> I completed a whitepaper for Bitcoin a proof-of-stake version which uses a > single nomadic verifiable mint agent and distributed replication of a > single blockchain by compensated full nodes to achieve 6-hop, sub-second > transaction acknowledgement times. Plus it pays dividends to holders > instead of wasting it on miners. Subsidized transaction fees are thus > lower.
I look at this and agree of course that the nodes are decreasing, see, https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/ But when I see stuff in the white paper like "misbehaving nodes" in the context of an "audit agent," a "single non-forking blockchain," the notion of "Misbehaving nodes" that would be "banned from the network" so as to "motivat(e) honest behavior," ~ really, all of this does sound as though a sort of morality is being formulated rather than a mathematical solution. This is not to say that the white paper hasn't addressed a problem that needs to be addressed, namely... the problem of the nodes disappearing, and a few other things. But to take that and then layer onto that the issues associated with proof of stake... There does seem to be a simpler way to address this and I think first without suggesting the complex issue of some kind of thing that would involve dividends for those in a proof-of-stake system, consensus achieved by stake-weighted voting, and so forth, one would be better off removing all references to voting and stake, and determining ways simply to incentivize more substantively those who actually run a full node. Additionally I am hesitant to characterize behavior as has been described in the white paper, as it would seem that (in such a system) there would be an inclination or a tendency to exclude certain patterns or groups of participants rather than determine ways in which all participants or potential peers can serve the network. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C4m-MFnxw0JjDorzrKs_IRQRqD9ila79o0IDt6KsbcE > > > Because the code is not yet written, this idea is half-baked so to speak. > Comments appreciated on my project thread, which will be a development > diary. I plan a hard fork of the Bitcoin blockchain in early 2016, after a > year of public system testing, and conditioned on wide approval. > > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=584719.msg6397403#msg6397403 > > -Steve > > Stephen L. Reed > Austin, Texas, USA > 512.791.7860------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE > Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. > Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform > available > Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." > http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs_______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
