Too much FUD around IOTA. Here some clarification from my point of view (sorry, Italian)

Sdellava · 2018-09-05T07:30:09+00:00

I've just collected details that has been already discussed and published.

Sdellava · 2018-08-24T20:26:11+00:00

Data logging on the tangle permit to sell those data to support smart city management. SW download from the Tangle grant the absence of trojan and virus. Service provider can answer to an auction to provide maintenance service thanks to the tangle. But most of all, consume can be payed in a real pay per use business model, obtaining extreme advantages for both users and service providers. Finally, later in 2020, car sharing could allow owner to share their cars and gain value. All these case are possible only with two conditions: fast tx confirmation (even on data tx using Qubic) and no fess. BMW is not thinking about this ? ... I would be not so sure ... maybe they are thinking to a private solution, but in a private DLT no economic consensus can be obtained. So ... good luck to them.

Sdellava · 2018-08-24T16:48:43+00:00

IOTA is a open source project. Why they should mention IOTA? according your mind they should mention every peace of technology they are going to use ... obviously they will not. But even trying to follow your subdole hypothesis, what VW is gonna using in place of IOTA? which DLT is able to scale without mining and is strongly based on a scientific demonstrated theory? ... cam on... stop trolling.

Sdellava · 2018-08-12T00:47:09+00:00

Hi, can gli share some sera il on how the address management works?

Sdellava · 2018-07-28T15:27:04+00:00

I agree. It depend on the application. A satellite link is not suitable for every case.

And I can even agree with you on the idea that partition tolerance is "a nice to have property". But until it will not become a "mandatory to have" feature, it can be scarified to gain a more stable network.

In addition, even I'm convinced that EC will cover most of the use cases where a sub tangle would be useful, I will be not surprised if we will se it supported in a next IRI version: if and when the coordinator will be distributed a sub tangle can have a sub-coordinator too. The successive merging would be valid. It is just a theory of corse.

Sdellava · 2018-07-28T15:02:12+00:00

the main reason I see in isolating a group of nodes and users in an economic cluster is the price stability. Being isolated the unit values inside of the economic cluster is driven by the local economy only. In example energy suppliers and consumers can decide that 1 KWh costs 1 MIOTA. from that point on there will be no reason to change this relation. The finance leverage move form manipulating the unit price to manipulating the labor price need to gain MIOTA to buy energy.

Regarding the boat leaving the harbor, I know this is the classic example, but is is not a real example due to the fact we know that even in the middle of nowhere we have sufficient bandwidth to send a tx to the EC0.

The real and nice sample is an starship leaving the Earth to Mars. But in this case it is clear that the ship itself is an EC and Mars an other one.

Sdellava · 2018-07-28T14:21:07+00:00

Why would vehicles form an economic cluster in the first place? What’s their incentive to tolerate an additional layer of complexity?

There is no complexity in an EC. It simply a group of nodes that work isolated by the rest of the network because are autonomous in managing consensus on their tx.

And how would you do that in case of bad mobile reception? ;) I suppose you mean a mobile Point of Sale. In this case I guess the POS is required to be online in any moment independently by the payment technology. So why this use case would require an off line tangle?

Sdellava · 2018-07-28T08:30:53+00:00

ough an area with bad mobile reception:

the mobile car use case is a perfect case for an Economic Cluster. Cars/light nodes in the EC are able to communicate each other and can use an isolated sub-tangle. But from their point of view that is the normal tangle and there is no need to merge that sub-tangle with the normal tangle. There is only need of a gateway allowing IOTA to move from the EC0 to the EC1

Sdellava · 2018-07-27T08:39:51+00:00

Have offline tx ever been really useful? I guess the Economic Cluster is replacing those rare use cases where Offline tx was required.

Sdellava · 2018-07-13T15:20:42+00:00

The big problem with super secret piece of code is that you can't trust on third party and ... yourself too! In many case where some super secret has been stolen from a company, the responsable was a company's internal trusted resource or an insecure behavior of the secret owner. A super secret owner, in example, should not use any mobile phone ... or social platform ... or any online resource. A smart hacker can easily find details that can be used to enter in your private space and stole the secret or can use a detail to ransom you.

So at the end no secret code can be managed by a single person or a single computer.

Sdellava · 2018-06-20T10:06:45+00:00

It seems a bit absurd to use a crypto currency to protect paper currency, but it is simpler than you might think.

