Bitcoin Forum
May 02, 2024, 07:05:11 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Topic moved out of Bitcoin Development & Technical Disccussion thread  (Read 824 times)
porqupine (OP)
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 214
Merit: 101


View Profile
November 07, 2014, 10:39:32 PM
 #1

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=848283.0

Quote
(Eliminating Nothing-is-at-Stake using Shamir's Secret Sharing)

Each address that participates in signing will have a deterministic secret S (it has to be deterministic to make their sharing verifiable) known only to them (i.e. the initial secret state could just be the SHA256 of an ECDSA signature over the genesis block), all the algorithmic steps are normal, except instead of distributing the secret among a number of holders, they will include a point pair (Xi, Yi) on each Block_i which they sign, where Xi is something publicly known such as the block-header hash of the block, and Yi is computed. Note, Shamir's Seceret Sharing has no mechanism for cheater resistance, but with cryptocurrencies identity is already established with ECDSA, since PoS reward does not need to be immediate (see below), it can be easily verified if said signer cheated when providing Xi, Yi pairs.  

I suggest re-adjusting block reward to a method, Let's call it Sign-Accumulate-Redeem. Fees from Block Processing will be collected and not returned instantly. For a given stake holder address after they have signed (n-1) number of blocks, they can claim their rewards, by referencing the number of each block in which they have signed, and also revealing their secret S . If S has already been revealed they cannot claim anything.
Reward calculation can just be something like sum (stake/total_signing_stake * (coin_days modifier) * (fees_collected in block)).

Would like to know why before I repost it, since some arbitrary mod might ban me. Thanks.

Edit: NOTE the absolute lack of relevance to an alt-coin in any of the posts in the topic.
"I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large transaction volume or no volume." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714676711
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714676711

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714676711
Reply with quote  #2

1714676711
Report to moderator
1714676711
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714676711

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714676711
Reply with quote  #2

1714676711
Report to moderator
1714676711
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714676711

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714676711
Reply with quote  #2

1714676711
Report to moderator
shorena
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1499


No I dont escrow anymore.


View Profile WWW
November 08, 2014, 11:44:39 AM
 #2

My guess: PoS is not a Bitcoin concept, so why post it there? If you wanted to discuss a replacement of PoW with an improved PoS your post fails to mention that.

It might also help if you explain why you think it belonged in the section you originally posted it in. Apparently at least the person reporting it and a mod think otherwise.

Im not really here, its just your imagination.
Pages: [1]
  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!