Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 37 results by asepticskeptic
Is there any examples in real life where being anonymous has a benefit ?
How about negatives ?
You guys line up to talk a lot of shit LOL
Would you go to eBay and buy stuff from an anon user ?
How about doing business with your bank in an alley as the bank teller wears a ski mask ?
You guys here have for years claimed that being able to hide like a coward is needed to make Altcoins.
Then why the trust systems ?
How many coins claim to have *verified developers ?
Hell how about this forums trust rating system ?
The Anonymity game is simply an advantage used for exploitation.
I can't even fathom how fucked up this scene would be if theymos released IP logs etc.
(or if a hacker did)
If the site owners here posted proof of all coins posted by what what users.
I think some coins would have been called into question before they could even get off the ground.
Take Doge coin for example.. who believes the dev(s) made 1 coin ?
I would bet they made many before Doge was launched.
If we always know who is doing what their loooooooooooooooong
shitty track records they hide here always would stop them cold in their tracks.
Instead what we have here is another 0 post count noob posting yet another coin ANN topic.
You guys claim you NEED to do that.
and i claim you do it so investors will not know you made a 100 other coins.
if they did you would be up shit creek.
You people are full of shit /.
Quit being little cowards and own up to your dumb scammy fucking bullshit.
edit:
all the stock market traders would be doing this stuff if you guys quit with the anon crap.
How about negatives ?
You guys line up to talk a lot of shit LOL
Would you go to eBay and buy stuff from an anon user ?
How about doing business with your bank in an alley as the bank teller wears a ski mask ?
You guys here have for years claimed that being able to hide like a coward is needed to make Altcoins.
Then why the trust systems ?
How many coins claim to have *verified developers ?
Hell how about this forums trust rating system ?
The Anonymity game is simply an advantage used for exploitation.
I can't even fathom how fucked up this scene would be if theymos released IP logs etc.
(or if a hacker did)
If the site owners here posted proof of all coins posted by what what users.
I think some coins would have been called into question before they could even get off the ground.
Take Doge coin for example.. who believes the dev(s) made 1 coin ?
I would bet they made many before Doge was launched.
If we always know who is doing what their loooooooooooooooong
shitty track records they hide here always would stop them cold in their tracks.
Instead what we have here is another 0 post count noob posting yet another coin ANN topic.
You guys claim you NEED to do that.
and i claim you do it so investors will not know you made a 100 other coins.
if they did you would be up shit creek.
You people are full of shit /.
Quit being little cowards and own up to your dumb scammy fucking bullshit.
edit:
all the stock market traders would be doing this stuff if you guys quit with the anon crap.
Now I see the nature of the dysfunction.
The internet is full of people you otherwise wouldn't be likely to talk to irl for two reasons. One is obvious geographical/physical limitation like Graham above. The other being not their chosen communication method.
For many, there's no point in even starting a conversation without assistance or reason irl. Like people are socially awkward and wouldn't even strike up a conversation on the street, or some other physical location with people.
The internet basically lets people walk around with giant billboards so that these people who you'd otherwise never hear from actually share a thought or two with the world.
You become part of their safe space, when you walk around with this billboard.
They get mad when you take it away, and its not that you're depriving them of something they're entitled to, its that you're making them seriously consider the very real scenario where they can't reply logically because they don't know how to speak to someone they don't know.
I'm sorry, but that's just not the way I see conversation on the internet. Sure that follows, after an email or key exchange. But up until that point were just a bunch of words looking to be singled out imo.
You're entitled only to the opinion that I'm willing to share, but not my post history.
Sure you can stalk me, figure out who I am. But I won't enable a stranger to do that too much .. In the same way I'd keep walking if people were to treat me the same way on the street. I promise you I'm not even interesting, nor do I think I am, nor should that be hard to figure out. If anything you should be happy I broke up two years of posting into logical chunks.
Asking is much less time consuming than hours of reading, but I guess that's just an opinion nobody feels they have the time for. Gotta get straight to the arguing anyways.
Also I do chuckle a little every time you bring up that mod recommendation about one liner profiles.
That one really gets you.
A viewpoint for you: So you and your buddies are having a loud conversation in Tim hortons about your new prime minister and how you can't wait for him to pass the tpp because its the current year. A dick American happens to overhear you and, clearly offended by your irrational retorts about your fearless leader, he mutters the word 'cuck' under his breath. Maybe one or two of you hear the obscenity and carry on like its a normal day. To you, he's always just gonna be some asshole tourist, but he's got a name and life you're never gonna know.
The mods recommendation is to be that guy every once in a while.
