Quote from: Hyperme.sh on October 03, 2017, 02:49:44 PM

Quote from: bjumb on October 03, 2017, 06:21:25 AM

Quote from: Hyperme.sh on October 02, 2017, 08:22:09 AM

However, they have a significant disadvantage compared to my project in that they are basing this on an ERC-20 token, yet Ethereum can't scale to millions of transactions per second.

Ethereum can scale to that much transactions. That's possible with Plasma, it just hasn't been implemented yet.
https://medium.com/chain-cloud-company-blog/plasma-in-10-minutes-c856da94e339

All off-chain (and side-chain) must be insecure and must be entirely centralized. Afaics, there is no possible solution to fix off-chain and side-chains, because the problem is inherent in them not being on-chain. Craig Wright explained that well (which appears to be correct even though he has made some mistakes in other areas of his analysis). I have a comment linking to that and discussing that on Steemit.

I will soon endeavor to delve into more detail on that to make it crystal clear.

You may also want to review the discussion I had with the developer of Bitbay about Lightning Neworks.

Regarding side-chains:

Quote from: https://gist.github.com/shelby3/6ba7130e7d6ec593048ea1266eeb29cd#fungibility

But since side-chains are insolubly flawed (even if not merged mined and using a different consensus algorithm) []

(Unvetted/claimed) FACT: Only our new decentralized ledger design solves secure, decentralized scaling. None of the others do: proof-of-work, proof-of-stake, side-chains, off-chain (aka time-locked contracts), Casper, Byteball, IOHKs Ouroboros, SPECTRE (is not same as Spectrecoin), Iota, and DPoS (which is used in many projects such as Bitshares, Steem, EOS, Lisk, Ark, etc). I am writing a blog post about why all those other systems are insolubly flawed.

This (claimed) fact will be explained in great detail.

Quote from: Hyperme.sh on October 01, 2017, 05:51:47 PM

Btw, the RADIX whitepaper appears to be gibberish, which is why I havent commented at that thread.

There is a secret Gist that describes the new invention. This will be made public soon.

I urge you to read Vitaliks astute analysis of the flaws of DPoS (and that it is entirely centralized and can be attacked by attacking the whales of it):

https://steemit.com/eos/@dan/reponse-to-vitalik-s-written-remarks

https://np.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6qm0y2/is_the_ethereum_team_defending_their_ground/dkyk94c/

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6qm0y2/is_the_ethereum_team_defending_their_ground/dkzoj5t/

DPoS is centralized, permissioned, and highly vulnerable to abuse by nations, lawsuits, etc.. That can not be a world changing decentralized ledger that we can depend on. Also the consensus algorithm is far too subjective and not objectively verifiable.

Steemits DPoS was offline for over an hour before I slept. And when I awoke it has still been down several hours later. A centralized ledger design is not robust enough to scale out to the world. It works for some small shit like Steemit sometimes. Is that centralized DPoS acceptable for a world computer in that it will go offline for hours?

Some interesting reading I don't really understand to every detail. But if I get it right the point is Segwit (or other off-chain transactions) aren't a security problem by themselves. They just give more incentive for miners to do 51% attack, because they could gain much more doing it.. It's a good point, but it doesn't mean ethereum can't. It can but hipotetically it will be less safe. I'm not sure why you even mention DPoS here, because it has nothing to with Ethereum or Kik scalability. But I agree DPoS has some flaws in fact every consensus has them. This is getting way offtopic now but it would be interesting if you wanted to discuss it in more appropriate thread.