Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proof-of-Loss

From: Mirelo <mirelo@deugh-ausgam-valis•com>
To: "erik@q32•com" <erik@q32•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proof-of-Loss
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 01:47:17 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8-v6bK-690VHP9qxNvpaC3SRosgAXxdba7BUBdcf2KBa-aeUDcza2jd3V7VXRWj6p0oZ-pDghJLH_nVRFG7_TWnht2GH8wAUe8EAg7RseL4=@deugh-ausgam-valis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJowKgJ8NBYedU_WAAk8wyNpZaHg479a-QukdbjAGaPwdhmGkw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2385 bytes --]

Erik,

No, it is not, but I would like to ask anyone with any feedback on proof-of-loss to please direct it only to my email, or else follow the discussion links on the Proof-of-Loss home page.

Thanks,

Mirelo

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proof-of-Loss
Local Time: April 5, 2017 11:43 PM
UTC Time: April 6, 2017 2:43 AM
From: earonesty@gmail•com
To: Mirelo <mirelo@deugh-ausgam-valis•com>, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>

Is this the same as proof of burn?

On Apr 5, 2017 5:28 PM, "Mirelo via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
With the feedback on Proof-of-Loss (always privately to my email), I realized the article was hard to understand for lacking:

* A more explicit definition of transaction rights.
* An overview of how the algorithm works.

As an abstract could not contain all that, I wrote an introduction with examples.

I also adopted a suggestion of including the current block height in the proof-of-loss data once I realized:

* Preventing the same proof-of-loss from chaining consecutive blocks was not the purpose of the proof-of-loss context, which did it statistically rather than logically.
* The presence of that height in the block header made serial chaining easier to enforce, by removing the need to include additional block height information.

While revising the algorithm, I made some corrections, mainly to:

* Transaction prioritization (which now uses fees instead of rights).
* Inactivity fees.

Finally, the new version more aptly derives the design and often has better wording.

The new text is available at:

https://proof-of-loss.money/

Mirelo

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Proof-of-Loss
Local Time: February 4, 2017 10:39 AM
UTC Time: February 4, 2017 12:39 PM
From: mirelo@deugh-ausgam-valis•com
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>

An alternative consensus algorithm to both proof-of-work and proof-of-stake, proof-of-loss addresses all their deficiencies, including the lack of an organic block size limit, the risks of mining centralization, and the "nothing at stake" problem:

https://proof-of-loss.money/

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5602 bytes --]