Quote from: Zergity on August 04, 2018, 05:10:07 AM

Quote from: dvietha on August 04, 2018, 02:31:31 AM

Can you make a summary to easy understand what is the main differences between your SSN and DASH?

SSN vs Master Node:

1. SSN is a decentralized p2p network, where everyone can easily join, while MN is widely considered to becoming more and more centralized due to the extremely high entry requirement.

2. SSN nodes can come and go as they will, while MN relies on the high availability of its nodes.

3. SSN using Kademlia DHT allows the network to scale to any level of adoptation, while MN works like a cloud service, where nodes have to keep track of each other avalaibility.

4. Every SSN operation is recorded on-chain, so everyone can re-evaluated and audit. That prevents any kind of history forging and provides the Proof of Bad Conduct for the network to punish the bad nodes. Meanwhile, MN is an offchain solution, where nothing is recorded onchain.

SSN's Input Locking vs MN's InstaSend:

1. SSN load balancing nature allow all transactions to be efficiently locked without any addition fee, while InstaSend only locks on request, with a higher fee.

2. SSN Input Locking mechanism relies on the collateralization and punishment, with 100% probability. That means, a locked transaction is either be finalized, or repaid by a bad node's collaterlized asset. Either ways, transaction receipients always get the value they are promised (by tx remitters and/or Input Locking Nodes).

Meanwhile, MN InstaSend only provides a high probability of finality. There's still chance that locked tx is double spent when 6/10 of selected nodes are compromised, and there's nothing MN can do about it.

Side Note: a prototype of SSN and Input Locking is being developed right now.

Sound great! Thank you for your very details explanation.