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: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?  (Read 1165 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

merockstar

  • Guest
will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« on: June 26, 2014, 01:14:46 AM »

I wrote this article about DPOS. When you aren't busy, I would love it if you guys could both tear it to shreds and point out things I forgot to mention.



***clipped, please see more current revision later in this thread***
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 02:55:13 AM by merockstar »

Offline bytemaster

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2014, 01:36:23 AM »
Quote
Under DPOS each of the trusted delegates running nodes receives pay equal to ten percent of the transaction fees in the blocks that they sign.

DPOS allows for a wide variety of delegate compensation plans.  The latest iteration allows each delegate to specify their fee rate and thus the shareholders can decide the rate.  This allows some delegates to promise to reinvest their income into marketing, development, or other services required by the DAC.   For fast growing DACs blockrewards beyond transaction fees can be given to the delegate to facilitate rapid growth.

.
Quote
Additionally, the system will not let more than two percent of the clients vote for a given delegate, and if they try to then the vote automatically gets cast for a delegate who has verifiably filled the role properly as well. This prevents any one delegate from gaining too much influence in the system. The system also automatically fires any delegate who tries to produce multiple blocks. In the event that something major were to occur, individual clients have the ability to go in and vote manually against any given delegate for a fee.

The latest incarnation of DPOS uses approval voting where every delegate has "approval" by some percentage of the shareholders.  It is possible for a delegate to have 100% approval, but they would still only get to produce 1 out of 101 blocks.   It is possible to have 101 delegates with 100% approval; however, in practice shareholders will not agree on whom will make the best delegate, so the 101 delegates with the highest overall approval are selected.   

There is no longer any "voting against" a delegate, instead you just remove your approval. 

Delegates can only be fired when someone produces a transaction with crypto-graphic proof that a delegate has signed a false statement (multiple blocks for the same time, or declared a transaction to be included in the chain when it wasn't).   



Great work with this, it should get put on our website and the DPOS white paper needs updated.   Stan, Brian, Arlen, SOMEBODY.... please see to it that the website gets updated with this info.
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.

merockstar

  • Guest
Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2014, 01:46:17 AM »
Great work with this, it should get put on our website and the DPOS white paper needs updated.   Stan, Brian, Arlen, SOMEBODY.... please see to it that the website gets updated with this info.

that means alot to me coming from the top dog here. thanks dan :)

this is only the first draft though, let me clean it up before it goes on the website.

Offline liondani

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2014, 01:47:23 AM »
Great work with this, it should get put on our website and the DPOS white paper needs updated.   Stan, Brian, Arlen, SOMEBODY.... please see to it that the website gets updated with this info.

  https://bitshares.OPENLEDGER.info/?r=GREECE  | You are in Control | BUY | SELL | SHORT | SWAP | LOAN | TRADE |  

Offline muse-umum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 717
  • BitShares everything
    • View Profile
Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2014, 01:48:37 AM »

Delegates can only be fired when someone produces a transaction with crypto-graphic proof that a delegate has signed a false statement (multiple blocks for the same time, or declared a transaction to be included in the chain when it wasn't).   


Be automatically fired or by approval removed manually.

Offline luckybit

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2014, 02:28:05 AM »
I wrote this article about DPOS. When you aren't busy, I would love it if you guys could both tear it to shreds and point out things I forgot to mention.



Intro to Delegated Proof of Stake first draft

Delegated Proof of Stake is a new method of securing a crypto-currency's network that attempts to solve some of the purported problems of Bitcoin's traditional Proof of Work system, and the Proof of Stake systems implemented by Peercoin and NXT.

