►
Description
In episode 34 of Whiteboard Series, we talk with Hans Moog from IOTA about Coordicide effort and their proposed sharding solution.
Learn more about Coordicide specification here: https://blog.iota.org/introduction-to-coordicide-specifications-f251254ab27d
This video is part of an ongoing effort to create high-quality educational materials about blockchain protocols.
Check out other episodes in which we dive deep into the design of various protocols such as Ethereum, Cosmos, Polkadot, and others here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9tzQn_TEuFWweVbfTbaedFdwVrvaYPq4
As well as our other technical write-ups: https://nearprotocol.com/blog/category/engineering/
Learn more about NEAR here: https://nearprotocol.com
If you are an entrepreneur in the web3 space, consider joining our accelerator with mentors from tier1 companies and investment firms in the space: http://openwebcollective.com/.
We help with all the aspects of building the business, including identifying the market, BD, marketing and fundraising.
#WhiteboardSeries #Blockchain #FutureIsNEAR
A
Okay,
hi
everyone.
This
is
episode,
34
of
whiteboard
serious.
We
in
the
middle
of
the
outbreaks
of
the
format
changes
accordingly
with
me.
Today
is
Han
smoke
from
iota
foundation
and
we
will
talk
about
iota.
We
will
talk
about
core,
decide
the
effort
of
removing
the
coordinator
from
iota
and
we
probably
going
to
talk
about
sharding
as
well
today
as
your
hands.
Would
you
like
to
introduce
yourself
and
give
us
an
overview
of
of
iota?
A
B
I
work
for
the
foundation
as
software
engineer
that
is
embedded
also
in
the
research
department,
because
I'm
responsible
for
writing
the
first
prototype
of
gold
shimmer,
which
is
our
prototype
implementation
of
the
chorus
I'd
version
of
iota,
which
is
essentially
a
complete
redesign
of
the
protocol.
We
change
a
lot.
The
data
structures
that
rhythm
how
stuff
gets
processed
and
yeah
I
think
it's
a
really
nice
format
to
be
able
to
share
some
insights
here,
to
explain
how
things
work
and
to
answer
question,
maybe
also
to
get
some
critical
feedback.
B
I
think
that's
a
good
question
also
regarding
the
grand
vision
because
I
feel
like
it
has
a
little
bit
one
of
the
lesser
well
understood
cryptocurrencies
in
this
space
and
not
because
not
just
because
we're
using
a
dag,
which
is
not
the
same
as
a
book
chain,
and
therefore
it
works
a
little
bit
different,
but
also
because
the
way
we
approach
this
whole
deity
space
is
slightly
different
than
how
others
do
it,
especially
when
it
comes
to
our
shaoling
solution.
I
think
that
will
also
become
a
little
bit
more
obvious.
B
Once
we
start
talking
about
the
technicalities
of
this,
we
are,
as
I
said,
a
dag
base
TLT
and
the
idea
and
vision
is
to
create
a
system
that
is
able
to
process
millions,
maybe
even
billions
of
transactions
per
second
in
a
network
where
you
don't
have
any
fees.
Where
should
where
machines
can
consequently
execute
micro
transactions,
and
you
can
have
like
self-driving
cars
paying
for
gasoline.
B
You
can
have
no
machines,
renting
electricity
from
energy
providers
and
it
essentially
just
a
platform
that
it
would
allow
you
to
implement
this
whole
machine
to
machine
economy
and
like
the
next
Industrial
Revolution.
How
is
usually
called
of
the
Internet
of
Things
yeah?
That's
the
grand
vision,
and
we
usually
also
received
a
lot
of
criticism
because
things
like
zero
fees,
for
example,
something
that
is
a
bit
controversial
because
as
soon
as
you
have
a
network
and
nodes
have
certain
resource
constraints,
and
you
have
potentially
unlimited
demand.
And
how
would
you
achieve
that?
B
B
B
So
I
mean
I've
seen
some
other
whiteboard
series
before
and
usually
people
start
more
or
less
from
the
basic
like.
How
does
technology
in
itself
work
I
want
to
also
kind
of
do
this
in
the
same
way,
but
I
want
to
jump
to
start
with
our
grand
vision
in
the
way
we
plan
to
you
to
shard
the
deck
and
maybe
also
talk
a
little
bit
of
the
the
benefits
of
the
tag
and
essentially
prepare
you
some
pictures-
and
this
is
a
little
bit
how
a
dag
looks
like
you
have
like
a
Genesis
transaction.
B
And
then,
essentially,
you
have
this
structure
which
grows
over
time,
we're
also
pretty
similar,
as
in
Bitcoin.
You
have
more
and
more
approvers
of
something
that
happened
in
the
past
and
at
some
point
the
idea
is
that
you
can
decide.
Okay,
this
is
confirmed,
and
the
network
of
course
needs
to
come
to
an
agreement.
How
to
deal
with
double
spends,
and
the
big
Pro
of
this
approach
is
that
you
don't
need
any
miners.
B
So
you
also
don't
need
to
wait
for
anybody
to
confirm
your
transactions,
but
you
can
just
attach
anywhere
where
you
want,
and
you
can
also
make
the
bag
wider
as
the
load
increases-
and
this
is
essentially
one
of
the
big
beautiful
things
of
tags
which
somehow
not
really
a
lot
of
people
are
actually
using
in
their
Sharleen
concepts.
But
the
big
benefits
of
a
dag
is
that
it
essentially
can
split
and
get
wider
and
wider
and
wider.
B
B
We
would
go
step
by
step
and
develop
like
even
much
more
beautiful,
charming
concept
out
of
this,
but
the
nodes
can
essentially
split
up
and
when
we
could
say
that
50%
of
the
validators
would
live
in
charge
one
and
shall
run
and
50%
of
the
validators
would
live
in
short
two
and
then
you
would
essentially
be
able
to
to
balance
load
in
the
network,
and
you
can
do
this
arbitrarily.
Often.
B
A
So
I
have
a
question
here,
so
we
didn't
quite
get
there
yet,
but
from
what
I
remember
what
about
a
yota
the
way
I
remember
a
yacht,
the
design
there
was
no
concept
of
validators.
So
is
it?
Is
it
a
concept
now
in
the
the
core
decide
or
or
are
you
referring
to?
The
transaction
issuers
has
the
validators.
B
The
transaction
issue
is,
or
actually
the
nodes
that
run
the
network,
so
the
transaction
issuer
can
also
be
just
a
client.
I
mean
the
ultimate
vision.
Is
that
essentially,
every
human
being
every
machine
and
everybody
who
wants
to
use
the
network
will
have
their
own
node
and
I
think
that
this
vision
might
sound
a
little
bit
unrealistic
at
current
in
the
current
market.
B
Adoption,
because
you
have
like
network
sizes,
typically
of
like
maybe
a
few
thousand
nodes
right,
but
the
problem
with
crypto
is
that
with
like,
if
you're
not
running
your
own
node,
then
what
your
most
of
the
time
doing
is
that
you're,
interacting
with
the
server
of
somebody
that
you're
requesting
for
payment
statuses,
where
you
get
like
some
answer
back
like.
If
my
is
my
payment,
confirmed
and
stuff
like
that.
B
B
Think
the
the
the
logical
consequence
of
deity
in
the
future
or
like
in
with
the
whole
deity
space
will
be
that
we
will
see
network
sizes
of
like
millions
or
maybe
even
billions
of
devices
that
are
trying
to
connect
to
these
networks
and
interact
on
these
deities
and
obviously
we're
not
really
there
yet
and
there's
some
work.
That
needs
to
be
done.
But
that
is
essentially
the
ultimate
vision
and
because
we
have
that
many
nodes
that
are
acting
as
validators
by
choosing
the
point
where
they
is
essentially
want
to
attach
to
their
transactions.
B
B
A
I
have
a
question
here
right
so
in
the
example
you
just
craft,
where
I'm
connecting
to
a
server
right.
So
if
we
use
a
as
an
example
in
the
theorem,
what
I
can
do
is
instead
of
running
a
full
node
I
can
run
so-called
light
client
where
I
validate
proof
of
work,
but
they
don't
validate
blocks
and
so
I.
