Bitcoin Forum
June 29, 2024, 04:18:43 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 [1930] 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ... 2557 »
  Print  
Author Topic: NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information  (Read 2761543 times)
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1132


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 03:51:34 PM
 #38581

I proposed a simpler method, but CIYAM said it was impossible.
Do you think using current method (without the random factor) we can simply reduce the time between blocks to 50 seconds? 30 seconds? 10 seconds?

James

We can reduce. But if u set gap between blocks to 10 sec then u'll need 6 times more confirmations to get the same reliability.
So with current internet latency the 60 seconds confirmation time is the fastest practical time?

What if we reduce the network to just hallmarked nodes all with high speed internet? What is the fastest practical time to get current reliability (just among the hallmarked nodes)?

James

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

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1078


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 03:51:56 PM
 #38582

Would Nxt be slower or faster?

Put it this way: 1 x 1 minute confirmation takes 1 minute and 6 x 10 second confirmations takes 1 minute.

Both are most likely about the same level of security.

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
redsn0w
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1042


#Free market


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 03:53:18 PM
 #38583

So... more nodes ?

It doesn't *change* the *latency* to have more nodes.

The latency is due to the physical hardware of the internet itself and some of the software (in particular things like the GCF) that sit at the fairly low levels above that.

Adding "more hops" can actually only make things *slower*.



then What's the solution ?
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1078


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 03:53:55 PM
 #38584

What if we reduce the network to just hallmarked nodes all with high speed internet? What is the fastest practical time to get current reliability (just among the hallmarked nodes)?

It only helps the "hallmarked nodes" in "talking to each other" - it doesn't change the time it takes your own node (if you are a retailer for example) to talk to them.

So sure you could have those nodes probably do things much faster "between themselves" but still the "outsider" can't catch up.

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142
Merit: 1009

Newbie


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 03:53:59 PM
 #38585

Would Nxt be slower or faster?

Depends on topology.
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 03:55:04 PM
 #38586

But for simple transactions?

That's where we have to work out "trade offs".

IMO having lots of forks is not a great idea (a fork of > 2 rarely happens in Bitcoin).

Remember the "average Joe" going into a 7-11 to purchase a "can of soda" probably isn't even "capable" of trying to do a "double spend" so is it any more likely to occur than if they "slipped the soda can into their pocket"?


Not sure why what trade-offs exactly you are talking about.

--------------------------
Btw:

For the can of soda aka shopping, we would need a protocol like this:

1) Joe creates a transaction with the parameters specified by the supermarket. (in fact some nice credit card looking object will do)
2) Joe sends the transaction data to the supermarket and get the can in exchange
3) The supermarket would be eager to send that transaction to the network ASAP
4) => supermarket will even run its own node to secure their transactions.

If the transaction was send to a fork node, it can be resend over and over again until the supermarket get its money.

Something wrong with that?
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 27, 2014, 03:56:15 PM
 #38587


I'm still lolling. My dog thinks I'm stupid. And I'm hodling.
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1078


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 03:56:30 PM
 #38588

Would Nxt be slower or faster?

Depends on topology.

Again - I think CfB and I are "in tune" with this.

You can't improve your own latency issues by having "some other servers" talk faster to each other.

At the end of the day your "slow connection" simply "can't keep up" so it won't be able to see those fast flying confirmations and more than likely will end up on a fork.

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
ChuckOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250

☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 03:58:28 PM
 #38589

I proposed a simpler method, but CIYAM said it was impossible.
Do you think using current method (without the random factor) we can simply reduce the time between blocks to 50 seconds? 30 seconds? 10 seconds?

James

We can reduce. But if u set gap between blocks to 10 sec then u'll need 6 times more confirmations to get the same reliability.
So with current internet latency the 60 seconds confirmation time is the fastest practical time?

What if we reduce the network to just hallmarked nodes all with high speed internet? What is the fastest practical time to get current reliability (just among the hallmarked nodes)?

James

Not sure why 60 seconds should be the fastest practical time. Simple transactions as buying a can of soda do not require 1440 blocks. As long as the "supermarket" caches its precious not-confirmed transactions until they are, nobody's in trouble.

@CfB
Could you elaborate?
bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 27, 2014, 04:00:09 PM
 #38590

Quick question: Does local signing change anything of the soda-can situation?

edit: Ok. Ignore.
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1078


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:00:22 PM
 #38591

If the transaction was send to a fork node, it can be resend over and over again until the supermarket get its money.

Not if the balance of said account has become *zero* in the meantime due to the supermarket not having fast enough internet to see the other tx that was sent by "tricky Joe" at the same time he bought the soda from another location (which emptied his balance via a higher speed route) as he had set that up perhaps via a VPS or some other way (as I said "average Joe" would be very unlikely to be able to get away with this).

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1132


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:01:26 PM
 #38592

What if we reduce the network to just hallmarked nodes all with high speed internet? What is the fastest practical time to get current reliability (just among the hallmarked nodes)?

