Author Topic: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency  (Read 32633 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline amatoB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 62
    • View Profile
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #105 on: March 29, 2014, 09:00:48 pm »

And Luckybit has a good point that the focus of our argument for requiring a trustee should be based on the fact that shareholders are not placing any more trust in our trustee than XRP holders place in a gateway, or BTC holders place in the ASIC pools; and far less destruction to our personal holdings can result in a 100% breach of trust by our trustee in our case as compared to those who recently got goxed.
 
And does this trustee method really speed up transactions? Because Ripple is FAST !

Bytemaster is leaning toward kicking up the UTILITY factor here, and I wholeheartedly agree.

Ripple is a great example of how we already have proof the market hates a trusted gateway approach.
Despite it's utility, speed and the investment that went into it, it's trending to zero and the fact that there are no ripple clones/forks out there is very telling.

The biggest currencies since Bitcoin are the ones that have developed methods that involve less trust in ASIC pools, Litecoin,  Peercoin, then NXT.  (Do you think the introduction of scrypt asics soon will increase or decrease Litecoins value?)

It's why no-one's afraid of JPM-coin it might have a lot more utility, but if it involves more trust than existing decentralised alternatives I think it's already dead in the water.


Last time I checked, Ripple was the 2nd largest cryptocurrency in terms of market cap, still worth over $1 billion. For example, this is over 20x bigger than peercoin and over 30x bigger compared to NXT. The price of Ripple XRP seems to have tracked bitcoin pretty well over the past few months.

I thought that most of the hostility towards Ripple was due to their initially being closed-source and also the seemingly self-serving, "premined" way in which they distributed the Ripple XRP currency (i.e., they initially held on to 99% of the supply and only promised to give something like 1/2 away)?

Offline toast

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4001
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: nikolai
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #106 on: March 29, 2014, 09:00:57 pm »
No, let a vested stakeholder do it. Maybe the large exchanges would offer to do it and would compete for the publicity it offered.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

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 CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clains
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #107 on: March 29, 2014, 09:05:51 pm »
The term trustee sounds like marketing suicide. Change the name.

Perhaps acceptor? 
Notary?
Witness?

Operator.
The connotation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operator_assistance

Facilitator or Processor

trustee/notary/witness/acceptor/inscriber/signer/authenticator/watcher/super node/cute cuddly bunny

"Notary" seems fine to me.  I don't think it helps to over-euphamize things to the point that the word is inaccurate or unclear and meaningless... that does more damage than good

I prefer Notary to all the other terms because it conveys the role best:  they have the power to sign/witness/certify transactions (contracts) but not to determine their contents.    Operator sounds like it has too much control and witness and observer is passive.  Trustee implies too much trust.  There is no need 'trust' a notary.

In a way the notary is just a 'timestamp server' and this also avoids the notary being confused with the issuer or operator of a virtual currency.

Wouldn't it be better to use terms that don't immediately lead the reader down the path of visualizing a human being? Terms like "facilitator" or "processor" might be better. Or, how about something like "trusted node" or "custodian node" or "operator node"?

Offline CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clains
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #108 on: March 29, 2014, 09:07:57 pm »
I vote notary, or notary nodes.

clout

  • Guest
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #109 on: March 29, 2014, 09:19:47 pm »
I vote notary, or notary nodes.

I agree

Offline jae208

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 525
    • View Profile
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #110 on: March 29, 2014, 09:24:41 pm »
I vote notary, or notary nodes.

 +5%
http://bitsharestutorials.com A work in progress
Subscribe to the Youtube Channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/BitsharesTutorials

Offline Empirical1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
    • View Profile
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #111 on: March 29, 2014, 09:53:23 pm »

And Luckybit has a good point that the focus of our argument for requiring a trustee should be based on the fact that shareholders are not placing any more trust in our trustee than XRP holders place in a gateway, or BTC holders place in the ASIC pools; and far less destruction to our personal holdings can result in a 100% breach of trust by our trustee in our case as compared to those who recently got goxed.
 
And does this trustee method really speed up transactions? Because Ripple is FAST !

Bytemaster is leaning toward kicking up the UTILITY factor here, and I wholeheartedly agree.

Ripple is a great example of how we already have proof the market hates a trusted gateway approach.
Despite it's utility, speed and the investment that went into it, it's trending to zero and the fact that there are no ripple clones/forks out there is very telling.

The biggest currencies since Bitcoin are the ones that have developed methods that involve less trust in ASIC pools, Litecoin,  Peercoin, then NXT.  (Do you think the introduction of scrypt asics soon will increase or decrease Litecoins value?)

It's why no-one's afraid of JPM-coin it might have a lot more utility, but if it involves more trust than existing decentralised alternatives I think it's already dead in the water.


Last time I checked, Ripple was the 2nd largest cryptocurrency in terms of market cap, still worth over $1 billion. For example, this is over 20x bigger than peercoin and over 30x bigger compared to NXT. The price of Ripple XRP seems to have tracked bitcoin pretty well over the past few months.

I thought that most of the hostility towards Ripple was due to their initially being closed-source and also the seemingly self-serving, "premined" way in which they distributed the Ripple XRP currency (i.e., they initially held on to 99% of the supply and only promised to give something like 1/2 away)?

No Ripple has a 'false-cap' they're multiplying their share price by 10-20x more that what's actually circulating in the market which is easily discernible from their low volume.

Similar to the way Auroracoin looked liked it had a huge cap only because 95% of the shares were held back and only a few were circulating. At least with Aurora though you knew when and how the airdrop was supposed to take place, with Ripple your share value is completely at the mercy of the central controllers, hoping and praying they won't be incentivised to devalue your shares too much, not unlike the way people are naive enough to believe central banks are working in their currency holders best interest.

bitbro

  • Guest
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #112 on: March 29, 2014, 10:11:48 pm »

Facilitator or Processor

+1 processor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline bitcoinba

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #113 on: March 29, 2014, 10:39:01 pm »
"A notary is a lawyer or person with legal training who is licensed by the state to perform acts in legal affairs, in particular witnessing signatures on documents. The form that the notarial profession takes varies with local legal systems.[1]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary

I don't think this is a good choice. In the US notaries are relatively innocent and provide a basic function, however outside the US in some countries they act as government officials and wield an enormous amount of power.





Offline onceuponatime

Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #114 on: March 29, 2014, 10:59:21 pm »


Facilitator or Processor

+1 processor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am now leaning towards "processor" or "processor node" as well.

All the other suggestions have negatives as listed in the very astute posts above.

Offline yidaidaxia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #115 on: March 30, 2014, 02:20:56 am »
Bytemaster, appreciated your hard work and briliant idea. I think it's a really good thing that we weight all the proposals based on objective oriented instead of religiosely for the ideal concept of pure decentralization.

Although it's maybe a problem for marketing since the competitors will attach this concept w/ centralization and single failure point(whatever it's true or not), I believe if we really find a way to resolve all the business logic and technique issues or make it the best balanced solution obviously, we could educate people to support and join it gradually.

Till now, the only issue really bother me is the one I quote below - DDoS. I know as you mentioned the notary node(or processor node..) would have redunant all over the world(not just likely, it should be a requirement for "the notary"), but I still have 2 concern:

1. compare to the whole alive nodes on the network, the quantity of the reduntant nodes of "the notary" is
    lower by ord of magnitude. To DDoS ten or one hundred nodes takes a lot of resource and much more
    difficult than attack single node but it become feasible to do.
2. It's true that to attack all the reduntant nodes simultaneously is very difficult, but how about attack them
    one by one? The attacker DDoS the current notary node first, and after the notary aware of the attack and
    start to use the reduntant node, the attacker also start to DDoS the new one. That will impact the trade
    very seriously and the attack could leverage it to affect the market price then make money from it.

This 2 concern will become more realistic when the system grow up to carry huge wealth and the expectation of this risk will suppress the value of the system seriously..

- One trustee one point of failure, the DDOS attack will be hard to prevent 
DDOS is not really possible because the network would still be broadcast based and the trustee would likely have multiple redundant nodes all over the world ready to sign blocks if there were an issue. 
PTS: PmUT7H6e7Hvp9WtKtxphK8AMeRndnow2S8   /   BTC: 1KsJzs8zYppVHBp7CbyvQAYrEAWXEcNvmp   /   BTSX: yidaidaxia (暂用)
新浪微博: yidaidaxia_郝晓曦 QQ:36191175试手补天

Offline bytemaster

Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #116 on: March 30, 2014, 02:23:01 am »
Bytemaster, appreciated your hard work and briliant idea. I think it's a really good thing that we weight all the proposals based on objective oriented instead of religiosely for the ideal concept of pure decentralization.

Although it's maybe a problem for marketing since the competitors will attach this concept w/ centralization and single failure point(whatever it's true or not), I believe if we really find a way to resolve all the business logic and technique issues or make it the best balanced solution obviously, we could educate people to support and join it gradually.

Till now, the only issue really bother me is the one I quote below - DDoS. I know as you mentioned the notary node(or processor node..) would have redunant all over the world(not just likely, it should be a requirement for "the notary"), but I still have 2 concern:

1. compare to the whole alive nodes on the network, the quantity of the reduntant nodes of "the notary" is
    lower by ord of magnitude. To DDoS ten or one hundred nodes takes a lot of resource and much more
    difficult than attack single node but it become feasible to do.
2. It's true that to attack all the reduntant nodes simultaneously is very difficult, but how about attack them
    one by one? The attacker DDoS the current notary node first, and after the notary aware of the attack and
    start to use the reduntant node, the attacker also start to DDoS the new one. That will impact the trade
    very seriously and the attack could leverage it to affect the market price then make money from it.

This 2 concern will become more realistic when the system grow up to carry huge wealth and the expectation of this risk will suppress the value of the system seriously..

- One trustee one point of failure, the DDOS attack will be hard to prevent 
DDOS is not really possible because the network would still be broadcast based and the trustee would likely have multiple redundant nodes all over the world ready to sign blocks if there were an issue. 

The IP address of the notary need not be known which would prevent DDOS on the notary server.
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: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #117 on: March 30, 2014, 02:24:03 am »
"A notary is a lawyer or person with legal training who is licensed by the state to perform acts in legal affairs, in particular witnessing signatures on documents. The form that the notarial profession takes varies with local legal systems.[1]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary

I don't think this is a good choice. In the US notaries are relatively innocent and provide a basic function, however outside the US in some countries they act as government officials and wield an enormous amount of power.

Perhaps the 'timekeeper'?   
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 Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #118 on: March 30, 2014, 02:26:11 am »
"A notary is a lawyer or person with legal training who is licensed by the state to perform acts in legal affairs, in particular witnessing signatures on documents. The form that the notarial profession takes varies with local legal systems.[1]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notary

I don't think this is a good choice. In the US notaries are relatively innocent and provide a basic function, however outside the US in some countries they act as government officials and wield an enormous amount of power.

Perhaps the 'timekeeper'?

Referee?
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 yidaidaxia

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 179
    • View Profile
Re: Profits, Performance, Trust & Efficiency
« Reply #119 on: March 30, 2014, 02:33:33 am »
No "referee"...There is so much argument and scandal in sports game about referees... "timekeeper" should be a good idea.. people will not catch the exact meaning of "timekeeper" for a DAC at first, and that could be a good thing.
PTS: PmUT7H6e7Hvp9WtKtxphK8AMeRndnow2S8   /   BTC: 1KsJzs8zYppVHBp7CbyvQAYrEAWXEcNvmp   /   BTSX: yidaidaxia (暂用)
新浪微博: yidaidaxia_郝晓曦 QQ:36191175试手补天