Topic: Myths and mis-understandings about &quot;decentralized exchanges&quot; (Read 2860 times)

- If you access something through a domain name then it is vulnerable to DOS attack and therefore is not a solution.

Agreed. A single domain name will never be a decentralized solution. But it could be something with a lot of domain names that work as entry points, such as Diaspora or the Pirate Bay.

Quote from: screamingservers on April 12, 2013, 02:23:55 AM

People vastly underestimate the scale of a viable solution. Somebodies shitty open source project that they started yesterday is not a viable answer to the Mt Gox problem.

In the long run it is. Bitcoin it is also started as "somebodies shitty open source project". Even Linux did. Someone needs to start with a good concept, work hard on it, and gather a community of active developers (instead of talkers and "idea people"). It's certainly not impossible. But most people just like to argue instead of build something. My point is that in grassroots open source land, everything starts small and as a toy.

We need a decentralized exchange that operates entirely from the computers of the users much like darknet sites run. Maybe even somehow interface it with the current miners to improve speed. Create a fee that goes to miners within the exchange. The miners keep the decentralized exchange running fast.

The main issue that I see is someone is always going to have to act as escrow for either the bitcoins or whatever fiat is in use. You can't just upload dollars to the internet. The holder of the purse will always be vulnerable to attack.

Exactly!

We have no choice but to take the risk and trust some people or some companies to act as brokers and handle our dollars when we trade bitcoin.

There are plenty of solutions to the trust problem.

Multi sig transactions
Escrow services
Reputation systems

This is not a constraint. Plenty of solutions here... Next problem...

Impaler

sr. member

Activity: 826

Merit: 250

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

And the bigger issue, BTC is bubble-licious and even a PERFECT exchange is not going to stop this community from blowing bubbles, irrationally believing the bubble is not a bubble and piling on and then panicking and selling like mad. Their are simply too many 'Animal Spirits' and too little connection to a rational price point to not have insane volatility.

gollum

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

In Hashrate We Trust!

There are three main problems with all these discussions.
1. Exchange Rated purchases are based on the market leader pricing, right now that id GOX, so if I buy a product on amazon, it the BTC goes through a proxy that bases its price on GOX. This would not be a problem if the rate was stable. All the evangelists love to say they are in it for the love, but if I posted my wildcard SSL certs at 3 BTC a month ago, that was a good price, but yesterday that would be outrageous, so prices for real goods need to be exchange rated. Vendors choose the easiest to do business with. MTGOX was that. Somewhere someone needs to agree on what a fair prices is.

2. Single systems can survive DDOS, enormous scale demands, hack attempts and natural disaster. DNS and other rarely changing content is actually the most immune from attack if done right with BGP anycast. Anycast lets you have the same IP in multiple places around the world, hundreds or thousands of networks can have the same IP if the content is the same (or different if you dont care). Actually you could have anycasted servers pushing dynamic content on a proxied back end that only proxies the authenticated users and the back end could be completely hidden secure backbone. Not only that, major backbone providers have a mechanism for blocking attackers by pushing a blackhole route through bgp. And that is just the stuff from 15 years ago. I am sure the new stuff is better. This is the stuff that cloudflare kind of offers as a service with public back end.

3. Craigslist is the perfect decentralized exchange. How do you upload USD to the Internet? Meet me at the coffee shop, hand me cash. I send you BTC, drink a latte while you wait for some confirmations, but I base my price on.... the leading exchange. ARG we keep going in circles.

If we will end up having a pool of say 5 major brokers with 70% of all trades, this pool will become the no1 source to check for the real time market price of bitcoin/usdollar.

screamingservers

newbie

Activity: 22

Merit: 0

There are three main problems with all these discussions.
1. Exchange Rated purchases are based on the market leader pricing, right now that id GOX, so if I buy a product on amazon, it the BTC goes through a proxy that bases its price on GOX. This would not be a problem if the rate was stable. All the evangelists love to say they are in it for the love, but if I posted my wildcard SSL certs at 3 BTC a month ago, that was a good price, but yesterday that would be outrageous, so prices for real goods need to be exchange rated. Vendors choose the easiest to do business with. MTGOX was that. Somewhere someone needs to agree on what a fair prices is.

