Question: Hashgraph

[abdmuiz]

Is this the correct thread for this topic ? I will give my 5 cents anyway

My understanding of hashgraph is that it will use timestamped "blocks", not really blocks but lets use that for this explanation.
When a node gets a transaction it will tell a few other nodes about the transaction, those nodes in turn would do this too and so on it will propogate throughout the network. Each node tells the other one about it with a timestamp attached. This timestamp is a basis for a transaction to be valid. When a certain amount of time is passed then  that gets set as the "block". This is my understanding of how it works in a basic form.

This uses a legacy protocol called gossip protocol, this was developed in the 1960's or something. It was never really used much. Which brings up concern number one for me, if this legacy protocol is the base of hashgraph then how do we know it has been stress tested and battlehardened. Even today we find exploits with TCP/IP. TCP/IP is the basis for the internet and networks as we know them today.
Let's face it, programmers today know a lot more than the original creators did in those days, applications and protocols are developed with security in mind.

Then onto the way transactions are advertised. This sounds very similar to some more legacy networking technologies (Such as RIP routing protocol), I am unsure of what kind of loop prevention they have. From what I have read about it I don't  see a fool proof loop prevention mechanism in it, I can think that if I recieve a gossip packet  from someone else I can just modify the timestamp in the header before passing it on in my node (this might screw with the whole system). As the network grows the bandwidth requirements will probably start getting quite large which means it wont  be usable on mobiles.
I didn't research this extensively though, so this point might be mute. But the bandwidth requirement will go up as the network scales. Which I think is a bit of a problem, there should be a set limit as to how many confirmations are needed for a transaction to limit the bandwidth requirements.

My biggest problem with this, like others have stated is the fact that this is patented and  developed by one company. I'm sure it will have some uses, but I dont see this replacing blockchain. Blockchain is starting to become really cool, modern blockchain 3.0 products really lay the ground for mass disruption and previously unthinkable innovation. I don't see hashgraph bringing such extensive scalable smart contract technology to the table.
If it's not open source then that means we can't see the code, that means we need to trust the entity who created it. With BTC and others the code is there for anyone to read and check, meaning we don't need to trust anyone, which is the beauty of blockchain.
"Each node in Hashgraph can disseminate sealed information (called events) about transactions created and transactions received from others, to other nodes chosen at random, these nodes will add the received events with the information received from other nodes in a new event, and then They will send to other nodes chosen at random, this process continues until all the nodes know the information created or received at the beginning, and the new information can reach each node of the network in a very fast way.

Fast: 250,000 transactions per second. (7 transactions / second in BItcoin)
More just: Better mathematical configuration (with 2/3 of the network the transaction is validated). For example, a miner could NOT decide which transaction to "make" before due to the higher fee payment.
More secure: It is asynchronous. Nobody can avoid reaching a consensus or trying to interrupt one that has already been reached.
Efficient: No new block can become obsolete.
Less storage: Allows if an event occurs, everyone knows it in minutes, and only the transaction is saved, everything else goes straight to the trash.
Less electricity costs: As they do not rely on PoW (work proof), there are no miners nor would that amount of electricity be consumed. "

This is a bit of the information I found about it.