2 ms·
This raises a giant red flag for me. Storage is storage. This is not like hash mining, which is based on probabilities. You either have the data or you don't. I
by colllectorof 6y ago
This raises a giant red flag for me. Storage is storage. This is not like hash mining, which is based on probabilities. You either have the data or you don't. If you have the data, even partially, this should be useful to the system. I can conceive of no reason why a reasonably designed distributed storage system would have such insane requirements.
- jimpick 6y agoSecurity, mostly - if the proofs fail, it’s not just the data that could be corrupted - bad actors could attack the consensus itself and steal unlimited funds. The params for the proofs could be loosened, at the cost of extra risk of an attack. They’ve gone the safe route and picked challenging parameters that would be uneconomic to brute force attack.