Quote from: abvhiael on September 28, 2016, 05:06:58 PM

Quote from: holgerkpedersen on September 26, 2016, 08:15:38 AM

@abvhiael: Thanks for the info update of your thoughts about the attacks on ETH based blockchains. Wink

I understand your concerns about the centralization of knowledge about locking blocks, and the chance of corruption amongst insiders. I agree, it's not better. But, the bigger the number of nodes, the harder it is to take over with 51% attacks. Probably, it could be a solution until the network has matured.

ive been giving this a lot of thought, and tearing thru google like a madman, about this problem thats faced Krypton and Shift. and the idea presented, hardcoded blocks, seems like the best scenario, assuming a trustworthy currency developer. Ive never veiwed SOIL as a financial engine... hell, theres more than enough blockchains out there that are hyperobsessed with fintech, and yeah, thats where the money is. but SOIL isnt about that, its always been about the technology, how it can change EVERY sector of industry. and to make that technology available, globally. its always been about building the dApps for distributed climate prediction, and microgrid systems, and food provenance and livestock lineage, its been about making this sort of technology, these smart contracts, available to anyone, with operating costs a fraction of what corporate interests use to line their pockets with. i think its sad to see Krypton abandon the EVM, and its sad to see Shift migrate to LISK, but thats the reality of the cryptopolitical landscape. to accomplish wwhat SOIL is to become, we need the EVM. and no, not Ethereum's blockchain or Expanse's blockchains, because those currencies are very good at being what they are building themselves into. SOIL should always be something different, and it should always be independent, and as open to its users as it is NOW. anyone can build on SOIL, anything. gas costs, comparatively, for computational intesive work, SOIL is gonna be the place to go. and i want SOIL to be a.. well.. a "humanitarian blockchain" or maybe the first truly GREEN one. ive said from the beginning that this project is going to something that takes YEARS to mature. what i WANT to build with it, technology has to catch up with. its a committment, and its been hard to really focus on it over the last few months, while finances were tighter than theyve ever been. but i weathered thru, and SOIL did too. i hope, if the 51Crew guys are monitoring these smaller EVM blockchains, and if theyre reading this, please dont attack SOIL. theres no money to pay off your ransom. for me, keeping my family fed is a near day to day proposition. i have NO cryptocurrency reserves. but SOIL is something different. we're under the radar, quietly building something that will benefit humanity in the end. its not about money, its about leaving something more and better behind than what we found this world when we were born.

that being said,hard coded benchmarks on the blockchain should be easy enough to fit into our protocols, and have those run by a smart contract. theres quite a lot of smart contract blockchain administrative stuff that i want to get set up under an umbrella SOILdev account, things already running on the SOILnet as contracts. this should be one of those sorts of things. at least, although the SOILcoin Foundation might maintain the keys to those contracts, the whole of it can be automated, and protected by a 2-of-3 multisig wallet, with at least one unaffiliated but active community member as a signatory.

this post really went sideways from where id planned, but lack of coffee in my system toay is likely the culprit. trying to catch up on these nodes, and cloud servers. to whom offered up a vultr server instance, id check the message list, but ive got KITTENS roaming across my mousepad right nw, and one wrong move... (sighs) will post again later if i can. i have a massive TO-DO list involved to get SOILnet back up and healthier than ever. then i can get back to building the neat stuff for it.

Coffee beats it all Cheesy

Lots of thoughts. The weak spot is the trustworthyness of the developers involved with setting the benchmarks on the nodes. They are very important central players. If one of them turns evil; trouble will start spinning.

It might still be possible to take over the best chain with less nodes than 51% - The 51Crew DDoS attacks will be able to take down the majority of nodes; except those controlled by the attackers. Safety of the blockchain is the key to success. If you can't trust it; you can't risk it.

Just a thought: If the software, somehow could detect a major fallout of the peers; the software could be able to alert the other nodes; and set the network to a halt; preventing the attackers from doing anything, because of suspension, until a routine investigation has been done by blockchain surveiling software. A certain percentage of nodes must send a "go" signal; before the suspension of the network will be reverted to normal state.