With no offense to the OP I see this as an answer in search of a question.
If you do some deep hunting around you can find some other people who tried something similar over the years here and none of them really went to far.
Not saying it's a bad idea, but that there are other things that get you close enough already so you can't just be better. You have to be a lot better and easier to use and more secure and.....
Because of mental inertia, people are going to keep doing what were doing instead of going in another direction since even if what you propose is better, getting people to change is just about impossible.
Not the same as what you are proposing but look at all the people who still leave their coins on exchanges knowing the vulnerabilities of them. Or use insecure hot wallets knowing the vulnerabilities of them. And so on. Why do they do this? Mostly because there is zero work involved in not changing what you are doing.....
-Dave
Topic: Bitcoin second-layer life/death certification system protocol (Read 75 times)
If the owner failed to verify his ownership when he's alive or the other people can't give a proof if the owner is dead, what will you do? if you freeze his coins it's nothing different with centralization.
I don't see there's a big difference with the current protocol, the owner can open a multi-sig wallet and give the private key to other people he trust.
I don't see there's a big difference with the current protocol, the owner can open a multi-sig wallet and give the private key to other people he trust.
I've been working on a design doc (https://github.com/araujo88/bitdc) for a second-layer implementation of a life/death verification protocol, which I named "BitDC". The basic idea is to leverage its multi-signature capabilities and integrate a proof of life mechanism through dust-transactions.
To solve the oracle problem, it proposes a redundancy and weight approach, using different methods as sources of truth and also proposes some mechanisms for collusion prevention for forging one's own death. One of this methods is to use pre-selected and random verifiers for signing a multi-signature wallet to confirm the death of an individual.
The issue with current methods that use "blockchain" for certificates is that the issuers are centralized authorities, as in MIT's Blockcert for example. This protocol main objective is to solve this problem and descentralize the whole process.
I would appreciate any help/feedback on developing this idea further.
Details can be found here: https://github.com/araujo88/bitdc
To solve the oracle problem, it proposes a redundancy and weight approach, using different methods as sources of truth and also proposes some mechanisms for collusion prevention for forging one's own death. One of this methods is to use pre-selected and random verifiers for signing a multi-signature wallet to confirm the death of an individual.
The issue with current methods that use "blockchain" for certificates is that the issuers are centralized authorities, as in MIT's Blockcert for example. This protocol main objective is to solve this problem and descentralize the whole process.
I would appreciate any help/feedback on developing this idea further.
Details can be found here: https://github.com/araujo88/bitdc
Jump to: