How Many Satoshis Are In A Bitcoin? | CryptoCoins Info Club

hashflare

Discussion based on cloud mining specifically using HashFlare.
[link]

Where is Bitcoin Going and When?

Where is Bitcoin Going and When?

The Federal Reserve and the United States government are pumping extreme amounts of money into the economy, already totaling over $484 billion. They are doing so because it already had a goal to inflate the United States Dollar (USD) so that the market can continue to all-time highs. It has always had this goal. They do not care how much inflation goes up by now as we are going into a depression with the potential to totally crash the US economy forever. They believe the only way to save the market from going to zero or negative values is to inflate it so much that it cannot possibly crash that low. Even if the market does not dip that low, inflation serves the interest of powerful people.
The impending crash of the stock market has ramifications for Bitcoin, as, though there is no direct ongoing-correlation between the two, major movements in traditional markets will necessarily affect Bitcoin. According to the Blockchain Center’s Cryptocurrency Correlation Tool, Bitcoin is not correlated with the stock market. However, when major market movements occur, they send ripples throughout the financial ecosystem which necessary affect even ordinarily uncorrelated assets.
Therefore, Bitcoin will reach X price on X date after crashing to a price of X by X date.

Stock Market Crash

The Federal Reserve has caused some serious consternation with their release of ridiculous amounts of money in an attempt to buoy the economy. At face value, it does not seem to have any rationale or logic behind it other than keeping the economy afloat long enough for individuals to profit financially and politically. However, there is an underlying basis to what is going on which is important to understand in order to profit financially.
All markets are functionally price probing systems. They constantly undergo a price-discovery process. In a fiat system, money is an illusory and a fundamentally synthetic instrument with no intrinsic value – similar to Bitcoin. The primary difference between Bitcoin is the underlying technology which provides a slew of benefits that fiat does not. Fiat, however, has an advantage in being able to have the support of powerful nation-states which can use their might to insure the currency’s prosperity.
Traditional stock markets are composed of indices (pl. of index). Indices are non-trading market instruments which are essentially summaries of business values which comprise them. They are continuously recalculated throughout a trading day, and sometimes reflected through tradable instruments such as Exchange Traded Funds or Futures. Indices are weighted by market capitalizations of various businesses.
Price theory essentially states that when a market fails to take out a new low in a given range, it will have an objective to take out the high. When a market fails to take out a new high, it has an objective to make a new low. This is why price-time charts go up and down, as it does this on a second-by-second, minute-by-minute, day-by-day, and even century-by-century basis. Therefore, market indices will always return to some type of bull market as, once a true low is formed, the market will have a price objective to take out a new high outside of its’ given range – which is an all-time high. Instruments can only functionally fall to zero, whereas they can grow infinitely.
So, why inflate the economy so much?
Deflation is disastrous for central banks and markets as it raises the possibility of producing an overall price objective of zero or negative values. Therefore, under a fractional reserve system with a fiat currency managed by a central bank – the goal of the central bank is to depreciate the currency. The dollar is manipulated constantly with the intention of depreciating its’ value.
Central banks have a goal of continued inflated fiat values. They tend to ordinarily contain it at less than ten percent (10%) per annum in order for the psyche of the general populace to slowly adjust price increases. As such, the markets are divorced from any other logic. Economic policy is the maintenance of human egos, not catering to fundamental analysis. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth is well-known not to be a measure of actual growth or output. It is a measure of increase in dollars processed. Banks seek to produce raising numbers which make society feel like it is growing economically, making people optimistic. To do so, the currency is inflated, though inflation itself does not actually increase growth. When society is optimistic, it spends and engages in business – resulting in actual growth. It also encourages people to take on credit and debts, creating more fictional fiat.
Inflation is necessary for markets to continue to reach new heights, generating positive emotional responses from the populace, encouraging spending, encouraging debt intake, further inflating the currency, and increasing the sale of government bonds. The fiat system only survives by generating more imaginary money on a regular basis.
Bitcoin investors may profit from this by realizing that stock investors as a whole always stand to profit from the market so long as it is managed by a central bank and does not collapse entirely. If those elements are filled, it has an unending price objective to raise to new heights. It also allows us to realize that this response indicates that the higher-ups believe that the economy could crash in entirety, and it may be wise for investors to have multiple well-thought-out exit strategies.

Economic Analysis of Bitcoin

The reason why the Fed is so aggressively inflating the economy is due to fears that it will collapse forever or never rebound. As such, coupled with a global depression, a huge demand will appear for a reserve currency which is fundamentally different than the previous system. Bitcoin, though a currency or asset, is also a market. It also undergoes a constant price-probing process. Unlike traditional markets, Bitcoin has the exact opposite goal. Bitcoin seeks to appreciate in value and not depreciate. This has a quite different affect in that Bitcoin could potentially become worthless and have a price objective of zero.
Bitcoin was created in 2008 by a now famous mysterious figure known as Satoshi Nakamoto and its’ open source code was released in 2009. It was the first decentralized cryptocurrency to utilize a novel protocol known as the blockchain. Up to one megabyte of data may be sent with each transaction. It is decentralized, anonymous, transparent, easy to set-up, and provides myriad other benefits. Bitcoin is not backed up by anything other than its’ own technology.
Bitcoin is can never be expected to collapse as a framework, even were it to become worthless. The stock market has the potential to collapse in entirety, whereas, as long as the internet exists, Bitcoin will be a functional system with a self-authenticating framework. That capacity to persist regardless of the actual price of Bitcoin and the deflationary nature of Bitcoin means that it has something which fiat does not – inherent value.
Bitcoin is based on a distributed database known as the “blockchain.” Blockchains are essentially decentralized virtual ledger books, replete with pages known as “blocks.” Each page in a ledger is composed of paragraph entries, which are the actual transactions in the block.
Blockchains store information in the form of numerical transactions, which are just numbers. We can consider these numbers digital assets, such as Bitcoin. The data in a blockchain is immutable and recorded only by consensus-based algorithms. Bitcoin is cryptographic and all transactions are direct, without intermediary, peer-to-peer.
Bitcoin does not require trust in a central bank. It requires trust on the technology behind it, which is open-source and may be evaluated by anyone at any time. Furthermore, it is impossible to manipulate as doing so would require all of the nodes in the network to be hacked at once – unlike the stock market which is manipulated by the government and “Market Makers”. Bitcoin is also private in that, though the ledge is openly distributed, it is encrypted. Bitcoin’s blockchain has one of the greatest redundancy and information disaster recovery systems ever developed.
Bitcoin has a distributed governance model in that it is controlled by its’ users. There is no need to trust a payment processor or bank, or even to pay fees to such entities. There are also no third-party fees for transaction processing. As the ledge is immutable and transparent it is never possible to change it – the data on the blockchain is permanent. The system is not easily susceptible to attacks as it is widely distributed. Furthermore, as users of Bitcoin have their private keys assigned to their transactions, they are virtually impossible to fake. No lengthy verification, reconciliation, nor clearing process exists with Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is based on a proof-of-work algorithm. Every transaction on the network has an associated mathetical “puzzle”. Computers known as miners compete to solve the complex cryptographic hash algorithm that comprises that puzzle. The solution is proof that the miner engaged in sufficient work. The puzzle is known as a nonce, a number used only once. There is only one major nonce at a time and it issues 12.5 Bitcoin. Once it is solved, the fact that the nonce has been solved is made public.
A block is mined on average of once every ten minutes. However, the blockchain checks every 2,016,000 minutes (approximately four years) if 201,600 blocks were mined. If it was faster, it increases difficulty by half, thereby deflating Bitcoin. If it was slower, it decreases, thereby inflating Bitcoin. It will continue to do this until zero Bitcoin are issued, projected at the year 2140. On the twelfth of May, 2020, the blockchain will halve the amount of Bitcoin issued when each nonce is guessed. When Bitcoin was first created, fifty were issued per block as a reward to miners. 6.25 BTC will be issued from that point on once each nonce is solved.
Unlike fiat, Bitcoin is a deflationary currency. As BTC becomes scarcer, demand for it will increase, also raising the price. In this, BTC is similar to gold. It is predictable in its’ output, unlike the USD, as it is based on a programmed supply. We can predict BTC’s deflation and inflation almost exactly, if not exactly. Only 21 million BTC will ever be produced, unless the entire network concedes to change the protocol – which is highly unlikely.
Some of the drawbacks to BTC include congestion. At peak congestion, it may take an entire day to process a Bitcoin transaction as only three to five transactions may be processed per second. Receiving priority on a payment may cost up to the equivalent of twenty dollars ($20). Bitcoin mining consumes enough energy in one day to power a single-family home for an entire week.

Trading or Investing?

The fundamental divide in trading revolves around the question of market structure. Many feel that the market operates totally randomly and its’ behavior cannot be predicted. For the purposes of this article, we will assume that the market has a structure, but that that structure is not perfect. That market structure naturally generates chart patterns as the market records prices in time. In order to determine when the stock market will crash, causing a major decline in BTC price, we will analyze an instrument, an exchange traded fund, which represents an index, as opposed to a particular stock. The price patterns of the various stocks in an index are effectively smoothed out. In doing so, a more technical picture arises. Perhaps the most popular of these is the SPDR S&P Standard and Poor 500 Exchange Traded Fund ($SPY).
In trading, little to no concern is given about value of underlying asset. We are concerned primarily about liquidity and trading ranges, which are the amount of value fluctuating on a short-term basis, as measured by volatility-implied trading ranges. Fundamental analysis plays a role, however markets often do not react to real-world factors in a logical fashion. Therefore, fundamental analysis is more appropriate for long-term investing.
The fundamental derivatives of a chart are time (x-axis) and price (y-axis). The primary technical indicator is price, as everything else is lagging in the past. Price represents current asking price and incorrectly implementing positions based on price is one of the biggest trading errors.
Markets and currencies ordinarily have noise, their tendency to back-and-fill, which must be filtered out for true pattern recognition. That noise does have a utility, however, in allowing traders second chances to enter favorable positions at slightly less favorable entry points. When you have any market with enough liquidity for historical data to record a pattern, then a structure can be divined. The market probes prices as part of an ongoing price-discovery process. Market technicians must sometimes look outside of the technical realm and use visual inspection to ascertain the relevance of certain patterns, using a qualitative eye that recognizes the underlying quantitative nature
Markets and instruments rise slower than they correct, however they rise much more than they fall. In the same vein, instruments can only fall to having no worth, whereas they could theoretically grow infinitely and have continued to grow over time. Money in a fiat system is illusory. It is a fundamentally synthetic instrument which has no intrinsic value. Hence, the recent seemingly illogical fluctuations in the market.
According to trade theory, the unending purpose of a market or instrument is to create and break price ranges according to the laws of supply and demand. We must determine when to trade based on each market inflection point as defined in price and in time as opposed to abandoning the trend (as the contrarian trading in this sub often does). Time and Price symmetry must be used to be in accordance with the trend. When coupled with a favorable risk to reward ratio, the ability to stay in the market for most of the defined time period, and adherence to risk management rules; the trader has a solid methodology for achieving considerable gains.
We will engage in a longer term market-oriented analysis to avoid any time-focused pressure. The Bitcoin market is open twenty-four-hours a day, so trading may be done when the individual is ready, without any pressing need to be constantly alert. Let alone, we can safely project months in advance with relatively high accuracy. Bitcoin is an asset which an individual can both trade and invest, however this article will be focused on trading due to the wide volatility in BTC prices over the short-term.

Technical Indicator Analysis of Bitcoin

Technical indicators are often considered self-fulfilling prophecies due to mass-market psychology gravitating towards certain common numbers yielded from them. They are also often discounted when it comes to BTC. That means a trader must be especially aware of these numbers as they can prognosticate market movements. Often, they are meaningless in the larger picture of things.
  • Volume – derived from the market itself, it is mostly irrelevant. The major problem with volume for stocks is that the US market open causes tremendous volume surges eradicating any intrinsic volume analysis. This does not occur with BTC, as it is open twenty-four-seven. At major highs and lows, the market is typically anemic. Most traders are not active at terminal discretes (peaks and troughs) because of levels of fear. Volume allows us confidence in time and price symmetry market inflection points, if we observe low volume at a foretold range of values. We can rationalize that an absolute discrete is usually only discovered and anticipated by very few traders. As the general market realizes it, a herd mentality will push the market in the direction favorable to defending it. Volume is also useful for swing trading, as chances for swing’s validity increases if an increase in volume is seen on and after the swing’s activation. Volume is steadily decreasing. Lows and highs are reached when volume is lower.
Therefore, due to the relatively high volume on the 12th of March, we can safely determine that a low for BTC was not reached.
  • VIX – Volatility Index, this technical indicator indicates level of fear by the amount of options-based “insurance” in portfolios. A low VIX environment, less than 20 for the S&P index, indicates a stable market with a possible uptrend. A high VIX, over 20, indicates a possible downtrend. VIX is essentially useless for BTC as BTC-based options do not exist. It allows us to predict the market low for $SPY, which will have an indirect impact on BTC in the short term, likely leading to the yearly low. However, it is equally important to see how VIX is changing over time, if it is decreasing or increasing, as that indicates increasing or decreasing fear. Low volatility allows high leverage without risk or rest. Occasionally, markets do rise with high VIX.
As VIX is unusually high, in the forties, we can be confident that a downtrend for the S&P 500 is imminent.
  • RSI (Relative Strength Index): The most important technical indicator, useful for determining highs and lows when time symmetry is not availing itself. Sometimes analysis of RSI can conflict in different time frames, easiest way to use it is when it is at extremes – either under 30 or over 70. Extremes can be used for filtering highs or lows based on time-and-price window calculations. Highly instructive as to major corrective clues and indicative of continued directional movement. Must determine if longer-term RSI values find support at same values as before. It is currently at 73.56.
  • Secondly, RSI may be used as a high or low filter, to observe the level that short-term RSI reaches in counter-trend corrections. Repetitions based on market movements based on RSI determine how long a trade should be held onto. Once a short term RSI reaches an extreme and stay there, the other RSI’s should gradually reach the same extremes. Once all RSI’s are at extreme highs, a trend confirmation should occur and RSI’s should drop to their midpoint.

Trend Definition Analysis of Bitcoin

Trend definition is highly powerful, cannot be understated. Knowledge of trend logic is enough to be a profitable trader, yet defining a trend is an arduous process. Multiple trends coexist across multiple time frames and across multiple market sectors. Like time structure, it makes the underlying price of the instrument irrelevant. Trend definitions cannot determine the validity of newly formed discretes. Trend becomes apparent when trades based in counter-trend inflection points continue to fail.
Downtrends are defined as an instrument making lower lows and lower highs that are recurrent, additive, qualified swing setups. Downtrends for all instruments are similar, except forex. They are fast and complete much quicker than uptrends. An average downtrend is 18 months, something which we will return to. An uptrend inception occurs when an instrument reaches a point where it fails to make a new low, then that low will be tested. After that, the instrument will either have a deep range retracement or it may take out the low slightly, resulting in a double-bottom. A swing must eventually form.
A simple way to roughly determine trend is to attempt to draw a line from three tops going upwards (uptrend) or a line from three bottoms going downwards (downtrend). It is not possible to correctly draw a downtrend line on the BTC chart, but it is possible to correctly draw an uptrend – indicating that the overall trend is downwards. The only mitigating factor is the impending stock market crash.

