Quote from: Crestington on August 08, 2014, 09:33:24 PM

Quote from: digitalindustry on August 08, 2014, 03:11:46 PM

Quote from: digitalindustry on August 08, 2014, 08:42:53 AM

Quote from: neuroMode on August 07, 2014, 10:42:02 PM

Quote from: Crestington on August 07, 2014, 10:13:17 PM

Quote from: foodies123 on August 07, 2014, 09:16:36 PM

Quote from: digitalindustry on August 07, 2014, 06:45:21 AM

I have a question it doesn't directly relate to the topic but more to vPoW-
let me give you a scenario - :

is there an attack vector that exists here:

lets say we have for example 3 "algos"

1. Xa

2. Xb

3. Xc

now (in this world) - there is a beautiful community developed CPU and GPU miner for both

what this miner does is it can mine each of the 3 and choose the lowest diff of each -

is there a potential attack vector where the miner can "game" the next block i.e by jumping form aglo to aglo -

so exploited some how the way in which the next block is determined?

sorry for the newb question.

what i'm asking is:

what is the mechanism that determines the next block is it really random?

None, the block hash is generated and can be solved by any of the algos. It's just a matter of difficulty vs hash power.

So then couldn't a group of miners devote hash power to the algorithm with the lowest difficulty? or does it become where the sheer number of different altcoins it can be mined with should make that unachievable?

Lets assume that a mining pool of groups of mining pools have a lot of hashpower in different algorithms and can switch their hashpower to the algorithms of the lowest difficulty like the reverse polarity of the Myriad Blockchain itself to achieve maximum profit. How would the different algorithms prevent such an attack?

This is a good project and important for all altcoins so I am trying to get my head around how this can be implemented on a large scale.

Right now Myriad has a chicken and egg problem: Our hashrate is not incredibly high, but once we gain hashrate through PolyMYR and Simplicity we should have continuous long lasting high network hashrates that should make it increasingly harder to attack individual algorithms.

Furthermore, we have discussed some interesting mechanisms to prevent algorithms from solving multiple blocks in a row. One solution might be to temporarily raise the difficulty on one algorithm if it finds two blocks in a row. The difficulty would rise exponentially if they found 3, 4, 5 blocks in a row. So even if an attacker is trying to form 5-6 blocks in a row and then insert them into the blockchain, the exponentially rising difficulty would prevent them from ever getting to that 5th or 6th block in a reasonable timespan.

hmm very interesting -

i like it !

but wait - what i meant was actually the miner - the software (for the pool users) can effectively switch to the lowest diff, so let me try to give an example:

{A < finds one bock
{B
The Hash {C (this is now lowest diff) < switches to this algo to find block driving up Diff
{D
{E

So "The hash" can go to any of the algos right?

is there a way to game that?

BTW when I meant "peer" review yes i meant try it until it breaks.

Same thing I asked as well but in a different context. I think what he means is that it is still in quite of an experimental state for also balancing out difficulties at low adoption. With a large amount of altcoins mining on the different algorithms they can also adjust their own values and difficulties to protect against sudden spikes and attacks.

I assume that Myriadcoin wants to be a type of central hub that connects all the hashpower of the Altcoins and then relays and adjusts difficulty/smoothing over a very large amount of algorithms so that in order to 51% attack you need more hashpower than all the Altcoins combined versus one network.

More or less, still a lot of work to do

More or less, yes. Definitely lots of work to do, including overcoming those who still don't really "see" the nice implications of a multi-PoW blockchain.

Also, being a "central" hub is nice, but it's an optional hub (i.e. I don't like the word centralized).