21–30 of 104 posts
Funny. The first class was a public class & anybody could join in at any time. The second class had reserved early seats based on the initial supply of the dices; without investment in the initial dices the game doesnt start, whereas sudoku generation is free.
I'm not sure I see how this relates to cryptocurrency. It misses the core attributes that give crypto value: scarcity, and the fact that it can be exchanged for other things of value. If there's no shortage of bricks, and those bricks can't be used (or exchanged) for anything other than the material for making the tower taller, then of course that would be pointless. But that's not how cryptocurrency works. The whole…
A third class plays using a consensus model based on explicit relationships of trust. Each student keeps track of which of the others they consider trustworthy. Since they all play together everyday, they know who is nice, and who is naughty. When a supermajority trusts the student placing a new block, that student is allowed to place it anywhere. When not enough people trust the student placing the block, they preve…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But at the end of the day, PoW is simply a fee that users of the network pay (in the form of inflation) to secure the network. I'm not convinced it's really a distribution mechanism.
Is the network so secure if relatively few groups hold most of the power? The danger of 51% attacks[0] is well known. [0] https://dci.mit.edu/51-attacks
If one has control of 51% of the network it's in one's best interest to keep that network going successfully. Sure, there's suicidal malcontents and those that just want chaos. But barring some brain cancer it's very difficult for individuals to throw away billions of dollars. Because if a 51% attack works it's not going to work for long, the corrupted blocks are going to be immediately known, and everyone else will just fork off and leave that 51% attacker holding the bag.
A third class plays using a consensus model based on explicit relationships of trust. Each student keeps track of which of the others they consider trustworthy. Since they all play together everyday, they know who is nice, and who is naughty. When a supermajority trusts the student placing a new block, that student is allowed to place it anywhere. When not enough people trust the student placing the block, they preve…
How do you turn that into code?
A third class plays using a consensus model based on explicit relationships of trust. Each student keeps track of which of the others they consider trustworthy. Since they all play together everyday, they know who is nice, and who is naughty. When a supermajority trusts the student placing a new block, that student is allowed to place it anywhere. When not enough people trust the student placing the block, they preve…
Alternatively, we could ask for a supermajority of coins, and then I think we've re-invented proof-of-stake.
A third class plays using a consensus model based on explicit relationships of trust. Each student keeps track of which of the others they consider trustworthy. Since they all play together everyday, they know who is nice, and who is naughty. When a supermajority trusts the student placing a new block, that student is allowed to place it anywhere. When not enough people trust the student placing the block, they preve…
I'm not sure I see how this relates to cryptocurrency. It misses the core attributes that give crypto value: scarcity, and the fact that it can be exchanged for other things of value. If there's no shortage of bricks, and those bricks can't be used (or exchanged) for anything other than the material for making the tower taller, then of course that would be pointless. But that's not how cryptocurrency works. The whole…
the bricks are the blocks not the currency, here the value is in able to write their own names on the bricks with a sharpie.
> If they add their brick to the top, other students will pay them (in bricks) to write their own names on it with a sharpie
Other students are paying in bricks? Is that supposed to be transaction fees, mining (that's the sudoku puzzles), or what? And is there any indication that a name on a brick means anything (or can be exchanged for anything)? Is there a limit to the number of names on bricks? Can those names be verified at any instant, anywhere in the world with near 100% confidence?
I know it's a simplification for the purpose of making a point; it's just that the point becomes invalid when the simplification throws out the central characteristics of the thing that's being represented.
A third class plays using a consensus model based on explicit relationships of trust. Each student keeps track of which of the others they consider trustworthy. Since they all play together everyday, they know who is nice, and who is naughty. When a supermajority trusts the student placing a new block, that student is allowed to place it anywhere. When not enough people trust the student placing the block, they preve…
Which cryptocurrency does this describe?
Cryptocurrencies are not one-to-one with blockchain, rather one thing you can do with them.
Funny. The first class was a public class & anybody could join in at any time. The second class had reserved early seats based on the initial supply of the dices; without investment in the initial dices the game doesnt start, whereas sudoku generation is free.
Could you explain? Anyone can run a node for a proof-of-stake, or delegate/stake to the node they want. Why do you add the reserved seat to the story?