Topic: Question: Hashgraph - page 2. (Read 457 times)

Me not thinks HashGraph is like IOTA because that only does 100 TPS and HashGraph is more
like 50,000 TPS or something

Evo is one worth studying and has some very interesting concepts but the killer is that
it's based in China and the gas it uses as a currency can only be traded on one exchange 


Still trying to defend seven transactions per second are we with $30 Tx fees and the "Lightning Network"
to the rescue debate is in full swing and it's funny but this "open-source project maintained by volunteers and community"
is not listening to us developers and they knew eight years ago that Bitcoin would not scale which is very "suspicious" and yes the Bitcoin
network never has bugs if we blame everyone else when coins get lost in translation.

Did you know there are people in this world that can create block-chains that does scale and everything can stay on block
and are mining pools centralization anyway or maybe your happy with the monopoly too.

Is this the correct thread for this topic ? I will give my 5 cents anyway

My understanding of hashgraph is that it will use timestamped "blocks", not really blocks but lets use that for this explanation.
When a node gets a transaction it will tell a few other nodes about the transaction, those nodes in turn would do this too and so on it will propogate throughout the network. Each node tells the other one about it with a timestamp attached. This timestamp is a basis for a transaction to be valid. When a certain amount of time is passed then  that gets set as the "block". This is my understanding of how it works in a basic form.

This uses a legacy protocol called gossip protocol, this was developed in the 1960's or something. It was never really used much. Which brings up concern number one for me, if this legacy protocol is the base of hashgraph then how do we know it has been stress tested and battlehardened. Even today we find exploits with TCP/IP. TCP/IP is the basis for the internet and networks as we know them today.
Let's face it, programmers today know a lot more than the original creators did in those days, applications and protocols are developed with security in mind.

Then onto the way transactions are advertised. This sounds very similar to some more legacy networking technologies (Such as RIP routing protocol), I am unsure of what kind of loop prevention they have. From what I have read about it I don't  see a fool proof loop prevention mechanism in it, I can think that if I recieve a gossip packet  from someone else I can just modify the timestamp in the header before passing it on in my node (this might screw with the whole system). As the network grows the bandwidth requirements will probably start getting quite large which means it wont  be usable on mobiles.
I didn't research this extensively though, so this point might be mute. But the bandwidth requirement will go up as the network scales. Which I think is a bit of a problem, there should be a set limit as to how many confirmations are needed for a transaction to limit the bandwidth requirements.

My biggest problem with this, like others have stated is the fact that this is patented and  developed by one company. I'm sure it will have some uses, but I dont see this replacing blockchain. Blockchain is starting to become really cool, modern blockchain 3.0 products really lay the ground for mass disruption and previously unthinkable innovation. I don't see hashgraph bringing such extensive scalable smart contract technology to the table.
If it's not open source then that means we can't see the code, that means we need to trust the entity who created it. With BTC and others the code is there for anyone to read and check, meaning we don't need to trust anyone, which is the beauty of blockchain.

And the fact that all those "innovative" projects that are promising to disrupt Bitcoin and blockchain are spending a lot of resources on marketing while having very little codebase makes them extremely suspicious. This is the exact opposite of Bitcoin - free, non-profit and open-source project maintained by volunteers and community with no central authorities.

I believe it's a similar to IOTA's tangle, it has no blocks, and I believe it suffers from similar game theoretical exploits that could lead to lack of security compared to proof of work, but the biggest concern is the fact that it's closed source, which makes it have 0 value as far as im concerned. No way it poses real competition for Bitcoin.

Hi, guys

Today, I read an article about Hashgraph. In short, this technology is developing in parallel with blockchain.  I don't fully understand the technical part. They are very similar, but hashgraph faster than blockchain. So I have a question, what is the fundamental difference? And whether hashgraph to be a murderer blockchain?