A
Don't
even
have
student
loan
locks
in
this
case
right,
but
if
I'm
connecting
them
to
someone,
because
there
is
a
miracle
proof
that
there's
a
miracle
root
of
the
state
and
every
in
every
block,
then
they,
if
I,
make
requests
about
the
state,
then
they
cannot
flip
a
bit
right
because
it
must
match
the
miracle
proof.
So
do
you
consider.
B
B
B
So
that
means
that
you
have
nodes
which
can
then
decide
to
take
part
in
the
smart
phone
tree
computation,
whereas
other
nodes,
who
are
only
interested
in
doing
the
payments,
can,
for
example,
who
decide
to
only
do
the
payment
aspect
and
the
the
reason
why
I
said
that
in
the
case
of
Iona,
is
kind
of
problematic
that
you
need
to
trust
a
node.
It's
because
a
lot
of
the
clients
are
supposed
to
be
IOT
devices,
which
maybe
also
something
I
should
have
said
in
the
beginning.
B
That
I
has
a
strong
focus
on
delivering
a
platform
where
IOT
devices
can
connect
to
each
other
and
most
of
the
times
these
devices
don't
necessarily
have
the
computing
requirements.
Do
these
kind
of
checks
or
like
store
the
corresponding
block
headers
for
a
long
time
to
do
these
kind
of
verifications,
and
also
the
problem
is
that
as
soon
as
you're
cutting
the
dag?
It's
not
that
easy
anymore
to
validate
these
kind
of
chains,
as
you
can
easily
do
in
a
book
chain.
For
example,
mm-hmm.
A
B
A
Interestingly,
in
aetherium
they
also
do
cut
cut
cut,
cut
out
the
the
recent
history,
the
the
old
history
right,
so
majority
of
majority
of
notes
in
a
theorem
today,
they
they
do
state
sink
into
some
recent
block,
and
this
is
a
quite
a
bit
of
controversy
between
Bitcoin
community
and
a
team
community
on
whether
such
a
node
can
be
considered
fully
secure.
No
sorry,
so
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
similarities.
B
Its
steak
very
and
I
would
say
because
the
way
proof
state
usually
works
is
that
people
take
their
funds,
they
lock
them
in
and
a
certain
address.
Then
they
get
a
certain
say
in
the
network.
Be
it
in
the
voting
or
like
an
interval,
is
how
often
they
can
propose
blocks
and
stuff
like
that,
but
to
stake
in
light
attitude
to
stake
your
funds,
because
you're
kind
of
like
blocking
them
from
from
using
them
in
everyday
life
right.
B
Don't
have
these
centralized
providers
that
provide
this
infrastructure,
then
it
would
be
very
tiresome
to
have
a
contract
with
each
and
every
one
of
them
and
maybe
pay
like
a
flat
fee
up
front,
and
it
seems
to
be
a
much
easier
way
to
allow
transactions
to
be
in
the
form
of
micro
payments,
where
I
can
even
send
like
fractions
of
a
send
for
use
cases.
For
example,
in
a
highway
I
do
things
like
the
tuning
or
a
lot
of
cars
or
driving
behind
each
other
and
they
synchronize
their
behavior.
A
B
They
essentially
save
some
fuel
costs
like
this,
and
the
idea
is
that
you
could,
for
example,
as
a
car
that
is
landing
behind
another
car
that
he
could
pay
the
guy
in
front
of
you,
like
some
of
the
savings,
so
he's
willing
to
inform
you
about
the
things
he's
gonna
do
like.
If
he's
gonna
do,
braking
or
something
that
he
just
gives
a
sense.
You
assured
modification,
so
you
can
buy
that
car
yeah.
B
B
So
you
have
like
a
limited
resources
that
is
not
so
easy
to
to
to
attack
from
in
from
outside
point
of
view,
because
you
can
simply
not
create
an
unlimited
amount
of
coins
to
play,
and
what
we're
doing
is
that
every
node
identity
or
like
nodes
have
identities.
So
so
it's
just
like
a
public/private
key
pair
right,
so
you
can
consign
your
messages
and
you
can
validate
if
the
is
really
coming
from
a
particular
node,
and
if
I
have
a
certain
amount
of
coins
for
certain
amount
of
time,
then
I
multiply
these
two
values.
B
There's
a
simplified
version,
the
extra
formulas
a
little
bit
more
complicated
and
then
I
receive
a
certain
amount
of
reputation.
So
that
means
every
transaction.
That
is
a
process
in
the
network,
gives
the
nodes
a
certain
reputation
based
on
how
much
stake
they
had
in
the
network
for
how
much
time-
and
this
gives
us
essentially
a
perception
of
what
nodes
exist
in
the
network
and
how
much
weight
they
have
in
that
particular
moment,
and
it's.
A
A
B
A
B
Like
the
moment,
you
send
the
transaction,
you
look
up
in
your
nature
state.
When
were
the
funds
moved
the
last
time
you
multiplied
by
the
time
so
like
sending
funds,
and
so
in
circles,
just
always
to
yourself,
for
example,
doesn't
generate
any
access
like
extra
mana.
You
really
have
to
buy
it,
so
we
combine
the
token
amount
with
something
that
you
cannot
really
buy
a
time
and
then,
as
soon
as
you
issue,
the
transaction,
the
node
that
you
used
to
issue.
B
B
B
You
kind
of
turned
the
staking
a
little
bit
on
its
head
to
make
it
easier
and
therefore
also
I
get
rid
of
the
problem
that
you
would
have
to
otherwise
pay
people
an
incentive
to
stake
and
because
every
single
transaction
always
stakes
at
all
times.
It
also
means
that
it's
very
unlikely
that
you
only
have
a
certain
percentage
of
the
funds
that
are
staked,
but
you
will
always
have
a
very
large
percentage
of
the
funds
being
stake
because
everybody
always
takes
it.
Take
all
the
time.
A
Right
and
my
question
was
also
about
the
fact
about
the
fact:
what
about
how?
How
how
is
that
money
used
right
so
that
man
is
the
anti
civil
resistance
mechanism?
Is
it
just
well
if
I
see
so,
let's
say,
I
see
two
two
bags
and
they
clearly
constricting,
for
example,
right
so
do
I,
just
see
which
one
has
more
mana
accumulated
in
it
in
the
transactions
or
or
do
they
have
to
do
they
actually
explicitly
vote
in.
B
The
dance
well,
we
use
a
random
substantive
voting
in
the
proposal
that
we're
working
in
there's
also
some
other
ideas
floating
around.
But
it's
maybe
something
we
could
discuss
at
another
time.
But
currently
it's
it's
a
random
substantive
voting.
That
means
me,
as
a
node
I
joined
the
network.
Of
course,
I
can,
if
I
see
those
two
conflicting
decks.
B
But
these
are
like
long
range
attack
things
that
any
proof
of
stake
based
chain
has
as
well
and
which
have
turned
out
to
not
be
that
problematic
in
real
life.
And,
of
course,
you
always
have
the
ability,
as
somebody
who
operates
a
node
once
you
sewing
kit,
the
very
first
time
to
just
verify
that
the
transaction
that
you're
seeing
are
in
fact
the
same
one.
Does
everybody
see
as
well
and
once
you
have
done
this
initial
would
strip
in
you're
good
to
go?
B
B
They
give
you
the
answer
and
if
most
of
them
say,
I
I
think
this
rejection
is
really
good.
Then
you
follow
their
this
outcome
and
you
change
your
opinion
and
other
people
ask
you
as
well,
and
you
kind
of
yeah
you
pit
disperses
a
few
rounds
and
then,
after
a
short
amount
of
time,
you're
you
reach
consensus.
So.
A
A
B
Mean
mana
and
there's
different
manner
versions
or
like
monarch,
concepts
in
the
whole
system.
So
mana
is
essentially
just
like
a
funny
word
that
we
came
up
with
because
nothing
else
seemed
to
fit
and
we
were
all
a
bit
nerdy
and
thought
it's
it's
a
nice
name,
because
it's
refilling
over
time.
As
you
see
new
transactions,
they
can.
B
A
Effectively
when
the
transaction
is
issued,
the
transaction
makes
the
graph
heavier
by
the
amount
of
money
transferred
in
the
transaction,
multiplied
by
how
much
by
so
you're
saying.
If
this
is
you
TXO
right.
So
in
fact,
over
the
issue
transaction,
the
weight
of
the
transaction
is
the
size
of
the
you
check
so
multiplied
by
the
time.
When
that
you
do
from
the
moment
they
saw
was
k2.
Thank
you
now,
I
see
yeah.
B
Exactly
but
it's
not
that
the
transaction
itself
carries
the
weight
in
the
in
the
case
of
the
voting
layer,
but
it's
that
the
nodes
get
through
the
identity.
I
get
this
weight
applied
to
them.
So
that
means
to
know
it
has
a
certain
mana
and
certain
importance
in
the
network
and
even
if
he
issues
just
a
small
amount
of
money
like
a
he
just
does
a
small
token
transfer,
for
example.
B
A
Let's
say:
I
have
let's
say:
I
have
1,000
tokens
right
once
a
1000
iota
torque
and
let's
say
it's
a
lot:
I,
don't
know
the
food
supply,
but
let's
see
1000
is
a
lot
and
then
let's
say
that
that
1000
I
had
since
Genesis
right.
So
like
I'm,
one
of
the
early
people
and
it's
been
many
years
from
Genesis
and
then
I
start
sending
a
lot
of
transactions
each
one
transfers
point
one
sense:
does
every
transaction
add
1000
multiplied
by
all
this
time
to
do
the.
B
Called
a
de
Mirage
function
on
top
of
that,
it's
a
exponential
decay,
so
the
money
is
like
the
the
mana
is
growing
on
that
address,
but
at
the
same
time
the
decay
rate
is
also
increasing
and
that
kind
of
like
balances
our
to
have
this
kind
of
mechanism.
So
if
you're
spending
something
for
a
large
amount
of
like
a
that,
you
held
for
really
long
amount
of
time,
then
you
will
not
generate
much
more
than
somebody
who
regularly
uses
his
tokens
and
like
spends
it
here
and
then
starts
accumulating
again.
For
example,
right.
A
A
So
and
then
at
that
point
let's
say:
I
issue
two
transactions.
So
let's
say
this
amount
of
man
is
like:
let's
it's
it's
X
mana
right
and
then
they
issued
two
very
small
transactions.
So
if
you
want
transaction
which
transfers
point
one
cents
and
then
another
transaction,
it
transfers
point
one
cents
on
top
of
that
one.
So
do
they
make
the
graph
from
perspective
of
the
person
who
just
sinks
into
the
network,
yet
the
graph
became
X
bigger
or
did
it
become
2x
bigger
right,
so
do
I.
Do
that?
B
B
So
this
will
not
just
jump
up
immediately
and
then,
from
that
point
on,
you
will
also
again
have
a
PK.
So
if
I'm,
if
the
mana
will
over
time
lose
its
value.
So
if
if
the
node
is
only
used,
like
only
sees
this
transactions
just
one
single
time,
then
over
time
it
will
lose
its
importance
again
and
here
the
potential
mana
and
that's
a
moment
on
that
address
because
I
moved
the
funds
just
now
would
drop
to
zero
and
then
it
would
again
start
to
gain
weight.
B
Essentially
and
as
soon
as
I
do
the
next
transaction,
then
I
would
get
on
my
I.
Don't
know-
let's
say
the
mana
has
dropped
to
here
by
that
time
and
then
I
get
another
value
and
topsoil.
So
that
means
my
mana
would
fluctuate
a
little
bit
like
depending
on
how
much
activity
you
know,
processes
but
nodes
that
are
online
constantly
that
are
processing
payments
of
users
or
machines
that
are
interacting
constantly.
B
A
A
So
let
you
on
the
Left
chart
right
so
let's
say
I
have
them
on
multiple
UK
exomes,
but
because
it's
the
same
note,
they
all
contribute
to
the
same
manner
right
and
so
let's
say
I
spent,
so
I
have
1,000
tokens
total
one
of
the
Yuki
EXO's
only
has
one
token
and
I
spent
that
you
check.
So
then
my
manager
was
down
by
know
how
much.
B
So
that
means,
if
I
one,
then
this
one
has
like
maybe
generated
like
this
much
amount
of
money
like
I,
don't
know
and
then
I
will
get
that
mount
amount
of
value
booked
into
my
node
identity.
Then
it
starts
decaying,
but
at
the
same
time
it's
also
growing.
It
is
essentially
a
symmetric
function,
so
it
it
doesn't
really
matter
how
how
how
long
you
hold
the
money.
The
rule
to
mad
mana
that
you
have
in
the
system
that
you
can
realize
is
more
or
less
constant.
Rather.
A
B
Moving
average
changes
that
slightly
so
certain
behavior,
like
maybe
it's
better
to
not
wait
until
it
reaches
the
top
tier,
but
already
spend
your
mana
here.
If
you
want
your
fans
here,
if
you,
for
example,
use
that
to
maximize
your
mana,
which
has
some
positive
effects,
because
we
use
mana
and
not
only
for
voting
but
also
for
things
like
great
control,
so.
A
A
B
So
this
is
not
100%
finalized.
This
is
something
that
we're
going
to
test
in
the
public
test
net.
To
see
how
much
mana
do
people
actually
have
in
a
real
Network?
How
is
it
distributed?
Who
has
how
much
mana?
Is
it
a
very
even
distribution,
or
is
it
what
we
are
expecting
more
of
something
like
as,
if
distribute
distribution?
We
have
a
few
very
rich?
No,
it's
because
they're
public
nodes
that
everybody
uses,
for
example,
then
you
have
a
lot
of
nodes
that
maybe
have
not
that
much
weight
in
the
network
right.
A
I
have
one
last
question
about
mana
and
then
we
can.
We
can
jump
deeper
into
sharding
or
talk
about
voting,
which
everything
could
be
better
to
discuss.
So
let's
say
I'm
synchronizing
right
and
so
I'm
gonna
draw
like
a
small
deck
here,
so
they
so
there
are
two
dogs
right
and-
and
let's
say
that
these
two
transactions-
they
are
a
double
spent
right
and
so
well
I'm,
not
drawing
very
correct
draft.
But
right-
and
so
let's
say
on
top
of
both
of
them.
B
If
you,
if
you
think
from
the
start,
then
to
know
what
is
the
outcome,
you
always
need
to
sing
to
the
end,
essentially
I
mean,
of
course,
you
can
also
sing
from
the
from
the
heads
and
just
look
at
the
deaths
and
stuff,
but
yeah.
It's
essentially
the
same
for
you,
you
you
you
solidify
it.
That's
how
we
call
it
like
you.
You
request
all
the
missing
transactions.
Like
you
join
in
the
network.
You
see
the
chips
that
people
are
currently
talking
about,
and
then
every
transaction
has
a
reference
to
the
previous
one
right.
B
So
you
need
week
for
the
missing
one,
and
you
just
continue
that
until
you
reach
a
point
where
either
we
reach
the
Genesis.
That
might,
in
theory
take
a
very
long
time,
but
you
can
also
bootstrap
your
node
with
things
like
locate
snapshots.
They
have
a
snapshot
file
which
is
essentially
a
summary
where
you,
where
you
start
to
dig
and
maybe
I,
can
how
can
I
remove
stuff
just
here.
B
I
can
I
can
have
some
space,
so
if
we,
if
we
look
at
the
dag
and
like
we
have
all
the
transactions
that
reference
each
other
and
stuff
like
that,
then
each
of
these
transactions
essentially
introduces
a
state
change
to
the
global
system
right,
but
from
every
point
of
view
of
a
specific
transaction,
the
state
is
exactly
there's
exactly
one
state.
So.
B
Like
I,
don't
know,
I
think
might
be
the
wrong
address.