2. Single systems can survive DDOS, enormous scale demands, hack attempts and natural disaster. DNS and other rarely changing content is actually the most immune from attack if done right with BGP anycast. Anycast lets you have the same IP in multiple places around the world, hundreds or thousands of networks can have the same IP if the content is the same (or different if you dont care). Actually you could have anycasted servers pushing dynamic content on a proxied back end that only proxies the authenticated users and the back end could be completely hidden secure backbone. Not only that, major backbone providers have a mechanism for blocking attackers by pushing a blackhole route through bgp. And that is just the stuff from 15 years ago. I am sure the new stuff is better. This is the stuff that cloudflare kind of offers as a service with public back end.

3. Craigslist is the perfect decentralized exchange. How do you upload USD to the Internet? Meet me at the coffee shop, hand me cash. I send you BTC, drink a latte while you wait for some confirmations, but I base my price on.... the leading exchange. ARG we keep going in circles.

99bitcoins

member

Activity: 65

Merit: 10

Just wanted to say, gollum I'm with you all the way. I will contribute it anyway I can to this project. This is the only viable option for Bitcoins to survive. People don't seem to yet realize how important this is.

PS: wow, you got the /p2p on github - perfect ! Wink

gollum

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

In Hashrate We Trust!

Quote from: doobadoo on April 12, 2013, 01:32:55 AM

- Ripple won't magically fix everything; Ripple is a payment network and not a Bitcoin trading client. Ripple is more like a platform. It's a part of the solution but not the solution itself. It's like you are bleeding and want a bandage, and I hand you scissors then ask why you are not fixed yet.

- Bitcoin OTC isn't an answer to anything, you have no fiat balance. The fiat balance is the entire point.

- DOS attack prevention and decentralization are related but aren't the same things. A decentralized exchange with a single front end is still vulnerable to DOS attack.

- If you access something through a domain name then it is vulnerable to DOS attack and therefore is not a solution.

- People vastly underestimate the scale of a viable solution. Somebodies shitty open source project that they started yesterday is not a viable answer to the Mt Gox problem. It would, in my opinion, take a team of 4+ people and around a year to create a proper decentralized trading client on top of Ripple.

Forget all that, how do you establish trust for clearing and settling?

The same way it is today: if MtGox, BTCE and BitStamp are going to cooperate in a broker-pool, they got to trust each other and settle dollars and bitcoins every day with eachother.

doobadoo

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

- Ripple won't magically fix everything; Ripple is a payment network and not a Bitcoin trading client. Ripple is more like a platform. It's a part of the solution but not the solution itself. It's like you are bleeding and want a bandage, and I hand you scissors then ask why you are not fixed yet.

- Bitcoin OTC isn't an answer to anything, you have no fiat balance. The fiat balance is the entire point.

- DOS attack prevention and decentralization are related but aren't the same things. A decentralized exchange with a single front end is still vulnerable to DOS attack.

- If you access something through a domain name then it is vulnerable to DOS attack and therefore is not a solution.

- People vastly underestimate the scale of a viable solution. Somebodies shitty open source project that they started yesterday is not a viable answer to the Mt Gox problem. It would, in my opinion, take a team of 4+ people and around a year to create a proper decentralized trading client on top of Ripple.

Forget all that, how do you establish trust for clearing and settling?

jubalix

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1023

- If you access something through a domain name then it is vulnerable to DOS attack and therefore is not a solution.

Agreed. A single domain name will never be a decentralized solution. But it could be something with a lot of domain names that work as entry points, such as Diaspora or the Pirate Bay.

Quote from: jubalix on April 12, 2013, 01:24:34 AM

People vastly underestimate the scale of a viable solution. Somebodies shitty open source project that they started yesterday is not a viable answer to the Mt Gox problem.

In the long run it is. Bitcoin it is also started as "somebodies shitty open source project". Even Linux did. Someone needs to start with a good concept, work hard on it, and gather a community of active developers (instead of talkers and "idea people"). It's certainly not impossible. But most people just like to argue instead of build something. My point is that in grassroots open source land, everything starts small and as a toy.

then use namecoin sheeesh it perfect for this

wumpus

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1022

No Maps for These Territories

decentralized exchange front end done....

as many exchanges as you want ready to go

Google infrastructure

http://www.bteex.com/

But how is Google decentralized? Maybe in a technical sense, but certainly not in a social sense. They could pull the plug at any time.

jubalix

legendary

Activity: 2632

Merit: 1023

decentralized exchange front end done....

as many exchanges as you want ready to go

Google infrastructure

http://www.bteex.com/

gollum

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

In Hashrate We Trust!

