RE: The Blockchain Just Became 😨 Obsolete 😨, the Future is Hashgraph... or NOT?! 😎
Hashgraph is a patented algorithm that can be used as the basis for a lot of different types of solutions - Swirlds is just one of these solutions.
respectfully, it sounds like you've bought hook, line, and sinker into their "kewl-aid". I understand that hashgraph is just a "consensus algorithm", but the fascinating thing to me, is that everything you say I don't seem to understand, pretty much comes directly from Leemon Baird himself! Furthermore, there isn't even a working model in active production that can verify any of the claims that made. Even if it works, what makes you so confident that this patented algorithm will be any better or faster than any of already proven complete solutions using alternative consensus mechanisms already available today (such as DPOS or even Ripple) for similar usage cases?
And perhaps gun.js is another option as well. GUN is a real-time, distributed, offline-first, graph database engine, doing 20M+ ops/sec in just ~9KB gzipped, and open-source! Of course, it too comes with its own set of constraints and limitations.
From swirlds (his own company which he is also chief marketer and promoter):
A tech report is available, which is a white paper describing the hashgraph, the consensus algorithm, and the mathematical proofs of Byzantine fault tolerance. A second tech report goes through examples illustrating each step of the consensus algorithm.
And as we already know from IPFS, relying on "peers" isn't generally the best way to go for assuring network stability and fast consensus. And gossip circles themselves take time to propagate throughout the whole system too. For example, what if on STEEMIT, it took several minutes before you could confirm a vote or a market bid/offer or trade goes through?
But then again, if I wrote the fastest database system ever, even faster than an in-memory database, it would be unfair to compare it to a complete distributed and persistent solution that didn't involve sending all data to /dev/null...
Consensus time stamping prevents an individual from affecting the consensus order of transactions.
Once an event occurs, everyone knows about it within a couple of minutes. Only the effects of the transaction are necessary in storing, everything else can be discarded. This shrinks the amount of storage currently needed (Bitcoin: 60GB) to a fraction of 1GB, allowing a smart phone to now act as a node.
Link: Blockchain Just Became Obsolete. The Future is Hashgraph
Whooooaa, say what?! Everyone knows about it "within a couple of minutes"?! Well, apparently that's how long it takes for consensus to be assured using Hashgraph. And of course, that's just for ordering, not including all the required validation as well.
And, would you really want to use a smart phone as a node, with the high cost of bandwidth, not to mention high latency and intermittent connectivity?!
Like I said earlier, I just must be missing something here, or perhaps I'm simply jaded by all the bullshit claims I've seen over my 30+ years of programming that never came close to living up to their hype.
I'm not certainly not saying that Leemon Baird and his colleagues have everything solved.. far from it. I think they have a hell of a lot more work to continue with. Additionally, it would not make sense for them to put every transacting entity on Hashgraph as a full node, and so no, I don't anticipate smartphones as full nodes. The connectivity and data storage would certainly be a limitation. The point of even mentioning a smart phone being able to run on it was in comparison to the ridiculous computational power needed to do effective Bitcoin mining.
I have no stake in Hashgraph and really don't care whether it's Hashgraph or another technology that takes us to the next step in fully peer-to-peer transactions. My interest is just to see that the middlemen finally get taken out and if Hashgraph shows real promise of doing this, then let's see what it can do. I'm certainly not religious about it. (By the way, miners are middlemen too, just as we have seen in the ridiculous costs of Bitcoin transactions and their centralization in China and elsewhere.)
If you look historically, it has always been key controlling monopolies / oligopolies that have screwed mankind. These controllers have used their middleman manipulation in trade, money, markets, communications, etc. to basically keep everyone under their thumb. My hope with Hashgraph, or any other technology that works exceedingly well in its stead to keep out the middlemen, is that finally we can have truly free markets, money, trade, and communications. It's also my personal view that blockchain is still in its infancy in its ability to fully enable this needed transformation. This, therefore, is my real interest in Hashgraph, but I don't care if it's Hashgraph or another technology that can achieve it. In other words, I'm not drinking any Hashgraph Kool-Aid, but I do want to see them enable what Baird is envisioning. His vision is to disintermediate everything and this is exactly what I want to see as well.
well, now this response is more difficult for me to take issue with! lol :)
I suppose my biggest issue with all this Baird / Hashgraph stuff is that so far I've seen mostly a bunch of marketing hype from what I would consider another one of those groups that actually seems more interested in helping those middlemen maintain control (ie. private, permissioned ledgers), versus something that works towards openly "setting the world free" (I mean, who else will be a "client")?
