Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitshares-PTS to double/triple in price in the next 45 days!!? - page 8. (Read 15263 times)

full member
Activity: 207
Merit: 100
Call it approval voting, call it DPoS, call it delegates, we use different names for it but it is the same in essence.

approval voting is an actual type of voting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting. bitshares and nxt do not use the same voting algo so they do not use the same consensus algo. yes they both use delegated proof of stake (i think nxt calls it leasing) but  the way active delegates/ active forgers are determined is different. originally bitshares was going to use up and down votes for delegates. i don't know the specifics of how forgers are chosen in nxt.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82
Call it approval voting, call it DPoS, call it delegates, we use different names for it but it is the same in essence.
full member
Activity: 207
Merit: 100
Point is the consensus algo is the same to an extreme extend.

The consensus mechanism is approval voting which Nxt does not use. Please see the following thread from the forum:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5205.90
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82
Point is the consensus algo is the same to an extreme extend.
newbie
Activity: 41
Merit: 0
Lol?

So, it is basically Nxt. Thanks again for clarifying.

I'm not sure what is humorous or why you think it is "basically NXT".  For starters BitShares isn't attempting to be a currency.  After the exchange is released, the toolkit will be released.  The toolkit will allow creation of currencies, but there isn't a core currency being hyped like NXT.  Bitshares will also be completely open source from the beginning allowing a true free market approach by giving anyone the ability to fork.

Bitshares is an ecosystem.  NXT and Bitshares have more overlap than almost all other projects, but NXT is more like other coins than Bitshares.  Bitshares is unique in their approach.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82
Lol?

So, it is basically Nxt. Thanks again for clarifying.
newbie
Activity: 41
Merit: 0
Cool. In BitShares they can only run more than one of the 101 delegate positions if shareholders are ok with that/they convince shareholders they are different people. Producing ID and various other assurances aren't out the question if that's what shareholders feel they need. When CAP & remuneration get big enough, they might even end up voting for people's whose integrity is extremely high. People the majority trust in the 2.0 space/Ron Paul/Who knows.

Personally I would probably vote for Andreas Antonopoulos to be a delegate if he wanted to for example, & once it's paying well, for little work, mainly high trust, maybe someone like him would be up for it etc.

I concur with devphp. No anonymity possible here?

There is as much anonymity as one desires and no more.  Any crypto system can have no anonymity if the person decides to reveal who they are or they messages they've sent etc.  Block-signers aka delegates choose to become elected over the identity they publicly put forth.  This could be their real name or someone else's name.

So if for whatever reason the stake holders are wanting everyone to reveal their true identity to become elected then perhaps it would remove a lot of anonymity.  Realize though that the delegates could just as well choose to not reveal themselves and 101 delegates would be chosen anyway.

The fact of the matter is that a directionless equally weighted p2p network does not scale very well.  Thus we have DPOS and the future.
sr. member
Activity: 345
Merit: 250
It's possible, some may make a valid case for saying,  'if a few delegates are anonymous they can't be targeted or compromised.'
You can only compromise the person maintaing the delegate ..
the machines wich run the delegates can be hidden behind tor or vpn proxies .. they are just broadcasting signed blocks ..
there are lot's of ways possible to hide those for net getting ddos'd
legendary
Activity: 1138
Merit: 1001
Cool. In BitShares they can only run more than one of the 101 delegate positions if shareholders are ok with that/they convince shareholders they are different people. Producing ID and various other assurances aren't out the question if that's what shareholders feel they need. When CAP & remuneration get big enough, they might even end up voting for people's whose integrity is extremely high. People the majority trust in the 2.0 space/Ron Paul/Who knows.

Personally I would probably vote for Andreas Antonopoulos to be a delegate if he wanted to for example, & once it's paying well, for little work, mainly high trust, maybe someone like him would be up for it etc.

I concur with devphp. No anonymity possible here?

It's possible, some may make a valid case for saying,  'if a few delegates are anonymous they can't be targeted or compromised.'

