Topic: [BOUNTY] 🔥🔥WINNER-GETS-ALL / PROOF-OF-TRANSACTION CONSENSUS DEBATE BOUNTY!🔥🔥 - page 7. (Read 4113 times)

Hi, I'm excited about POT and the challenge TAU raised against - I think it is a great, innovative project.

However, I have a few remarks I'd like to share.
The first remark is about the harvest club, in particular the club leader. I understand you provide incentives for club leaders and empower the 'poor' to take part in the mining process, but the issue I see is around the idea of shifting full reward control to the club leader, who first sets aside its own reward while the rest of the reward is split among the renaming club members via the club wiring protocol.
The way I see it, this opens a manipulative window for the club leader over the club members, which could be a great concern.
The way, I'd go around this issue is by calculating harvest power percentages from each member and allocating the reward accordingly and automatically, while allowing for +5-10% extra for the club leader as added benefit.

The second remark is based around the scalability issue. While I agree that there shouldn't be an 'upper bound for block size', I fail to see how the proposed solution ('...to let harvest club leaders (full nodes) determine their optimal block size') would work given that its all dependent on future block chain technology for bringing more bandwidth and shorter delays. Here, you have to decide on your balance between decentralized and security vs scalability and centralization.

Also, the whitepaper may need revisiting, there are a couple of typos.

I think we need Alternatives to PoW and PoS - so thank you for the idea! I think anyway that Proof of Transaction will run into problems. There is a chapter missing in your whitepaper how to handle sybil attacks. It is not about a 51% attack, but about harvesting rewards with fake transactions. Sybils are multiple accounts created by only one person with the goal to allow that person to profit on transactions.Fake transactions done between Sybil Accounts in favor of few People will most likely flood the network as soon as there grows any hope on value in it. This has happened to others before.

Take a deeper look into the sphere of cryptoubi, you will find out that some of the biggest projects in usercount most likely allready did met such sybil attacks, no matter that their value is neglectable or not even existing for now. You might want to have a look at Mannabase.com and swiftdemand.com to find out that more than the half of those networks users where allready banned within the last few month - most likely on suspicion for beeing sybils.

Before that ban, swiftdemands stats counter for example had more than 10.000 transactions each day, now there are only around 100 each day. A dev on OpenUBI telegram group said that the number of active swiftdemand accounts dropped from around 200.000 to arround 80.000 when some unknown actions against sybils took place.

Most cryptoubi-projects try to avoid those problems now by limiting the number of possible accounts to one each individual in different ways, for example by registering each account and connecting it to personal data via centralized KYC.

But centralized KYC is not trustable from users perspective  either.

So another approach against sybils could be creating so called WebOfTrusts (but that takes time) or do a anonymous KYC based on projects like (all yet to be developed) kuwa, brightid or github.com/UBIC-repo

Good luck with your project. I support everything that may help to speed up the downfall of PoW and PoS, still I think you really have to take the sybil problem more serious?

Dear Ubiubi18, thank you for the nice analysis and introduce ubi space. Regarding Sybil attacks on universal basic income,ubi crypto project, Taucoin is not an ubi project but requiring user effort or money to secure coins. Accumulating transation weight needs holders pay fees and compete to be packed up in next block. One part we soon put into whitepaper is miners need to pack higher transaction fee to increase own likelyhood to generate next block, which is randomness x fee in block. Therefore, holders transfer numerous coins among own addresses will have to pay attractive fees to be recogonized. These fees collected by miners will be distribute to club members according to the history transaction weight or transaction fee weight, between these two we have not decide.
I am in line with you on not doing centralized KYC and replacing pow/pos.

-iMorpheus

This guy gets it 

I welcome this project , first of all as search for an alternative to POW and POS. The need for consensus alternative is well outlined at the start of the whitepaper.  That is , I do not want to be a trader or speculator to earn POW reward.  I do not want to collect or stake coins, I just want use crypto instead of fiat.

All hands on deck, this could be a great marketing stunt or a great dud if not enough people show up. Let's try to get some of the heavy hitters on the forum interested in here. I'll take part for sure.


For anyone interested. I still haven't decided whether I would speak FOR Tau or AGAINST it. Even though I support the idea.

Don't be shy, you could be the first! Either you agree that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus or you can share your disagreement and win big!

This is really new to me - debate bounty. Hope you will get many debate from good member here. Good luck guys.

1 MILLION TAU! AND $1,000? Now that's a generous challenge. Can't wait to see the innovative arguments and discussions people bring to the table, there's a huge amount of intelligent members here, so no doubt somebody will be able to rise to the challenge.

Its the first time ive ever seen a Debate bounty. Too bad I can't participate 

TAUcoin, has proposed a brand new consensus mechanism called Proof-of-Transactions. It proposes a fast circulation currency without inflation. Users collectively maintain the network security by doing normal economical behavior - transactions through time. With the technical innovation of "Proof Of Transaction", users are incentivized to making necessary transactions by sharing the future block reward. No advantage is given to accumulating wealth and hardware.
Learn about TAUCOIN here

We believe that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus mechanism when it comes to being:

•   The most secure decentralized network
•   The fairest decentralized network
•   The most environmentally friendly decentralized network

Let’s jump to the year 2040, with the assumptions that:
1.   Internet Speed has dramatically increased, from 4G to 10G.
2.   Coins (TAU) with Proof-of-Transaction mechanism are widely distributed to billions of holders
3.   TAU foundation team has successfully developed “automatic block sizes” that allows all miners to define their size and time of block generation.

The increase of internet speed allows decentralized nodes to communicate faster. With the implementation of automatic block sizes, POT network will be able to support 1000 times more transactions than today, which is about roughly 10 billion transactions every day.

By Shannon’s theory, it is impossible for one node to collect all transactions in a world-wide competitive decentralized network. Thus, there will be thousands of “mining clubs” around the world to pick up transactions from different parts of the network. They are all competing on reducing commissions and capturing as many transactions as fast as they can. Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to form a 51% attack to obtain any significant share of the 10 billion fee based transactions daily, especially when one is trying to manipulate a massive amount of transactions in a 1 year sliding window.
*Proof-Of-Transaction Whitepaper*


Rules
1.   The debate starts today. Anyone in Bitcointalk is able to participate anytime until the end of the debate. The debate ends on the 30th of September.
2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.
3.   The community votes among the top 3 best arguments/ideas/proofs, and 1Million TAU + $1,000 worth of BTC are being awarded to the highest vote.
4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.
5.   The arguments/ideas/proofs are defined to be the first user to propose it under TAU’s bitcointalk thread, with supported evaluations.
6.   TAU foundation team’s arguments will not participate on the result voting. The winner of the debate can be anyone else, but TAU.
7.   TAU foundation team will reward users that propose an interesting point of view or idea. This is purely defined by the TAU foundation team; an act to encourage everyone to share their thinking.



Update:
Here is the finalist for our Debate bounty
- Akosipepot
- Lodyman
- Rexxarofmoknathal

Click to vote for your favourite debater, and help him win 1M TAU + $1000 worth of BTC!!!



Updates:

Upon further analysis, it has become our decision to disqualify Lodyman based on Rule No,2 "Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed."

All votes for Lodyman will not be counted and the debate vote will end on the assigned date.



Final update: Congratulations to Akosipepot for winning our debate bounty! Please get in touch with us to claim your rewards!