A Consensus Protocol Based on the Ability of Network Dispersity. - page 2.

monsterer2

full member

Activity: 351

Merit: 134

Quote from: yj1190590 on May 10, 2018, 06:45:59 AM

Quote from: monsterer2 on May 09, 2018, 03:41:01 AM

I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.

I don't quite catch the point of you but if there were any misunderstandings caused by the grammar and syntax, I'm very sorry about that becsuse I'm not a native English speaker.
If you have any point of view that is against mine, would you please tell me in a direct way because I don't want to miss the main idea again. Thanks.

You cannot objectively verify claimed network latency, so you cannot build a consensus using this concept. I think you have realised this, so you've stake weighted your consensus to compensate.... At best this will leave you with the security model of PoS. At worst you will have all kinds of sybil attack problems related to the nuances of your implementation.

yj1190590

member

Activity: 199

Merit: 15

Quote from: aleksej996 on May 10, 2018, 07:15:11 AM

Proof of Stake protocol is less secure than Proof of Work. Calling it more successful is naive. It has it's costs and it's benefits.
It trades security for energy consumption, it isn't better, it is just different.

I have never said that PoS is better than PoW.
I said PoS is the most successful one of the other alternative protocols, isn't it ?

Quote

All the other protocols are following the same logic, like Proof of Activity, Proof of Burn, Proof of Storage, Proof of Elapsed Time, and so on. "Proof of Stake" (PoS) protocol is the most successful one of them...

aleksej996

sr. member

Activity: 490

Merit: 389

Do not trust the government

Quote from: yj1190590 on May 10, 2018, 06:45:59 AM

Quote from: monsterer2 on May 09, 2018, 03:41:01 AM

I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.

I don't quite catch the point of you but if there were any misunderstandings caused by the grammar and syntax, I'm very sorry about that becsuse I'm not a native English speaker.
If you have any point of view that is against mine, would you please tell me in a direct way because I don't want to miss the main idea again. Thanks.

Proof of Stake protocol is less secure than Proof of Work. Calling it more successful is naive. It has it's costs and it's benefits.
It trades security for energy consumption, it isn't better, it is just different.

yj1190590

member

Activity: 199

Merit: 15

Quote from: monsterer2 on May 09, 2018, 03:41:01 AM

I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.

I don't quite catch the point of you but if there were any misunderstandings caused by the grammar and syntax, I'm very sorry about that becsuse I'm not a native English speaker.
If you have any point of view that is against mine, would you please tell me in a direct way because I don't want to miss the main idea again. Thanks.

monsterer2

full member

Activity: 351

Merit: 134

Quote

“Proof of Stake” (PoS) protocol is the most successful one of them because it doesn’t
need any external resources and consumes low energy

I stopped reading the paper at this point. I'm afraid this paper reads like a blog post from someone who just read about cryptocurrencies for the first time.

yj1190590

member

Activity: 199

Merit: 15

hi:
This is the research paper about the project I posted before.
Thank you for your time.
[disabled]
If there are any questions, please let me know. Thanks.

previous post:[disabled]

Topic: A Consensus Protocol Based on the Ability of Network Dispersity. - page 2. (Read 349 times)