4 ms·
"... gives maximum freedom ..." nice way of putting the fact that there's basically no consensus; i've got even better idea, with more freedom - everybody can w
by mirekrusin 9y ago
"... gives maximum freedom ..." nice way of putting the fact that there's basically no consensus; i've got even better idea, with more freedom - everybody can write whatever they want into append only database and they have freedom to choose which bits make sense.
- JonnyNova 9y agoSo, IOTA?
- runeks 9y agoIOTA is not decentralized. Although it allegedly will be in the future.
- StavrosK 9y agoMultiple commenters here are saying that Stellar has no consensus. Is that true? How could such a big issue be overlooked?
- grandmczeb 9y ago> Is that true? No. If you’re worried about it, read the linked paper. The mechanics (and assumptions) are covered in painstaking detail.
- ytjohn 9y agoThat sounds like secure scuttlebutt. Secure Scuttlebutt is a database protocol for unforgeable append-only message feeds. "Unforgeable" means that only the owner of a feed can update that feed, as enforced by digital signing (see Security properties). This property makes Secure Scuttlebutt useful for peer-to-peer applications. Secure Scuttlebutt also makes it easy to encrypt messages. https://scuttlebot.io/more/protocols/secure-scuttlebutt.html https://scuttlebot.io/more/protocols/secure-scuttlebutt.html
- gregknicholson 9y agoThis is a very lucid description of how Secure Scuttlebutt works. SSB is deliberately “against consensus”, which makes it useless as a trustless decision-making tool. So I take your point that this property of Stellar seems to make Stellar useless for its stated purpose. (I haven't read the paper, so I may be very wrong.)