From 1181aca9d776a72860aa4ec0d1a8597dae2c5ed5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ladd Hoffman Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 11:56:34 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Notes --- forum-network/notes/dao.md | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- forum-network/notes/validation.md | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 forum-network/notes/validation.md diff --git a/forum-network/notes/dao.md b/forum-network/notes/dao.md index 48a026e..58f017a 100644 --- a/forum-network/notes/dao.md +++ b/forum-network/notes/dao.md @@ -1 +1,35 @@ -A DAO is a group of cooperating entities +A DAO is a group of cooperating entities. + +If we're running our own network, it probably makes sense to consider nodes as the participants. + +If we're running as smart contracts, it probably makes sense to consider individual addresses as the participants. + +These schemes overlap, since both involve asymmetric keys. + +Each node must validate the work of the other nodes + +Our protocol will be a peer protocol, and will rely on signatures. + +Therefore we arrive at a requirement for nodes: they must be physically secured so that private keys are protected. + +We also arrive at a requirement for our network protocol: It must be possible to sign messages and verify message signatures against known public keys. + +The network protocol MAY support asking peers about other peers / telling other peers about peers. + +IF we support this IT SHALL BE linked with each node's reputation. + +CAN WE SAY that each node MUST maintain A VIEW of THE ENTIRE / (THE CURRENT) / (ALL / CURRENT) HASHES / MERKLE TREE / -- World state, History + +CAN WE GET AWAY WITH ONLY SAYING that each node maintains its own view. + +WHAT is our protocol for evaluating the perspectives offered by peers? + +- If one node perceives consensus among many others, that may sway their opinion. + + - There may be opportunity during "informal voting" / non-binding validation pools (low tokenLossRatio) to gather this sort of information. + +- If there is exact agreement, we have a very efficient case. + +- If there is the HOPE of exact agreement, mistakes and attacks can be costly + +- If there is an EXPECTATION of exact agreement, there must be externalities supporting that agreement, i.e. a common protocol and governance of that protocol. diff --git a/forum-network/notes/validation.md b/forum-network/notes/validation.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1cbb49a --- /dev/null +++ b/forum-network/notes/validation.md @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +Possible statements + +- It is what I would have done +- It is consistent with what I (would) have done