Erik,
No, it is not, but I would like to ask anyone with any feedback on
proof-of-loss to please direct it only to my email, or else follow the
discussion links on the Proof-of-Loss home page.
Thanks,
Mirelo
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proof-of-Loss
Local Time: April 5, 2017 11:43 PM
UTC Time: April 6, 2017 2:43 AM
From: earone...@gmail.com
To: Mirelo <mir...@deugh-ausgam-valis.com>, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Is this the same as proof of burn?
On Apr 5, 2017 5:28 PM, "Mirelo via bitcoin-dev"
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
With the feedback on Proof-of-Loss (always privately to my email), I realized
the article was hard to understand for lacking:
* A more explicit definition of transaction rights.
* An overview of how the algorithm works.
As an abstract could not contain all that, I wrote an introduction with
examples.
I also adopted a suggestion of including the current block height in the
proof-of-loss data once I realized:
* Preventing the same proof-of-loss from chaining consecutive blocks was not
the purpose of the proof-of-loss context, which did it statistically rather
than logically.
* The presence of that height in the block header made serial chaining easier
to enforce, by removing the need to include additional block height information.
While revising the algorithm, I made some corrections, mainly to:
* Transaction prioritization (which now uses fees instead of rights).
* Inactivity fees.
Finally, the new version more aptly derives the design and often has better
wording.
The new text is available at:
https://proof-of-loss.money/
Mirelo
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Proof-of-Loss
Local Time: February 4, 2017 10:39 AM
UTC Time: February 4, 2017 12:39 PM
From: mir...@deugh-ausgam-valis.com
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
An alternative consensus algorithm to both proof-of-work and proof-of-stake,
proof-of-loss addresses all their deficiencies, including the lack of an
organic block size limit, the risks of mining centralization, and the "nothing
at stake" problem:
https://proof-of-loss.money/
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
