Quote from: matt608 on January 01, 2015, 12:33:53 PM

Quote from: cbeast on January 01, 2015, 06:42:09 AM

Quote from: matt608 on December 31, 2014, 08:00:44 PM

Sfinder was found and voted out successfully.

It is almost impossible for full pay delegates to be the same person. Unless they are superhuman and able to complete multiple jobs at the same time. You can view the work delegates are doing. They have to be transparent and productive or they are voted out. It's simply not possible to all be the same person because 1 person cannot do 101 jobs. And there are huge incentives to not do this.

Delegates are one of the great features of BitShares. It's creating a thriving community and a whole new type of decentralised organisation. Not to mention the unique identity v

erifying features being developed. DPOS is an amazing, fascinating and powerful invention which is going to re-structure society itself. Constructive criticism is always welcomed, but please keep it real.

That's the most ridiculous thing to say in the internet age. Of course one person can do millions of procedural tasks at once. If you can't write software to do it you hire cheap tech support in Mexico or India and script them. Break them up into teams for each delegate pseudonym and offer compensation based on productivity.

Point taken there can be subcontracting.

Mathematically proving delegates are different people isn't necessary. Incentives work strongly against any attacker. They would have to spend months developing (via subcontracting or doing it themselves) a bunch of features for BitShares to win voter approval to take multiple positions or they would have to buy a massive amount of BTS to be able to vote themselves in, only to then attack themselves by attacking the network. The cost of attack is already very high.

There is nothing necessarily wrong with having a social construct be part of the mix. Lets compare it to massive warehouses filled with asics run by a handful of mining pools. Both methods are worthy experiments and no one knows what POW or DPOS will lead to in the future.

Quote

only to then attack themselves by attacking the network. The cost of attack is already very high.

But isn't the attack a double spend? It can more than make up for lost revenue. If you run enough double spend scams for awhile you can always sell your position down and quietly exit.