//STORE enables these computing, economic, and governance primitives

Zero-fee settlement-layer enables

Zero-fee, peer-to-peer value transfer

Fast transactions

Scalable transactions

Democratic and 2/3 censorship resistant governance (one entity, one vote)

Tokenized Data enables

Data to be open and tradable

Data to be programmable by third party apps and devices

Data to have a monetary premium (like $STORE, $BTC, $ETH, $EOS, and gold)

Datacoin revenue to be shared with users, citizens, more

…which enables these high-level use cases

Zero-fee settlement-layer enabled

Tokenized data enabled (p2p cloud)

High-level Use Cases

Fast, zero-fee, programmable payments for the public internet

Voting on the global rules of a decentralized, zero-fee digital asset

Zero-fee, 2/3 censorship resistant value transfer of data as a digital asset

Voting on the global rules of decentralized, open, and programmable data

A web2 app developer opening APIs for other developers to build with (for $STORE)

An IoT device developer live streaming datasets for anyone to access (for $STORE)

A health care system making a prized and rare dataset available (for $STORE)

An autonomous car or drone opening its ML-ready, live data streams (for $STORE)

A local government streaming IoT device data for anyone to access (for $STORE)

SUBMIT AN INDUSTRY USE CASE TO EARN $STORE

(If we publish, we’ll award you with 100,000 $STORE – enough to compete in founding mining auctions.)

While STORE transactions are zero-fee for both end users and developers, if STORE is initially deployed as n ERC20 token on Ethereum, applicable gas fees apply on Ethereum. All settlement transactions on Ethereum incur gas fees. When the ERC20 STORE tokens are swapped with native STORE token tokens, transactions will be settled on the STORE network and at that time, zero-fee transactions are resumed.

Back to News

Copy Link

September 26, 2018 . 5 min read

Minimizing incentive-driven threat in Proof of Stake protocols

STORE’s DyPoS does it with a leaderless consensus algorithm and equitable incentive model

1/ The paper, "Formal Barriers to Longest-Chain Proof-of-Stake Protocols" by Jonah Brown-Cohen, Arvind Narayanan, Christos-Alexandros Psomas, and S. Matthew Weinberg assumes PoS blockchains are "similar" to PoW, except for wasted energy associated with the latter.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

2/ In other words, they assume PoS blockchains that are leader-based, similar to PoW's method of choosing the winning miner to add the new block to the blockchain.

3/They also assume PoS blockchains use the "longest chain rule," similar to PoW.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

4/ With these assumptions the aim is to isolate the incentive-driven threat.

5/ Blockchain designs that are not leader-based or that do not use the "longest chain rule" don't fall into the same threat model.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

6/ @storecoin's BlockFin consensus engine is leaderless -- there is no leader or delegate chosen to create new blocks. The consensus engine requires that all nodes validate and sign the blocks.

7/ For their participation, all validators share the block reward for every block.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

8/ This equitable incentive model ensures there is no $ benefit in deviating from the protocol.

9/ This leaderless consensus eliminates any long-term tendency toward centralization. By addressing the centralization concerns in the design, BlockFin ensures true decentralization.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

10/ In @storecoin's BlockFin BFT consensus algorithm, the incoming transactions are assembled into pre-created blocks that are later validated and signed by all validators.

11/ This avoids chain forks, so the longest chain rule doesn't apply.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

12/ Together, these two properties discourage temptations to deviate from the protocol rules.

13/ So, what could go wrong with such a design?!

🤔
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

14/ Block validation progress requires > 2/3 of validators to sign the blocks, so malicious validators may delay signing the blocks by going offline for extended periods of time.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

15/ But, unless > 1/3 of validators collude and coordinate their attack, the block validation progresses well. The way BlockFin validation is designed, the whole network and any external observers know who is not signing the blocks.
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

16/ This is because the assembled blocks are in pending state with ~2/3 validator signatures, so all observers know the current state of block validation progress. BlockFin addresses this concern in a novel way, but that discussion is for another day!
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

17/ Decentralization (security) can't be achieved with technology alone. We believe that economics and on-chain governance must bear equal responsibilities. @storecoin's Dynamic Proof-of-Stake protocol, which uses BlockFin as its "technology" foundation, will try to achieve this. pic.twitter.com/mohE5ajFw1
— Chris McCoy (@chrisamccoy) September 25, 2018

Back to News

Copy Link

About STORE

STORE is zero-fee, p2p cloud that will transform data into open, tradable, and programmable money called datacoins. Governed by a 2/3 fault tolerant democracy (1e1v).

Minimizing incentive-driven threat in Proof of Stake protocols

Thanks for subscribing to STORE updates!

Visit https://storelabs.org/updates to see our latest.

Subscribe to receive STORE research, news, and updates

About STORE

Thanks for your email address! You'll start receiving updates soon.

Get invited to our next Milestone Token Offering (MTO)