Re: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"
...
I'm not sure exactly what your goal is, but it sounds like Namecoin could be a viable alternative.
CLAMour is one application of the overall ClamSpeech system, created for petitions. So if you want to store identities, I would recommend something along the lines of 'create identity ' as per your example. At one point we explored a potential format for ClamSpeeches that included metadata before the rest of the ClamSpeech - a "category identifier." Ultimately something more plain-language was used.
There are no enforced rules on the contents of ClamSpeeches (and I'm confident that there never will be), only on their lengths. So if somebody wants to store identity data in the CLAM chain, it doesn't really matter what anyone else approves of.
If you do use the CLAM chain for identity data, there is one thing you should be aware of: The requirement that a petition be declared with 'create clamour []' exists because petitions are identified by their first 4 bytes when voting for them (so multiple petitions can be voted for in one stake transaction). Since you probably won't need to refer to multiple identities in one ClamSpeech, you can just omit the 'create identity' step. Thus, you can simply put 'identity []' in a ClamSpeech instead of 'create identity []'.
I'm not sure exactly what your goal is, but it sounds like Namecoin could be a viable alternative.
CLAMour is one application of the overall ClamSpeech system, created for petitions. So if you want to store identities, I would recommend something along the lines of 'create identity ' as per your example. At one point we explored a potential format for ClamSpeeches that included metadata before the rest of the ClamSpeech - a "category identifier." Ultimately something more plain-language was used.
There are no enforced rules on the contents of ClamSpeeches (and I'm confident that there never will be), only on their lengths. So if somebody wants to store identity data in the CLAM chain, it doesn't really matter what anyone else approves of.
If you do use the CLAM chain for identity data, there is one thing you should be aware of: The requirement that a petition be declared with 'create clamour []' exists because petitions are identified by their first 4 bytes when voting for them (so multiple petitions can be voted for in one stake transaction). Since you probably won't need to refer to multiple identities in one ClamSpeech, you can just omit the 'create identity' step. Thus, you can simply put 'identity []' in a ClamSpeech instead of 'create identity []'.
I mainly need a short unambiguous way to refer to a public key, so using CLAMour for this is probably overkill. I've done some testnet tests and the next post will be about it. (It's already written, but wanted to respend to your post first.)