Eliminating ACP

Wellenreiter

If wie need something like a super key, we have a central authority hat can change things to own advantage and we don’t need to change/modify/improve ACP.

I tried to describe an approach to implement an additional set of rules/procedures/algorhisms to increase the security oft the blockchain without centralized authorities, as I think, it’s the idea oft crypto currencies to work without such central ‘banks’

zerodrama

[quote name=“Wellenreiter” post=“53258” timestamp=“1390071031”]
Could Kevlar’s flux protocol be used the that communication?
[/quote]

You mean Link? Link uses the address system to store information. Not sure if that much info should go into addresses. My FLUX design also depends on Link. Maybe if we had a MetaCoin or PoolCoin or such.

[quote]
Also to build a trust level, I was thinking to use the uptime of the pool nodes.

Probably a lot of this - if not all- is nonsense…
Thoughts are not really sorted out…
No clue, if such a principle/process can be implemented…
Not really sure, if this really would help to secure the blockchain…

comments?
[/quote]

The unfortunate thing is: ACP was introduced to deal with hostile and potentially suicidal attackers. They intended to lose money. We need to defend not just adapt.

kris_davison

instead if this being only for pools could we not add this to the normal client where trusted node starts out being the acp server node but is then recalculated by each node broadcasting which it thinks should be trusted based on

uptime - higher is better
hashrate - lower is better ()

etc etc

essentially a primary node on the network. If we can get a consensus on the block chain why cant we get a consensus on this?

I know it would potentially suffer the same problems with a 51% but we would then have two lines of defence rather than one.

estrabd

I don’t pretend to understand a lot of this stuff, but I’d expect to be hearing the name Leslie Lamport being thrown around. I am sure *something* he has done regarding distributed consensus would apply here - namely the Paxos related consensus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Lamport

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paxos_algorithm

Is there a coin that even mentions Paxos or Lamport anywhere? If there was, I’d sure jump on it (as a total CS nerd).

groll

paxos is a very useful distributed voting, but it lacks one big thing for coins the notions of attacker node that is one of the problem of coins.

someone can setup millions of voting nodes to say yes so win the concensus but those node are attacker node. coin own in POS is a way to minimized this and replace it by who own more coins. the actual POW is who work hard enough to find the solution.

Wellenreiter

[quote name=“groll” post=“56200” timestamp=“1391141274”]
… the actual POW is who work hard enough to find the solution.
[/quote]

This would give a lot of power to the ‘big wales’, a very big drawback for me.

wrapper

[quote name=“Tuck Fheman” post=“52165” timestamp=“1389720303”]
[quote author=wrapper0feather link=topic=6861.msg52126#msg52126 date=1389711177]
“Loyal network”
[/quote]

Go onnnn. What is this “loyal network” of which you speak?
[/quote]

That is my cuddly name for “loyal miners” who just mine Feathercoin, and don’t try to coin hop to manipulate the Difficulty calculation.

estrabd

[quote name=“groll” post=“56200” timestamp=“1391141274”]
paxos is a very useful distributed voting, but it lacks one big thing for coins the notions of attacker node that is one of the problem of coins.

someone can setup millions of voting nodes to say yes so win the concensus but those node are attacker node. coin own in POS is a way to minimized this and replace it by who own more coins. the actual POW is who work hard enough to find the solution.
[/quote]

Just saying that distributed consensus with adversaries, however defined, is fairly well researched. I am sure POS or POW can be incorporated. CCs strike me as an area ripe for application.

Matl

I’d like to see this happen. While ACP has been something to add security against good old 51% and was something that I liked. It does centralize FTC which I think is ultimately what is holding it back from its true market potential.

lizhi

Will be replaced by ACP DCP , Is it true ?

MrWyrm

I’d like to see this happen. While ACP has been something to add security against good old 51% and was something that I liked. It does centralize FTC which I think is ultimately what is holding it back from its true market potential.

I agree. It’s that big chunk of news that will get the nay sayers talking.

How are we coming along with this?

Just wondering if it was all still in the works.

Wellenreiter

I think, it is still in the queue, but other things cought more focus, e.g. new website and the fluctuating difficulty

For sure ahy. The new site taking priority was the right way to go. The difficulty issue should be the next. After that, eliminating ACP would be next I suppose.

panoramix

ACP should not be eliminated. Only the number of trusted ACP centers should increase.

MrWyrm

ACP should not be eliminated. Only the number of trusted ACP centers should increase.

One step towards decentralisation is better than none. Personally though I’d like to see it entirely decentralised.