I'd vote for known delegates, located in a range of jurisdictions and again personally I'd be voting for people who have established reputations of trust and integrity in this space/their field as well. But it's up to the majority of shareholders in each DAC.


sr. member
Activity: 345
Merit: 250
I concur with devphp. No anonymity possible here?
It is possible .. but difficult to get enough votes/trust
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
☕ NXT-4BTE-8Y4K-CDS2-6TB82
Cool. In BitShares they can only run more than one of the 101 delegate positions if shareholders are ok with that/they convince shareholders they are different people. Producing ID and various other assurances aren't out the question if that's what shareholders feel they need. When CAP & remuneration get big enough, they might even end up voting for people's whose integrity is extremely high. People the majority trust in the 2.0 space/Ron Paul/Who knows.

Personally I would probably vote for Andreas Antonopoulos to be a delegate if he wanted to for example, & once it's paying well, for little work, mainly high trust, maybe someone like him would be up for it etc.

I concur with devphp. No anonymity possible here?
legendary
Activity: 1138
Merit: 1001
Not sure what you mean by 'those 300 accounts could be linked to very few people'. If you mean the Sybil attack, well, can't delegates in BitShares also be linked to very few people? Can't one person run a few nodes? It's not like BitShares ask for government ID and allows to run only one Smiley

I understand the way it works in Bitshares now. Just explaining that that link by Daniel has a few things that need to be corrected.

Cool. In BitShares they can only run more than one of the 101 delegate positions if shareholders are ok with that/they convince shareholders they are different people. Producing ID and various other assurances aren't out the question if that's what shareholders feel they need. When CAP & remuneration get big enough, they might even end up voting for people's whose integrity is extremely high. People the majority trust in the 2.0 space/Ron Paul/Who knows.

Personally I would probably vote for Andreas Antonopoulos to be a delegate if he wanted to for example, & once it's paying well, for little work, mainly high trust, maybe someone like him would be up for it etc.


sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 260
Hi ya, yeah I like NXT, Yes I agree, the part about your leased forging needs to be updated. But there's a big difference between 300 or 3000 random accounts and 101 elected delegates. Those 300 accounts could link to very few people.

In BitShares a delegate position is very well remunerated. So people will be fighting over those positions to convince and prove to shareholders they are worthy. So we may well have 101 people spread across the four corners of the globe if shareholders think that's best for the DAC. They can also be voted off easily and even by the system if they delay blocks, don't include transactions etc. it's a very different proposition.

But I'm one of the least technical supporters, I think others could explain it better.

You don't quite understand.

300-350 is the number of forgers who have successfully forged at least one block. But the number of forgers is larger than that, some are just not lucky yet. The number of successful forgers gradually increases with time as the distribution gets more even. For example, 6 months ago there were only 200 accounts that successfully forged blocks (you can verify that with the java code above), now there are 300-350.

There is no reliable way to calculate how many accounts are forging, you can only calculate how many have been successful at that by checking their public keys in the block chain.

Not sure what you mean by 'those 300 accounts could be linked to very few people'. If you mean the Sybil attack, well, can't delegates in BitShares also be linked to very few people? Can't one person run a few nodes? It's not like BitShares ask for government ID and allows to run only one Smiley

I understand the way it works in Bitshares now. Just explaining that that link by Daniel has a few things that need to be corrected.
legendary
Activity: 1138
Merit: 1001
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 260
If you want to read more about the system http://bitshares.org/delegated-proof-of-stake/

Edit: Yes read that link, it covers comparisons to all the other system in terms if 'decentralisation', attacks etc.

That's a nice link, thank you.
In the section on NXT decentralization Daniel makes some assumptions, quoting:

Quote
2.5.3 Nxt

Nxt uses transparent forging where the next node is deterministically selected. It can be compared to using Delegated Proof of Stake where the only person you can delegate to is yourself and the frequency in which you have the opportunity to forge a block is directly related to your balance. In this sense Nxt is more decentralized than Peercoin and Bitcoin, but still suffers poor user participation due to security risks and the fact that most regular users do not leave their computers on all day to take advantage of the opportunity.

