Jump to content

Codius Smart Oracles / Multiple Hosts


Recommended Posts

I am relatively new to smart contracts. I am learning about Codius as well as Chainlink. I see both white papers leverage research from Cornell, with Link also using the new Mixicles technology from Cornell (Ari Juels), whereas Codius uses Google Native client for running untrusted code.

I understand that Codius uses offline contracts for enhanced security. In Codius, how are the multiple hosts/independent smart oracles selected and incentivized? I know fault tolerance can be selected, but how do smart contract creators assess the performance and trust of the multiple hosts they are using for any given contract?

I've gained an understanding of how Chainlink's project is set up to address this, and I would like to understand how this is addressed with Codius. Your smart contract can only be as good as your weakest oracles, and a distributed and trusted oracles ecosystem are essential for many high-value use cases. How does Codius approach this?

Screenshot_20190915-112612_Chrome.jpg

Edited by XRPboi
Media
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 11 months later...

I just thought this was really cool and had to be shared! Possibly inspired by Codius' idea of self-funded oracles. 

https://www.publish0x.com/publish0x-posts/second-tezos-based-oracle-harbinger-xroeerg

Quote

The Harbinger design is a fantastic concept that fits into Tezos perfectly. Oracles need transactions to work. These transactions cost fees. This is how Link is supposed to create scarcity: more oracle use, means more use of the Link token, means more scarcity, means increase in Link price. But Harbinger makes perfect use of Tezos' XTZ token itself: since Harbinger runs on Tezos, fees are payed in XTZ. To pay for these fees, Harbinger account holders, deposit an amount of XTZ on their account, and delegate their XTZ. Delegating means that you earn stakingrewards, without setting up a node. You delegate to a baker, who has a Tezos node running, and gets a small percentage of your stakingrewards. These stakingrewards, pay for the fees that are needed to keep the price-oracle running. Deposit an amount of XTZ once, and the oracle is funded for as long as it will be needed. After whatever period the oracle is needed, you can close your account, and get your XTZ back. This means that Harbinger, has created a free oracle service. One word: genious.

Good news for Tezos holders is that the use of Harbinger doesn't only require fees in XTZ, but when devs that use Harbinger make use of stakingrewards for self sustaining fee payments, this XTZ will be out of circulation for the duration of the oracle use. Which can be years, if not decades. So a win-win for both devs and holders. Usage will produce scarcity for XTZ, while the devs that use the oracle will be able to withdraw their XTZ eventually, totaling the cost of their oracle use effectively zero. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, NightJanitor said:

"you delegate to a baker"

What the ****'s a baker?

Is that code for "techologist who doesn't understand finance/econ, likes to re-invent the wheel, confuses things by inventing new terms, and also might be a touch stoned?"

So tired of this bullshit...

Wow, calm down. Baking = staking. 

Do a 5 second Google next time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, thinlyspread said:

Wow, calm down. Baking = staking. 

Do a 5 second Google next time. 

That's my point, exactly.  There's a bunch of Dude Where's My Car kids infesting crypto who have no background in the relevant fields yet want to play master plumber with the global economy - and they can't even be bothered to learn the language and history of the thing.  (Five years of watching morons talk monetary theory on Twitter takes its toll.)

Rub-a-dub-dub,
Three men in a tub,
And who do you think they were?
The butcher, the baker,
The candlestick-maker,
They all sailed out to sea,
‘Twas enough to make a man stare.

Edited by NightJanitor
Mother Goose
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NightJanitor said:

That's my point, exactly.  There's a bunch of Dude Where's My Car kids infesting crypto who have no background in the relevant fields yet want to play master plumber with the global economy - and they can't even be bothered to learn the language and history of the thing.  (Five years of watching morons talk monetary theory on Twitter takes its toll.)

It's just a word for a feature unique to Tezos. That's what words are for: defining things. Arthur Breitman (founder of Tezos inc. 'baking') was an Associate of Goldman Sachs before Vice President at Morgan Stanley, btw. So presumably has a deeper understanding than you, no offence.

If you've got some agenda, can you take it elsewhere please as you're not contributing anything. Thanks.

Edited by thinlyspread
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an introductory article from its original authors. (I should have used this one to begin with actually it's much better written.) 

https://medium.com/@Blockscale/introducing-harbinger-a-self-sustaining-price-oracle-for-tezos-7cab5c9971d

Quote

Tezos is a liquid proof of stake cryptocurrency network, so account holders can delegate their Tezos to a validator (referred to as a “baker”). Delegators receive a share of the block rewards they earn by helping to secure the Tezos network. In Harbinger, an account that pays for fees to update the price oracle can be delegated and pre-funded with tez. This enables the development of self-sustaining price oracles, where the rewards for participating in proof of stake consensus offset the fees required to keep the oracle data current.

Below we dive into oracles and how they’re a key building block of Decentralized Finance or “DeFi”. We’ll then provide an overview of the Harbinger Price Oracle and why it marks an important step towards creating a Decentralized Finance ecosystem on Tezos.

Really cool concept. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, thinlyspread said:

It's just a word for a feature unique to Tezos. That's what words are for: defining things. Arthur Breitman (founder of Tezos inc. 'baking') was an Associate of Goldman Sachs before Vice President at Morgan Stanley, btw. So presumably has a deeper understanding than you, no offence.

If you've got some agenda, can you take it elsewhere please as you're not contributing anything. Thanks.

My agenda is clarity.  (Appeals to authority do not impress me.)

I looked at their docs - what they call an "endorser" is actually a validator who then signs (and they assign the name "endorser" based upon only the signing part of the operation).  I'm not sure what it's actually appropriate for them to call a "baker," as I didn't read that far into it, but I'll imagine that there is, likewise, a proper term of art.

My conclusion is that they are either lazy, ignorant, intentionally obfuscatory (perhaps in order to reach wider markets, with more mass appeal) - or some combination.

As far as telling me what words are for, here's Jonathan Swift on that:

"The proper words in the proper places are the true definition of style."

Edited by NightJanitor
Clarity + Style
Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting part is that, from a functional analytic perspective, there's not much novel to a lot of these models - beyond their "interesting" choices of terminology which seem to mask/indicate some very minor points of differentiation/design.  If parsing the language that they use helps me to discover that (and if it offends you), consider my apology...

(I also find it interesting - and potentially revealing - that a space which is so hyperfocused on "interoperability" and "standardization" has such rife non-standard / hap-hazard terminology use.  I reckon that many of these models' primary differentiatiors are really the terminology that they use or misuse, whether that's to evade comparison to extant analogues - which may be subject to regulation if called by their true names - or whether it's done just for marketing purposes.  "Staking," to wit, seems like it entails both "custody" and "deposit" - and maybe some other things if there is a "reward" (formerly/formally known as a "return" - though we mustn't say it!).)

Schwartzy outlines technical reasons why PoS might not be a great idea, but I wonder if there's another (legal) reason that is complementary to that line of thought.

One of the prongs of Howey - the one that PoS depends upon, crucially - is that the "return" on the investment is not wholly dependent upon the work of others.  The usual argument is that the staker does some work which is necessary to generate the return, but I wonder about the timing involved in stake deposit/return and any work done, as well as what they're calling "delegation," the "rewards" for which look a lot like a rights offering which happens to be priced at $0 for their subscribers.

(Wouldn't it be funny if PoS / DPoS turned out to be the models that actually do involve an investment contract...) :bomb:

Edited by NightJanitor
Irony -> Clarity
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do we need a third party to provide us with this Oracle stuff?

We need external parties providing price feed, e.g. Coinbase providing their price. It should be as easy as Coinbase using their well-known address to publish their price using some standard contract.

And the rest should all happen on-chain. You could design a contract where you specify which published prices from which external sources you trust and under which rules you think the new price should be calculated. You then call the contract with the correct parameters, and done .. If you want to 'thank' the Oracles you use, you use the 'transferAndCall' function, as with link..

Edited by jn_r
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/202035011.pdf

Looks like the IRS is not falling for the "my bot's income last year was not $100k, it was actually 10,000,000 individual (thusly de minimis!) pennies" argument...

Edited by NightJanitor
Everyone who works at Goldman for 2 years without being fired makes "associate" and Morgan has so many VP's it has a VP of counting how many VP's it has.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.