Time Symmetry Analysis of Bitcoin

Time is the movement from the past through the present into the future. It is a measurement in quantified intervals. In many ways, our perception of it is a human construct. It is more powerful than price as time may be utilized for a trade regardless of the market inflection point’s price. Were it possible to perfectly understand time, price would be totally irrelevant due to the predictive certainty time affords. Time structure is easier to learn than price, but much more difficult to apply with any accuracy. It is the hardest aspect of trading to learn, but also the most rewarding.
Humans do not have the ability to recognize every time window, however the ability to define market inflection points in terms of time is the single most powerful trading edge. Regardless, price should not be abandoned for time alone. Time structure analysis It is inherently flawed, as such the markets have a fail-safe, which is Price Structure. Even though Time is much more powerful, Price Structure should never be completely ignored. Time is the qualifier for Price and vice versa. Time can fail by tricking traders into counter-trend trading.
Time is a predestined trade quantifier, a filter to slow trades down, as it allows a trader to specifically focus on specific time windows and rest at others. It allows for quantitative measurements to reach deterministic values and is the primary qualifier for trends. Time structure should be utilized before price structure, and it is the primary trade criterion which requires support from price. We can see price structure on a chart, as areas of mathematical support or resistance, but we cannot see time structure.
Time may be used to tell us an exact point in the future where the market will inflect, after Price Theory has been fulfilled. In the present, price objectives based on price theory added to possible future times for market inflection points give us the exact time of market inflection points and price.
Time Structure is repetitions of time or inherent cycles of time, occurring in a methodical way to provide time windows which may be utilized for inflection points. They are not easily recognized and not easily defined by a price chart as measuring and observing time is very exact. Time structure is not a science, yet it does require precise measurements. Nothing is certain or definite. The critical question must be if a particular approach to time structure is currently lucrative or not.
We will measure it in intervals of 180 bars. Our goal is to determine time windows, when the market will react and when we should pay the most attention. By using time repetitions, the fact that market inflection points occurred at some point in the past and should, therefore, reoccur at some point in the future, we should obtain confidence as to when SPY will reach a market inflection point. Time repetitions are essentially the market’s memory. However, simply measuring the time between two points then trying to extrapolate into the future does not work. Measuring time is not the same as defining time repetitions. We will evaluate past sessions for market inflection points, whether discretes, qualified swings, or intra-range. Then records the times that the market has made highs or lows in a comparable time period to the future one seeks to trade in.
What follows is a time Histogram – A grouping of times which appear close together, then segregated based on that closeness. Time is aligned into combined histogram of repetitions and cycles, however cycles are irrelevant on a daily basis. If trading on an hourly basis, do not use hours.
  • Yearly Lows (last seven years): 1/1/13, 4/10/14, 1/15/15, 1/17/16, 1/1/17, 12/15/18, 2/6/19
  • Monthly Mode: 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 4, 12
  • Daily Mode: 1, 1, 6, 10, 15, 15, 17
  • Monthly Lows (for the last year): 3/12/20 (10:00pm), 2/28/20 (7:09am), 1/2/20 (8:09pm), 12/18/19 (8:00am), 11/25/19 (1:00am), 10/24/19 (2:59am), 9/30/19 (2:59am), 8/29,19 (4:00am), 7/17/19 (7:59am), 6/4/19 (5:59pm), 5/1/19 (12:00am), 4/1/19 (12:00am)
  • Daily Lows Mode for those Months: 1, 1, 2, 4, 12, 17, 18, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30
  • Hourly Lows Mode for those Months (Military time): 0100, 0200, 0200, 0400, 0700, 0700, 0800, 1200, 1200, 1700, 2000, 2200
  • Minute Lows Mode for those Months: 00, 00, 00, 00, 00, 00, 09, 09, 59, 59, 59, 59
  • Day of the Week Lows (last twenty-six weeks):
Weighted Times are repetitions which appears multiple times within the same list, observed and accentuated once divided into relevant sections of the histogram. They are important in the presently defined trading time period and are similar to a mathematical mode with respect to a series. Phased times are essentially periodical patterns in histograms, though they do not guarantee inflection points
Evaluating the yearly lows, we see that BTC tends to have its lows primarily at the beginning of every year, with a possibility of it being at the end of the year. Following the same methodology, we get the middle of the month as the likeliest day. However, evaluating the monthly lows for the past year, the beginning and end of the month are more likely for lows.
Therefore, we have two primary dates from our histogram.
1/1/21, 1/15/21, and 1/29/21
2:00am, 8:00am, 12:00pm, or 10:00pm
In fact, the high for this year was February the 14th, only thirty days off from our histogram calculations.
The 8.6-Year Armstrong-Princeton Global Economic Confidence model states that 2.15 year intervals occur between corrections, relevant highs and lows. 2.15 years from the all-time peak discrete is February 9, 2020 – a reasonably accurate depiction of the low for this year (which was on 3/12/20). (Taking only the Armstrong model into account, the next high should be Saturday, April 23, 2022). Therefore, the Armstrong model indicates that we have actually bottomed out for the year!
Bear markets cannot exist in perpetuity whereas bull markets can. Bear markets will eventually have price objectives of zero, whereas bull markets can increase to infinity. It can occur for individual market instruments, but not markets as a whole. Since bull markets are defined by low volatility, they also last longer. Once a bull market is indicated, the trader can remain in a long position until a new high is reached, then switch to shorts. The average bear market is eighteen months long, giving us a date of August 19th, 2021 for the end of this bear market – roughly speaking. They cannot be shorter than fifteen months for a central-bank controlled market, which does not apply to Bitcoin. (Otherwise, it would continue until Sunday, September 12, 2021.) However, we should expect Bitcoin to experience its’ exponential growth after the stock market re-enters a bull market.
Terry Laundy’s T-Theory implemented by measuring the time of an indicator from peak to trough, then using that to define a future time window. It is similar to an head-and-shoulders pattern in that it is the process of forming the right side from a synthetic technical indicator. If the indicator is making continued lows, then time is recalculated for defining the right side of the T. The date of the market inflection point may be a price or indicator inflection date, so it is not always exactly useful. It is better to make us aware of possible market inflection points, clustered with other data. It gives us an RSI low of May, 9th 2020.
The Bradley Cycle is coupled with volatility allows start dates for campaigns or put options as insurance in portfolios for stocks. However, it is also useful for predicting market moves instead of terminal dates for discretes. Using dates which correspond to discretes, we can see how those dates correspond with changes in VIX.
Therefore, our timeline looks like:
  • 2/14/20 – yearly high ($10372 USD)
  • 3/12/20 – yearly low thus far ($3858 USD)
  • 5/9/20 – T-Theory true yearly low (BTC between 4863 and 3569)
  • 5/26/20 – hashrate difficulty halvening
  • 11/14/20 – stock market low
  • 1/15/21 – yearly low for BTC, around $8528
  • 8/19/21 – end of stock bear market
  • 11/26/21 – eighteen months from halvening, average peak from halvenings (BTC begins rising from $3000 area to above $23,312)
  • 4/23/22 – all-time high
Taken from my blog: http://aliamin.info/2020/
submitted by aibnsamin1 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

White Paper, Miner, Pizza … | "Old Objects" in the Cryptocurrency Museum

White Paper, Miner, Pizza … |
https://preview.redd.it/giu1ssilga151.jpg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=41510785ccdc0d99544ec74229f62427d1c0ce3e
Museum has played the role of a time recorder. Talking about bitcoin, more than ten years has passed since the creation of it. Although it is uncomparable to the stock market with a hundred years of history, during the ten years, in the different stages of the development of bitcoin and blockchain have continuously poured in geeks, miners, speculators, newbies, leaving keywords such as sudden rich, myth, scam, belief, revolution, etc.
There are also many “old objects” with stories in the “Museum” of the cryptocurrency realm. On Museum Day, let ’s review the stories brought by these “old objects”.
The First Digital Currency White Paper — Bitcoin White Paper
On Oct. 31, 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto released the Bitcoin white paper — A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System in the cryptographic mail group where he belongs, and Bitcoin was born since then.
A white paper is a document that explains the purpose and technology used in cryptocurrency. Usually a cryptocurrency uses the white paper to help people understand what it provides, and it is also an important information channel for investors to understand a project. Therefore, the level of the white paper affects people’s confidence towards the coin.
In a word, in the cryptocurrency and blockchain industry, the value of a white paper is equivalent to that of a standard financing speech. The white paper plays a vital role in this emerging market.
The First Public Bitcoin-Physical Transaction — Pizza
Since Satoshi Nakamoto mined the Bitcoin genesis block on January 3, 2009, Bitcoin has only been spread among the small crowd and has not realized its value.
Not until May 22, 2010, Bitcoin enthusiast “Laszlo Hanyecz” bought a pizza coupon worth $25 with 10,000 bitcoins. This is the first public bitcoin-physical transaction. Bitcoin has its price with 0.3 cents per bitcoin.


This day has also become the famous “Bitcoin Pizza Day” in Bitcoin history. Bitcoin as the imagination of the financial system has more practical significance. The tenth anniversary is coming. How will you commemorate it? Will you buy a pizza?
The First Digital Asset Exchange — Bitcoinmarket.com
After the birth of Bitcoin, in addition to mining, the only way to get Bitcoin in the early days was to conduct transactions on forums or IRC (commonly known as Internet Relay Chat). However, this method involves both long transaction time and great security risk.
In March 2010, the first digital asset exchange — Bitcoinmarket.com launched. However, due to lack of liquidity and transaction depth, it disappeared soon after its establishment, but Bitcoinmarket.com opened the era of the operation of the cryptocurrency realm exchange 1.0.


On June 9, 2011, China’s first Bitcoin exchange — Bitcoin China (BTCChina) launched. Its founder, Yang Linke, translated Bitcoin into Chinese “比特币” for the first time. In 2013, China’s bitcoin trading entered the golden age, and exchanges sprung up. China monopolized more than 90% of the world’s bitcoin transactions. Now, if the top three exchanges Binance, Huobi Global, OKEx are the Exchange 2.0, then the index exchange represented by 58COIN called the 3.0 version, leading the trend.
The First Generation of High-Performance Miner — ASIC Miner
When Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin, the only way to get it is to use computers (including home computers) to mine, mainly relying on the CPU to calculate. However, as the value of digital currencies such as Bitcoin has become higher and higher, mining has become an industry with the competition is getting fiercer, accompanied by increasing difficulty of mining. Therefore, hardware performance competition starts.
In July 2012, the genius Jiang Xinyu (Internet nickname is “Friedcat”) from the junior class of the University of Science and Technology declared at the forum that he could make ASIC miners (chips). As far as mining computing power is concerned, ASICs can be tens of thousands or more higher than the same-generation CPUs and GPUs.
At the beginning of 2013, Zhang Nanqian (Pumpkin Zhang), a suspended doctoral student from the Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, developed the ASIC miner and named it “Avalon”.


In June 2013, the Friedcat’s miner USB was finally released, and it maintained 20% of the computing power of the entire network.
At the end of 2013, Wu Jihan, used the tens of millions yuan earned from Friedcat through investment, worked together with Jenke group, to develop the Antminer S1. Since then, the miner manufacturer Bitmain began to enter the stage of history.
It is no exaggeration to say that Friedcat and Zhang Nangeng have opened the domestic “mining” era.
The Birthplace of China’s Bitcoin — Garage Coffee
It is not only the “old objects” that record history, but also a place that everyone in the cryptocurrency realm aspires to.
Guo Hongcai once said, “Without no The Garage Café, there will be no cryptocurrency realm today. Since it is a very mysterious place that all waves of people from the café joint together to create today’s digital asset industry.

▲ In March 2013, American student Jake Smith successfully purchased a cup of coffee at The Garage Café with 0.131 bitcoins. This move attracted the attention of CCTV, and it conducted an interview.
Indeed, The Garage Café is the world ’s first entrepreneurial-themed coffee shop. It has been legendary since its establishment in 2011. The Garage Cafét is not only the core coordinate on China’s Bitcoin map, but also the birthplace of the Chinese cryptocurrency circle, where digital asset realm tycoons including Guo Hongcai, Zhao Dong, Li Xiaolai, Li Lin have made their ways.
The development of digital currency is only 11 years old. Through these “old objects”, we review the various stories of this wave of technology together, hoping to help you understand the development process of the digital currency field. Meanwhile, I also remind all practitioners to use history as a mirror and forge ahead.
Website: https://www.58ex.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/58_coin
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/coin.58COIN
Telegram: https://t.me/official58
Medium: https://medium.com/@58coin_blog/
submitted by 58CoinExchange to u/58CoinExchange [link] [comments]

The One Thing EVERYONE Must Know About the Dev Funding Plan: IT'S COMPLETELY FREE.

sigh I get so tired of having to stop working to put out a post explaining issues. If anyone else wants to join in I could use help. (actually I've seen Jonald F. do this before too, so thanks JF!)
Things are bad when even developers don't understand what's going on. So I'll try to clearly explain an important point on the Dev Funding Plan (DFP from now on) for the community: it's completely free. Yet we still get panicked posts saying Please Save Us from the TAX!!! Somebody Help!
You may be for or against the DFP, but either way please at least understand what you're forming an opinion on.
Let's start from the beginning. We know Bitcoin works on blocks and block coin rewards. The block reward, which started at 50 coins per block, and cuts in half approximately every 4 years, serves two purposes: it's a fair way to bring coins into circulation, but more importantly it provides security for the network.
For simplicity, please think of "security" as being measured in power bars. When the network first started, with just Satoshi and Hal Finney, there was 1 power bar. This power bar was made up of the electricity their combined computer hardware used to find blocks. They were the first miners. Bitcoin uses a difficulty level to adjust how hard or easy it is to find blocks. This level is important for a key reason: we want the inflation rate of coins (how fast they come into circulation) to stay about the same, regardless how many miners (computing power) suddenly comes online. If the difficulty is set at super easy, but suddenly a super computer comes online that computer can gobble up thousands of coins in minutes if not seconds, creating massive rapid inflation. So the first thing to understand is that due to the Difficulty Level Adjustment the rate of coins coming into circulation will always stay about the same, regardless how many miners join or leave the network.
Getting back to power bars. So the point of Bitcoin is there is no center, no fixed authority. The problem is we still need a decision made about which chain is valid. This is where proof-of-work comes in. Satoshi's fairly brilliant solution to a consensus decision, with no leader, was to simply look for the longest chain (technically the chain with most hashing work). The reasoning was: as there are far more ordinary people than there are governments and dictators a Bitcoin supported by the all the world's people should always be able to muster more hashrate than even rich governments.
So Bitcoin began and people saw the brilliance: even with a weak power bar level of 1 (a couple computers), Bitcoin was safe from 51% attacks and attacking govs competing for control of the chain because a super low hashrate meant Bitcoin wasn't popular and govs wouldn't bother paying attention. By the time Bitcoin was big enough for govs to worry about attacking it should also have so many participants the power bar level would be far higher, providing strong defense.
Let's say the ideal power bar level is 50,000. At this level no government on earth has enough resources to beat the grassroots network. We hear people brag about how much security BTC has. However, the marketcap for all of BTC is about $160B. Countries like the U.S. and China have GDP measured in many trillions; a trillion is 1,000 billion. Does 160B really seem untouchable? For numeric comparison the main U.S. federal food assistance program cost the government $70B in 2016, representing about 2% of the budget. So the entirety of the BTC market cap is about twice the size of one welfare program, representing 2% of the overall budget. Where should we place the current security power bars if we want guaranteed safety from a determined U.S. gov? If 50,000 is guaranteed safe we're far from it. I'd say BTC is more like 5,000. That's still pretty decent.
Of course, BCH split from BTC... and didn't carry over all the miners and accompanying security. That's not an immediate concern because if BTC isn't on government's radar yet BCH sure isn't. However, that doesn't mean BCH doesn't need security from hostile forces. It's still a valuable network and needs defenses. Where would we put power bars for BCH? If BTC is 5,000 and BCH only has 3% of that hashrate then BCH has just 150. That's it.
How the Developer Funding Plan Works
Back to the DFP. What this says is as a community we agree to break off a piece of the block reward and instead of giving 100% to miners we give a small percent to developers. If each block is 10 coins and the price is $300 then winning a block means winning $3,000. Of course that's not all profit because miners have electricity and other expenses to pay before calculating profit. So if we reduce the portion of the miner reward by 10% so they get just 9 coins per block yet the price stays the same what happens? It means miners receive $2,700 for the same effort. We've just made it more expensive to mine BCH from the point of view of miners. What would any miner then rationally do? Seek profitability elsewhere if available. Suddenly BTC SHA256 hashing looks slightly more attractive so they'll go there. Hashrate leaves BCH and goes to BTC, but the key important point is BOTH chains have a difficulty adjustment algorithm which adjusts to account for rising or lowering miners overall, which keeps the coin inflation rate steady. This means BTC total hashrate rises (more miners compete for BTC) and its Difficulty Level rises accordingly, so the same rate of BTC pumps out; on BCH total hashrate falls (less miners compete for BCH) and its Difficulty falls, so the same rate of BCH pumps out. Inflation remains about the same on both coins so the price of both coins doesn't change any, beyond what it normally does based on news/events etc.
So what difference is there? The difference is total network security. Hashrate totals have changed. BTC gains more miner securing hashrate while BCH loses it. So BTC goes from 5,000 to say 5,100 power bars. BCH goes from about 150 to 140.
Does any of that matter in the grand scheme of things? Not in the slightest. Part of the reason is due to our emergency circumstances with BCH we had to rework our security model. Our primary defense is an idea I came up with, which BitcoinABC implemented, saying it's not sheer hashpower that dictates what chain we follow. We won't replace a chain we're working on if a new one suddenly appears if it means changing more than 10 blocks deep of history. This prevents all the threatening hashrate hanging over our heads from mining a secret chain and creating havoc unleashing it causing 10+ confimed txs to be undone, while exchanges, gambling sites etc. have long since paid out real world money.
Switching $6M worth of block rewards from mining to devs just means we lose a bit of hashrate security, while we gain those funds for development. Nothing more. Nobody holding BCH pays in the form of inflation or any other way. It costs literally NOTHING BECAUSE The block reward is ALREADY ALLOCATED. It will EITHER go 100% to mining security if we do nothing, or go to both miners and devs if the plan is put into effect. Hopefully this helps.
:)
TL;DR: we switch security which we don't really need, for developer funding which we do.
submitted by cryptos4pz to btc [link] [comments]

