Author Topic: IOTA + Bitshares  (Read 16236 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DestBest

I have just skimmed the paper and must say that it has some very innovative ideas that are very similar to some a white paper I am writing.  I reference your paper by mine.

I think there is potential for IOTA and CNX to work together on providing the best possible technology for micro-transactions.   As I mentioned on Mumble today, our internal project codenamed Plasma is aiming to make transactions free and instant and thus perfect for micro transactions. 

There are just a few nuggets of inspiration missing from IOTA that when fused by Plasma will amplify your system.   

Once I complete the white paper I think you will be very excited to work with us on standardization.   
BitShares French ConneXion, le portail francophone BitShares.
BitShares French ConneXion, the BitShares french gateway.
www.bitsharesfcx.com

Offline bytemaster

I have just skimmed the paper and must say that it has some very innovative ideas that are very similar to some a white paper I am writing.  I reference your paper by mine.

I think there is potential for IOTA and CNX to work together on providing the best possible technology for micro-transactions.   As I mentioned on Mumble today, our internal project codenamed Plasma is aiming to make transactions free and instant and thus perfect for micro transactions. 

There are just a few nuggets of inspiration missing from IOTA that when fused by Plasma will amplify your system.   

Once I complete the white paper I think you will be very excited to work with us on standardization.   
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline Come-from-Beyond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
    • View Profile
Does the DAG get pruned?  Do transactions have inputs and outputs similar to Bitcoin?

No, it's still not clear how popular oracle feature will be. Yes.

Offline mthcl

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Hi all,

I'm the author of that "Tangle" paper. Answering:

1. To approve means to reference or to confirm; that is, you have to cite these 2 tx' in order to issue yours. It is a good strategy to check if the 2 tx's you reference are not in conflict; otherwise, you risk that others won't approve your tx.

2. similar to bitcoin, i.e., finding a nonce that gives hash with N zeros in front

3. correct.

4. yes, exactly

5. yes. We are modifying the approval strategy, though, as the current design can be gamed.

6. yes (modulo the previous comment)

7. yes. Against (b), there is no other defence but to cap the tx own weight (or even set it to constant)

--------------
Quote
Does the DAG get pruned?

Do transactions have inputs and outputs similar to Bitcoin?
CfB is a better person to answer that.

Quote
in the event that two transactions reference the same inputs, the one with the larger cumulative weight wins?
yes, exactly

Offline BTSdac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: K1
I want to say it again, don't give up micro-transactions.
yes I think so , it is very important thing now , so let us reduce the transfer fee now
github.com :pureland
BTS2.0 API :ws://139.196.37.179:8091
BTS2.0 API 数据源ws://139.196.37.179:8091

Offline 70231f697a2b3c2b

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Reading through the whitepaper now.

Could you help me wrap my brain around the concepts?  Here's what I think I understand so far:

--

1. When a new transaction is broadcast to become a tip, it must approve two existing transactions.  What does it mean to approve an existing transaction?  Is it similar in concept to generating a block hash in Bitcoin?

2. Section 2 indicates that a node may invest a variable amount of work into creating the transaction (ultimately resulting in an own weight value that is equal to a power of 3).  What is the nature of the work?  Again using Bitcoin concepts, would this be similar to voluntarily using a higher/lower difficulty when computing the block hash?

3. Each transaction has 2 different weights and a height:
  a. Its own weight, which is determined by the amount of work that was invested into creating it (see question 2 above).
  b. Its cumulative weight, which is determined by summing the own weights of all of the transactions that approve it, plus the own weight of the transaction itself.  Conceptually, you could think of this like tracing all of the paths from that transaction to the tips and adding up all of the own weights of the transactions that you encounter along the way.
  c. Its height, which is determined by summing up the own weights of all the transactions that it approves, plus the own weight of the transaction itself.  Conceptually, you could think of this like tracing all of the paths from that transaction all the way to the genesis block and adding up the own weights of the transactions that you encounter along the way.

4. A new tip is allowed to approve any two existing transactions at any height(s), but it is more valuable to the network if incoming transactions approve other tips with the highest possible height, in order to ensure that new transactions get confirmed, correct?  Is that the problem being addressed in section 3?

5. Unlike, say, Bitcoin, you don't try to entice the network to include your transaction by including a transaction fee; instead you try to ensure that your transaction's height is within the top xx% of all tips in the network, so that it is more likely that other nodes will prefer to approve your transaction.

