Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 134 results by HereticalSmile
ЗЫ А вообще очень классный проект, с учетом что как говорится "в одно рыло", было бы многим интересно услышать основные грабли на которые наступили походу, на подобии тех с генератором адресов, как Вас хакали, как оборонялись и тп. На хабре можно было бы это запостить, было бы вдохновляющие, так как биржа посерьёзнее проект сосцети(смотря какой конечно), как для одного чела это очень круто. Код закрыт, думаю публикация уже найденных уязвимостей и ошибкок на пути, не навредят, но будет другим очень интересно, а Вам реклама))
Год назад перестало здесь дальше обсуждаться.
Почему, интересно? Знает кто.
Вот у меня идей огромная масса и раз в неделю новая рождается, а для реализации вечно чего-то не хватает, то времени, то средств, то толкового разработчика, которому можно доверять, поделитесь люди, кто и как и какие идеи свои реализовал? А то у меня так получается, что пришла идея, никем не реализована, пока то да сё, бац, уже кто-то реализовал, а потом как водится куча "форков".
Нужно создать механику, четкий алгоритм/схему превращения идей в реальный продукт.
В этой схеме как раз и должны быть проработаны процессы привлечения недостающих ресурсов, денег, разработчиков, времени.
Кстати, крипта ибн блокчейн - чуть ли не самый совершенный на сегодня механизм, который все это позволяет легко реализовывать. DAO, всякие ланчпады, все буквально уже на блюдечке, да не на одном. Бери и делай.... но у многих затыки все равно.
Вполне может быть интересно подробнее по таким затыкам пройтись. По себе знаю, что главный затык - прокрастинация идеегенераторов
they've got it already, they can sign any data and put it in their block reward transaction.
And this fact immediately offers to solve many applicative, including technical problems. In what applications is this already used? After all, you can do interesting things with this feature.
For example, sub-chains without pre-mining, but with PoS, in which coins are also mined by bitcoin miners, in case they freeze their bitcoins in these sub-chains for a certain number of bitcoin blocks (the lifetime set by the protocol of this sub-chain), on some kind of smart contracts.
I wonder if this has not been implemented anywhere yet.
technically, what you're suggesting cannot be achieved, which you readily conceded earlier. why are you still talking?
There are still technical aspects here, even without ideology. For example, if you drop the topic of proving that a digital label corresponds to a real physical object (even unsubstantiated attempts to do this also have technical aspects), but simply give the miner the right to put this label.
Then such a technical aspect has already been raised here. How difficult will it be in any transactions to allocate tags attached to coins during mining? I assume that this complexity is not infinite, but how big - it would be interesting to understand. Immediately, the second question arises technically, does it make sense to limit the lifetime of tags inside the bitcoin chain to a certain number of blocks? I thought there was some dislike in your question. Or was it just my imagination?
Should we label every coin based on who owned the previous transactions as to whether they were a republican/democrat/libertarian/socialist, or whether they believed in christianity/judaism/islam/shintoism/buddhism/etc?
Yes, why not? The only question is what kind of community, who will fill this label with value. Equipment manufacturers were mentioned first of all, because they could potentially really give this additional value quite noticeable, they could implement their own sub-chain. And also, the question of the possibility of some proof of mining on the equipment of a particular manufacturer is still relevant.
If tags were added to each bitcoin that was mined, then you would eventually result in infinite tags to a child coins after used coins are mixed.
Is it now impossible for any transaction in bitcoin to find out through a retrospective study in which blocks all the components were extracted by the miners? I do not know how difficult it is to calculate, but since there are all inputs and outputs in the circuit, it is certainly possible.
The protocol, by the way, could provide that in the bitcoin chain, the additional value from the manufacturer lives no more than n blocks, so as not to really load the native network and motivate miners to immediately output the mined bitcoins into the side chain to clear the bits from the labels and receive the manufacturer's tokens.
But what happens as soon as the coin is mixed with others?
In bitcoin, there is no absolute mixing, since all the inputs and outputs are always known, there are no balances in the chain, only history.
The hardware you're looking for isn't ASIC, but FPGA (Field-programmable gate array) which have good performance (compared with CPU/GPU) while can be used for multiple application.
In the topic of bitcoin tags, of course, the most interesting question is the algorithmic proof that calculations (any flow of information) had a specific hardware source. If algorithmic is impossible, then it would be interesting to know about the ways that make it as difficult as possible to replace (things like mac, IMEI, etc.)
sorry, I'm a little bored of this thread
I don't have everything ready yet to dispel boredom. But the topic is part (and not very mandatory) of another, much larger and not boring at all.
Depending on ones intent this would digress from the original idea of incentivising people to use specific mining hardware though, leaving only the advertising aspect.
...
Imagine that ASIC manufacturers have found a parallel application for their devices, which is in demand by millions of consumers, and not by tens of thousands of miners.
The idea would have gained more interest.
cryptography cannot secure real physical objects in the real world
no amount of extra cryptography can solve this problem
What makes us limit ourselves to trustless and only cryptography in order to obtain the required functionality? Just an understanding that it is ugly to spoil a clean implementation with dirty inclusions?
When solo mining, proving that particular equipment was used to mine a block is trivial, all that is needed is checking the coinbase transaction.
well, I think this is actually a problem (an insoluble one)
attesting what your equipment was when mining a block is trivial. Proving it is not, and I'm not sure how you could achieve it.
Any scheme used whereby the miner or the manufacturer of the mining unit certifies what spec of machine was used could be manipulated (and real-world miners may end up using a mix of unit types in practice, that's another hot mess to contend with). Same goes for the location; using all kinds of IP proxy rules out determining origin using IP addresses. And the algorithm used to mine the blocks is entirely generic, the concept would not work if that were not true.
so, yes, it's a strange idea.
There are two possible ways.
The first is that the manufacturer will not mind that his label is put even untruthfully. It is for advertising purposes.
And the second way is that the manufacturer deploys its own small private chain (or non-private) in which the correspondence between the equipment id and the public key is fixed. It could look like a side chain in which only bitcoins with their labels go, there could be a division of values. A miner would send bitcoins to that network, receive a token of that chain, and return bitcoins back to the main chain.
For me, it seems pointless, but technically it is possible.
Point, for example, is to get some kind of tokens on the bitcoin chain that carry additional value in addition to the value of bitcoin itself
also bitcoin network should not be a place for advertisement!
Advertising is the engine of trade.
Where there is value, there is advertising, and vice versa.
Those "labels" could be easily faked and it would be impossible to reliably verify whether the coins have been mined on hardware by a specific manufacturer.
How difficult is the implementation of the scheme, when such a fake would be impossible or as difficult as possible?
⭐ Merited by kaggie (1)
There are a certain number of ASIC manufacturers.
Has anyone suggested the idea of labeling bitcoins mined on the equipment of a particular manufacturer so that the manufacturer can offer separate incentives, bonuses for the owners of bitcoins mined on their equipment?
Has anyone suggested the idea of labeling bitcoins mined on the equipment of a particular manufacturer so that the manufacturer can offer separate incentives, bonuses for the owners of bitcoins mined on their equipment?