At the heart of the creation of DPOS is the subject of centralization. With Proof of Work centralization just kind of crept it's way in over time with the advent of computers designed specifically for mining, called ASICs. The production of specialized computers for this purpose is limited to a segment of the population with the resources to design and produce computer parts. The tremendous amount of hash power that could be produced by these machines dwarfed the GPU and FPGA mining rigs that had been previously securing the network, and the end result was that a small number of miners, who already had an economic advantage, ended up securing most of the network. If they were to collaborate into mining pools, this gives these mining pools the ability to combine resources and gain over fifty one percent of the network hash rate. Having that much of the hashrate gives these mining pools the ability to falsify a blockchain if they wanted to, meaning the greater community has to trust that they won't do that.

Centralization seems to be an inevitability in cryptocurrency. Even with Proof of Stake the cost of accumulating enough network resources to falsify the blockchain long enough to create a double spend is much higher, but not out of the realm of possibility. Instead of making blocks more computationally difficult to produce, proof of stake weighs the amount of coin being held by each individual in the network, and chooses who will sign blocks by who has the most to lose from the network being compromised.

Delegated proof of stake doesn't deny the fact that centralization is an inevitability, but instead mitigates the potential negative impacts of centralization by spreading out the job of signing blocks to 101 delegates who are voted on by everybody using the network with every transaction that gets made. Instead of trying to reduce the need for trust all together, DPOS has safeguards in place the ensure that those trusted with signing blocks on behalf of the network are doing their job correctly. Additionally, each block that gets signed must have verification that the block before it got signed by a trusted node. Eliminating the need in other types of blockchains to have to wait until a certain number of untrusted nodes have verified it for confirmation.

In addition to speeding up transaction times, this system of intentionally placing trust in the most trustworthy of potential block signers, as decided by the network, has the added benefit that no artificial encumbrance need be imposed to slow down the block signing process. Allowing for many more transactions to be included in a block than in traditional proof of work and proof of stake systems. This brings cryptocurrency to a level where it can compete with the centralized clearinghouses like Visa and Mastercard who administer the currently most popular forms of electronic payment systems in the world.

Under DPOS each of the trusted delegates running nodes receives pay equal to ten percent of the transaction fees in the blocks that they sign. This has the effect of making the job sought after, and incentivises them to keep the job by showing the rest of the network they they are doing it properly, using the standard software. To be able to disrupt the network in any way you would first have to secure the position of delegate by being elected by the network, then once you're in the potential for profit from doing this job correctly outweighs the potential to profit from attempting to disrupt the network in anyway.

If somebody were to attempt to do something harmful to the network, signing a bad block, failing to produce a block in a timely manner, or not including all the valid transactions that had been broadcast more than a minute before receiving the block, then the software automatically causes all the running clients to start voting against that delegate until they are forced out of the position. Additionally, the system will not let more than two percent of the clients vote for a given delegate, and if they try to then the vote automatically gets cast for a delegate who has verifiably filled the role properly as well. This prevents any one delegate from gaining too much influence in the system. The system also automatically fires any delegate who tries to produce multiple blocks. In the event that something major were to occur, individual clients have the ability to go in and vote manually against any given delegate for a fee.

In a delegated proof of stake system centralization still occurs, but it is controlled. Unlike with other methods of securing a cryptocurrency network, every client in a DPOS system gets the ability to decide who is trusted with this centralization. This allows the network to reap some of the major advantages of centralization, while still maintaining a decentralized nature to a certain calculated extent.

A suggestion is that you use the word "Democracy" or "Democratic" somewhere in your article. That one word highlights the key difference between PoW and DPoS.

Some phrases to add in are "designed with democracy in mind" or "technologically democratic by design".

These frames attract broader audiences and hit on points which don't require a computer science PhD to understand. "Centralization" while an accurate term to use is a bit of a nerd term because no one talks about "Centralization" when they talk about spreading democracy even if decentralization is a tactic you can use to spread it.


« Last Edit: June 26, 2014, 02:33:05 AM by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline toast

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2014, 02:34:52 AM »
^^ Actually we are pretty vehemently anti-democracy for these sorts of systems. Democracy means one vote per person, which is not how DACs work.
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline bytemaster

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #7 on: June 26, 2014, 02:47:23 AM »
^^ Actually we are pretty vehemently anti-democracy for these sorts of systems. Democracy means one vote per person, which is not how DACs work.

Toast is right that we are rather against the "one-vote, one person" perspective, but I also know that people like toast and I think differently than the masses in that we demand accurate descriptions and hate loose words.    That said, though democracy isn't a true ideal to be strived for, it is something that many people have associated with fairness. 

So I suggest we simply redefine democracy and democratic to suite our purposes and gain the good will that 99% of the population associates with the term.   Lets embrace the positive propaganda rather than fight it and then include in fine print in a blog article the nuance interpretation that keeps it consistant with our ideals.
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.

merockstar

  • Guest
Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #8 on: June 26, 2014, 02:55:43 AM »
^^ Actually we are pretty vehemently anti-democracy for these sorts of systems. Democracy means one vote per person, which is not how DACs work.

Toast is right that we are rather against the "one-vote, one person" perspective, but I also know that people like toast and I think differently than the masses in that we demand accurate descriptions and hate loose words.    That said, though democracy isn't a true ideal to be strived for, it is something that many people have associated with fairness. 

So I suggest we simply redefine democracy and democratic to suite our purposes and gain the good will that 99% of the population associates with the term.   Lets embrace the positive propaganda rather than fight it and then include in fine print in a blog article the nuance interpretation that keeps it consistant with our ideals.

i agree, when luckybit says to frame it that way he's actually being pretty politically astute (based on what I learned in the government class I took in college)

I understand the point your making toast in that most DACs don't work that way, but isn't that how DPOS happens to work? each delegate takes turns signing a block so that each representative gets equal say.

Offline toast

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #9 on: June 26, 2014, 03:01:11 AM »
^^ Actually we are pretty vehemently anti-democracy for these sorts of systems. Democracy means one vote per person, which is not how DACs work.

Toast is right that we are rather against the "one-vote, one person" perspective, but I also know that people like toast and I think differently than the masses in that we demand accurate descriptions and hate loose words.    That said, though democracy isn't a true ideal to be strived for, it is something that many people have associated with fairness. 

So I suggest we simply redefine democracy and democratic to suite our purposes and gain the good will that 99% of the population associates with the term.   Lets embrace the positive propaganda rather than fight it and then include in fine print in a blog article the nuance interpretation that keeps it consistant with our ideals.

i agree, when luckybit says to frame it that way he's actually being pretty politically astute (based on what I learned in the government class I took in college)

I understand the point your making toast in that most DACs don't work that way, but isn't that how DPOS happens to work? each delegate takes turns signing a block so that each representative gets equal say.

each representative, yes, but representatives aren't voted in in a way where everyone has equal say.

But yeah, I guess you could use "democratic"
Do not use this post as information for making any important decisions. The only agreements I ever make are informal and non-binding. Take the same precautions as when dealing with a compromised account, scammer, sockpuppet, etc.

Offline onceuponatime

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #10 on: June 26, 2014, 03:20:55 AM »
^^ Actually we are pretty vehemently anti-democracy for these sorts of systems. Democracy means one vote per person, which is not how DACs work.

Toast is right that we are rather against the "one-vote, one person" perspective, but I also know that people like toast and I think differently than the masses in that we demand accurate descriptions and hate loose words.    That said, though democracy isn't a true ideal to be strived for, it is something that many people have associated with fairness. 

So I suggest we simply redefine democracy and democratic to suite our purposes and gain the good will that 99% of the population associates with the term.   Lets embrace the positive propaganda rather than fight it and then include in fine print in a blog article the nuance interpretation that keeps it consistant with our ideals.

In my opinion that would open us up to attack. Fine print is a bad way to mitigate the fact that we are using a word unconventionally/falsely to gain emotional appeal from the unaware - and we would surely be caught out and attacked.

merockstar

  • Guest
Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #11 on: June 26, 2014, 03:22:01 AM »
each representative, yes, but representatives aren't voted in in a way where everyone has equal say.


I read the whitepaper today but didn't grasp that for some reason. although, now that I think about it, it would make sense that each vote be weighted, this being a proof of stake system.

would the sway of each vote be weighted by actual stake, or by coin-age?

but... the house of representin' (idiocracy reference) is weighted by the population of each state. maybe I could explain that it is democratic in a house way, but not in a senate way.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2014, 03:24:49 AM by merockstar »

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2865
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BTS: Stan
Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #12 on: June 26, 2014, 03:28:46 AM »
^^ Actually we are pretty vehemently anti-democracy for these sorts of systems. Democracy means one vote per person, which is not how DACs work.

Toast is right that we are rather against the "one-vote, one person" perspective, but I also know that people like toast and I think differently than the masses in that we demand accurate descriptions and hate loose words.    That said, though democracy isn't a true ideal to be strived for, it is something that many people have associated with fairness. 

So I suggest we simply redefine democracy and democratic to suite our purposes and gain the good will that 99% of the population associates with the term.   Lets embrace the positive propaganda rather than fight it and then include in fine print in a blog article the nuance interpretation that keeps it consistant with our ideals.

i agree, when luckybit says to frame it that way he's actually being pretty politically astute (based on what I learned in the government class I took in college)

I understand the point your making toast in that most DACs don't work that way, but isn't that how DPOS happens to work? each delegate takes turns signing a block so that each representative gets equal say.

each representative, yes, but representatives aren't voted in in a way where everyone has equal say.

But yeah, I guess you could use "democratic"

Quote
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
Sir Winston Churchill British politician (1874 - 1965).
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline bytemaster

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #13 on: June 26, 2014, 03:53:42 AM »
each representative, yes, but representatives aren't voted in in a way where everyone has equal say.


I read the whitepaper today but didn't grasp that for some reason. although, now that I think about it, it would make sense that each vote be weighted, this being a proof of stake system.

would the sway of each vote be weighted by actual stake, or by coin-age?

but... the house of representin' (idiocracy reference) is weighted by the population of each state. maybe I could explain that it is democratic in a house way, but not in a senate way.

Coinage is not part of DPOS.   
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 bytemaster

Re: will you guys proofread my article about DPOS for me?
« Reply #14 on: June 26, 2014, 04:02:10 AM »
^^ Actually we are pretty vehemently anti-democracy for these sorts of systems. Democracy means one vote per person, which is not how DACs work.

Toast is right that we are rather against the "one-vote, one person" perspective, but I also know that people like toast and I think differently than the masses in that we demand accurate descriptions and hate loose words.    That said, though democracy isn't a true ideal to be strived for, it is something that many people have associated with fairness. 

So I suggest we simply redefine democracy and democratic to suite our purposes and gain the good will that 99% of the population associates with the term.   Lets embrace the positive propaganda rather than fight it and then include in fine print in a blog article the nuance interpretation that keeps it consistant with our ideals.

In my opinion that would open us up to attack. Fine print is a bad way to mitigate the fact that we are using a word unconventionally/falsely to gain emotional appeal from the unaware - and we would surely be caught out and attacked.

I don't think we are using it falsely.   Most people would say that companies operate on a the principle of democracy among shareholders.   Democracy is nothing more than majority rules and it is still democratic when you weight votes by shares.   

I think the issue is whether or not a democratic process is considered "good" and I have argued that it is inherently "bad" because the minority has their property rights subjected to the majority.    IE: a democracy is a way of fighting without bloodshed.  It is not a valid means to reach an honest answer about what is right or wrong.

The premise of democracy is that the majority is "good" and thus it should prevent bad actors from gaining control.   I think this may be generally true in systems with an enforceable constitution such as blockchains, but is clearly flawed in governments.
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.

 

Google+