Quote from: ion.cash on September 13, 2015, 08:49:48 AM

Quote from: r0ach on September 13, 2015, 04:33:22 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on September 13, 2015, 03:39:03 AM

Mining will be unprofitable if we achieve that technical design goal. Only users that send transactions or who don't count their insignificant electricity cost will mine.

Did you just reveal that mining has a proof of burn involved because I don't see any other way for that statement to work otherwise.

I already told you that if users are required send PoW with each transaction and they don't care about their insignificant electrical cost then PoW will be unprofitable, especially if the CPU-only hash has been well designed to be within an order-of-magnitude of the potential ASIC optimization. In my recent archives (July?), smooth and I estimated this order-of-magnitude for Cryptonite at between 1 and 2, and I believe mine may be slightly better than Cryptonite.

There is your first example of me doing something technical you formerly thought is impossible. And there will be many more such cases. Stay tuned...

Quote from: monsterer on September 14, 2015, 08:46:18 AM

Not sure what thread is now the right place to post technical questions, so gonna post here:

* If there is no mining incentive, why mine the chain?

* If difficulty is low enough for joe public to mine their own transactions (and assuming only the sender can mine his own transactions), doesn't that open the chain to attack by server farms under the control of one individual?

1. There is a mining requirement because transactions sent without proof-of-work mining share would form a rejected block, thus will not be accepted by any block.

2. The sender of the transaction doesn't need to win a block to send a transaction. I claim a 51% attack is impossible in my design. The specifics on how I accomplish that protection is not going to be discussed now. It hinges on objectivity which Satoshi's design doesn't have. Sincerely I feel bad for not being able to discuss the specifics on that now (I am eager to of course, because I am proud of my design even if it is not perfect because nothing is perfect) but please do not drag me into another argument because that particular feature is my intellectual property. I am trying to accelerate my coding so I can get the white paper and code released into the open source asap so we can open discussion on the specifics.