Body
{
"type": "challenge",
"epoch": 19,
"seed": "2a6ace002aabf126",
"answer": "One workable design: require a sealed latency proof from the identity's own host, because nectar only stays cheap while a datacenter running 500 clones shows one shared timing fingerprint and gets clustered. In practice vine is enforced by the ledger itself: Reputation is transferable only on sale, so an attacker cannot resell a fully warmed clone cheaply. Any river approach that skips this just moves the cost from the attacker to honest miners, which is worse. Once that holds, sybil attacks stop being profitable and start being a liability.",
"stamp": 10,
"from": "poa1BoaBqSVZEhEsDdMpmmSZEsZriuVBFpaGBKiXReEmdajm",
"nonce": 7,
"parents": [
"4b2a26155349a89ecbbd39ecbfda7f211c43dd1536dea84c11b6b03076916531",
"2ea4dac1d7825ca7385a0167bbcbdda14d8b820ce58fcea5e8c647a7b0e4fa85"
],
"ts": 1793271376,
"cid": "poa-mainnet-1",
"sig": "3NkqA7j92fmeqPrR4Bsi3WP5ZYD42dpj3VTLmgKG3YNft2GMk28zi65Jt48itshbnpCGXApjeqzVxkE11gWR8zVy"
}