How to Assess the Value behind Cryptocurrencies

How to Assess the Value behind Cryptocurrencies

https://preview.redd.it/5ihj6bi79dr41.jpg?width=6480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=babfa7255e9c017508197ec0bc7319d74b1050c9
Many of the investors and financial institutions that I talk to are hesitant to invest in cryptocurrencies, often saying that they can’t determine their real value. For example, if we were looking to buy equity in a company, we could look at its fundamentals and make a prudent decision about whether to invest in it or not. Crypto is different in that, it is in its early days and cannot present evidence of a long track record.
Admittedly, the process of value assessment may not be as straightforward for cryptocurrencies as for some of the more traditional asset classes. However, we can still refer to certain other drivers to help us form an assessment of value.
Let’s start with the original cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, and discuss how it compares to gold and commodities.
Valuing Bitcoin — Stock to Flow Ratio
Bitcoin is often valued using the stock to flow ratio, which quantifies the “hardness” of an asset. A report by Bayerische Landesbank found that:
“Applied to Bitcoin, an unusually strong correlation emerges between the market value of this cryptocurrency and the ratio between existing stockpiles of Bitcoin (“stock”) and new supply (“flow”).”
The book “The Bitcoin Standard” by Saifedean Ammous introduced the stock-to-flow approach in relation to valuing Bitcoin. The supply of Bitcoin can be engineered at will. Satoshi set into the protocol a drastic decline in supply growth (due to halving every 4 years). Price is decoupled from mining efforts, so as the price rises, the difficulty of mining Bitcoin increases. Subsequently, new supply, or flow, correspondingly reduces.
The supply profile is guaranteed by the existing setup — if the supply profile were to change, it would adversely affect the peer to peer network that holds bitcoin and dilute the value of their coins.
As a comparison, the stock to flow ratio is the way gold is valued. Gold is used as a store of value in hard times. The supply of gold cannot be increased in huge quantities, and the annual production of fresh gold (“flow”) is limited, adding only incrementally to the existing stockpile (“stock”). So gold is described as having a high stock to flow ratio. However much the price of gold increases, the amount produced will not be increased exponentially, which would dilute the stock to flow ratio.
The next Bitcoin halving is due to take place in May 2020, potentially hugely increasing the stock to flow ratio of Bitcoin. It will be interesting to see what that does to the Bitcoin price.
Valuing according to utility
A cryptocurrency must have a strong use case to incentivize people to have the coins. How useful a coin is feeds through to the value of the coin.
If we take the example of Ether, in order to execute commands and develop applications in the Ethereum blockchain, you need to own Ether. The Ether is converted into “Gas”, which is used to run the network. Ether is, therefore, the currency used to drive transactions and development on the Ethereum blockchain. The more people that are transacting with and on Ethereum, the greater the demand for Ether becomes, eventually leading to a price increase.
“Users will use the infrastructure that offers them the applications they need. And yes, at the moment this is clearly Ethereum. There are more Apps and smart contracts deployed on Ethereum than on all other application-focused blockchain protocols put together.” Max Lautenschläger, Managing Partner, Iconic Holding
Therefore, price of utility protocols is contingent upon the community engaging them and adoption of applications built on top of them. As long as they continue to build and adopt, because it is useful for them, the growing utility that will continue to drive value.
There are many other types of cryptocurrencies and crypto assets, as my colleague highlighted in a recent article. Crypto may be in its early stages and be extremely volatile, but traditionally-minded investors and financial institutions can rest easy knowing there are standard ways through which value can be calculated.
# # #
This article is strictly for educational purposes and isn’t to be construed as financial advice.
By Sara Sabin, Business Development, Iconic Holding
submitted by IconicLab to u/IconicLab [link] [comments]

Bitcoin's Current Production cost in China is ~$3,200. What will it be after next years halving?

Satoshi said himself "The price of any commodity tends to gravitate toward the production cost. If the price is below cost, then production slows down. If the price is above cost, profit can be made by generating and selling more. At the same time, the increased production would increase the difficulty, pushing the cost of generating towards the price. "

We know the production cost (in China where it's cheaper) is 3,200 -- also happened to be the bottom. What will the production cost to produce one BTC once this next halving occurs? How can this be calculated?

EDIT: People are asking where I found this information. I extracted it from these two sources:
https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25
https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/3eCM0tWa-What-Satoshi-said-about-price-action/
submitted by cryptoeric to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

block confirmation rules

First time, long time here...I love bitcoin. I used to mine around 2013 on my gtx480, earned enough to play some satoshi dice every couple days, just to play until i lost it all. honestly, it was fun at the time. One day I had enough and just zipped it into password-i-can-no-longer-remember file and the rest is history. my latest foray into bitcoin has since focused on the keeping-them-secure side of things. (love that trezor). Anyway, here's the question-
How would one manually calculate the hash-- using a sha-256 calculator, or something of that ilk -- in order to confirm the work of the latest block?
My understanding is that the header with all the transactions and such is hashed with a nonce in order to get a hashed value under a certain amount of zero's, depending on network difficulty. Therefore, all anyone needs to do is compute the the header hash for themselves and confirm the hash number (along with the obvious other rules of ensuring all TX's have enough balance, coinbase fee is per protocol, etc.)
This all could be nonsense, I have zero programming knowledge.
submitted by jabdrw15a to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A better anti-reorg algorithm using first-seen times to punish secret/dishonest mining

Bitcoin currently allows a malicious miner with at least 51% of the network hashrate to arbitrarily rewrite blockchain history. This means that transactions are reversible if they belong to a miner with a hashrate majority, and such transactions are subject to double-spend attempts. Bitcoin SV's miners have repeatedly threatened to perform this attack against exchanges using BCH by mining a secret, hidden chain which they only publish after they have withdrawn funds in a different currency from the exchange. It would be nice if we could prevent these secret mining re-org attacks.
Yesterday, I came up with a new algorithm for making secret re-org attacks very expensive and difficult to pull off. This new algorithm is designed to avoid the permanent chainsplit vulnerabilities of ABC 0.18.5 while being more effective at punishing malicious behavior.
The key to the new algorithm is to punish exactly the behavior that indicates malice. First, publishing a block after another block at the same height has arrived on the network suggests malice or poor performance, and the likelihood of malice increases as the delay increases. A good algorithm would penalize blocks in proportion to how much later they were published after the competing block. Second, building upon a block that was intentionally delayed is also a sign of malice. Therefore, a good algorithm would discount the work done by blocks based not only on their own delays, but the delays that were seen earlier in that chain as well. Since the actions at the start of the fork are more culpable (as they generate the split), we want to weight those blocks more heavily than later blocks.
I wrote up an algorithm that implements these features. When comparing two chains, you look at the PoW done since the fork block, and divide that PoW by a penalty score. The penalty score for each chain is calculated as the sum of the penalty scores for each block. Each block's penalty score is equal to the apparent time delay of that block relative to its sibling or cousin[1], divided by 120 seconds[2], and further divided by the square[3] of that block's height[4] from the fork.[5]
This algorithm has some desirable properties:
  1. It provides smooth performance. There are no corners or sharp changes in its incentive structure or penalty curve.
  2. It converges over very long time scales. Eventually, if one chain has more hashrate than the other and that is sustained indefinitely, the chain with the most hashrate will win by causing the chain penalty score for the slower (less-PoW) chain to grow.
  3. The long-term convergence means that variation in observed times early in the fork will not cause permanent chainsplits.
  4. Long-term convergence means that nodes can follow the standard most-PoW rule during initial block download and get the same results unless an attack is underway, in which case the node will only temporarily disagree.
  5. Over intermediate time scales (e.g. hours to weeks), the penalty given to secret-mining deep-reorg chains is very large and difficult to overcome even with a significant hashrate advantage. The penalty increases the longer the attack chain is kept secret. This makes attack attempts ineffective unless they are published within about 20 minutes of the attack starting.
  6. Single-block orphan race behavior is identical to existing behavior unless one of the blocks has a delay of at least 120 seconds, in which case that chain would require a total of 3 blocks to win (or more) instead of just 2.
  7. As the algorithm strongly punishes hidden chains, finalization becomes much safer as long as you prevent finalization from happening while there are known competitive alternate chains. However, this algorithm is still effective without finalization.
I wrote up this algorithm into a Python sim yesterday and have been playing around with it since. It seems to perform quite well. For example, if the attacker has 1.5x as much hashrate as the defenders (who had 100% of the hashrate before the fork), mine in secret for 20 minutes before publishing, and if finalization is enabled after 10 blocks when there's at least a 2x score advantage, then the attacker gets an orphan rate of 49.3% on their blocks and is only able to cause a >= 10 block reorg in 5.2% of cases, and none of those happen blindly, as the opposing chain shows up when most transactions have about 2 confirmations. If the attacker waits 1 hour before publishing, the attack is even less effective: 94% of their blocks are orphaned, 95.6% of their attempts fail, 94.3% of the attacks end with defenders successfully finalizing, and only 0.6% of attack attempts result in a >= 10 block reorg.
The code for my algorithm and simulator can be found on my antiReorgSim Github repository. If you guys have time, I'd appreciate some review and feedback. To run it:
git clone https://github.com/jtoomim/antiReorgSim.git cd antiReorgSim python reorgsim.py # use pypy if you have it, as it's 30x faster 
Thanks! Special thanks to Jonald Fyookball and Mark Lundeberg for reviewing early versions of the code and the ideas. I believe Jonald is working on a Medium post based on some of these concepts. Keep an eye out for it.
Edit: I'm working on an interactive HTML visualization using Dash/Python! Here's a screenshot from a preliminary version in which convergence (or attacker victory, if you prefer) happens after 88.4 hours. In this scenario, the attacker wins because of the rule in Note 5.
Edit 2: An alpha website version of the simulator is up! The code is all server-side for the simulation, so it might get overloaded if too many people hit it at the same time, but it might be fine. Feel free to play around with it!
Note 1: This time delay is calculated by finding the best competing chain's last block with less work than this one and the first block with more work than this one and interpolating the time-first-seen between the two. The time at which the block was fully downloaded and verified is used as time-first-seen, not the time at which the header was received nor the block header's timestamp.
Note 2: An empirical constant, intended to be similar to worst-case block propagation times.
Note 3: A semi-empirical constant; this balances the effect of early blocks against late blocks. The motivation for squaring is that late blocks gain an advantage for two multiplicative reasons: First, there are more late blocks than early blocks. Second, the time deltas for late blocks are larger. Both of these factors are linear versus time, so canceling them out can be done by dividing by height squared. This way, the first block has about as much weight as the next 4 blocks; the first two blocks have as much weight as the next 9 blocks; and the first (n) blocks have about as much weight as the next (n+1)2 blocks. Any early advantage can be overcome eventually by a hashrate majority, so over very long time scales (e.g. hours to weeks), this rule is equivalent to the simple Satoshi most-PoW rule, as long as the hashrate on each chain is constant. However, over intermediate time scales, the advantage to the first seen blocks is large enough that the hashrate will likely not remain constant, and hashrate will likely switch over to whichever chain has the best score and looks the most honest.
Note 4: The calculation doesn't actually use height, as that would be vulnerable to DAA manipulation. Instead, the calculation uses pseudoheight, which uses the PoW done and the fork block's difficulty to calculate what the height would be if all blocks had the fork block's difficulty.
Note 5: If one chain has less PoW than the other, the shorter chain's penalty is calculated as if enough blocks had been mined at the last minute to make them equal in PoW, but these fictional blocks do not contribute to the actual PoW of that chain.
submitted by jtoomim to btc [link] [comments]

[Blockchain Classroom] Lesson 11:Why hasn't Bitcoin been completely mined yet?

The Bitcoin system relies on adjusting the difficulty factor to ensure that Bitcoin will not be mined too quickly.
Every 10 minutes, miners across the network calculate one problem together, competing for bookkeeping rights and Bitcoin rewards. If the computing power of the entire network continues to grow, Bitcoin will be completely mined soon.

In order to ensure the mining of one block in about 10 minutes, Satoshi Nakamoto designed the difficulty for miners to obtain bitcoin through mining is dynamically adjusted every 2016 blocks (about every 2 weeks). The expected time to generate a block after adjustment is 10 minutes.

The current difficulty coefficient is about 480PH/s, which is about 68 billion times that of the genesis block. In other words, with the current computing power, miners across the network need to go through about 300 trillion trillion hash operations to find a qualified answer and generate a new block.
submitted by BitRabbit_Team to u/BitRabbit_Team [link] [comments]

Constructing an Opt-In alternative reward for securing the blockchain

Since a keyboard with a monero logo got upvoted to the top I realized I should post various thoughts I have and generate some discussion. I hope others do the same.
Monero is currently secured by a dwindling block reward. There is a chance that the tail emission reward + transaction fees to secure the blockchain could become insufficient and allow for a scenario where it is profitable for someone to execute a 51% attack.
To understand this issue better, read this:
In Game Theory, Tragedy of the Commons is a market failure scenario where a common good is produced in lower quantities than the public desires, or consumed in greater quantities than desired. One example is pollution - it is in the public's best interest not to pollute, but every individual has incentive to pollute (e.g. because burning fossil fuel is cheap, and individually each consumer doesn't affect the environment much). The relevance to Bitcoin is a hypothetical market failure that might happen in the far future when the block reward from mining drops near zero. In the current Bitcoin design, the only fees miners earn at this time are Transaction fees. Miners will accept transactions with any fees (because the marginal cost of including them is minimal) and users will pay lower and lower fees (in the order of satoshis). It is possible that the honest miners will be under-incentivized, and that too few miners will mine, resulting in lower difficulty than what the public desires. This might mean various 51% attacks will happen frequently, and the Bitcoin will not function correctly. The Bitcoin protocol can be altered to combat this problem - one proposed solution is Dominant Assurance Contracts. Another more radical proposal (in the sense that the required change won't be accepted by most bitcoiners) is to have a perpetual reward that is constant in proportion to the monetary base. That can be achieved in two ways. An ever increasing reward (inflatacoin/expocoin) or a constant reward plus a demurrage fee in all funds that caps the monetary base (freicoin). This scenario was discussed on several threads: - Tragedy of the Commons - Disturbingly low future difficulty equilibrium https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=6284.0 - Stack Exchange http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3111/will-bitcoin-suffer-from-a-mining-tragedy-of-the-commons-when-mining-fees-drop-t Currently there is no consensus whether this problem is real, and if so, what is the best solution. 
Source: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_Commons

I suspect that least contentious solution to it is not to change code, emission or artificially increase fees (which would actually undermine the tail emission and lead to other problems, I believe: https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2016/10/21/bitcoin-is-unstable-without-the-block-reward/) but rather use a Dominant Assurance Contract that makes it rational for those who benefit from Monero to contribute to the block reward.

