all of our goals.

However, the community will have to vote on it before it activates.

[iamnotback]

Lightning network implementation is currently on our roadmap for 2017, and we are on track to achieve all of our goals.

Okay so you're the fallback if Litecoin can't get SegWit activated? That is why Charlie Lee was in on this, in case the miners of his Litecoin don't cooperate?

Intrigue.

Or maybe just putting your bets in many hats to diversify?

Another issue with Decred may be that it doesn't appear to solve massive TPS scaling and real-time instant transactions. So all the new risky (i.e. not extremely well vetted) changes to consensus algorithm without significant gains at least in those stated areas afaik.

So the PoS control enables "the community" (of whales, lol) to overrule miners when they need to, e.g. on activating LN. So that is perhaps the big gain (if you consider that a gain).