GitHub/quartz
1
0
Fork 2
mirror of https://github.com/jackyzha0/quartz.git synced 2025-12-27 23:04:05 -06:00
Code Issues Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

vault backup: 2022-11-30 14:39:37

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Jet Hughes 2022-11-30 14:39:37 +13:00
parent e0db773354
commit c2b98dd537
1 changed files with 11 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

13
content/notes/think-writing.md
View File

@ -355,6 +355,15 @@ Yesterday
- started to think about what I am looking for in a base. I realised I still dont really know and that starting from a base might not actually help me to find that out. I need to identify issues with current systems, because to me it seems like I could almost just use an existing p- maybe not. I think I just need to write down a basic overview of what I want, then work out the details later.
Meeting with david
- I should look into some specific scenarios and how they might play out within existing closed blockchain systems
- I should look into some specific scenarios and how they might play out within existing closed blockchain systems. e.g.,
- kicking out one or more participants
- forking due to not trusting or agreeing with other participants
- what if one participant is a bad actor and the other want to remove them, but the bad actors vote is required
- The idea of tethering a closed blockchain to a public blockchain is worth considering
- Rather than acting directly as a source of truth, a blockchain as applied to the veracity project should
- Rather than acting directly as a source of truth, a blockchain as applied to the veracity project should act as a store of records that can then be used by relevant authorities make decisions – which can then be recorded on the chain
- maybe consider something related to a reputation system like ebay (talk to andrew), trademe, etc
- regarding scope: this is something I need to think about. Does it make sense to have a closed blockchain with 100s or 1000s of participants. This is somewhere where we would like have a small group of validator nodes and many less-priviledged participant nodes
- my role is this project is exploratory. By considering many small scenarios, I might eventually find one which breaks the existing architectures and I can then work on a solution for that.
- i should spend some time to try and get the prolog kernel working
- try rolling back to an earlier version
- also test the aforementioned scenario using a small network of ~10 participants