Re: [ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything (decentralized blockexplorer coming)
This is how Proof of Bitcoin Node (or any cross chain Node) needs to work, using the OP_RETURN updates in BIP74
The internal communications within the Spreadwallet make this whole thing work. The internal communications within the Spreadwallet can be similar to the way exchanges deal with transactions, they have their own ledgers that keep track of whats going on, and only when customers put money in or take money out do they interact with specific coin daemons.
Because of Bitcoin confirmation wait times, the completion of the proof might take 10 minutes or 10 days, but the relay communications can be ring fenced / locked by the servicenode network to avoid an attacker stealing payments.
If you have the required public and private keys, only you can create and confirm the hash as proof of the broadcast message.
The internal communications within the Spreadwallet make this whole thing work. The internal communications within the Spreadwallet can be similar to the way exchanges deal with transactions, they have their own ledgers that keep track of whats going on, and only when customers put money in or take money out do they interact with specific coin daemons.
Because of Bitcoin confirmation wait times, the completion of the proof might take 10 minutes or 10 days, but the relay communications can be ring fenced / locked by the servicenode network to avoid an attacker stealing payments.
If you have the required public and private keys, only you can create and confirm the hash as proof of the broadcast message.
In regards to this post ^
You suggested something about BIP74 found here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0074.mediawiki
So would that have to be implemented into Bitcoin in order for this all to work?
People who have issues with the block size would be against adding more data per block, no?
Also, in my recent reading, I saw some mention of Proof of Storage. Do you know anything about that?
This BIP update would need to find its way into Bitcoin.
This is one approach, one that I think could work with some sort of Proof of running a Bitcoin Node. If you can attach some meta data and have that going into the blockchain, you can look that up to do some validation.
The requirement to have collateral is a great way to fix the issue of fake SPR nodes, but the Bitcoin nodes will be held by the SPR node. So we need a way for the Spreadwallet to communicate with the Bitcoin node and then the bitcoin blockchain. Possibly making the Spreadwallet a Bitcoin wallet too.
The good think is that the Spreadwallet can create a hash of something, like a notification that the particular ServiceNode has been elected for payment subject to verification. Being able to pass a hashed message through the ServiceNode >> get that into a payment loop into the Bitcoin blockchain via the Spread/Bitcoin wallet >> and then back out again because the Spreadwallet can validate the hashed message >> could be an option to our particular Sybil problem.
Will it add more data to the blockchain? Yes. It is worth the price to? If it creates a payment system for running nodes, i think so. The long term goal is to help fund mining too, so the network will be paying for the data storage.
Easy? No. Possible? Maybe.
Proof of storage. Remind me.....do you mean the MIT research on doing data mining on encrypted databases?