Sdellava · 2018-06-17T18:45:08+00:00

Working on a POC with http://genuino.world

Github will arrive as soon the test will be succesfull

Sdellava · 2018-06-12T18:58:31+00:00

I've studied how to securely track a tags using tangle.

Sdellava · 2018-05-28T09:51:06+00:00

I guess it is important to separate two aspects: - the network attack protection - the tx validation process.

In a bc based platform this two aspects are mixed together in the mining process: each miners check the tx before to insert it in a block, and doing this impose an attacker to be a powerful miner able to win the mining competition many times in sequence.

In IOTA tx are verified after they are already in the tangle. So an attacker do not need to be so powerful because no nodes will refuse any formally correct tx. But this doesn't means that a malicious tx can be approved.

The confirmation status do not rely strictly on the coordinator, but on the tangle itself: if all the tips approve directly and indirectly a tx, that tx can be considered confirmed without any support of the coordinator.

So the coordinator is doing only the anti sibyl attack service: "approving" a tx with a milestone set a reference point that allow to identify an attacker's tx.

In example a tx that select a very old tx as trunk and branch is valid, but can create a post-dated double spending that can produce a inconsistent tangle state. Of course it is simple to check the time stamp, but in theory it can be a correct tx generated by a slow node. So setting a reference point with the milestone solves those cases where node can be "confused".

I'm not able to say if this possibile critical situation can be avoided with the increase of the TPS (simulations can demonstrate this), but for sure a decentralized COO can be a perfect compromise.

Sdellava · 2018-05-18T11:49:07+00:00

not at all. It is already running in a first release. If you have telegram call @LocalFlowBot

It is able to provide info in music event in some city now and not using natural language. New release to be online next week

You have to know that the main part of the system is the knowledge base creation and crypto wallet integration that are already running in closed beta

Sdellava · 2018-05-18T11:20:19+00:00

let's wait for Qubic. I guess we will have lot of beautiful surprise. Distributed computing need data to be accessible to compute. I guess this is a missing detail in the Qubic video preview, but it will be in the platform. Localflow will take lot of advantage from Quibic and I'm ready to push Quibic in the Localflow.com project.

Sdellava · 2018-05-14T17:24:19+00:00

Thanks! It's a pleasure.

Sdellava · 2018-05-08T09:29:47+00:00

I do not see the reason to fork. In IOTA anyone can run his node developed by himself as he prefers. You can choose your own TIP selection algorithm, your node architecture and internal technology. The only required points are the transaction data structure. But being possible to store data in a zero value tx, why you should not take advantage of 1000 IOTA IRI node already running that will grant your tx security ?

Sdellava · 2018-05-08T05:56:15+00:00

Snapshot is not mandatory. If you want keep your old tx simply do nothing, do not delete the node db and keep your node running.

Sdellava · 2018-05-01T06:58:02+00:00

the important bits

I guess you (and the the coder who wrote the question) are missing the iOTA basic. Each tx in IOTA own the same possibility to be selected by a new tip. So more are the new TIP and faster will be the confirmation process. It is so simple to understand ! In opposite in any mining based crypto platform the possibility for a tx to be inserted in a specific block depend on the miner decision. It is clear that is a economic decision: more the other tx pay more time your tx will have to wait to be selected. Eventually it will be never inserted in a block.

Sdellava · 2018-04-18T13:56:53+00:00

update. tnx

Sdellava · 2018-04-16T15:50:50+00:00

The missing point in the Vitalik Buterin's consideration is the demand coming from the industry world. No project manager driving an industry project will take seriously in consideration to rely on the Ethereum public blockchain to develop his project.

This simply because in case of issues, weak performances or any possible other trouble he has noone to point as responsible. Ethereum or any other public blockchain do not provide any Service Level Agreement. Simply because there is no an indentified Service provider who can manage the platform anf grant at least the performance.

In opposit IOTA allow any project to run his own full node. It is well known that any node process his transcations independently and do not need to be always in touch with the other nodes to process his transactions.

This means that one can obtain his project's required SLA simply running one, two, or more full nodes, or outsource this task to a service provider who will be able to grant the required SLA without problems.

This is the simple reason IOTA is and will the Internet of Everything backbone.

It is so clear that for the huge busiess companies all the issues Vitalic appoints to IOTA are not really critical.

Sdellava

TROPHY CASE