Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Google [Bot] like(s) this thread.

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby freequant » Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:40 pm

donch wrote:But to extend your analogy further, the current status quo is that all accepted papers are only being authored by Stanford University and they aren't citing anybody else:-)

Yes, and they always refer to whitepapers #0 to #32569 that lay the fundamentals of the discipline, but you are not allowed to review these papers ;).
freequant
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby donch » Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:42 pm

freequant wrote:
donch wrote:But to extend your analogy further, the current status quo is that all accepted papers are only being authored by Stanford University and they aren't citing anybody else:-)

Yes, and they always refer to whitepapers #0 to #32569 that lay the fundamentals of the discipline, but you are not allowed to review these papers ;).

I heard there was an incident in the library, something to do with a filing cabinet and a new indexing system...
donch
 
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:07 pm

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby BeRichLiveFree » Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:58 pm

donch wrote:All successful transactions go through and require Ripple Labs hardware. Single point of failure. Non-decentralised. Unfortunate.

If Ripple Labs hardware were to fail--I am not sure it would be a single point of failure. We have others out there running additional validator nodes I believe.

And, having spent my life in the IT world--how would you describe a single point of failure?? How are the Ripple Lab servers deployed? In a data center, being run on VM servers with the data center being mirrored to another data center in a different geographical? I do not know--do you?

But, I would bet Ripple Labs and the founders are protecting the system--it is holding just a few XRPs for them also...

Again, not decentralised maybe to the level some would like to see it--but, even BTC, LTC, FTC, etc. had to start somewhere.

What is unfortunate is all the blockchain people who keep trying to beat this poor dead horse!! LOL

This is not a blockchain. It is not BTC or LTC or FTC or DoggieButt! It is Ripple--something new--something different--something which has the power to change the world, even more so than all the others! IMHO

How can I say that you ask--because, it has the power of bring all the others together! It is called senergy!!

BeRichLiveFree :+1: 8-) :+1:
User avatar
BeRichLiveFree
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 5:02 pm

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby donch » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:21 pm

BeRichLiveFree wrote:
donch wrote:All successful transactions go through and require Ripple Labs hardware. Single point of failure. Non-decentralised. Unfortunate.

If Ripple Labs hardware were to fail--I am not sure it would be a single point of failure. We have others out there running additional validator nodes I believe.

And, having spent my life in the IT world--how would you describe a single point of failure?? How are the Ripple Lab servers deployed? In a data center, being run on VM servers with the data center being mirrored to another data center in a different geographical? I do not know--do you?


The hardware isn't going to fail (which is wholly using Amazon EC2 in various data centres - it is redundant), but Ripple Labs might fail as a corporate entity, a sys-admin or a developer might do something to the servers over which they have control, which is automatically a super-majority of the trusted validators. It would be a lot harder to co-ordinate an attack on a majority of servers acting as validators maintained by different people in different organisations than it would be against how it is now.

The ripple.com client defaults to Ripple Labs servers and when the SSL certicate expired we saw how this SPOF rapidly materialised. There are lots and lots of problems with having a lot of money entrusted into Ripple with how it is now configured. If you don't see that then you are blind to risk :geek:
Last edited by donch on Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
donch
 
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:07 pm

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby freequant » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:24 pm

donch wrote:
freequant wrote:
donch wrote:But to extend your analogy further, the current status quo is that all accepted papers are only being authored by Stanford University and they aren't citing anybody else:-)

Yes, and they always refer to whitepapers #0 to #32569 that lay the fundamentals of the discipline, but you are not allowed to review these papers ;).

I heard there was an incident in the library, something to do with a filing cabinet and a new indexing system...

Rumour has it that a robotic shredder went berserk, homed in on the cabinet and destroyed all the papers. Thankfully they managed to salvage the bindings, the synopsis, the indexing metadata and a lot confettis so that we can at least feel reassured that the whole corpus of research we have today is based on sound and well documented axioms that used to be known, and may someday be known again.
Meanwhile, the dean himself took personal responsibility of the incident and committed to solve himself the billion-pieces jigsaw with a tweezer and a pair of spectacles, and has declined so far any external assistance.
freequant
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby donch » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:37 pm

freequant wrote:Rumour has it that a robotic shredder went berserk, homed in on the cabinet and destroyed all the papers. Thankfully they managed to salvage the bindings, the synopsis, the indexing metadata and a lot confettis so that we can at least feel reassured that the whole corpus of research we have today is based on sound and well documented axioms that used to be known, and may someday be known again.
Meanwhile, the dean himself took personal responsibility of the incident and committed to solve himself the billion-pieces jigsaw with a tweezer and a pair of spectacles, and has declined so far any external assistance.

And the rest of the world waits with baited breath, living in hope of one day discovering how those 136 scholars (also known as AccountRoots on the campus) ended up with so much of this magical, wonderful stuff called XRP.

https://gist.github.com/anonymous/10152587
donch
 
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:07 pm

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby BeRichLiveFree » Tue Apr 08, 2014 5:36 pm

donch wrote:The hardware isn't going to fail (which is wholly using Amazon EC2 in various data centres - it is redundant), but Ripple Labs might fail as a corporate entity, a sys-admin or a developer might do something to the servers over which they have control, which is automatically a super-majority of the trusted validators. It would be a lot harder to co-ordinate an attack on a majority of servers acting as validators maintained by different people in different organisations than it would be against how it is now.

The ripple.com client defaults to Ripple Labs servers and when the SSL certicate expired we saw how this SPOF rapidly materialised. There are lots and lots of problems with having a lot of money entrusted into Ripple with how it is now configured. If you don't see that then you are blind to risk :geek:

No, I am not blind to risk. LOL

And, yes Ripple Labs could fail; but, I do not see that happening--but, it could anything is possible. However, I for one do not think if they failed the Ripple Protocol would just dry up and die. Just as if the Bitcoin Foundation went away Bitcoin would not die. Actually, what you would most likely see, is all the Ripple haters jumping on board swearing it is the best system ever.

And, knowing they are using Amazon EC2 makes me feel even more comfortable as far as a DDos attack, etc.

As for, different people in different organizations acting as validators, again that will continue to happen over time.

Also, the time the SSL certificate expired it did cause some issues; but, I can think of a few times I could not get logged into my account at Bank of America, I can remember some of the stock exchanges having network issues. Stuff like that happens, we are humans and mistakes will happen. I believe even BTC has had problems with software deployments and forking.

Not saying things are perfect. I just think people need to overcome their Bitcoin/blockchain mindset and realize even after all of these years Bitcoin still has issues. It is not perfect and neither is Ripple. So, invest knowing the risks and do not invest anything you can not afford to lose.

BeRichLiveFree :+1: 8-) :+1:
User avatar
BeRichLiveFree
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 5:02 pm

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby GryphonArk » Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:36 pm

BeRichLiveFree wrote: It blows my mind that people really think all people can be trusted when it comes to money and a system which controls it.


This is the whole point of satoshis premise / paper and decentralization. And it does blow one's mind. Self interest is the answer. It works, note people left mining pools when it went too high, voluntarily. Wogtami notes the value/importance of a distributed p2p hash pool to finally solve this problem.

The posts itt that refer to renegade networks versus good one miss the point. There is no such thing. One ledger versus another is the issue and who can have it. some may see ripple labs appropriation of most of the XRP as the renegade ledger an deal with it.

The definition of decentralization was not narrow, but the broadest possible as all other "forms" of decentralization can be held within it (do the venn diagram find on that is more decentralized than the form I posit)

The wrap up is Ripple is tacitly centralized via UNL and "need to listen" or easily taken over by a bundle of amazon EC2's. I'm not sure which.
Last edited by GryphonArk on Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GryphonArk
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:13 am

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby JoelKatz » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:19 pm

GryphonArk wrote:The wrap up is Ripple is tacitly centralized via UNL and "need to listen" ore easily taken over by a bundle of amazon EC2's. I'm not sure which.
Any system has some mechanism by which that system is regulated and where if a majority of that mechanism is controlled by malicious entities, you cannot rely on that system. With Bitcoin, it's miners. If the majority of them conspire against you, you cannot transact. All it takes to be a miner is money. With Ripple, it's the servers on your UNL, which you can choose.
User avatar
JoelKatz
Ripple
Ripple
 
Posts: 1859
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:45 pm
Location: Oakland, CA

Re: Consensus...mechanisim UNL

Postby donch » Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:57 pm

JoelKatz wrote:
GryphonArk wrote:The wrap up is Ripple is tacitly centralized via UNL and "need to listen" ore easily taken over by a bundle of amazon EC2's. I'm not sure which.
Any system has some mechanism by which that system is regulated and where if a majority of that mechanism is controlled by malicious entities, you cannot rely on that system. With Bitcoin, it's miners. If the majority of them conspire against you, you cannot transact. All it takes to be a miner is money. With Ripple, it's the servers on your UNL, which you can choose.


So, as the controllers of the all the validating Ripple servers would you be comfortable with some third party hosting your client wallet code and forcing other validators onto the network via their default websocket host settings? Or do you, as Ripple Labs have to approve those third parties? The advantage of bitcoin is that it is so much more democratic, all nodes are equal. Yes, the mining/proof of work is annoying. It would just be nice if the Ripple consensus mechanism actually could scale to hundreds of nodes, not five - all owned by Ripple Labs... Judging by the amount of traffic generated by proposals and the ledger closing time, this seems unlikely to ever occur, which is also annoying.
donch
 
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 8:07 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests