Re: -- The Riddle of the Twin Brothers - Who Were, Are and Will Rule the World!
I just design the PoW. It's up to other people to launch new coins that use it:-)
They should go with a relatively long block interval though (10min), so they can increase the
memory requirement to 4GB or more (where running a single instance takes over a minute).
I'm also a proponent of fixed rewards, since the rate of lost coins is a probably a few percent,
so even a fixed reward coin can't remain inflationary for long.
Translated: Here's the results of what my employer, RenTec, allows me to do on my spare time - created a new algo for the crypto space and give it to them for free so that they can use my new algo in creating new coins where ... wait for it ... my employer with their super-duper signal machine thingy will trade said coins once they hit the exchanges that they may or may not control themselves. BRB, for I got to go and check how my Medallion Fund is doing. Back, as in Adam. It's doing swell. Thanks for asking.
WTF dude, you got any proof of this? If these guys were for real you think they'd let Dr. Wright and the Chinese miners take over and destroy their plans? I call BS. Their yearly bonus alone could sink the Chinese miners yet I see no opposition.
I think this is Bitcoin Core propaganda preparing to hire these guys are a credible plausible replacement/stand-in for Satoshi in an attempt to shut down Dr. Wright.
At least leave Mercer out of it; I don't like hunting down like minded spirits.
John Tromp is an avid Go player, yet I've posted more times about AlphaGo than he has, of which at last count John had zero posts:
I think its amazing that machine can win againts human, its human that created machine and yet its winning againts human
"Hey, Chuck, after seeing AlphaGo beat Lee, I think it's amazing that a machine can win against a human, given that machines are made by humans. What do you think?"
Speaking of core ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Key-ID: 331B6406
Fingerprint: BE9209A6C773FBF91E4ED2E425C33539331B6406
Last updated: 2017/03/25 04:48 UTC
Rule #1: We are not here to debate against PoW change-- this thread is for people who have already decided to help with a PoW change of some kind. It is, however, acceptable (and desirable) to debate exactly what kind of PoW fork, based on data, testing, exploit discovery, etc.
[BrCoh1] Cuckoo cycle is one of the most ASIC-resistant Proof-of-Work algorithms.
Bitmain is close to having de facto control of a great majority of the network hashrate:
"Bitmain, one of bitcoins biggest miners with a current hash-share of around 15% of the network, is to launch a new giant mining facility this December with 45 rooms, independent substations, offices and a total size of 140,000 kilowatts.
By some calculations, that translates to around 45% of the network hash-share, but it is not clear whether the new facilities are simply for a relocation or to accommodate additional mining power."
[ Quentson, A. (2016, February 11). "Bitmain to Launch a Giant New Bitcoin Mining Center". CryptoCoinsNews.]
This poses the risk of:
- transaction censorship ("PBoC does not approve of your transaction, so Bitmain has their pools exclude it from blocks")
- double-spend attacks (if Bitmain is not motivated by mining profits (as a KnC miner executive once speculated) because e.g. their real profits come from a ChinaGov paycheck), then they will happily destroy the value of Bitcoin's network by executing double-spend attacks.
Given the urgency of settling these issues in order to protect Bitcoin's prime reputation and its adoption rate, I offer the following recommended ranking of types of communications on this thread, starting with the most valuable at (1):
(1) Empirical data - Tests, competitive benchmarks between PoW algorithms when merged with Bitcoin codebase, accurate descriptions of vulnerabilities/exploits with sample code.
(2) Analysis of data - Identification and further extrapolation of patterns in data, technical critique of methods used in tests, model-based predictions of outcomes of tests (if the tests themselves are too resource/labor intensive to actually carry out)
(3) Interpretation of results - Discussion (with proof/justification) of what the results and analysis of the tests will mean for the Bitcoin market cap, decentralization, censorship-resistance, and any new vulnerabilities.
(4) Broader discussion - Including discussion of businesses related to Bitcoin, quotes by notable personalities relevant to Bitcoin, regulations and other activities of governments with respect to Bitcoin, and what implications these things have for the PoW project.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJY1fjOAAoJECXDNTkzG2QGfcoIAJEp1+LmBom2ZDAEC13PeIdH
8V9w6bP0/dRe2lcrwU5bOSCZHrzqI7JOCUC28KMXrt3RvHUdtuwcnoPpS3Rebaub
+5BloS+OEwSNDb5qvLIJX7dp38GYKThK/Kw70r5/NS+Vh1VMCwZyWd+BLjoMSnmw
QyNZOLSVk9bR7WShxdq0aj4ADGAPhTwBey0/R9CfHZOlQzWHQIVwmOXShOBfDI1O
ENomlu9k1b1fPf5U5V8Zg3rEyPU0nfWLSGjNqwGNeRuofob61XCFfYGHopyPdmRP
cliCCXg1R236sJICFjYJ/c/+gyzw9cxRXwwXseJ/ik2wM/5dl9rzgnQp4TmnNB8=
=fBZw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA256
Key-ID: 331B6406
Fingerprint: BE9209A6C773FBF91E4ED2E425C33539331B6406
Last updated: 2017/03/25 04:48 UTC
Bitcoin Proof-of-Work Update Initiative
Goal
To research the suitability of alternate proof-of-work algorithms, to test them, and then to implement the algorithm that makes it through these filters as Bitcoin mainnet's new proof-of-work function.Contributors
- luke-jr - renowned Bitcoin Core developer - Development
- /u/riiume (me) - Marketing/publishing
- r00tdude
- desantis - is working on a PoW fork proposal
- ... Perhaps you? If interested in going full bore on this project, please PM me, along with a one sentence bio, then you will be added to this list.
