Topic: Obyte: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments - page 6. (Read 1234316 times)

Thanks for your time and reply. I can't say I am fully convinced, but you have your point, and I am far from being a judge here, as I am no expert in the topic anyway. Thanks again for taking the time to explain.
I see you spend a lot of time fighting with some of the community members, and see some valued members left due to those arguments over the course of development of the project. You may be right, they might be wrong, but in any case listening to the active community and keeping them active is crucially important for any public project like this. I would suggest using them, asking them for help, but not fighting them. More open approach could make this project great again, as it was once... Just my opinion though.

If somebody manages to take down majority of Order Providers (7 out of 12) then network will still work (accepts payments and relays it to other full nodes), but the new part of the DAG doesn't become stable (transactions in new part of the DAG doesn't become confirmed/final). That's because Order Providers are not middlemen like block producers, Order Providers are more like lighthouses that others follow and they do exactly the same things as other full nodes that post transactions, they just have pledged to do it with a version of a full node (obyte-witness) that posts those transactions regularly. There can be many other full nodes on the network, some of them have to be full nodes, some of them don't https://developer.obyte.org/tutorials-for-newcomers

While the Order Providers are down, you can still post new transaction even with unconfirmed UTXOs - this feature has been there since early 2019 for your own UTXOs and has been optional for incoming uncomfirmed transactions (Spend unconfirmed funds setting), but with the latest GUI wallet, it's ON for all transactions. On blockchains, there is no order for transactions before block producers/miners take them from mempool and add to new block, but on Obyte, even when Order Providers are down, you can broadcast your transactions to the network and they have some kind of order already, just not final. You could argue that, the fee sets the order, but that's only true once the block is actually mined and block producers/miners can re-order the block contents anyway they like. It has become even a rapidly exploitable thing called MEV (BPEV). This makes blockchain unsuitable for DeFi.

Yes, you can ATTEMPT a double-spend any time, but if it clearly comes later than previous spending then it gets discarded immediately and if the order cannot be clearly calculated yet because not enough transactions from Order Providers then both transactions remain in the unstable part of the DAG until the order can be figured out by all full nodes. Full nodes need Order Provider transactions to figure out the main path (main chain) through the DAG. Order Providers doesn't vote on any transactions, they just show the direction of the DAG and therefore a main chain, like dropping breadcrumbs for others to follow.

If those majority of the Order Providers (7 out of 12) never come online then the community has a decision to make, either wait little longer or hard-fork and put new Order Providers in place (hard-fork needed because normally only 1 Order Provider can be changed at once, not multiple at once).

Yet, the age old question remains, which I have asked from FUDsters before: where is it illegal to post your own transactions to distributed ledger and how would 7 government institutions suddenly agree and get court orders to organize a event of taking down all the Order Provider nodes? Order Providers doesn't vote on any transactions and if posting your own transactions to distributed ledger becomes illegal then making new blocks or voting whose transactions go to blocks would become illegal way before.

Already today, we see some miners attempting to not include transactions from some addresses, it's just not an issue yet when majority doesn't do the same. On Obyte, Order Providers have no choice to tell what gets into the DAG and what doesn't - majority of them would need to sabotage the whole network in order to censor one. On blockchain, it takes majority to censor one, but you can't fork away from tyrannic mining whale, they will follow you even when you hard-fork, unless you change the mining algorithm so much that their miners become absolute.

P.S. Yes, you can see his post history that he posts updates here sometimes, but mostly you can see him on Discord. His next post will probably be either about Obyte-Ethereum/BSC bridge or about Smart Contracts with Arbitration. Both built by multiple devs.

Let me understand this right... If somebody (hackers, government or anything of that sort) takes down all 12 Order Providers, and keep them down (harass the owners, arrest them or whatever), what will happen to the network? Can transactions still be made, and will they be secure and trusted, without possibility of double-spend, fork or any other manipulation?

If those 12 Order Providers never come back, can/will other entities take their role and become Order Providers, how that process will be conducted (can it be decentralized?), and how much time will it take?

I like the project, its uniqueness, I was here back when it was just started, but didn't follow since... I am just trying to understand whether Obye meets my perception of decentralization... thanks for everyone's input.

P.S. An unrelated question... Is tonych still actively working on this project?

It's not a flaw, xenon131 just spreads FUD and you ate it all up too. Whole point of Order Providers is that network stays up and all full nodes have access to keep posting to network.

That's more decentralized than any blockchain where if something happens with block producers (miners) then you can't even get your transactions to chain because block producers are the middlemen who pick the transactions.

Order Providers doesn't even have the power to 51% attack to double-spend, but on blockchains you can.

So, what is a flaw here, delayed confirmations on Obyte or possibility to double-spend via re-org?

You are right, every network has it's flaws, and xenon131 just pointed out Obyte's flaw , that is all.

Just shows you still doesn't understand how Obyte works, but you think you do.
Because, you think there is 15 Order Providers, but there is 12. Always have been 12. If stats.obyte.org shows more, then there is still 12, others additional ones on there are just candidates to become one of 12. Those 12 Order Providers are not the network, the network is all full nodes, which have been between 60-200 during previous years. Many of these full nodes can automatically recover even if DDoS them, some of them are even behind TOR.