From this perspective we can conclude that the Nxt network is being secured by a small minority of the shareholders. In effect, if you don’t show up to vote you lose your vote. To resolve this issue some Nxt users pool their funds and trust a 3rd party to mine for them. This increases shareholder participation by being a form of Delegated Proof of Stake, but also risks their balance while they are participating in the pool.

In fact, there is no poor user participation in NXT. Analysis of the blockchain reveals that the total number of accounts generating new blocks in NXT is between 300 and 350. Which is better than 100 delegates in BitShares.

Here is the java code that can be used to calculate active (who have forged blocks) forgers in the NXT blockchain:

Code:
import java.sql.Connection;
import java.sql.DriverManager;
import java.sql.ResultSet;
import java.sql.SQLException;
import java.sql.Statement;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Iterator;

public class inspectDB {

        public static void runQuery(int startHeight, int endHeight) {

                Connection conn = null;

                String dbUrl = "jdbc:h2:nxt_db/nxt;DB_CLOSE_ON_EXIT=FALSE";
                dbUrl += ";DB_CLOSE_ON_EXIT=FALSE";

                try {

                        Class.forName("org.h2.Driver");

                        conn = DriverManager.getConnection(dbUrl, "sa", "sa");

                        Statement stmt = conn.createStatement();
                        // generator_public_key
                        ArrayList pubgenkeys = new ArrayList();
                        String stmtStr = "SELECT generator_public_key, height, timestamp, total_amount FROM block where total_amount >= 0 and height > "
                                        + startHeight + " and height < " + endHeight;
                        ResultSet selectRS = stmt.executeQuery(stmtStr);// total_amount
                        while (selectRS.next()) {
                                String a = selectRS.getString(1);
                                pubgenkeys.add(a);

                        }

                        Iterator it = pubgenkeys.iterator();
                        HashMap occ = new HashMap();
                        while (it.hasNext()) {
                                String cur = it.next();
                                // System.out.println(cur);
                                if (occ.containsKey(cur)) {
                                        int last = occ.get(cur).intValue();
                                        occ.remove(cur);
                                        occ.put(cur, new Integer(last + 1));
                                } else
                                        occ.put(cur, 1);
                        }

                        int numBlocks = endHeight - startHeight;
                        int numAddr = occ.values().size();

                        System.out.println("startBlock  " + startHeight
                                        + " generated by # addresses : " + numAddr
                                        + " (numBlocks: " + numBlocks + ")");

                        conn.close();

                } catch (SQLException e) {
                        e.printStackTrace();
                } catch (ClassNotFoundException e) {

                        e.printStackTrace();
                } finally {
                        if (conn != null)
                                try {
                                        conn.close();
                                } catch (SQLException e) {
                                        e.printStackTrace();
                                }
                }

        }

        public static void main(String[] args) {
                int maxh = 200000;
                int step = 10000;
                for (int bh = 0; bh < maxh; bh += step) {
                        runQuery(bh, bh + step);
                }

        }
}



Also, in the last paragraph last sentence he says users risk their balance with a pool. No, they don't. The feature called Leased Forging doesn't require sending your coins to a pool. It only helps to lease your effective balance for forging. But your coins are all in your possession, nobody but you has access to them.

Other sections of that link may be checked also for doubtful information. I outlined two most outstanding... eh, inconsistencies Smiley
full member
Activity: 226
Merit: 100
Have I understood correctly that BitShares is not decentralised? I don't want to spread FUD so please correct me if I understood this wrong. If it's true then how would you response to someone who critizises centralisation?
I'm mainly into crypto because of the idea of decentralisation. In fact I think that's the only reason why we need crypto. Why should I invest in a coin that is not really decentralised?
it is decentralized as the network is dezentralized as a p2p network .. the security model is different ... atm 101 delegates produce the blocks .. and only they can produce block .. so in terms of decentralized block production bitshares not word decentralized .. however: as a proof-of-stake 'coin' you can vote for your delegates .. if you have enough approvals you can set up a delegate by your own ..
the list of delegates is (in contrast to ripple) dynamic .. if a delegate stops producing blocks or does not include transactions (those are the only two things delegates can do to harm the network) they get 'fired' as they loose approval by the users (stakeholders, all participants with >0 stake) ...
the advantage is: in contrast to NXT (also with transparent forging) the delegate that generates the next block is deterministically defined (randomized per round - 1 delegate = 1 block per round) and as such the network can confirm transactions very rapidly .. last testnet ran several days without major issues with 10 secs blocks ..