Rule #1: We are not here to debate against PoW change-- this thread is for people who have already decided to help with a PoW change of some kind. It is, however, acceptable (and desirable) to debate exactly what kind of PoW fork, based on data, testing, exploit discovery, etc.
Developer Resources
- luke-jr's prototype of how a PoW change could be implemented in code: https://github.com/luke-jr/bitcoin/commit/8d3a84c242598ef3cdc733e99dddebfecdad84a6
- Bitcoin Hard Fork Research - repository of quality research into general Bitcoin hard forks
- Malice Reactive Proof of Work Additions (MR POWA)
- Github BIP - in the works
- Wiki - in the works - a curated reference to the most valuable data/tests/benchmarks to come out of these discussions. Hopefully a sort of "rock-of-objectivity" upon which the ongoing planning and discussing can be built.
Media, Essays
- "Proof-of-Work update is not a threat to miners, it is a necessity for users" [Nicolas Dorier]
- Reddit+Twitter+SocialMedia:
Claims Worth Testing
(pm me if you would like to recommend edits to this list)[BrCoh1] Cuckoo cycle is one of the most ASIC-resistant Proof-of-Work algorithms.
Social
- Website: btcpowupdate.org
- Twitter: @BtcPowUpgrade
Raison D'être
Bitmain is close to having de facto control of a great majority of the network hashrate:
"Bitmain, one of bitcoins biggest miners with a current hash-share of around 15% of the network, is to launch a new giant mining facility this December with 45 rooms, independent substations, offices and a total size of 140,000 kilowatts.
By some calculations, that translates to around 45% of the network hash-share, but it is not clear whether the new facilities are simply for a relocation or to accommodate additional mining power."
[ Quentson, A. (2016, February 11). "Bitmain to Launch a Giant New Bitcoin Mining Center". CryptoCoinsNews.]
This poses the risk of:
- transaction censorship ("PBoC does not approve of your transaction, so Bitmain has their pools exclude it from blocks")
- double-spend attacks (if Bitmain is not motivated by mining profits (as a KnC miner executive once speculated) because e.g. their real profits come from a ChinaGov paycheck), then they will happily destroy the value of Bitcoin's network by executing double-spend attacks.
Recommended Discussion Guidelines
Given the urgency of settling these issues in order to protect Bitcoin's prime reputation and its adoption rate, I offer the following recommended ranking of types of communications on this thread, starting with the most valuable at (1):
(1) Empirical data - Tests, competitive benchmarks between PoW algorithms when merged with Bitcoin codebase, accurate descriptions of vulnerabilities/exploits with sample code.
(2) Analysis of data - Identification and further extrapolation of patterns in data, technical critique of methods used in tests, model-based predictions of outcomes of tests (if the tests themselves are too resource/labor intensive to actually carry out)
(3) Interpretation of results - Discussion (with proof/justification) of what the results and analysis of the tests will mean for the Bitcoin market cap, decentralization, censorship-resistance, and any new vulnerabilities.
(4) Broader discussion - Including discussion of businesses related to Bitcoin, quotes by notable personalities relevant to Bitcoin, regulations and other activities of governments with respect to Bitcoin, and what implications these things have for the PoW project.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJY1fjOAAoJECXDNTkzG2QGfcoIAJEp1+LmBom2ZDAEC13PeIdH
8V9w6bP0/dRe2lcrwU5bOSCZHrzqI7JOCUC28KMXrt3RvHUdtuwcnoPpS3Rebaub
+5BloS+OEwSNDb5qvLIJX7dp38GYKThK/Kw70r5/NS+Vh1VMCwZyWd+BLjoMSnmw
QyNZOLSVk9bR7WShxdq0aj4ADGAPhTwBey0/R9CfHZOlQzWHQIVwmOXShOBfDI1O
ENomlu9k1b1fPf5U5V8Zg3rEyPU0nfWLSGjNqwGNeRuofob61XCFfYGHopyPdmRP
cliCCXg1R236sJICFjYJ/c/+gyzw9cxRXwwXseJ/ik2wM/5dl9rzgnQp4TmnNB8=
=fBZw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
It's worth exploring since it is a more palatable "non-emergency" solution. As for the current fork, be it HF or SF, I like the idea of a memory intensive POW. It would indeed remove China's hardware monopoly -- and subsidized electricity can be found in many countries.