Quote from: Slab Squathrust on April 11, 2013, 11:30:25 PM

Still I think more exchanges is only a good thing. I can tell you right now that I have money locked up in Gox. As long as they are down and have been holding a majority of the trading, people can't move to other exchanges and panic ensues. Having the trading spread more evenly will help blunt the hit if one exchange goes down for whatever reason.

Agree,
Assume there were four major brokers working against the same exchange: as a client you would open account at each broker and put 1/4 of your dollars in each of them to diversify the risk, since you dont know which of this 4 brokers might go down, get hacked or screw their clients. By doing this you theoretically only risk 25% of your capital in such events if we assume that all brokers will not get DDOSed and hacked exactly at the same time.

Slab Squathrust

full member

Activity: 169

Merit: 100

Quote from: gollum on April 11, 2013, 11:27:23 PM

Quote from: Slab Squathrust on April 11, 2013, 11:23:37 PM

- If you access something through a domain name then it is vulnerable to DOS attack and therefore is not a solution.

Agreed. A single domain name will never be a decentralized solution. But it could be something with a lot of domain names that work as entry points, such as Diaspora or the Pirate Bay.

Quote from: Slab Squathrust on April 11, 2013, 11:23:37 PM

People vastly underestimate the scale of a viable solution. Somebodies shitty open source project that they started yesterday is not a viable answer to the Mt Gox problem.

In the long run it is. Bitcoin it is also started as "somebodies shitty open source project". Even Linux did. Someone needs to start with a good concept, work hard on it, and gather a community of active developers (instead of talkers and "idea people"). It's certainly not impossible. But most people just like to argue instead of build something. My point is that in grassroots open source land, everything starts small and as a toy.

We need a decentralized exchange that operates entirely from the computers of the users much like darknet sites run. Maybe even somehow interface it with the current miners to improve speed. Create a fee that goes to miners within the exchange. The miners keep the decentralized exchange running fast.

The main issue that I see is someone is always going to have to act as escrow for either the bitcoins or whatever fiat is in use. You can't just upload dollars to the internet. The holder of the purse will always be vulnerable to attack.

Exactly!

We have no choice but to take the risk and trust some people or some companies to act as brokers and handle our dollars when we trade bitcoin.

Still I think more exchanges is only a good thing. I can tell you right now that I have money locked up in Gox. As long as they are down and have been holding a majority of the trading, people can't move to other exchanges and panic ensues. Having the trading spread more evenly will help blunt the hit if one exchange goes down for whatever reason.

gollum

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

In Hashrate We Trust!

- If you access something through a domain name then it is vulnerable to DOS attack and therefore is not a solution.

Agreed. A single domain name will never be a decentralized solution. But it could be something with a lot of domain names that work as entry points, such as Diaspora or the Pirate Bay.

People vastly underestimate the scale of a viable solution. Somebodies shitty open source project that they started yesterday is not a viable answer to the Mt Gox problem.

In the long run it is. Bitcoin it is also started as "somebodies shitty open source project". Even Linux did. Someone needs to start with a good concept, work hard on it, and gather a community of active developers (instead of talkers and "idea people"). It's certainly not impossible. But most people just like to argue instead of build something. My point is that in grassroots open source land, everything starts small and as a toy.

We need a decentralized exchange that operates entirely from the computers of the users much like darknet sites run. Maybe even somehow interface it with the current miners to improve speed. Create a fee that goes to miners within the exchange. The miners keep the decentralized exchange running fast.

The main issue that I see is someone is always going to have to act as escrow for either the bitcoins or whatever fiat is in use. You can't just upload dollars to the internet. The holder of the purse will always be vulnerable to attack.

Exactly!

We have no choice but to take the risk and trust some people or some companies to act as brokers and handle our dollars when we trade bitcoin.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Ripple potentially can be the glue that helps fiat balances move between the exchanges, if there's some way to actually implement it would being shut down by regulators.

Slab Squathrust

full member

Activity: 169

Merit: 100

- If you access something through a domain name then it is vulnerable to DOS attack and therefore is not a solution.

Agreed. A single domain name will never be a decentralized solution. But it could be something with a lot of domain names that work as entry points, such as Diaspora or the Pirate Bay.