Saying
somebody
sends
me
money,
then
this
and
everybody
else
would
think
that
this
is
a
bad
transaction
and
they
would
not
approve
it.
So
it's
not
like
it's
not
really
anything
super
bad.
That
can
happen,
but
of
course
it
puts
the
ball
into
the
node
operator.
A
Right
so
now
getting
back
to
this
bag
on
the
right
right,
so
you
mentioned
so
if
you
had
two
charts
right
so
on
the
Left
chart,
which
is
which
is
gone
by
now,
you
were
showing
manna
which
was
accumulating
whenever
you
check
so
separately
right
and
the
right
chart
shows
how
that
manna
contributes
to
the
the
man
off
of
the
note
right.
So
so
here
when.
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
Voting
because
the
block
producers
they
have
their
vote,
which
chain
from
their
perception
for
our
point
of
view,
is
the
long
as
when
they
attach
it
to
the
chain
and
and
and
then
the
chain
gets
longer
in
the
chain
that
get
the
most
votes,
especially
the
one
that
wins
right.
Another
consists
making
the
voting
mechanism
and
yeah
I
mean
it's,
and
we
have
like
this.
This
random
subset
we're
voting
as
a
second
layer
and
Topman.
B
It
allows
notes
to
decide
word
attach
their
transactions
because
they
need
to
have
more
or
less
consensus
on
which
transactions
are
the
one
that
are
currently
preferred
in
the
network,
and
it's
even
okay.
If
every
now
and
then
one
or
two
nodes
have
come
to
a
different
conclusion,
for
example,
because
we
also
have
some
kind
of
research
organization
mechanisms
where
they
would
detect
these
kind
of
inconsistencies.
B
Just
by
observing
how
much
like
mana
from
the
next
approvers
that
was
approving
to
their
transaction
and
if
they
see
a
certain
amount
of
activity
in
the
in
the
network
approve
something
that
they
don't
like
or
the
other
way
around.
Then
they
can
repeat
the
voting
with
the
logic,
a
second
size,
for
example,
because
usually
you
have
the
sample
size
relatively
small,
to
reduce
the
message
of
that
and
then
can
they
can,
for
example,
get
back
with
their
opinion
only.
B
B
B
A
B
Iota
works
is
the
way
we
achieve
consensus
is
that
we
observe
in
the
in
the
in
the
tank,
like
the
transaction,
get
concept
around
if
I
was
missing
or
whatever,
and
transactions
usually
have
like
to
take
different
times
to
propagate
in
that
org
right.
So
you
can
have
a
certain
amount
of
nodes
somewhere
in
the
network.
B
I
would
just
like
paint
them
with
different
colors
I
know
we
have
like
some
red
ones,
and
then
you
have
some
other
nodes
that
maybe
saw
in
the
case
of
conflicts,
and
you
would
have
taken
blue
and
red
transactions
for
example,
then
you
would
have
some
nose,
that's
all
the
red
transactions
first
and
then
you
have
some
nodes
that
saw
the
blue
transaction
first
and
maybe,
let's
make
a
few
more
blue
just
so
it
becomes
a
little
bit
more
obvious
how
this
thing
is
going
to
work
and
what
every
node.
So
this
is.
B
B
They
gossip
and
what
they
now
do
to
reach
consensus.
Is
that
every
node?
Let's
say
we
have
this
one.
For
example,
you've
randomly
asks
other
people
in
the
network
what
they
like,
which
one
of
the
two
conflicting
transactions
they
like,
and
they
ask
them
like
hey.
What
do
you
think
I
like
blue?
What
do
you
think
and
then
he
asks
this
one
hey.
What
do
you
think
and
then
he
asked
this
one?
B
What
do
you
think,
and
he
does
it
with
a
with
a
given
sample
size
in
our
case,
is
like
around
20
other
nodes,
and
then
he
analyzes
the
results
of
these
of
these
queries
and
depending
on
the
fact,
if
there
was
a
majority
majority
of
other
nodes
that
liked
a
transaction
or
preferred
a
transaction
that
he
doesn't
like
and
he
would
adjust
his
opinion
and
vice-versa.
So
that
means
that
if
we
have
more
blue
in
the
network,
then
statistically
the
chances
of
asking
other
nodes
that
light
blue
are
also
bigger.
B
And
therefore,
if
everybody
does
that
the
network
will
slowly
tip
to
one
side
and
then
maybe
if
the
red
guy
is,
for
example,
let's
say
this
guy
here
buried
some
other
nose
got
got
a
more
blue
bag
than
the
red.
When
maybe
he
was
unlucky
in
the
first
one
and
only
favorite
guys,
so
he
doesn't
change
his.
Oh,
you
don't
see
my
mouse
on
the
screen
right
and.
B
Okay,
I
guess
it's
because
it's
it's
not
Windows
picture
or
something,
and
so
I
was
talking
about,
there's
a
lower
one.
That's
saying
he
queried
like
a
few
people
and
if
he
didn't
get
enough
votes
to
change
his
opinion
then
like
after
the
next
round.
He
does
the
same.
So
you
repeat
this
voting
process
in
regular
intervals
with
a
short
time
period
in
between,
and
if
everybody
does
that,
then
ultimately,
everybody
will
eventually
right.
B
Lu
and
the
network
will
essentially
have
reached
consensus
on
which
transaction
is
the
right
one
and
the
way
we
then
translate
that
into
the
deck
structure.
Is
that
nodes
initially
do
not
like
a
transaction
for
a
certain
amount
of
time?
Let's
say
five
seconds,
for
example,
which
is
by
close
to
the
average
Network
delay,
and
only
if
they
did
not
receive
a
transaction
that
that
was
not
conflicting
with
the
one
that
they
have
received
before
so
they
have
not
received
in
either
transaction
that
spends
the
same
uniques
output.
B
B
So
that
means
that
on
average
on
this
transaction
will
can
be
considered
to
be
confirmed
relatively
fast
or
not
really
confirmed,
because
you
also
need
to
wait
for
enough
tips
to
reference
them
to
make
sure
that
they
don't
get
often
or
like
left
behind,
because
it
could
happen
that
maybe
only
you
see
your
transaction
and
all
the
rest
of
the
network.
They
don't
see
this
transaction
because
your
internet
dropped
or
whatever.
And
then,
if
six
seconds
expire-
and
you
think
it's
the
right
one,
then
you
would
maybe
accept
something
that
shouldn't
be
accepted.
A
Yes,
so
I
have
couple
questions
here.
One
is
around
as
you're
saying
if
it's
been
five
seconds
and
accept
the
transact,
what
happens
if
it
has
been
five
seconds?
I
accepted
the
transaction
but
turned
out.
There
was
actually
some
network
glitch
and
so
there's
actually
another
half
of
the
network,
which
accepted
the
different
transaction
will
wish
to
vote
or
or.
B
Your
line,
you
know
essentially
like
what
I
said,
is
not
really
the
exactly
exact,
but
it's
giving
a
good
idea.
Essentially,
we
have
these
levels
of
knowledge,
so
that
means
after
six
seconds
I
like
this
transaction,
but
I
don't
consider
it
to
be
finalized.
Yet
it's
just
like
I
personally
from
my
point
of
view,
think
that
this
transaction
looks
like
an
honest
transaction
right
and
all
other
nodes
in
network
might
also
like
it
so
but
they're,
but
they
have
not
finalized
the
decision.
B
Yet
they
will
then
wait
another,
like
average
network
delay
and
take
multiple
levels
of
them
or
the
multiple
integrals
of
these
and
and
the
more
intervals
passed
between
the
time
the
higher
might
confer
like
my
credibility
in
this
transaction
becomes,
but
I
already
start
to
use
this
from
section
and
tips
election
as
soon
as
it's
light
kind
of
so
from
after
the
seconds
time
would
do
like
six
seconds
time
window
five
seconds
time.
You
know
that's
something.
B
B
B
Yet
then
still
they
will
have
most
probably
formed
the
initial
opinion
to
be
the
same
as
yours,
and
even
if
you
could
vote-
and
you
essentially
come
up
with
the
same
result
anyway.
