decentralisation

innovation

A Revolutionary Step - Bitlattice

Blockchain has reached the peak of its capabilities. With every new project appearing in this area it becomes obvious that there is no way for further revolutionary blockchain development, except in small improvements and workarounds from the original Bitcoin blockchain. The scheme ingenious in its simplicity, due to this simplicity is extremely rigid. There is a growing need for a new paradigm that while retaining the base features of blockchain will allow for more complex interactions and more flexible structure on a global scale.

The Monolithic nature of blockchain that makes immutability possible at the same time renders scalability impossible. There are workarounds, but they are neither inherent nor reliable.

We need to go further with caveats that give birth to a new scheme altogether, but with blockchain in mind. The History of blockchain development clearly shows that while it was an elegant and efficient scheme at first, with more and more added functionalities it became bloated and maze-like. There is no viable decentralized solution to return to simplicity except by providing a new scheme with more degrees of freedom.

I am in process of introducing a revolutionary change in cryptocurrency. It will be a new coin, but no longer under the conventional blockchain protocol, instead a multi-dimensional lattice structure, known as Bitlattice.

Bitlattice is a new paradigm and fundamentally different from Bitcoin and the major alt-coin protocols. It is something very novel and experimental. Bitlattice mitigates many common issues in the classic blockchain including scalability, timing, complexity, and the inability to have independent oracles.

Blockchain as a technology is already quite old. The majority of the underlying protocol on the Bitcoin blockchain is reasonable. However, there are some points that hamper wide and eager adoption of it. For example, well-known scalability issues stemming from the flatness of the chain (and few other factors as well). Time stamping problems stemming from the distributed peer-to-peer architecture that actually wasn't designed for this purpose (while there are many different implementations of p2p protocols in general, they differ with only a handful of schemes).

There are also higher level issues, like which proof to pick, what prioritization to set, how miners are placed inside a network and many more. All of them have certain benefits and drawbacks.

My project differs substantially from traditional projects because it is not a blockchain. While it still provides the same fundamental benefits, lattice architecture is totally different thus providing additional benefits and solving several inherent blockchain issues.

It's lattice retaining some chain's properties. Actually, at the present stage of research it’s a five-dimensional lattice interconnected with curves, and can be portrayed with directed graphs. It can be collapsed to one-dimensional chain which provides the same immutability the current blockchain provides. But at the same time it provides means for features like lattice encryption.

There is one additional funny side-effect of the structure I have in mind. Such network could potentially act as a neural network and be able to self-organize to a certain extent.

My friend, neurobiologist, compared my idea exactly to a Neural Network. And there is some truth in this comparison. Up to the point that one of the features in my idea acts exactly as synapses and I also postulate homomorphically encrypted seeded entities acting as local authorities and being "hidden variables" of this network, something that can be compared to a primitive consciousness.

Such an approach, with technical details will describe when I'm sure that everything works as expected on a prototype level.

Everyone can join now provided that they conform to my foundational Bitlattice idea - this is to prevent mess and encourage a cohesive team with preset goals. We are looking for visionaries like us, people who are open-minded and courageous enough to thump conservatism and bring the lattice protocol to the mainstream cryptocurrency world.

Thank you,

Hibryda[published 15 02.2017]

We invite you to follow our thread on bitcointalk

* We are at the research & developmental stage of the project and will notify you personally through email when updates on the second and third generation updates are implemented.

#Ask Hibryda

FAQ

Knowledge matters

*free guide available on bitcoinwoman.com

Universal knowledge matters in a rapidly changing world, knowledge not skills. Skills depend on currently used tools and technologies while knowledge is universal.

The goal is to provide a new perspective on learning process and ample opportunity for beginners who can get some practical guidance from our 'knowledge matters' series and gain universal knowledge together with us.

Core Team

Hibryda

creator of Bitlattice

Inventor, independent security researcher. Since inception of blockchain’s technology, developer and early adopter in this area.

I deal with security issues since some 20 years. I know both physical architecture related ones as well as those that stem from logical limitations. After 25 years of programming (started on 386 DX2 66Mhz with 2MB of RAM :) ) I can code in anything code-able.

MaStudio

founder and main investor to Bitlattice

Multi disciplinary artists, creative graphic designers and programmers, enthusiasts of inventions and stunning artworks, passionate about the latest researches in areas of robotics, securitysystems and Human-Robots Transcultural Interaction. Authors of "Knowledge Matters - gaining universal knowledge"

Miss Direct

investor and active supporter of the project

Wtfc360

investor and active supporter of the project

Stardust

inventor, programmer, machine learning specialist

Develops low latency machine learning assisted discovery network protocols for Bitlattice

Blog

Update

December 9 2017

The development goes as expected. Most of crucial components are operational, still lots of work to do. The launch of network will take place after New Year. Not sure about the exact date. The shift is actually due to BTC market turmoil that can effectively damp any new coin appearance. Besides, some additional time will give us opportunity to add features and test all thoroughly.


Knowledge matters

June 28 2017

Cryptocoins depend on many concepts that should be understood before going deeper. Unfortunately, to understand it properly there is no shortcut. As to Bitlattice - a catch is that it's not a blockchain. There are common points, but mostly approach differs. So, base knowledge about computing issues can help a lot.

Our free guide 'knowledge matters' is already available on bitcoinwoman.com


Update

May 8 2017

Work is in progress in several areas. First of all basic tx operations using different vectors of operation have been initially tested. They still need to be refined in terms of reliability. Meanwhile works on a network protocol are before test phase. BL will use custom toroid based network protocol making use of resolving tensors with machine learning algorithm. While there are similar solutions in the wild we prefer to have custom made one due to specific needs of BL. To perform live tests we build now a server rig capable of simulating controlled network environment (32 cores for VMs, VMs running multiple simple end nodes, lots of net hardware and cables :)).

There will be testnet. Cannot however say now precisely when. If Bitlattice would be a fork of some blockchain based solution there will be little issue with providing testnet fast. However, BL isn't blockchain at all, it has similar properties, but is different at a base level. Thus, the client must be written almost from scratch. It have to take some time to bind all the features into one concise piece of code. So, be patient, it will come.


Funds for further research

Mar 8 2017

Funds for further research for this year are already secured.


3D styled website

Feb 25 2017

We've updated our website to be more in line with 3D:). Furthermore, we'll add chat and/or forum in some not too distant future.

We invite you to follow our thread on bitcointalk


New logo and website

Feb 23 2017

New logo and website are ready.


Immutability — discourse on absolute values

This article 'A Philosophical Note on the Existential Risks of Absolutism in the Pro-Fork / Anti-Fork Debate' drove me into some philosophical considerations that I usually prefer to evade. As this piece is a good read I would like to augment it with my thoughts no matter how shallow they are.

Whenever I read about any absolute principal values I see this page 362 from Principia Mathematica followed by a sarcastic laughter of Tarski and far less audible one of Gödel (as dying of hunger is a resource consuming process). Then I hear Russel mumbling about how elegant it was supposed to be and how cruel the reality is. Finally Turing joins the argument speaking something of a monstrous halting issue to be better poisoned with gas (presumably hydrogen cyanide given his final predilection).

side note: actually trying to figure out Principia’s inference rules shaped my scant style of writing; I constantly try to keep my texts maximally consistent; with little effect, I know. No, never read this from cover to cover :)

We can safely exclude math and logic from a list of candidates for being absolute principal values, as while it seems to offer absolute certainty, exceptions are written in fine print as annotations. And sadly, there is no way to fix it.

Surely then at least our material world must offer stable foundations… I can picture only one — absolute boredom of being a photon. Nothing happens. No time passes. Nothing moves. Gosh.

Despite this special case nothing can be certain (actually even this special case), not to mention absolute. All would be fine if PETA existed early enough to keep this deviant Schrödinger away from felines. Tough luck, this poor cat will bounce between right. being dead and alive unless observed. As everything. Funny how acceptable it became to people. Probably because they think that this only happens somewhere down there, among particles. And levitating superconductors on science fairs are magic…

Let it all be stochastic, people say, but on macro scale we can at least measure everything and tackle all these strange quantum side effects. Provided we can measure anything with absolute precision. And of course we cannot — whole SI measures system suffers from lack of precision (with most prominent example of mass units). Again absolute miss.

OK, but our measures are good enough to send space probes zillions of miles from our planet and they hit the spot, right? Actually only because they have error correction algorithms applied, as a simple problem of calculating trajectories of three or more celestial bodies is impossible to solve with absolute certainty. And it’s not because errors in our measures accumulate (despite they do), but because this problem isn’t easily solvable. Actually there are some special cases solutions, but in mostly error correction to mitigate perturbations is the only effective measure, at least in our universe. Speaking of the universe, even this entity cannot be considered absolute. There can be other universes. Besides we cannot prove even existence of the one we probably are in. The brain in the vat concept is pretty attractive, as it would mean that I write for myself and my audience will behave exactly as I’ll force it to. Because there is no audience. You are all my imagination.

Or maybe not? Maybe we live in a simulation? Very hyped theory now, actually with roots in Antiquity. Shame that Plato cannot deal with Musk, even if the latter used rather unrefined arguments. So, we all take part in a game. Not sure why picked this exact hub to play in, maybe because I wanted to face a hard difficulty level where stupidity is predominant. Will have plus twenty to stupidity evasion skill when I finish it. Whoever wrote this mod should be praised for design. Bots and sceneries are convincingly real.

Of course, if it’s simulation there is nothing absolute here, no eternal principles; maybe somewhere in real world…

I could iterate my search for objective absolute principles over many more areas, but I suppose that the only discovery would be a word count limit of Medium.

Humans and absolute principles

The above lengthy introduction serves two purposes. First, it shows how hard is to tell anything really precise about our reality, not to mention objective principles of absolute impact on it. Second, which derives from the first, is the conclusion that any and all absolute values are products of our brains.

We, humans, are products of evolution (disregard simulacra and brain in the vat for a moment). While purposeless, this process exhibits a feature that makes it self sustainable — the self preservation instinct. One of adaptations serving this instinct is our intelligence. We, as well as most animals, developed sophisticated biological computers able to process abstract representations of reality. While simple animals can only match some shapes and patterns, we, together with primates and some other complex animals, are able to process very complex schemes. What differentiates us from our cousins is that we are the only species that can describe these schemes and even transfer into external records or pass them to children.

We call these schemes “ideas”. When one sees a chair, an idea of a chair is compared with perception signals coming from senses. Then the brain decides whether the signal matches or not with what is defined by the idea. For our safety (to satisfy the self preservation instinct) it’s better if we sit on a chair instead of an alligator or a camp fire.

Just because why not we also craft ideas that have no material equivalent. Like god, democracy, good, bad, justice. While most people more or less know what these words mean, they have no strict definitions — they always depend on subjective perception of individuals and some very faint logical scaffoldings (thanks Hume). They serve multiple purposes mostly regarding our social relations. As these relations, due to biological reasons, are important to us, we tend to ascribe these terms an “absolute” property. Of course without any logical reason behind. Because why not. Because this way they sound more serious.

Humans are made to survive, not to be honest. The strategy of tricks and lies, we use so often, is a part of of the above mentioned self preservation instinct that makes our survival chances higher. On the other hand, we don’t like others using excessively this strategy as it disorganizes our fragile social relations. In search of a golden rule we enforced laws and law enforcement. But these are makeshift measures never addressing the real issue.

Immutability

When blockchain appeared it looked like it has a property expected since millenias — no trust needed thanks to immutability that guarantees that no human can fraudulently alter the ledger. It quickly became evident that even with support of this purported property humans remain susceptible to be scammed and fooled. Nothing really changed. The world of cryptocurrency is not less dirty then the material one. The only difference is that one doesn’t have to meet a scammer in person to be screwed.

What’s more important the immutability property is a myth. A single entity with enough power and money could mutate any blockchain. It’s just not profitable enough. Every peer to peer network can be supervised and manipulated. Encryption helps only a little (but helps). A community of any size can do the same with hard fork if enough support is amassed. In Ethereum case this manipulation seems to be fair as it will be an effect of common consensus. With all side effects that can happen.

One striking thing that appeared during the process of reaching consensus is that in fact a hard fork is far more honest than the a soft one. Contrary to its name and popular perception soft fork is not about forking per se, but about censorship of the network. The chain remains intact, while clients control the flow of information. To exert a soft fork of any kind a majority of miners must follow. Miners must be incentivised somehow for this action which in turn generates uneven and thus degenerate situation of the community being dependent on miners. Situation that in fact hampers popular adoption and application of blockchain technology as a whole.

Contrarily a hard fork is more independent of miners (not totally, but they are placed in a correct perspective in this case; they are the network servants instead of managers). Competence to execute a fork belongs to the community. What’s crucial — any part of it, not fifty one percent. I could issue a client application implementing a hard fork even tomorrow. If I could find enough supporters, my chain would become predominant with time. Frankly, it looks like really community’s rule measure. At least far more straight forward and honest than the soft fork censorship.

The above shows how subjective and unimportant the immutability is. It serves a purpose to keep the ledger consistent and it’s its only use in fact. As absolute values are born in our minds the “absolute”, “inviolable”, “principal” or whatever adjective can be added to it at will, however with neither real meaning nor impact.

No matter how much we’d like to run away from trust issues they’ll chase us and kick our asses. Unless we become friends. The community governance based on trust is exactly what should be discussed now, instead of never ending and fruitless bragging about absolute principles. There are reputation systems in development, there are existing ones that could be investigated. This is what would make this business sane. Instead of yelling again “Vitalik saved us” and waiting for a miracle the community could plan and execute steps with full conscience assured by trusted entities. Trusted thanks repetitive testing and assessment of deeds. Entities with exactly defined responsibilities and profits.

Let’s leave philosophy to philosophers and focus on functionality.

Hibryda

ask hibryda

  • Can you describe the problems that will be hard to overcome within the current blockchain Scope?

    There are several problems that are already hard to overcome.

    • Scalability

      It’s so obvious that even laymen know it. Ethereum tries to deal with it with light client, and Bitcoin with Lightning Network. Both their solutions (and many others) are just workarounds. They may work in short-term. In long - lack of the ability of the blockchain to be scaled is inherent. It’s a one dimensional structure where beginning depends on end and vice versa. There is no good solution to split it. With multidimensional (3+2) scheme of Bitlattice there are actually several strategies that enable scaling. Both atomic and more general. And it’s inherent. So, in simple words, an inherent feature of blockchain is it’s un-scalability, inherent feature of Bitlattice is scalability. Bitlattice's clusters can operate independently while still retaining integrity. Thus there is no need of full nodes (or plenty of them) when certain network saturation is achieved. Because most of info isn't stored in blocks – it’s stored in the subtle structure of lattice. In homomorphic transformations leading to certain arrangement of lattice (using a rather popular science analogy - it's like the data storage in a hologram. Not exact, but gives an idea). All in 3+2 dimensions (because it gives enough capacity for the system itself to live till the end of universe without risk of being overflown, while still being easy to calculate). So, this system is planned to be scalable from the very beginning. Also, what is actually impossible with a blockchain solution, lattice enables concurrent operations (as long as they don't cross the boundary of two or more clusters that are subject to some operations).

    • Timing

      One of the biggest problems with blockchain is time (events) synchronization. Thus you have PoW/PoS and multitude of other proofs. PoS tries to mitigate time issues with in fact dirty hacking and stacking. Lattice solution offers different approach - every cluster of lattice can have own time, as long as there is no operation crossing lattice clusters' boundary there is no need to synchronize. Even when synchronization must occur changes are communicated by a subtle structure of lattice itself. Like changes in fractal dimensions due to subtle changes of parameters. I'm poor teacher and hardly find good comparisons, but this is closest to actual idea.

  • What is the point of network saturation that you need to achieve to make full nodes unnecessary?

