Bitcoin Forum
July 17, 2019, 03:36:13 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 [1475] 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 ... 2567 »
  Print  
Author Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information  (Read 2754315 times)
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:41:57 AM
 #29481

1000 * 1 millisecond = 1 second
Call a 1 millisecond script a transaction and it is part of the 1000 TPS
generates the same fee so what does it matter the type it is?

Although the actual amount of CPU pain might not be overwhelming the real problem is going to be the "size" of the tx (I can't imagine that these scripts are going to be anywhere near as small as a standard NXT tx currently is).

The whole 1000+ TPS is about "size" (and "bandwidth") more than it is about actual CPU time.

With CIYAM anyone can create 100% generated C++ web applications in literally minutes.

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1563377773
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563377773

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563377773
Reply with quote  #2

1563377773
Report to moderator
1563377773
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563377773

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563377773
Reply with quote  #2

1563377773
Report to moderator
1563377773
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1563377773

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1563377773
Reply with quote  #2

1563377773
Report to moderator
xyzzyx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250


I don't really come from outer space.


View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:44:02 AM
 #29482

If all the nodes have to compute it, then all the nodes have to compute it.

So once again - do you want 1000+ TPS or do you want these "arbitrary script" type txs (as I don't believe that you are going to be able to have both)?


you have convinced me for one CIYAM. another blockchain another day. i definitely think that nxt's proof of stake lays a foundation for a much better DAC than pow. someone should definitely develop a turing complete nxt, just not on this chain.

Thought experiment time.  Let's say each node gets to run an arbitrary program in a VM, but only 1 instruction per block.   Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

How about 2 instructions per block?

I think you see where this is going.

N instructions per block (where N is variable based on the speed of the underlying hardware)?

Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:44:21 AM
 #29483

1000 * 1 millisecond = 1 second
Call a 1 millisecond script a transaction and it is part of the 1000 TPS
generates the same fee so what does it matter the type it is?

Although the actual amount of CPU pain might not be overwhelming the problem is going to be the "size" of the tx.

The whole 1000+ TPS is about "size" (and "bandwidth") more than it is about actual CPU time.

If it is about bandwidth why was everyone so worked up about inefficiencies of subleq?

So interpreted subleq VM is not a CPU bottleneck?

You are worried about bandwidth and amount of AM?

James

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:45:46 AM
 #29484

If all the nodes have to compute it, then all the nodes have to compute it.

So once again - do you want 1000+ TPS or do you want these "arbitrary script" type txs (as I don't believe that you are going to be able to have both)?


you have convinced me for one CIYAM. another blockchain another day. i definitely think that nxt's proof of stake lays a foundation for a much better DAC than pow. someone should definitely develop a turing complete nxt, just not on this chain.

Thought experiment time.  Let's say each node gets to run an arbitrary program in a VM, but only 1 instruction per block.   Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

How about 2 instructions per block?

I think you see where this is going.

N instructions per block (where N is variable based on the speed of the underlying hardware)?

Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?
Why would 1 millisecond execution time impact 1000 TPS transaction times?
Maybe reduce it to half millisecond time budget to give some room

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
Zahlen
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:46:34 AM
 #29485

If the network didnt check the forgers work than forgers could just publish false answers every time and claim the transaction fees anway. meaning they would have no incentive to actually execute the code.

Algos could be designed to be easy to check. Like factoring numbers: difficult to factor, but easy to check that the product of factors is the original. Proof of computation! So one (or a few) beefy nodes have a large computation burden while many smaller nodes have a lower burden.

(Can't be done for all algos. This will incentivize and select for those which can be done more intelligently.)

jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:46:56 AM
 #29486

If all the nodes have to compute it, then all the nodes have to compute it.

So once again - do you want 1000+ TPS or do you want these "arbitrary script" type txs (as I don't believe that you are going to be able to have both)?


you have convinced me for one CIYAM. another blockchain another day. i definitely think that nxt's proof of stake lays a foundation for a much better DAC than pow. someone should definitely develop a turing complete nxt, just not on this chain.
What if we limited it to 100 Turing scripts per block?

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
xyzzyx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250


I don't really come from outer space.


View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:47:28 AM
 #29487

Why would 1 millisecond execution time impact 1000 TPS transaction times?
Maybe reduce it to half millisecond time budget to give some room

Don't think in terms of real time.  The VM is virtual.  So is the time.

"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1003


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:48:08 AM
 #29488

If it is about bandwidth why was everyone so worked up about inefficiencies of subleq?

