9

The writer describes it as a "solution to the blockchain consensus problem that does not require mining."

The white paper is viewable here: http://tendermint.com/docs/tendermint_v04.pdf

I don't mean what are the pros and cons in relation to Bitcoin specifically, since I don't believe Bitcoin is likely to take it up. I am thinking more of the possibility of a popular altcoin like Dogecoin adopting it, or perhaps an smaller altcoin e.g. Reddcoin.

2

I'm the author of the paper.

PoW mining may be wasteful, but it's a great distribution mechanism. Coins and other applications that use Tendermint might want to tack on a distribution mechanism that tapers off over time. I'm also exploring alternative distribution algorithms that don't require PoW, but for now I'm busy implementing core Tendermint.

Dogecoin could adopt it with a hardfork. Alternatively, one could take Dogecoin's transaction data and create a new coin using Tendermint's consensus protocol. The biggest problem with this is that exchanges and wallet services may benefit unfairly.

3
  • PoW mining may be wasteful, but it's a great distribution mechanism. Coins and other applications that use Tendermint might want to tack on a distribution mechanism that tapers off over time. Dogecoin already has this. Approximately 100 billion coins to be mined by end of 2014. Thereafter, 5.2 billion new coins per year. I am aware that at least one of Dogecoin's four main developers is thinking about implementing Tendermint reddit.com/r/dogecoindev/comments/26wtyu/idea_dump/chx184n. Are Dogecoin's parameters are relatively favorable ones in which to implement Tendermint? – user1205901 - Reinstate Monica Jun 14 '14 at 1:26
  • Kwon, Your system model is based on the point that if Bp(t) is the number of "bad" peers and Hp(t) is the number of honest peers, at any time t, Bp(t)/Hp(t) < 0.5. Have you any analysis that shows that Bp(t)/Hp(t) < 0.5, any time ? If you have one and your analysis is totally free from any senseless assumptions, then we don't need any more PoW! – efaysal Jan 2 '15 at 21:08
  • 2
    Like Bitcoin and traditional Byzantine agreement analysis, it assumes that the ratio is < 1/3. (Bitcoin's paper claims < 1/2, but see Eyal & Sirer etc) (Also, this ratio could be higher in Tendermint, but there's a tradeoff on the guaranteed slashed stake in the event of a fork). For both Bitcoin and Tendermint, when the tolerance threshold is exceeded, things tend to blow up. In Tendermint, since validation is pseudonymous (not anonymous like mining power) users can regroup onto a new consensus chain after slashing stake. So in that sense it's more accountable. Can work with Dogecoin! – JaeKwon Jan 4 '15 at 0:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.