Viewing profile — trevelyan
trevelyan
HN member- Joined
- Sat, Feb 24, 2007, 3:48 AM UTC
- HN karma
- 2,938
- Public activity
- 1,423 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About trevelyan
david - at - saito - dot - tech
Recent public activity
- story
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #40397308
i use this regularly now. highly recommend over zoom.
-
comment
Comment #38797238
The prompts shown literally invite the LLM to complete the copyrighted text by providing unedited selections and asking the machine to finish those. Even if this is problematic in …
-
comment
Comment #37972876
Perhaps you are being a bit cynical? There are certainly no problems that can't be solved by giving more money to government initiatives like the MaRS Centre in Ontario. These inst…
-
comment
Comment #37761820
You missed the last paragraph. The dominant strategy for users is indeed to broadcast two nodes.
-
comment
Comment #37749575
the irony is that POW is actually more complex here, which is why it is vulnerable to these attacks
-
comment
Comment #37747951
The sybil-proof mechanism here is not POS but a variant of POW.
-
comment
Comment #37747904
I think perhaps you should read the paper if you want to have a deeper discussion? An understanding of how the mechanism works should make it clear how the solution enables outboun…
-
comment
Comment #37735638
Do you want your transaction fee to pay for mining, or do you want it to pay for the servers that run the network? If it pays for mining, who pays for the servers that run the netw…
-
comment
Comment #37735618
You seem to be concerned about censorship attacks -- attacks that necessarily involve orphaning work in some capacity -- either orphaning blocks produced by honest nodes, or orphan…
-
comment
Comment #37735507
You're not describing a sybil attack. You're talking about censorship. If you want to address that, your best strategy is to incentivize people to run access points that do not cen…
-
comment
Comment #37735439
> There are no excess hops in the attack I am describing. As above, you're not describing a sybil attack. Adding a bunch of 1st hop nodes to a network doesn't mean that those nodes…
-
comment
Comment #37735401
> However depending on the architecture that is the only motivation needed and depriving others of rewards; in the long term this could result in centralization of routing nodes (b…
-
comment
Comment #37735309
Author of the original paper this write-up was based on here. The sybil attack as a theoretical problem is defined in the "Red Balloons" paper ("information propagation without sel…
-
comment
Comment #37735283
The attack vector you are describing doesn't work. If an attacker owns 1010 nodes and collects inbound transactions on 1010 nodes, then they have to relay those transactions to a s…
-
comment
Comment #37735240
Saito isn't an obscure blockchain. The formal proof of its sybil-proof properties is also chain-agnostic. https://github.com/SaitoTech/papers/blob/main/sybil/A_Simple... It would b…
- comment
- story
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #33774610
thank you for sharing this
-
comment
Comment #32862335
Chiming in because we have an open source game engine on Saito ( https://saito.io/arcade ) which imo is the future of crypto gaming but is usually overlooked by people who want to …
- comment