So interpreted subleq VM is not a CPU bottleneck?

You are worried about bandwidth and amount of AM?

I do think that "subleq" would end up becoming a CPU bottleneck but I am now going on the assumption we have an *efficient* instruction set (so am now ignoring the CPU issue) but I think that even assuming no CPU issue the bandwidth usage would become an even bigger problem.

With CIYAM anyone can create 100% generated C++ web applications in literally minutes.

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:48:59 AM
 #29489

Why would 1 millisecond execution time impact 1000 TPS transaction times?
Maybe reduce it to half millisecond time budget to give some room

Don't think in terms of real time.  The VM is virtual.  So is the time.
Yes, but it is running on similar class servers, so we can estimate time to correspond to number of opcodes interpreted. Wont be exact, but as long as we charge by opcodes executed, all the scripts will behave in expected manner

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:50:07 AM
 #29490

If all the nodes have to compute it, then all the nodes have to compute it.

So once again - do you want 1000+ TPS or do you want these "arbitrary script" type txs (as I don't believe that you are going to be able to have both)?


you have convinced me for one CIYAM. another blockchain another day. i definitely think that nxt's proof of stake lays a foundation for a much better DAC than pow. someone should definitely develop a turing complete nxt, just not on this chain.

Thought experiment time.  Let's say each node gets to run an arbitrary program in a VM, but only 1 instruction per block.   Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

How about 2 instructions per block?

I think you see where this is going.

N instructions per block (where N is variable based on the speed of the underlying hardware)?

Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

It would make the problem even worse

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128
Merit: 1009

Newbie


View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:50:40 AM
 #29491

So the script will be able to access any AM in the blockchain. The app needs to seed the script with the required block#, etc.
Will the scripts have an easy way to access alias data also? If so, that could be another way to pass data to the script

Scripts will have easy way to access any data on the blockchain.
xyzzyx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250


I don't really come from outer space.


View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:51:15 AM
 #29492

Thought experiment time.  Let's say each node gets to run an arbitrary program in a VM, but only 1 instruction per block.   Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

How about 2 instructions per block?

I think you see where this is going.

N instructions per block (where N is variable based on the speed of the underlying hardware)?

Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

It would make the problem even worse

I am a poor communicator.  Sad


"An awful lot of code is being written ... in languages that aren't very good by people who don't know what they're doing." -- Barbara Liskov
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:51:20 AM
 #29493

If it is about bandwidth why was everyone so worked up about inefficiencies of subleq?

So interpreted subleq VM is not a CPU bottleneck?

You are worried about bandwidth and amount of AM?

I do think that "subleq" would end up becoming a CPU bottleneck but I am now going on the assumption we have an *efficient* instruction set (so am now ignoring the CPU issue) but I think that even assuming no CPU issue the bandwidth problem will be an even bigger problem.

I agree bandwidth is a big problem, but 1Mbps is supposed to available everywhere and much much more in Belarus

I am worried about beefy hub servers. We need lots of them to support 1000TPS and if we are going to have all those servers anyway, might as well use the CPU power. I have a feeling without running Turing scripts they will get bored at 1% load factor

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:52:30 AM
 #29494

So the script will be able to access any AM in the blockchain. The app needs to seed the script with the required block#, etc.
Will the scripts have an easy way to access alias data also? If so, that could be another way to pass data to the script

Scripts will have easy way to access any data on the blockchain.
Good morning Belarus!!!

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:52:35 AM
 #29495

If the network didnt check the forgers work than forgers could just publish false answers every time and claim the transaction fees anway. meaning they would have no incentive to actually execute the code.

Algos could be designed to be easy to check. Like factoring numbers: difficult to factor, but easy to check that the product of factors is the original. Proof of computation! So one (or a few) beefy nodes have a large computation burden while many smaller nodes have a lower burden.

(Can't be done for all algos. This will incentivize and select for those which can be done more intelligently.)

Maybe but i don't know any good reason to expect this to be possible.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Eadeqa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:52:51 AM
 #29496


If the network didnt check the forgers work than forgers could just publish false answers every time and claim the transaction fees anway. meaning they would have no incentive to actually execute the code.


The whole idea has security implications that we haven't even considered yet. This will turn out to be real bad for Nxt if malicious nodes  are able to steal money.  