So
it
reads
that
after
six
seconds
for
smaller
amounts
of
funds
like
if
you
want
to
buy
a
coffee
or
like
a
machine
transacting
like
fractions
of
a
cent,
they
might
already
be
fine
just
by
not
seeing
conflict
within
that
time
period.
But
if
a
conflict
Rives,
you
still
vote,
but
also
really
up
to
a
certain
point
so
like.
B
A
A
So
another
question
I
have
is
so
this
voting
mechanism,
it's
very
it's
very
similar
to
snowball
right,
the
the
Cornell's
paper
and
in
snowball,
if,
regardless
of
perimeters,
ation
right,
snowball
for
liveness
can
tolerate
at
most
20%
or
so
of
malicious
actors,
and
otherwise
they
can.
They
can
just
they
can
still
snowball
just
by
with
very
high
chance
right,
just
by
splitting
the
network
in
half
of
all
most
people
and
just
disappointing
right
to
one
half
and
blue
to
another
half.
A
A
B
It
doesn't
really
work
and
the
way
we
we
deal
with
this
is
that
we
essentially
we
wiggle
around
the
the
threshold
where
like,
above,
which
my
result
that
I'm
expecting
to
change.
My
opinion
needs
to
be
to
tip
and
one
or
the
other
direction,
and
because
the
the
attacker
does
not
know
the
random
these
random
thresholds
upfront,
he
has
a
really
hard
time
keeping
the
network
in
balance.
So
it's
at
some
point.
B
You
would
just
have
a
slightly
bigger
fraction
of
the
network
already
being
on
one
side
and
then
maybe
the
the
threshold
is
a
little
bit
lower
than
you
would
have
expected,
and
essentially
the
simulations
show
that
it
tips
relatively
fast,
also
much
faster
than
in
our
launch
in
that
sense,
and
and
that
kind
of
like
gets
rid
of
this.
This
problem
to
certainly
be
mm-hmm.
A
B
The
protocol,
it's
it's
a
separate
layer,
but
it
gets
persisted
on
the
tank.
So
that
means
that
you
have
like
a
certain
transaction
type
which
gets
in
the
in
the
tanker.
So
that
means
that
everybody
references.
This
beacon,
for
example,
is
then
also
able
to
see
it
and
like
requested
for
past
decisions
and
stuff
like
that,
so
it
is
persisted
in
the
tag,
but
the
the
agreement
on
which
random
number
you
use
is
currently
outside
of
the
protocol.
But,
as
I
said,
there's
also
ideas
and
discussions
about
using
maybe
some
other
source
of
randomness.
A
B
A
B
B
Like
if
you,
what
is
the
tip,
is
a
transaction
that
is
at
the
end
of
the
deck
where
it
is
like
the
direction
in
which
it
grows,
which
has
not
been
referenced
by
any
other
transactions.
That's
what
we
usually
call
the
tip.
So
whenever
we
issue
a
new
transaction,
we
usually
want
to
attach
it
somewhere
here
in
the
deck,
because,
if
I
attach
something
that
is
made
to
all,
for
example,
that
people
might
have
stuff
started
already,
then
they
might
not
even
approve
my
transaction.
B
B
It's
what
we
call
a
based
initial
opinion
and
also
on
the
outcome
of
voting,
and
then
you
just
University
it
random
choose
choose
one
of
the
tips
and
you
just
connect
these
two
transactions
and
the
letters
say
the
unique
source
a
it
essentially
makes
sure
that
you
do
not
accidentally
light.
Two
conflicting
tips,
so
you
can
always
just
like
tips
that
are
not
conflicting
with
other
tips
kind
of
so
that
has
a
little
bit
changed
from
the
original
white
paper
version,
because
there
we
had
this
kind
of
random
walk.
B
Well,
you
always
walk
from
one
of
these
transactions
and
you
walk
past
the
up
cone
and
they
do
this
based
on
weight.
So
you
always
end
end
up
in
the
like
heavy
heaviest
heavier
chain,
but
this
did
not
scale
very
well.
So
we
kind
of
had
to
get
really
good
at
the
additional
voting
layer
on
top
still
gives
us
the
ability
to
make
these
kind
of
decisions
without
having
to
do
this
anymore.
So.
B
A
B
Bad
connection
was
rejected
anyway,
then.
What
you
would
have
to
do
is
you
would
need
to
take
your
transaction
and
attach
it
somewhere
else.
So
that's
a
something
that
is
possible
in
the
dag.
Also,
you
essentially
just
issue
a
copy
of
the
transaction,
just
with
the
reference
point
or
set
to
other
transactions,
so.
B
Means
I
have
to
kind
of
like
take
care
a
little
bit
of
this
tag,
but
simulations
show
that,
if
you,
if
you
make
this
this
time
or
slightly
bigger
than
the
network
delay,
then
this
is
extremely
seldom
that
this
happens,
because
even
if
you,
if
you
see
something
arriving
after
like
half
of
the
network,
delay
and
chance,
is
because
gossip
spreads
exponentially
fast
that
other
people
have
also
seen
this
transaction
as
the
first
one.
And
this
is
maybe
a
your
direct
neighbor
that
gives
you
this
transaction
are
still
pretty
big
on
average
right.
A
Let's
call
the
transaction
one
which
I
received
I
waited
for
five
seconds,
I
accept
it.
I
produce
my
transaction
two,
which
builds
on
top
of
one
right,
and
then
we
wait
for
five
seconds.
Someone
else
waits
for
five
seconds
before
they
produce
transaction
T,
which
is
one
two
right,
so
it
will
take
for
every
extra
layer
extra
extra
depth
on
top
of
one.
It
takes
extra
five
seconds
right,
so
yeah.
B
A
A
B
Takes
for
a
transaction
to
be
in
the
deck
without
a
conflict,
the
more
confident
you
you
essentially
get
into
this
or
a
second
to
be
the
one
that
will
most
from
your
acceptance
by
the
network
and
at
some
point
after
a
certain
time
threshold.
You
just
decide.
Okay,
this
one
is
finalized
now
so
means
also
that
you
that
we
favor
lifeless
and
functionality
of
the
deck
over
partition
tolerance.
So
if
you
have
like
a
network
speed
for
example,
then
what
would
happen?
B
B
Versions
of
this
tag,
where
you
need
to
either
manually
intervene
and
say
like
okay,
every
sync
with
the
network,
if
it's,
for
example,
is
something
that
just
happened
to
my
particular
node
or
like
we
would
have
to
find
some
agreement
in
the
real
world.
How
we
continue
after
that,
if
they
have
been
double
spends,
how
we
would
kind
of
like
make
it
captain,
they
combine
them
in
a
in
a
global
action.
B
A
B
Continually
they
will
run
when
they
are
young,
make
sense
it's
next
to
each
other,
but
to
have
resynchronization
mechanism,
which
is
a
little
bit
complex,
because
then
we
have
really
a
lot
of
new
concepts
and
data
structures.
Also
in
the
way
we
calculate
this
kind
of
weight.
So
it's
maybe
a
bit
too
too
much
to
explain
that
right
now.
B
But
if
this
falling
out
of
sync
happens
to
just
a
small
subset
of
nodes
like,
for
example,
I,
don't
know
like
I
have
a
server
in
a
data
center
and
that
they
have
a
network
outage
and-
and
it
happened
at
a
really
really
stupid
moment
where,
like
one
of
the
double
spending
transactions
arrived
at
my
point
and
somehow
they
were
still
enough.
Honest
nodes
in
the
network
that
I
used
to
see
that
are
still
continue
to
build
up
on
this
transaction.
B
Then
it
couldn't
theory
happen
that
I
fall
out
of
sync,
but
then
there's
an
additional
mechanism
where
I
again
use
a
similar
mechanism,
as
we
used
in
the
initial
sync
scenario,
where
we
observe
the
the
economic
activity
in
my
network
and
if
my
confidence
in
this
transaction
is
not
too
high
yet
so
like
for
a
certain
amount
of
time.
I
can
do
this
and,
and
it
seems
to
be
conflicting
with
the
rest
of
the
perception
of
all
the
other
actors
in
the
network
which
I
can
keep
track
of
by
monitoring
the
economic
activity.
