Search content
Sort by
Showing 6 of 6 results by u8A8
⭐ Merited by vapourminer (1)
There are a lot of benefits in creating Asymmetric weighted multi-sig wallets. These are wallets where not all keys are equal.
Currently, in a 3-of-5 wallet, all 5 keys are treated as equals. While this may be fine for a majority of uses, it might not be best for all.
Imagine a system where a corporation has a multi-sig wallet with keys held throughout the financial management structure, the CFO's key should not be weighted the same as a manager's key.
Or a traditional multi-sig wallet where you give contingency key(s) to family. You may not want their key to be worth as much as one of your own.
While these systems are *technically* possible right now by just giving higher-weighted entities more keys (e.g. the CFO gets two keys, everyone else gets one), there is no real system for this in Bitcoin.
This essentially moves multi-sig m-of-n keys to be m-of-n 'units', where a threshold of signature units must be met, and each key is worth a set number of units.
Currently, in a 3-of-5 wallet, all 5 keys are treated as equals. While this may be fine for a majority of uses, it might not be best for all.
Imagine a system where a corporation has a multi-sig wallet with keys held throughout the financial management structure, the CFO's key should not be weighted the same as a manager's key.
Or a traditional multi-sig wallet where you give contingency key(s) to family. You may not want their key to be worth as much as one of your own.
While these systems are *technically* possible right now by just giving higher-weighted entities more keys (e.g. the CFO gets two keys, everyone else gets one), there is no real system for this in Bitcoin.
This essentially moves multi-sig m-of-n keys to be m-of-n 'units', where a threshold of signature units must be met, and each key is worth a set number of units.
On the Feasibility, Limits, and Logistics of a Kardashev-Scale Bitcoin Network
Paper abstract:
This paper investigates the feasibility of Bitcoin mining and usage as humanity advances through the Kardashev scale, from a planetary (Type I) to a stellar (Type II) and ultimately a galactic (Type III) civilization. We analyze how Bitcoin and its Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus mechanism can adapt to vastly different energy capacities, and interstellar-spanning distances. This paper proposes ideas such as new necessary mathematical models for hashrate efficiency, relative hashrate, and a Mining Feasibility Index to provide a framework for assessing mining viability across interplanetary and interstellar distances. Additionally, we propose the use of Federated Proof-of-Work sidechains and localized second-layer networks to enable scalable and secure usage of Bitcoin across stellar and galactic distances, even in the presence of relativistic travel and causality constraints. This work outlines a long-term vision for how Bitcoin could remain viable in a high energy and space-faring future.
_________________________
LINK TO PAPER ON GOOGLE DRIVE
_________________________
Thought you guys would enjoy a fun little read about the far-future of Proof-of-work consensus mechanisms, the problems that arise in such a future, and how Bitcoin can still persevere. The work is purely speculative but the physics, math, and everything is very much grounded in reality and fully serious. Would love to hear thoughts!
This paper investigates the feasibility of Bitcoin mining and usage as humanity advances through the Kardashev scale, from a planetary (Type I) to a stellar (Type II) and ultimately a galactic (Type III) civilization. We analyze how Bitcoin and its Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus mechanism can adapt to vastly different energy capacities, and interstellar-spanning distances. This paper proposes ideas such as new necessary mathematical models for hashrate efficiency, relative hashrate, and a Mining Feasibility Index to provide a framework for assessing mining viability across interplanetary and interstellar distances. Additionally, we propose the use of Federated Proof-of-Work sidechains and localized second-layer networks to enable scalable and secure usage of Bitcoin across stellar and galactic distances, even in the presence of relativistic travel and causality constraints. This work outlines a long-term vision for how Bitcoin could remain viable in a high energy and space-faring future.
_________________________
LINK TO PAPER ON GOOGLE DRIVE
_________________________
Thought you guys would enjoy a fun little read about the far-future of Proof-of-work consensus mechanisms, the problems that arise in such a future, and how Bitcoin can still persevere. The work is purely speculative but the physics, math, and everything is very much grounded in reality and fully serious. Would love to hear thoughts!
Re: On the Feasibility, Limits, and Logistics of a Kardashev-Scale Bitcoin Network.
I am looking to get this published on Ledger Journal in the short term - if anyone is an expert in the field and/or has existing papers published on Bitcoin, Blockchain, Theoretical Economics, Network Science, Information Theory, or any other relevant field - I would much appreciate if I could submit the paper after your review!
