You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Reputational Enhanced Delegated Proof-of-Stake (REDPOS)
a bunch of accounts and those accounts could eventually become old enough for your standards.
If you can delay an attack for 2 years, that's a feature. It's a lot of time to prepare a defence, don't you think?
PS: I'm not trying to present a bullet proof idea, just ideas for a better protocal than DPOS, making use of data provided by the use of the accounts over the years and somehow incorporate that data on the protocol, per comparison increasing the cost of an eventual attack.
It is not a 2 year delay if they have sets of sock puppets accounts that can come out one day and then another group of bot accounts could pop up the next week or the next month following that and all the accounts could be two years old or older and they could come out.
But someone has had to create those accounts two years in advance.
True, but once they do, then you could have a situation where they come out again and again.
Right now a new account on STEEM costs 3 STEEM. I like the anti-spam account fee. As I said to implement a good REDPOS protocol would need a very well thought use of "reputational related parameters" (such as account age).
One use of the "account age" parameter is restricting an account based on age for the eligibility as a witness.
But the same parameter can be used to alter the "voting power" of every account. So essentialy an effective attack on the chain should take place if most of the chain is "corrupt", but if that happenes, then it is what most of the members of the "social blockchain" decided to be.
And we are talking about just ONE parameter that should be taken into account for such protocol. Ideally if well implemented, all the human related parameters that modify how that kind of blockchain operates should be balanced so as to turn any posible attack into an extremely costly one (in terms of money, time, preparation).
If STEEM should be forked and a "REDPOS" protocol is implemented on that NEWSTEEM, the fork could exclude accounts that are known to be just dormant or that currently are acting against the social blockchain (spam accounts, etc). So it would start "clean".
Would it help if when potential witnesses apply, the blockchain freezes their Steem money, their SP, for a whole month, or a certain period of time, so Steem accounts can vote, so that we get enough time to decide who to vote for and in order to verify how committed the potential witnesses might be? I wonder if the Tron witnesses would be ok with that? It is possible that Justin Sun would say that is way too slow and unfair.
A potential witness doesn't need much SP on their own. A potential witness just needs that users with enough SP vote for them in order to rank higher.
This Justin Sun experience has shown us an "unnatural" situation for a 4 years old (so called) social blockchain. No established community in the real world would let a "newborn" or a "newcomer" to rule it, because experience is an important aspect of governance.
So that's what a good implementation of a REDPOS spirit should reflect at code level.
Sorry. I had things backwards in my brain.
Don't be sorry @joeyarnoldvn, the idea is to ignite a debate.
But if reputation is based on several factors, account age, comments/posts made, votes received, and anonymous peer t0 peer reputation voting (perhaps weighted by reputation of the voter), then accounts would only gain reputation (and therefore be able receive rewards and voting power) if they are real people. 1 person with 100 accounts would have to work 24 hours per day to gain even a small reputation - but i think it would become obvious that they are not real so reputation would not be gained. Here is a draft i made in 30 minutes today (doesnt include the peer to peer voting yet). It's just food for thought
https://steempeak.com/blockchain/@atma.love/re-argsolver-q7d1u0
That is true. I have read about that line of thinking concerning how it is to work for REP.