Comment

Comment by mattwilsonn888

Well I hoped you wouldn't continue in this thread because I laid out a secure interactive proof scheme that DOES offer statistical proof that a node behaves and performs well, and that it is not likely a Sybil.

If you are that concerned with reputation, you can ask for token lock-ups - further diminishing the ability of many identities appearing distinct.

But the greater point is that these are not Sybils, because they do not gain power over the system. If your counter-point to that is that users will waste money then clearly this attack is not sustainable - some node can take that revenue by saving users' money.

And if your concern is so extreme that a whole network around a user is locked down, then I can make a similarly unusual case that physical transmission of data is incentivized - because it is.

Of course recovering from extreme cases is not user-friendly - but the point is that you can recover and these states of total control are not sustainable; it would take a lot of work to even get into one of these states and it wouldn't even offer the attacker an ability to hold it.

So in practice it is unlikely to happen. The same way it's unlikely you will keep buying bread from the guy that charges twice the market rate.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton