Quote from: dzimbeck on June 08, 2018, 03:39:38 AM

Quote from: cryptohunter on June 08, 2018, 12:08:36 AM

Quote from: dzimbeck on June 07, 2018, 07:20:15 AM

Quote from: cryptohunter on June 06, 2018, 05:56:40 PM

Quote from: dzimbeck on June 05, 2018, 11:56:14 PM

Quote from: Piston Honda on June 05, 2018, 06:01:44 PM

holy crap still alive? lol....wow.

sad.

You afraid of us? Working decentralized markets, all templates done, peg almost done as promised.

Unless people have criticism that has some weight ie brings some observable events worthy of criticism their comments mean nothing.

Bitbay is way way way ahead of other projects of our market cap and really is equal to those in the top 20 .........let's face it MOST of the top 100 caps are bullshit fake inflated caps that would implode like a rotting pumpkin if someone tried to cash out any significant %

I think people think pos3 is old hat now (even though it may be a very strong design) they are all about high tps bullshit blockchain 3.0 (most of which just look like very centralised solutions).

Yeah high every high tps I've seen is centralized or even worse closed source and vaporware. People throw around names like Hashgraph without actually checking if there is a working model or considering security design. But okay it's possible to increase transaction load if some of the major concerns are met. My concept was simply pruning the chain and benchmarking nodes with a reputation system.

By the way cryptohunter you will be happy to know I'm coding the peg now and talked to Munti and we are strongly considering 2% interest if someone voluntarily freezes liquid coins and 1% for reserve coins and .25% for liquid but give liquid 3x voting power. We think this will incentivize frozen holders to
not push the economy around to unfreeze without buying some liquid and in exchange they get higher interest. These numbers aren't exact yet but it seemed like something you would like. I know you like models that encourage hoarding.

Btw, ignore Piston he is a shill I remember the name from the old days.

Exactly David. Yes, the concept of pruning and benchmarking nodes with rep system sounds excellent and effective.

Great news on the peg and for sure I do like to see incentives for investors to hold strong rather than attempting to churn constantly to increase their holdings. I like the idea of the more you lock down and the longer you lock them down for the more interest you get. For example it would be great (although perhaps crazy complex to implement) like you have a filed where you enter how many coins you will freeze and a field for duration of freezing then it shows you the interest you will get for that entire period then you hit confirm a couple of times and its done. Although I know when the layman announces such great plans the real coder and real designer sighs and thinks to himself if only these things were possible or even plausible

so yeah anything to give extra incentive to hold or lock up is great news david

can't wait.

Could you give just a brief (not detailed enough for copy cats to start getting ideas) outline of how the benchmarking and rep system of nodes could work. I'm guessing their hardware is given a stress test and they get a score and those with the fastest hardware would be the primary nodes. So a bit like dpos but not down to 12 nodes like some super centralised systems. The rep system is automated? according to downtime and other misbehaving factors? and will pass processing to the next most powerful nodes if more powerful nodes rep gets too low? do you think this along with a pruning option would enable bitbay to challenge these so called 3.0 projects with tps? also how long would something like that take to fully design, test and complete for bitbay?

It would seem to be after that bitbay would have everything it would need to score higher or as highly as nearly every single project on this board in all important areas except perhaps anon which tbh is already coming under some pressure in several countries so it could almost be better to watch how that goes before even considering adding that.

If we had such a design already planned out and on the road map I would expect we can expect to grab a bit of the tps hype before pegging. Would be good to have 1.5k -3k sats before the peg is activated.

Well it's just ideas in my head, still unsure of what the best scaling solution is. However the idea is to give a POW to new nodes just to test their capacity. It should be a relatively easy POW that a computer that would be able to handle the TX load should do in between blocks. They could then publish this info to the chain.

Then a node reputation system perhaps do something where nodes can confirm the honesty of another node that is doing POS maybe even tie this to IP address. Perhaps even include a harsh penalty for a bad transaction in a block such as a double spend. The penalty could perhaps be financial. It could be cryptographically proven since the previous block would contain the TX being violated.

Then only really well established nodes (perhaps ones that have been in the network for years, staked many blocks, etc) can then choose to prune the chain and they can form a consensus on what the new block hash would be. The community can choose places to post these hashes to inform users who are downloading from a botnet or fake chain. I guess you can even share these via torrent.

Eventually, you take this system and only allow nodes that can keep up with transaction load to stake blocks (based on reputation, their ability to handle traffic, etc). I think really you can prove they were able to handle it simply by the size of the block. The block size itself could be variable again based on the reputation system and perhaps with a limited maximum growth to prevent bad actors from overloading the chain.

None of this is set in stone, they really are just ideas. No clue if or when they could be investigated.

all talk, zero results yet. we'll see post results.