Dominant assurance contracts
Dominant assurance contracts, created by Alex Tabarrok, involve an extra component, an entrepreneur who profits when the quorum is reached and pays the signors extra if it is not. If the quorum is not formed, the signors do not pay their share and indeed actively profit from having participated since they keep the money the entrepreneur paid them. Conversely, if the quorum succeeds, the entrepreneur is compensated for taking the risk of the quorum failing. Thus, a player will benefit whether or not the quorum succeeds; if it fails he reaps a monetary return, and if it succeeds, he pays only a small amount more than under an assurance contract, and the public good will be provided.
Tabarrok asserts that this creates a dominant strategy) of participation for all players. Because all players will calculate that it is in their best interests to participate, the contract will succeed, and the entrepreneur will be rewarded. In a meta-game, this reward is an incentive for other entrepreneurs to enter the DAC market, driving down the cost disadvantage of dominant assurance contract versus regular assurance contracts.
Monero doesn't have a lot of scripting options to work with currently so it is very hard for me to understand how one might go about creating a Dominant Assurance Contract using Monero, especially in regards to paying out to a miner address.
This is how it could work in Bitcoin:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Dominant_Assurance_Contracts
This scheme is an attempt at Mike Hearn's exercise for the reader: an implementation of dominant assurance contracts. The scheme requires the use of multisignature transactions, nLockTime and transaction replacement which means it won't work until these features are available on the Bitcoin network.
A vendor agrees to produce a good if X BTC are raised by date D and to pay Y BTC to each of n contributors if X BTC are not raised by date D, or to pay nY BTC if X BTC are raised and the vendor fails to produce the good to the satisfaction of 2 of 3 independent arbitrators picked through a fair process
The arbitrators specify a 2-of-3 multisignature script to use as an output for the fundraiser with a public key from each arbitrator, which will allow them to judge the performance on actually producing the good
For each contributor:
The vendor and the contributor exchange public keys
They create a 2-of-2 multisignature output from those public keys
With no change, they create but do not sign a transaction with an input of X/n BTC from the contributor and an input of Y BTC from the vendor, with X/n+Y going to the output created in 3.2
The contributor creates a transaction where the output is X+nY to the address created in step 2 and the input is the output of the transaction in 3.3, signs it using SIGHASH_ALL | SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY, with version = UINT_MAX and gives it to the vendor
The vendor creates a transaction of the entire balance of the transaction in 3.3 to the contributor with nLockTime of D and version < UINT_MAX, signs it and gives it to the contributor
The vendor and contributor then both sign the transaction in 3.3 and broadcast it to the network, making the transaction in 3.4 valid when enough contributors participate and the transaction in 3.5 valid when nLockTime expires
As date D nears, nLockTime comes close to expiration.
If enough (n) people contribute, all of the inputs from 3.4 can combine to make the output valid when signed by the vendor, creating a valid transaction sending that money to the arbitrators, which only agree to release the funds when the vendor produces a satisfactory output
If not enough people ( Note that there is a limit at which it can be more profitable for the vendor to make the remaining contributions when D approaches
Now the arbitrators have control of X (the payment from the contributors) + nY (the performance bond from the vendor) BTC and pay the vendor only when the vendor performs satisfactorily
Such contracts can be used for crowdfunding. Notable examples from Mike Hearn include:
Funding Internet radio stations which don't want to play ads: donations are the only viable revenue source as pay-for-streaming models allow undercutting by subscribers who relay the stream to their own subscribers
Automatically contributing to the human translation of web pages


Monero has these features:
  1. Multisig
  2. LockTime (but it is much different then BTCs)
  3. A possibility to do MoJoin (CoinJoin) like transactions, even if less then optimally private. There is hope that the MoJoin Schemes will allow for better privacy in the future:
I have a draft writeup for a merged-input system called MoJoin that allows multiple parties to generate a single transaction. The goal is to complete the transaction merging with no trust in any party, but this introduces significant complexity and may not be possible with the known Bulletproofs multiparty computation scheme. My current version of MoJoin assumes partial trust in a dealer, who learns the mappings between input rings and outputs (but not true spends or Pedersen commitment data).

Additionally, Non-Interactive Refund Transactions could also be possible in Monero's future.
https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/595
I can't fully workout how all of these could work together to make a DAC that allows miners to put up and payout a reward if it doesn't succeed, or how we could make it so *any* miner who participated (by putting up a reward) could claim the reward if it succeeded. I think this should really be explored as it could make for a much more secure blockchain, potentially saving us if a "crypto winter" hits where the value of monero and number of transactions are low, making for a blockchain that is hard to trust because it would be so cheap to perform a 51% attack.


I am still skeptical of Dominant Assurance Contracts, despite success in an initial test https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2013/08/a-test-of-dominant-assurance-contracts.html
it still remains questionable or at least confusing: https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/747/im-not-understanding-why-dominant-assurance-contracts-are-so-special
submitted by Vespco to Monero [link] [comments]

DISC may be a better choice if you didn’t seize the opportunity of Bitcoin

DISC may be a better choice if you didn’t seize the opportunity of Bitcoin
https://preview.redd.it/di9avv4gqx441.png?width=1211&format=png&auto=webp&s=eb92d1eaffc52764bfd4bb0f0c55dead94aabf26
At present, the mainstream consensus mechanism of the encryption world is the Proof of Work (POW) used by Bitcoin (BTC) and the Proof of Stake (POS) used by EOS. In addition, there are more than 30 kinds of consensus mechanisms such as Proof of Capacity (POC) in the encryption world. Among them, POC has caused extensive discussion. Together with POC, there is also the cryptocurrency Diskcoin in the POC ecosystem, a core algorithm based on POC, which aims to establish a cryptocurrency of a greener energy-saving mining system.
Before introducing POC and Diskcoin, you need to understand POW and BTC first.

Proof Of Work
Ten years ago, Satoshi Nakamoto took the POW into the BTC mining, which once brought more than 200 billion US dollars in economic value to human society. BTC can sit on the throne of the encrypted world, and POW is indispensable. The BTC changed the traditional business model and the role of “miners” was born.
With the development, the miners gradually increased and the competition more fierce. There are large miners, mining pools, mines and other organizations. Due to the emergence of these organizations, the limitations of BTC have gradually emerged. BTC is proud of its decentralization and is no longer decentralized.
At the same time, POW was gradually occupied by ASIC. More and more mining machine manufacturers began to participate in mining. The reward of mining was slowly monopolized by giants such as mining machine manufacturers and mining pools, and small miners lost the opportunity to compete on the same stage.
BTC has been labeled as a privileged label, and now, without enough assets, it is almost impossible to participate in BTC.

Proof Of Capacity
The original intention of Satoshi Nakamoto to design BTC is that everyone can participate in mining and participate in the casting of “currency”. Therefore, in the early BTC mining, only one ordinary computer was needed for calculation work. Now, if you want to use a computer to mine BTC, it is simply a dream. The mining is mainly based on GPU and ASIC mining machines. This makes the cost of mining and the difficulty of mining greatly increase. Most of the hashrate of the BTC full net has been controlled by a few mining pools.
Power energy is also consumed in large quantities. BTC currently has a total hashrate of 43.42EH/S. It is mainly based on the popular S9 ant mining machine currently on the market. The average S9 hashrate is 13TH/S. The converted BTC full net hashrate is equivalent to 3.34 million S9 mining machines! In use, the power of the S9 is 1500 watts, and the power consumption per day is 36 watts. The power consumption of one S9 per month is 1080 watts. If multiplied by 3.34 million machines, the power consumption of the BTC for one year up to 43.2 billion degrees! The BTC full net has consumed more than 159 countries a year, accounting for 0.2% of global electricity consumption!
Can the BTC face a new solution?
At this point, POC boarded the stage of the encrypted world and launched a competition with POW.

Principle of Proof Of Capacity
Before the mining starts, the POC will calculate in advance and the hash value calculated by shabal256 will be stored in the hardisk. This process is called Plotting.
The POC uses a hash algorithm called shabal256. Compared to the B256 sha256, the shabal256 algorithm requires a longer calculation and workload. The benefit of Shabal256 is that miners do not need to perform hash calculations during mining, so the verification process will be relatively fast, and shabal256 will also prevent cheating.
From this we can know that the energy consumption of POC mining is extremely small. Because the repetitive and large amount of calculations are required compared to the POW, the POC simply scans the stored data.
In order to make everyone understand the POC hard drive mining, I will give you a simple example. POC mining process is similar to the lottery in the hardisk, and the process of mining is that you only need to wait for the lottery to draw the prize, you will scan the lottery in the hardisk to confirm whether it is winning, nothing more.
Someone here may have doubts, will it be faster to use an SSD hard drive? The clear answer is, no. Because the POC only cares the capacity of the hardisk, the larger the capacity is, the more lottery tickets you store on the hardisk, the greater the probability that you win the prize, and this has nothing to do with what kind of hardisk you use, what brand of hardisk.
The POC has changed the traditional mining method, which not only reduces the energy consumption of mining, but also lower the threshold of mining, so that everyone can participate.

Diskcoin
Diskcoin, referred to as DISC. DISC, like Bitcoin, has a total of 21 million. Based on the consensus of hardisk capacity, DISC lowers the participation threshold and allows more participation in the casting of coins, which is more conducive to the realization of decentralization.
DISC uses an upgraded version of the POC algorithm - CPOC Conditioned Proof Of Capacity.
Miners need to Stake Diskcoin to get the most reward. The ratio of Staking is not fixed or gradually reduced. Instead, an algorithmic mechanism called DES (Dynamic Equilibrium Staking) is used to adjust the Staking ratio based on the difficulty of mining. DISC's Staking economy model makes it impossible for miners to sell tokens without restrictions. This initiative is also to maintain the healthy and stable development of the DISC ecosystem.
Supply and demand are very important in economics. Supply and demand are the most direct factors for the decline in commodity prices, and the most effective market feedback. DISC's economic model ensures that the circulation of its currency is stable, keeping it in balance with the number of markets.
CPoC mining combines miners with the entire ecological interests, and replaces the originally consumed power resources with tokens as new production materials, so that the entire ecosystem of DISC continues to expand independently, forming a virtuous cycle system.
submitted by Diskcoin to DiskcoinOrg [link] [comments]

Ryan charles last video summed up: "we want to create a ridiculous expensive script so that nchain can sell you their magic patented solution that DSV obsoletes".

Honestly,
this is already beyond ridiculous. The guy who says that csw is satoshi wants to centrally plan how much sats this or that use-case needs to pay, while nothing at all of the original fee design of bitcoin changes with DSV: pay x sats for y bytes.
Apparently, you can do the same with some other scripts and it costs only outrageous hundreds of kilobytes. Of course no one will use it, no one will pay 2, 5, 10 bucks to validate a single RSA signature or similar.
There's a reason why bitcoin is not pay-for-cpu-cycle, because this is impossible to measure and doesn't reflect the load as good as the bandwidth. But Ryan wants you to believe it is fair that you continue to use an abacus instead of a pocket calculator.
There's also another reason as to why miners won't care, they can set apart those Tx to be inserted after they already exhausted a nonce round, validate them, create a new block template and voilá, no impact whatsoever in mining, and this is considering the case they just received them. This is not a problem really.
TL;DR: What this is is the oldest game in the world: "create difficulty to sell solutions". Create a ridiculous equivalent to DSV so that nChain PATENTED SOLUTION THAT DSV OBSOLETES can be sold as substitute.
submitted by rdar1999 to btc [link] [comments]

12-13 15:04 - 'Read this went the opposite way' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/fukya40 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 38-48min

