elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
Consensus Research 2015 singapore
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Latest Nxt Client: Nxt 1.11.15

Pages: 1 [2]  All

Author Topic: Consensus Research 2015  (Read 5545 times)

kushti

  • Board Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +184/-5
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 384
  • Nxt Core & Apps Dev
    • View Profile
Re: Consensus Research 2015
« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2015, 03:44:29 am »

Hi everybody,

Thanks Daedelus for providing the link.

Kushti, I've been reading your work for some time, and I think it's great you're publicly addressing the flaws of anti-PoS papers (reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zpmlj/expanded_rewrite_of_distributed_consensus_from/ )

The community definitely needs more of this type of communication.
We’d love to get some feedback from you on the white paper in general.

In particular, we’re interested in whether PoS can not only “keep clients in consensus over time if they were in consensus at an earlier time" but also allow to “trustless bootstrap” or “trustless update” after a node has been offline for a significant period.
This is an area of research for us, what do you guys think about this at NXT?
IMO these kind of issues are way smaller than the ones bitcoin is facing but it's something to keep in mind considering the fact that people like Andrew Poelstra seem to have an issue with this
(reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zpmlj/expanded_rewrite_of_distributed_consensus_from/cplardu )



I agree, common efforts from all the researchers / devs around blockchain tech are needed, without worshipping to #bitcoin-wizards, teen-like holywars & other silly things happening around. E.g. yesterday I had a real-life talk with Vlad Zamfir making a proof-of-stake spec for Ethereum.

Regarding “trustless update”, the claim around is some significant in past account can generate long private chain, and then it's impossible to distinguish the two forks for an account just connected. Well, after moment of splitting alternative fork will lose in terms of cumulative difficulty for next few blocks due to retargeting in comparison with main fork, so newcomer will choose main fork as having better cumulative difficulty. It seems proof-of-stake critics think longest chain is the measure, but that's not true. The cumulative difficulty in it's current form is not the best chain quality measure for proof-of-stake environment, we're thinking on ways  to improve it.


 
Logged
for donations / messages: NXT-PKXM-WH25-UXXG-CJAVD (alias: kushti)
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
assembly
assembly