Gridcoin 4.0-2018 General Roadmap Poll - Proof of Research Blockchain
Gridcoin 4.0-2018 General Roadmap Poll - Proof of Research Blockchain
This is the description and thread for the Gridcoin 4.0-2018 General Roadmap Poll pertaining to using research done to secure the blockchain. You can find the Cryptocurrency Talk thread, which contains information on all polls, here. Any questions asked on this thread should relate only to this poll. Any questions on the Cryptocurrency Talk thread that are related to this poll will be relayed here and vice versa. Please, do not be afraid to ask questions. We want to make sure that everyone understands what they are voting on.
You can find the poll on Gridcoinstats here.
The poll was made by @tomasbrod with address: SFhy5MRyNqVcC2pCtEYeMSULe6wA5SPYMk.
A blockchain is a chain of blocks held on many nodes of the blockchain’s network. A block is a collection of information compiled by a single node of the network and confirmed and accepted by other nodes. There are dozens of protocols that determine which node is given the privilege to compile information into a block. The two most common protocols are Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS). Being given the chance to compile a block is known as “Securing the Network” and is one of the principal technologies behind a blockchain. The network security protocols are ways of decentralizing power. Because a blockchain is nothing more than a series of blocks, and blocks are compiled by nodes on the network, it can be said that whoever compiles the most blocks owns the blockchain. If Bob can compile, or secure, 90% of the blocks, Bob gets to say what information goes into 90% of the blockchain. The purpose of most blockchain security protocols is to distribute that power among many nodes so that no one entity can compile 51% of the blocks.
Currently, Gridcoin uses a Proof of Stake protocol. PoS is common among many blockchains today. It relies primarily on a statistic which any node can easily retrieve from the blockchain and confirm: How many coins does an address have? The number of coins held by an address is known as “Stake.” There are other variables to PoS, such as time, which differ among blockchains, but all PoS blockchains use stake as their principal security statistic. The current PoS protocol used by Gridcoin is known as “Stake V8.”
Gridcoin is a unique blockchain. Most blockchains contain stake as the only clearly defined and confirmable statistic. Gridcoin, on the other hand, contains Stake along with BOINC statistics. Before Stake V8, Gridcoin used these BOINC statistics, which calculate a variable, known as “Magnitude,” to help decide which node is given the privilege of securing a block. Stake V8 was implemented because of a security flaw in that protocol. It may be possible to again use magnitude to secure the blockchain, however it is unknown if this can be done securely.
"Should we continue exploring ways of using research done on BOINC (magnitude) to secure the blockchain?"
-Yes
-No
-Need more information
-Abstain
A blockchain secured by PoR does make me somewhat uncomfortable since it couples the security of the network to centralized entities, namely BOINC and project servers. Until we can figure out how to decentralize the BOINC aspect of Gridcoin, I vote we steer clear of a blockchain secured in this way.
More technical and popular information regarding this topic can be found in the Original read-map article and a chain of progress reports.
I am strongly in favor of a yes vote. I believe research is at the core of Gridcoin and should be at least a part of securing the blockchain.
Why I will be voting NO on the proof-of-research roadmap poll
Another article on PoR
https://steemit.com/gridcoin/@jringo/why-i-will-be-voting-no-on-the-proof-of-research-roadmap-poll
Absolutely not - it was proven massively insecure & could have caused the absolute destruction of Gridcoin back on the 1 millionth block.
Accelerating reward claims (MERR), massively increasing the max reward window (from 6 months to several years) and/or implementing the grey list (to prevent loss of unpaid rewards upon project downtime) are far more appropriate than putting network consensus at risk.
The Beacon Mint scheme safety depends on it's inputs (owed reward, magnitude) to be safe. On the other hand, the scheme contains defensive mechanisms to cope with breach in the owed/magnitude system. It will not put the block-chain to immediate risk even when the inputs are compromised. Of course, I can't call it flawless.
IMO I don't see the need for it at all, if we work towards manual reward claims, then why should insecure properties be imposed on POS? The past insecurities have taken this concept entirely off the table for myself.
That is why there is a poll.
Absolutely yes. We are not talking about going back to the old insecure system. We are talking about discussing and testing a new system which serves the same purpose as the old but without it's flaws. If it turns out that another flaw shows up then it will NOT be implemented until it is deemed secure - else it will be discarded.
Securing the blockchain through research was something that made Gridcoin unique. Pure PoS was an emergency measure to address the security flaw exploited at the millionth block. It is imperative that ways are discussed and explored to return our blockchain to its unique form.
If we implement the ability to claim your rewards at the click of a button, what's the point of attempting to secure the network with magnitude? POS is secure, POR based stake weight prove absolutely insecure & pretty much wrote the concept entirely off the table for me.
Where (one stop?) can I learn about the former weakness in order to help me think through this?
I will see what I can find = ) it might not be one stop.
https://github.com/tomasbrod/Gridcoin-Research/ Several of the 'staking-hack' branches made it possible to stake unlimited blocks at will.
I don't think this (por stake weight concept) will ever make a come back given the severity of the hack & that superior proposals like manual reward claims exist.
What are the advantages of using magnitude over balance for securing the Gridcoin block chain?
Is it simply an argument that powerful researchers should have as much chance to stake a block as wealthy investors?
You are more or less correct. Whoever stakes a block could be said to own or control the blockchain. Do we want the blockchain to be owned by researchers and those with balance or do we want it owned only by those with balance.
Those with magnitude eventually get balance, so they also own the blockchain, however not as much as if the amount of research they contribute is factored in.
Further discussion is taking place here
I have read the article Some thoughts regarding a Proof of Research Blockchain by core developer TheCharlatan and found it very useful in clarifying what "using magnitued to secure the block chain" means and why magnitude was replaced with pure PoS.
I can see how this could be a tricky discussion balancing the ideals of a coin that supports research with the importance of security and technical difficulties in leveraging data from many disparate third party systems (ie BOINC projects) in a way that is difficult to exploit.
To me this poll is posing a broad philosophical question regarding distribution of power rather than proposing to bring back a flawed mechanism. Personally I like the idea but I don't see it as a development priority at this point in time, I would like to see some of the other issues from the road map proposals addressed fist then re-evaluate distribution of power in the next round.