Thanks
Thanks
I am at a loss with your suggestion and situation. No Bitcoin is invisible. If the Bitcoin once existed, the Bitcoin still exists. If the Bitcoin exists, every movement that the Bitcoin has made (all the way back to the coinbase reward it originated from) can be traced backwards.
Re: On the Feasibility, Limits, and Logistics of a Kardashev-Scale Bitcoin Network.
⭐ Merited by ABCbits (1)
That was interesting read. I have few casual thoughts about it.
1. The actual delay will be slightly longer, considering time to verify block and not all node have direct connection to node on different planet.
2. On section 3.2.4, the paper mentioned miner on location 4 should choose mine on top of block that is less likely to be orphaned (rather than one with most accumulated work). What are basis to consider which block is less likely to be orphaned?
3. I see you write it under assumption light remains as communication method with lowest delay/latency. I certainly hope there'll be better communication option when human moved on from current (type 0) civilization.
1. The actual delay will be slightly longer, considering time to verify block and not all node have direct connection to node on different planet.
2. On section 3.2.4, the paper mentioned miner on location 4 should choose mine on top of block that is less likely to be orphaned (rather than one with most accumulated work). What are basis to consider which block is less likely to be orphaned?
3. I see you write it under assumption light remains as communication method with lowest delay/latency. I certainly hope there'll be better communication option when human moved on from current (type 0) civilization.
Thanks!
1. I agree that there will be other delays associated with the communication, e.g. information processing times at the endpoints, but this is the time that I did assume will diminish towards zero as humanity progresses. For the sake of simplicity, the most important and longest portion of this delay is the light-time latency
2. The reason is because the block has yet to be orphaned - it's like betting on a very slow man in the 100 meter dash vs. Usain Bolt, if you observe the slow man at the 90 meter mark, and Usain is still at the 10 meter mark. You're able to determine the probability that the block will be orphaned by how far away that block is from propagating towards the system's center of hash to reach consensus first.
3. I also agree FTL communication would be great, but for the time being I did still want to explore what this would look like given our current physics constraints.
On the Feasibility, Limits, and Logistics of a Kardashev-Scale Bitcoin Network.
Paper abstract:
This paper investigates the feasibility of Bitcoin mining and usage as humanity advances through the Kardashev scale, from a planetary (Type I) to a stellar (Type II) and ultimately a galactic (Type III) civilization. We analyze how Bitcoin and its Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus mechanism can adapt to vastly different energy capacities, and interstellar-spanning distances. This paper proposes ideas such as new necessary mathematical models for hashrate efficiency, relative hashrate, and a Mining Feasibility Index to provide a framework for assessing mining viability across interplanetary and interstellar distances. Additionally, we propose the use of Federated Proof-of-Work sidechains and localized second-layer networks to enable scalable and secure usage of Bitcoin across stellar and galactic distances, even in the presence of relativistic travel and causality constraints. This work outlines a long-term vision for how Bitcoin could remain viable in a high energy and space-faring future.
_________________________
LINK TO PAPER ON GOOGLE DRIVE
_________________________
Thought you guys would enjoy a fun little read about the far-future of Proof-of-work consensus mechanisms, the problems that arise in such a future, and how Bitcoin can still persevere. The work is purely speculative but the physics, math, and everything is very much grounded in reality and fully serious. Would love to hear thoughts!
This paper investigates the feasibility of Bitcoin mining and usage as humanity advances through the Kardashev scale, from a planetary (Type I) to a stellar (Type II) and ultimately a galactic (Type III) civilization. We analyze how Bitcoin and its Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus mechanism can adapt to vastly different energy capacities, and interstellar-spanning distances. This paper proposes ideas such as new necessary mathematical models for hashrate efficiency, relative hashrate, and a Mining Feasibility Index to provide a framework for assessing mining viability across interplanetary and interstellar distances. Additionally, we propose the use of Federated Proof-of-Work sidechains and localized second-layer networks to enable scalable and secure usage of Bitcoin across stellar and galactic distances, even in the presence of relativistic travel and causality constraints. This work outlines a long-term vision for how Bitcoin could remain viable in a high energy and space-faring future.
_________________________
LINK TO PAPER ON GOOGLE DRIVE
_________________________
Thought you guys would enjoy a fun little read about the far-future of Proof-of-work consensus mechanisms, the problems that arise in such a future, and how Bitcoin can still persevere. The work is purely speculative but the physics, math, and everything is very much grounded in reality and fully serious. Would love to hear thoughts!