Not for scamming, illegality, raping, murdering, pillaging, doxing, or otherwise being illegitimate. Its a continuation of something that happens every day outside of the internet. Obviously those are a part of it, not that i think those are swell but I'm not gonna give up an inch of my ability so you can feel more secure.
"I think you all should come clean and be honest about how many accounts you have here."
6 including this one used to talk with. 5 of those I don't even know the password because I get pissed off and really just mash a bunch of shit into the browser bar and copy paste it twice then sign out.
Maybe about ten more one-liner profiles, because sometimes it's funny. I don't even remember what they were. I think one of them was papa_harold or something i made to make fun of that asshat that was running its fingers off. He's alright though, prob just romanian. None of which I have a clue of what the password are.
Pretty much all of these accounts are attached to some tempinbox email.
The worst part is, that it doesn't even make sense that you'd even be mad that someone has more than one profile.
I mean, it's kind of weird that someone would even use just one forum account to be honest.
I don't walk around and introduce myself to every person I meet and hand them a textbook of my history in the real world, off the internet. Why in the shit would I start doing anything differently?
If, it were possible to hide post history, I'd have one profile.
But the internets fucking creepy and every single thing you've done is logged and catalogged. How are you even okay with that?
It wouldn't bother you if some dickmeat you met yesterday and whom you've had no interaction with beforehand comes back to you and says "yeah well you remember when you fucked that chick in high school?" like it even fucking matters?
It turns people into stalking fascists, where the each response is tailored to you rather than the merit of what you're trying to work on.
It stops progress completely, and gets in the way of conversation.
If, by the second conversation with every person I've ever met ever, they were to know that I've blown coke, been quite violent, sold less than reputable things, done shit they don't agree with, nobody would get anywhere.
It's called privacy and you should learn to fucking respect it.
If you would like to know about my private life, you should probably fucking ask me for it rather than expect to be entitled to it like some slimy piece of shit.
No better than the rest of the fucking scum here.
6 including this one used to talk with. 5 of those I don't even know the password because I get pissed off and really just mash a bunch of shit into the browser bar and copy paste it twice then sign out.
Maybe about ten more one-liner profiles, because sometimes it's funny. I don't even remember what they were. I think one of them was papa_harold or something i made to make fun of that asshat that was running its fingers off. He's alright though, prob just romanian. None of which I have a clue of what the password are.
Pretty much all of these accounts are attached to some tempinbox email.
The worst part is, that it doesn't even make sense that you'd even be mad that someone has more than one profile.
I mean, it's kind of weird that someone would even use just one forum account to be honest.
I don't walk around and introduce myself to every person I meet and hand them a textbook of my history in the real world, off the internet. Why in the shit would I start doing anything differently?
If, it were possible to hide post history, I'd have one profile.
But the internets fucking creepy and every single thing you've done is logged and catalogged. How are you even okay with that?
It wouldn't bother you if some dickmeat you met yesterday and whom you've had no interaction with beforehand comes back to you and says "yeah well you remember when you fucked that chick in high school?" like it even fucking matters?
It turns people into stalking fascists, where the each response is tailored to you rather than the merit of what you're trying to work on.
It stops progress completely, and gets in the way of conversation.
If, by the second conversation with every person I've ever met ever, they were to know that I've blown coke, been quite violent, sold less than reputable things, done shit they don't agree with, nobody would get anywhere.
It's called privacy and you should learn to fucking respect it.
If you would like to know about my private life, you should probably fucking ask me for it rather than expect to be entitled to it like some slimy piece of shit.
No better than the rest of the fucking scum here.
Re: Bear Report: Shitcoiners across the globe put on suicide watch!
And I couldn't be happier.
Really glad I woke up one fine morning two months ago and sold everything I had into oblivion.
Dash? Dashed.
Doge? Put out to pasture.
Nxt? Next.
Ripple? Flatlined.
BitShares? Yea I shared those for USD real quick.
Peercoin? Gave it right back to them.
Bytecoin? Bit the dust.
Namecoin? Yea, in the obituaries.
Blackcoin? Gone.
BitcoinDark? teleported that shit. To my bank account basics.
Supernet? super-broke net.
NEM? Already OEM.
Boolberry? Squashed.
I could go on for quite a while. But I'm sure you already get it.
Really glad I woke up one fine morning two months ago and sold everything I had into oblivion.
Dash? Dashed.
Doge? Put out to pasture.
Nxt? Next.
Ripple? Flatlined.
BitShares? Yea I shared those for USD real quick.
Peercoin? Gave it right back to them.
Bytecoin? Bit the dust.
Namecoin? Yea, in the obituaries.
Blackcoin? Gone.
BitcoinDark? teleported that shit. To my bank account basics.
Supernet? super-broke net.
NEM? Already OEM.
Boolberry? Squashed.
I could go on for quite a while. But I'm sure you already get it.
You have forgot Monero/Bitcoin/Litecoin... Mr.Fanboy.
And you forgot USD, RUR, CNY Mr. Assblast.
Bitcoin? BTFO.
Litecoin? Left your pockets a little light.
Monero? Blownero.
Are you seriously damaged as well? What point about: "Sell all your shitcoins and hold onto your fiat for dear life now" don't we fucking get? Do I literally have to put down every single piece of shit nerdcash here to get my point across? If anything you should be happy you have one last chance to not exit with 30% or greater losses. Your shirts still feel nice from last time by the way.
As far as the other post above me, I try not to come in and repeat myself when there's a 20% raise in top-shitcoin, because that would make me not only look retarded, but I would actually be certifiably retarded as well.
I'll be sure to bump this in mid/late december, because, you know, time frames can be longer than two weeks ya nutty 12 year olds.
Dash - Starts with 'D', ends with 'evolution'
Brilliant marketing. Didn't even have to hand you the noose.
Personally, I like Devolution better than Dashed. Little bit more relatable for the rest of the board here.
Brilliant marketing. Didn't even have to hand you the noose.
Personally, I like Devolution better than Dashed. Little bit more relatable for the rest of the board here.
No, no it certainly would-fucking-not.
Fortunately for the rest of the world it's illegal for the same reason google isn't allowed to pay your salary in google bux, and facebook isn't allowed to pay your salary in facebux.
Good thing there's stuff like laws people much smarter than you happened to enact before you were born so you didn't grow up one day and soil yourselves while they retired.
Cryptocurrency isn't going to the masses. It's going to broke AF basement dwelling creeps who don't realize that there's still a world going on outside of the internet, where most of the people are.
Fortunately for the rest of the world it's illegal for the same reason google isn't allowed to pay your salary in google bux, and facebook isn't allowed to pay your salary in facebux.
Good thing there's stuff like laws people much smarter than you happened to enact before you were born so you didn't grow up one day and soil yourselves while they retired.
Cryptocurrency isn't going to the masses. It's going to broke AF basement dwelling creeps who don't realize that there's still a world going on outside of the internet, where most of the people are.
There are more than 3 billion people on the internet. The main reason the other 4 billion people aren't on the internet is poverty. While there will always be a world outside of the internet, you'll be kidding yourself if you think that brick and mortar stores are going to outcompete the likes of Amazon.com and other ecommerce platforms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MnQJFEVY7s
I don't think that these 4 billion people living in poverty are there because amazon didn't give them a good deal on shea butter and charcoal filters, and that they have no way to settle their debts without an ecommerce platform.
They need what the rest of the world has right now - a fully funded debt fueled top down controlled government structure that isn't constantly being destabilized with the full force of a military that is actually strong enough to decimate public uprisings. Or the technology to cause them from not happening to begin with.
Not some seeds, dreams and a belly rub. Not moon rockets.
No it won't be brick and mortar, but composites printed from the front of the welfare line that gets them in order. And it won't be blockchain technology they pay in, because they won't have any need for money. Commerce will be something that gets phased out anyways, and as you've already pointed out, doesn't even currently exist for over half the people on the planet.
Can't need what you never lost to begin with, right?
I agree that BTC in its current form is not the answer for hundreds of millions of people living on < $2/day in wages. However, BTC will change, evolve and may ultimately play a major role in democratizing access to finance with any mobile device (not just smart phones).
As far as ecommerce going away, I think you've drank a bit too deep from the Star Trek koolaid.
I don't see this happening anytime before AI takes over, becomes a hive-mind and then there's no personal need to allocate resources or services. Short of this, even AI devices need electricity, maintenance, raw materials, etc.As an example, take a look through the comments here: http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/15/10/12/006239/can-star-treks-world-with-no-money-work-in-real-life
Always drink extra deep from the kool aid. If it's anything non toxic they'll just call you greedy and you can carry on to the next cult.
I don't believe that finance can be democratized any more than I believe these 4 billion people need anything from the other 3 at all, but were moving a bit far away from whether or not companies should issue funbux.
As far as maintaining the illusion of choice in a post scarcity economy - there's 7000 alt coins. Infinite horizontal value scaling has brought no real value to this. Yet the hivemind continues to follow the value over and over again. These people rarely invest in value, they invest in the illusion of choice, and sometimes by random chance or manipulation by those who see that that's what these people follow, they make a dollar or two.
But the value is diminishing, because people are realizing that investing in random chance or manipulation is degenerate. The scammer can't make money if he's the only one playing the game. Btc won't evolve because its not something that can.
