Quote from: ion.cash on September 09, 2015, 02:50:02 AM

Recently I announced my rationale to develop my coin non-anonymously, with any anonymity features to be added by other developers later.

The proposed name of the coin is Ion with a capitalized first letter when it can be written with a serif font, e.g. Ion otherwise ion instead of Ion. For me ion connotes a thing that can conduct a current and be zapped to a destination.

Formerly AnonyMint et al, I expended 2+ years thinking about anonymity designs and recently formalized an unreleased white paper which I think is the holy grail of on chain anonymity. This will be offloaded to other developers, so I can work non-anonymously on this coin.

The current focus of my development on this coin is to complete a novel consensus network design which has proposed the following fixes to flaws in Satoshis design while retaining proof-of-work as unbounded entropy[1]:

Censorship resistance even if mining is entirely centralized.

Attack-free instant zero confirmation instantaneous transactions.

Impervious to selfish mining and 51% attacks.
Transaction rates virtually unbounded by block chain bandwidth and size.
Resilient against network fragmentation.
Decentralization of pools and ASICs by making them uneconomic.
Non-heuristic Sybil and DoS resistance.

None of the above is a joke nor exaggeration. I am entirely serious. My programming background and expertise is documented in the archives of my prior usernames.

Currently unreleased white papers will not be published until this coin is nearer to release to insure these designs are released first in our coin. Thus for the time being I may not be providing more details on how the above features are accomplished.

Soon I will be uploading some code to the internet and will update this opening post and bump the thread. I will also be announcing some bounties in coins for those who want to do development on this coin. I will also later add some information on the targeted launch date and other details on the coin supply and distribution.

So that new readers can digest this thread from start to finish, I will be removing your posts sometimes to incorporate what was discussed into this opening thread post. I will also remove posts which are redundant or otherwise don't add anything useful information. Constructive critical discussion is welcomed.

The future goal is to have a Wiki and incorporate all discussion there. All posts would remain viewable in the Wiki history as they are removed from current versions of the Wiki pages and the outcome of discussion incorporated into the current versions of the Wiki pages. The point again is so new readers can access the information they need.

You are welcome to make an unmoderated thread, but do not expect me to comment there. Bring any issue in this thread if you want me to address it.

[1] My position until I am convinced otherwise is that all non-proof-of-work consensus systems have a bounded entropy (e.g. the total stake and/or any initial seeds used for randomization) and thus their attributes (e.g. decentralization, censorship resistance, DoS resistance, Sybil attack resistance, impartiality) is subject to a game theory which is potentially undiscovered. Whereas, the entropy of proof-of-work is unbounded because it is externally added and the game theory is well defined.

Seriously I would like to discuss the possibility of having a decentralized functional system/network that is:

1. Attack-free

2. Instant transactions

3. Zero confirmation

Discuss.