'''
// Copyright (c) 2008 Satoshi Nakamoto // // Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy // of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal // in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights // to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell // copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is // furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: // // The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in // all copies or substantial portions of the Software. // // THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR // IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, // FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT // SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR // OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING // FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS // IN THE SOFTWARE.
class COutPoint; class CInPoint; class CDiskTxPos; class CCoinBase; class CTxIn; class CTxOut; class CTransaction; class CBlock; class CBlockIndex; class CWalletTx; class CKeyItem;
static const unsigned int MAX_SIZE = 0x02000000; static const int64 COIN = 1000000; static const int64 CENT = 10000; static const int64 TRANSACTIONFEE = 1 * CENT; /// change this to a user options setting, optional fee can be zero ///static const unsigned int MINPROOFOFWORK = 40; /// need to decide the right difficulty to start with static const unsigned int MINPROOFOFWORK = 20; /// ridiculously easy for testing
extern map mapBlockIndex; extern const uint256 hashGenesisBlock; extern CBlockIndex* pindexGenesisBlock; extern int nBestHeight; extern CBlockIndex* pindexBest; extern unsigned int nTransactionsUpdated; extern int fGenerateBitcoins;
FILE* OpenBlockFile(unsigned int nFile, unsigned int nBlockPos, const char* pszMode="rb"); FILE* AppendBlockFile(unsigned int& nFileRet); bool AddKey(const CKey& key); vector GenerateNewKey(); bool AddToWallet(const CWalletTx& wtxIn); void ReacceptWalletTransactions(); void RelayWalletTransactions(); bool LoadBlockIndex(bool fAllowNew=true); bool BitcoinMiner(); bool ProcessMessages(CNode* pfrom); bool ProcessMessage(CNode* pfrom, string strCommand, CDataStream& vRecv); bool SendMessages(CNode* pto); int64 CountMoney(); bool CreateTransaction(CScript scriptPubKey, int64 nValue, CWalletTx& txNew); bool SendMoney(CScript scriptPubKey, int64 nValue, CWalletTx& wtxNew);
class CDiskTxPos { public: unsigned int nFile; unsigned int nBlockPos; unsigned int nTxPos;
CDiskTxPos() { SetNull(); }
CDiskTxPos(unsigned int nFileIn, unsigned int nBlockPosIn, unsigned int nTxPosIn) { nFile = nFileIn; nBlockPos = nBlockPosIn; nTxPos = nTxPosIn; }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE( READWRITE(FLATDATA(*this)); ) void SetNull() { nFile = -1; nBlockPos = 0; nTxPos = 0; } bool IsNull() const { return (nFile == -1); }
friend bool operator==(const CDiskTxPos& a, const CDiskTxPos& b) { return (a.nFile == b.nFile && a.nBlockPos == b.nBlockPos && a.nTxPos == b.nTxPos); }
friend bool operator!=(const CDiskTxPos& a, const CDiskTxPos& b) { return !(a == b); }
void print() const { if (IsNull()) printf("null"); else printf("(nFile=%d, nBlockPos=%d, nTxPos=%d)", nFile, nBlockPos, nTxPos); } };
class CInPoint { public: CTransaction* ptx; unsigned int n;
CInPoint() { SetNull(); } CInPoint(CTransaction* ptxIn, unsigned int nIn) { ptx = ptxIn; n = nIn; } void SetNull() { ptx = NULL; n = -1; } bool IsNull() const { return (ptx == NULL && n == -1); } };
class COutPoint { public: uint256 hash; unsigned int n;
COutPoint() { SetNull(); } COutPoint(uint256 hashIn, unsigned int nIn) { hash = hashIn; n = nIn; } IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE( READWRITE(FLATDATA(*this)); ) void SetNull() { hash = 0; n = -1; } bool IsNull() const { return (hash == 0 && n == -1); }
friend bool operator<(const COutPoint& a, const COutPoint& b) { return (a.hash < b.hash || (a.hash == b.hash && a.n < b.n)); }
friend bool operator==(const COutPoint& a, const COutPoint& b) { return (a.hash == b.hash && a.n == b.n); }
friend bool operator!=(const COutPoint& a, const COutPoint& b) { return !(a == b); }
void print() const { printf("COutPoint(%s, %d)", hash.ToString().substr(0,6).c_str(), n); } };
// // An input of a transaction. It contains the location of the previous // transaction's output that it claims and a signature that matches the // output's public key. // class CTxIn { public: COutPoint prevout; CScript scriptSig;
CTxIn() { }
CTxIn(COutPoint prevoutIn, CScript scriptSigIn) { prevout = prevoutIn; scriptSig = scriptSigIn; }
CTxIn(uint256 hashPrevTx, unsigned int nOut, CScript scriptSigIn) { prevout = COutPoint(hashPrevTx, nOut); scriptSig = scriptSigIn; }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE ( READWRITE(prevout); READWRITE(scriptSig); )
bool IsPrevInMainChain() const { return CTxDB("r").ContainsTx(prevout.hash); }
friend bool operator==(const CTxIn& a, const CTxIn& b) { return (a.prevout == b.prevout && a.scriptSig == b.scriptSig); }
friend bool operator!=(const CTxIn& a, const CTxIn& b) { return !(a == b); }
void print() const { printf("CTxIn("); prevout.print(); if (prevout.IsNull()) { printf(", coinbase %s)\n", HexStr(scriptSig.begin(), scriptSig.end(), false).c_str()); } else { if (scriptSig.size() >= 6) printf(", scriptSig=%02x%02x", scriptSig[4], scriptSig[5]); printf(")\n"); } }
bool IsMine() const; int64 GetDebit() const; };
// // An output of a transaction. It contains the public key that the next input // must be able to sign with to claim it. // class CTxOut { public: int64 nValue; unsigned int nSequence; CScript scriptPubKey;
// disk only CDiskTxPos posNext; //// so far this is only used as a flag, nothing uses the location
public: CTxOut() { nValue = 0; nSequence = UINT_MAX; }
CTxOut(int64 nValueIn, CScript scriptPubKeyIn, int nSequenceIn=UINT_MAX) { nValue = nValueIn; scriptPubKey = scriptPubKeyIn; nSequence = nSequenceIn; }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE ( READWRITE(nValue); READWRITE(nSequence); READWRITE(scriptPubKey); if (nType & SER_DISK) READWRITE(posNext); )
uint256 GetHash() const { return SerializeHash(*this); }
bool IsFinal() const { return (nSequence == UINT_MAX); }
bool IsMine() const { return ::IsMine(scriptPubKey); }
int64 GetCredit() const { if (IsMine()) return nValue; return 0; }
friend bool operator==(const CTxOut& a, const CTxOut& b) { return (a.nValue == b.nValue && a.nSequence == b.nSequence && a.scriptPubKey == b.scriptPubKey); }
friend bool operator!=(const CTxOut& a, const CTxOut& b) { return !(a == b); }
void print() const { if (scriptPubKey.size() >= 6) printf("CTxOut(nValue=%I64d, nSequence=%u, scriptPubKey=%02x%02x, posNext=", nValue, nSequence, scriptPubKey[4], scriptPubKey[5]); posNext.print(); printf(")\n"); } };
// // The basic transaction that is broadcasted on the network and contained in // blocks. A transaction can contain multiple inputs and outputs. // class CTransaction { public: vector vin; vector vout; unsigned int nLockTime;
CTransaction() { SetNull(); }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE ( if (!(nType & SER_GETHASH)) READWRITE(nVersion);
// Set version on stream for writing back same version if (fRead && s.nVersion == -1) s.nVersion = nVersion;
READWRITE(vin); READWRITE(vout); READWRITE(nLockTime); )
void SetNull() { vin.clear(); vout.clear(); nLockTime = 0; }
bool IsNull() const { return (vin.empty() && vout.empty()); }
uint256 GetHash() const { return SerializeHash(*this); }
bool AllPrevInMainChain() const { foreach(const CTxIn& txin, vin) if (!txin.IsPrevInMainChain()) return false; return true; }
bool IsFinal() const { if (nLockTime == 0) return true; if (nLockTime < GetAdjustedTime()) return true; foreach(const CTxOut& txout, vout) if (!txout.IsFinal()) return false; return true; }
bool IsUpdate(const CTransaction& b) const { if (vin.size() != b.vin.size() || vout.size() != b.vout.size()) return false; for (int i = 0; i < vin.size(); i++) if (vin[i].prevout != b.vin[i].prevout) return false;
bool fNewer = false; unsigned int nLowest = UINT_MAX; for (int i = 0; i < vout.size(); i++) { if (vout[i].nSequence != b.vout[i].nSequence) { if (vout[i].nSequence <= nLowest) { fNewer = false; nLowest = vout[i].nSequence; } if (b.vout[i].nSequence < nLowest) { fNewer = true; nLowest = b.vout[i].nSequence; } } } return fNewer; }
bool IsCoinBase() const { return (vin.size() == 1 && vin[0].prevout.IsNull()); }
bool CheckTransaction() const { // Basic checks that don't depend on any context if (vin.empty() || vout.empty()) return false;
// Check for negative values int64 nValueOut = 0; foreach(const CTxOut& txout, vout) { if (txout.nValue < 0) return false; nValueOut += txout.nValue; }
if (IsCoinBase()) { if (vin[0].scriptSig.size() > 100) return false; } else { foreach(const CTxIn& txin, vin) if (txin.prevout.IsNull()) return false; }
return true; }
bool IsMine() const { foreach(const CTxOut& txout, vout) if (txout.IsMine()) return true; return false; }
int64 GetDebit() const { int64 nDebit = 0; foreach(const CTxIn& txin, vin) nDebit += txin.GetDebit(); return nDebit; }
int64 GetCredit() const { int64 nCredit = 0; foreach(const CTxOut& txout, vout) nCredit += txout.GetCredit(); return nCredit; }
int64 GetValueOut() const { int64 nValueOut = 0; foreach(const CTxOut& txout, vout) { if (txout.nValue < 0) throw runtime_error("CTransaction::GetValueOut() : negative value"); nValueOut += txout.nValue; } return nValueOut; }
bool ReadFromDisk(CDiskTxPos pos, FILE** pfileRet=NULL) { CAutoFile filein = OpenBlockFile(pos.nFile, 0, pfileRet ? "rb+" : "rb"); if (!filein) return false;
// Read transaction if (fseek(filein, pos.nTxPos, SEEK_SET) != 0) return false; filein >> *this;
// Return file pointer if (pfileRet) { if (fseek(filein, pos.nTxPos, SEEK_SET) != 0) return false; *pfileRet = filein.release(); } return true; }
friend bool operator==(const CTransaction& a, const CTransaction& b) { return (a.vin == b.vin && a.vout == b.vout && a.nLockTime == b.nLockTime); }
friend bool operator!=(const CTransaction& a, const CTransaction& b) { return !(a == b); }
void print() const { printf("CTransaction(vin.size=%d, vout.size=%d, nLockTime=%d)\n", vin.size(), vout.size(), nLockTime); for (int i = 0; i < vin.size(); i++) { printf(" "); vin[i].print(); } for (int i = 0; i < vout.size(); i++) { printf(" "); vout[i].print(); } }
bool TestDisconnectInputs(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool) { return DisconnectInputs(txdb, mapTestPool, true); }
bool TestConnectInputs(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool, bool fMemoryTx, bool fIgnoreDiskConflicts, int64& nFees) { return ConnectInputs(txdb, mapTestPool, CDiskTxPos(1, 1, 1), 0, true, fMemoryTx, fIgnoreDiskConflicts, nFees); }
bool DisconnectInputs(CTxDB& txdb) { static map mapTestPool; return DisconnectInputs(txdb, mapTestPool, false); }
bool ConnectInputs(CTxDB& txdb, CDiskTxPos posThisTx, int nHeight) { static map mapTestPool; int64 nFees; return ConnectInputs(txdb, mapTestPool, posThisTx, nHeight, false, false, false, nFees); }
private: bool DisconnectInputs(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool, bool fTest); bool ConnectInputs(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool, CDiskTxPos posThisTx, int nHeight, bool fTest, bool fMemoryTx, bool fIgnoreDiskConflicts, int64& nFees);
public: bool AcceptTransaction(CTxDB& txdb, bool fCheckInputs=true); bool AcceptTransaction() { CTxDB txdb("r"); return AcceptTransaction(txdb); } bool ClientConnectInputs(); };
// // A transaction with a merkle branch linking it to the timechain // class CMerkleTx : public CTransaction { public: uint256 hashBlock; vector vMerkleBranch; int nIndex;
CMerkleTx() { Init(); }
CMerkleTx(const CTransaction& txIn) : CTransaction(txIn) { Init(); }
void Init() { hashBlock = 0; nIndex = -1; }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE ( nSerSize += SerReadWrite(s, (CTransaction)this, nType, nVersion, ser_action); if (!(nType & SER_GETHASH)) READWRITE(nVersion); READWRITE(hashBlock); READWRITE(vMerkleBranch); READWRITE(nIndex); )
int SetMerkleBranch(); int IsInMainChain() const; bool AcceptTransaction(CTxDB& txdb, bool fCheckInputs=true); bool AcceptTransaction() { CTxDB txdb("r"); return AcceptTransaction(txdb); } };
// // A transaction with a bunch of additional info that only the owner cares // about. It includes any unrecorded transactions needed to link it back // to the timechain. // class CWalletTx : public CMerkleTx { public: vector vtxPrev; map mapValue; vector > vOrderForm; unsigned int nTime; char fFromMe; char fSpent;
//// probably need to sign the order info so know it came from payer
CWalletTx() { Init(); }
CWalletTx(const CMerkleTx& txIn) : CMerkleTx(txIn) { Init(); }
CWalletTx(const CTransaction& txIn) : CMerkleTx(txIn) { Init(); }
void Init() { nTime = 0; fFromMe = false; fSpent = false; }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE ( /// would be nice for it to return the version number it reads, maybe use a reference nSerSize += SerReadWrite(s, (CMerkleTx)this, nType, nVersion, ser_action); if (!(nType & SER_GETHASH)) READWRITE(nVersion); READWRITE(vtxPrev); READWRITE(mapValue); READWRITE(vOrderForm); READWRITE(nTime); READWRITE(fFromMe); READWRITE(fSpent); )
bool WriteToDisk() { return CWalletDB().WriteTx(GetHash(), *this); }
void AddSupportingTransactions(CTxDB& txdb); void AddSupportingTransactions() { CTxDB txdb("r"); AddSupportingTransactions(txdb); }
bool AcceptWalletTransaction(CTxDB& txdb, bool fCheckInputs=true); bool AcceptWalletTransaction() { CTxDB txdb("r"); return AcceptWalletTransaction(txdb); }
void RelayWalletTransaction(CTxDB& txdb); void RelayWalletTransaction() { CTxDB txdb("r"); RelayWalletTransaction(txdb); } };
// // Nodes collect new transactions into a block, hash them into a hash tree, // and scan through nonce values to make the block's hash satisfy proof-of-work // requirements. When they solve the proof-of-work, they broadcast the block // to everyone and the block is added to the timechain. The first transaction // in the block is a special one that creates a new coin owned by the creator // of the block. // // Blocks are appended to blk0001.dat files on disk. Their location on disk // is indexed by CBlockIndex objects in memory. // class CBlock { public: // header uint256 hashPrevBlock; uint256 hashMerkleRoot; unsigned int nTime; unsigned int nBits; unsigned int nNonce;
// network and disk vector vtx;
// memory only mutable vector vMerkleTree;
CBlock() { SetNull(); }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE ( if (!(nType & SER_GETHASH)) READWRITE(nVersion); READWRITE(hashPrevBlock); READWRITE(hashMerkleRoot); READWRITE(nTime); READWRITE(nBits); READWRITE(nNonce);
// ConnectBlock depends on vtx being last so it can calculate offset if (!(nType & (SER_GETHASH|SER_BLOCKHEADERONLY))) READWRITE(vtx); else if (fRead) const_cast(this)->vtx.clear(); )
void SetNull() { hashPrevBlock = 0; hashMerkleRoot = 0; nTime = 0; nBits = 0; nNonce = 0; vtx.clear(); vMerkleTree.clear(); }
bool IsNull() const { return (nBits == 0); }
uint256 GetHash() const { return Hash(BEGIN(hashPrevBlock), END(nNonce)); }
uint256 BuildMerkleTree() const { vMerkleTree.clear(); foreach(const CTransaction& tx, vtx) vMerkleTree.push_back(tx.GetHash()); int j = 0; for (int nSize = vtx.size(); nSize > 1; nSize = (nSize + 1) / 2) { for (int i = 0; i < nSize; i += 2) { int i2 = min(i+1, nSize-1); vMerkleTree.push_back(Hash(BEGIN(vMerkleTree[j+i]), END(vMerkleTree[j+i]), BEGIN(vMerkleTree[j+i2]), END(vMerkleTree[j+i2]))); } j += nSize; } return (vMerkleTree.empty() ? 0 : vMerkleTree.back()); }
vector GetMerkleBranch(int nIndex) const { if (vMerkleTree.empty()) BuildMerkleTree(); vector vMerkleBranch; int j = 0; for (int nSize = vtx.size(); nSize > 1; nSize = (nSize + 1) / 2) { int i = min(nIndex1, nSize-1); vMerkleBranch.push_back(vMerkleTree[j+i]); nIndex >>= 1; j += nSize; } return vMerkleBranch; }
static uint256 CheckMerkleBranch(uint256 hash, const vector& vMerkleBranch, int nIndex) { foreach(const uint256& otherside, vMerkleBranch) { if (nIndex & 1) hash = Hash(BEGIN(otherside), END(otherside), BEGIN(hash), END(hash)); else hash = Hash(BEGIN(hash), END(hash), BEGIN(otherside), END(otherside)); nIndex >>= 1; } return hash; }
bool WriteToDisk(bool fWriteTransactions, unsigned int& nFileRet, unsigned int& nBlockPosRet) { // Open history file to append CAutoFile fileout = AppendBlockFile(nFileRet); if (!fileout) return false; if (!fWriteTransactions) fileout.nType |= SER_BLOCKHEADERONLY;
// Write index header unsigned int nSize = fileout.GetSerializeSize(*this); fileout << FLATDATA(pchMessageStart) << nSize;
// Write block nBlockPosRet = ftell(fileout); if (nBlockPosRet == -1) return false; fileout << *this;
return true; }
bool ReadFromDisk(unsigned int nFile, unsigned int nBlockPos, bool fReadTransactions) { SetNull();
// Open history file to read CAutoFile filein = OpenBlockFile(nFile, nBlockPos, "rb"); if (!filein) return false; if (!fReadTransactions) filein.nType |= SER_BLOCKHEADERONLY;
// Read block filein >> *this;
// Check the header if (nBits < MINPROOFOFWORK || GetHash() > (~uint256(0) >> nBits)) return error("CBlock::ReadFromDisk : errors in block header");
return true; }
void print() const { printf("CBlock(hashPrevBlock=%s, hashMerkleRoot=%s, nTime=%u, nBits=%u, nNonce=%u, vtx=%d)\n", hashPrevBlock.ToString().substr(0,6).c_str(), hashMerkleRoot.ToString().substr(0,6).c_str(), nTime, nBits, nNonce, vtx.size()); for (int i = 0; i < vtx.size(); i++) { printf(" "); vtx[i].print(); } printf(" vMerkleTree: "); for (int i = 0; i < vMerkleTree.size(); i++) printf("%s ", vMerkleTree[i].ToString().substr(0,6).c_str()); printf("\n"); }
bool ReadFromDisk(const CBlockIndex* blockindex, bool fReadTransactions); bool TestDisconnectBlock(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool); bool TestConnectBlock(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool); bool DisconnectBlock(); bool ConnectBlock(unsigned int nFile, unsigned int nBlockPos, int nHeight); bool AddToBlockIndex(unsigned int nFile, unsigned int nBlockPos, bool fWriteDisk); bool CheckBlock() const; bool AcceptBlock(); };
// // The timechain is a tree shaped structure starting with the // genesis block at the root, with each block potentially having multiple // candidates to be the next block. pprev and pnext link a path through the // main/longest chain. A blockindex may have multiple pprev pointing back // to it, but pnext will only point forward to the longest branch, or will // be null if the block is not part of the longest chain. // class CBlockIndex { public: CBlockIndex* pprev; CBlockIndex* pnext; unsigned int nFile; unsigned int nBlockPos; int nHeight;
CBlockIndex() { pprev = NULL; pnext = NULL; nFile = 0; nBlockPos = 0; nHeight = 0; }
CBlockIndex(unsigned int nFileIn, unsigned int nBlockPosIn) { pprev = NULL; pnext = NULL; nFile = nFileIn; nBlockPos = nBlockPosIn; nHeight = 0; }
bool IsInMainChain() const { return (pnext || this == pindexBest); }
bool EraseBlockFromDisk() { // Open history file CAutoFile fileout = OpenBlockFile(nFile, nBlockPos, "rb+"); if (!fileout) return false;
// Overwrite with empty null block CBlock block; block.SetNull(); fileout << block;
return true; }
bool TestDisconnectBlock(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool) { CBlock block; if (!block.ReadFromDisk(nFile, nBlockPos, true)) return false; return block.TestDisconnectBlock(txdb, mapTestPool); }
bool TestConnectBlock(CTxDB& txdb, map& mapTestPool) { CBlock block; if (!block.ReadFromDisk(nFile, nBlockPos, true)) return false; return block.TestConnectBlock(txdb, mapTestPool); }
bool DisconnectBlock() { CBlock block; if (!block.ReadFromDisk(nFile, nBlockPos, true)) return false; return block.DisconnectBlock(); }
bool ConnectBlock() { CBlock block; if (!block.ReadFromDisk(nFile, nBlockPos, true)) return false; return block.ConnectBlock(nFile, nBlockPos, nHeight); }
void print() const { printf("CBlockIndex(nprev=%08x, pnext=%08x, nFile=%d, nBlockPos=%d, nHeight=%d)\n", pprev, pnext, nFile, nBlockPos, nHeight); } };
void PrintTimechain();
// // Describes a place in the timechain to another node such that if the // other node doesn't have the same branch, it can find a recent common trunk. // The further back it is, the further before the branch point it may be. // class CBlockLocator { protected: vector vHave; public:
CBlockLocator() { }
explicit CBlockLocator(const CBlockIndex* pindex) { Set(pindex); }
explicit CBlockLocator(uint256 hashBlock) { map::iterator mi = mapBlockIndex.find(hashBlock); if (mi != mapBlockIndex.end()) Set((*mi).second); }
IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE ( if (!(nType & SER_GETHASH)) READWRITE(nVersion); READWRITE(vHave); )
void Set(const CBlockIndex* pindex) { vHave.clear(); int nStep = 1; while (pindex) { CBlock block; block.ReadFromDisk(pindex, false); vHave.push_back(block.GetHash());
// Exponentially larger steps back for (int i = 0; pindex && i < nStep; i++) pindex = pindex->pprev; if (vHave.size() > 10) nStep *= 2; } }
CBlockIndex* GetBlockIndex() { // Find the first block the caller has in the main chain foreach(const uint256& hash, vHave) { map::iterator mi = mapBlockIndex.find(hash); if (mi != mapBlockIndex.end()) { CBlockIndex* pindex = (*mi).second; if (pindex->IsInMainChain()) return pindex; } } return pindexGenesisBlock; }
uint256 GetBlockHash() { // Find the first block the caller has in the main chain foreach(const uint256& hash, vHave) { map::iterator mi = mapBlockIndex.find(hash); if (mi != mapBlockIndex.end()) { CBlockIndex* pindex = (*mi).second; if (pindex->IsInMainChain()) return hash; } } return hashGenesisBlock; }
int GetHeight() { CBlockIndex* pindex = GetBlockIndex(); if (!pindex) return 0; return pindex->nHeight; } };
extern map mapTransactions; extern map mapWallet; extern vector > vWalletUpdated; extern CCriticalSection cs_mapWallet; extern map, CPrivKey> mapKeys; extern map > mapPubKeys; extern CCriticalSection cs_mapKeys; extern CKey keyUser;
'''
Read this went the opposite way
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: fukya40
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Bitcoin, dogecoin. How I tried to make my fortune in 2014 with the sweat of my computer.