Ecommerce will, sure. But btc isn't fiat. Not just btc either. Every single crypto is a bitcoin as far as the rest of the world can tell.
Even if they hear about an altcoin, nobody's gonna fall for the 'new gold of the week' trick more than a few times.
Crypto is much easier to manipulate than fiat, so its much less suitable than fiat to hold value, and as such, all crypto tends to zero. And its not an implementation or design flaw, its something a little more close to home. For as long as crypto is in a parasitic relationship with a fiat denominated society, it will never be decentralized. If it's not decentralized, it can't hold more value than fiat.
This is why we don't use facebux, and this is why we don't use googlebux. How could you people forget that?
No, no it certainly would-fucking-not.
Fortunately for the rest of the world it's illegal for the same reason google isn't allowed to pay your salary in google bux, and facebook isn't allowed to pay your salary in facebux.
Good thing there's stuff like laws people much smarter than you happened to enact before you were born so you didn't grow up one day and soil yourselves while they retired.
Cryptocurrency isn't going to the masses. It's going to broke AF basement dwelling creeps who don't realize that there's still a world going on outside of the internet, where most of the people are.
Fortunately for the rest of the world it's illegal for the same reason google isn't allowed to pay your salary in google bux, and facebook isn't allowed to pay your salary in facebux.
Good thing there's stuff like laws people much smarter than you happened to enact before you were born so you didn't grow up one day and soil yourselves while they retired.
Cryptocurrency isn't going to the masses. It's going to broke AF basement dwelling creeps who don't realize that there's still a world going on outside of the internet, where most of the people are.
There are more than 3 billion people on the internet. The main reason the other 4 billion people aren't on the internet is poverty. While there will always be a world outside of the internet, you'll be kidding yourself if you think that brick and mortar stores are going to outcompete the likes of Amazon.com and other ecommerce platforms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MnQJFEVY7s
I don't think that these 4 billion people living in poverty are there because amazon didn't give them a good deal on shea butter and charcoal filters, and that they have no way to settle their debts without an ecommerce platform.
They need what the rest of the world has right now - a fully funded debt fueled top down controlled government structure that isn't constantly being destabilized with the full force of a military that is actually strong enough to decimate public uprisings. Or the technology to cause them from not happening to begin with.
Not some seeds, dreams and a belly rub. Not moon rockets.
No it won't be brick and mortar, but composites printed from the front of the welfare line that gets them in order. And it won't be blockchain technology they pay in, because they won't have any need for money. Commerce will be something that gets phased out anyways, and as you've already pointed out, doesn't even currently exist for over half the people on the planet.
Can't need what you never lost to begin with, right?
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash | First Anonymous Coin | Inventor of X11, DGW, Darksend and InstantX
You would have to own a majority of masternodes in order to attack instant transaction locks. The cost of acquiring this many nodes (currently about 1.7 million DASH) would be prohibitive, as there is obviously not that much available for sale and even if there was, the price would skyrocket if anyone tried to obtain this much.
AnonyMint wants a system that is NSA/state-resistant (well who wouldn't?), and a system where the state with its limitless resources can buy/bribe most of the masternodes does not pass the criteria. Current holders could become filthy rich in the process but the end result would be a government controlled coin.
Maybe they'll just forego all worries and dump all yearly budgeted military spending on buying dash?
So, 1,235,000 million?
Yeah, buy things not solve things!
Let's try to act overexcited as well.
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/current_revenue
Think of the dank profits.
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash | First Anonymous Coin | Inventor of X11, DGW, Darksend and InstantX
Quote from: your name
sourceLocked-why
Because Shelby thinks differently than most people, and decided to lock his unmoderated thread while simultaneously keeping it bumped by himself.
In order to compensate for the eccentricity, I had to form the quotes manually.
Personally I'm a little offended you didn't have the brain cells to piece this together, but this is btctalk, logic is involved, lots of things are going on, and all so I get it. Don't worry I'll let you cuban cigar and everything though.
No grand conspiracies here, other than the obviously enthralling name, doublewrite, shining the lights on cockroaches, occasional venting, the realization that fat people aren't always addicted to eating, but rather the endorphin-fueled hour long high after defecation that I've decided to successfully link to the idea that most people here aren't addicted to altcoins, but instead losing money.
I get it, that's all. I don't hate you, I hate your condition, so never change
Re: [ANN][DASH] Dash | First Anonymous Coin | Inventor of X11, DGW, Darksend and InstantX
Whats up suicides? Apparently you're on shitcoiner watch!
I redacted a name or two so you don't get triggered like good little toys and make fools of yourselves again.
Apparently he is the one who actually made your masternodes too?