B
Then
I
can
do
a
bigger
query
where
I
asked
more
than
20
people,
because
in
here
it
could
also
happen.
That
I
was
just
like
super
super
unlucky
and
asking
the
wrong
people.
When
I
did
this
random
subset
thing,
then
I
will
do
a
bigger
query
with
like
hundred
nodes,
for
example,
and
then
I
will
eventually
reevaluate
my
decision
and
correct
that
decision.
B
B
So
one
problem
that
you
have
with
this
approach
is
that
they
do
not
share
the
same
amount
of
validators,
but
they
the
same
past,
which
means
that
when
I
receive
a
transaction
here
in
the
same
past,
cone,
then
suddenly
I
would
be
able
to
spend
it
on
the
right
side
in
this
chart
and
I
would
also
be
able
to
spend
it
in
this
chart.
Right.
A
B
You
don't
really
have
like
there
there.
It
seems
to
be
a
pretty
pretty
complex
problem
and
other
people
have
also,
for
example,
22
mm
have
said
like
okay,
that's
the
reason
why
I
you
know
time
will
never
shard
in
a
way
without
allowing
double
spins
to
a
certain
degree,
and
we
have
thought
about
ways
how
we
can
fix
that
without
having
a
centralized
entity
like
the
:
ater,
just
monitoring
all
of
the
shards
and
building
like
another
chain
at
top
of
all
the
other
chains.
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
A
B
Would
you
will
not
have
these
distinct
charts
that
you
have
usually
in
the
book
chamber
so,
but
this
is
essentially
the
basic
idea.
You
say
just
put
like
a
stick
on
every
transaction.
Everybody
knows
who's
responsible
for
that
and
if
we
need
to
shard,
then
we
can
we
can
yeah.
We
can
do
that
and
nobody
can
double
spend
so.
B
You
have
a
scenario,
there's
one
problem
with
this
approach.
The
problem
is
that
the
shards
essentially
need
to
know
when
and
where
to
split,
and
this
is
something
that
is
a
bit
tricky
to
achieve,
because
it
essentially
requires
you
to
have
another
consensus
mechanism,
one
cup
of
consensus
mechanism
right.
A
A
B
Both
France
right,
so
this
is
this-
is
like
it's
kind
of
like
the
early
idea.
It's
maybe
a
good
way
to
understand
the
whole
concept
in
that,
and
it
also
makes
you
understand
how
this
like
this.
This
whole
concept
works,
but
we
also
don't
have
the
ability
to
send
funds
between
sharks
currently
right
like
there's.
No,
we
when
we
don't
want
to
have
another
chain
and
top
of
all
of
these
charts.
A
B
But
these
kind
of
sharp
markers
are
a
little
bit
like
the
colors
of
the
rainbow
I
mean
I
only
have
four
calories
here,
and
that
in
this
picture,
because
I
cannot
possibly
write
like
one
trillion
colors,
but
you
will
have
like
a
gradient
of
all
the
different
colors
from
one
from
starting
number
to
the
ending
number.
Okay.
So.
A
B
A
B
B
We
always
try
to
select
tips
that
are
close
to
ours
in
a
short
location
right,
but
we
also
needed
to
have
a
certain
monotonicity
like
if,
if
this
one
has
5,
then
this
one
should
be,
or
let's
say:
if
this
one
here
is
5,
then
this
one,
for
example,
should
be
5
or
smaller,
and
this
one
should
be
5
or
bigger.
So
you
always
position
yourself
in
the
middle
between
two
other
tips
that
your
friends,
so
you,
if
I
move
in
one
direction,
it
always
grows
or
three
like
stays
the
same.
B
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
Have
more
that
has
this
window
of
perception
so
I
download
to
tango,
but
I,
don't
know
I,
don't
don't
know
everything,
because
if
we
go
back
to
this
example
here
then,
let's
say
red
was,
let's
say:
Berlin
transactions
in
Berlin
and
blues
transactions
and
mock
mock,
which
is
a
city
that
is
not
too
far
away
from
Berlin
and
all
the
people
that
are
living
in
Berlin
would
only
naturally
be
interested
in
the
balance
right.
They
don't
really
care
if
somebody
like
in
another
city
or
in
another
continent
or
whatever
has
as
as
balances.
B
So
the
intention
of
this
charting
is
that
you
only
download
reference
and
process
the
transaction
that
you're
immediately
interested
in
and
the
same
thing
is
true
here
and
in
this
window
of
perception.
The
note
would
have
its
focal
point
like
the
the
the
the
sharding
space
that
it
wants
to
process
in
the
middle.
So
a
note
that
is
interested
in
the
red
markers
we
download
these
transactions,
but
it
will
also
download
and
and
solidify
and
request
the
transactions
that
are
a
little
bit
further
away.
B
Can
you
so
far,
okay,
and
this
means
that
you
also
will
have
a
situation
where
these
kind
of
perception
windows
can
overlap
like
you
will
have
somebody
who's
like
maybe
operating
in
the
middle
of
Berlin,
then
you
will
have
something
some
nodes
operating
in
West
Berlin.
So
these
perception
windows
are
overlapping,
depending
on
which
node
is
seeing.
What
kind
of
so.
B
Where
is
my
business
located,
for
example,
all
if
I
have,
if
I
have
a
note
that
is
more
buy-in
than
this,
this
node
can
even
change
its
rowling
location
as
soon
as
issues
the
next
transition
transaction
with
the
new
shop
market,
then
everybody
will
also
know
which
every
of
this
whole
charting
space
it
observes.
So
that
means
nodes
can
freely
move
between
these
shards.
B
Global
tangle
that
spans
around
the
whole
globe,
without
any
discrete
orders,
we
still
have
the
situation
that
every
single
transaction
indirectly
references
another
transaction
anywhere
else
in
the
world,
even
though
I
don't
really
know
about
this
anymore,
because
I
cut
off
my
perception
window
here
right.
This.
A
B
Not
really
complicated,
with
slightly
different,
take
on
shopping
at
the
interesting
aspect.
Here,
maybe
know
just
one
more
thing
before
we
start
talking
about
inter
short
transactions,
is
that
in
my
directness,
energy
is
pretty
easy
for
me
to
do
in
two
short
transactions
right,
I
know
the
balance
here
and
just
one,
for
example.
If
this
bell,
the
student
sends
some
funds
into
this
chart,
for
example,
then
I
will
immediately
be
able
to
verify.
A
B
Right,
it
means
kind
of
close
distance
into
short.
Okay
transactions
can
be
done
by
the
nodes
just
by
observing
and
voting
for
it
in
the
same
way
as
he
does
it
look,
but
as
soon
as
I
want
to
transfer
funds
that
are
a
bit
further
away,
then
of
course,
this
is
not
as
easily
possible
anymore,
and
then
we
have
another
mechanism
which
we're
going
to
use
for
this
inter
shore
transaction
and
here's
an
example.
Then
we
have
the
deck
now
written
like
from
up
to
down.
B
There
would
be
a
source
shown
in
the
target
chart
and
initially
this
step
is
like
the
tip
here
and
it
will
get
verified
by
its
local
meditators,
which
we
look
at
this
transaction
in
which
were
like
start
to
reference
it
accordingly,
and
then
it
will
build
on
top
of
that
and
the
people
next
to
it
will
do
the
same,
and
at
some
point
people
will
have
a
direct
indirect
reference
to
this
transaction.
And
what
now
is
that,
while
this
like?
A
B
Destination
where
it
needs
to
go,
and
then
it
always
wait
until
the
new
transaction
gets
attached,
collects
the
hashes
and
essentially
builds
a
market
proof.
This
of
this
thing
of
the
whole
path,
and
as
soon
as
it
arrives
on
the
destination
shard,
then
I
can
present
to
this
recipe,
kind
of
which
proves
that
this
original
transaction
gets
reattached
there.
A
A
B
B
That
doesn't
rise
no
good
with
McKinney,
but
what
you
can
do
is
also
if
this
fast
gets
too
long.