There are many other things in the pipeline:

- Distributed Storage - In progress
- Multi-signatures - In progress
- Blockchain Shrinking - In progress
- Two-phase Payments - In progress
     Software supported escrow transactions
- Voting System - In progress
- Reputation System - Will be implemented after Voting System
     Account trust rating system.  Check if sellers on the distributed exchange have a good history, if stock issuers pay dividends and if gateways honor their asset redemptions.
- Decentralized Mixing Service - Concept not ready - Cryptographers please contact core dev team members
- Distributed Computing - Concept not ready
- Smart Contracts - Concept not ready

Why not work on these?

It appears cfb has very short attention spam. Last week it was zerocoin, and now it's built in VM.

I hope he doesn't follow through this and  focuses on finishing things already listed. Maybe more trusted developers should be added to the team. Looking at his posting history, I will vote for "CIYAM Open".






NXT-GZYP-FMRT-FQ9K-3YQGS
https://nxtforum.org
LiQio
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1175
Merit: 1002



View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:53:38 AM
 #29497

Thought experiment time.  Let's say each node gets to run an arbitrary program in a VM, but only 1 instruction per block.   Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

How about 2 instructions per block?

I think you see where this is going.

N instructions per block (where N is variable based on the speed of the underlying hardware)?

Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

It would make the problem even worse

I am a poor communicator.  Sad



*backslapping* - i got it Smiley
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:55:01 AM
 #29498

Thought experiment time.  Let's say each node gets to run an arbitrary program in a VM, but only 1 instruction per block.   Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

How about 2 instructions per block?

I think you see where this is going.

N instructions per block (where N is variable based on the speed of the underlying hardware)?

Will that impact 1000 TPS transaction times?

It would make the problem even worse

I am a poor communicator.  Sad



Oh so you are saying that the amount of operations required would be something of a time limit. it couldn't be included in a block until after enough blocks had passed inorder to make sure that low power cpus could keep up. that would address the transaction per second problem but it would address other problems.

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1090


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2014, 06:55:06 AM
 #29499


If the network didnt check the forgers work than forgers could just publish false answers every time and claim the transaction fees anway. meaning they would have no incentive to actually execute the code.


The whole idea has security implications that we haven't even considered yet. This will turn out to be real bad for Nxt if malicious nodes  are able to steal money.  

There are many other things in the pipeline:

- Distributed Storage - In progress
- Multi-signatures - In progress
- Blockchain Shrinking - In progress
- Two-phase Payments - In progress
     Software supported escrow transactions
- Voting System - In progress
- Reputation System - Will be implemented after Voting System
     Account trust rating system.  Check if sellers on the distributed exchange have a good history, if stock issuers pay dividends and if gateways honor their asset redemptions.
- Decentralized Mixing Service - Concept not ready - Cryptographers please contact core dev team members
- Distributed Computing - Concept not ready
- Smart Contracts - Concept not ready

Why not work on these?

It appears cfb has very short attention spam. Last week it was zerocoin, and now it's built in VM.

I hope he doesn't follow through this and  focuses on finishing things already listed. Maybe more trusted developers should be added to the team. Looking at his posting history, I will vote for "CIYAM Open".






Etherium

Edit: I think it would be really cool to do to Etherium what XCP did to mastercoin
Edit2: Plus I think CfB was getting bored doing easy stuff, this is not so easy

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
Anon136
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1211



View Profile
February 05, 2014, 06:56:17 AM
 #29500


If the network didnt check the forgers work than forgers could just publish false answers every time and claim the transaction fees anway. meaning they would have no incentive to actually execute the code.


The whole idea has security implications that we haven't even considered yet. This will turn out to be real bad for Nxt if malicious nodes  are able to steal money.  

There are many other things in the pipeline:

- Distributed Storage - In progress
- Multi-signatures - In progress
- Blockchain Shrinking - In progress
- Two-phase Payments - In progress
     Software supported escrow transactions
- Voting System - In progress
- Reputation System - Will be implemented after Voting System
     Account trust rating system.  Check if sellers on the distributed exchange have a good history, if stock issuers pay dividends and if gateways honor their asset redemptions.
- Decentralized Mixing Service - Concept not ready - Cryptographers please contact core dev team members
- Distributed Computing - Concept not ready
- Smart Contracts - Concept not ready

Why not work on these?

It appears cfb has very short attention spam. Last week it was zerocoin, and now it's built in VM.

I hope he doesn't follow through this and  focuses on finishing things already listed. Maybe more trusted developers should be added to the team. Looking at his posting history, I will vote for "CIYAM Open".







+1

Rep Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=381041
If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
Pages: « 1 ... 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 [1475] 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 ... 2567 »
  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!