Re: BYTEBALL: Totally new consensus algorithm + private untraceable payments
Ok, let's return to this once the software is polished enough to run a stresstest. I'll stay in the old 50/50 position and will be telling that DAG/CHAIN question will be answered after the test.
You cant win with troll.
Now you are just changing your original question to be "what is the result of a stresstest", and if tonych actually makes a stresstest you would just say "but oh you run the stresstest with AMD Ryzen and more powerful motherboard than what is available for normal people living in Moldova".
Byteball is the first DAG-coin and that hurts your little ego since Iota is still not on any exchange and has the retarded idea of using Proof-of-Work in the space of IoT.
Start an issue on github if you have something to back this up with, and work it out with the dev through official channels.... github being one of the most direct way to go about it 
I just need an answer. Any answer I could just link people to.
Use this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1608859.msg18291320#msg18291320 as tonych gave you answer to your "scalability" question previously.
It is normal that there is no consensus (yet) about the unstable trailing part.
If we denote the interval of time between a transaction issuance and the transaction finalization (by witnesses) as confirmation time, does an average confirmation time increase monotonically if the global TPS rate increases monotonically?
PS: "Yes" would mean that SatoNatomato was wrong that DAG has no limits on scaling even if we have superpowerful hardware (but the latency still persists).
It all depends on the behavior of witnesses. That said, it is reasonable to expect that as TPS increases, witnesses also post more frequently, therefore confirmation time decreases. Of course, there is a lower bound defined by network latency, times number of witnesses.
As more transactions are posted to the network transaction times decrease - throughput increases.
Just pathetic CfB being pathetic.