For
example,
it's
not
super
long
I
mean
you
do
you
have
like
if
you
buy
it's
a
really
lucky
you,
because
you
can
always
also
calculate
the
previous
hash
from
the
one
here.
So
every
for
every
step,
I
only
need
one
hash.
Yes,
I
need
our
original
transaction,
so
I
need.
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
A
Yeah
and
so
then,
let's
say
these
there's
a
green
sword
over
here
right
and
they
they
sort
of
touch
each
other
and
then
there's
a
red
shirt
next
to
it,
and
so
let's
say
that
iota
iota
has
been
running
for
a
while:
it
processes,
let's
say
million
transactions,
business
transactions
per
second,
and
so
to
maintain
the
flow.
The
number
of
shorts
actually
grew
to
be
pretty
big
right
and
also,
let's
say
that
the
number
of
users
is
also
like.
What's
actually
just
like
every
car,
every
Tesla,
every
every
gas
station
has
it
right.
A
B
Number
right:
it's
like
you,
you
just
have
a
certain
window
of
perception,
which
is
a
certain
diameter
of
egg,
that
you
can
actually
process
and
the
nodes
can
individually
decide
how
much
of
the
bigger
picture
they
want
to
see.
So,
if
you
have
a
very
lightweight
node,
for
example,
then
this
lightweight
node
might
only
see
like
I,
don't
know
the
next
two
kilometers,
for
example,
but
if
you
have
like
a
node
that
has
a
little
bit
more
processing
power,
for
example,
it
might
see
two
inside
like
and
keep
track
of
transactions
that
way,
but.
A
For
the
sake
of
experiment,
let's
say
that
majority,
because
majority
of
the
nodes
will
be
very
lightweight
right.
So
so
let's
say
there
is
several
nodes,
but
very
few
of
them
who
are
very
heavyweight
so
like,
for
example,
some
people
an
iota
Foundation
on
a
node
which
just
drives
the
entire
tag
right
or
like
some,
but
majority
of
nodes
are
actually
IOT
devices
and
let's
say
we
know
that
on
average
deployment
on
the
Eric
a
device
they
track
a
like
their
perception
window
is
approximately
corresponding
to
t-shirts
right.
A
So,
let's
see,
if
like
one
shard,
is
sufficiently
wide
to
like
fit
so
I,
don't
exactly
what
we
measure,
but
let's
say
it's
hashes
right,
so
it
fits
some
width
of
caches.
Let's
say
that
the
average
IOT
devices
actually
tracks
like
three
times
that
or
four
times
that
then
what
I
can
do
is
I
can
create
a
large,
so
I
can
Sybil
attack
couple
shirts,
so
Sybil
attacking
the
whole
system
is
very
expensive.
Right.
I
would
have
to
have
mana
proportional
to
the
mana
of
the
entire
system,
but.
A
What
they
can
try
to
do
is
they
can
try
to
move
all
my
mana
into
this
red
window
right
so
over
time.
So
let's
say
I'm
planning
my
attack
today,
which
I
will
carry
out
in
the
year
and
so
within
a
year
like
in
January,
today,
I
moved
all
my
mana
to
the
red
to
the
red
sort
of
space.
So
in
the
red
space
my
mana
dominates
the
the
space
and
also
to
yellow
right
so
red
and
yellow
both
dominated
me,
while
nowhere
else
I
have
my
manner
right.
B
Is
the
same
problem
that
you
have
with
any
slalom
like
as
soon
as
the
shards
get
really
really
small?
Also,
the
security
problems
kind
of
get
a
little
bit
smaller
right,
but
but
like
the
weight,
sorry
and
and
I
agree
that
I
have
to
say
that
currently
mana,
for
example,
is,
is
the
anti
civil
mechanism
that
we're
using,
but
in
the
future
it
would
mostly
make
much
more
sense
if
we
have
this
amount
of
a
doctrine
to
not
use
mana
as
anticipate
mechanism,
but.
A
B
Actually
world
identities
since
we're
anyway,
local
already
and
people,
know
each
other
and
know
they
have
a
certain
perception
of
trust.
And
if
you
live,
for
example,
in
the
city
of
burnin,
and
you
say
all
the
shops,
although
all
the
government
agencies,
all
the
companies
that
are
operating
in
Berlin,
would
like.
We
have
the
trust,
maybe
even
bound
by
the
legal
framework
of
the
country
where
the
technology
is
used.
Then
you
kind
of
have
the
ability
to
use
this.
That
has
an
anti
super
mechanism
and
that
of
course
becomes
much
harder
to
attack.
B
B
Shimmer
is
around
ten
twenty
thousand
TPS.
So
it's
quite
a
lot
and
even
normal
naked
machine.
That
is
not
like
a
super-strong
server
right
because
yeah
you
can
process
everything
as
it
arrives
that
you
don't
need
to
wait
and
rock
train,
then
they
go
through
all
the
transaction
and
do
all
the
signature
checks.
At
the
same
time,
of
course,
if
you
crease
the.
A
B
So
everybody
will
see
everything
it's
most
obviously
very
secure
to
do
it
like
that
right
and
then,
however,
time
adoption
rises.
Maybe
at
some
point
we
have
like
a
hundred
thousand
TPS
in
the
system
or
something
then
and
and
each
now
it
can
pose
up
to
twenty
thousand.
Then
you
will
have
essentially
five
shots,
but
it's
not
really
five
shots.
They
will
overlap.
So
that
means
you
will
have
some
people
observing
this.
Some
people
are
serving
this.
B
Maybe
there
are
some
smaller
devices
observing
this,
and
you
will
have
a
kind
of
like
a
patch
of
of
people
living
here
right,
and
this
also
would
be
reflected
in
the
business
relationships,
because
we
have
this.
This
charting,
based
on
these
geographic
proximity
and
and
most
of
the
economy,
still
happens
locally
like
if
I,
if
I
want
to
buy
a
pizza,
I
go
to
my
pizzeria
around
the
corner
and
it
would
be
good
if
those
guys
know
my
balance
and
we
can
communicate
with
each,
and
it
also
means
that
yeah.
B
B
Another
server
here
and
I
can
observe
what's
going
on
in
other
parts
of
the
world
and
if
somebody
would
say
if
I
were
and
would
start
to
kind
of
suddenly
reverse
decisions
and
stuff
like
that,
I'm
pretty
sure
that
at
that
point
of
adoption
we
would
see
this
being
recognized
by
some
of
the
actors
and
they
could
inform
the
world
and
say,
like.
Oh,
this
round
has
just
done
something
really
really
bad.
B
Don't
accept
payments
from
from
from
that
right
side,
section
here
right
and
the
same
is
also
true
like
if
you
could
have
community
in
countries,
for
example,
it's
very
unlikely
that
you
will
have
no
other
actor
economic
actor
in
the
world.
That
has
that
would
see
that
in
a
way
right
like
you,
can
you
can.
B
You
can
report
that,
and
they
I
also
have
some
ideas
around
how
you
can
even
automate
that
with
like
servers
that
are
that
are
located
like
every
now
and
then
then
they
connect
the
information
that
they
see
and
build
additional
market
proofs
and
keep
that
as
like
a
point
of
reference
which
allows
you
to
prove
these
things
in
the
past.
Also
and
of
course,
then,
the
ultimate
solution
would
be
that
you
have
like
a
really
fine,
grained
Charlet
network,
where
everything
is
like.
B
A
B
A
I
can
provide
you
some
references
which
would
be
interesting
how
this
compares
to
to
what's
been
happening
in
the
sharding
research
in
the
like,
for
example,
what
was
happening
in
near
a
theorem
or
polka-dot,
which
are
all
you
know
to
an
extent
like
pokel?
It
is
also
to
an
extent,
is
charting,
so
so
the
the
basic
attack
right,
which
you,
which
you
mentioned,
you
also
mentioned
how
to
try
to
get
around
it
is.
A
Let's
say
this
has
happening
the
geographic
activity
basis
right
unless
it
that
somewhere
over
here
somewhere
over
here,
is
something
that
I
managed
to
Sybil
attack.