Bitcoin, dogecoin. How I tried to make my fortune in 2014 with the sweat of my computer.

https://preview.redd.it/mv21lvsa3do31.jpg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=51bf5296a06eedc178079cf0b3ab4c3cfc44f271
Make money just by working on your computer: the rise of electronic currencies, in the wake of bitcoin, can be a little dream, especially in times of crisis. We tried the experiment. Wealth at your fingertips? Not for everybody.
Reading time: 6 min.
We have known at least since March 2013, with the soaring Bitcoin (BTC) price during the closing of Cypriot banks: electronic currencies, it has not much virtual. Since the creation of the enigmatic Satoshi Nakamoto serves as a safe haven, a playground for speculators, interests the States and even makes it possible to pay for his trip to the space where his beer, bigger world would dare to pretend that it only serves to buy prohibited substances on SilkRoad - if it ever was.
At the end of November, James Howells was mocked a lot, this Brit, caught in a household frenzy, inadvertently threw a hard disk containing 7,500 bitcoins, the equivalent of 4.8 million euros. A small fortune now lost in the depths of the Docksway dump near Newport. Nevertheless, before causing the consternation of the global Internet, Jamie still had the nose to undermine the BTC at a time when the experience mobilized a handful of hardcore geeks.
Since the rise (sawtooth) bitcoin, each unit currently weighs more than 800 dollars, nearly thirty cryptocurrencies have emerged. Is it possible, this year again, to let this promising, volatile and risky train pass, or to fall into
  1. Choose your electronic motto.
  2. All are based on the same principle: to summarize (very) big features [1], the issuance of money is governed by an algorithm, and the new corners put in circulation reward the resolution, by participants in a network of peer and mathematical problems, including the validation and archiving of transactions, which are public [2]. Mining a cryptocurrency is like putting the computing power of your computer in the service of the network.
  3. Since the program is decreasing [3], the mining becomes more and more difficult with time (and with the increase of the number of participants): to hope to make his pelote via the only computational activity, one must either have to at its disposal a large fleet of machines, to be a miner from the first hour. Exit the bitcoin, long since out of the reach of a personal computer.
  4. I similarly gave up the litecoin and peercoin, already well launched (they date respectively 2011 and 2012), to set my heart on one of the most recent currencies - and certainly the hippest of the moment: the dogecoin.
  5. As its name suggests, the cryptocurrency favorite Shiba Inus from around the world is a tribute to the Doge, one of the most famous memes of 2013, with its captions in Comic Sans, the font most sorry for the web. A geek joke, therefore, except that - the unfathomable mysteries of the Internet - its value jumped 900% in the third week of December, and she suffered a Christmas robbery online.
  6. Admittedly, at the time when these lines are written, the dogecoin caps at 0.00023 dollars [4] - its quite ridiculous (and quite depressing), but even if you bet on the future, so much to go frankly.
  7. 2. The hands in the engine the billboard.
  8. From there, things get tough (a little). Installing an electronic purse on ones computer is not very complicated (the software is available for Windows, MacOS, Android or, for the more adventurous, on a repository to compile under Linux). It is also possible to use an online wallet, but it is more risky (except, perhaps, when one is called James Howells). When opened for the first time, the purse automatically synchronizes with the Dogecoin network (be careful, it can be long), which gives you a payment address (we can generate more later).
  9. The two most common ways to undermine electronic money are to use the computing power of the computers microprocessor (CPU) or, more efficiently, that of the graphics card processor (GPU). In the first case, the program is simple to install; in the second, it is necessary to choose the most adapted to its material [5]. There are, thankfully, a lot of online tutorials. Still, to operate the corner board requires in all cases to trade the comfort of the GUI for aridity, so confusing to the layman, command lines - we have nothing for nothing.
  10. Finally, at work alone, we prefer collaboration. Mining is best done in groups, or rather in pool: it distributes the gains, of course, but also the difficulty. For the dogecoin as for all the crypto-currencies, the pools are numerous. A quick tour of a dedicated section of the Reddit community site can help you make your choice.
  11. 3. Extension of the field of struggle.
  12. And after? After, we can rest, since it is the machine that works. But the truth of a cryptocurrency - even at the exceptionally high LOL and LOL rates of the Shiba Inu - is cruel and brutal: not all computers are equal. Or rather, some are more equal than others. For while you heat your CPU or your graphics card to grapple some unfortunate corners, others will sweep the game thanks to specialized integrated circuits, computing capabilities much higher.
  13. If the game of buying and reselling corners is basically just another stock exchange mechanism, less the intervention of the central banks - what is at stake, and the big political question they ask: are we certain to prefer speculation pure and perfect to monetary policies, however questionable they may be? -, production, it is the law of the strongest (in calculation). There are even lethal weapons at $ 10,000 each, with which your processors are like mosquitoes in front of an A bomb.
  14. And if you think it does not matter because after all, it does not cost you anything, think again: the components, like humans, wear out faster when they work at full speed, and the bill of electricity can quickly grow. The profitability of the case is anything but certain, as evidenced by the results of online calculators. (Needless to say, our laughing dogecoin does not stand up to this kind of simulation.)
  15. Much more boring, from a collective point of view: the carbon footprint, current and above all expected, of electronic currencies worries more and more. Last spring, Bloomberg estimated that the energy consumption of the Bitcoin network was equivalent to that of 31,000 US households. Not sure, according to the site, that their emission is less damaging to the environment than have been some physical currencies.
  16. For exciting to analyze that is the emergence of cryptocurrencies, it is better to ask now about their cost, economic and ecological. To see it as a potential source of income, except for being a very early adopter with a hollow nose, an individual with a lot of computational capital or a clever trader, you have to make a point.
  17. If the recurrent comparison with the famous Ponzi pyramid [6] is discussed (after all, the decentralized currencies do not make promises), remains that, as long as the value does not collapse, the system benefits mainly to the first entrants - except James Howells.
  18. As the Bitcoin.fr site aptly states: all this is just an experiment, invest only the time and money you can afford to lose. LOLs love was not a worse reason than another to experiment, so I finally submitted my laptop to four days and three nights of intense activity, which makes me happy. owner of a good half a thousand dogecoins. Either the equivalent of 0.115 dollar, or 0.08 euro. It is obviously not worth the electricity consumed to generate them, it increases my carbon footprint, but it amuses my entourage. But laughter is, as everyone knows, a safe bet in times of crisis, less volatile than a real bitcoin.
  19. And then, after all, you never know.
  20. Amaelle Guiton.
  21. 1. For explanations more provided (the case is quite complex), refer, for example, to the series of very detailed notes devoted to blogger Turblog.
  22. 2. And as such, searchable by everyone. It is the identity of the users that is not known, unless they reveal it, hence the reputation of anonymity (relative, therefore) cryptocurrencies.
  23. 3. In the case of bitcoin, the maximum of 21 million units should be reached around 2140.
  24. 4. For a day-to-day follow-up, see the CoinMarketCap site which lists the exchange rates of crypto-currencies, based on the dollar value of bitcoin.
  25. 5. We discover then, unfortunately, that some graphics cards do not allow the mining. This is the case for the author of these lines, reduced to working in conditions of extreme computer deprivation.
  26. 6. Comparison which is at the heart of a hilarious note on the ponzicoin, signed by the economic journalist Matthew OBrien, on The Atlantic (to read if you intend seriously to invest in the dogecoin).
submitted by Mejbah411 to u/Mejbah411 [link] [comments]

Time to discuss the elephant in the room. Nicehash 51% Attacks.

While I've argued for ProgPoW because I'm not a fan of ASIC manufactures because of their malicious business practices, I think we all know the real problem for PoW security, Hashrate Rental sites. Let's go through a short-list of coins that are listed on Nicehash, where hashpower could be bought and then executed a 51% attack.
Monacoin 51%
BitcoinGold 51%
EthereumClassic 51%
Vertcoin 51%
ZenCash(Now Horizen) 51%
BitcoinPrivate 51% (Ethical Hack)

Nicehash has been the #1 to go to "sell" hashpower for whatever coin they support for BTC and other rental services such as miningrigrental. While we cannot prove that this attacks were used by buying hashpower on nicehash, a ethical hacker Geocold lived streamed how easy it was to attack PoW coin BTCP. "using a couple of hundred dollars’ worth of rented hashpower he’d purchased from Nicehash with BTC" (bitcoin.com). We can assume then that other 51% attacks all follow this method.

Step 1. Buy more Hashpower than the current network using rental services
Step 2. moves coins on the true network to other addresses, makes deposits, then withdraws them to a safe addresses
Step 3. broadcast the untruthful chain to the network
Step 4. this reverts the truthful network.
Step 5. Profit.
Shockingly, several crypto-currencies not only were cheap to attack but also had plenty of hash rate for sale on NiceHash with which such an attack could take place. When 51% attacks were considered in the past, most calculations included the cost of hardware, electricity, and maintenance. But this new “rent-a-attack” method is proving dangerous for smaller networks. (ccn.com)
This is what happened to ETC recently. Few people who were using nicehash services commented that they noticed a pay-bump mining ETH-HASH.

One PoW altcoin team has set up a script to constantly monitor their hashrate. In the event of a spike of over 10%, they will be automatically notified. Should the newly added hashrate emanate from an unknown pool, or be in danger of tipping an existing pool over 50%, they have a large quantity BTC on standby with Nicehash ready to purchase their own firepower to counter the attack (bitcoin.com)
Again it shows the only way that people counter this is to over-bid/buy more hashrate.

While I understand PoS doesn't suffer from these type of attacks. However I find it unreasonable to say PoW is flawed because 51% attacks. Hashrental services we not envisioned by Satoshi's PoW. Any actual mining actors not using hash rentals would need a sizable amount of resources to perform a 51% and double-spend even on small cap coins. Nicehash takes your money and doesn't care.

The elephant Crypto needs to deal with it shutting off nicehash and rental services. After the nicehash hack I know I saw a sizable increase in profits because difficulty dropped on so many coins.

IMHO Nicehash needs to turn-off purchasing hashrate and instead turn to "auto-covert" where they mine the coin that's profitable that day and turn into bitcoin for the user. We wouldn't have the chance of 51% attacks.
submitted by Xazax310 to gpumining [link] [comments]

AMA in the community

Q1:- What is SpockChain & its Current Progress? What are the Problems SpockChain trying to solve?

Ans:- Spock has been launched its mainnet on 8/13 2019, it’s the first public blockchain support Solidity smart contract with PoC consensus. In the last month, we have achieved several goals: 1.launched the mainnet, 2.been listed on 6 exchanges, and also Spock has won the voting competition for free list on MXC. 3. Spockpool is online to help small miners to union their capacity and get share of the mining reward. Spock is building a decentralized application network with PoC consensus, which is a more cost saving, environment friendly solution for blockchain system. Spock is going to release is first smart contract in the following months.

Q2:- What is the Use-case Of Spok Coin In Your Ecosystem? How can Holders & Investors Generate Rewards Using Spock Platform?

Ans:- In Spock Network, People can publish/run the apps on the network, all the dapps running on the network needs SPOK. and besides PoC consensus, Spock also involves the concept of PoS, which is that miners need to stake some coins to mine the coins, if not, the miner cannot get the 100% of the block reward, so in SpockPool, coin holders can lend the coins to the miners, when miners mined the reward, it can share with the coin holders.

Q3:- What is the Need & Importance Of SpockChain project in Blockchain Industry?

