Shahin Go-Round, Proof-of-Consistency (PoCo) and the RingChain..

[mixoftix]

You are referring me to wikipedia for ring topology and IBM token ring in this context?

unfortunately this history is necessary, because it seems blockchainers have problem with detailed advantages / disadvantages of ring.. the conversation of every daily phone call that I receive about PoC begins with: "why you enforce nodes to work around a ring!?"

to generate even more confusions instead of addressing the problems

but these are work flows of the PoC - I can't apologize if they are complicated. ordinarily, talking/thinking about consensus is beautiful, not simple.. all these people here in bitcointalk still share their ideas/problems/misunderstandings about established PoW and everyday we learn something new from each other.. and however the PoC shows progress and I can't find a fatal flaw in it, but after all I personally do not hesitate in throwing a bad idea away.

[aliashraf]

but these are work flows of the PoC - I can't apologize if they are complicated. ordinarily, talking/thinking about consensus is beautiful, not simple..

Complicated algorithm is bad algorithm. It is the rule of thumb in designing algorithms generally, but for public decentralized ecosystems like in cryptocurrency, it is a MUST.

Instead of artificially stacking up everything we could find and presenting a conglomeration of heterogeneous ideas, it would be more convenient and practical to stick with brilliant, simple  ideas of the past or invent a simpler and more brilliant one. My advice.

[BAC Blockchain]

Forgive the noob question, but isn't Bytecode Virtual Machine the most efficient way to process transactions? This is from my CTO's mouth...

And how would i know about "Bytecode Virtual Machine/BVM" (since you're talking about technology for altcoin while this is Bitcoin Development & Technical Discussion section) ?
Why don't you share the whitepaper/technical article of this "Bytecode Virtual Machine" since just say "it's the most efficient way to process transactions" doesn't prove anything.

Frankly i don't believe it as Bitcoin transaction is very simple and use ECDSA which have fast verification speed, unless this BVM uses cryptography signature which have faster verification time than ECDSA.
Bitcoin also use merkle tree for it's block structure which is pretty fast

Forgive me, didn't realize I was overstepping the boundaries of the thread so egregiously. Apparently Bytecode Virtual Machine are what ETH and EOS have achieved, if I may mention their names in this sacrosanct space, so no whitepaper. Thanks though.

[mixoftix]

a presentation file for PoCo Workshop is available now at:
http://www.mixoftix.net/knowledge_base/blockchain/shahin_go-round_v_1_2.ppt

/*
UPDATE: Note: page 15 of the ppt file talks about cluster mechanism and expresses the ability of masternodes to reject a cluster when a conflict with protocol happens. in fact, there are several steps before creating a cluster that reject such conflicts with protocol and giving this power to masternodes obviously could bring damage to the crypto. so this (the only) ability of masternodes to reject blocks will remove from the PoCo in next update unless a comment changes the situation.
*/

it contains the latest feedbacks from discussions here, in bitcointalk. and now we have master nodes in protocol, which have no super power, but some responsibilities. these slides could better show how PoCo will work so could expose any possible hidden flaws in workflows. related discussion are listed bellow:


- Is it possible to generate a consensus algorithm using machine learning?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5079827.0

- Proof of Thought (PoT): The Holy Grail has arrived! Only Humans can mine
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4459113.0

- A Possible Solution To Re-Org Attacks That Isn't Inculudes Checkpoints
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5077722.0

- A new idea for node reward
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5085744.0

- The necessity of "flash-back-pinning" in structure of transactions..
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089384.0

[vuongvuive]

I know some good engineers that believe blockchain is just a linked list and Merkle tree is just a binary tree, mixed with hash algorithms. But we know well these all are about providing new Use Cases and we assess their importance by their outcomes.

[monsterer2]

I know some good engineers that believe blockchain is just a linked list and Merkle tree is just a binary tree, mixed with hash algorithms.

That's like saying an aeroplane is just a bunch of aluminium, silicon, plastic and some engines.

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

I must start off by giving credit to the op for such a informative post and well published doc's on the subject.
It is becoming a rare thing to see people putting in the effort like this and credit should be dew for this.

One advantage of his type of network is that it can transfer data quickly, even with large number of devices connected because the data only flows in one direction, so there can't be any data collisions.
However, the real disadvantage is that if the main cable fails or any node is faulty, then the entire network will fail.

Self-Stabilizing Structured Ring Topology P2P Systems
https://ccl.northwestern.edu/2005/ShakerReevesP2P.pdf

I do like the concept behind this structure but I am unsure it would be suitable for bitcoin dew to the complexity of the structure as posted already by aliashraf.

I look forward to reading more of your work.

I wil credit some merit when I next have some.

MagicByt3

[mixoftix]

I must start off by giving credit to the op for such a informative post and well published doc's on the subject.
It is becoming a rare thing to see people putting in the effort like this and credit should be dew for this.

Thank you for spending time on this study, Magic Byte. Your kind reply provides great energy that we all need to continue such researches.

However, the real disadvantage is that if the main cable fails or any node is faulty, then the entire network will fail.

Actually, this is the most important part of the PoCo, where we force (holder)nodes to shape a Ring for syncing the pre-mined transactions during new block creation. because Ring is very sensitive due to faults and fails, this could quickly expose any possible forks during block creation. with PoCo, holdernodes could simply bypass the faulty node and continue - however they also attempt to reconnect to the faulty node. in other words, such disadvantage in Ring Network could become an advantage in PoCo consensus model.

I do like the concept behind this structure but I am unsure it would be suitable for bitcoin dew to the complexity of the structure as posted already by aliashraf.

well, this research project contains several sub-systems like flash-back-pinning (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5089384.0) that could get used immediately in bitcoin core. but as you have mentioned above the whole bitcoin may not convert into such consensus model. I personally like bitcoin remains in PoW area forever. someday a team may come up with the idea of forking to have "Bitcoin PoCo" in the market.