News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Hundreds of Bitcoin Wannabes Show Hallmarks of Fraud by woah on Thursday May 17, 2018 @06:43PM (#17096773)
I'm working on a blockchain-based mesh project. We currently have around 6 users on a test network in Oregon, but the product isn't completely done yet and no real payments work yet. Our goal is to create a system where individuals and businesses can participate in a decentralized ISP with the routers "peering" automatically and routing along the cheapest, best paths in the network.

What blockchain gives us is a very low overhead payment system (payment channels), along with decentralized management of IP addresses and networks.

This could all in principle be managed by a centralized server but blockchain gives our systems a more-or-less neutral venue in which people can interact with predetermined rules, whereas a centralized server would put us in the position of arbiter of all interactions on the system.

Re:Hundreds of Bitcoin Wannabes Show Hallmarks of Fraud by hudon on Thursday May 17, 2018 @07:25PM (#17097099)
Do you have a website with more information?

On your blockchain, if a new consensus rule is being disputed or if a bug in the consensus rules causes a fork, who has the final say, the developers or the miners?

Re:Hundreds of Bitcoin Wannabes Show Hallmarks of Fraud by woah on Thursday May 17, 2018 @09:16PM (#17097848)
http://altheamesh.com

We will likely use Cosmos which uses proof of stake validators instead of miners although we are prototyping on Ethereum. In any case, the miners/validators would decide, as they always have and always will. If there was a big divide between users and validators, the users could choose to leave and use a different fork (although they would have to modify their router firmware). The only power that the developers have is thought leadership, and the ability to claim that something is an "official" binary. This is also how the Ethereum DAO hardfork went down.