I also think EOS is a lot closer to actually solving many of these issues, and Dan's solution is completely open-source. Perhaps its the programmer in me, but I also get what Dan says. It makes sense from a practical perspective. Take, for example, his explanation of how they plan to achieve sub-second stable block times. No hype or B.S., just matter-of-fact "how we plan to achieve this":
Link: EOS.IO DAWN 2.0 Released & Development Update
That said, I think open-source projects such as Bisq.Network are pretty cool too! :)
I'm looking forward to seeing what Dan develops with EOS, but Dan is working not for himself but for Block One. I am very glad to see it is Open Source, but have to say that I am still very suspicious of Block One, especially considering the BS ICO tactics that BlockOne have used to date. Everything about how this ICO has been done has been a disaster in my view. Let's see what EOS is when it arrives as a usable platform.
I've written another post sometime back about EOS and the naming and branding of EOS by Block One makes me very suspicious as well. (So you still may have something to take issue with. :) I have been studying occult symbolism for a long time because those in power are almost always involved in secret societies that use very specific symbolism to advertise their plans and control. They almost always give us hints to their agendas in symbols rather than words.
Eos is the Greek goddess of the Dawn and the mother of Lucifer, the morning star (a.k.a. Eos-phoros). This is a veiled reference to Lucifer worship that was used most prominently in late 1800s and early 1900s. (Have a look at another previous post here for more on this.) Just as an example of this, if you go to Newport, RI and see the handful of Vanderbilt and other Gilded Age mansions there that are open to the public, three of them have massive centerpiece murals of Eos on the ceiling. Why? Because just like the Obama logo and tagline, they saw themselves as bringing in "the dawn of a new day." The Soviets used this symbolism very prominently as well since Lenin and Trotsky were Freemasons in Brooklyn before they headed over to start the "people's revolution" funded by the most powerful bankers in the world at that time. I'm not saying that EOS is therefore absolutely not to be trusted, but I watch all the actions of the people that are involved in major initiatives and I can tell you that I don't like a number of things with Block One to date. This symbolism definitely concerns me as part of the story because it is by no means a mistake on their part. They know exactly what this symbolism means even if the vast majority of the uninitiated populace have no idea what it really means.
Hopefully this doesn't weird you out too much, but I reference it simply because just as you are wondering about motivations with Hashgraph, I am also wondering about motivations with Block One and EOS.
BTW, thanks for the tip on Bisq. I'll happily have a closer look.
you might find some of our hangouts and "after-party" discussions quite interesting... stop by next time if you have a chance! :) lol
Link: BitShares Hangout #52 | 2017-12-30 | Sat @200PM UTC | OpenSource Agenda [Beyondbit Payouts Powered by SP!]
(and that's all I'll say about that, for now! lol)
Thanks very much for the invite.. I'll be sure to stop by.
EOS ico will produce the most decentralized blockchain in terms of users and accounts. It has worked so bloody well - DPOS hinges on a wide and varied voting base so individual actors can not get control of the network. Block one has the most shares, owning 10% of the network. The next biggest whale owns less than 1% of the network. More than 80% of the network is owned by ethereum accounts that hold 10,000 or less EOS.
This ICO is a slam dunk. Look at steem or bitshares of Bitcoin for that matter where 98% of accounts own like 2% of the Bitcoin or something stupid.
Woa, real good arguments with the minutes... But wait validating is done by virtual voting! Which means you already have that for free, it's Gossip about Gossip!
they're validating "the order", not the actual payload
Lol, looks like time has proven this entire rant incorrect.