Quote from: TPTB_need_war on October 21, 2015, 04:24:14 PM
Both |||||||||||||| and r0ach have mentioned Dash working on a new block chain scaling design. The only information I found on this as follows:
https://dashtalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/
I have a reasonable sure idea what Evan is thinking. I expect the weaknesses of his design I expect he is conflating distributed and decentralized and uses the later term where he should use the former. Yes the masternodes are distributed but if you give them any discretionary power then you have the problem of power corrupts absolutely. Remember masternodes can be purchased.
Edit: I found the following information:
https://dashtalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-19-2015.6429/
https://dashtalk.org/threads/dash-team-at-bitcoin-wednesday-amsterdam-presentation.6287/page-6 (see last post on page)
Appears to be something like this Open Transactions white paper:
http://stashcrypto.com/how-it-works/
So Evan is planning to allow a quorum of masternodes to confirm a transaction through thresholded multisig. He will move transaction confirmation off chain, similar to the InstantX which moved certain transactions presigned to certain outputs off chain to the masternode. The transaction's hash will determine I assume which quorum the transaction is routed to.
So yes he is doing exactly what I expected him to do. The weakness is that a little bit of corruption in the masternodes and you have either chaos of a block chain that is double-spent or loss of fungible permission-less commerce. The difficulties are in coordination overhead (DoS, etc), fungibility, and verifiable global coherence. The security model of crypto currency either has to be proven to still be in force, or he has to explain how he has modified the security model and why his alternative is secure. The Bitcoin security model is that any full node can download the entire block chain history and verify everything.
Evan claims immunity to 51% attacks. I also claimed this is in my design in recent months. He didn't mention that in the March post, so assume he (or Dash people) read my posts. (remember the masternode concept originally started back when Darkcoin was created when I was in discussion in the forum with Evan about the weaknesses of his first design for Darkcoin).
I know how he intends to achieve 51% attack immunity. But I think he will lose verifiable global coherence. I claimed that feature knowing that I could not commit these shortcut errors in design that I assume he is making. Any way, I haven't seen his design, so let's see if I end up being correct. Perhaps they will read this post and try to correct the mistakes they were going to make.
Edit#2: found this and seems to confirm to me that he is doing it the way I expected him to do it. Not enough details are revealed for me to determine how he is handling the issues I stated above.
Quick and possibly daft question on the method for selecting the 10 masternodes. The 10 nodes to handle a transaction are selected by the 10 nearest transaction IDs for the 1000 Dash transaction needed to set up the masternode (I think). Is that vulnerable to the malleability issues Bitcoin is seeing at the mo? ie. could transaction IDs be modified to direct to a small number of malicious masternodes?
Unless I'm mistaken, it's based off the block hash, not the transaction IDs.
All security is inherited from the mining network, which basically is deterministically setting up the quorum system, in a way that is provable. For example when you use DAPI, it will do something like create a transaction from Xaddr1 to Xaddr2 for 10 DASH. You then get back your command, a result status and all of the signatures from the quorum participants. You as the end user will know what quorum is activated for that node already, so you can tell if they're lying.
In terms of scalability, if we have 3300 masternodes and a quorum size of 10, that means we can handle 330 requests at once. If the average time per request is about 100 ms, that means we can do 3300 requests per second. The estimate is based on the fact that the network is also doing maintenance at all times (propagating blocks, shard updates, syncing clients, etc), so I'm guessing ~50% of a fully utilized network will go to other activities. Therefore we end up with 1650 requests per second.
Also we're going to aim for your average every day user, so we're talking just a few requests per month. So how many users can we support if they use 15 requests per month? 86400*1650*30/15 = 285,120,000. Ok, 285 million, that's pretty good.
What about reducing the collateral to 500 DASH? Now we have 6600 masternodes and can handle 570 million users. Isn't the masternode count going up anyway? Yep. That number should hit about 700M about when we launch. This is why it says 500-1500 tx per second, I guess that should say "requests per second" because it's not really accurate. Also the 700M should be a range also, that's the high end, the low end is 285M for current Dash requirements.
I've done a lot of guesswork to figure out these numbers, we'll see how close I am when we start seeing some serious adoption. Either way the system is built to scale with adoption in a way nothing else can, it should be pretty cool. I figure if we start to see a good deal of adoption and usage, we'll always either ask for more storage, processing power or reduce the collateral to split the network before it becomes an issue . They'll be good problems to have and we'll have lots of solutions available.
Edit#3: It doesn't appear this is aimed at block chain scaling rather only at faster confirmation times for transactions. Because it appears that all the confirmation records have to come back to the block chain. So you still need huge blocks and lots of CPU power to verify all the confirmation records. He is authorizing a quorum to preconfirm the transaction before the block confirmation.
