Topic: Idea about a new blockchain - page 2. (Read 480 times)

Good start, I have some questions, though:


How does this coupon system work exactly? Is there a lottery, is there a reward-per-coupon-system? Redeeming the PoW as a classic PoW, with the miners being essentially pool operators and the senders contributing to the pool won't work.

In either case, this will lead to the effect that every block will be full. If nothing else, miners will fill them themselves, just to not miss out on the rewards. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, just something to keep in mind.


Where is the data of sidechains stored? How are those who store it incentivised to do so?

I wasn't aware of the meaning of Shun in English, but my reference was apparently too obscure. I meant 'Shun' because of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_Shun

Anyways, here is the first version of the whitepaper,

https://github.com/iam-zhang-wei/whitepaper/blob/master/README.md

I wrote in a hurry, I will polish it up tonight but I think it is good enough to get even more feedback.

Ah yes, I thought about something like this… It's kinda like the miner providing a pool. However, in that case, it goes back to the question, what if you can't provide the needed PoW because your computer (or rather your phone) isn't powerful enough?

Also, what would a transaction look like in this case? Because if a sender would have to provide PoW right from the beginning, it is potentially a part of every miner's pool, which means nobody is really profiting from it...


I assume you meant Shun the Emperor? I don't realls see a connection between Andromeda and him. Why not go with something a bit closer, like Shiji?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Records_of_the_Grand_Historian

Also, "Shun" is an english word with not the most ideal meaning.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shun

Thanks everyone for you feedback.

I'm now writing a formal specification,a whitepaper answering all the questions that you guys asked here and more. I will also put a website so more people can know about my idea. I think I'll name project Andromeda (as a reference to the many chains) and the native coin should be named Shun (Google why).

So far I can do the prototype, I'm a Golang developer and I have experience with the Geth. My prototype will be a fork off Ethereum, I think it would be crazy not to start off Geth/Ethereum.

I thought of mentioned it, but apparently not. Well, the PoW can be translated to gas. Think of it like the PoW that people are done in order to interact with smart contracts are like coupons that miners can redeem for their equivalent in 'fees'. At the end of the day it would be the same for the miners to process transactions that pay fee or transaction that have done and include some PoW in them.

The difficulty of the PoW would be used to measure how much gas a PoW worth.

Is the idea behind this clear?

Here is something I missed before, I think it hasn't been adressed yet:

The assumption was that Gas was needed as an anti spam measure, but it also needed to incentivise miners to include an interaction or a transaction in the blockchain. Thus, unless I'm missing something, having a pure PoW as a means to prevent spam is either not enough or you'd need to force miners to include these kinds of transactions. Or am I missing something here?

That looks a bit like the idea behind Lisk, which has a strong sidechain focus. If you haven't, you might want to check it out.

There is a lot of idea behidn the blockchaine technoil:ogy and they are all good idea

My idea is that each smart contract has their own blockchain, as I mentioned before, *but* the main chain has a reference to their last valid node (a hash). By doing so, the smart contract's blockchain is a secure as the main chain (which is secure with Proof of work, stake or any other method (I think PoW is good for starters)).

(A) <- (B) <- (C) <- (F) <- (H)
            |_(A') <- (A1')

Let's assume that in block "H" the smart contract A' is updated, then inside the block "H" there will be something like "the new head of blockchain A' is A1'".

TL;DR the sidechains are not secured with PoW or anything but with a reference to the newer head block on the main chain.

That's my idea so far, I'm now creating a document with some formal specification to ask for more feedback, I'll publish the document in here first.

I think it's a good idea (that's basically how Lisk works) but the problem is that then you must take care that the security of every sidechain is ensured by a sufficient number of validators. The incentive system for that may be pretty complex. The "child chain" model I mentioned earlier may be simpler as the validators would be basically the same ones, but it gives less scalability advantages. Every model comes with some sort of tradeoff ...

Well, to be honest, all of this is pretty much out of my scope of knowledge, including the next logical step. The problem is that almost everyone is working on their own stuff, but maybe write a whitepaper, then reach out to some public figures you trust, which are not directly associated with concrete projects, such as Andreas Antonopoulos (although guys like Vitalik Buterin, Zooko Wilcox, Charlie Lee and so on seem to be relatively open to communication), not in a way that implies that you want them on board, but ask them this very question: "I have this idea, what would you say the next logical step would be? How can I reach out to people?" That's probably what I would do if I wanted to commit myself to such a project.

Also, get people involved as early as possible. You want others to understand what you are doing, be it to discuss ideas, in case of you having to stop working on the project for whatever reason and so on.

Here's another thought on the PoW-as-a-service thing: I like it because it keeps the first layer extremely simple. You could build all kinds of stuff on top of that, without having the massive clusterfuck which is ethereum. Multiple languages? No problem. Private chains? Go for it. This is really great, because I think, if you were to move to multiple layer blockchain solutions (i.e. off-chain scaling, such as lightning network and so on), you don't have to make compromises as to what the first layer looks like. So this would be my approach: keep the first layer as simple as possible. I'm not sure whether this is inside the scope of what you are working on, it was just a thoguth I just had.

