[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       hyperledger-technical-discuss
Subject:    [technical-discuss] Quantumledger Proposal
From:       irvingthemagnificent () yahoo ! com (David Vandervort)
Date:       2016-02-13 15:27:48
Message-ID: 912479712.2956576.1455377268426.JavaMail.yahoo () mail ! yahoo ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

You may be being a bit too harsh, though I wonder if we need a "concepts and \
principles" mailing list, since the "proof of trust" idea is not yet at the level of \
"technical" (which I associate with concrete implementation). One important point \
about "proof of trust" is that trust is context dependent and also has varying \
degrees. I trust my dog with my life but not with my checkbook. I trust my bank with \
my paycheck but I still check my account online for errors on a regular basis. The \
Bitcoin consensus protocol provides sufficient security to allow a high degree of \
trust that funds exist and that no one but the owner can spend them. It does not \
provide much trust that the owner intended to spend them or that the address \
receiving the funds is actually in use. Addresses can be mistyped, buttons can be \
clicked by toddlers or cats walking on a keyboard. Malware can make your computer do \
things you did not expect. So the first question is, what kind of information does \
the nicely (but inaccurately) named QuantumLedger hope to provide establish as \
trustworthy and in what context? It seems to me to be geared toward verifiable \
information such as the existence of a document or service but not the document's \
current state (is paragraph 112c of a contract currently in force in Maryland?). btw, \
one of the examples shows the context-dependent nature of trust quite well. If you \
ask for?'citybank.accounts' you may, indeed, receive a list of accounts that Citibank \
has on record. You may be able to trust that this list is complete and up to date as \
of earlier in the day. You may be able to see the balances and trust that they are \
accurate. By allowing you to see these things, Citibank may have violated the trust \
of the owners of those accounts. So some clarification of the parameters of the \
                trusted information QuantumLedger is intended to work with would be \
                helpful.
      From: Allen via hyperledger-technical-discuss <hyperledger-technical-discuss at \
lists.hyperledger.org>  To: hyperledger-technical-discuss at lists.hyperledger.org 
 Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:27 AM
 Subject: Re: [technical-discuss] Quantumledger Proposal
   
I think you don't know what you are doing and this is a complete waste of time.? \
Proof-of-work is used to create consensus, not "derive value" and nothing in your \
proposal shows what proof-of-trust is or how it would create consensus.? Https to \
prevent mitm attacks requires domain names and certificates, and if you propose using \
https to prevent mitm attacks, you need to describe why resistance to mitm attacks is \
important, who issues the domain names and certificates, and who decides which domain \
names get to participate in the network.? This proposal is so poorly thought out it \
is a waste of time at this point to even discuss it.? If you do eventually come up \
with a real proposal, please include simulation code that proves your method achieves \
consensus, as well as a paper describing and analyzing the method (performance, \
resistance to faults and attacks, vulnerabilities, etc.) and the tests you ran on it.

_______________________________________________
hyperledger-technical-discuss mailing list
hyperledger-technical-discuss at lists.hyperledger.org
https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/listinfo/hyperledger-technical-discuss


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.hyperledger.org/mailman/private/hyperledger-technical-discuss/attachments/20160213/95f9ef0d/attachment.html>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]