On Friday, June 10, 2016, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote: > What this group is doing is defining a standard and the goal of this > standard should be to allow users to pick any place to store their > identity. Blockstack is an implementation. The goal should be many > implementations and a protocol for interoperability between them. > I'd also note the Bitcoin blockchain in particular has pretty substantial data volume requirements (i.e. Butcoin transactions) consisting of what is effectively irrelevant information for an identity system. The usual response I've heard to the argument regarding the high overhead of layering systems like this on top of the Bitcoin blockchain is that some trusted caching proxy should do the work of processing the blockchain, extracting identities and answering requests for them on demand, but at that point, such a system sounds an awful lot like something like CONIKS with all of the irrelevant data of Bitcoin transactions. I feel there's a much simpler approach possible here that doesn't require coupling to Bitcoin, and I think it looks like CONIKS or CT. -- Tony Arcieri
Received on Friday, 10 June 2016 21:50:13 UTC