I recommend to read at wiki.bitshares.org

Sounds pretty interesting, I'll read a little bit about it.
legendary
Activity: 1138
Merit: 1001
Have I understood correctly that BitShares is not decentralised? I don't want to spread FUD so please correct me if I understood this wrong. If it's true then how would you response to someone who critizises centralisation?
I'm mainly into crypto because of the idea of decentralisation. In fact I think that's the only reason why we need crypto. Why should I invest in a coin that is not really decentralised?

It's a good question, earlier in this thread, there was a similar discussion with someone more involved in NXT, so this is the convo from there, but I'd wait for a more tech explanation from Clout too.

  
Cool, What would you say, in your opinion, is the best system in terms of decentralisation and performance out there at the moment?

My opinion would be called biased if I said it's NXT.
I see BitShares has achieved a pretty good decentralization level compared to Bitcoin.
Will it be good enough in the future? Only time can tell.
Certainly, 101 delegated nodes are far more difficult to compromise than just 2 biggest Bitcoin pools. It's not 100% decentralization, but I guess many people will find it decent enough to use.

Yeah I would agree with that.

I'm one of the people who think decentralisation is a means not an end. https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3923.0

Any increased decentralisation starts to add significant cost and time delay to the network. For me it's about .Gov or the banks/corporations trying to interfere with my liberty. 'If' DPOS achieves security against that & attack/compromise, (Other than making me wealthy with a buyout) then I'm OK with that.

It means BitShares will have the most competitive blockchains, and I know most end customers generally want the best products at the best price. So we should be able to outperform both centralised systems and ones that are more decentralised.

Though I think there will still be a market for people who like more decentralised systems on principle.
 
   

If you want to read more about the system http://bitshares.org/delegated-proof-of-stake/

Edit: Yes read that link, it covers comparisons to all the other system in terms if 'decentralisation', attacks etc.
sr. member
Activity: 345
Merit: 250
Have I understood correctly that BitShares is not decentralised? I don't want to spread FUD so please correct me if I understood this wrong. If it's true then how would you response to someone who critizises centralisation?
I'm mainly into crypto because of the idea of decentralisation. In fact I think that's the only reason why we need crypto. Why should I invest in a coin that is not really decentralised?
it is decentralized as the network is dezentralized as a p2p network .. the security model is different ... atm 101 delegates produce the blocks .. and only they can produce block .. so in terms of decentralized block production bitshares not word decentralized .. however: as a proof-of-stake 'coin' you can vote for your delegates .. if you have enough approvals you can set up a delegate by your own ..
the list of delegates is (in contrast to ripple) dynamic .. if a delegate stops producing blocks or does not include transactions (those are the only two things delegates can do to harm the network) they get 'fired' as they loose approval by the users (stakeholders, all participants with >0 stake) ...
the advantage is: in contrast to NXT (also with transparent forging) the delegate that generates the next block is deterministically defined (randomized per round - 1 delegate = 1 block per round) and as such the network can confirm transactions very rapidly .. last testnet ran several days without major issues with 10 secs blocks ..

I recommend to read at wiki.bitshares.org
sr. member
Activity: 345
Merit: 250
well, no release yet; we will see if they deliver => actually the table should show a big red NO Wink
how is that? They have a running testnet .. I'd say they will for sure release .. no idea when but probably sooner than you think!
full member
Activity: 226
Merit: 100
Have I understood correctly that BitShares is not decentralised? I don't want to spread FUD so please correct me if I understood this wrong. If it's true then how would you response to someone who critizises centralisation?
I'm mainly into crypto because of the idea of decentralisation. In fact I think that's the only reason why we need crypto. Why should I invest in a coin that is not really decentralised?
Pages:
Jump to: