Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
zerpdigger

IOTA's Tangle meets Internet of Things requirements better than any blockchain

Recommended Posts

By Ripple I assume you are referring to the interledger and computation required to transact XRP over it?

Well we have no way of comparing energy consumption required to keep the interledger up and running (i.e. nodes) and no stats on the tangle so probably difficult to state which is more efficient... probably nothing in it, and either way, a negligable consideration to adoption and the benefits each will bring.

Edited by Mazza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mazza said:

Well we have no way of comparing energy consumption required to keep the interledger up and running (i.e. nodes) and no stats on the tangle so probably difficult to state which is more efficient... probably nothing in it, and either way, a negligable consideration to adoption and the benefits each will bring.

 

right -- exactly, we have to see how it plays out, we don't have large scale metics yet, and tangle is very young still 

what's interesting is how we as users will socialise these costs: we have bitcoin's pow model, and now ripple's and iota's

until the economy develops, just like it did with ISPs, and then better PCs and more efficient OSs and browsers etc, we don't know what the overall economic trade-offs are and where these costs will be offset

i find it exciting that we now have so many options and competing players 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@zerpdigger, so many comments in your own post... This must be a new record at XRPchat. Congratulations!

If this group of new kids can survive next 3-5 years and there is a solid and quality work done, then perhaps we may consider this legitimate.

Ripple competitor? No.

Edited by Duke67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked on Twitter about how it handles the spam issue.  I received the same answer that I see here from @zerpdigger:

Quote

when you "spam" the tangle it actually helps the network, so spamming is actively and officially encouraged (!!)

I am not embarrassed to say that I don't get it.  It makes no sense to me.

It seems from what I'm reading here that users who wish to do a transaction become miners doing previous transactions.  This sort of sounds like what that bitcoin company 21 was trying to do with bitcoin by turning every little IOT device into a tiny mining rig but instead of having a consistent pool of miners you have users who are forced to become miners.  I don't get it.  I think that might be fine for my refrigerator but what if I have to process a transaction fast, how do I skip the line?

I'm also not understanding this argument about metrics required to determine which is more efficient?  This would be proof of work right? The users are providing computer power to perform whatever computations to complete their transaction? It's not a necessary process, ripple doesn't require it, it is an additional requirement, therefore it requires more energy.

I don't get it. 

Edited by CNFlinch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mumbo jumbo alert.

Why all the language and phrasing designed to bewilder noobs? e.g.

Quote

"It's not surprising that Internet of Things (IoT) transactional settlement and data transfer layer IOTA is a co-founding partner of IoT consortium the Trusted Internet of Things Alliance.

wtf is that supposed to mean? I'm supposed to be surprised that they are part of their own alliance? lol!

The phrase "Trusted Internet of Things Alliance" is only from that article.

Trusted by whom?

Here's my token, it's trusted, by me. I'm glad they trust themselves. Very confidence inspiring. hah

Is it also true that Bitfinex isn't allowing deposits? To keep the price jacked up?

The way this token is being released to the market reeks of a piggy backing Ethereum hype exit scam.

Edited by xebit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CNFlinch  I am confused by this as well.  I believe they expect this to be solved by more adoption.  In the video they explain that the network needs enough participants to create a larger tangle to navigate.  Each node only needs to confirm 2 transactions and based on the cumulative score set by the tangle chain position (and history) - some nodes would have a metric that indicates more trust and there for less routing?  

My main problem with IOTA is that they are priced as if this network is in place and in reality they haven't even proven the working concept yet in a live environment.  I would expect this to be a good valuation if they were further along in development, but this much for a whitepaper and off chain ICO?  

Edited by Dennis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An older member of this forum mentioned IOTA a couple of times last year on the zerpbox (I appologies for not recollecting her/his name). 

Got in there, checked around and bought some, not much, but it was terribly complicated (at least for me) to buy. The quantities accumulated by others were impressive (even as %) at prices similar to the scale of Ripple last year vs now.

I noticed that every now and then many members were actively and collectively spamming the network, testing its endurance, but the technicalities overwhelmed me. 

So, whoever is technically strong on this side, might want to check for itself what is actually going on, I guess that this would be the best way to have an opinion, based on facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes nik, rather complicated indeed, not saying I have a grasp of all the detail and totally not here to endorse or otherwise (litterally used my IOTA profits from yesterday to top up on XRP seeing as I was late to it), just willing to share what I've learnt and observed while looking into IOTA. 

People think IOTA is new. It is not. It's been in development for 2 years. First year was in complete stealth mode, they only started talking about it last summer, once they had a proof of concept i.e. a functional network and development projects well under way. Could it all be for show? Perhaps, time will tell.

Bitfinex have messed up the deposit system, I got an email back from their support saying they deposited my funds to the wrong wallet initally. YDK exchange should be up in a few days and I think it's a big project for IOTA, their own decentrilized exchange, to trade all cryptos (yes all 750 or whatever the count is -- well that's what they were saying, like why not all of them) and at zero trading fees - I think there will be a deposit fee though (obviously) -- I'm following this closely so can inform others here if desireable. They wanted to give Bitfinex a head start (3 days) to aviod being accused of price manipulations, looks like that hasn't worked out.

Have a read of other posts on this forum where Zerpdigger and I have discussed stuff, might be some leads/new info for you. 

oh and may the zerp be with you (shi*e 2 starwars references in one day, I must be tired). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mazza said:

By Ripple I assume you are referring to the interledger and computation required to transact XRP over it?

Well we have no way of comparing energy consumption required to keep the interledger up and running (i.e. nodes) and no stats on the tangle so probably difficult to state which is more efficient... probably nothing in it, and either way, a negligable consideration to adoption and the benefits each will bring.

Yes, we do.

First, let me say that Iota is a genuinely new innovation that I find very interesting from a technical standpoint. I'm not yet convinced of its security, but I haven't yet invested enough time in analyzing it. Unlike pretty much every other crypto out there, it's actually not a chain of blocks.

But, two things:

1) If you make transactions unlimited, then you can and will have lots and lots of them, as many as people feel like creating. Many of them will have little or no value to anyone. That will mean, at a minimum, that nodes will need lots of space and bandwidth to keep up with the network. This is unavoidable -- you can't know that someone has the right to transfer a token unless you saw something that tells you that they have that right. So free, unlimited transactions would produce a *crappy* public chain/ledger/tangle system without a radically different design.

2) Any scheme secured by PoW is going to have to have lots of work done or it will not be secure. If the security comes from all the honest participants in aggregate doing more computational work than any attacker could muster, then that sets a baseline work floor that is orders of magnitude higher than any non-PoW system would require to accomplish the same end result. The typical ratio is around 400 times more computational effort. This isn't a "we'll have to wait and see" thing, it's an inherent property of the technology. You still have to do all the non-PoW stuff (that you need in systems like Ripple or PoS systems) in a PoW system (like relaying transactions and tracking who holds what), plus you also have to do more work than an attacker could.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a convoluted question for you all:

Does a system that focuses principally on burning energy to keep itself secure burn more energy than a system that focuses on not burning lots of energy whilst maintaining security?

Edited by Dsimmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoelKatz said:

Yes, we do.

First, let me say that Iota is a genuinely new innovation that I find very interesting from a technical standpoint. I'm not yet convinced of its security, but I haven't yet invested enough time in analyzing it. Unlike pretty much every other crypto out there, it's actually not a chain of blocks.

But, two things:

1) If you make transactions unlimited, then you can and will have lots and lots of them, as many as people feel like creating. Many of them will have little or no value to anyone. That will mean, at a minimum, that nodes will need lots of space and bandwidth to keep up with the network. This is unavoidable -- you can't know that someone has the right to transfer a token unless you saw something that tells you that they have that right. So free, unlimited transactions would produce a *crappy* public chain/ledger/tangle system without a radically different design.

2) Any scheme secured by PoW is going to have to have lots of work done or it will not be secure. If the security comes from all the honest participants in aggregate doing more computational work than any attacker could muster, then that sets a baseline work floor that is orders of magnitude higher than any non-PoW system would require to accomplish the same end result. The typical ratio is around 400 times more computational effort. This isn't a "we'll have to wait and see" thing, it's an inherent property of the technology. You still have to do all the non-PoW stuff (that you need in systems like Ripple or PoS systems) in a PoW system (like relaying transactions and tracking who holds what), plus you also have to do more work than an attacker could.

 

So what's your sense of them being aware of and addressing or answering these questions? I would be very interested in your opinion of the project generally after you spent some additional time looking at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Nedkt said:

So what's your sense of them being aware of and addressing or answering these questions? I would be very interested in your opinion of the project generally after you spent some additional time looking at it.

I haven't spoken to anyone directly connected to the project, but I'd tell you what my response to all that would be if I were on that project. I'd agree with all of that stuff and point out that those are inherent weaknesses in any PoW-based system or public ledger system. I'd repeat that Iota's "Tangle" scheme is unique and interesting and possibly superior to blockchain systems in a number of ways though likely also inferior in other ways. Then I'd point out that there's lots of room for different ledgers with different properties to tackle different use cases. I'd stress Iota's IoT use case and point out that as the technology matures, other use cases could emerge too, perhaps ones that even better exploit the tech's advantages.

And, again, while I'm not convinced it can be sufficiently secure to handle large amounts of value, it does seem to be sufficiently secure for IoT use cases. And it's possible that with more analysis, I could become convinced that it is sufficiently secure. The limitation could just be the amount of time I've invested in understanding and analyzing it.

I do tend to put small amounts of money into every emerging crypto that isn't an obvious scam. I did buy some Iota and it now comprises about 0.3% of my crypto-currency portfolio.

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...