From what I have understood so far, this is not really a blockchain, or even crypto related concept, in fact it sounds to me like you have proposed a new standalone transaction system. I don't really see why you think that this concept is similar to sidechains, it rather sounds like a disitributed transaction server, with no need of a native currency. I saw you don't have comments in the source code, so I won't be spending much time for now to figure out what goes where.
How is this different from any off chain transactions?
You claim this is double spending proof, how do you collect proof form what you call an account, that he is overseeing his chain in a way the network deems ethical?
Topic: Block lattice project - page 3. (Read 2981 times)
I’m hoping people would have some feedback on a project I’ve been working on. The issue I was trying to solve was scalability: transactions per second and confirmation speed. What I ended up with is a system similar to side-chains except it’s taken to the extreme where each account manages its own chain and all chains are replicated to all nodes. What happens with this system is there are virtually no distributed agreements because each account has authoritative control over its own chain. With the account owner having authoritative control over their own chain, transactions don’t need to be mined for validity so confirmation time drops to near zero and transactions speed is as fast as they can be published.
I was looking for some comments, good, bad, indifferent on what people think.
For gritty details I did a writeup here https://github.com/clemahieu/raiblocks/wiki/Block-lattice which includes information about double-spending
I was looking for some comments, good, bad, indifferent on what people think.
For gritty details I did a writeup here https://github.com/clemahieu/raiblocks/wiki/Block-lattice which includes information about double-spending
Jump to: