3 ms·

I'd be curious to hear about any solutions to enforcing invariants on state transitions in a decentralized manner pre 2008.

by abiro 5y ago

throwmeariver1 5y ago
You are curious but you are not able to search for it? Oracle worked on it in the 90s.
- abiro 5y ago
  Worked != solved.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwmeariver1 5y ago
    Worked doesn't imply that they didn't solve it. You can still be CURIOUS and look up the patents :) Just because something is new for you (and lets be clear 14 years and counting isn't new) doesn't mean it's new for everyone.
    - abiro 5y ago
      “Curious” was my courteous way of saying that your and the first commenter’s claims are BS.
      - throwmeariver1 5y ago
        Well, snarky comments like that are forbidden on HN better stay with the I am to gulible to search argument. The patent was filled in 1998 but I am not helping your CURIOUS mind any further. ;0)
falcolas 5y ago
Markov chains (cryptographic signatures on a linked list of transactions) have been around for much longer than 14 years. There's your "decentralized invariants on state transitions". The "magic" provided by bitcoins was the "proof of work" part - basically trying to create only one "real" trusted branch of the markov chain at any point in time. But that "reality" has been broken multiple times by both the miners and the programers with voluntary and involuntary splits, double spends, etc.
- abiro 5y ago
  Assuming you mean a Merkle tree (a Markov chain is a statistical concept). A Merkle tree provides an efficient way to compute hashes (not signatures) of data. It provides neither properties that you claim for Markov chains.
  - falcolas 5y ago
    You're correct - Merkle tree. Words are hard some days. > A Merkle tree provides an efficient way to compute hashes (not signatures) A signature is a hash, in that it is effectively unique for the content. It simply has the additional property of being generated using cryptographic keys, proving that not only is the hashed content what's expected, it was generated using the specified key.
    - abiro 5y ago
      Signing and hashing are specific cryptographic operations with well defined properties. You can’t use them interchangeably if you want to be taken seriously.
      - falcolas 5y ago
        A merkle tree that uses cryptographic signing instead of hashing is still a merkle tree. Though if we really feel it's necessary, we could simply say "a merkle-tree like implementation that uses cryptographic signatures in place of a hash function". Pedantry about the difference between hashes and signatures doesn't change the validity of the structure as a response to the original question.

I'd be curious to hear about any solutions to enforcing invariants on state transitions in a decentralized manner pre 2008.

by abiro 5y ago

I'd be curious to hear about any solutions to enforcing invariants on state transitions in a decentralized manner pre 2008.

throwmeariver1 5y ago

You are curious but you are not able to search for it? Oracle worked on it in the 90s.

abiro 5y ago
Worked != solved.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- throwmeariver1 5y ago
  Worked doesn't imply that they didn't solve it. You can still be CURIOUS and look up the patents :) Just because something is new for you (and lets be clear 14 years and counting isn't new) doesn't mean it's new for everyone.
  - abiro 5y ago
    “Curious” was my courteous way of saying that your and the first commenter’s claims are BS.
    - throwmeariver1 5y ago
      Well, snarky comments like that are forbidden on HN better stay with the I am to gulible to search argument. The patent was filled in 1998 but I am not helping your CURIOUS mind any further. ;0)

falcolas 5y ago

Markov chains (cryptographic signatures on a linked list of transactions) have been around for much longer than 14 years. There's your "decentralized invariants on state transitions". The "magic" provided by bitcoins was the "proof of work" part - basically trying to create only one "real" trusted branch of the markov chain at any point in time. But that "reality" has been broken multiple times by both the miners and the programers with voluntary and involuntary splits, double spends, etc.

abiro 5y ago
Assuming you mean a Merkle tree (a Markov chain is a statistical concept). A Merkle tree provides an efficient way to compute hashes (not signatures) of data. It provides neither properties that you claim for Markov chains.
- falcolas 5y ago
  You're correct - Merkle tree. Words are hard some days. > A Merkle tree provides an efficient way to compute hashes (not signatures) A signature is a hash, in that it is effectively unique for the content. It simply has the additional property of being generated using cryptographic keys, proving that not only is the hashed content what's expected, it was generated using the specified key.
  - abiro 5y ago
    Signing and hashing are specific cryptographic operations with well defined properties. You can’t use them interchangeably if you want to be taken seriously.
    - falcolas 5y ago
      A merkle tree that uses cryptographic signing instead of hashing is still a merkle tree. Though if we really feel it's necessary, we could simply say "a merkle-tree like implementation that uses cryptographic signatures in place of a hash function". Pedantry about the difference between hashes and signatures doesn't change the validity of the structure as a response to the original question.