Quote from: hashman on February 27, 2015, 12:34:24 PM

This is hugely important work, thanks for your efforts!

Like many brilliant ideas around these parts, I am left wondering "where is the implementation?"

I think you will find that determining "the truth" or in the language of your whitepaper "accurate reporting" is the crux of the biscuit. I see from your blog you are tackling this head on and moving past the days of suggesting that "Googling" is somehow part of the solution. if we could trust a predetermined third party to report on outcomes we wouldn't need your project.

I think you will find that some use of proof of coin holdings by reporters for trust of event reporting is a good way to go.

You will also need to make a decent analysis of the monetary risk of corruption of reporting source (I guess people are using the name oracle for this which I don't like but hey that's pretty typical of language). In other words, if the bids and asks on a given prediction market really start to heat up and the amount of BTC at stake starts to reach some function of the BTC that is being held and counted in use of reporting the event outcome, the reliability of this market is compromised.

So sorry, just more ideas here, not the implementations you would like.

Keep up the good work! I have money riding on your success Wink

You're exactly right that it's the crux of the biscuit (fellow biscuit lover here btw)!

There's been a lot of discussion and work done on risks of corruption by Vitalik Buterin (his p+epsilon posts) and Paul Sztorc (Truthcoin whitepaper and forum discussions). I think it'd be interesting to do some BAR (Byzantine, Altruistic, Rational) analysis on our system's reporting aspects. Yeah, you're right on the BTC at stake part; the problem starts to appear when the BTC at stake in a market is > value of all reputation used for reporting.

Thank you, just finished a major codebase refactoring & put a bunch of our contracts on ethereum blockchain so I'm quite excited too!