Topic: IOTA - page 763. (Read 1471689 times)
Well yea, but what are the pros and cons between the two? The tree scales better but has more potential for some type of critical failure in the ACID test?
I can't say how good trees are without spending a lot of time on analysis, so I can't compare.
Here's a really stupid question. As a regular human being on the planet earth, why exactly do I want IoT to be invented in the first place? How do I benefit from this? There was what IoT seems like to me from another post. Basically me walking or driving around and having the government attacking me with surveillance and microtransactions:
Sounds great if IoT wasn't a code word for giant surveillance grid of doom. Yes, this is the type of structure things like unmanned cars will be built around. People will be required to carry devices to travel on public infrastructre, maybe a cell phone type device that acts as a transponder. In addition to their sensors simulating sight, unmanned cars will detect the RF from the device and act as a collision avoidance plus navigation system. Your wallet and identity will then be connected to the same transponder. Everyone will be tracked like cattle.
So yea, there is really no such thing as a "decentralized IoT". All it is, is a system to broadcast as much personal information as possible to be centrally administratively controlled.
So yea, there is really no such thing as a "decentralized IoT". All it is, is a system to broadcast as much personal information as possible to be centrally administratively controlled.
Well I guess if you quote yourself then it must be true as you've never been wrong before. Right?
Here's a really stupid question. As a regular human being on the planet earth, why exactly do I want IoT to be invented in the first place? How do I benefit from this? There was what IoT seems like to me from another post. Basically me walking or driving around and having the government attacking me with surveillance and microtransactions:
Sounds great if IoT wasn't a code word for giant surveillance grid of doom. Yes, this is the type of structure things like unmanned cars will be built around. People will be required to carry devices to travel on public infrastructre, maybe a cell phone type device that acts as a transponder. In addition to their sensors simulating sight, unmanned cars will detect the RF from the device and act as a collision avoidance plus navigation system. Your wallet and identity will then be connected to the same transponder. Everyone will be tracked like cattle.
So yea, there is really no such thing as a "decentralized IoT". All it is, is a system to broadcast as much personal information as possible to be centrally administratively controlled.
So yea, there is really no such thing as a "decentralized IoT". All it is, is a system to broadcast as much personal information as possible to be centrally administratively controlled.
Like everything in this world: there are two sides. Any technological breakthrough can be used positively and negatively from nuclear energy and nuclear bombs to anonymity and complete surveillance in ledger technology. Usually the benefits outweigh the potential nefarious use-cases. IoT will bring about a revolution in virtually every field from medicine to comfort. IoT will happen no matter what you do, you can try to Ted Kaczynski it away, but it wont happen. The benefits are simply too great. IOTA want to enable a decentral payment method between these devices and give power back to users.
Sorry, maybe I didn't see a question, sometimes Skype messages are not delivered. Here is the complete transcript of our conversation, did I miss anything:
I confirm the transcript is complete(and my Skype nickname is 'sandylabs').
Here's a really stupid question. As a regular human being on the planet earth, why exactly do I want IoT to be invented in the first place? How do I benefit from this? There was what IoT seems like to me from another post. Basically me walking or driving around and having the government attacking me with surveillance and microtransactions:
Sounds great if IoT wasn't a code word for giant surveillance grid of doom. Yes, this is the type of structure things like unmanned cars will be built around. People will be required to carry devices to travel on public infrastructre, maybe a cell phone type device that acts as a transponder. In addition to their sensors simulating sight, unmanned cars will detect the RF from the device and act as a collision avoidance plus navigation system. Your wallet and identity will then be connected to the same transponder. Everyone will be tracked like cattle.
So yea, there is really no such thing as a "decentralized IoT". All it is, is a system to broadcast as much personal information as possible to be centrally administratively controlled.
So yea, there is really no such thing as a "decentralized IoT". All it is, is a system to broadcast as much personal information as possible to be centrally administratively controlled.
Though I was invited to review the whitepaper, it seems all my questions remains unanswered. And section "4.1 Resistance to quantum computations" (added after my review?) seems pretty controversial by its reasoning. Anyway, Popov's work is the deepest made on DAG cryptocurrencies(all I've seen before were just forum & blog posts), I'm not sure what's presented enough to make something production-ready though. Let's see what will happen here. Have luck guys! 
