Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?  (Read 383 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bitmarley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?
« on: January 06, 2015, 10:02:26 AM »

The way I currently understand it 101 delegates seems like very few. Given that some delegates could actually be the same person that means that <101 people are acting as delegates.

That seems like a very small number of people. If all their identities were known could that be a security concern?
Why not make it 1001 or 10001 delegates?

Offline fundomatic

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?
« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2015, 11:07:44 AM »
>>> blockchain_list_delegates 3000 20

is supposed to "Returns a list of all the delegates sorted by vote". And I see some names. So, there are more that 101 delegates registered.

101 delegates are the ones with most votes which enables them to produce blocks.

I guess there are many reasons not to extend that number to 1001.
The one I see is: a stakeholder should eventually know each block signing delegate, which is pretty hard if there are too many of them.

Offline bitmarley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2015, 11:19:05 AM »
Ahhh I see thanks.

Is there a special name given to these top 101 delegates?
What would be the process for expanding the number? Is it very difficult?
I guess its not dynamic atm and a hard fork is required?

<Side note: If stakeholders should know all the top delegates then it would be a useful feature for the client facilitated pointing to delegate websites and perhaps email/secured chat. >
 


Online svk

Re: Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?
« Reply #4 on: January 06, 2015, 11:51:44 AM »
Ahhh I see thanks.

Is there a special name given to these top 101 delegates?
What would be the process for expanding the number? Is it very difficult?
I guess its not dynamic atm and a hard fork is required?

<Side note: If stakeholders should know all the top delegates then it would be a useful feature for the client facilitated pointing to delegate websites and perhaps email/secured chat. >
 

I believe BM once said 101 was an upper bound in terms of efficiency, but with improving technology it could potentially be increased in the future.

The client already includes links to a delegate's website, but it's up to each delegate to actually add that information to their account. If you go to dev.bitsharesblocks for example in the client you should see a link to www.bitsharesblocks.com
Worker: dev.bitsharesblocks

Offline bitmarley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2015, 12:10:08 PM »
Those links are interesting thanks. I understood from there that 101 delegates is chosen based upon a 100x transaction fee being viable to compete with other payment processing systems. One line the chart doesn't show is the fees moving inverse to the profit line ie. increasing with the x axis delegate count.


I believe BM once said 101 was an upper bound in terms of efficiency, but with improving technology it could potentially be increased in the future.


I think increasing the 101 bound will be absolutely necessary given each top delegate spot could be taken by the same entity and tech costs are always falling and decentralization is always desired. So perhaps the Top Delegates pool should be a dynamic number instead of fixed?
   
Does it require a hard fork to change that number at the moment?

Offline bitmarley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
    • View Profile
Re: Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?
« Reply #6 on: January 06, 2015, 01:08:26 PM »
I finally got to the part where bytemaster and merockstar are talking about a sweet spot in the size of the Top Delegate pool here:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5564.60


Offline xiahui135

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
    • View Profile
Re: Why 101 Delegates? Why not 1001?
« Reply #7 on: January 07, 2015, 11:17:26 AM »
can delegates hosted on a decentralized storage platform ? If so we need not delegates, people just have to run the cloud storage node. 
As i know, storj and maidsafe are working on this.

 

Google+