6. If your transaction's height isn't enough, you could try to increase it by generating empty transaction(s) that approve it.
  a. The new transaction(s) have a larger height than the original one, and if they also approve another tip with a large height (recall that each transaction must approve exactly 2 others), then that could be enough to bump the new transaction into the coveted "top xx%" subset.
  b. If more work is invested into the empty transaction(s), this also increases their height values (because the transaction's own weight is included in its height).

7. A double spend could theoretically be carried out against the network in one of two ways:
  a. An attacker spams the network with a massive number of new transactions approving the double-spend transaction and not the legitimate transaction (even indirectly).
  b. An attacker submits a new transaction with a huge own weight (by investing lots of work into it) that approves the double-spend transaction and not the legitimate transaction.

If either attack succeeds, the network builds on the transactions from the double-spend, orphaning the the part of the DAG where the legitimate transaction resides.

It is not clear to me, though, what that actually looks like.  Does the DAG get pruned?  Do transactions have inputs and outputs similar to Bitcoin, and in the event that two transactions reference the same inputs, the one with the larger cumulative weight wins?
« Last Edit: October 30, 2015, 02:08:34 pm by todofixthis »

Offline iota

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
    • IOTA
Hello,

I'm David from the IOTA project (www.iotatoken.com). In short: iota is a lightweight, blockless micro-transactions token aimed specifically at Internet-of-Things (IoT). My co-founder, Come-from-Beyond, posed a few questions here a couple weeks back regarding Bitshares 2.0 and micro-transactions in this thread: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18784.0.html

It seems that Bitshares is not aiming for micro-transactions and instead focusing on its strengths. One of IOTA's goals is to find overlap and collaborate with the serious blockchain projects as we see no reason to 'compete', instead we rather compliment the blockchain projects.

I am opening this thread to start discussion about how IOTA and Bitshares can find  some overlapping use-cases which will benefit both projects.

Did you already talk with @ccedk , @stan , @bytemaster ?

We all love micro-transactions  +5%

I have spoken with Ronny (CCEDK) and Dan Notestein about it yes and initiated some conversation about overlap between iota and bitshares. As for Stan and Bytemaster, I have sent both a PM a couple of days ago, no reply thus far, but I suppose this is due to them being very busy and will get around to it soon enough:)

Offline DestBest

Hello,

I'm David from the IOTA project (www.iotatoken.com). In short: iota is a lightweight, blockless micro-transactions token aimed specifically at Internet-of-Things (IoT). My co-founder, Come-from-Beyond, posed a few questions here a couple weeks back regarding Bitshares 2.0 and micro-transactions in this thread: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,18784.0.html

It seems that Bitshares is not aiming for micro-transactions and instead focusing on its strengths. One of IOTA's goals is to find overlap and collaborate with the serious blockchain projects as we see no reason to 'compete', instead we rather compliment the blockchain projects.

I am opening this thread to start discussion about how IOTA and Bitshares can find  some overlapping use-cases which will benefit both projects.

Did you already talk with @ccedk , @stan , @bytemaster ?

We all love micro-transactions  +5%
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 07:52:58 pm by DestBest »
BitShares French ConneXion, le portail francophone BitShares.
BitShares French ConneXion, the BitShares french gateway.
www.bitsharesfcx.com

Offline iota

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
    • IOTA

Looks interesting.  Have you also looked at RaiCoin? https://github.com/clemahieu/raiblocks/wiki  They seem to have similar goals.

No, this one is new to me. I'll have a look.

Quote
As an exchange, BitShares generally needs single threaded transaction sequencing, which is abandoned in both IOTA and RaiBlocks to optimize for microtransactions.  I certainly think an offchain microtransaction could be complementary to BitShares.  Ideally a trustless integration system would be desirable, but the easiest way to get functional integration initially would just be to get IOUs for your tokens issued by CCEDK, blocktrades.us, and MetaExchange on BitShares.

This would not be possible for machine-to-machine payments on a grand (IoT) scale which needs to be as trustless as possible, Instant and automatic.

Offline Come-from-Beyond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
    • View Profile
Who will do the pow work?

Payment benefactor or beneficiary. Anyone can do it.


If there is no mining, how can the node benifit from runing a pow node?

Benefit comes from ability to send transactions.


