Live data from Hacker News

The Blockchain Problem Space – When to Use Blockchain?

blog.ironbay.digital

61–63 of 63 posts

Re: The Blockchain Problem Space – When to Use Blockchain?

#61
post #56
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok since you detached the threas I'm going to guess the downvote is yours, with no response so you think there is no problem. And this is off-topic. Well, I've brought it to your attention, no reason to mention it anymore. Good day sir! :-)

If you want to talk to the mods, you can just email them instead of posting your complaint repeatedly in random threads and hoping someone notices.

[deleted]

Re: The Blockchain Problem Space – When to Use Blockchain?

#62
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though many new "blockchain" systems do achieve BFT (perhaps most notably Tendermint, which seems to be passing aphyr's Jepsen tests with flying colors), it's important to keep in mind Bitcoin falls short of achieving it: https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/765.pdf "Regarding BA, we observe that Nakamoto’s suggestion falls short of solving it, and present a simple alternative which works assuming that the adversary’s hashin…

> With ByzCoin, if you can't reach quorum, you can't make progress [...] This may be a stupid questions, but how does such a system prevent me from adding new nodes, only to remove them all at once if I want to prevent the system from progressing?

The participants in the consensus group are selected via PoW. You would need to control > 1/3rd of them (i.e. 1/3rd of the nodes that have recently won the PoW leader election race/lottery) to cause Byzantine faults.

Re: The Blockchain Problem Space – When to Use Blockchain?

#63
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though many new "blockchain" systems do achieve BFT (perhaps most notably Tendermint, which seems to be passing aphyr's Jepsen tests with flying colors), it's important to keep in mind Bitcoin falls short of achieving it: https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/765.pdf "Regarding BA, we observe that Nakamoto’s suggestion falls short of solving it, and present a simple alternative which works assuming that the adversary’s hashin…

Not a bandaid at all. Unconfirmed transactions in the "lost" chain are bringing fees with them, so it is the exact same incentive of every other transaction. Besides , how many times in history a continental network partition of the internet has happened? And it would only take a single node connected to both sides (land and satellite?), to undo all the work of the would be attacker.

This is no different than, say, watching MongoDB for if it loses your writes, and if it does, replaying them.

This is definitely a band-aid: a good database doesn't lose writes it acknowledged.

Post reply on HN