    It needs to be calculated. But roughly - it requires few days of operation and enough saturation is achieved. It’s not about big numbers, it’s just about at least some transactions. To have a structure evolved beyond few recorded operations only.

  • Can you explain a concurrent operation that would cross the boundary of two or more clusters that are subject to some operation?

    In the present scheme of blockchain there is no possibility to perform more than two operations at once, stemming from the fact that every next blocks depends on the previous. Of course this is mitigated by packing multiple transactions into one block and pushing them collectively. But it’s far from concurrency, rather it’s just a way to deal with this very limited structure. In lattice things are different. There can be multiple root points that are referred to from the main root. It resembles child chains in some applications, but is very different on the basic level of functionality.

    With lattice, many operations can be performed at the same moment in time by different miners/processing units. And still the whole structure will retain integrity. Because clusters can, but usually won’t overlap.

  • Can you give me an example of an application that, if performed on a lattice would outperform blockchain at scale?

    Actually every operation would be faster and will scale. Because there is no need to consult contents of whole chain every time operations are performed.

  • Which applications for Bitcoin/Ethereum/Others are running into urgent/critical scaling issues?

    With time – all of them. There is a never ending story with constantly growing time of BTC operations. After another hack in Ethereum there were considerable problems with even completing transactions.

    And this happens in all chains that gain considerable size. While in most cases time to perform hashing grows slowly with a longer chain’s length, it still requires more and more power. Even with lightclient (or Lightning Network) there is still need for many full nodes. And there is no way to circumvent it.

    As to real life - check times of txs in most popular chains - hmmm.

    • Encryption

      Bitlattice is best suited for lattice-based encryption. And not because of name - actually lattice has two meanings, and my design encompasses both. It was proven that such systems aren't breakable with quantum computers (no way to break an algorithm into concurrent set of operations that QC eats for breakfast). But this isn't the most important feature. The most important is the possibility to make fully homomorphic encryption that leads to entities living in lattice and having their own private/public keys that enable them to independently sign anything. As you know, contracts must still be run by people and cannot use any keys on their own (because such keys could be read from chain). With homomorphic encryption, it becomes possible to have encrypted entities with built in key-pairs interacting with the outside world independently (It has nothing to do with child blockchain).

      As to fully homomorphic encryption - it’s something very novel and experimental. But really cool!

    • Wider area of application

      Internet of Things (IoT) and mobile devices currently have problems with chain applications because such applications require lots of resources. Even light clients won't solve the issue, as they still need some chain synchronization and often it is still a lot of data exchanged. Even if the data-transferring wasn’t an issue, the synchronization leaves room for attack vectors due to their dependence on external full nodes. BitLattice will require only having knowledge of the local cluster (with size not being hard set - every size will fit. It will be in discretion of the device to ease work by extending the cluster if performing border-crossing operations turns out to be more expensive). More, even crossing border will be far less costly than comparable chain operations as the only proof required would be proof of subtle structure. Which can be performed with GPU cores as it's based on parametric curves.

  • Can you list some example advantages of lattices as they apply to IoT?

    IoT devices are meant to be small and power saving. Thus they cannot provide high processing power. They also cannot serve big storage for data. Blockchain based solutions cannot be fully applied without full node. Bitcoin chain weights now many GBs. The same applies to all popular chains. While memories are cheaper every year, they stopped following Moore’s law. So, probably chains will grow faster than actual data capabilities. Managing storage also requires energy, as well as processing data. So, for IoT there are workarounds like light clients and web apis. While they solve some issues they open new attack vectors.

    Lattice needs no workarounds. Only client defined cluster has to be fetched, with boundaries adjusted to most used transaction vectors. Thus it requires very little memory and energy.

  • Whose attempting to solve similar problems?

    The entire blockchain industry. Bitcoin with patchy lighting network. Ethereum with patchy light clients. Actually all deal with these problems, via light clients, via sidechains, but none deals by providing better scheme.

  • If the code is open sourced, what will stop big players from taking your solution and sharing it with their community. What is proprietary?

    Open source does not mean that there is no license. There can be.

