Proposal to Witness for Peerplays

3 months ago
53 in peerplays

reporter.jpg

Dear Peerplays Stakeholders,

For those who may be unaware, the Peerplays network operates based on information that is confirmed on its blockchain. Peerplays witnesses validate blocks for the network, and also independently confirm various events in a timely manner. You have the ability to vote for which witnesses confirm the information on the network.

As a supporter of Peerplays, I submit for your approval a proposal to operate a witness on the network. By electing this witness, you will add not only another strong technical link to the network but also gain bonus material that will keep you informed on the state of the network and its operations.

Infrastructure

This witness will be operated primarily out of Switzerland in a facility designed to handle automatic fail-over protections in the event of hardware failures, and with a networking infrastructure designed to mitigate DDOS attacks. Backup witnesses will be provided in order to increase the robustness of this witness.

To enhance a fast experience for the Peerplays users, a data node (“seed node”) that is four times (4x) as powerful as the witness node will also be operated to help users from around the world access the latest information on the network as fast as possible. Additional data nodes may be added with sufficient feedback from the stakeholders.
Information from the outside of the network (“off-chain data”) will be published to the blockchain to provide a full spectrum of data regarding tokens and external events.

This infrastructure is similar to the one that is deployed for the witness and data nodes that I currently operate on the BitShares test network (which proved to be capable during the recent stress test of March 2017), and for publishing data on the BitShares main network regarding the HERO asset.

Reporting on Network Activity

In addition to this infrastructure, a monthly report on various metrics regarding activity on the network will be provided by me to help Peerplays stakeholders make informed decisions regarding network fees and worker proposals. This report will be similar to a report that I prepared regarding the BitShares network yet will be tailored for Peerplays activities.

Code of Conduct

Verifying an Off-Chain Event

Trust in the network is a matter of prime importance. One effort to enhance that trust regards the confirmation of the truth of an off-chain event.

  • An on-chain event is an event that occurs based on information that is available on the blockchain and can therefore be verified by anyone through inspection of the blockchain.
  • In contrast, an off-chain event is an event that occurs outside of the blockchain such as whether one sports team defeats another sports team, or whether one player defeated another player in an online game, etc.

The incorporation of off-chain event information into the blockchain allow the Peerplays network to be used for all kinds of events in the world.

Any witness can verify whether an event occurred. If sufficient witnesses verify the outcome of an event then the blockchain will register the event as being resolved. Previously, I delved into various considerations for how an event might be verified by a witness based on the trustworthiness of different data sources. Below is a summary of how this operator intends to confirm an off-chain event.

At least one of the following criteria for validating the truth of any particular binary event will be used:

(a) a single authoritative and authenticated source reporting on an event;

  • e.g. sports league reporting the results of a game

(b) at least two non-authoritative yet authenticated sources reporting on an event;

  • e.g. two independent and respected sources that publish their results through an authenticated connection such as a secure website or television channel

(c) at least one non-authoritative and authenticated source and two unauthenticated sources reporting on an event;

  • e.g. one independent and respected sources that publishes its results through an authenticated connection, and two unauthenticated other sources whose reporting on the event could theoretically be altered by a third-party during transmittal of the information

(d) a stricter criterion that is determined by the Peerplays Blockchain Standards Association (PBSA).

If any one of these criteria cannot be met, then this witness will not confirm the outcome of an event to either possibility despite an attempt to verify. In addition, if an event is canceled or re-scheduled or of disputed resolution, then this witness will also not confirm the outcome of an event despite an attempt to verify it.

Timeliness of Reporting

This witness will attempt to report on an off-chain event as soon as possible. The process of rapid reporting on events from all around the world 24/7 is still under development and I consequently do not yet have an estimate on the amount of time that will elapse between the completion of an event and its reporting by this witness on the blockchain. For various reasons, this delay in reporting will vary by event and the sources that report on the event. Therefore, minimizing this reporting delay is a high priority for me.

Avoiding Actual and Perceived Conflicts of Interest

I seek to avoid all actual and perceived conflicts of interest as a witness. Future articles on this topic will be posted here.

Feedback Welcome

The Peerplays gaming network is setting the standard for provably-fair gaming in which users need not trust any single party. I hope to earn your support as one element in that decentralized network, and welcome any feedback regarding this witness proposal.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  trending
52
  ·  3 months ago

Hey Taconator
Great proposal.
It seems to me witnesses hold a lot of trust by users of the network. Therefore they are a big potential point of failure. I'm wondering how members Peerplays can hold trust in these witnesses. Perhaps they need to be more public? And in a verifiable way? I'm not sure what that would look like. But I have seen a couple of Witness proposals and as someone who hasn't been part of the Bitshares project other than a casual observer, I find myself wondering about these people who will be so integral to the project.
What's to stop a witness or a group of witnesses from acting maliciously? I guess it won't be in their interest because it will devalue the project, but there are other things that could happen that are unforseen. For example, something that politically divides the community such as has been seen in Bitcoin.

So I guess my suggestion would be to have more information about you as a person and a verifiable public profile.

73
  ·  3 months ago

you have my vote...that is 100%

48
  ·  3 months ago

Fantastic!!. Very good @taconator initiative. I am looking forward with great enthusiasm, Reporting on Network Activity.
Upvote, resteem and follow.