mazieres

7 ms·

31.
by mazieres 9y ago
If you are so allergic to cryptocurrency, why didn't it bother you when Keybase started writing their root into the Bitcoin blockchain ( https://keybase.io/docs/server_security/merkle_root_in_bitco... )? There
32.
by mazieres 9y ago
How is Stellar still "in the gate," more than two years after deploying their decentralized Byzantine agreement algorithm? Ripple has only just now, in 2018, published their decentralized consensus algorithm (Cobalt), which as far
33.
by mazieres 9y ago
Note that in general there is no way to name a particular branch of a blockchain fork. In cases with a protocol change coordinated well in advance, a counterparty anticipating the fork could announce that their tokens on one branch will be
34.
by mazieres 9y ago
What's interesting is that SCP implements consensus without electing a leader. There are, of course, numerous asynchronous protocols that do this, like Ben Or, Rabin, Mostéfaoui, and most recently HoneyBadger, but is rarer for synchro
35.
by mazieres 9y ago
Yes. Every validator in Stellar has a copy of the complete ledger. However, different validators may be authoritative for different types of token. Say bank_A runs a validator and issues digital dollars on Stellar, while bank_B runs a va
36.
by mazieres 9y ago
To be more precise about this, the Ripple consensus paper ( https://ripple.com/files/ripple_consensus_whitepaper.pdf ) says in Section 3.3, "Since the UNLs for each server can be different, agreement is not inherent
37.
by mazieres 12y ago
Well for safety it's a logical AND, not an OR. But for liveness you'd most likely you'd have some threshold. For example, you might that at least 34 of the 50 are honest.
38.
by mazieres 12y ago
At it's core, the question of whom to trust is of course crucial, as there are clearly at least straw-man answers that have undesirable effects. But the trust topology affects more than safety, it affects the scenarios in which a cons
39.
by mazieres 12y ago
So first, a lot of problems with Internet routing do not really affect SCP's safety--for example bogus route announcements. Part of the reason is that SCP depends on transitive reachability. And of course part of the reason is that S
40.
by mazieres 12y ago
Yes, and this is kind of the whole point of the protocol. It just hinges on defining the real stellar network. An analogous question is, "Is there a way for a computer to realize it has been partitioned from the real Internet?"
41.
by mazieres 12y ago
Bitshares is more democratic than decentralized. Basically people vote their stakes to elect 100 nodes that ensure consensus, but everyone knows who the 100 nodes are. By contrast, the FBA trust model is completely independent of coin hol
42.
by mazieres 12y ago
No. At least for the moment, the proofs are English language only.
43.
by mazieres 12y ago
You are correct that safety requires overlapping quorums. However, the trust decisions are public, as this is what allows participants to discover quorums. The scenario you describe of two groups of 100 participants overlapping at one nod