1.) There is code that scans all incoming blocks for transaction locks when accepting transactions and blocks. This means that a block that contains a conflicting transaction will be automatically rejected.
2.) The answer to this one is 3 fold.
a. Currently if there are conflicting locks on the network, they will actually cancel each other. 2 conflicting locks doesn't really give miners a choice, it just removes instantX and goes back to proof of work.
b. The quorums are selected by inputs though, so you'll get the same quorum for the same transaction even with a different fee. This means, they would have already decided and no conflicting lock would be issued.
c. The new improved way is to use the quorum timestamp, then take the earliest one always.
Edit#4: I realized his claim of immunity against 51% attacks is not true. Because if the minority refuses to honor the collusion between some masternodes and 51% of the mining hashrate, then those masternodes can stop responding to the minority block chain, thus forcing the minority chain either to violate its own protocol or be orphaned. As usual, he hasn't thought this out very well.
https://dashtalk.org/threads/rebranding-and-scalability.4254/
I have a reasonable sure idea what Evan is thinking. I expect the weaknesses of his design I expect he is conflating distributed and decentralized and uses the later term where he should use the former. Yes the masternodes are distributed but if you give them any discretionary power then you have the problem of power corrupts absolutely. Remember masternodes can be purchased.
Edit: I found the following information:
https://dashtalk.org/threads/development-update-oct-19-2015.6429/
https://dashtalk.org/threads/dash-team-at-bitcoin-wednesday-amsterdam-presentation.6287/page-6 (see last post on page)
Appears to be something like this Open Transactions white paper:
http://stashcrypto.com/how-it-works/
So Evan is planning to allow a quorum of masternodes to confirm a transaction through thresholded multisig. He will move transaction confirmation off chain, similar to the InstantX which moved certain transactions presigned to certain outputs off chain to the masternode. The transaction's hash will determine I assume which quorum the transaction is routed to.
So yes he is doing exactly what I expected him to do. The weakness is that a little bit of corruption in the masternodes and you have either chaos of a block chain that is double-spent or loss of fungible permission-less commerce. The difficulties are in coordination overhead (DoS, etc), fungibility, and verifiable global coherence. The security model of crypto currency either has to be proven to still be in force, or he has to explain how he has modified the security model and why his alternative is secure. The Bitcoin security model is that any full node can download the entire block chain history and verify everything.
Evan claims immunity to 51% attacks. I also claimed this is in my design in recent months. He didn't mention that in the March post, so assume he (or Dash people) read my posts. (remember the masternode concept originally started back when Darkcoin was created when I was in discussion in the forum with Evan about the weaknesses of his first design for Darkcoin).
I know how he intends to achieve 51% attack immunity. But I think he will lose verifiable global coherence. I claimed that feature knowing that I could not commit these shortcut errors in design that I assume he is making. Any way, I haven't seen his design, so let's see if I end up being correct. Perhaps they will read this post and try to correct the mistakes they were going to make.
Edit#2: found this and seems to confirm to me that he is doing it the way I expected him to do it. Not enough details are revealed for me to determine how he is handling the issues I stated above.
Quote from: eduffield on October 08, 2015, 10:19:52 PM
Quote from: ddink7 on October 08, 2015, 09:10:06 PM
Quote from: stan.distortion on October 08, 2015, 09:05:38 PM
Quote from: Minotaur26 on October 08, 2015, 07:35:25 PM
...
In this video Evan explains decentralized oracles, is a must watch to understand subquorums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGh43BQrxK0
In this video Evan explains decentralized oracles, is a must watch to understand subquorums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGh43BQrxK0
Quick and possibly daft question on the method for selecting the 10 masternodes. The 10 nodes to handle a transaction are selected by the 10 nearest transaction IDs for the 1000 Dash transaction needed to set up the masternode (I think). Is that vulnerable to the malleability issues Bitcoin is seeing at the mo? ie. could transaction IDs be modified to direct to a small number of malicious masternodes?
Unless I'm mistaken, it's based off the block hash, not the transaction IDs.
All security is inherited from the mining network, which basically is deterministically setting up the quorum system, in a way that is provable. For example when you use DAPI, it will do something like create a transaction from Xaddr1 to Xaddr2 for 10 DASH. You then get back your command, a result status and all of the signatures from the quorum participants. You as the end user will know what quorum is activated for that node already, so you can tell if they're lying.
