Cool. Feel free to copy it, some attribution would be nice;)
There's some capability for this system to add new blocks if there was a desire to add them in the future.
If you wanted to roll your own some things to consider are: right now voting on balance decision is controlled in proportion by balances. If all of a sudden we were voting on things with a much higher value than the units in the network, there might be more incentive to be a network adversary.
I like the idea of smart contracts though my overall worry is the only quantity the network can prove or reverse is the unit of accounting on the network. For rai I thought there were significant uses of fast transaction of one unit enough to warrant focusing on that.
Thank you for responding! Of course, goes without saying that attribution would be in place. That said - you stated clearly that RAI's goal is to do one thing and do it well - instant transactions.
I also have some other ideas, for example, does a transaction have to be confirmed by everyone? Couldn't a transaction confirmation be a subset of all the balances? (I'm thinking in terms of scaling). For example if you shard all the account balances such that you get the hex they end in so you split in 256.
You could have it that if A wants to send to B - you look at the shards they fall in, and only 2 shards at max would need to confirm transactions.
This would allow for parallelism. Of course, it would imply a lot more people are actually using the system.
To illustrate, let's say balances are somewhat equally distributed and you have 00, 01, ... FE, FF as last byte in the address.
Then if A ends with 84 and B ends with F7, only balances that have 84 and F7 would have to "commit" the transaction.
Not sure if this works with your system, but that's what I've been pondering on in my design.
Good job nonetheless! I really like what you've come up with.
