Slashdot Mirror


A Cryptocurrency Without a Blockchain Has Been Built To Outperform Bitcoin (technologyreview.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: Bitcoin isn't the only cryptocurrency on a hot streak -- plenty of alternative currencies have enjoyed rallies alongside the Epic Bitcoin Bull Run of 2017. One of the most intriguing examples is also among the most obscure in the cryptocurrency world. Called IOTA, it has jumped in total value from just over $4 billion to more than $10 billion in a little over two weeks. But that isn't what makes it interesting. What makes it interesting is that it isn't based on a blockchain at all; it's something else entirely. The rally began in late November, after the IOTA Foundation, the German nonprofit behind the novel cryptocurrency, announced that it was teaming up with several major technology firms to develop a "decentralized data marketplace."

Though IOTA tokens can be used like any other cryptocurrency, the protocol was designed specifically for use on connected devices, says cofounder David Sonstebo. Organizations collect huge amounts of data from these gadgets, from weather tracking systems to sensors that monitor the performance of industrial machinery (a.k.a. the Internet of things). But nearly all of that information is wasted, sitting in siloed databases and not making money for its owners, says Sonstebo. IOTA's system can address this in two ways, he says. First, it can assure the integrity of this data by securing it in a tamper-proof decentralized ledger. Second, it enables fee-less transactions between the owners of the data and anyone who wants to buy it -- and there are plenty of companies that want to get their hands on data.
The report goes on to note that instead of using a blockchain, "IOTA uses a 'tangle,' which is based on a mathematical concept called a directed acyclic graph." The team decided to research this new alternative after deciding that blockchains are too costly. "Part of Sonstebo's issue with Bitcoin and other blockchain systems is that they rely on a distributed network of 'miners' to verify transactions," reports MIT Technology Review. "When a user issues a transaction [with IOTA], that individual also validates two randomly selected previous transactions, each of which refer to two other previous transactions, and so on. As new transactions mount, a 'tangled web of confirmation' grows, says Sonstebo."

3 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. How about a coinless currency? by istartedi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seems like the big problem with Bitcoin is hoarding, which discourages trade. How about a decentralized ledger without a "coin"? If you just had a secure, decentralized record of trades, *and* you could transact in less than a second, *and* you were simply creating a secure record of transaction in pre-existing currency *then* you'd have something that might compete with what the credit card companies and check clearinghouses do. Then you might actually reduce fees for the rest of us, even if we don't use it directly.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:How about a coinless currency? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The good that will come out of this whole cryptocurrency bubble is a testing of numerous approaches to decentralized transaction processing. There is no mystery about Bitcoin hoarding. It's a direct outcome of the limited money supply, which has transformed what was intended to be a digital currency into an imaginary investment.

      Yes, just focusing on decentralized transaction processing with national currencies would be a good idea to explore. Goal: is there a way of handing this which is inexpensive at reasonable transaction volumes? Such a scheme doesn't have to match Visa's 24,000 transactions per second. It just has to be high enough to serve a population interested in anonymous transactions.

  2. Re:Don't Roll Your Own Crypto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is no empirical evidence that 1% inflation is a 'good' thing for the economy - it's just a random target that seems justifiable easily. The ECB has a 2% target, in Australia the RBA officially targets 2 - 3%, but basically there is on science of the 'goodness' behind these figures.

    Any inflation mostly benefits investors with debts and basically constitutes a wealth transfer from savers to investors (~ from poorer to richer).

    The higher the inflation - the more unfair a society seems to be.