Or it is not decentralised?

It is decentralized.

Basiclly, can you tell how many roles there and how they act and why they join.

One role. Cooperation with peers gives benefits to every participant, this is why they will join.

Offline xiahui135

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
    • View Profile
Thanks for the warm welcome everyone!

Welcome David. Your website looks very nice and the project sounds very intriguing. Would you mind explaining a little bit about the governance architecture of IOTA please? How trust in the system established and maintained?

Thanks for the kinds words.
For sure, so in IOTA there is no mining and there are no fees, instead transactions are confirmed by very lightweight PoW which is established by an unique alloy of techniques whose combination gives an unprecedented result. If you have read the whitepaper you will get a better idea. The details are quite challenging to explain in layman terms.  But if you are an experienced programmer it will be easier to grasp. In short: Iota client doesn't need to order transactions, it doesn't need to track balances, it doesn't need to validate transactions most of time except lightning-fast verification of a PoW token.

If you have any specific technical questions we'll try to answer them as clear as possible
thanks for explaining. I have several question.

Who will do the pow work? If there is no mining, how can the node benifit from runing a pow node? Or it is not decentralised?

Basiclly, can you tell how many roles there and how they act and why they join.

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
    • View Profile
I want to say it again, don't give up micro-transactions.

That's why collaboration is great. As a product designer you quickly learn that by trying to create a swiss army knife that has an application for 'everything' you will always end up with only mediocre solutions to each of these things. This is like a law of product development called 'Feature Creep' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_creep). By introducing ever more features and applications you invariably have to do trade-offs, this is fine for a swiss army knife which's design is not to be the best knife, cork opener, scissor, file or anything else, but to be 'acceptable' in as many different environments as possible. However it is not fine for a chef's knife or a hair dresser's scissor.

This is a recurring problem in product design, especially software and I see it happen all the time in crypto too. Each platform wants to be *the* 'universal key' that solves all problems. But that's just not doable. This is why we elected  to keep IOTA the absolute best solution possible for micro-payments instead of trying to add more and more and more features and end up with a mediocre micro-payments design as a consequence.

Looks interesting.  Have you also looked at RaiCoin? https://github.com/clemahieu/raiblocks/wiki  They seem to have similar goals.

As an exchange, BitShares generally needs single threaded transaction sequencing, which is abandoned in both IOTA and RaiBlocks to optimize for microtransactions.  I certainly think an offchain microtransaction could be complementary to BitShares.  Ideally a trustless integration system would be desirable, but the easiest way to get functional integration initially would just be to get IOUs for your tokens issued by CCEDK, blocktrades.us, and MetaExchange on BitShares.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2015, 12:58:46 pm by Troglodactyl »

Offline ebit

  • Committee member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1847
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: ebit
I think Bitcoin or Ethereum is perfect for IOT.
Tilepay is follow them.
Or learn to create a new blockchain from gadgetcoin.
If you like bitshares's blockchain ,you can have a fork like muse.
We all  interested in snapshot .
telegram:ebit521
https://weibo.com/ebiter

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
Quote
It can strengthen these blockchains' security by providing checkpoints and also act as an oracle for smart contracts.
(quote from your iota website)
This sounds interesting and could be a revenue stream for you because all (I guess) that is needed for launcing betting /prediciton markets and private bitassets (stable crypto currencies) is a price / data feed.
Could you explain how IOTA would work as an oracle?

Offline iota

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
    • IOTA
I want to say it again, don't give up micro-transactions.

That's why collaboration is great. As a product designer you quickly learn that by trying to create a swiss army knife that has an application for 'everything' you will always end up with only mediocre solutions to each of these things. This is like a law of product development called 'Feature Creep' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_creep). By introducing ever more features and applications you invariably have to do trade-offs, this is fine for a swiss army knife which's design is not to be the best knife, cork opener, scissor, file or anything else, but to be 'acceptable' in as many different environments as possible. However it is not fine for a chef's knife or a hair dresser's scissor.

This is a recurring problem in product design, especially software and I see it happen all the time in crypto too. Each platform wants to be *the* 'universal key' that solves all problems. But that's just not doable. This is why we elected  to keep IOTA the absolute best solution possible for micro-payments instead of trying to add more and more and more features and end up with a mediocre micro-payments design as a consequence.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2015, 11:57:55 am by iota »