You don't understand what centralization means, Obyte doesn't have block producers like on blockchains, so it doesn't matter if there is 12 or 15 Order Providers, what matters is that nobody has majority. Whether Obyte founder has 5 out of 12 or 7 out of 12, that is not majority. So, he is not single point of failure.
So, even if you take down all his nodes, which you don't know where they are and which doesn't have to be on same machine, that would not stop the DAG from becoming stable and nothing serious would happen, maybe just little longer confirmation times.

And even if you could somehow take down majority of 12 Order Providers, it would not take the network down and confirmations are not delayed forever, they are only delayed until they come up again or the network gets forked. If you would understand anything about Obyte, you would also understand that Obyte doesn't have mempool, so even if all Order Providers are down, all your transactions can be considered as confirmed once they have been posted. Only thing yet to be determined is just the order of transactions. Even GUI wallet let's you spend unconfirmed funds because the transactions are already on the network, not in mempool. Blockchain has probabilistic finality, so you can't be sure when your transactions ends up confirmed, but Obyte has deterministic finality without any voting.

But you probably still don't understand this because even if you have managed to teach yourself how blockchains work, your tiny brain can't take in any more information to understand that there is other ways without blockchain cons.


Here are things that by your logic are "network down":
* Nano - when network got spammed, user transactions didn't got confirmed, but spam did. Network down?
* IOTA - when payments were disabled for whole month and only 0-value data transactions went through. Network down?
* Bitcoin - China lost power, 30% hashrate disappeared, blocks weren't mined in every 10 mins on average for 2 weeks.
* Ethereum - Geth follower certain rules, Parity followed other rules, Infura wasn't updated because unannounced hard-fork.

What do you call those networks, that can be re-orged with 51% attack? Network f-ed? Can't happen on Obyte, but happens on blockchains.

Nope, that's not how you stop the network. In order to stop the network, you would need to take out all full nodes.

Where did you get the number 15 from? There is 12 Order Providers needed for every transaction and as long as there are at least 7 of them are posting their own transactions, all previous transactions can become stable. There is no blocks, so if for short while, too many of them stopped, network keeps running and new transactions get distributed, just the confirmations are delayed.

There are 7 Order Providers who are not the founder, so Obyte has been fully decentralized and doesn't have a single point of failure since July 2020. You have no proof where founder's 6 Order Providers run, you just made it up.

Maybe shut up about things you don't understand.

Thank you for pointing that out.

Obyte-win64

Unable to reproduce it.
Do you mean installing the 64bit setup file or do you mean building it from the source?

Confirm, just checked.

fresh install of v3.3.2 on a new win10(64bit), the wallet tries to open and crashes immediately.  

Obyte explainer video with giveaway

https://twitter.com/ObyteSimply/status/1399556623543148545?s=20

On whose shoulders should the momentum be then? Obyte Foundation creates the software and publishes the news, it's up to the community to make it heard.
One man or small group of people can only do very little, a community on the other hand, could make a lot of noise, if they wanted.
Bitcointalk, luckily, removes lot of the spam and tonych uses Bitcointalk mostly to dump news (you can see it from his latests posts).
I sometimes post to combat FUD. Silence would be better because then FUD wouldn't bury the news.



Didn't we have news, that we take bids for raising the funds to get listed on good exchanges? Even feedback from those people was that they would buy more GBYTE if would raise more to get on bigger exchanges. We just haven't raised enough so it would align with the expectations of how much good exchanges ask. Meanwhile, everyone is pretty happy to ape into unfinished projects that promise to fix their sh1t by the end of the year (they postpone the goal post every year).

Speaking of rebranding, the name change is the last thing that would interest me ... and it’s not the first time I’ve seen you place a lack of momentum on the shoulders of the community. As for the "wall of pessimism" you are talking about, I think any reasonable person should agree that this is much better than a wall of spam, or even worse, complete silence, (you should be aware that everyone here appreciates your presence and that of tonych). However, something is wrong ..

There wasn't much wrong with Byteball brand and there isn't anything wrong with Obyte brand either. Any brand can be marketed, it's all up to the community if they do it or not.

If you look other communities, they have users who take the news that their project publishes and they speead the news, they discuss the news, they compare it with other project. You come here, in Obyte, you just get wall of pessimism.

Obyte has given all the tools and content for you to market it, so do it, don't just FUD it all the time (FUDing your own bag is stupid). And if you think you are marketing genius, apply for a job https://obyte.org/careers

Many people here feel the same way, and although the technical implementation of Obyte is beyond praise, there are those who think that their marketing strategy is dead. In the end, after rethinking the mistakes and realizing that the existing marketing concept does not work there is nothing wrong with rebranding.

There won't be a good exchange, either, until the Obyte team is on the path to fix it ... and I really feel like someone is hiding the setbacks. Btw, since conventional strategies don't work, maybe in this case Obyte team will contact Tether and agree on the launch of USDT on the Obyte Network? ^{[tether/transparency]}

It's up to the community and Order Providers (Witnesses) to decide. Anybody can put up their candidacy, community can signal the Order Providers (by changing their OP list) who they want to replace and if they do it coordinated way (that they all replace the same old OP with same new OP) then it's only Order Providers, who have the last say and they have pledged to change their list when better candidate comes around.