https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman


Domain Name:BITSEED.ORG
Domain ID: D170425430-LROR
Creation Date: 2013-12-12T19:00:07Z

Just to make it clear to everyone so there is no confusion - BitSeeds and BitSeeds Foundation are in no way associated with Bitseed or Bitseed.org. We have been posting from our Bitseed account and selling our product for months now, long before BitSeedsFoundation announced their altcoin.

BitSeeds ≠ Bitseed.

Incentivizing voting has been a concern of mine as well. One way to create an interest in participation would be for delegates to set their own fees, and users would pay the fee of the delegate they vote for. The transaction would still be processed by the forging delegate, but the fees would be split at the end of the round according to how much the delegates are charging instead of evenly. I expect running a delegate will be more of part of marketing its main business, like a company putting its name on a stadium, than used as a source of income by itself. The point of DPoS is to minimize the cost of securing the network, not make money for the delegates.

The fee is higher initially to create an incentive for people to go through the expense and work of setting up and running delegates during the initial phase of lower transaction volume. The plan is to go to a fee which dynamically adjusts based on activity, so as volume increases, the fee decreases.

I fully understand the issue with transaction fees. It is a big problem I have with credit and debit cards and other payment processors. Since many of the recipients of funds turn around and use the funds to buy inventory and pay expenses using the same payment systems with similar fees, which is yet again recursively spent and more fees paid paying still more people and businesses, it adds up to a huge parasitic overhead on the economy. A major goal of the crypto currency movement is to eliminate this type of burden on productive people.

To my knowledge, nothing has ever been removed from the Crypti thread other than updating the OP to reflect current project status and links. Constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement are welcomed. Feedback from the the communication is very important to the Crypti development effort.

We have seen the utility of other project threads severely degraded when trolls post page after page repeating the same comments over and over. Extremely offensive content also gets posted from time to time. Self moderation provides a means to remedy these types of situations should they arise.

Bter is waiting for 0.1.9 to be released to enable withdrawals. You may want to restart the wallet to sync if it seems frozen.

We have 0.1.9 running on the ARM based coinbox, still needs to be connected to the main net to finish testing. Currect usage stats are 100 Mb RAM, 5% CPU usage, which will probably increase once connected to main net and processing transactions.

Yes, memory leak.

Yes, the coinbox is ideal for torrent files since it can stay on with little power consumption, about 10 watts. The blockchain makes for a great place to store the file list, along with ratings, and user credits for seeding.

I'm working on the matrix, but a new version of Crypti, 0.2.0, which will be released in the next few weeks, is going to make some major changes to items in the list. Is there a deadline for when you need it and are the published results easy to change once posted? Thanks.

The whole cryptoasset sector is in the post-hype, trough of sorrow phase right now lead by the Bitcoin price decline. Tough to tell when Realization sets in and we start the steady, sustainable growth phase of next-gen blockchain technology. All we can do is average out buys throughout the trough until it eventually turns around.

Nice feature list from salsacz. Is this for a publication? I've posted it to our discussion group to fill out the answers. A lot of it is in the road map and then some. Inflation is most definitely not in any plans. Mesh networking is my preferred app but farther down the road than some of the other things.

The coinbox has done well in testing, and we'll be launching it this month. Below is a preview. It is stackable as well as wall mountable. Below is a preview.

Benefits

Maintains the full blockchain stored inside the device
Runs the “Satoshi” open source client (Bitcoin Core)
Can serve as a trusted node for phones, tablets, and PCs running lite clients
Can be used as a local blockchain database for advanced blockchain applications
Lower cost than 1 year of a VPS service
Always on 24/7/365
Low Power Consumption:  Uses less than 10 watts of power


Features

120 GB storage will support bitcoin blockchain for years
Preloaded with full blockchain
Power Consumption is less than 10 watts
Access blockchain data via bitcoind or bitcoin-cli RPC interface
Browser interface allows the wallets to be controlled from standard PCs and mobile devices
Access to the wallet is strictly limited to PCs and devices you have pre-authorized


Retail Product

Price:  $139
Includes:
Node Server device
Power Adapter
Ethernet Cable
120 GB built-in storage


Technical Specs

2 core ARM processor 1.5GHz
1 GB RAM
120 GB HDD
Gigabit Ethernet port
2x USB Port
5 vdc 2.0A

Is anyone having problems with Crypti withdrawals from Bter. I've never had a problem before, or delay more than an hour. I have two withdrawals which have been stuck at "processing" and "waiting for balance..." for two days.

I received a response to my ticket saying problem resolved but the withdrawals still have not shown up ay my XCR address, the two withdrawals still show same status as 2 days ago, and my XCR balance does not show any refund. I've sent another response to the email saying problem resolved, still no response.

It is now Monday in China so it should be possible to resolve this now.

SyRenity is still working on the project. We just had our weekly meeting yesterday. 0.1.9 is in testing.

Looks like a 'selfie' of the photographer with his iphone reflecting off the gold label on the mug - I can see a beard on his face.

Below are more details on option 2 of PoT, the iterative probabilistic method.

1. Separate transaction processing from block generation, so transactions can be confirmed by consensus quickly without being held back by verification of node uptime for block generation.

2. Divide fees proportionally among all nodes according to individual weights for each block instead having one node take all for the block.

3. Have nodes confirm each others' timestamps and transactions by iterative random sample with consensus.

    a. first sample, 10 for example must have 100% consensus. For a sample size of 10 with 10% bad nodes on network, odds of fail are .1^10 =0.00000001% or 1/10 billion.

    b. if first sample is not 100% consensus, second larger sample is taken, for example, 100, requiring 90% consensus. For a sample size of 100 with 10% bad nodes on the network, odds of a fail with 90 or more nodes being bad are effectively 0 (my calculator calculates the sum of the probabilities of 90 through 100 nodes being bad as 0. This may continue through further iterations with increasing numbers of nodes and lower consensus requirements as a failsafe against network attacks by floods of bad nodes.

(for number of nodes N is much larger than sample size, using Binomial Distribution as approximation instead of sampling without replacement, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution)

    c. The above sample sizes can be adjusted so probability of step a failing is equivalent to probability of step b failing.

4. flag nodes with consistently disagreeing results as bad

    a. ignore in confirmations

    b. alert owners node is malfunctioning

    c. maybe auto-restart node when flagged as bad

    d. too many flags and restarts blacklists node permanently.

5. Since fees are split proportionally, block may be forged randomly with highest difficulty to select valid forks as chains having highest difficulty.

Overall, this amounts to a quality and reliability engineering approach to crypto.

Ideally, the weight should reflect the quality of a node. Currently the metrics are its reliability as expressed in uptime and its activity in the amount it spends. More metrics may be added, such as the speed and accuracy of its results in processing transactions and reaching consensus, the accuracy of its time stamping, and the speed with which it responds to queries from its peers for consensus. The random sampling of nodes may be dynamically weighted to sample nodes of known higher quality more frequently than nodes of lower or unknown quality to improve the reliability of the network.

The probabilistic model is a reliability problem. The required reliability is determined as length of time the network must run with an acceptable probability of failure. If it does fail, it must do so in a graceful manner without catastrophic results, with full recovery possible. In crypto, a graceful failure is degradation of performance, less graceful is a full halt with no data or transaction loss or error. Least graceful is error requiring rollback of the blockchain for recovery. Any fails beyond this are unacceptable as they would be catastrophic, and even a rollback must be avoided.

To anticipate and avoid problems, a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failure_mode_and_effects_analysis) will be needed to identify all possible failure modes and what effects they would have on network reliability and its users. The parameters of the probabilistic iterations may be adjusted to achieve the required reliability. It is what is known in reliability engineering as a standby redundant system, where if a primary module fails, a secondary takes its place, and further iterations of consensus act as additional standby redundancy.

What Mal has proposed has given me an idea on solving the PoT problem. I have never liked the lottery aspect of Bitcoin mining since it encourages the consolidation of mining into mining pools. Joining a mining pool lets the participant earn a steady return instead of hoping to eventually win a block reward.

With Crypti, I would rather see all nodes, or those meeting a minimum threshold of uptime, divide all of the forger portion of fees as they come in. This would eliminate the windfall a node receives if it happens to forge a block containing a large total of fees while other blocks pay less by simply distributing a portion of the fees to each node in proportion to its weight determined by PoT and PoP. This would work as a consensus system to confirm transactions as they come in. It simplifies things a lot by not needing to sort or compare weights from nodes to determine the winner of the next block.

This would maintain the decentralized architecture of Crypti, eliminate the lottery aspect, and improve network performance.

The proposed plan to attack other projects using legal means is a non-starter for me as it goes completely against my ethics. I go out of my way to avoid doing business with companies and professions which receive protectionist mercantile privilege or use the legal system to thwart competition and force people to do business with them.

PoT + PoP is not a lottery since it is determined by the total amount of time a node has been running since its last forge or initial start plus the total amount of spends it has made. Chance may enter into it in the occasional event of a tie, and the runners up in that tie are still at or near the top of the queue to generate a block soon after the tie.

Thanks, glad you like it.

We are following the proven model of cellphones, where the carrier would subsidize the cost of the handset to the customer in exchange for a contract of long enough duration to pay for the actual cost of the phone. This has been a very successful marketing strategy to promote widespread use of cellphones.

Happily, in the case of the Crypti box,  in exchange for running Crypti along with the coin of his choice, the customer receives a device which can make him money, and be used for a Point of Sale system in his business, instead of costing him money for a service contract, other than the electricity at a low price.

The box is also pre-configured and self updating for ease of use and convenience to encourage mass adoption, along the lines of Apple products. Early adopters who participate are also encouraged to contribute to testing and continued development of the system.

Thanks for your suggestions, Mal.

The pcDuino is a top contender to replace the current candidate Cubie boards, reducing cost without sacrificing performance. We are meeting with the pcDuino manufacturer tomorrow to discuss, among other things, adding more RAM to pcDuino so it can reliably run Crypti along with another PoS type coin, most notably NXT. This would also be useful for running Supernet alongside Crypti.

There is a plan being worked on to introduce the Crypti coinbox at or even below cost to encourage operation of independent nodes. The box is being designed to run two coins so another coin with larger forging rewards or other features may be run for more revenue while the Crypti network grows. The box has a SATA port so it is well configured to even run a storage coin like Storj or Maidsafe by adding a SATA drive. The numbers being considered are 500-1000 nodes. The final number will be determined based on consultation with the independent vendor reviewing the Crypti code for security.

The system will also form the core of the mesh networking node to be released at a later date.

I invested in the SuperNET pre-sale and hope it does well. I have corresponded with jl777 on possibly integrating it into a coinbox project a group of us are working on. I consider anonymity and privacy in commerce to be a very important feature, though it is not our main focus in Crypti. Integration of Crypti in SuperNET is being considered, but improving scalability for the Crypti network has been the overriding priority of late.

I very much agree with the philosophy of working with other projects towards a synergistic improvement in progress.