In terms of scalability, if we have 3300 masternodes and a quorum size of 10, that means we can handle 330 requests at once. If the average time per request is about 100 ms, that means we can do 3300 requests per second. The estimate is based on the fact that the network is also doing maintenance at all times (propagating blocks, shard updates, syncing clients, etc), so I'm guessing ~50% of a fully utilized network will go to other activities. Therefore we end up with 1650 requests per second.
Also we're going to aim for your average every day user, so we're talking just a few requests per month. So how many users can we support if they use 15 requests per month? 86400*1650*30/15 = 285,120,000. Ok, 285 million, that's pretty good.
What about reducing the collateral to 500 DASH? Now we have 6600 masternodes and can handle 570 million users. Isn't the masternode count going up anyway? Yep. That number should hit about 700M about when we launch. This is why it says 500-1500 tx per second, I guess that should say "requests per second" because it's not really accurate. Also the 700M should be a range also, that's the high end, the low end is 285M for current Dash requirements.
I've done a lot of guesswork to figure out these numbers, we'll see how close I am when we start seeing some serious adoption. Either way the system is built to scale with adoption in a way nothing else can, it should be pretty cool. I figure if we start to see a good deal of adoption and usage, we'll always either ask for more storage, processing power or reduce the collateral to split the network before it becomes an issue . They'll be good problems to have and we'll have lots of solutions available.
Edit#3: It doesn't appear this is aimed at block chain scaling rather only at faster confirmation times for transactions. Because it appears that all the confirmation records have to come back to the block chain. So you still need huge blocks and lots of CPU power to verify all the confirmation records. He is authorizing a quorum to preconfirm the transaction before the block confirmation.
Quote from: eduffield on October 12, 2015, 07:04:15 PM
Quote from: cryptonewb on October 12, 2015, 06:48:40 PM
Quote from: cryptonewb on October 12, 2015, 02:04:19 PM
1) How are the masternode locks enforced in the network? How do you force miners to not mine a double spent transaction?
2) Is it possible that there is a competing locked transaction? If that transaction has a higher fee (double spend attempt), I guess the miners rather confirm the transaction with the higher fee...
3) Masternodes don't get fees to lock transactions? What is the incentive to do the work? How are the masternode rewards distributed? How can the network "know" that masternodes are online and doing the work in stead of just being idle to have a lower bandwidth usage?
4) I wonder how you can have so much transactions per second? (the slide shows 500-1500) I read that bitcoin is limited to 7 transactions per second. I showed that it seems impossible to lock 350 transactions simultaneously with 3500 masternodes, unless you allow overlap. But that should be avoided, because it can happen that a masternode has the power to decide which of the 2 transactions he confirms during a double spend attack.
2) Is it possible that there is a competing locked transaction? If that transaction has a higher fee (double spend attempt), I guess the miners rather confirm the transaction with the higher fee...
3) Masternodes don't get fees to lock transactions? What is the incentive to do the work? How are the masternode rewards distributed? How can the network "know" that masternodes are online and doing the work in stead of just being idle to have a lower bandwidth usage?
4) I wonder how you can have so much transactions per second? (the slide shows 500-1500) I read that bitcoin is limited to 7 transactions per second. I showed that it seems impossible to lock 350 transactions simultaneously with 3500 masternodes, unless you allow overlap. But that should be avoided, because it can happen that a masternode has the power to decide which of the 2 transactions he confirms during a double spend attack.
2.) The answer to this one is 3 fold.
a. Currently if there are conflicting locks on the network, they will actually cancel each other. 2 conflicting locks doesn't really give miners a choice, it just removes instantX and goes back to proof of work.
b. The quorums are selected by inputs though, so you'll get the same quorum for the same transaction even with a different fee. This means, they would have already decided and no conflicting lock would be issued.
c. The new improved way is to use the quorum timestamp, then take the earliest one always.
Edit#4: I realized his claim of immunity against 51% attacks is not true. Because if the minority refuses to honor the collusion between some masternodes and 51% of the mining hashrate, then those masternodes can stop responding to the minority block chain, thus forcing the minority chain either to violate its own protocol or be orphaned. As usual, he hasn't thought this out very well.
I redacted a name or two so you don't get triggered like good little toys and make fools of yourselves again.
Apparently he is the one who actually made your masternodes too?
Well its either some awful name, Orion.
See what I did there?
I did just realize the excellent idea behind openalias last week some time. Neat service.Obviouslykinda unrelated. Just felt like sharing, because I'm a sharing kinda fella.
See what I did there?
I did just realize the excellent idea behind openalias last week some time. Neat service.
Re: [XMR] [Speculation thread] [Unmoderated] Monero as the best investment for 2015?
can we please let this obvious troll thread die?
Nope. Its been fun checking out the phrase(s) that trigger people into getting motivated to make these threads though.
