MaidSafe Dev Update - May 24, 2018 - Introducing PARSEC

Was woundering regarding the post on twitter from one of the devs : It’s possible that #PARSEC will actually be fully asynchronous soon! We have some promising ideas for improving the concrete coin. I’m excited :slight_smile: #SAFENetwork
Does this mean the implementation of PARSEC is on hold ?

No it is not on hold. There is a team implementing and a few folks still looking for any improvements and interop with routing. PARSEC implementation is ongoing :+1:

17 Likes

Great to hear!
Seeing activity in here …finally… sorry :sweat_smile:
and here
:+1:
YaY!

2 Likes

And HERE obviously!!
Spoiler,
PARSEC

7 Likes

I seldom find good enough words for situations like this.

One thing that struck me when reading the whitepaper when it was published, is how fast this part was done. (I was thinking the same with Peruse. One day the move was suggested, and not long after it was all there…!)

Now, I’m sure a lot of work is based on previous work, and a lot of MaidSafe people were probably deep into the thinking already before. But still, from announcing that you were focusing on Routing, to this. That.Went.Super.Fast.

I am so deeply impressed by your accomplishment.

One more little thing, PARSEC is a hell of a cool name. Just epic.

14 Likes

The moment you realize PARSEC is a better spelled anagram of CASPER.

WrKPhfd

38 Likes

Oh jeeze, that’s good lol :laughing:

11 Likes

That made my day, week, possibly my month!!!
It was a great name, now it’s priceless.

received_1648536865265291

6 Likes

A response I got on YouTube in regards to an open source alternative to Hashgraph.

“I already researched PARSEC, part of their algo they are using the gossip about gossip protocol, which they call something else. In essence, they are in violation of Swirlds Patent. If you want to follow a project that is breaking the law, be my guest.”

What y’all think? :thinking: I have my doubts to say the least so I asked which section of the whitepaper was in violation to get specifics. Not exactly sure what to respond with though. Gossip isn’t patented but apparently gossiping about gossip is by Hashgraph. Any ideas what he might be referencing?

Let me guess, supremax67. That guy is scanning 24/7 the word Hashgraph on Youtube and responses on every comment on it. The funny thing is, as soon PARSEC is mentioned, he puts more energy in responding than if other projects are mentioned. So he is getting nervous :sweat_smile:

8 Likes

@nevel It was supermax67! Lolol

2 Likes

Gossip is not a word mentioned anywhere in swirlds patent. Gossip also not patentable, also hashgraph do not do ABA -> full consensus and have no coin implemented or discussed in their patent. Apart from that they are both algorithms :scream_cat: :smiley:

21 Likes

See also the comments in @TylerAbeoJordan 's channel

3 Likes

Yes, but he is really referring to the ‘gossip about gossip’ thing. So not gossip itself. So probably he means the idea of sending all your gossips back instead of 1. (I hope you understand what I mean, I’m no expert on this).
So he thinks that this idea is part of the patent or so.

3 Likes

I think he thinks anything is :smiley:

The gossip about gossip is clever as a marketing term but also how to build a DAG. It is a method of using gossip to sample network-wide aggregates which is a well known (i.e. not novel) thing. It is not covered in the patent at all, probably as it is not patentable. In any case, these are very different algorithms regardless how many gossips they have :smiley:

11 Likes

well xD when i look at some swirlds paper i get an idea why he might get slighly annoyed when seeing the explanation of parsec

image

why did you choose the same names for your example? xD

1 Like

Alice Bob Carol are pretty common names in crypto. Dave is sometimes called Dave and sometimes David. Ed, we actually call Eric :slight_smile: Anyway, naming conventions are really unrelated to patents :smiley:

12 Likes

okay - granted xD :smiley:

And lightening use Erin https://coincenter.org/entry/what-is-the-lightning-network :smiley: There was a proposal to change some of these names a while back in some crypto paper. I cannot find it right now – ah here is a reference https://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/01/crypto_analogies/

3 Likes

:smiley: i’m glad you didn’t change anything! would have been a shame if i never learned that this is how things are meant to be :wink:

5 Likes