Le 28/04/2014 21:38, Aaron Estrada a écrit : > > Hi Lionel, > > Scalability seems like it could definitely be an issue with the > per-block payment scheme, which is why I wanted to hear peoples > opinions on it. Dust, and high transaction volume would be expected, > hence the desire for a block chain specifically tuned to handle it. I > agree, it would probably be most suitable for larger block sizes and > cool-ish data. My initial thinking for this system is that it would be > used for backups, so the data would be concatenated into opimal sized > blocks before transmisison. > > My logic behind zero-knowledge compensation is that it increases > plausible deniability for the data steward. That's all. Considering > the data is encrypted anyway maybe it's overly paranoid. > > If we take the loosely coupled zero-knowledge compensation out of the > equation and re-purpose some of these ideas into a Data Steward > initiated billing scheme like you suggest there are some optimization > possibilities. >
I think you'll find a lot of ideas here already (just looked up in the tickets as I had seen ideas with similar goals before on this list): https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/query?status=!closed&keywords=~accounting&order=priority I've not read every one of them as I should really begin by reviving an old private grid (down for nearly 2 years) on which I had a nasty bug to try to reproduce it with the latest code (it seems it may have been fixed since then: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1791)... Best regards, Lionel _______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list tahoe-dev@tahoe-lafs.org https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