Hope the OP knows they got triggered into making the sock and thread. Same three people as last time.
Shame fishys. Still following that worm.
Shame even more on the other fishys that did little more than pretend they're billboards.
OK, someone I've just met recently is trying to find an insurance policy.
I figured since all of you were such bros, you'd totally have a legit guy (or gal) to call for these kinda things.
OK so, this is baseline what I need from the policy writer:
1) Total insurance from complete financial loss for any and all holders both present and future for a cryptocurrency somewhere in the range of 5k USD all the way to 12bn USD.
2) No collateral requirement. I have nothing but my own personal finances to bring to the table, which I am not willing to place up as collateral. Maybe my boy joe got a few things too.
3) Bankruptcy clause. I have to always be able at all times to be able to claim that.
4) No prior history of insurance engagement. Let's all be honest here, at least I haven't put in a claim yet. I'll be right on my way to that triple a rating in no time of course.
5) No face to face meetings or personal information exchanged whatsoever.
That's kinda just the beginning, so you can get an idea of what I'm looking for. It seems like a common thing to insure against here and probably totally exists.
Am I missing anything? Good to go right?
I figured since all of you were such bros, you'd totally have a legit guy (or gal) to call for these kinda things.
OK so, this is baseline what I need from the policy writer:
1) Total insurance from complete financial loss for any and all holders both present and future for a cryptocurrency somewhere in the range of 5k USD all the way to 12bn USD.
2) No collateral requirement. I have nothing but my own personal finances to bring to the table, which I am not willing to place up as collateral. Maybe my boy joe got a few things too.
3) Bankruptcy clause. I have to always be able at all times to be able to claim that.
4) No prior history of insurance engagement. Let's all be honest here, at least I haven't put in a claim yet. I'll be right on my way to that triple a rating in no time of course.
5) No face to face meetings or personal information exchanged whatsoever.
That's kinda just the beginning, so you can get an idea of what I'm looking for. It seems like a common thing to insure against here and probably totally exists.
Am I missing anything? Good to go right?
I'm ignoring you. I haven't even created the crypto coin yet, and you're already saying, "It's a scam."
Oh, and what part of, "Insured against loss," did you miss?! As in I'm gonna buy INSURANCE to make sure the investors do not lose their money. What dumbass "scammer" would PAY money to buy insurance? Scammers TAKE money, right?!
Oh, and what part of, "Insured against loss," did you miss?! As in I'm gonna buy INSURANCE to make sure the investors do not lose their money. What dumbass "scammer" would PAY money to buy insurance? Scammers TAKE money, right?!
Good luck getting that policy underwritten.
So rarely do I see someone thinking more than one step ahead of the situation.
My point exactly.
In fact, the only services with enough clout to actually guarantee such a policy and not be total scammers is the USA, hence FDIC and global reserve currency and top military and such. Of course other countries as well.
Because someone that's a scammer would just go ahead and claim to have an insurance policy and move forward anyways, knowing full well that's a check that can't be cashed in.
As such, there's money to be made by pumping and dumping it. Unless you think I'm the only one that's gonna call your bluff?
This isn't a summer camp. You're making the claim that you're gonna mint your own currency and tell people to use it, effectively announcing the formation of some new republic with no military, no money, , no capital, but fuck it all you've got insurance.
So unless you've got the backing of all three of those, which you don't, never will, and cannot buy, you're a scammer and I'm on ignore.
Bear Report: Shitcoiners across the globe put on suicide watch!
And I couldn't be happier.
Really glad I woke up one fine morning two months ago and sold everything I had into oblivion.
Dash? Dashed.
Doge? Put out to pasture.
Nxt? Next.
Ripple? Flatlined.
BitShares? Yea I shared those for USD real quick.
Peercoin? Gave it right back to them.
Bytecoin? Bit the dust.
Namecoin? Yea, in the obituaries.
Blackcoin? Gone.
BitcoinDark? teleported that shit. To my bank account basics.
Supernet? super-broke net.
NEM? Already OEM.
Boolberry? Squashed.
I could go on for quite a while. But I'm sure you already get it.
Really glad I woke up one fine morning two months ago and sold everything I had into oblivion.
Dash? Dashed.
Doge? Put out to pasture.
Nxt? Next.
Ripple? Flatlined.
BitShares? Yea I shared those for USD real quick.
Peercoin? Gave it right back to them.
Bytecoin? Bit the dust.
Namecoin? Yea, in the obituaries.
Blackcoin? Gone.
BitcoinDark? teleported that shit. To my bank account basics.
Supernet? super-broke net.
NEM? Already OEM.
Boolberry? Squashed.
I could go on for quite a while. But I'm sure you already get it.