honestly? the multi resource consensus mechanic sat in the back of my mind for weeks as POWER was stuck in my mind before i understood why it matters as much as it does 😂
most consensus mechanisms deal with one resource type. transactions move tokens. validators confirm them. the resource is singular and the consensus logic is built around that assumption.
midnight handles multiple resource types in the same consensus round. night, dust, and private state transitions all need to reach finality together. each has different properties - night is transferable, dust is non-transferable and address-bound, private state is local and proven through ZK. and i wonder that its same as ZKP?
bundling them into a single consensus mechanism means the protocol has to satisfy the validity requirements of all three simultaneously rather than sequentially.
what that gets right is atomicity. a transaction that touches multiple resource types either finalises completely or not at all. no partial settlement. no state where dust was consumed but the corresponding private state transition failed.
what i cant resolve is whether consensus complexity scales cleanly as more resource types or more ZK proof types are added to the protocol over time.
atomic multi resource finality that makes midnight transactions composable and safe or a consensus mechanism whose complexity compounds with every new resource type the protocol eventually needs to support?? 🤔
#night @MidnightNetwork $NIGHT