So
if
it's,
if
it's
mana
proof
of
mana
and
I,
just
managed
to
move
all
my
men
are
there
or
if
it's
proof
of
identity,
then
I
just
like
went
to
some
city
or
which
travels
back
in
Russia,
where
I'm
from
right
and
I
just
managed
to
grab
the
entire
city
of
who's.
A
Asked
and
I'm
convinced
everybody
in
the
zest
to
collude
and
also
know
the
neighboring
cities
right
and
so
what
they
do
is
in
my
city.
The
organelles
I
create
something
completely
bogus
like
a
crater,
you
TXO,
which
is
invalid
and
prints
money,
and
then
my
neighboring
cities,
whom
I
also
convinced
to
collude.
They
do
not
produce
anything
invalid.
Except
accepting
that
you
Excel,
you
know
so
that
someone
who
is
who
is
neighboring
those
stitches.
A
They
don't
see
anything
incorrect
happening
in
this
proximity
because
they
don't
look
at
the
desk
where
they
actual
invalid
transaction
happened
and
so
that
invalid
UT
EXO
managed
to
propagate
through
the
system
and
then
somewhere
in
Berlin
after
multiple
Hope
suspended.
And
so
the
general
way
that
that
you
mentioned,
which
makes
lot
of
sense,
is
that
you
actually
do
have,
because
it
takes
one
node
to
detect
invalid
behavior
and
one
node
is
cheap
right,
so
you
will
have
one
node,
one
very
expensive
note
standing
in
various
parts
of
the
world.
A
However,
it
is
a
big
problem
here,
which
is
when
I
create
an
invalid.
You
check
so
I
invalidate
Yuki
xoxo,
which
reference
is
something
that
does
not
exist
right
so
great.
You
check
so
I
where
I
say
you
know,
the
output
of
this
UT
EXO
is
1
million
iota
tokens
and
the
input
I
just
I
just
create
random
hashes.
You
know,
like
I,
just
create
random
hashes,
and
so,
if
you
have
that
server,
which
is
which
is
supposed
to
provide
proofs,
you
cannot
really
prove
to
everybody
else
that
those
you
get
so
they
invalid.
A
So,
even
though
you
cannot
fetch
them
locally
write
to
you
locally
that
very
expensive
server,
which
is
supposed
to
more
you
to
resist.
You
see
that
invalid.
So
you
clearly
understand
it's
invalid.
You
know
it
looks
very
suspicious,
but
you
cannot
prove
to
everybody
else
that
those
hashes
incorrect.
So
the
only
thing
you
can
do
is
you
can
go
to
everybody
else
and
say
guys.
Is
that
straight
at
you
EXO,
which
is
invalid?
A
B
A
certain
degree
like
I'm,
not
100%
sure
about
that,
but
there
are
some
ideas
around
that
which
are
not
finalized.
Yet
there's
also
like
a
very
new
new
concepts
like
as
I
said,
it's
the
first
time
that
we
talked
about
this
publicly
at
all.
So
there's
maybe
also
room
for
improvement,
but
you
might
be
able
to
prove
that
it
at
some
point
at
least
and
from
Genesis,
but
I,
wouldn't
maybe
be
so
sure
about
that.
B
B
A
The
way
I
can
work
very
briefly,
tell
what's
happening
in
the
in
this
in
the
ecosystem.
Is
that
the
so?
The
first
problem
where
I
were
is
asked,
you
know,
goes
rogue
and
creates
an
invalid
state
transition,
and
that
is
called
state
validate
or
like
data
validity
state
validity
problem,
and
so
your
solution
is
actually
exactly
how
most
of
the
people
solve
it
right.
They
just
have
nodes
which
monitor
the
situation
and
challenge
it,
but
to
challenge
something
you
actually
need
to
see
the
whole
history
so
in
case
of
iota.
A
If
actually
like,
you
have
a
smaller
No
which
do
not
you
lead,
like
you
know,
apply
all
the
state
transitions,
but
they
constantly,
for
example,
attest
to
the
availability
of
the
data
so
vector.
There
is
a
larger
set
of
people
who
will
say:
yes,
I
saw
those
hashes,
and
so
it
will
be
harder
for
me
to
corrupt
all
those
people.
Yeah.
B
B
A
B
A
A
B
B
I
mean,
but
it
doesn't
matter
like
how
many
like
how
much
you
you
do
this.
You
essentially
split
up
the
security
of
your
network
by
an
eighth
or
by
an
64,
or
something
like
that.
I
mean
maybe
not
exactly,
but
the
security
gets
slightly
lower
because
you
kind
of
need
to
speed
up
your
validate
in
this
concept.
I,
don't
need
to
do
this
with
a
upfront.
I
can
have
an
extremely
secure
network
in
times
where
the
adoption
is
not
that
large.
Yet
right.
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
Terms,
one
last
thing
also
the
whole
a
class
today
we're
going
to
talk
about
something
else
after
as
well,
but
one
point
that
was
also
really
important
is
that
iota
still
has
second
layer
scaling
as
well.
We
have
something
which
is
called
flash
challenge,
so
that
means
I
can
create
a
transaction
that,
with
like
a
person
that
I
want
to
transact
untangle
it
create
like
a
payment
share.
It
essentially
pretty
similar
to
how
the
lightning
Network
works.
It's
a
little
bit
different,
but
not
much
different,
and
that
means
that
I
can
then
transact
of
chain.
B
Do
is
like
I
open
this
payment.
She'll
go
with
the
gas
station
cost
me
any
fuse.
I
can
do
that
even
for
like
a
two
or
five
dollar
payment
or
whatever,
and
then
I
start
streaming
to
pay
him
single
units
of
IRA
or
like
ten,
each
or
something
which
is
like
fractions
of
a
cent.
And
then
the
gas
station
would
continue
providing
me
energy.
A
B
B
Energy,
so
it
means
that,
even
though
you
you
have
a
lot
of
machines,
interacting
not
everything
will
always
happen
on
the
main
time.
The
main
thing
is
essentially
just
a
broker
broker
for
transactions
that
happen
between
individuals.
That
cannot
be
made,
that
they
cannot
use
these
kind
of
payment
channels
and
also
for,
inter
short
transaction.
You
can
do
the
same.
You
can
essentially
have
an
end,
a
clip
and
paying
something,
but
this
is
also
something
that
is
still
researched.
So
that
is
more
in
the
realm
of
like
ideas.
B
B
And
then
you
don't
have
to
do
these
really
long
inter
shard
transactions
that
you
would
otherwise
do
you
can't
do
it,
but
it's
eventually
slow
if
the
if
the
clustering
is
really
really
big.
As
you
said
earlier,
like
especially
with
this
containment
period
of
the
of
the
transactions,
then
you
yeah,
you
would
have
the
problem
that
yeah
then
I
would
just
take
long.
So
if
you
have
these
kind
of
payment
channels
as
the
second
layer
solution,
then
you
can
offer
these
kind
of
services,
maybe
even
ask
for
small
fee
for
operating
this
service.
B
A
A
B
At
the
end
of
the
day
like,
if
you
see
there
is
like
some
difference,
then
you
can
just
send
the
money
and
then,
if
it
takes
like
two
or
three
minutes
until
it
arrives
into
your
location,
that's
also
fine
I
mean
that's.
You
don't
have
to
do
that,
but
this
could
be
used
for
like
instant
payments.
Like
I
know,
you
want
to
buy
something
old
or
something
from
the
UK
and
you're
in
Berlin.
B
And
this
is
also
why
why
our
whole
algorithm
made
the
kind
of
like
way
it
just
took
so
long,
because
I've
been
developing.
All
of
these
concerns
like
getting
the
ideas
how
we
do
this
I
mean
initially
when
we
started
we,
we
had
kind
of
this
idea,
but
we
didn't
know
how
to
connect
these
channels.
We
didn't
really
know
how
to
prevent
that
in
spends.
It
took
some
time
and
it's
it's
really
simple,
like
simple
idea.
Essentially,
it
is
not
really
really
complex
to
understand.