It only helps the "hallmarked nodes" in "talking to each other" - it doesn't change the time it takes your own node (if you are a retailer for example) to talk to them.

So sure you could have those nodes probably do things much faster "between themselves" but still the "outsider" can't catch up.

Please try to understand what I am saying. You agree that we can have hallmarked nodes going at a much faster speed. I understand that it will only be between themselves.

Now, lets assume that we place the hallmarked nodes in a topology such that with the actual Internet of today, all nodes are a short ping distance away from at least one hallmarked node. And we restrict non-hallmarked nodes to only use peers with a fast enough ping time.

This two tiered approach is kind of what is going on now, but not strictly. I cant understand why the overall processing wont go any faster if all nodes are fast to a hallmark and all hallmarks are fast to each other.

So, in China there would be hallmarked servers that you can ping in 50 milliseconds. We make sure the hallmarks in China have a fast path outside.

Are you saying that with this structure we are still at 60 seconds? If so, math please

James

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

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1078


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:01:57 PM
 #38593

Quick question: Does local signing change anything of the soda-can situation?

No - you can have your balance emptied by a *faster* tx (if you know how to achieve that) so that your tx at the supermarket will simply fail due to zero balance.

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
landomata
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:02:20 PM
 #38594

If the transaction was send to a fork node, it can be resend over and over again until the supermarket get its money.

Not if the balance of said account has become *zero* in the meantime due to the supermarket not having fast enough internet to see the other tx that was sent by "tricky Joe" at the same time he bought the soda from another location (which emptied his balance via a higher speed route) as he had set that up perhaps via a VPS or some other way (as I said "average Joe" would be very unlikely to be able to get away with this).


Joe is buying a coke he can;t be in two places at once.

bitcoinpaul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 27, 2014, 04:03:32 PM
 #38595

If the transaction was send to a fork node, it can be resend over and over again until the supermarket get its money.

Not if the balance of said account has become *zero* in the meantime due to the supermarket not having fast enough internet to see the other tx that was sent by "tricky Joe" at the same time he bought the soda from another location (which emptied his balance via a higher speed route) as he had set that up perhaps via a VPS or some other way (as I said "average Joe" would be very unlikely to be able to get away with this).


Joe is buying a coke he can;t be in two places at once.


If Joe has no friends, it is not possible Grin
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1078


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:03:46 PM
 #38596

So, in China there would be hallmarked servers that you can ping in 50 milliseconds. We make sure the hallmarks in China have a fast path outside.

How are you going to "make sure" of this?

Are you going to "beat" the GCF?

If so please let me know the "secret sauce". Smiley

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
CIYAM
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1078


Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:05:56 PM
 #38597

Joe is buying a coke he can;t be in two places at once.


If Joe has no friends, it is not possible Grin

If he has a suitable AT then he might not need a friend. Grin

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

GPG Public Key | 1ciyam3htJit1feGa26p2wQ4aw6KFTejU
landomata
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:06:28 PM
 #38598


If Joe has no friends, it is not possible Grin

1) If Joe wanted to steal a coke he could simple walk out of the store without paying.


2) I understand we must act on reality not our limited assumptions....but I'm sure some very smart people said humans would never fly.

Seeing the impossible is also genius.

EDIT: seeing pass the impossible is genius

opticalcarrier
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100



View Profile
February 27, 2014, 04:06:39 PM
 #38599

What do you think about limiting max forging power to anywhere between 1% to 5%

I didn't come to a conclusion yet.

i still say this is one of the things we all need to talk through and address first.  how do we prevent centralization of forging in a non-trustless manner?  and can someone answer a question on the following 2 scenarios:

1) a single account has 91% of all NXT in its balance
2) a single account balance + all the effectiveBalances leased to that single account where the sum is 91% of all NXT

Do both these scenarios present the same risk of a 91% attack?  It seems to me that they do, but some people seem to have been suggesting otherwise, or at least thats how I understand some conversations

Also, can anyone answer this:

Quote
in what cases would you use broadcastTransaction API?  Is it only for light-clients to use to send to a full node?  I thought we were saying before that if some forger never picked up your transaction you could use broadcastTransaction to resend it, but that requires full bytes of the transaction, and you cannot obtain that unless you pull it from the blockchain, which means it is already *in* the blockchain.

I dont understand?
jl777
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1132


View Profile WWW
February 27, 2014, 04:10:08 PM
 #38600

So, in China there would be hallmarked servers that you can ping in 50 milliseconds. We make sure the hallmarks in China have a fast path outside.

How are you going to "make sure" of this?

Are you going to "beat" the GCF?

If so please let me know the "secret sauce". Smiley

So the "only" problem is that we cant ensure a fast path out of China? We can get the 50 milliseconds ping inside China?

If so, I might have a solution, just a matter of cost. Is is fair to assume that we can estimate a block generation time being limited by 200 times the worst ping times of nodes?

James

http://www.digitalcatallaxy.com/report2015.html
100+ page annual report for SuperNET
Pages: « 1 ... 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 [1930] 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 ... 2557 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!