Bitcoin and the Byzantine Generals Problem

Re:Bitcoin and the Byzantine Generals Problem by goldenkey on Sunday December 15, 2013 @11:28PM (#6912883)

Right on. So basically, Bitcoin solved part of the problem. The bigger unsolved, ie. not automated, problem would be adaptive updating with care to the intricacies of the diff between old and new behavior. And security in the process to prevent a mutiny or hostile takeover in the vulnerable split state. Obviously updates can't be atomic with so many players.

This kind of topic is worthy of a thesis. Thoughts?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bitcoin and the Byzantine Generals Problem by greyman on Monday December 16, 2013 @03:27AM (#6913506)

Yes, this is something above the Byzantine Generals Problem - that scenario didn't take into consideration, that the general's "agenda" is changing over time.

Another interesting angle is, that in case of Bitcoin, both groups have vested interest to cooperate with the other group and having the matter resolved as soon as possible; that's what actually happened in March. It seems to me like a variant of the "Prisoner's dilemma".

This is what I think that the "hostile takeover" is highly unlikely (in Bitcoin scenario), since that would very quickly brought the BTC value down. So like in the Prisoner's dilemma, both groups will become silent and cooperate, rather than "betray" the other.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bitcoin and the Byzantine Generals Problem by tadfisher on Monday December 16, 2013 @01:21AM (#6913204)

Include a complete description of the protocol in `x`?

[ Parent | on HN ]