Topic: IOTA - page 618. (Read 1473405 times)

Could a member of that forum pls re-post it here or stick it up on pastebin? thanks

Could a member of that forum pls re-post it here or stick it up on pastebin? thanks

June 26, 2014, 11:38:05 pm
Let me bring back an idea that we briefly discussed in our private conversations with Chuck and Matt, but then kind of left behind. So, why do we need a chain of blocks, and not a DAG? I mean a "one-ended" DAG, of course, so that there are sometimes parallel branches, but they eventually merge:



That's an easy question: it is because if the "parallel" branches are allowed, they may contain "conflicting" information, leading e.g. to double-spends. OK, for now.

But let me ask another question: why are we obliged to have only one blockchain, which is used for virtually everything?

Suppose that we need a place for storing some sort of information, such that no conflict between "parallel" chains may arise. For example, the accounts may "declare" or "register" something (e.g., "I've just forged a block", "I've just made an instant transaction"), wanting to later have a proof they did it (i.e., this can be particularly useful for timestamping). Then there is no problem if different "declarations" are made on different branches: this just proves that the account has declared two different things (those declarations are signed, of course). So, why not use a DAG? It can be probably built faster (the network latency is not so much a problem), and, if a restricted set of nodes is allowed to build this DAG, it can be really fast, IMHO.

So, what do you think? In my opinion, if this is viable, it can be quite useful for TF.

EDIT1: It seems I didn't express myself in a sufficiently clear way. Of course, for money transactions, there should be one and only one chain. But if we want to store some other information for which there is no possibility of conflicts similar to double-spending, we may well use another chain for that, or even a DAG.

EDIT2: I think there is a very important advantage of DAGs over chains: it is much easier to attack a chain than to attack a DAG!    As you know, there are many attack scenarios that go like this: a bad guy is doing something to create an alternative subchain, and then feeds this subchain to good guys. If the alternative subchain is "better", then the Dark Side wins. However, this kind of attack would be useless if a DAG is used instead of chain: the nodes would just store the two subchains, and that's all.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2014, 03:25:41 pm by mthcl »

Could a member of that forum pls re-post it here or stick it up on pastebin? thanks

I noticed that. It was not password protected before. What is the reason for Nxt forum to do it?

child_harold do you want to write a bestseller right now?

Good idea but it is mentioned that the foundation would rather hold IOTA than BTC because when foundation makes progress IOTA value grows and it's better for the foundation. In other words foundation funds value go hand in hand with development. At least that's how I understood it.  (someone please correct me if I'm wrong)

Thanks man! I'll chip you few IOTAS once the network is live. 

Who can introduce the detail of the big deal, so many guys mentioned "big deal" but no one introduce the detail.

I noticed that. It was not password protected before. What is the reason for Nxt forum to do it?

Maybe everyone can make another pledge - pledge all the btc received from the deal pool sale to the foundation. I will do it.

I took another thought about the foundation and deal pooling and mould like to make some changes to my pledges.
Yassin could you change my pledge to following: 100k Foundation and 50k Deal.
I think this is now the correct ratio. Going 100% to the deal wasn't such a good idea afer all. There needs to be enough funding for the foundation because
it is vital for the long term growth and adoption of IOTA. Also other people who have currently 100% on the deal I would like you to reconsider your pledge.

It's password protected for those who are not registered on the forum.

Here it is - https://nxtforum.org/proof-of-stake-algorithm/dag-a-generalized-blockchain/

You can spot it published by mthcl on Nxt forum almost 2 years ago.

I updated!! 

I took another thought about the foundation and deal pooling and mould like to make some changes to my pledges.
Yassin could you change my pledge to following: 100k Foundation and 50k Deal.
I think this is now the correct ratio. Going 100% to the deal wasn't such a good idea afer all. There needs to be enough funding for the foundation because
it is vital for the long term growth and adoption of IOTA. Also other people who have currently 100% on the deal I would like you to reconsider your pledge.

And the idea of the PoW in a DAG (Tangle) as also developed in DAGcoin (by Sergio). Who came up with this idea?

So the story of IOTA's inception goes back to the founding of the Jinn project in late 2014. Jinn was founded by me and Sergey/CfB, and we hired Serguei/Mthcl afterwards due to his expertise. The Jinn processor is being developed for ultra-low energy distributed computing, which will become more and more important, especially in Internet-of-Things, specifically Fog/Mist infrastructure. Naturally given that we are operating and R&Ding in this market segment we have conducted a lot of analysis on what is needed for this ecosystem to emerge and what sort of business opportunities that will arise within it.

In Fog/Mist and IoT in general it is obvious that interoperability will be the single most important component for new and seamless business-2-business opportunities. In general machine-2-machine/device-2-device payments will enable an autonomous economy of technological resource trade and collaboration across different sectors and turn more people into prosumers rather than just consumers. Due to this knowledge we drew on our previous expertise and experience in the distributed ledger world to see if there was a solution for these obstacles. We concluded that there were not, due to the high technological overhead of regular blockchains, as well as the prohibitive fee structure that make these required micro/nano-transactions infeasible.

In terms of roles within IOTA's creation it was multi-faceted. While I'm the leader of the project whose vision it is executed on, CfB and Mthcl's expertise and knowledge of several fields in symbiosis gave us the ability to create exactly the sort of solution that I deemed necessary for an IoT economy.

What's the story of IOTA?

Who started it? Who thought of the using a DAG PoW?
Was it iotatoken (David) who commissioned/paid for the Tangle whitepaper?
When did CfB come on-board? What are the nature of these relationships and how did it all come together?

Id like to know the true genesis of IOTA, if somebody could lay it out please.

thanks.