In that regard, you wouldn't have to work on the Internet-by-relay thing. Let someone else build it.

Thanks guys for you feed. What would be the next logical step? I was thinking in writing a whitepaper or maybe a (power point?) presentation with my ideas and plans, try to get more developers interested and make it happen.

Suggestions?


I've seen projects like this before, it's a doable idea since all nodes will just broadcast the message (which they don't understand because it's encrypted) until the real recipient gets the message and deciphers it.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/sonnet-most-advanced-wireless-mesh-network#/

I get your idea though, people would broadcast until one of the nodes kindly publish the transaction to the Internet. Neat idea, I like it. It's a bit out of my scope of knowledge though, I'm not an Android/iOS developer.

This thing is getting momentum, I love it

I think you want to go bigger than "just" a blockchain based, decentralized Twitter, but for the sake of simplicity, let's keep is a the main example.


My concern wasn't so much the node/storage side, but the PoW side. What you could come up with is some type of "PoW-as-a-service" solution, where nodes provide their computing power for a service. What comes to mind is the client side of things: Maybe a client which shows you ads would be a way to reimburse the client provider, who at the same time provides you with a means to create PoWs. I'd rather pay a small fee, but others might be fine with the ad route.

In fact, the whole PoW-as-a-service thind opens up a number of possible ways to monetize unused assets. Storage, obivously, especially in a system which probably can't feasibly scale if you'd put every message (and every picture) on the mainchain.

Another thing, especially for smartphones, would be internet-by-proxy/internet-routing. Let me elaborate on that a bit:

A few years back, I heard of an app called firechat or something like that. It did something rather simple, yet neat: it looked for other phones near you and got in contact with them directly. I'm not sure what it used exactly, I don't think it was Bluetooth, more like a local lan (I'm not familiar with this type of setup). Now, the interesting thing was that in some countries with poor internet infrastructure, people used it as relays to get messages into the internet. A message(like email or whatever) jumped from phone to phone until eventually, it got to a phone that was connected to the internet.

I've always wondered why this wasn't explored more, especially as a way to earn some tokens or whathaveyou. I mean, combine that with a decentralized Twitter…

Looking at sm

If you would be creating a blockchain as your content was all about with these features, you are absolutely good to go. I would really say yes and comply with your idea and infact would assist in all ways to learn much more bitter. Everything would be split and not on only on those existing blockchain.

Another idea that crossed my mind, but I don't know yet how to implement, is that each smart contract has their own blockchain, aside from the main monetary chain (here smart contract's definition and native currency are going to be stored).

If you want to run a full node, you would have many blockchains, if you only care about your own DAPP's blockchain you can do so using less resources (Monetary chain + my dapp chain).

Do you think this may be a better idea?

Yep, that's a good idea and similar to the child-chain stuff I mentioned - myself I was thinking about a similar service some time ago. Cryptonite (XCN) which has a strong pruning feature (and so the blockchain size is small even with a high throughput) would have been my choice for a base for the "interaction" chain, which would be a sidechain of the main "monetary chain".

But now again to your idea to a "decentralized Twitter": Is it really necessary that all messages would be stored on-chain? What if you create a partly off-chain model? You could think about a Lightning-like model, but I think for a publication chain maybe a model where messages are published in a BitTorrent-like network would be fine - but to ensure integrity the publisher can choose to simply store a hash of his last tweets in the blockchain. If he makes an important tweet he could always choose to store it entirely, but then paying a fee ... (I'm only brainstroming a bit here ...)

Smartphones can talk to 2 or 3 API (or even more) providers which runs the entire copy of the ledger (both layers).

Not everybody needs a copy of the ledger. Even on my computer right now, all the clients are thin clients (Ethereum and bitcoin).

Ethereum blockchain size is over ~400GB right now. It does not fit in my brand new laptop, yet I'm still able to use it.

But it's a good thing that people are concern about it and I think I found something.

What if we have two different chains? One for the native currency (Which does pay fee) and another for smart contracts execution (which are paid with PoW).

Because smart contracts execution will not need the native currency (just PoW) I think we can discard my initial idea of '0' value transactions with no fees. All transactions that are going on the value layer should pay fees. All transactions being executed in the execution layer are paid with PoW. I think that separation is fair enough. People would still need the native currency for creating smart contracts, but interacting with them are paid with PoW.

Sounds better?

Cheers,

Yeah, you're darn right about that! I see now where you are ending up on this.

I think it is important that everyone is able to run a full node if they wish, though.

However, all in all, I love the idea of having something which is pretty much a "service layer" and have a "consumer layer" on top. I believe eventually, this is where Crypto is headed anyway.

Do you think maybe some type of Proof of Capacity / renting out disk space might be the way to go? If you want to build a decentralized Twitter, you'll have a space problem anyway. Messages have to be stored somewhere and you can't prune them (which is why I think pruning is not that important anyway). However, I'm afraid some 16GB Smartphone won't have enough disk space to make any kind of impact, which bring us back to square one, doesn't it…