Why do you need more than reputation? Literally everything is based on reputation. SN as it exists today is based on pure reputation.
Even if you could do what you want with split payments you would still need reputation as the prospect of future fees is no force preventing the Russian to exit scam.
The point isn't to absolutely remove reputation; to what extent does bitcoin require the participants to have reputation to run? The goal is to minimize reputation, because reputation is, as of yet, impractical to decentralize.
My goal is for SN to exist independent of its reputation and for it to "exist" because the network of relays etc are paid/incentivized to exist.
you would still need reputation as the prospect of future fees is no force preventing the Russian to exit scam.
Just like your tx fees are "no force" on miners including your tx in a block, yet they tend to do it anyway.
reply
Got it, you need proof-of-spacetime and proof-of-retrievability. Look at Filecoin. Or maybe Arweave which stores everything in a blockchain that isn't guaranteed to be kept by anyone.
These are the state-of-the-art solutions to the problem you're trying to solve.
reply
Those are solutions ungirded by a blockchain - but perhaps there's insight around incentives there.
To be extra clear, I'm not looking to prove they will hold onto messages forever, just that they're incentivized to hold them and therefore will bias toward doing so.
reply