Ans:- First of all, I think PoC consensus will be a serious option besides PoW and PoS in future, and there must be a significant project stands for PoC consensus, currently Burst or BHD maybe the one, but these two projects has a common problem is that they do not have ecosystem, they only created a coin with PoC consensus, that’s too simple to today’s blockchain world. Spock will be the star project in this area not only just created a coin with PoC consensus, but also it supports smart contract, Ethereum dapps, games can be easily migrated to Spock network.

Q4:- What are the Milestones SpockChain has achieved from the starting of this project? What are the Long Term Targets?

Ans:- For the first question, I have answered in the previous one. Like launch the mainnet, got investment from Continue Capital and other token funds, IEO/IGO on the several exchanges, got free list on MXC by won the voting competition, released explorer, dashboard, desktop wallet, Android wallet, and SpockPool, all these things above happens in the last month!!! For the short-term goal, Spock is trying to be the Ethereum with PoC consensus, so for the following 6 month to 1 year, Spock will expand the developer community to increase the dapps/tokens on its network. And also the final goal of Spock is to upgrade the consensus not only store the hash value, but also store documents, music, videos, etc. We’re still working on that part.

Segment 2 Questions

Q5:- What are your major goals to archive in the next 3-4 years? Where can we Spockchain ecosystem in this period? What are your plans to expand and gain more adoption?

Ans:- 1. Spreading the Proof of Capacity consensus, let more people know there is another way of mining to gain. 2. Build the developer economy on Spock Network, on Spock Network, not only smart contract, but a new type of tokens will be supported, which is not like the ERC-20, it’s tokens that generated as the block generated, but the developer can define the tokens generation rules, we call them mining-tokens. 3. Search the new way to upgrade the storage network, to finally achieve the goal that the a decentralized storage network can serve the internet users, that would be a totally new future of blockchain world.

Q6:- As a team member of Spockchain, what is your long-term vision about the industry which Spockchain is working at? Are you afraid someday there will be another project with more innovative technology can replace?

Ans:- I think the infrastructure of Blockchain world today has only two main directions: 1. cross chain Technoledge like Cosmos, Polka-dot. 2. Decentralized storage like IPFS. As long as we're heading to the right direction, we won't get a very bad result, even we have failed, but the way we passed through can be borrowed to other projects, there must be some projects success in this area. I feel confident about the project going and what we have done comparing to the other competitors, as currently so many projects claim that they want to be Ethereum in PoC, but none of the has launched the mainnet except SPOCK.

Q7:- Why Spock Network have Chosen Proof of Capacity Consensus Mechanism ? Any advantage over other consensus?

Ans:- Here is the description in the white paper about advantage of PoC:
Environmental protection: When a mining machine is initialized, the mining cost is relatively small, requiring only a small amount of disk access and a small amount of calculations per block.
• Economy: Many PCs have unused disk space. The marginal cost of using these spaces for mining is small, with immediate rewards and can be used for mining. It is not necessary to consider the cost of electricity as a bitcoin mining machine.
• Equality: Today Bitcoin has become the world of Asics mining machines and large mines, and small-scale investors have struggled to participate in the bitcoin mining ecology, while POC-based mining machines are hardly faced with bitcoin-like The mining machine is constantly updating its iterations so that it is completely eliminated.
• “computing power” sharing: BCH is a BTC hard fork chain, so BTC's proprietary mining machine can also dig BCH, but it can't dig BTC and BCH at the same time, and the POC mechanism can make the hard disk for different chains. The spatial "computing power" data structure is consistent, and these "computing power" can be used to dig assets on these chains at the same time.
I think the value of PoC is under-estimated today, that’s why we want to promote the consensus.

Q8:- What are the competitors of Spock Network? How Spock Network is better than their competitors ?

Ans:- In storage domain, they can be: Filecoin/Storj/Sia/Lambda/Filestorm/Yotta
In PoC consensus domain, there are: Burst/BHD/LHD/Boom/Newbi/Disc
In PoC+Smart contract domain, there are: Spock/Galaxy Network/BSN/EHD
Currently, in a completely decentralized blockchain network, there is no such consensus can distribute the coins as the miners contribute the hard disk and network, all these projects take some trade-off to make that happen except File coin, File coin uses Proof of Replication and Proof of Space-time consensus, that may be an option to solve this problem, but its mainnet has not launched, it would take time to achieve that. The Burst, BHD, and other similar projects only uses PoC consensus to created a mining coin, but the usage and scenario are very limited, it’s not year 2013, you can simply create an alt coin and people will buy it. The PoC consensus needs find some usage and scenario to make the network more solid and strong, the smart contract can be the way. As I listed, all the projects have not launched its mainnet except Spock.

Q9:- How Scalable Spock Network have , How many TPS achieved so far ?

Ans:- Spock has its own advantage about improve TPS, because nodes running in the network has much hard disks and network traffic, basically we can increase the size of block header to increase the TPS, and also we're investigating other ways to improve the TPS.

Q10:- Why the name of Project " SPOCK" . What does it signify about your project?

Ans:- Spock is the leading character of Star Trek, we choose the name to inspire the team to keep exploring the possibility of the blockchain world, sand the slogan of Spock is “live long and prosper”, which is also the hope of the team for the project, nowadays, too many fake mining projects out there, Spock wants to show the honesty and integrity by continually showing the code and improving the project.

Q11:- Followed your whitepaper, Spock has a leaderless PoC protocol, does not use a committee or an authority. How this use for? What benefit does it have for Spock?

Ans:- In the consensus level, there is indeed no such organization can change or control it, just like PoW, when the network needs to upgrade its consensus, the community will join the discussion and the dev team will follow the result of it. That's the spirit of Satoshi and all the early blockchain projects.

Q12:- What is the form of Spock mining? What are the conditions for miner application?

Ans:- To mine spock, you can just use normal computer with several hard dist with plotted files, there are tutorials on thehttps://www.spockchain.org

Q13:- What next technology updating after building a decentralized storage data application network in 2021? Will Spock expand to other areas in long term development?

Ans:- I think after the infrastructure is completed that we will focus on the application ecosystem and adoption of the ecosystem, Spock dev team will continue working on the infrastructure and other scenarios/applications to promote the adoption, I think in a very long time, Spock project will only focus on decentralized storage domain.

Q14:- Does your team have a plan to add DAO module into your project since its its effiency on autonomy, decentralization and transparency?

Ans:- Spock will run DAO mode for autonomy, the Spock team is still working on the details of it.

Q15:- What is the role of Smart Contract in Spock Chain? Does your team have a security system to check the operation of whole project?

Ans:- Smart Contract will be the key feature that distinguish Spock and other projects with PoC consensus, Spock leverages lots of work from Ethereum, so Spock is standing on the shoulders of giants, which potential lower-level security risks can be avoid, and we also have a security team to improve the smart contract, like before you submit your smart contract, there is a service to help to analysis the code to help you avoid some common mistakes.

Q16:- What is Spockchain vision and what's your biggest challenges?

Ans:- Spock is trying to be Ethereum with PoC consensus in a short-term, that goal seems to be very promising as everything goes well so far. Spock’s long-term goal is trying to provide a decentralized storage network for all the internet users, that would be challenging from both technical side and business side.

Q17:- Spockchain looks good but it confuses me that there are so many other Blockchain projects. What should I pay attention in Spockchain to give it the importance it deserves? What are you planning to achieve with your project goal?

Ans:- I think code and time talks, Spock is not a simply ERC-20 token, it’s a mining coin. If you checkout the top 50 projects on CMC, most of them are mining projects, because mining coins are very fair way to distribute the coins. And Spock provides another option for mining, you don’t have to search for low-cost electricity power, you can just set up the mining machines at home to mine the coins. It’s a potential mining way to mine cryptocurrency, if you have mined BTC/ETH, you can have a try about Spock/Burst/BHD, etc.

Q18:- Blockchain projects is not a child play. While creating spok projects, have u for once been discouraged to the extent of wishing to stop since its all about intelligent contract and users poc consensus.

Ans:- Honestly, we do. there is so many hard work to combine the smart contract and poc consensus, but we believe the technology and engineering, and we believe the judgement about the trend of blockchain technology, that's what encourage us to the place we have achieved.

Q19:- How the SpockChain project planning process is ensure? The market needs constant progress of project! How to avoid the spok Project idleness?

Ans:- We're continuously building and expanding the community and miner groups, both online and offline side. currently most miners are from Asia(China mostly),there are only several miners in Europe and US, we do want to spread spok ecosystem across other continents, if anyone in other countries is interested in promoting Spock, please directly contact me!

Q20:- Can anyone run a POC mining and does it require much processing power? Is the cost of POC mining high?

Ans:- Yes, anyone can run a PoC mining, it's electricity power insensitive. the electricity power of each petabytes of a day is only several dolloars, while the cost of a petabytes will be about 30000 dollars.

Q21:- Is POC exploitation cost high? What is it suitable for? What is the number of SPOCK user statistics today? Does SPOCK have a plan to attract users?

Ans:- you can check out the websites, Official website: https://www.spockchain.org Spock Explorer: http://www.spock.network Miner Dashboard: https://dashboard.spock.network

Q22:- What is the function of SPOCK? Are there any benefits to SPOCK holders? How do I earn SPOCK?

Ans:- All the smart contract runs on Spock will cost SPOK, and miners want to mine SPOK will need some amount of SPOCK to stake. You can get the Spock on the exchanges that lists Spock, MXC, Coinex, VB, Bihodl, etc.
Q23:- So What does SPOCK ecosystem include? What all problems SPOCK will solve in Crypto market?
Ans:- Spock is trying to be the Ethereum with PoC consensus, the biggest advantage of PoC consensus is that it saves much electricity than PoW, the “computing power “ is kind of like stored on the hard disk, so the system will be changed to be storage-incentive from computing-incentive., that would change the way of crypto mining, and also Spock introduced the Solidity smart contract in such blockchain system, which make the developers easily migrated their dapps from Ethereum to Spock.
Q24:- How Proof of Capacity Consensus works in SPOCK Chain?
Ans:- The core function about PoC in Spock is just like the PoC consensuse implementation in Burst project, which is the first project uses PoC consensus since year 2014. In high level, the PoC consensus is an algorithm which preprocessing the hash calculation by plotting the whole hard disk with hash values, when generating a new block, the node will scan the hard disk and find the most proper "answer" in the disks and submit to the network, the node submitted the most proper answer will get the mining reward.
Q25:- How Spock and other storage platform i.e. Google drive are different and what benefits you have over them?
Ans:- Basically Spock and Google drive is totally different, as Spock today only stores consensus data. I’d like to talk about the overall differences between decentralized storage and centralized storage services.
Traditional centralized storage platforms generally use cloud storage. Most of the data is stored on a few cloud platforms, which leads to data accumulation and serious centralization problems. There are also problems including higher cost, slower transfer rate, and lower data security. The decentralized storage application platform encrypts and distributes data through a distributed network, meaning that no data other than the data owner can access the data, ensuring security.
And another core feature is the protection of private data, the open decentralized platform can do better, just like the assets of the cryptocurrency, the ownership of the assets represented by the private key, in the decentralized storage platform The private key can represent the disposition and access rights of the data.
Q26:- What do you think is the biggest problem Spock Network will solve which is not solved by other projects yet and why is the problem important to solve?I mean how unique SPOCK Network have?What are the Real world use-cases & utility of SPOK ?
Ans:- 1. I think there are so much projects uses PoC consensus, but all of them are lack of economy, with smart contract feature, Spock will be the first public blockchain support Solidity smart contract and with lower energy cost for running.
2. First of all, the usage of the smart contract will cost SPOK , and the mining policy makes miners need to stake SPOK to mine. and other industry is trying to looking for the adoption of Spock as it's a storage network with smart contract, there is very much possibility we can explore.
Q27:- Will the mining on SPOCK CHAIN Platform Profitablein bear Market? In which form will the output of Mining?
Ans:- The PoC mining is the most anti-bear-marketing mining way I think, you know when BTC comes to 15000$, Bitmain miners S9’s price goes to 4000$, this year, when the BTC prices comes to 3000$, S9’s price is less than 100$. Miners takes all the risk for the price going down, because the manufactory of BTC/BCH miner machines are limited and united. While the miner machines of PoC consensus does not have that problem, because the supplyment of hard disk is very sufficient, and the price is very stable.
Q28:- Why does Spockchain use POC and not POW or POS? Are there advantages of POC compared to POW and POS? There are many projects using POC such as: BHD, BSN, .... Is Spockchain different from these projects?
Ans:- 1. The main issue of PoW is that it’s energy waste and it limits the miners nowadays, people basically cannot mine any PoW coins at home, they have to buy equipments and send them to some place with lower-cost electricity power which makes difficulty to ordinary people. The biggest advantage of PoC is that it save tremendous money on electricity power.
The PoS basically cost nothing to generate new coins, I think it would also be problem for the price, as people get the coins so easy, they may not value it.
2.I have a list about PoC coins (the list is growing..) I do want to share some opinion about all these PoC projects including Spock.
I categorized the projects into two:
PoC consensus only: Burst/BHD/LHD/DISC/Boom/Newbi/Lava
PoC consensus + Smart Contract: Spock/BSN/Galaxy Network/EHD
For the projects in first list, these projects only talks about consensus and coins, but lack of usage and scenarios.
For the second lines, please check out and compare all the projects, none of them have launched the mainnet except SPOCK, while those projects started to mine with ERC-20 tokens.
I think the chanlledge is lack of acknowledge of Proof of Capacity consensus all over the world, the PoC introduce a new way to mine cryptocurrency, currently, Spock has a lot of miners in China, but not much in other places, spreading the consensus takes time. I think code/products shows hoesty and integrity, we have lots of plan to develop the network, while so many projects with similar ideas still runs on ERC-20, with time goes by, people will distinguish that.
Q29:- Currently, what are risks affecting the Spockchain project? In order to develop project in long term and attract investors, which method do you use to manage, minimize the negative impact of risks? I mean that, what are the risks and how do you deal with them?
Ans:- do you mean cheat when mining? First of all, you cannot have fundamental issue on the consensus basis, then if there is some way for smart miners to cheat to gain more rewards, we can update the full node program which can prevent the cheat. I think if that happen, community will support us to update the nodes in the network.
Q30:- How can a cryptocurrency mining algorithm be detected and prevented? What makes them so difficult to detect?
Ans:- According to the stats, 2016-2018, the supply of hard disk is 1.2billion, if we count as average capacity 4T, which is 48,000,000P, while currenlty the largest network with PoC consensus is BHD, which has capacity at about only 1500P.
submitted by Unity111-spock to SPOCK_Chain_Official [link] [comments]

