Quote from: ByteFan on April 09, 2017, 02:04:10 PM

Quote from: Odrak on April 09, 2017, 12:55:47 PM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on April 09, 2017, 10:22:53 AM

Quote from: SatoNatomato on April 09, 2017, 07:07:25 AM

A hub can do that, but if a unit (transaction) has more than 1 mutation its invalid. Only when 1 witness is replaced by others as well, when the new witness has posted enough stamps, the "stability point" can be moved forward, and then the next witness replaced.

In other words, if you replace one witness with yourself and I replace another witness with myself we'll split the network into two halves. There will be 50% of users behind your choice and 50% of users behind my choice. And of course, I will never accept you as a witness and you will never accept me. Looks like the consensus will diverge for indefinite period of time in this scenario.

the one allowed mutation is sufficiently small compared with the 11 unchanged witnesses. In case a user thinks that any of the witnesses has lost his credibility, or there are just better candidates, the user can replace the witness with a new witness in his list, bearing in mind that his witness list may not differ from that of other units by more than one position. This means that any changes can happen only gradually, and a general consensus is required for a change bigger than one position.

Looks like Come-from-Beyond is right (?)

So end users should not be allowed to change more than 1 witness on the default list or they would be separated from the rest of the network. Obviously this sound too like a problem. Can we have some clarification from tonych ?

He has not been right one time in this entire thread, just an IOTA troll.

The network is a separate layer from the witnessing, but if you mean the progression of transactions, or that its actually usable, lets go with that. Each user can change 1 witness and witnessing goes on as usual, it doesnt affect how the DAG looks like at all. Its the majority of witnesses which matters, as long as a majority exists, even if several witnesses are replaced with many many other, and only 6 remain, it all still works.

The other question, but a user replaces all or 2 witnesses with his own, has been answered, those are invalid transactions. An attack on Byteball is possible only if already existing witnesses collude and conspire.

As you see, it is a very genius concept, a major major invention by Byteball, so it is hard for simpler minds like CfBs to fully grasp it. But he does like to post pictures, look a few pages back when he tried to compare Byteballs DAG to Ethereum blockchain with pictures, Cheesy

.

He hasnt even read the whitepaper, is just trolling and spreading FUD, every single one of his posts in this thread has been with intent to FUD.