    It means just this - the source is open. Bitcoin is open sourced as well. But actual knowledge in this area is so scarce that no one can steal it. The same applies to Bitlattice - if we work out this scheme we’ll have most recent and best knowledge what is under the hood. It’s so simple. And it works well in blockchain world since the beginning.

  • What about this project is lasting? What gives it longevity?

    Data Mining, Unique Applications, Communal Developments.

    Sustainability against other lattice solutions that come to market…

    Flexibility gives it longevity. Blockchain isn’t flexible. It’s very limiting. We provide a structure that can be extended and hacked without harm. And this stems from this structure’s inherent features.

  • So if first to market and leadership are the plays, it will have to be the community development along with successful dapps that will give Bitlattice sustainability as a revenue generating project.

    Right. We benefit from being first. Like Bitcoin. And of course at a stage between development finish and deployment it must become community driven project. But not earlier. As to dapps - we’ll give tools only (like Bitcoin) the rest can be made by community members. And will. If our product will provide handy and comfortable tools people will use it.

  • So there is an educational curve for a developer to use the Bitlattice? What would be the best pre-requisites? Dev’s currently in blockchain communities?

    Sure, as usual. But as most of operations will be similar or identical to chain ones there will be no steep learning curve. Also, the api can be structured to be similar to those on the market.

    Yes, current devs dealing with blockchain. Because who else? Web designers? :)

    As to special math skills - for the end users (and end devs) there is no need for them to know what is under the hood. The same with Bitlattice. Those who will need to know details will read the whitepaper and associated docs. All math will be there. The rest will have dev docs aimed at providing comfortable interface.

  • What will a developer have to do differently in order to develop on Bitlattice?

    Ideally - nothing. The basic set of operations won’t change. So, transactions, contracts, etc. There will be additional features that they can learn if they want (said autonomous entities). But the base remains unchanged.

  • Who is your first market?

    Developer community currently involved in blockchain projects and are reaching urgency in regards to solving for the above mentioned problems.

    Plus speculators, traders and all interested in new currencies. Given speed of transactions and different timing schemes, this coin can gain reasonable attention due to its flexibility.

    As a side note - I’m trader too. One thing I perceive as an issue in the crypto world is length of lags (confirmations) in main coins. This prohibits fast shifts between coins. Fiat money markets often operate on miliseconds intervals (I have history of being broker on forex years ago and still interested in these issues). Cryptocoins seldom stick to minutes. Especially when there is a need to shift funds between exchanges. That’s why I thought about multiwallet DApp with exchange built in.

    Target initial audience depends on what set of native applications will be developed first. As fast operations are an inherent feature applications like swift payments and micropayments can also be a first market.

  • When you say “attempt to supplement existing blockchain based technologies with more flexible scheme ” Do you mean that Bitlattice net will work together with existing blockchains?

    Nope. Actually it will replace them, but just not to be negative I tried to use milder wording. But this should be stated otherwise, I agree. As to possible integration - there are possible ports of blockchains into lattice, but not the other way round, as lattice is more complex and cannot be packed into less complex scheme.

  • Any Unique Features that emerge from the lattice scheme?

    There are also features not yet mentioned here. Homomorphic encryption and really autonomous entities are mentioned above. More, there are some inherent features bound with math used that enable even faster processing due to leveraging GPUs simplified calculations (in particular matrixes). Also load balancing that with this scheme is easy to apply.

    One important feature stems from the fact that nodes in lattice aren’t required to have fixed size. This enables far more flexible data management and permits more sophisticated operations on this data than those possible in classic blockchain. Of course, no fixed size does not mean no limit. Otherwise this network could be subject to quick overflow. Thus, there will be limit, however not fixed one. Price for additional data will grow exponentially and will tend to infinity around certain set value that can (but doesn’t have to) change under certain circumstances. Actual implementation is a matter of evaluation.

    And many minor ones that can turn up later to be key ones. But first the structure must be fully evaluated. It’s obvious it will work as expected, the question is what other benefits can be also squeezed from it.

Thank you,
Hibryda

*Questions prepared by Patrick
[published 21.02.2017]