Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 100 results by DrGrid
Re: Gridcoin (GRC) - first coin utilizing BOINC - Official Thread
Probably you also need to fix wallet encoding
This needs fixing, can you post your current system and its configuration? e.g. running Windows/Mac/Linux in which version, or distribution and desktop type.
They steal your Sweetcorn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdd4rBlsj2o
It's a mix between this and this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jbFJ8U3HZU
Gist of it is: At the end everything dumps. Who gets to be the plumber?
In your opinion, what is the best coin to seriously invest in long term?
(example: DOGE, DRK, XRP, Ethereum, BC, etc...)
If you can strike a private deal for some Ethers, that surely won't be too bad. As long as you keep your fingers away from Ethercoin. I would also start looking at Storj and Filecoin.(example: DOGE, DRK, XRP, Ethereum, BC, etc...)
The results are really impressive, thanks for the detailed explanation. Would be interesting to see what would happen to the transaction bursts, when the latency of the global network starts to kick in. Have you conducted a simulation yet, that would prove it to scale linear?
I think I am starting to understand the concept now thanks to the graphics, explanation and further discussion. If this system really would host a larger majority of good actors this sounds like it could work really well. However, when we are looking at a possible large minority of bad actors, the conflict resolution seems somewhat slow. Bitcoin was made to attack proof until really the network is being compromised, but instead sacrificed on scalability. To me this system looks like it has full scalability, but lacks efficient protection and quick solution against an all out attack.
Could you expand on how you envision stake being counted into solving the consensus problem?
Could you expand on how you envision stake being counted into solving the consensus problem?
I called parts of it a block chain since the send/receive blocks contain a hash of the previous block and it has a one-follows-another order. It's different than other cryptos in that one block is one transaction, a send or a receive, where others contain many transactions.
Thanks for spending the time you did looking at it, sorry about the lack of comments that's admittedly in poor style.
These differ from off-chain transactions in that each chain is replicated to all peers so all account actions are observed and validated by everyone. Rather than packing all transactions in to a single chain, all transactions for a single account are in a single chain.
On the double spending front, since all blocks for each chain are replicated to everyone, nodes can ask and publish their view of signed Y-follows-X blocks. If anyone instead sees a signed Z-follows-X block this is a fork and needs resolution. Unlike monolithic blockchains, a fork in this system only affects a single account instead of everyone, again working toward scalability where we don't stall everyone because one section has an issue.
Resolution is done through a weighted vote system where losing blocks and dependents are rolled back. Senders can be sure they're not receiving a double spend by observing votes and tallying them, if they observe no forks or a resolved fork they can safely accept the transaction in to their chain. Notice though that resolution is never needed in the normal, well-behaved case. Forks only happen with signed, conflicting blocks; only accounts that are misbehaving by intentionally creating forks will every be put up for resolution.
Let me know if any of what I wrote doesn't make sense.
So a block is taken as a single tx id with timestamp? If so this seems to fall into the category of Transactions as Proof of Work. I still see a number of challenges with this system. First up of course consensus; at what point can a transaction block be viewed as verified and have an acceptable level of cryptographic confirmations inside a network with an unknown number of peers. I actually see hard-coded rounds of confirmations as a possibility for this. Secondly, how do you make the attack you have just described as costly as possible. Since the Bitcoin community is always very passionate about strong security, that is so far unmatched by anything else, I am actually particularly intrigued by this point. Of course we can look at typical solutions like including a transaction fee, expanding the proofhash to multiple layers and reward good actors for their work. Thanks for spending the time you did looking at it, sorry about the lack of comments that's admittedly in poor style.
These differ from off-chain transactions in that each chain is replicated to all peers so all account actions are observed and validated by everyone. Rather than packing all transactions in to a single chain, all transactions for a single account are in a single chain.
On the double spending front, since all blocks for each chain are replicated to everyone, nodes can ask and publish their view of signed Y-follows-X blocks. If anyone instead sees a signed Z-follows-X block this is a fork and needs resolution. Unlike monolithic blockchains, a fork in this system only affects a single account instead of everyone, again working toward scalability where we don't stall everyone because one section has an issue.
Resolution is done through a weighted vote system where losing blocks and dependents are rolled back. Senders can be sure they're not receiving a double spend by observing votes and tallying them, if they observe no forks or a resolved fork they can safely accept the transaction in to their chain. Notice though that resolution is never needed in the normal, well-behaved case. Forks only happen with signed, conflicting blocks; only accounts that are misbehaving by intentionally creating forks will every be put up for resolution.
Let me know if any of what I wrote doesn't make sense.
From what I have understood so far, this is not really a blockchain, or even crypto related concept, in fact it sounds to me like you have proposed a new standalone transaction system. I don't really see why you think that this concept is similar to sidechains, it rather sounds like a disitributed transaction server, with no need of a native currency. I saw you don't have comments in the source code, so I won't be spending much time for now to figure out what goes where.
How is this different from any off chain transactions?
You claim this is double spending proof, how do you collect proof form what you call an account, that he is overseeing his chain in a way the network deems ethical?
How is this different from any off chain transactions?
You claim this is double spending proof, how do you collect proof form what you call an account, that he is overseeing his chain in a way the network deems ethical?
Wouldn't it be possible to make use of all those ~250 Phash/s of computer power that we today waste on solving fabricated algorithms? The essence of the Internet is information, so if we are looking for something concrete to be mined, encrypted information seems like a valid contender.
What is there to decrypt? The first thing that comes to my mind is Wikileaks. There are X amounts of encrypted documents that still remain hidden from us.
"What's Wikileaks hiding in its 400GB of 'insurance' files?"
Mining is one the biggest flaws of Bitcoin, because it's not used productive in any way. It's a common thing to hear that, "Bitcoin seems like a complete waste of resources".
What is there to decrypt? The first thing that comes to my mind is Wikileaks. There are X amounts of encrypted documents that still remain hidden from us.
"What's Wikileaks hiding in its 400GB of 'insurance' files?"
Quote
"The triumvirate of files are locked with NSA-approved AES encryption and weigh in at a beefy 3.6GB, 49GB and 349GB respectively.
Without a secret key to decrypt them (or a time machine and a very powerful computer) the files are useless blobs of ones and zeros that allow the safe dispersal of secret information beyond the reach of anyone who might want to interfere with Wikileaks."
Without a secret key to decrypt them (or a time machine and a very powerful computer) the files are useless blobs of ones and zeros that allow the safe dispersal of secret information beyond the reach of anyone who might want to interfere with Wikileaks."
Mining is one the biggest flaws of Bitcoin, because it's not used productive in any way. It's a common thing to hear that, "Bitcoin seems like a complete waste of resources".
As stated there are already coins that support this kind of work, Gridcoin probably being the most versatile. You could easily create a BOINC project to do this kind of decrypttion work in a distributed manner and Gridcoin supports BOINC projects. Creating a Proof of Work though that only directs itself to this purpose is questionable though, since it would lead to an insecure and unstable function. So Gridcoin is probably the only platform that currently has the theoretic ability to do this kind of work.
Another apporach for a more useful Proof of Work is basically Little Duke's IDCoin proposal. Here the Proof of Work involves maintaining PGP keys, so it also becomes a track record for identification and good or bad actors. I believe the Zennet project is also looking to integrate a similar kind of Proof of Work for their project, since it requires some form of trust record.
Re: Gridcoin (GRC) - first coin utilizing BOINC - Official Thread
any news about GRC PoR's exchanges?
Was thought to be today, but too many people are still reporting issues with the current build. Rob also announced that he added some security patches, so it will probably be some time still untill the new client finally arrives at the exchanges.They are old and pretty abandoned pieces of technology, however those two plus Datacoin have provided the groundbed for advanced cryptoccurrencies, that seek to combine all three, like Gridcoin.
I feel Bitcoin is taking a big hit and people are getting bored with it. Mining is not profitable what so ever, people keep selling out, it seems the Rise and Rise of Bitcoin is turning into the Fall and Fall of Bitcoin. I am getting completely out of Bitcoin and transitioning to something more promising for the future. Some alternatives that have caught my attention are: Ripple & Stellar.
Whats your guys opinion about Bitcoin? Are you guys getting out and transitioning also? What other currencies are you looking into?
Finally some illustrated despair, get ready for the disbelief in a few month's time.Whats your guys opinion about Bitcoin? Are you guys getting out and transitioning also? What other currencies are you looking into?
Re: Gridcoin (GRC) - first coin utilizing BOINC - Official Thread
Any update on Mac version?
Mac Version is packaged for Yosemite, head over to https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/13139-os-x-builds-feedback-bug-reporting/page-3 and post, if you want to see some action in that direction again, or build it yourself from source.In the end the true prevailing anonymizing feature will not be something run over a Altchain (I question the purpose of existence of every Altcoin that only promotes an anonymizing feature), but rather a protocol like the currently still unreleased Zerocoin/Zerocash, or the recently tested "Coin Shuffle" will bring anonymity in a much more convenient and consistent manner directly on the Bitcoin blockchain.
Just give it time
Just give it time