AN INTRODUCTION TO DIGIBYTE

DigiByte

What are cryptocurrencies?
Cryptocurrencies are peer to peer technology protocols which rely on the block-chain; a system of decentralized record keeping which allows people to exchange unmodifiable and indestructible information “coins,” globally in little to no time with little to no fees – this translates into the exchange of value as these coins cannot be counterfeit nor stolen. This concept was started by Satoshi Nakamoto (allegedly a pseudonym for a single man or organization) whom described and coded Bitcoin in 2009.
What is DigiByte?
DigiByte (DGB) is a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin. It is also a decentralized applications protocol in a similar fashion to Neo or Ethereum.
DigiByte was founded and created by Jared Tate in 2014. DigiByte allows for fast (virtually instant) and low cost (virtually free) transactions. DigiByte is hard capped at 21 billion coins which will ever be mined, over a period of 21 years. DigiByte was never an ICO and was mined/created in the same way that Bitcoin or Litecoin initially were.
DigiByte is the fastest UTXO PoW scalable block-chain in the world. We’ll cover what this really means down below.
DigiByte has put forth and applied solutions to many of the problems that have plagued Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general – those being:
We will address these point by point in the subsequent sections.
The DigiByte Protocol
DigiByte maintains these properties through use of various technological innovations which we will briefly address below.
Why so many coins? 21 Billion
When initially conceived Bitcoin was the first of a kind! And came into the hands of a few! The beginnings of a coin such as Bitcoin were difficult, it had to go through a lot of initial growth pains which following coins did not have to face. It is for this reason among others why I believe Bitcoin was capped at 21 million; and why today it has thus secured a place as digital gold.
When Bitcoin was first invented no one knew anything about cryptocurrencies, for the inventor to get them out to the public he would have to give them away. This is how the first Bitcoins were probably passed on, for free! But then as interest grew so did the community. For them to be able to build something and create something which could go on to have actual value, it would have to go through a steady growth phase. Therefore, the control of inflation through mining was extremely important. Also, why the cap for Bitcoin was probably set so low - to allow these coins to amass value without being destroyed by inflation (from mining) in the same way fiat is today! In my mind Satoshi Nakamoto knew what he was doing when setting it at 21 million BTC and must have known and even anticipated others would take his design and build on top of it.
At DigiByte, we are that better design and capped at 21 billion. That's 1000 times larger than the supply of Bitcoin. Why though? Why is the cap on DigiByte so much higher than that of Bitcoin? Because DigiByte was conceived to be used not as a digital gold, nor as any sort of commodity, but as a real currency!
Today on planet Earth, we are approximately 7.6 billion people. If each person should want or need to use and live off Bitcoin; then equally split at best each person could only own 0.00276315789 BTC. The market cap for all the money on the whole planet today is estimated to have recently passed 80 trillion dollars. That means that each whole unit of Bitcoin would be worth approximately $3,809,523.81!
$3,809,523.81
This is of course in an extreme case where everyone used Bitcoin for everything. But even in a more conservative scenario the fact remains that with such a low supply each unit of a Bitcoin would become absurdly expensive if not inaccessible to most. Imagine trying to buy anything under a dollar!
Not only would using Bitcoin as an everyday currency be a logistical nightmare but it would be nigh impossible. For each Satoshi of a Bitcoin would be worth much, much, more than what is realistically manageable.
This is where DigiByte comes in and where it shines. DigiByte aims to be used world-wide as an international currency! Not to be hoarded in the same way Bitcoin is. If we were to do some of the same calculations with DigiByte we'd find that the numbers are a lot more reasonable.
At 7.6 billion people, each person could own 2.76315789474 DGB. Each whole unit of DGB would be worth approximately $3,809.52.
$3,809.52
This is much more manageable and remember in an extreme case where everyone used DigiByte for everything! I don't expect this to happen anytime soon, but with the supply of DigiByte it would allow us to live and transact in a much more realistic and fluid fashion. Without having to divide large numbers on our phone's calculator to understand how much we owe for that cup of coffee! With DigiByte it's simple, coffee cost 1.5 DGB, the cinema 2.8 DGB, a plane ticket 500 DGB!
There is a reason for DigiByte's large supply, and it is a good one!
Decentralisation
Decentralisation is an important concept for the block-chain and cryptocurrencies in general. This allows for a system which cannot be controlled nor manipulated no matter how large the organization in play or their intentions. DigiByte’s chain remains out of the reach of even the most powerful government. This allows for people to transact freely and openly without fear of censorship.
Decentralisation on the DigiByte block-chain is assured by having an accessible and fair mining protocol in place – this is the multi-algorithm (MultiAlgo) approach. We believe that all should have access to DigiByte whether through purchase or by mining. Therefore, DigiByte is minable not only on dedicated mining hardware such as Antminers, but also through use of conventional graphics cards. The multi-algorithm approach allows for users to mine on a variety of hardware types through use of one of the 5 mining algorithms supported by DigiByte. Those being:
Please note that these mining algorithms are modified and updated from time to time to assure complete decentralisation and thus ultimate security.
The problem with using only one mining algorithm such as Bitcoin or Litecoin do is that this allows for people to continually amass mining hardware and hash power. The more hash power one has, the more one can collect more. This leads to a cycle of centralisation and the creation of mining centres. It is known that a massive portion of all hash power in Bitcoin comes from China. This kind of centralisation is a natural tendency as it is cheaper for large organisations to set up in countries with inexpensive electricity and other such advantages which may be unavailable to the average miner.
DigiByte mitigates this problem with the use of multiple algorithms. It allows for miners with many different kinds of hardware to mine the same coin on an even playing field. Mining difficulty is set relative to the mining algorithm used. This allows for those with dedicated mining rigs to mine alongside those with more modest machines – and all secure the DigiByte chain while maintaining decentralisation.
Low Fees
Low fees are maintained in DigiByte thanks to the MultiAlgo approach working in conjunction with MultiShield (originally known as DigiShield). MultiShield calls for block difficulty readjustment between every single block on the chain; currently blocks last 15 seconds. This continuous difficulty readjustment allows us to combat any bad actors which may wish to manipulate the DigiByte chain.
Manipulation may be done by a large pool or a single entity with a great amount of hash power mining blocks on the chain; thus, increasing the difficulty of the chain. In some coins such as Bitcoin or Litecoin difficulty is readjusted every 2016 blocks at approximately 10mins each and 2mins respectively. Meaning that Bitcoin’s difficulty is readjusted about every two weeks. This system can allow for large bad actors to mine a coin and then abandon it, leaving it with a difficulty level far too high for the present hash rate – and so transactions can be frozen, and the chain stopped until there is a difficulty readjustment and or enough hash power to mine the chain. In such a case users may be faced with a choice - pay exorbitant fees or have their transactions frozen. In an extreme case the whole chain could be frozen completely for extended periods of time.
DigiByte does not face this problem as its difficulty is readjusted per block every 15 seconds. This innovation was a technological breakthrough and was adopted by several other coins in the cryptocurrency environment such as Dogecoin, Z-Cash, Ubiq, Monacoin, and Bitcoin Gold.
This difficulty readjustment along with the MultiAlgo approach allows DigiByte to maintain the lowest fees of any UTXO – PoW – chain in the world. Currently fees on the DigiByte block-chain are at about 0.0001 DGB per transaction of 100 000 DGB sent. This depends on the amount sent and currently 100 000 DGB are worth around $2000.00 with the fee being less than 0.000002 cents. It would take 500 000 transactions of 100 000 DGB to equal 1 penny’s worth. This was tested on a Ledger Nano S set to the low fees setting.
Fast transaction times
Fast transactions are ensured by the conjunctive use of the two aforementioned technology protocols. The use of MultiShield and MultiAlgo allows the mining of the DigiByte chain to always be profitable and thus there is always someone mining your transactions. MultiAlgo allows there to a greater amount of hash power spread world-wide, this along with 15 second block times allows for transactions to be near instantaneous. This speed is also ensured by the use DigiSpeed. DigiSpeed is the protocol by which the DigiByte chain will decrease block timing gradually. Initially DigiByte started with 30 second block times in 2014; which today are set at 15 seconds. This decrease will allow for ever faster and ever more transactions per block.
Robust security + The Immutable Ledger
At the core of cryptocurrency security is decentralisation. As stated before decentralisation is ensured on the DigiByte block chain by use of the MultiAlgo approach. Each algorithm in the MultiAlgo approach of DigiByte is only allowed about 20% of all new blocks. This in conjunction with MultiShield allows for DigiByte to be the most secure, most reliable, and fastest UTXO block chain on the planet. This means that DigiByte is a proof of work (PoW) block-chain where all transactional activities are stored on the immutable public ledger world-wide. In DigiByte there is no need for the Lightning protocol (although we have it) nor sidechains to scale, and thus we get to keep PoW’s security.
There are many great debates as to the robustness or cleanliness of PoW. The fact remains that PoW block-chains remain the only systems in human history which have never been hacked and thus their security is maximal.
For an attacker to divert the DigiByte chain they would need to control over 93% of all the hashrate on one algorithm and 51% of the other four. And so DigiByte is immune to the infamous 51% attack to which Bitcoin and Litecoin are vulnerable.
Moreover, the DigiByte block-chain is currently spread over 200 000 plus servers, computers, phones, and other machines world-wide. The fact is that DigiByte is one of the easiest to mine coins there is – this is greatly aided by the recent release of the one click miner. This allows for ever greater decentralisation which in turn assures that there is no single point of failure and the chain is thus virtually un-attackable.
On Chain Scalability
The biggest barrier for block-chains today is scalability. Visa the credit card company can handle around 2000 transactions per second (TPS) today. This allows them to ensure customer security and transactional rates nation-wide. Bitcoin currently sits at around 7 TPS and Litecoin at 28 TPS (56 TPS with SegWit). All the technological innovations I’ve mentioned above come together to allow for DigiByte to be the fastest PoW block-chain in the world and the most scalable.
DigiByte is scalable because of DigiSpeed, the protocol through which block times are decreased and block sizes are increased. It is known that a simple increase in block size can increase the TPS of any block-chain, such is the case with Bitcoin Cash. This is however not scalable. The reason a simple increase in block size is not scalable is because it would eventually lead to some if not a great amount of centralization. This centralization occurs because larger block sizes mean that storage costs and thus hardware cost for miners increases. This increase along with full blocks – meaning many transactions occurring on the chain – will inevitably bar out the average miner after difficulty increases and mining centres consolidate.
Hardware cost, and storage costs decrease over time following Moore’s law and DigiByte adheres to it perfectly. DigiSpeed calls for the increase in block sizes and decrease in block timing every two years by a factor of two. This means that originally DigiByte’s block sizes were 1 MB at 30 seconds each at inception in 2014. In 2016 DigiByte increased block size by two and decreased block timing by the same factor. Perfectly following Moore’s law. Moore’s law dictates that in general hardware increases in power by a factor of two while halving in cost every year.
This would allow for DigiByte to scale at a steady rate and for people to adopt new hardware at an equally steady rate and reasonable expense. Thus so, the average miner can continue to mine DigiByte on his algorithm of choice with entry level hardware.
DigiByte was one of the first block chains to adopt segregated witness (SegWit in 2017) a protocol whereby a part of transactional data is removed and stored elsewhere to decrease transaction data weight and thus increase scalability and speed. This allows us to fit more transactions per block which does not increase in size!
DigiByte currently sits at 560 TPS and could scale to over 280 000 TPS by 2035. This dwarfs any of the TPS capacities; even projected/possible capacities of some coins and even private companies. In essence DigiByte could scale worldwide today and still be reliable and robust. DigiByte could even handle the cumulative transactions of all the top 50 coins in coinmarketcap.com and still run smoothly and below capacity. In fact, to max out DigiByte’s actual maximum capacity (today at 560 TPS) you would have to take all these transactions and multiply them by a factor of 10!
Oher Uses for DigiByte
Note that DigiByte is not only to be used as a currency. Its immense robustness, security and scalability make it ideal for building decentralised applications (DAPPS) which it can host. DigiByte can in fact host DAPPS and even centralised versions which rely on the chain which are known as Digi-Apps. This application layer is also accompanied by a smart contract layer.
Thus, DigiByte could host several Crypto Kitties games and more without freezing out or increasing transaction costs for the end user.
Currently there are various DAPPS being built on the DigiByte block-chain, these are done independently of the DigiByte core team. These companies are simply using the DigiByte block-chain as a utility much in the same way one uses a road to get to work. One such example is Loly – a Tinderesque consensual dating application.
DigiByte also hosts a variety of other platform projects such as the following:
The DigiByte Foundation
As previously mentioned DigiByte was not an ICO. The DigiByte foundation was established in 2017 by founder Jared Tate. Its purpose is as a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting and developing the DigiByte block-chain.
DigiByte is a community effort and a community coin, to be treated as a public resource as water or air. Know that anyone can work on DigiByte, anyone can create, and do as they wish. It is a permissionless system which encourages innovation and creation. If you have an idea and or would like to get help on your project do not hesitate to contact the DigiByte foundation either through the official website and or the telegram developer’s channel.
For this reason, it is ever more important to note that the DigiByte foundation cannot exist without public support. And so, this is the reason I encourage all to donate to the foundation. All funds are used for the maintenance of DigiByte servers, marketing, and DigiByte development.
DigiByte Resources and Websites
DigiByte
Wallets
Explorers
Please refer to the sidebar of this sub-reddit for more resources and information.
Edit - Removed Jaxx wallet.
Edit - A new section was added to the article: Why so many coins? 21 Billion
Edit - Adjusted max capacity of DGB's TPS - Note it's actually larger than I initially calculated.
Edit – Grammar and format readjustment
Hello,
I hope you’ve enjoyed my article, I originally wrote this for the reddit sub-wiki where it generally will most likely, probably not, get a lot of attention. So instead I've decided to make this sort of an introductory post, an open letter, to any newcomers to DGB or for those whom are just curious.
I tried to cover every aspect of DGB, but of course I may have forgotten something! Please leave a comment down below and tell me why you're in DGB? What convinced you? Me it's the decentralised PoW that really convinced me. Plus, just that transaction speed and virtually no fees! Made my mouth water!
-Dereck de Mézquita
I'm a student typing this stuff on my free time, help me pay my debts? Thank you!
D64fAFQvJMhrBUNYpqUKQjqKrMLu76j24g
https://digiexplorer.info/address/D64fAFQvJMhrBUNYpqUKQjqKrMLu76j24g
submitted by xeno_biologist to Digibyte [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Is A HORRIBLE Investment  SATOSHI NAKAMOTO How to Calculate the Satoshi Unit Value of Any Coins with this Formula  Crypto Hero bitcoin profit calculator with difficulty Free And Real Generate 5.942 BTC In 7day With Proof And Working hack Bitcoin Exploit 100% Satoshi to USD, Bitcoin BTC to USD

What is a Satoshi? Each bitcoin (BTC) is divisible to the 8th decimal place, so each BTC can be split into 100,000,000 units. Each unit of bitcoin, or 0.00000001 bitcoin, is called a satoshi.A Satoshi is the smallest unit of Bitcoin. Results may differ because of many factors: network hashrate, calculation of the average mining difficulty, pool luck, orphan block, coin value change, individual cards performance etc. Coin Information The Bitcoin network has a global block difficulty. Valid blocks must have a hash below this target. Mining pools also have a pool-specific share difficulty setting a lower limit for shares. How often does the network difficulty change? Every 2016 blocks. What is the formula for difficulty? difficulty = difficulty_1_target / current_target Satoshi Nakamoto’s (the founder of Bitcoin) Bitcoin’s block difficulty has substantially increased over the last year and a half, which has deterred quite a few people from pursuing mining. When using the 99Bitcoins.com Bitcoin calculator, all one needs to do is input the: Hash rate of your Bitcoin mining rig and hardware, Each bitcoin (BTC) is divisible to the 8th decimal place, so each BTC can be split into 100,000,000 units. Each unit of bitcoin, or 0.00000001 bitcoin, is called a satoshi. A Satoshi is the smallest unit of Bitcoin. Satoshi to Bitcoin is a Bitcoin converter/calculator. Right now, we offer two converters: Satoshi to BTC and BTC to Satoshi.

[index] [5027] [13868] [12160] [16058] [31136] [19823] [16891] [22454] [1649] [12037]

Bitcoin Is A HORRIBLE Investment SATOSHI NAKAMOTO

How to calculate the Satoshi value of any coins and my video explanation will guide you with a simple formula to achieve this task. Now on with this formula, no more need of a website to find the ... How to Calculate the Satoshi unit value with this Formula is a simple way I demonstrate how you can convert from Bitcoin price and the coin price to obtain theSatoshi unit value. Easy formula to ... Published. 04/07/2017. Explained satoshi to bitcoin hindi/urdu 10 crore satoshi to one bitcoin. YouTube URL https://youtu.be/w4ASC3ZvDM4 Episode 21 of Crypto Ride compares the US dollar to the satoshi and explores how much Bitcoin you'll likely need to be part of the 1% in the future. #Bitcoin #cryptocurrency Let's connect on ... bitcoin difficulty bitcoin definition bitcoin dominance ... g bitcoin mining calculator g bitcoin value g bitcoin gold g bitcoin.conf ... i bitcoin to satoshi i bitcoin cost bitcoin jobs bitcoin jesus

Flag Counter