@MoonBaze maybe we should start by reframing this discussion around the design goals of the L1. Do we expect for regular users to interact with the L1 “easily” once the Side Chain is live and the L2 is live?
I would like to propose that if we don’t expect average users to interact with the L1 regularly they will be less impacted by their inability to “easily” process PoW transactions. We can throttle the impact of a PoW attack at the block level (not sure how exactly) by assigning a percentage of TXs that can be PoW per block.
First time users can get access to QSR on the L1 from either (1) the L2 / side chain, (2) PoW provider, or (3) Performing extended PoW on their local computer for a “long” time.
Fees can live on the L2 and the L1 remains feeless. We can then focus on developing the algo for ordering TXs and figuring out how to dynamically adjust the number of PoW and QSR TXs per blocks (auto throttling) on the L1.
As I said, choosing an optimal base fee would render dust attack useless. 1/200 ZNN e.g.
Also, any implementation that requires PoW or QSR is much more easier to attack as it is much more cheaper than buying and burning ZNN. Of course, we don’t know when we will have EVM on L1 and we only have embedded but still, we need a strong protection mechanism. Computing power at the level of sending a tx is still very trivial as computing power increases at a very high rate and QSR is really cheap. For example, with 500 qsr fused for 500 adresses ( 250k qsr ~ 15k usd ) I can make sure noone gets in a tx. We should not have a mechanism that is good for 5k,50k, 5 millions but for hundreds of millions which is ZNN fees. An attack would only benefit the network and beneficiars. Also, fees spam attack is an attack that beneficiars want. What other mechanisms makes you want to be attacked?
Wouldn’t the cost of a QSR attack be higher? Was going through our notes from the last dev meeting. At 250,000 QSR an attacker would try to fill up a momentum with 3800 TXs. They would only be able to fuse 65 per address.
If they had 1m QSR, which is also possible, they could fuse 263 per address. If they did that it would mean users could overcome this attack by fusing more than 263. The system seems to balance itself naturally against this attack.
The attacker would pay a “fee” for this attack in the form of lost opportunity cost of fusing 250K or 1M QSR. If we continued with the artificial cap of 100 TX (or some other number such as 500) per momentum the attack would be a lot easier and effective.
I challenged every single one of your ideas and you’re just going in circles. At some point you exhausted yourself and decided to undermine everything by claiming Mr. Kaine might be fake, and I am the one trolling? Read everything that has been discussed above, if you can suffer people disagreeing with you without being yelling troll every two minutes. For what I know someone can have control of your account and crypto so your delegation change isn’t a proof of anything. My point here was simply to show how ridiculous you were talking about Mr. Kaine this or that.
People would still have to acquire more QSR to fuse which is the equivalent of paying a fee, they just have to do some more txs to get them (while being spammed).
Chadass I just love how a non technical guy is challenging a technical one on matters that are way above your head to understand. You just see fee vs non fee and I can tell you hate fees. I will just ignore you from now on as you bring 0 value to the conversation. I am not here to fight with anyone but your ego is fueled by these clashes and you can’t stop it seems. Go on telegram and do what you know best and I will stay here to do what I know best.
I kindly request that we keep this conversation peaceful. These are obviously difficult topics.
Clearly I do not have a technical understanding of the protocol like moon, but I do understand quality of service in a network. Maybe we can take a short break, study / research some more, and keep discussing.
I love when technical guys have 0 understanding of marketing, UX, UI, story telling or narrative and blindly go for a costly ideology rather than looking for other solutions than might work even better. I’m not the only one challenging the direct fee route. If you weren’t so full of yourself, you could see it. Trolling and ignoring contradictory positions might be the usual way for you, I doubt this is how Zenon work.
You can ignore us all you want. I’m not talking to you only and I hope people will realize that mimicking what every single project does will inevitably end up with nothing different and nothing better.
There are dozens approaches of fee structures we can think of, from Chromia to what Mr. Kaine and the WP suggest. Invalidating them all on a whim indeed goes way above my head.
How do Tier 1 ISPs deal with high throughput and spam?
What if we think of NoM pillars as a federation that governs and operates the Tier 1, L1?
Should we expand this “Tier 1” language into marketing, to communicate the scale of our vision?
Where is the ‘network congestion’ intercept between the cost of PoW vs the max network capacity (with narwhal and tusk)?
How about a maximum plasma rate? For example, all transactions with max plasma (200 QSR) are queued and processed in sequence. How much QSR would an entity have to possess in order to single handedly cause congestion, given the network utilizes N & T?
QSR distribution VS cost of PoW VS network capacity - what if it’s simply impractical and pointless to attack the network, and the federation stands to step in, in the event of some extreme situation, as it does in any case.
Shouldn’t the network be able to handle plasma traffic up to the full amount of QSR in circulation?
What if plasma is prioritized over PoW and PoW transactions have the option to be accelerated with plasma (replace by fee, but with plasma).
Zenon’s “feeless” characteristic is one of the protocol’s biggest selling points. Chadass is right: there must be a massive reason to even consider undermining it.
The fact that you dismiss his opposition to introducing fees on the premise that he is a non technical guy and thus shouldnt have a say in this is concerning + indicates a lack of understanding from your end on the “non technical” implications the introduction of fees would have. I.e. Zenon becomes one of thousands of shitcoin projects (no, 99% of users dont give a rats ass about decentralization).
Find a way to prevent network spam without undermining its core value props.
I don’t mind discussing this topic with non technical people because a cryptocurrency is so much more than it’s algorithm and we have to take into consideration all the implications. I mind discussing with people like him that start to troll and harass people for no reason.
Zenon’s “feeless” characteristic is one of the protocol’s biggest selling points.
The network would still be feeless, that’s the point. You all forget that fees are optional. A fee spam attack cannot hold too much time and with increasing momentum size we won’t have 100% utilization all the time in regular conditions.
I see that you are all against but in my opinion there is no good pow / plasma solution that we can implement correctly with the given man power / financing.
I will move on from this for now and let you all decide, I said what I had to say. I will start to look into increasing momentum capacity.
I will read the entire thread but a bit short on time so just some thoughts that popped in my head. Could you charge a fee based on a tx threshold of total transaction limit by account? Get we can create many accounts so second question, could you limit free account generation e.g., each instance of syrius/ip can generate 10 accounts for free then it is x to set up each additional account.
Another thought, ideally we will have multiple classes of customers including enterprise size, small business, and individuals. Fusing massive amounts of QSR to produce plasma would be feasible for enterprise customers but a bit of rich getting richer case there - need to find a way to not punish the average person in whatever solution is designed.
Maybe plasma generation time comes into play and there is an option to pay a fee to regen plasma faster - average user sends a few tx a day can wait for plasma regen while enterprise / attacker could not so rich / attackers have fees avg person does not
It seems like the parameter limits should be set, such that the network can handle throughput in the event that all QSR in circulation were to be fused to plasma.
Combine that with a separate dynamic lane for PoW, which also has maximum parameters.
A person can only breath so much air, according to their lung capacity and breathing frequency. And there are only so many people on earth. Whether we approach the equation from the volume of air on earth, or the volume of air a person can breathe, there is no danger of any one party breathing all the air.
There is a limit / constant to network throughput (which I suppose will increase with adoption) but we have the power to set the parameters on the other side of the equation - maximum transaction size, frequency of plasma recharge, etc. As long as the upper limits are set so that the network can handle it’s own circulating supply, there is no vulnerability.