Sorry, maybe I didn't see a question, sometimes Skype messages are not delivered. Here is the complete transcript of our conversation, did I miss anything:
Code:
[16.10.2015 20:40:19] David: Alex, when you're on leave the feedback in this channel
[16.10.2015 22:08:27] sandylabs: hi guys
[16.10.2015 22:08:49] Come-from-Beyond: hi
[16.10.2015 22:09:30] sandylabs: so well, the attack section is starting sharply, and it's proposing as is fact contradicting txs could live in DAG
[16.10.2015 22:09:52] sandylabs: a lot of interesting things possible with that aside of double-spending
[16.10.2015 22:10:10] sandylabs: say e.g. I'm submitting two contradicting txs simultaneously
[16.10.2015 22:10:38] sandylabs: then with 1/2 probability one of them will have more weight(so be more true?)
[16.10.2015 22:11:00] sandylabs: and in next round another could be leader
[16.10.2015 22:11:33] sandylabs: so we're going to a system with potentially unstable view(existing for a long time)
[16.10.2015 22:14:28] Come-from-Beyond: The rule is to reject transactions that reference contradicting transactions.
[16.10.2015 22:15:10] sandylabs: Am I missing something in paper?
[16.10.2015 22:16:15] Come-from-Beyond: no
[16.10.2015 22:16:27] sandylabs: ah
[16.10.2015 22:16:28] sandylabs: so
[16.10.2015 22:16:38] sandylabs: I'm just reviewing the paper
[16.10.2015 22:20:36] Come-from-Beyond: aye, I'm explaning how that attack is counteracted. the paper is a draft and doesn't contain all the stuff
[16.10.2015 22:21:21] sandylabs: ok so why contradicting txs are possible in the paper?
[16.10.2015 22:23:00] Come-from-Beyond: is it specified explicitly?
[16.10.2015 22:25:49] sandylabs: section on attack scenarios
[16.10.2015 22:26:37] Come-from-Beyond: it's the whole DAG that can contain conflicting state
[16.10.2015 22:27:07] Come-from-Beyond: but none of the transactions can reference directly or indirectly conflicting transactions
[16.10.2015 22:27:22] Come-from-Beyond: conflict is possible if there are more than 1 tip
[19.10.2015 12:48:16] sandylabs: So Sergey(mthcl), it would be good to see coverage on that
[19.10.2015 12:48:32] sandylabs: and in this case mb it's worth to move
[19.10.2015 12:49:12] sandylabs: "3.1 How fast the cumulative weight typically grow?" into an appendix
Though I was invited to review the whitepaper, it seems all my questions remains unanswered. And section "4.1 Resistance to quantum computations" (added after my review?) seems pretty controversial by its reasoning. Anyway, Popov's work is the deepest made on DAG cryptocurrencies(all I've seen before were just forum & blog posts), I'm not sure what's presented enough to make something production-ready though. Let's see what will happen here. Have luck guys!
Main problem with Emunie, besides the issue of if it works or not, is due to the way the monetary system works, the coin issuer is set to make lots of money but investors aren't. Somewhat high risk for investors with no big payout like for Bitcoin early adopters.
Again, shows how you don't understand anything about the economics and ROI of the application. Don't worry, that'll be explained soon enough so that you can understand.
Hint: 2 ways you can increase the "value" of a portfolio:
a. How much it costs (per unit)
b. How many you have
If you have 'more' of them doesn't that equate to an ROI?
Regardless, don't want to continue discussions on this thread with Debbie Downer as this is clearly CfB's time to shine.
The designs are different. Trees VS DAG.
We're no longer using trees, but rather a channeled ledger. It's easy to understand the confusion as we scrapped them (trees) a while ago.
Interesting that you plan to use this for IoT as I likewise plan to present our solution to several Cisco engineering teams for inclusion as a solution to the IoT/IoE problems you concisely articulated.
Good luck with your development and I look forward to reading more about this project.
Fuserleer and the emonkeys were doing the same design then scrapped it for something else. I don't really understand the pros and cons between the two yet.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12642425
The designs are different. Trees VS DAG.https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12642425
I guess some people would feel tangled when they see the Tangle.
At least my vision is tangled over the Tangle pic. The designs are different. Trees VS DAG.
Well yea, but what are the pros and cons between the two? The tree scales better but has more potential for some type of critical failure in the ACID test?
That'll change soon enough even with your obvious belligerent attitude towards anything different.
Main problem with Emunie, besides the issue of if it works or not, is due to the way the monetary system works, the coin issuer is set to make lots of money but investors aren't. Somewhat high risk for investors with no big payout like for Bitcoin early adopters.
Fuserleer and the emonkeys were doing the same design then scrapped it for something else better. I don't really understand the pros and cons between the two yet.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12642425
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12642425
FTFY
We get that you don't understand it yet.
That'll change soon enough even with your obvious belligerent attitude towards anything different.
I don't really understand the pros and cons between the two yet.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12642425
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12642425
The designs are different. Trees VS DAG.
Jump to: