Quote from: Tobo on October 31, 2015, 02:48:51 PM
What is oracle?

Something that tells facts happened outside of tangle/blockchain.

Quote from: 70231f697a2b3c2b on October 30, 2015, 12:44:23 AM
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.

Quote from: xiahui135 on October 28, 2015, 02:06:28 PM
Who will do the pow work?

Payment benefactor or beneficiary. Anyone can do it.

Quote from: xiahui135 on October 28, 2015, 02:06:28 PM
If there is no mining, how can the node benifit from runing a pow node?

Benefit comes from ability to send transactions.

Quote from: xiahui135 on October 28, 2015, 02:06:28 PM
Or it is not decentralised?

It is decentralized.

Quote from: xiahui135 on October 28, 2015, 02:06:28 PM
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.

Quote from: EstefanTT on October 09, 2015, 09:58:20 PMYep but if the 3rd party deal with the micro payment, you don't need to have a lot a funds there ;)

You do need to have a lot of funds, every payment is very small but you need a lot of such payments.

Quote from: Ander on October 09, 2015, 05:36:47 PM
A third party could support micropayments by keeping track of them on their own IOU system, and then only transferring once the total reaches a certain limit.  This would be similar to how most bitcoin faucets and faucet wallets work, like microwallet, faucetbox, etc.

This requires trust in that 3rd party.

Quote from: cass on October 07, 2015, 01:43:20 PM
guess CFB is creating a new comparsion chart for major 2.0 chains!
If so, it would be great u would post it here before publishing for reviewing ..

Not chart, just cheatsheet for internal use.

Thank you, guys. I'll exclude BTS 2.0 from the table.

Hello. I know very little about BTS 2.0 and I didn't find detailed explanation of some nuances, I hope someone could answer few simple questions...

Is BTS 2.0 aiming to support micropayments (fractions of US cents)?
What is the limit on the lowest transfered amount?
What is used to prevent spam?
Can these micropayments be used for Internet-of-Things industry?

I'm interested in the answers to prepare comparison table.

Quote from: xeroc ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ on March 06, 2015, 07:46:30 AM
.. which, however, is just a denial of service and not disruptive for the network

Eclipse attack is a good opening move for a double-spending attack against a single merchant.

Quote from: vikram on March 05, 2015, 09:58:14 PM
Suggestions for improvement are always welcome.

More nodes. Every delegate should provide as many seed nodes as possible and shareholders should cast votes for those who controls more than others.

Quote from: vikram on March 05, 2015, 07:31:18 PM

Quote from: monsterer on March 05, 2015, 06:57:46 PM
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares/blob/ee44418782f1b519480ddab7eb845b0612a99498/libraries/client/include/bts/client/seed_nodes.hpp

Provided by volunteers and delegates. I encourage everyone to help!

So, it's possible to add 153 seed nodes controlled by me and make it easy to do an eclipse attack? Neat...

Quote from: emski on March 05, 2015, 02:46:36 PM
Initially the clients connect to a random subset of seed nodes.

How are nodes added to the set?

What is BitShares network topology? Is it standard Bitcoin's "connect to 8 random peers"?

Quote from: delulo on March 01, 2015, 08:51:00 AM
So after 3 weeks the delegated forging power is taken away from the forging pool again and the one that delegated the forging power would have to renew his vote if his forging power should not be "wasted"?

Yes.

Quote from: arhag on March 01, 2015, 12:21:16 AM
Furthermore, I do not see how this Economic Clustering completely solves the Nothing-at-Stake problem as you claim in your post. The attacker producing the fake blockchain can simply remove everyone else's transactions from their fake blockchain and include their own transactions between sockpuppets to make it appear that the fake blockchain is valid. If they are able to trick the user onto that chain, they could then carry out the double-spend attack. The only problem for the attacker is if the victim is recovering an existing account where they have already made outgoing transactions to people that they expect to see in their transaction history (that is something that cannot be faked by the attacker). Even incoming transactions can be faked if the fake blockchain starts far enough in the past such that the parties that sent the victim the funds had not yet registered their account names on the blockchain (assuming the victim had not pinned the BTS public keys of their contacts in a wallet backup of course).

The trick is to know accounts of big market players like Walmart. If you don't see transactions made by Walmart then your branch is not legit.