Peercoin c'est quoi ? Différences avec le Bitcoin

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide
Staking means you are holding your cryptocurrency funds in a wallet and thus support the functionality of a blockchain system. Stakeholders lock their cryptos in their wallets. In return, they are rewarded by the network.

Proof-of-Stake versus Proof-of-Work.

What Is Proof Of Stake

To clear up the idea of staking, we should explain the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism. PoS and its versions are widely used in many blockchain networks.
The pioneers of PoS were (most likely) Sunny King and Scott Nadal. They were the first to describe and implement this idea for the crypto project Peercoin (PPC). Originally, its blockchain was using a hybrid of PoW and PoS. It made the network less dependent on the alternative protocol and attracted more participants. They were miners who came to compete for a reward.

Delegated Proof-of-Stake in BitShares versus Proof-of-Work in Bitcoin.

Delegated Proof Of Stake

Two years later, Daniel Larimer, a prominent software developer, and crypto entrepreneur introduced a modified version of PoS. Its name was Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS). The first network to apply it was Bitshares. Larimer also launched EOS and Steem. Both projects adopted the Delegated Proof of Stake protocol for their blockchains.
What is the key feature of DPoS? This mechanism allows all network users to ‘convert’ their crypto holdings into votes. These votes are used to elect trusted witnesses (‘delegates’). They will manage the blockchain on your behalf. The delegates validate the transactions and make sure the network functions as it should. The weight of your vote depends on how big your stake is. As a stakeholder, you get a regular reward for keeping your crypto in the network.

DPoS Pros

The DPoS model addresses the important problems of PoS and PoW blockchains. First of all, it’s the scalability issue. DPoS improves network capacity by increasing the speed of transaction processing. It is possible because the DPoS model allows reaching consensus much faster, as it needs fewer nodes to validate a transaction. On the dark side, Delegate Proof of Stake usage promotes centralization: a DPoS network relies on a limited group of delegates for its operation.

How Staking Works

As we said earlier, staking means holding cryptocurrency or tokens to support a network operation and getting a reward for it. Naturally, this process is typical for blockchains using the PoS protocol or any of its versions.
Unlike PoW, this protocol does not rely on miners who validate blocks by doing ‘work’. This work consists of solving math puzzles using increasingly powerful mining hardware. Instead, the mining power of any network participant depends on how many coins they commit to stake. It allows a PoS-based blockchain to avoid usage of ASICs and other equipment that consumes a great amount of electricity.

Advantages Of Staking

The bigger is the amount you stake, the better are your chances to become the validator for the next block and grab the reward. The PoS model saves you a lot of money. You don’t have to invest in expensive mining hardware and cooling equipment. Also, you don’t have to pay huge electricity bills every month. You still spend some money, but it’s a direct cryptocurrency investment. Every PoS network features its own ‘staking currency’.
The increased scalability, ensured by staking, is one of the main reasons why the Ethereum plans to move to this model in 2020 when it adopts the Casper protocol.
There are networks that prefer DPoS. In this model, you may use other network participants to signal your support for some event. It means you delegate decision making to the nodes you trust.
In fact, these delegates are responsible for handling the blockchain, as they deal with the issues of major importance. They play a key role in consensus achievement and make management decisions.

Consensus protocols compared: PoW, PoS and DPoS.

Network Inflation

There are blockchains who pay a staking reward in the form of a fixed percentage, the so-called ‘inflation rate’. The purpose is to persuade more people to stake their coins. It’s like a bank encouraging you to keep your money with them and not at home.
Until recently, Stellar was a typical example of such a scheme. Their fixed inflation rate was 1%. Every week, the network used to distribute ‘inflation money’ among the holders, who kept their funds in the staking pool. The main pro of this model is that you get a fixed bonus regularly.
For example, a Stellar user who was holding 10,000 XLM for 1 year, could expect the reward of 100 XLM. This information was open to all the users, helping them to decide in favor of staking. It motivated the people who preferred a moderate but predictable reward to a big but random one.
In the 4th quarter of 2019, Stellar abandoned the inflation scheme.

Staking Pool

An idea behind staking pools is simple. To form a pool, many network stakeholders combine together. It increases their collective odds of validating a new block and getting rewarded for it. Like in a PoW mining pool, the reward is proportionately split among all the participants. The money you put in, the bigger is your share.
Pooling might be the best staking solution if your network has a high entry barrier. In practice, it means that you have to contribute a large amount of money to enter, but you cannot afford it alone. Note, that running a pool is not free, as there are maintenance and development costs. As a result, you often have to pay a ‘membership fee’ to the pool providers. Normally, it’s a fixed percentage of your reward share.
Besides, pools may offer additional benefits related to withdrawal time, minimum balance, etc. It attracts new participants and results in a greater degree of decentralization of the network.

Cold Staking

Cold staking is when you stake your crypto using a cold (hardware) wallet. Such a wallet has no connection to the Internet. There are networks that let you stake the funds kept in cold storage. The biggest benefit of cold staking is that your funds are 100% safe. For large stakeholders, it’s the top priority. If a stakeholder takes the crypto out of the cold wallet, their rewards are discontinued.

Future Of Staking

The number of users seeking to contribute their assets to participate in blockchain management and decision-making grows. It means staking becomes popular. To meet the demand, the entry process is becoming more user-friendly. Accordingly, more people will be taking an active part in the development of their blockchain ecosystems.

Conclusion

In conclusion, staking is an innovative investment tool. It can compete with traditional ones in terms of stability. In terms of assets growth potential, it’s superior to them.
P.S. Hope you found this article interesting and useful. If you want to read more articles on crypto, finance, and blockchain check out our blog.
submitted by EX-SCUDO to CryptoCurrencies [link] [comments]

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide
Staking means you are holding your cryptocurrency funds in a wallet and thus support the functionality of a blockchain system. Stakeholders lock their cryptos in their wallets. In return, they are rewarded by the network.

Proof-of-Stake versus Proof-of-Work.

What Is Proof Of Stake

To clear up the idea of staking, we should explain the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism. PoS and its versions are widely used in many blockchain networks.
The pioneers of PoS were (most likely) Sunny King and Scott Nadal. They were the first to describe and implement this idea for the crypto project Peercoin (PPC). Originally, its blockchain was using a hybrid of PoW and PoS. It made the network less dependent on the alternative protocol and attracted more participants. They were miners who came to compete for a reward.

Delegated Proof-of-Stake in BitShares versus Proof-of-Work in Bitcoin.

Delegated Proof Of Stake

Two years later, Daniel Larimer, a prominent software developer, and crypto entrepreneur introduced a modified version of PoS. Its name was Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS). The first network to apply it was Bitshares. Larimer also launched EOS and Steem. Both projects adopted the Delegated Proof of Stake protocol for their blockchains.
What is the key feature of DPoS? This mechanism allows all network users to ‘convert’ their crypto holdings into votes. These votes are used to elect trusted witnesses (‘delegates’). They will manage the blockchain on your behalf. The delegates validate the transactions and make sure the network functions as it should. The weight of your vote depends on how big your stake is. As a stakeholder, you get a regular reward for keeping your crypto in the network.

DPoS Pros

The DPoS model addresses the important problems of PoS and PoW blockchains. First of all, it’s the scalability issue. DPoS improves network capacity by increasing the speed of transaction processing. It is possible because the DPoS model allows reaching consensus much faster, as it needs fewer nodes to validate a transaction. On the dark side, Delegate Proof of Stake usage promotes centralization: a DPoS network relies on a limited group of delegates for its operation.

How Staking Works

As we said earlier, staking means holding cryptocurrency or tokens to support a network operation and getting a reward for it. Naturally, this process is typical for blockchains using the PoS protocol or any of its versions.
Unlike PoW, this protocol does not rely on miners who validate blocks by doing ‘work’. This work consists of solving math puzzles using increasingly powerful mining hardware. Instead, the mining power of any network participant depends on how many coins they commit to stake. It allows a PoS-based blockchain to avoid usage of ASICs and other equipment that consumes a great amount of electricity.

Advantages Of Staking

The bigger is the amount you stake, the better are your chances to become the validator for the next block and grab the reward. The PoS model saves you a lot of money. You don’t have to invest in expensive mining hardware and cooling equipment. Also, you don’t have to pay huge electricity bills every month. You still spend some money, but it’s a direct cryptocurrency investment. Every PoS network features its own ‘staking currency’.
The increased scalability, ensured by staking, is one of the main reasons why the Ethereum plans to move to this model in 2020 when it adopts the Casper protocol.
There are networks that prefer DPoS. In this model, you may use other network participants to signal your support for some event. It means you delegate decision making to the nodes you trust.
In fact, these delegates are responsible for handling the blockchain, as they deal with the issues of major importance. They play a key role in consensus achievement and make management decisions.

Consensus protocols compared: PoW, PoS and DPoS.

Network Inflation

There are blockchains who pay a staking reward in the form of a fixed percentage, the so-called ‘inflation rate’. The purpose is to persuade more people to stake their coins. It’s like a bank encouraging you to keep your money with them and not at home.
Until recently, Stellar was a typical example of such a scheme. Their fixed inflation rate was 1%. Every week, the network used to distribute ‘inflation money’ among the holders, who kept their funds in the staking pool. The main pro of this model is that you get a fixed bonus regularly.
For example, a Stellar user who was holding 10,000 XLM for 1 year, could expect the reward of 100 XLM. This information was open to all the users, helping them to decide in favor of staking. It motivated the people who preferred a moderate but predictable reward to a big but random one.
In the 4th quarter of 2019, Stellar abandoned the inflation scheme.

Staking Pool

An idea behind staking pools is simple. To form a pool, many network stakeholders combine together. It increases their collective odds of validating a new block and getting rewarded for it. Like in a PoW mining pool, the reward is proportionately split among all the participants. The money you put in, the bigger is your share.
Pooling might be the best staking solution if your network has a high entry barrier. In practice, it means that you have to contribute a large amount of money to enter, but you cannot afford it alone. Note, that running a pool is not free, as there are maintenance and development costs. As a result, you often have to pay a ‘membership fee’ to the pool providers. Normally, it’s a fixed percentage of your reward share.
Besides, pools may offer additional benefits related to withdrawal time, minimum balance, etc. It attracts new participants and results in a greater degree of decentralization of the network.

Cold Staking

Cold staking is when you stake your crypto using a cold (hardware) wallet. Such a wallet has no connection to the Internet. There are networks that let you stake the funds kept in cold storage. The biggest benefit of cold staking is that your funds are 100% safe. For large stakeholders, it’s the top priority. If a stakeholder takes the crypto out of the cold wallet, their rewards are discontinued.

Future Of Staking

The number of users seeking to contribute their assets to participate in blockchain management and decision-making grows. It means staking becomes popular. To meet the demand, the entry process is becoming more user-friendly. Accordingly, more people will be taking an active part in the development of their blockchain ecosystems.

Conclusion

In conclusion, staking is an innovative investment tool. It can compete with traditional ones in terms of stability. In terms of assets growth potential, it’s superior to them.
P.S. Hope you found this article interesting and useful. If you want to read more articles on crypto, finance, and blockchain check out our blog.
submitted by EX-SCUDO to CryptoCurrencyTrading [link] [comments]

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide
Staking means you are holding your cryptocurrency funds in a wallet and thus support the functionality of a blockchain system. Stakeholders lock their cryptos in their wallets. In return, they are rewarded by the network.

Proof-of-Stake versus Proof-of-Work.

What Is Proof Of Stake

To clear up the idea of staking, we should explain the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism. PoS and its versions are widely used in many blockchain networks.
The pioneers of PoS were (most likely) Sunny King and Scott Nadal. They were the first to describe and implement this idea for the crypto project Peercoin (PPC). Originally, its blockchain was using a hybrid of PoW and PoS. It made the network less dependent on the alternative protocol and attracted more participants. They were miners who came to compete for a reward.

Delegated Proof-of-Stake in BitShares versus Proof-of-Work in Bitcoin.

Delegated Proof Of Stake

Two years later, Daniel Larimer, a prominent software developer, and crypto entrepreneur introduced a modified version of PoS. Its name was Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS). The first network to apply it was Bitshares. Larimer also launched EOS and Steem. Both projects adopted the Delegated Proof of Stake protocol for their blockchains.
What is the key feature of DPoS? This mechanism allows all network users to ‘convert’ their crypto holdings into votes. These votes are used to elect trusted witnesses (‘delegates’). They will manage the blockchain on your behalf. The delegates validate the transactions and make sure the network functions as it should. The weight of your vote depends on how big your stake is. As a stakeholder, you get a regular reward for keeping your crypto in the network.

DPoS Pros

The DPoS model addresses the important problems of PoS and PoW blockchains. First of all, it’s the scalability issue. DPoS improves network capacity by increasing the speed of transaction processing. It is possible because the DPoS model allows reaching consensus much faster, as it needs fewer nodes to validate a transaction. On the dark side, Delegate Proof of Stake usage promotes centralization: a DPoS network relies on a limited group of delegates for its operation.

How Staking Works

As we said earlier, staking means holding cryptocurrency or tokens to support a network operation and getting a reward for it. Naturally, this process is typical for blockchains using the PoS protocol or any of its versions.
Unlike PoW, this protocol does not rely on miners who validate blocks by doing ‘work’. This work consists of solving math puzzles using increasingly powerful mining hardware. Instead, the mining power of any network participant depends on how many coins they commit to stake. It allows a PoS-based blockchain to avoid usage of ASICs and other equipment that consumes a great amount of electricity.

Advantages Of Staking

The bigger is the amount you stake, the better are your chances to become the validator for the next block and grab the reward. The PoS model saves you a lot of money. You don’t have to invest in expensive mining hardware and cooling equipment. Also, you don’t have to pay huge electricity bills every month. You still spend some money, but it’s a direct cryptocurrency investment. Every PoS network features its own ‘staking currency’.
The increased scalability, ensured by staking, is one of the main reasons why the Ethereum plans to move to this model in 2020 when it adopts the Casper protocol.
There are networks that prefer DPoS. In this model, you may use other network participants to signal your support for some event. It means you delegate decision making to the nodes you trust.
In fact, these delegates are responsible for handling the blockchain, as they deal with the issues of major importance. They play a key role in consensus achievement and make management decisions.

Consensus protocols compared: PoW, PoS and DPoS.

Network Inflation

There are blockchains who pay a staking reward in the form of a fixed percentage, the so-called ‘inflation rate’. The purpose is to persuade more people to stake their coins. It’s like a bank encouraging you to keep your money with them and not at home.
Until recently, Stellar was a typical example of such a scheme. Their fixed inflation rate was 1%. Every week, the network used to distribute ‘inflation money’ among the holders, who kept their funds in the staking pool. The main pro of this model is that you get a fixed bonus regularly.
For example, a Stellar user who was holding 10,000 XLM for 1 year, could expect the reward of 100 XLM. This information was open to all the users, helping them to decide in favor of staking. It motivated the people who preferred a moderate but predictable reward to a big but random one.
In the 4th quarter of 2019, Stellar abandoned the inflation scheme.

Staking Pool

An idea behind staking pools is simple. To form a pool, many network stakeholders combine together. It increases their collective odds of validating a new block and getting rewarded for it. Like in a PoW mining pool, the reward is proportionately split among all the participants. The money you put in, the bigger is your share.
Pooling might be the best staking solution if your network has a high entry barrier. In practice, it means that you have to contribute a large amount of money to enter, but you cannot afford it alone. Note, that running a pool is not free, as there are maintenance and development costs. As a result, you often have to pay a ‘membership fee’ to the pool providers. Normally, it’s a fixed percentage of your reward share.
Besides, pools may offer additional benefits related to withdrawal time, minimum balance, etc. It attracts new participants and results in a greater degree of decentralization of the network.

Cold Staking

Cold staking is when you stake your crypto using a cold (hardware) wallet. Such a wallet has no connection to the Internet. There are networks that let you stake the funds kept in cold storage. The biggest benefit of cold staking is that your funds are 100% safe. For large stakeholders, it’s the top priority. If a stakeholder takes the crypto out of the cold wallet, their rewards are discontinued.

Future Of Staking

The number of users seeking to contribute their assets to participate in blockchain management and decision-making grows. It means staking becomes popular. To meet the demand, the entry process is becoming more user-friendly. Accordingly, more people will be taking an active part in the development of their blockchain ecosystems.

Conclusion

In conclusion, staking is an innovative investment tool. It can compete with traditional ones in terms of stability. In terms of assets growth potential, it’s superior to them.

P.S. Hope you found this article interesting and useful. If you want to read more articles on crypto, finance, and blockchain check out our blog.
submitted by EX-SCUDO to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide

What Is Staking: The Ultimate Beginner’s Guide
Staking means you are holding your cryptocurrency funds in a wallet and thus support the functionality of a blockchain system. Stakeholders lock their cryptos in their wallets. In return, they are rewarded by the network.

Proof-of-Stake versus Proof-of-Work.

What Is Proof Of Stake

To clear up the idea of staking, we should explain the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism. PoS and its versions are widely used in many blockchain networks.
The pioneers of PoS were (most likely) Sunny King and Scott Nadal. They were the first to describe and implement this idea for the crypto project Peercoin (PPC). Originally, its blockchain was using a hybrid of PoW and PoS. It made the network less dependent on the alternative protocol and attracted more participants. They were miners who came to compete for a reward.


Delegated Proof-of-Stake in BitShares versus Proof-of-Work in Bitcoin.

Delegated Proof Of Stake

Two years later, Daniel Larimer, a prominent software developer, and crypto entrepreneur introduced a modified version of PoS. Its name was Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS). The first network to apply it was Bitshares. Larimer also launched EOS and Steem. Both projects adopted the Delegated Proof of Stake protocol for their blockchains.
What is the key feature of DPoS? This mechanism allows all network users to ‘convert’ their crypto holdings into votes. These votes are used to elect trusted witnesses (‘delegates’). They will manage the blockchain on your behalf. The delegates validate the transactions and make sure the network functions as it should. The weight of your vote depends on how big your stake is. As a stakeholder, you get a regular reward for keeping your crypto in the network.

DPoS Pros

The DPoS model addresses the important problems of PoS and PoW blockchains. First of all, it’s the scalability issue. DPoS improves network capacity by increasing the speed of transaction processing. It is possible because the DPoS model allows reaching consensus much faster, as it needs fewer nodes to validate a transaction. On the dark side, Delegate Proof of Stake usage promotes centralization: a DPoS network relies on a limited group of delegates for its operation.

How Staking Works

As we said earlier, staking means holding cryptocurrency or tokens to support a network operation and getting a reward for it. Naturally, this process is typical for blockchains using the PoS protocol or any of its versions.
Unlike PoW, this protocol does not rely on miners who validate blocks by doing ‘work’. This work consists of solving math puzzles using increasingly powerful mining hardware. Instead, the mining power of any network participant depends on how many coins they commit to stake. It allows a PoS-based blockchain to avoid usage of ASICs and other equipment that consumes a great amount of electricity.

Advantages Of Staking

The bigger is the amount you stake, the better are your chances to become the validator for the next block and grab the reward. The PoS model saves you a lot of money. You don’t have to invest in expensive mining hardware and cooling equipment. Also, you don’t have to pay huge electricity bills every month. You still spend some money, but it’s a direct cryptocurrency investment. Every PoS network features its own ‘staking currency’.
The increased scalability, ensured by staking, is one of the main reasons why the Ethereum plans to move to this model in 2020 when it adopts the Casper protocol.
There are networks that prefer DPoS. In this model, you may use other network participants to signal your support for some event. It means you delegate decision making to the nodes you trust.
In fact, these delegates are responsible for handling the blockchain, as they deal with the issues of major importance. They play a key role in consensus achievement and make management decisions.

Consensus protocols compared: PoW, PoS and DPoS.

Network Inflation

There are blockchains who pay a staking reward in the form of a fixed percentage, the so-called ‘inflation rate’. The purpose is to persuade more people to stake their coins. It’s like a bank encouraging you to keep your money with them and not at home.
Until recently, Stellar was a typical example of such a scheme. Their fixed inflation rate was 1%. Every week, the network used to distribute ‘inflation money’ among the holders, who kept their funds in the staking pool. The main pro of this model is that you get a fixed bonus regularly.
For example, a Stellar user who was holding 10,000 XLM for 1 year, could expect the reward of 100 XLM. This information was open to all the users, helping them to decide in favor of staking. It motivated the people who preferred a moderate but predictable reward to a big but random one.
In the 4th quarter of 2019, Stellar abandoned the inflation scheme.

Staking Pool

An idea behind staking pools is simple. To form a pool, many network stakeholders combine together. It increases their collective odds of validating a new block and getting rewarded for it. Like in a PoW mining pool, the reward is proportionately split among all the participants. The money you put in, the bigger is your share.
Pooling might be the best staking solution if your network has a high entry barrier. In practice, it means that you have to contribute a large amount of money to enter, but you cannot afford it alone. Note, that running a pool is not free, as there are maintenance and development costs. As a result, you often have to pay a ‘membership fee’ to the pool providers. Normally, it’s a fixed percentage of your reward share.
Besides, pools may offer additional benefits related to withdrawal time, minimum balance, etc. It attracts new participants and results in a greater degree of decentralization of the network.

Cold Staking

Cold staking is when you stake your crypto using a cold (hardware) wallet. Such a wallet has no connection to the Internet. There are networks that let you stake the funds kept in cold storage. The biggest benefit of cold staking is that your funds are 100% safe. For large stakeholders, it’s the top priority. If a stakeholder takes the crypto out of the cold wallet, their rewards are discontinued.

Future Of Staking

The number of users seeking to contribute their assets to participate in blockchain management and decision-making grows. It means staking becomes popular. To meet the demand, the entry process is becoming more user-friendly. Accordingly, more people will be taking an active part in the development of their blockchain ecosystems.

Conclusion

In conclusion, staking is an innovative investment tool. It can compete with traditional ones in terms of stability. In terms of assets growth potential, it’s superior to them.
P.S. Hope you found this article interesting and useful. If you want to read more articles on crypto, finance, and blockchain check out our blog.
submitted by EX-SCUDO to ethtrader [link] [comments]

Staking — The New Way to Earn Crypto for Free

Staking — The New Way to Earn Crypto for Free

https://preview.redd.it/jpadsinyz3c41.png?width=616&format=png&auto=webp&s=c0dc410484430b863b0488727f92135f218edff2
Airdrops are so 2017, free money was fun while it lasted but now when someone says free money in crypto, the first thoughts are scams and ponzi schemes. But in 2020, there is a way to earn free money, in a legitimate, common practice, and logical manner — staking.
Staking is the core concept behind the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus protocol that is quickly becoming an industry standard throughout blockchain projects. PoS allows blockchains to scale effectively without compromising on security and resource efficiency. Projects that incorporate staking include aelf, Dash, EOS, Cosmos, Cardano, Dfinity and many others.

https://preview.redd.it/luczupo004c41.png?width=616&format=png&auto=webp&s=2a2aba11c35c9962e42d1ea56b9e4f33532750ef

PoW — Why change

First, let’s look at some of the issues facing Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus that led to the development of PoS.
  1. Excessive energy consumption — In 2017, many concerns were raised over the amount of electricity used by the bitcoin network (Largest PoW blockchain). Since then the energy consumption has increased by over 400%, to the point where 1 single transaction on this network has the same carbon footprint of 736,722 Visa transactions or consumes the same amount of electricity as over 20 U.S. households.
  2. Varying Electricity Costs — The profit of any miner on the network is tied to two costs, the initial startup cost to obtain the hardware and infrastructure, and more critically, the running cost of said equipment in relation to electricity usage. Electricity costs can vary from fractions of a cent per kWh to over 50 cents (USD) and in some cases it is free. When a user may only be earning $0.40 USD per hour then this will clearly rule out certain demographics based purely on electricity costs, reducing the potential for complete decentralization.
  3. Reduced decentralization — Due to the high cost of the mining equipment, those with large financial bases setup mining farms, either for others to rent out individual miners or entirely for personal gains. This results in large demographic hotspots on the network reducing the decentralized aspect to a point where it no longer accomplishes this aspect.
  4. Conflicted interests — The requirements of running miners on the network are purely based on having possession of the hardware, electricity and internet connection. There are no limits to the amount a miner can earn, nor do they need to hold any stake in the network, and thus there is very little incentive for them to vote on upgrades that may benefit the network but reduce their rewards.
I want to take this moment to mention a potential benefit to PoW that I have not seen anyone mention previously. It is a very loose argument so don’t take this to heart too strongly.
Consistent Fiat Injection — The majority of miners will be paying for their electricity in fiat currency. At a conservative rate of $0.1 USD per kWh, the network currently uses 73.12 TWh per year. This equates to an average daily cost of over $20 million USD. This means every day around $20 million of fiat currency is effectively being injected into the bitcoin network. Although this concept is somewhat flawed in the sense that the same amount of bitcoin will be released each day regardless of how much is spent on electricity, I’m looking at this from the eyes of the miners, they are reducing their fiat bags and increasing their bitcoin bags. This change of bags is the essence of this point which will inevitably encourage crypto spending. If the bitcoin bags were increased but fiat bags did not decrease, then there would be less incentive to spend the bitcoin, as would see in a staking ecosystem.

https://preview.redd.it/8dtqt6e204c41.png?width=631&format=png&auto=webp&s=065aedde87b55f0768968307e59e62a35eac949d

PoS Variations

Different approaches have been taken to tackle different issues the PoS protocol faces. Will Little has an excellent article explaining this and more in PoS, but let me take an excerpt from his piece to go through them:
  • Coin-age selection — Blockchains like Peercoin (the first PoS chain), start out with PoW to distribute the coins, use coin age to help prevent monopolization and 51% attacks (by setting a time range when the probability of being selected as a node is greatest), and implement checkpoints initially to prevent NoS problems.
  • Randomized block selection — Chains like NXT and Blackcoin also use checkpoints, but believe that coin-age discourages staking. After an initial distribution period (either via PoW or otherwise), these chains use algorithms to randomly select nodes that can create blocks.
  • Ethereum’s Casper protocol(s) — Being already widely distributed, Ethereum doesn’t have to worry about the initial distribution problem when/if it switches to PoS. Casper takes a more Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT) approach and will punish nodes by taking away (“slashing”) their stake if they do devious things. In addition, consensus is formed by a multi-round process where every randomly assigned node votes for a specific block during a round.
  • Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPoS) — Invented by Dan Larimer and first used in Bitshares (and then in [aelf,] Steem, EOS, and many others), DPoS tackles potential PoS problems by having the community “elect” delegates that will run nodes to create and validate blocks. Bad behavior is then punished by the community simply out-voting the delegated nodes.
  • Delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerance (DBFT) — Similar to DPoS, the NEO community votes for (delegates) nodes, but instead of each node producing blocks and agreeing on consensus, only 2 out of 3 nodes need to agree on what goes in every block (acting more like bookkeepers than validators).
  • Tendermint — As a more sophisticated form of DBFT and a precursor to Casper, Jae Kwon introduced tendermint in 2014, which leverages dynamic validator sets, rotating leader elections, and voting power (i.e. weight) that is proportional to the self-funding and community allocation of tokens to a node (i.e. a “validator”).
  • Masternodes — First introduced by DASH, a masternode PoS system requires nodes to stake a minimum threshold of coins in order to qualify as a node. Often this comes with requirements to provide “service” to a network in the form of governance, special payment protocols, etc…
  • Proof of Importance (POI)NEM takes a slightly different approach by granting an “importance calculation” to masternodes staking at least 10,000 XEM. This POI system then rewards active nodes that act in a positive way over time to impact the community.
  • “Proof-of-X” — And finally, there is no lack of activity in the PoS world to come up with clever approaches and variants of staking (some are more elaborate than others). In addition to BFT protocols such as Honeybadger, Ouroboros, and Tezos, for further reading, also check out “Proof-of-”: Stake Anonymous, Storage, Stake Time, Stake Velocity, Activity, Burn, and Capacity.
https://preview.redd.it/n28a8n5404c41.png?width=604&format=png&auto=webp&s=0ea8827fd0458e768d4eb3a0a1fa88c984ba0a82

Earning Your Stake

In order to understand how one can earn money from these networks, I’ll break them down into 3 categories: Simple staking, Running nodes, and Voting.
Simple Staking - This is the simplest of the 3 methods and requires almost no action by the user. Certain networks will reward users by simply holding tokens in a specified wallet. These rewards are generally minimal but are the easiest way to earn.
Running a node - This method provides the greatest rewards but also requires the greatest action by the user and most likely will require ongoing maintenance. Generally speaking, networks will require nodes to stake a certain amount of tokens often amounting to thousands of dollars. In DPoS systems, these nodes must be voted in by other users on the network and must continue to provide confidence to their supporters. Some companies will setup nodes and allow users to participate by contributing to the minimum staking amount, with a similar concept to PoW mining pools.
Voting - This mechanism works hand in hand with running nodes in relation to DPoS networks. Users are encouraged to vote for their preferred nodes by staking tokens as votes. Each vote will unlock a small amount of rewards for each voter, the nodes are normally the ones to provide these rewards as a portion of their own reward for running a node.

Aelf’s DPoS system

The aelf consensus protocol utilizes a form of DPoS. There are two versions of nodes on the network, active nodes & backup nodes (official names yet to be announced). Active nodes run the network and produce the blocks, while the backup nodes complete minor tasks and are on standby should any active nodes go offline or act maliciously. These nodes are selected based upon their number of votes received. Initially the top 17 nodes will be selected as active nodes, while the next 100 will stand as the backup ones, each voting period each node may change position should they receive more or less votes than the previous period. In order to be considered as a node, one must stake a minimum amount of ELF tokens (yet to be announced).

https://preview.redd.it/47d3wqe604c41.png?width=618&format=png&auto=webp&s=062a6aa6186b826d400a0015d4c91fd1a4ed0b65
In order to participate as a voter, there is no minimum amount of tokens to be staked. When one stakes, their tokens will be locked for a designated amount of time, selected by the voter from the preset periods. If users pull their tokens out before this locked period has expired no rewards are received, but if they leave them locked for the entire time frame they will receive the set reward, and the tokens will be automatically rolled over into the next locked period. As a result, should a voter decide, once their votes are cast, they can continue to receive rewards without any further action needed.
Many projects have tackled with node rewards in order to make them fair, well incentivized but sustainable for everyone involved. Aelf has come up with a reward structure based on multiple variables with a basic income guaranteed for every node. Variables may include the number of re-elections, number of votes received, or other elements.
As the system matures, the number of active nodes will be increased, resulting in a more diverse and secure network.
Staking as a solution is a win-win-win for network creators, users and investors. It is a much more resource efficient and scalable protocol to secure blockchain networks while reducing the entry point for users to earn from the system.
submitted by Floris-Jan to aelfofficial [link] [comments]

Is there a media agenda to kill off altcoins so that Bitcoin can grow?

Is there a media agenda to kill off altcoins so that Bitcoin can grow?
A couple of days ago on the Dash Nation Discord longtime community member toknormal shared some thoughts about Bitcoin and altcoins. It's shared below in its entirety in the hopes that it'll be thought-provoking to those on this subreddit and may spark some conversation.

------------------------------------------------------------
TL;DR: This post is about an emerging media agenda to "kill off" altcoins so that bitcoin can grow. The (faulty) perception by bitcoin maximalists that altcoins are a deadweight. How they are going to attack us. Why this is a crucial moment to try to kill off alts and how Dash as a community can constructively address it to its advantage. See also #markets [channel in the Dash Nation Discord linked above] where I've posted some observations about the very long range nature of the Dash market VS bitcoin and its prospects.

I usually try not to write long posts anymore. But my nerves are getting the better of me and all charts are sending the same message so I decided make this a bit of a ramble.
Lately I've been debating (on and off) with the maximalists in the BTC Wall Observer thread (who are very nice people and not trolls) but are convinced that alts are going to get wiped out. I've noticed a common theme in all the conversations that suddenly took me aback - along the lines of "ok - this is it, Bitcoin is now established, we don't need alts any more". Then I saw Max Keiser suddenly declare himself to be a "bitcoin maximalist" out of the blue.
This made me think for a bit because whatever one thinks of Max Keiser, he's not a monopolist. I also noticed how consistent his arguments were with those that I'd encountered in the "Wall Observer" thread and other places such as various Twitter feeds.
The common mantra was that "Bitcoin can do everything".
I'd like to bring this agenda to the community's attention - i.e. that there's some kind of co-ordinated effort afoot to kill off alts going on (even from people who don't believe in monopolies) and offer some tips as to how to address it.
Why now ?
Without knowing much about the politics, it's easy to see why people like Max Keiser might be - albeit guardedly - positioning themselves as "maximalists" at this particular moment in time. Also why there might be a wider coercive effort to kill off altcoins. You only have to look at the Bitcoin dominance charts. (To find this, go to coinmarketcap.com and find the little "Dominance" link right at the top of the page - quite small).
Alts have "eaten" bitcoin's lunch in 3 distinct phases, each of which lasted around 3 years. The first was the "dawn" of alt coins around 2013 when we saw Peercoin, Feathercoin et al emerging and that died off around halfway through the post 2013 bear market. The second was in 2015 when bitcoin was doing basically nothing but consolidating and Dash hit its second ATH on the ratio of 0.02+. The third was the "perfect storm" of ICOs and Bitcoin contentious hard forks when Bitcoin's very existence was in jeopardy. Now we're about to commence a new altcoin dominance rally.

https://preview.redd.it/4smbtxd89d031.png?width=1360&format=png&auto=webp&s=583333624bc64cd72c93ca5fc90eeab13794ed97
The "maximalists" are aware of a potentially massive impending "Phase 4" altcoin capitalisation beyond anything that has been seen to date. If you look at that chart you can see we are on the cusp of completing a consolidation which - if sustained - will lead to a new influx of growth. You can also see that the growth profiles of altcoin dominance is asymmetrical - there are very long bear markets but right at the end there's an almost vertical, massively invasive bull market. That's what the monopolists are trying to mitigate.
My contention is that this is good for bitcoin. It is natural because bitcoin is a reserve asset that can only capitalise from utility assets that lie above it in "Exter's Pyramid". There is no conflict between bitcoin and other crypto assets and Dash should easily have a 2x to 10x growth against BTC in front of it if BTC functions as a reserve asset in the crypto space. That growth will ultimately find its way into bitcoin, being the reserve.
But many maximalists don't see it that way. They see competing assets as draining capital, brainpower and marketcap from bitcoin. This is ridiculous and not true, but it doesn't matter - they are going to start a media war (possibly worse) against alts. So we need to be aware of this and be able to field authentic challenges to their attacks.
How to address institutional challenges ?
There are 2 core themes IMO:
  1. DIVERSITY (Is an essential component of any market)
  2. ECONOMIC THEORY (Bitcoin is not a natural monopoly)
Most people can understand the idea of "trading pairs". If you don't have a trading pair in the same asset class then you ain't got no market. So from that perspective alone Bitcoin is not a go-er on its own. Side chains, Mimblewinble, whatever technology BTC comes up with, it can't be independently valued as long as it's all pegged to BTC. So that on its own is a dead duck. Then, economic theory has quite a lot to say about whether bitcoin can "kill of all alts" or not. It all depends on whether bitcoin is a natural monopoly:
A natural monopoly is a monopoly in an industry in which high infrastructural costs and other barriers to entry relative to the size of the market give the largest supplier in an industry, often the first supplier in a market, an overwhelming advantage over potential competitors.
Economics
What is a "Bitcoin maximalist" ? It is someone who's advocating that cryptocurrencies are a natural monopoly. Natural monopolies are well known and researched phenomena in economics. We can test this thesis against the definition of natural monopolies and compare each aspect of the definition as to how it applies to cryptos. Intuitively, it seems ridiculous that there can only be one crypto but the media war will try to portay it as such. Dash has made huge advances and we must not take our eye off the ball at this crucial time when altcoins are at the cusp of a new growth phase.
The monopolists have noticed this "end of phase" period and they think we haven't.
Having been engaged in much of this debate lately I've been wondering if I should ditch Dash and go all in Bitcoin as I realised that altcoins in general are at a watershed phase. Is there going to be another bull market against BTC or isn't there ? I've spent a lot of time thinking about this, engaging bitcoin maximalists on other threads and so on. Disclosure - I'm holding BTC as well as Dash. But the truth is I'd rather Dash succeeded and grew against bitcoin. It would be better for bitcoin, better for crypto and better for the world because diversity is a measure of freedom and like it or not, Dash is now one of the significant digital assets.
Regarding 1, I will link to one of my posts on the Wall Observer thread. Obviously it is a huge subject and many will have opinions but
High Infrastructural Costs
Dash has already overcome these as a "barrier to entry". The Dash network hashrate is huge in comparison to what's required to secure a viable cryptocurrency. It has also captured enough of a relative market size to be significantly traded, reviewed and invested in. Over Dash's lifetime, ROI is better then bitcoin. (See Dash/BTC).
William Baumol Criteria
According to this definition, "multi-firm" production would (and is) making cryptocurrency cheaper. If Bitcoin had been unique in the market it would not have had to compete with other blockchains for miners for example. We would not have had mining profitability ranking that tell miners which coin is most viable for them (almost never bitcoin). We would not have had proof of stake. Therefore Bitcoin does not meet the William Baumol criteria for a natural monopoly as "multi-firm" production has made the bitcoin network more efficient (by demonstrating competitively its inefficiencies)
Cost of Production
The original concept of a "natural monopoly" was made by John Stuart Mill according to the Wikipedia entry for "natural monopoly". His motivation was that in the absence of a natural monopoly, prices would reflect the cost of production.
submitted by TrustThyself to dashcrypto [link] [comments]

DOGE market analysis for February 19th 2014

1 DOGE is currently valued at $0.00139 or 0.000002196 Bitcoin/DOGE. DOGE has become 5% more valuable vs. the Bitcoin since yesterday, and roughly 5% more valuabe vs. the USD since Bitcoin's price is holding steady around $630/Bitcoin.
The DOGE market cap (total value of all DOGE) is $71,123,000 today, with a total of ~52 billion DOGE in existence. The market cap of DOGE is roughly 1% the size of Bitcoin's market cap, which is impressive. DOGE currently has the 5th biggest market cap out of all the digital currencies, behind Bitcoin, Ripple (not really a mineable currency), Litecoin, and Peercoin.
DOGE has seen a steady decrease in value this week, losing 40% of its value vs. the USD, and 11% of its value vs. Bitcoin. Alot of this can probably be explained by instability in the Bitcoin market due to Mt. Gox's shutdown.
However, in the longer term DOGE is showing strong growth. It has increased in value 315% vs. Bitcoin since it opened 67 days ago. DOGE has strengthened 31% vs. the USD since opening, however since DOGE's weakest point on January 8th DOGE has strengthened 650% vs. the USD!
In other news, miners are currently mining around block 108,000. Rewards for blocks won't be halved until 92,000 blocks from now. The current reward is 0-500000 per block.
submitted by turtlecane to dogecoin [link] [comments]

Draft of CGB Website's new text - Your Input Requested!

EDIT - SITE IS LIVE: http://cgb.holdings

Greetings everyone. I am posting a draft of some of the sections of the new website. They are a work in progress and any input on this content or anything else you would like to see on the new site is appreciated! The website will be focusing on educating investors of all ability so that they can understand the crypto-currency markets and make wise decisions within them. Without this understanding, our markets will not be able to efficiently, and with confidence, allocate capital to the true pillars of this new economy.
Note: Most of my updates can be seen directly here. I expect to have this completed by the weekend so that we can hopefully have the new site up and running. Even once up, there will be lots of work to do to really perfect it.

Site Navigation:

Quick Nav: FAQ | Block Explorer | Paper Wallet | Get CGB
Main Nav: Home | About | Getting Started | Investor Brief | Blog | Resources | Contact
The main navigation categories may have a submenu. Any sub items of this submenu are page sections.
Home
About
  • About CGB
  • Team
  • Learn More
    • Papers and Articles
    • CGB's Life Cycle
    • Market Fundamentals
  • Frequently Asked Questions
Getting Started
  • Quick Overview
  • Get CGB
  • Storage and Use
  • Investor Brief
Blog
Resources
  • CGB Resources
  • Community
    • CGB Communities
    • Support CGB
    • Development
    • Community Content
    • CGB Accepted Here
  • Charts and Data
    • Embedded Live Data
    • External Live data (links)
    • Static Charts
    • Analysis
  • Marketing
    • Marketing Strategy
    • Viral Concepts
    • Material
    • Press
Contact

Home

  • (logo)
  • Released in late June 2013, Cryptogenic Bullion was designed primarily with wealth preservation in mind. With its accelerated mining period, and fast declining inflation, Cryptogenic Bullion is now entering it’s final stage as an interest bearing, low inflation, cryptographic digital asset.
  • Wallet download selection
  • Quick Information section
  • What is Cryptogenic Bullion? - Cryptogenic Bullion is a peer-to-peer internet currency that enables instant payments to anyone in the world. Its fundamental specifications enable it to efficiently function as a store of wealth.
  • Energy and Cost Efficient - Our network requires far less energy than generating hardware-intensive proof-of-work hashes. Proof-of-stake also does away with the ~$1 billion “tax” on the Bitcoin network through proof-of-work blocks.
  • Higher Security - Maintaining the network through the hybrid proof-of-work/proof-of-stake algorithm reduces the risk of the Selfish-Miner Flaw, 51% attacks, Kimoto Gravity Attack and the block bloating that have been used to exploit other currencies.
  • Coin Specifications - Cryptogenic Bullion is based on a hybrid Proof of Stake / Proof of Work scrypt algorithm. It has a block interval of 60 seconds and retargets difficulty every 2 blocks. A reward of 1.5% interest is earned by those who maintain a savings of CGB, while 0.5% interest is earned by miners who also help to secure the network.
  • A Digital Asset - Cryptogenic Bullion is a digital asset with all of the properties of money. Like gold, it is portable, divisible, fungible, scarce, low inflation, durable, non-consumable, and a store of wealth. It can be stored in a private safe and yet transferred across the globe in minutes.
  • Get Involved - Our community is focused on empowering its members with the knowledge and resources required to quickly spread the benefits of Cryptogenic Bullion to new participants.
  • Updates and News Latest blog information, twitter feed, etc.
  • Investor Brief
    $___ USD/CGB Price $500,000 Market Cap B_____CGB/BTC Price 950,000 CGB Total Supply Last updated: X seconds ago

About

About CGB:
Cryptogenic Bullion is a digital asset with all of the qualities of money. It is a descendant of Bitcoin, but employs an advanced security model which is more efficient and more secure than Bitcoin. The problems of today's debt based fiat currencies find solutions in cutting-edge decentralized cryptographic currencies like Cryptogenic Bullion. Designed to function as a store of wealth, CGB's fundamentals emulate the properties and supply of gold.
While Cryptogenic Bullion shares many traits with Bitcoin such as fast global payments, decentralization, pseudo-anonymity, and non-reversible transactions, there are many improvements which allow CGB to more reliably store wealth. A critical requirement for storing wealth is a low inflation rate. Cryptogenic Bullion is a very rare exception in that it has nearly completed its volatile inflationary stage and settled into its maximum yearly inflation rate of 2%. It also allows prudent savers of Cryptogenic Bullion to earn up to 1.5% interest on funds left unspent in their wallets for at least 30 days.
Crypto-currencies are finding support among a massive and diverse range of participants. For newcomers, a visit to one of the following pages would be beneficial depending on your current level of understanding and intention. Cryptogenic Bullion emulate the properties of gold, a classic safe-haven asset, and also represents a part of the movement towards a more fair and honest system of money. For more details on why and how, see the Fundamental Knowledge section. To quickly learn more about the crypto-markets, see the Investor Brief section. For analysing market dynamics, see the Market Fundamentals section.
Specifications
  • Proof of Work/Proof of Stake Hybrid
  • Algorithm: Scrypt
  • Linear difficulty retarget (every 2 blocks)
  • 5 Confirmations
  • 60 Second block time
  • 1.5% Annual interest earned
  • Subsidy halving after every 50k blocks until reward of 0.01
  • Target ~1,000,000 CGB
  • 0.5% PoW & 1.5% PoS inflation
  • Based on Peercoin & Novacoin
Team:
Fundamental Knowledge:
In order to understand the need for cryptographic currencies like Bitcoin and Cryptogenic Bullion, we must consider a number of fundamental challenges with our current financial system, and the solutions that cryptographic currencies provide. The world's currencies are referred to as debt-based fiat currencies because they are not backed by a physical asset like gold, and can burden up to 30 participants with debt for each actual dollar in reserve, creating the potential for bank runs. It helps to realize that when a credit card is used to purchase something, dollars are created , and when you pay it off, dollars are destroyed. This scheme is referred to as fractional reserve banking and can not happen in a digital currency system without the owner's knowledge because the supply is strictly controlled by a decentralized protocol.
We are beginning, as a society, to understand the dangers and inefficiencies found in centralized systems as corruptions and self destructive processes manifest themselves with no true remedy. As our society looks for answers, they are being found in technological advances which allow us to connect with each other in more meaningful ways which do not require a third party. Cryptographic currencies provide the convenience of cash, with neither the excessive centralized printing, nor the potential for censorship or sanctions which block the transmission of funds. A new economy is forming with various crypto-currencies attempting to fill different roles within the ecosystem. It is imperative that we capitalize these technologies through careful investment to allow for the necessary development which will enable them to be a major part of modern society. To quickly learn more about the crypto-markets, see the Investor Brief section.
Trust in crypto-currencies must begin with a basic understanding of how the system functions and how to use it. Technology has existed for decades now which allow us to verify that a message was signed by an individual. This authentication technology is now used to prove that the holder of a private wallet has sent funds form that wallet to another. Keeping this key secret is the responsibility of each participant and this responsibility is the price for the freedom enabled by cryptographic currencies. Every transaction that has ever occurred is recorded in a distributed ledger which proves the current balance of all wallets in order to validate further transactions. Blocks created every 60 seconds containing all of the new transactions are added to the top of the block chain and further serve to set all previous blocks in "cryptographic" stone. For more details on how CGB's decentralized protocols provide trusted security and honest money, see the Papers and Articles section.
In order to get a glimpse of what the future cryptographic currency ecosystem could look like we must accept that there are many different roles to fill, and it is difficult for one currency to efficiently fill all roles. A store of wealth, like Cryptogenic Bullion (CGB), must have a low inflation rate to preserve capital and reduce volatility. Stability can also be encouraged if the bearer is allowed to earn interest on savings stored unspent for a specified length of time. A currency, like Dogecoin (DOGE), must have a higher inflation rate to slightly exceed the adoption rate. This provides liquidity and encourages spending which furthers the expansion of the participant base. A market gateway, like Bitcoin (BTC), must also have a higher inflation rate to match adoption so that liquidity is maintained which enhances the access to each of its markets. The market gateway also insulates the cryptographic currencies and stores of wealth from the market fluctuations caused by volatile shifts in demand for fiat currencies vs. crypto-currencies as a whole. For more information on these dynamics, see the Market Fundamentals section.
Frequently Asked Questions:
Categories
  • General
  • Investing
  • Storing Wealth
  • Wallet Software
  • (more?)
...
Continued in this comment (directly below).
submitted by papersheepdog to CryptogenicBullion [link] [comments]

How to use your GPUs to support bitcoins and hinder altcoins

A few days ago, several community members, including several prominent members, expressed alarm at the recent price rises of altcoins. Litecoins, for example, trade at 0.0387 bitcoins at the time of writing, a value which cannot be explained by merchant acceptance or widespread usage.
Regardless of your personal beliefs about the technical specifics of altcoins, it is difficult to argue that having three or five crytocurrencies on equal footing will result in a net benefit to society. The HD DVD vs. Blu-ray format war, for example, delayed the introduction of HD movies into the home for several years, during which HDTV owners had to watch DVDs despite movies being aired in HD over the air. Imagine going to a cash register at a Subway, and people being presented with the option to pay in bitcoins, litecoins, peercoins, and novacoins. Consider the immense investment in making software compatible with all these types of coins. That doesn't count the economic cost of having to train employees to understand all these different coins. Altcoins contribute to confusion and people's thinking that crytocurrency is a joke, given that anyone can start a new coin and call it an altcoin.
Perhaps Quarkcoins might even have been a better design than bitcoins had they come first, but that doesn't matter. If there is a protracted battle between bitcoins and some other currency, the adoption of crytocurrencies will be delayed or even killed. Further, any cryptocurrency that is sufficiently better than bitcoins will need to be so different that it doesn't look like any of the current batch of coins. Most of these coins even use copies of the bitcoin-qt wallet with a few cosmetic changes and a different hashing algorithm.
If you have GPUs, you can do your part to help bitcoins succeed by using the middlecoin.com pool. Unlike pools that just allow you to mine altcoins, this pool mines altcoins that are pumped up, sells them immediately, and pays out in bitcoins. This forces down the price of altcoins, since the pool operator sells everything he mines, and raises the price of bitcoins. Incidentally, the most profitable algorithm is also the algorithm that is most damaging to altcoins, because if enough people join, it prevents any one coin from rising too high in value.
Watching this pool operate, I discovered that it even unintentionally performs 51% attacks on many altcoins by switching to them when prices are high and mining huge numbers of blocks. When the difficulty rises, the pool leaves for a different coin. Yesterday, I saw a coin with difficulty 57 generating blocks every few seconds. When the pool leaves, the difficulty is stranded so high that confirmations take hours for the remaining miners not part of the pool.
It's simple to set up - just enter your bitcoin wallet address as username with any password. It is also far more profitable than what the people who spend millions on ASICs are making - I made $26 per Radeon7970 per day this weekend. You don't have to do anything except hash - the operator takes care of selecting coins and selling for you. If enough people join, hopefully this could be a significant drag on altcoin prices.
If you agree with my view of how altcoins present a threat to bitcoins, consider donating your GPUs to this cause.
Disclaimer: I don't own this pool and I don't know who does.
submitted by quintin3265 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Discussion on the Coin Maturation Rate.

Hi fellow Minters,
Today I am petitioning to the development team a proposal to reduce the time needed for coins the "Mint" from 20 days to 36 hours.
I have put a lot of thought into this and I believe this to be very important to the future of this coin. As many of you know, Blackcoin has a coin maturation rate of 8 hours with a confirmation time similar to ours. I have heard from many people that they have switched over to Blackcoin for this very reason. People do not want to wait 20 days to be able to use their coins.
Although I understand the idea that the coin will have value because the incentive to hold is greater than the incentive to spend (20% interest), this is not appearing to be the case. Traders make or break a coin and for them, the opportunity to make that 20% in less time is more favourable, especially when going from 10 to 11 satoshi is 10%. This is due to the amount of Mintcoins that exist. One of the reasons the orders for Blackcoin are so much thinner is because there are fewer coins giving them more satoshis of breathing room to spread between. We are jam packed in a small space with no where to go.
Peercoin was the founding PoS coin. They have a coin maturation rate of 30 days. The reasoning for this length of time is based on security. By ensuring that the coins that are staking are deep within the blockchain (by this time 4,320 confirmations), we are sure that these coins are secure. Taking this reasoning and applying it to Mintcoin, the same amount of confirmations would require a coin maturation rate of 36 hours. I believe this to be a fair amount of time to have to wait in order to start minting new blocks.
I look forward to hearing your questions or comments. This is an important feature to discuss for the future of the coin.
Update: I posted a question in the Peercoin subreddit(http://www.reddit.com/peercoin/comments/20x62o/reason_for_30_day_coin_maturation/) about the reasoning behind having the 30 day coin maturation rate in the first place since they are they found fathers of PoS. They had someone insightful and informative replies that I wanted to share here.
Here is what one member had to say:
"To say you have an actual stake in the currency you should own Peercoins for a while (and not move them around) because that is why it is considered proof of your stake. If I could buy 10K coins, immediately mine with them, then sell them off, that really wasn't much proof of my stake then, is it? That's more like proof of monetary parasitism." -OrderAmongChaos
and also:
"the idea behind it is that you must have a stake in the coin to mine. Allowing all transactions to mine PoS means having stake is an option, one that is nice to have, but an option nonetheless. A security proof must make sure people have an active stake in the outcome of the system. For Bitcoin, your investment in an expensive computer ensures you actively want Bitcoin to thrive, for Peercoin, your issuance of stake assures that you are actively interested in the system, as it contained your wealth for an extended period of time. Allowing anyone to mine straight away opens the system up to drive-by stake mining, which means the miner more than likely doesn't care about the ultimate outcome of the system. This would open up Peercoin to a tragedy of the commons scenario much more quickly than it would occur otherwise." -OrderAmongChaos
The discussions that we have had have allowed me to further reflect on this issue and I now believe that having a longer maturation rate is not such a bad thing. brainmaster7000 brings up the good point that reducing the coin maturation time creates an unfair playing field for the rich vs the poor.
http://www.reddit.com/MintCoin/comments/20xugz/discussion_on_the_coin_maturation_rate/cg7xn1g http://www.reddit.com/MintCoin/comments/20xugz/discussion_on_the_coin_maturation_rate/cg7xem8
I summarize the problem here: http://www.reddit.com/MintCoin/comments/20xugz/discussion_on_the_coin_maturation_rate/cg7yww7
submitted by ahbartsch to MintCoin [link] [comments]

Primecoin future is bright

I made the effort to read Primecoin and Peercoin whitepaper seriously for the first time yesterday and realized they are both into solving 2 problems that Bitcoin will encounter inevitably: 1) the energy efficiency issue and 2) having high security/low inflation/low fee at the same time is unsustainable.
In primecoin whitepaper, below are the relevant quotes, that stress Primecoin advantanges.
-Security "However, a non-linear difficulty curve would negatively impact block chain security. Also, using prime size as difficulty indicator would interfere with efficiency of verification. Eventually I discovered that the remainder of Fermat test could be used to construct a relatively linear continuous difficulty curve for a given prime chain length. This allows primecoin to largely keep the security property of bitcoin."
-Fee vs Security "However a higher transaction fee reduces the competitiveness of a crypto- currency as payment-processing network. Since last year, bitcoin’s share of network mining income has shrunk much faster than its capital ma rket share. Basically, for a pure proof-of-work design, it’s not real istic to expect all three goals to sustain: high network security, low inflation and low tr ansaction fee. This topic has been explored in ppcoin paper, however it would become more evide nt as the competition intensifies in cryptocurrency market and bitcoin’s infl ation rate drops further. As Moore’s Law approaches its limit, primecoin inflati on rate would taper off and gives a slower drop toward zero. There is still good scarcity pro perty similar to gold while network security is maintained without the need to raise transaction fee." - there is still good scarcity with good security wihout the need of raising the fee!
-Inflation "The inflation in primecoin is designed to drop slower than ppcoin’s proof-of- work minting, to compensate for the need of sustained energy consumption of pure proof-of-work cryptocurrencies."
Conclusion:Primecoin fills a space that is a blue oean and is its first mover. After Bitcoin and Litecoin, Primecoin positions itself as a serious secure and sustainable payment network that has the potential of lasting.
submitted by crypto_coiner to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

I rewrote the sidebar text

Markdown (source): First, Rev 1, Rev 2, Rev 3, Rev 4, Rev 5, Rev 6. Use RES or orangered me to get latest.
Changes (First->Latest): (excl. minor edits)
“third” to “fourth” “annum” to “year” Remove “to” Restore paragraph split Restore peerco.in since it's back online Numbered list to bullet points Edit descriptions of exchanges Update link Add marketplace Clean up Link to Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Namecoin Wikipedia pages (last Rev 6 edit) Link to Proof-of-{Stake,Work} explanations Edit cointip text Change FAQ/wiki links Add example screenshots Remove btcto.com until they come out of testing Add link to service list BTC-e now supports two-factor authentication Add Mt.Gox Add important facts link 
Screenshots: current sidebar vs suggested sidebar.
Comment with any suggestions or ideas you have.
PPCoin or Peercoin is the cryptocurrency with the fourth highest market cap after Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Namecoin. It is the first known iteration of a combined proof-of-stake/proof-of-work coin.
It is designed to be energy efficient in the long run, have a steady inflation rate of one percent per year, and (through proof-of-stake) be free of dependence on miners.
/PPCoin FAQ, wiki
Official website, FAQ, wiki
Wikipedia article
Important facts
Getting started
Walkthrough for Peercoin wallet setup
PPCoin.org faucet (free Peercoins)
PPCoinTalk marketplace
List of exchanges and other services
Exchanges
All support two-factor authentication.
Utilities
USD converter (peerco.in)
Cryptocurrency value tracker (altco.in)
Ticker for Chrome (Creator's announcement thread)
Ticker for Firefox (Creator on reddit)
Forums
PPCoinTalk.org
BitcoinTalk.org (alternative currencies section)
Related subreddits
PPCoinMining
Cryptocurrency
Litecoin
Bitcoin
BitcoinTip (Quick Start Guide)
ALTcoinTip
BitcoinTip and ALTcoinTip enabled on /PPCoin.
submitted by AnonymousEntity to ppcoin [link] [comments]

Debunking exaggerations of the security of Cosmos peg zones. Copy of tendermint.slack.com #cosmos debate between rilly and ashgreen

https://tendermint.slack.com/archives/C1ER2AN4C/p1493093698914392
rilly 4:14 AM (I'm trying to migrate a conversation from the ourchain.slack) @ebuchman I wanted to ask about how Cosmos peg zones compare with BTC Relay. Here is what tendermint said on reddit. "Cosmos keeps the Bitcoin bridge as a separate zone because we want to keep the Cosmos Hub a simple blockchain agnostic to PoW verification logic. If you have Ethereum act as a hub ala BTC Relay, how do you deal with future forks where e.g. Dogecoin change the PoW/consensus algorithm? Also, AFAIK there are functional limitations to BTCRelay as compare to Cosmos Bitcoin pegs." https://www.reddit.com/Synereo/comments/5v00k5/cosmostendermintethermint_might_have_the_fastest/ddztrms/ (edited)
rilly 4:21 AM I'm not sure how you would deal with a hard fork. Maybe this would mean you would have to "hard fork" (reissue and recreate) every token and contract that depends on BTC Rely? That is the price you pay for making things "read-only". For these sorts of things you need an alert system to let everyone know to upgrade. Bonded messaging is a decentralized alert system where bonds are used to ensure the receiver appreciates the message (if enough of them disapprove the bond is taken). 4:23 Who does a Cosmos zone trust to decide which forks to follow? ebuchman 4:31 AM i dont think btc relay provides a peg, its just a light client for bitcoin (edited) 4:31 the cosmos bitcoin pegzone will actually be a peg to bitcoin 4:32 handling forks is somewhat unresolved/unspecified. it will depend on the conditions 4:32 eg if bitcoin hard forks, the peg zone will need to upgrade the mechanics of the peg to keep up - its effectively a bitcoin client like anyone else (edited) rilly 4:42 AM Will Cosmos Hub validators all be signatories of a Bitcoin multisig wallet to hold the Bitcoins to back the pegs? (edited) 4:46 Or are these the sorts of pegs that aren't actually backed by Bitcoins, ie they use ATOM or something and hope the price stays in a certain range? (edited) krzysiekj 10:05 AM joined #cosmos. Also, @gxinterest joined, @dthn joined. ashgreen 12:30 PM @rilly Bitcoins on Cosmos Hub will be backed by actual Bitcoins on the main chain 12:31 it is really important to make the software in a way that people even can not tell which one is which 12:32 Once btc on both of the chains feels the same, the whole blockchain industry is ready to integrate into the Cosmos ecosystem starting from any services using btc. (edited) rilly 1:55 PM @ashgreen I'm such an idiot I believed that the "bitcoins" were so pricey at Mt Gox because they were the most trusted exchange. Now I understand what I was seeing. The BTC-IOUs became more valuable than the USD-IOUs because Gox was redeeming more of the BTC-IOUs than the USD-IOUs but eventually they stopped redeeming both. Therefore I think it really important to make a very clear distinction between IOUs and the actual bitcoin in your own wallet. Thus my solution is bonded messaging alerting people to upgrade. ashgreen 1:58 PM @rilly Cosmos btc peg is more than just an IOU. It is technical guarantee that btc on Cosmos represents the ownership of btc on the main chain 1:59 but yes your concern is very important and that is why Cosmos also wants to build a hybrid style distributed exchange 1:59 so that MT.Gox won’t happen again rilly 2:17 PM @ashgreen If you tell us how it works will it undermine the sacred trust? Maybe we need to write "In God We Trust" on these tokens LOL AFAIK bitcoin scripts cannot hold bitcoin in contracts to be released when an IOU is redeemed on a "sidechain" so I believe this "technical guarantee" you speak of is not as strong as BTC Relay. Here you can find a list of less secure "technical guarantees" for redeeming IOU tokens on "sidechains" https://www.reddit.com/Synereo/comments/5hm7xn/rchain_will_not_require_amps_to_function/db36lzy/ (edited) ashgreen 2:22 PM I think we are considering a bunch of ways and you can join the discussion on Reddit. Not a certain solution Cosmos team can tell at this moment. 2:22 How are they different? Pegging by sidechain and btc relay? don’t they both use multi sig? rilly 2:30 PM The problem is that you can't put a light client for a "sidechain" on Bitcoin. You can't make scripts/contracts on bitcoin that execute when your BTC IOUs are redeemed on the sidechain. But with BTC Relay you can have a decentralized exchange with half an order book. The ETH seller can put ETH on the order book, go offline, and people can buy the ETH with BTC, only trusting the contracts. You can't put BTC-IOU on the order book and go offline without trusting the signatories of a multisig. If you have a multisig that is as large as your validator set you have similar security. Thus I asked whether Cosmos Hub validators would all be a part of a BTC multisig wallet. I believe the answer is, "no". ebuchman i dont think btc relay provides a peg, its just a light client for bitcoin Posted in #cosmosApril 25th at 4:31 AM rilly 2:45 PM @ashgreen "Pegging by sidechain and btc relay? don’t they both use multi sig?" BTC Relay might be used by someone claiming to peg an IOU to actual BTC but the closest thing to a "technical guarantee" for a BTC IOU is a token backed by far more ETH/ATOM than the value of the BTC that is to be redeemed. That is probably more expensive that it is worth and it only guarantees the IOU until the price of ETH vs BTC hits a certain value. You cannot guarantee that (during a TheDAO hack, for example) the ETH can be automatically traded for BTC on a decentralized exchange, to force redemption of the IOU before the orders can be taken off the exchange. (edited) krzysiekj 2:58 PM left #cosmos ashgreen 3:26 PM @rilly 1) you only need to go through the signatories when you pull out btc onto the mainnet, the transfer between blockchains, not when you trade and the signatories are supposed to run the nodes 24hours. If the ecosystem including the PG companies move over to Cosmos, the IOU wouldn’t be IOU anymore, which I don’t think is IOU in the first place. It will have its own value. 2) maybe you are mentioning about Atomic swap but Cosmos Dex is hybrid. The trade can get settlement finality in realtime using the hybrid feature (see the github note for the detail). (edited) rilly 4:12 PM @ashgreen PG = peg? Mainnet = Bitcoin blockchain? "If the ecosystem including the PG companies move over to Cosmos" Are you assuming major exchanges will choose to run on Cosmos zones (like Open Transactions was/is hoping for with voting pools) (if you offer them enough ATOM)? How many are interested thus far? "the IOU wouldn’t be IOU anymore, which I don’t think is IOU in the first place. It will have its own value" Yes these "non-mainnet bitcoins" could have a radically different price from actual bitcoins so I suggest we not call them "bitcoins" nor create any illusions or exaggerations of a "technical guarantee" to maintain a peg without a way to enforce this via blockchain contract. Of the two blockchain pegging mechanisms I am aware they both have been broken already and this is with a stable asset unlike BTC. BitUSD on Bitshares and NuBits which I think is on the Peercoin blochain. rilly 4:21 PM "2) maybe you are mentioning about Atomic swap but Cosmos Dex is hybrid. The trade can get settlement finality in realtime using the hybrid feature (see the github note for the detail)." I barely understand atomic swaps or state channels. I'm reading up on that. subtillion 4:43 PM joined #cosmos. Also, @akibabu left. ashgreen 6:48 PM @rilly PG = Payment Gateways such as Bitpay or Circle, the major Bitcoin users or service makers. Mainnet = Yes, Bitcooin main blockchain. 1) If there are enough and clear incentives for the service providers, it is possible that they immigrate to Cosmos. I think faster transaction speed, smart contract availability for BTC using smart contract zone, way cheaper transaction fee, and unlimited scalability should be the incentives strong enough to convince them to join. They are not individuals. They are business operators. If something proves to maximize the profit and streamline the processes, they will take a proper managerial decisions. 2) Yes. You can say that btc on mainnet and Cosmos Hub are different. If a right tech and safe pegging architecture is implemented, the difference between those two should be only a “location” where btc is getting confirmed. In that case, it is not IOU, it is btc itself. If it is not the case, yes it is something different and will have different names with a proper explanation about risks and how it works which I don’t deem as a good thing to use. If btc on Cosmos Hub is just an IOU, I personally don’t put much value on even creating it. 3) Pegging solutions that use a reserve fund such as BitUSD(bitshares), Steem dollar(Steem), Tether(with HongKong bank reserve), Labor Hour(Chronobank), and other stable currencies, these are NOT IOU nor the pegging subject itself. They merely back a certain token’s value pegged to a subject with a reserve fund. This value pegging system using reserve funds can always break down when facing high degree of fluctuations and steady price trend that goes only one way(mostly trend going downwards). 4) Unlike the value pegging system with reserve funds, Cosmos Hub pegs the token itself on the main blockchain physically and technically. If the peg is not guaranteed technically in a safe way and the way people agree to come onboard, I don’t see any improvements Cosmos brings to this decentralized world, at least in that sector. However, if it does, I think it will be strong enough to reconstruct the whole industry. (edited)
https://tendermint.slack.com/archives/C1ER2AN4C/p1493420204022785
rilly 10:56 PM @ashgreen @faddat @eudu @asmodat https://tendermint.slack.com/archives/C1ER2AN4C/p1493146086530837 "4) Unlike the value pegging system with reserve funds, Cosmos Hub pegs the token itself on the main blockchain physically and technically." That appears to be nonsense. On Ethereum you can write a contract that is a Cosmos client just like BTC Relay is a Bitcoin client. The Cosmos client contract can trigger an IOU contract release actual ETH when the ETH IOUs are sent to the corresponding contract on the Cosmos exchange. Bitcoin scripts can't run a Cosmos client, so you have to hold Bitcoin in multisig wallets. Am I wrong so far? Who are the signatories? I don't fully understand atomic swaps or state/payment channels but I don't think that matters because I think these still require someone to hold bitcoins if they are to be backing for a token on another blockchain. Atomic swaps require both parties to be online at the time of the swap and state/payment channels mitigate this somehow with a third party. I thought I saw a video of Buterin arguing that state channels were insecure from network failure, but maybe I have it confused. (edited) ashgreen 11:05 PM @rilly you are right. Bitcoin has to have signatories since it doesn't support smart contracts. Think in this way. Smart contracts on Ethereum rely on Ethereum miners, the signatories. So basically every blockchain model has to put a trust in the native validator set. Of course they will act exactly on the protocols written in advance but they still can influence the system. Having signatory doesn't mean it is any bad but rather means the operation of signatories has to be put in an agreed and safe way. Cosmos is working on how to empower the signatories in a way that secures trust and safe. I believe that Jae will write something about it and then we can discuss further about the methodologies. rilly 11:33 PM "Having signatory doesn't mean it is any bad but rather means the operation of signatories has to be put in an agreed and safe way." It is not bad unless you are pretending it is more secure and trustless than it is. 11:33 If the DEX is deployed according to the projected timeline, Tendermint will only have been tested for 4 months on a public blockchain, and DEX will be completely untested in this reality. So you have all the possible vulnerabilities of Bitcoin plus the unknown vulnerabilities of Cosmos. You decided to put a cap on the fundraiser presumably because you didn't want to take on too much responsibility but here you are hyping this thing like it can't fail. Bitcoins are more secure than a peg/IOU token but these tokens can be put on order books and traded faster and cheaper. It can distribute trust for making instant exchanges in comparison with Shapeshift or Changelly (at the cost of privacy?). (edited) 11:33 "Cosmos is working on how to empower the signatories in a way that secures trust and safe. I believe that Jae will write something about it and then we can discuss further about the methodologies." Maybe you haven't decided who the signatories would be. If it is just exchanges that may be less secure than if it is all the Hub validators. But either way exchanges may not trust anyone else to hold their bitcoins. It doesn't necessarily give you better security if your security is better than the others in the multisig. Having many independent exchanges means that many can get hacked without jeopardizing the most secure ones. The more Bitcoins you put in a single multisig the higher the bounty for hacking it. Some of what I was reading sounded like anyone could make a peg zone so couldn't they have one signatory or pick whoever they want? (edited) ashgreen 11:43 PM @rilly nobody is pretending anything. It is just an obvious and simple thing that we need to make it secure and trustless to the level that we can actually commercialize and open up to public with all risks clarified. (edited) balibalo 11:46 PM joined #cosmos rilly 11:51 PM https://tendermint.slack.com/archives/C1ER2AN4C/p1493146086530837 "In that case, it is not IOU, it is btc itself." They should be called pegs, IOUs, or something other than bitcoins. (edited) ashgreen 11:52 PM @rilly right 11:54 pegs sound good rilly 3:36 AM Someone should make a proposal to the on-chain gov to use the validator's atom bonds to back the multisig wallets.
submitted by ioniza to cryptonomics [link] [comments]

Primecoin's future is bright

I made the effort to read Primecoin and Peercoin whitepaper seriously for the first time yesterday and realized they are both into solving 2 problems that Bitcoin will encounter inevitably: 1) the energy efficiency issue and 2) having high security/low inflation/low fee at the same time is unsustainable.
In primecoin whitepaper, below are the relevant quotes, that stress Primecoin advantanges.
"However, a non-linear difficulty curve would negatively impact block chain security. Also, using prime size as difficulty indicator would interfere with efficiency of verification. Eventually I discovered that the remainder of Fermat test could be used to construct a relatively linear continuous difficulty curve for a given prime chain length. This allows primecoin to largely keep the security property of bitcoin."
-Network mining income , the sum of all miners’ income, is a direct measureme nt of the level of block chain security across competing pur e proof-of-work cryptocurrency networks. A fixed cap scarcity model relies heavily on transaction fees to sustain network security. . - primecoin does not rely on a fixed cap and fee should be low
"However a higher transaction fee reduces the competitiveness of a crypto- currency as payment-processing network. Since last year, bitcoin’s share of network mining income has shrunk much faster than its capital ma rket share. Basically, for a pure proof-of-work design, it’s not real istic to expect all three goals to sustain: high network security, low inflation and low tr ansaction fee. This topic has been explored in ppcoin paper, however it would become more evide nt as the competition intensifies in cryptocurrency market and bitcoin’s infl ation rate drops further. As Moore’s Law approaches its limit, primecoin inflati on rate would taper off and gives a slower drop toward zero. There is still good scarcity pro perty similar to gold while network security is maintained without the need to raise transaction fee." - there is still good scarcity with good security wihout the need of raising the fee!
"The inflation in primecoin is designed to drop slower than ppcoin’s proof-of- work minting, to compensate for the need of sustained energy consumption of pure proof-of-work cryptocurrencies."
Primecoin fills a space that is a blue oean and is its first mover. After Bitcoin and Litecoin, Primecoin positions itself as a serious secure and sustainable payment network that has the potential of lasting.
submitted by crypto_coiner to peercoin [link] [comments]

In Case you Haven't Read the 2nd Community Interview with Sunny King Because you Haven't Signed up at the Forum yet, Here it is...

Some people have not signed up at PeercoinTalk.org yet and don't have access to Sunny's interview, so here it is...
Sunny King: hi all
JustaBitofTime: Hey Sunny, nice to have you with us. Are you ready to get started?
Sunny King: Yes John I'm ready.
JustaBitofTime: Coolbeans94 wanted to know about Peercoin's long term approach, he asks "27. Is its design more for long-term security and sustainability? How does that relate to Bitcoin’s longterm vision?(Coolbeans94)"
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. Both PPC and XPM are designed to last. PPC is designed with energy efficiency, XPM is designed with energy multiuse. Bitcoin has a long term uncertainty as to whether transaction fees can sustain good enough level of security. Before that the main concern is how to balance transaction volume and transaction fee levels. Currently I get the feeling that bitcoin developers favor very low transaction fees and very high transaction volume, to be competitive against centralized systems (paypal, visa, mastercard etc) in terms of transaction volume, to the point of sacrificing decentralization. This also brings major uncertainties to bitcoin's future.
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. From my point of view, I think the cryptocurrency movement needs at least one 'backbone' currency, or more, that maintains high degree of decentralization, maintains high level of security, but not necessarily providing high volume of transactions. Thinking of savings accounts and gold coins, you don't transact them at high velocity but they form the backbone of the monetary systems.
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. Pure proof-of-work systems such as bitcoin is not 100% suitable for this task. This is because transaction fee is not a reliable incentive to sustain network security. If the mining generation amount is kept constant (there have been several such attempts in altcoins) it would work better security-wise but then it would also significantly weaken the scarcity property of the currency. XPM's inflation model is designed in such a way that it could serve as backbone currency better than bitcoin if needed, because it could maintain high security reliably for longer, with reasonably good scarcity property as well. Of course that's only from architect's point of view, whether or not it would be chosen by the market is a whole different matter.
JustaBitofTime: Along those lines the community wanted to know ""If the tax fees are to remain fixed at 0.01 and Peercoin becomes widely adopted, (Thus a sharp rise in value) the fees could become too much for microtransactions. What would happen in this case? What solutions do you imagine to get around the microtransaction issue?"
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. PPC is designed to serve even better as a backbone currency. The proof-of-stake technology in PPC is not only energy efficient; it also maintains high level of security without relying on transaction fee. Thus PPC could be safely designed with strong scarcity property yet serving well as backbone currency.
Sunny King: @Coolbeans 94. Both PPC and XPM use protocol enforced transaction fees, which reflects my preference that high transaction volume is discouraged in favor of serving as backbone currencies.
JustaBitofTime: Speaking of security, there's often quite a bit of debate surrounding the PPC vs XPM checkpointing. 27.5 Will checkpoints be optional like they are in XPM in the next client version?
Sunny King: @transaction fees: Right now if we are talking about micropayments in the US$1 range, both PPC and XPM still handle them with much lower overhead than credit card network. In the long term micropayments should be provided by centralized providers, or a less decentralized network optimized for high capacity transaction processing.
Sunny King: @transaction fees: On the other hand there is no promise that minimum transaction fee wouldn't be adjusted. If processing capacity of personal computers continues to advance at the current pace, both max block size and minimum transaction fee could very well be adjusted at some point. However I do take a very cautious approach to adjusting transaction fees, as opposed to bitcoin devs. The impact to the fitness of the currency as a backbone currency is of great concerns to me.
Sunny King: @checkpoint: Decentralization of PPC checkpoint is currently planned to begin in v0.5. It would be a gradual process.
JustaBitofTime: I can tell you from my own Libertarian leaning, being able to add some layer of anonymous transactions is important to me. 47. Can you tell us more about 'sendtoaddressfrom' and Avatar mode? Will this be released in the next client version? (JustaBitofTime)
Sunny King: @JustaBitofTime Yeah this is still at conceptual stage. It shares some similarity to coin control. However from user point of view I'd like them to think in terms of avatars instead of addresses and coins, it's simpler and better for privacy.
Sunny King: The main rule is that in avatar mode the client doesn't automatically assemble coins from different avatars into the same transaction but it can still do so within an avatar
JustaBitofTime: One of the challenges the Peercoin community faces is breaking down all the technical nuances of the coin. Alertness asks "60. Could you please explain exactly how the level of PoW and PoS difficulty is calculated? (Alertness)"
Sunny King: so you probably need to specify which avatar the money should come from in a send
Sunny King: I would wait to see how coin control is introduced in bitcoin first. If bitcoin implements similar concepts first that would be nice too.
Sunny King: @Alertness For simplicity we can think of the difficulty adjustment of PoW and PoS blocks independent of each other. Basically it uses some technique called 'exponential moving' to keep the block spacing relatively constant. It adjusts on every block and smoother than bitcoin's adjustment, responding to change of network hash rate much faster than bitcoin, but at the same time not too fast to make difficulty manipulation exploits difficult.
Sunny King: @Alertness PoS blocks have a constant 10-minute spacing target. PoW blocks have a variable spacing target, between 10-minute and 2-hour, but on average it's about 30-minute when PoS block spacing is close to the 10-minute target. This serves to reduce the variation of block spacing.
JustaBitofTime: Along those lines, 60.5 Could you please spend some time talking about the environmental impact of Bitcoin vs Peercoin now and then in the future? (JustaBitofTime)
Sunny King: @JustaBitofTime I don't like to paint bitcoin in a negative picture because it's indeed a brilliant system with high integrity and reasonably good inflation design. High energy consumption is only a minor blemish. To say that it's gold 2.0 I think is quite reasonable.
Sunny King: But if we can solve one of the issues with gold and gold 2.0, their environmental impact, that would be very nice, wouldn't it? We all want to live on a cleaner and happier earth, right? So we should take this task more seriously and PPC provides a possible solution.
Sunny King: On the other hand we should also respect other people's free will. For example we should not force other people to not mine bitcoin or participate in distributed computing projects, because of the environmental cost. So XPM complements the goal here as it produces additional scientific value from the consumed energy. So people who like to mine cryptocurrency for whatever reason have a better choice to mine, to get more benefit out of the mining activity and environmental cost.
JustaBitofTime: For our non-technical users, how does PoS factor into the environmental impact? In other words, 1 friend is mining Bitcoin and the other is mining Peercoin. How does that look now and how does it look in 1 year?
Sunny King: Currently PPC market cap is still small, so the effect is still small. If PPC becomes as successful as BTC, then the energy saving would be significant, and more and more so as difficulty rises
JustaBitofTime: As difficulty rises, what is the net effect? I feel this is an area that many new to the coin have trouble making the connection.
Sunny King: A caveat here is that the energy consumption on bitcoin mining might drop in the long term as well, due to lack of incentive in mining. However this would drop bitcoin's security level
JustaBitofTime: You spoke about producing additional scientific value from consumed energy with XPM. 55. What are your thoughts about [email protected]? Do you see a place for it in crypto coins?
Sunny King: Difficulty increase in PPC reduces inflation rate, which also reduces the energy consumption. This is assuming market capitalization stays the same
Sunny King: It's hard to say, I am not an expert in protein folding algorithms but I can imagine it would be hard to completely decentralize. There has been a proposal of a less decentralized solution whereas traditional hashing provides network security and half of the minting, whereas folding computation provides the other half of the minting using the existing centralized distributed computing network. This approach is not limited to [email protected] though, people are also thinking about other networks such as BOINC.
Sunny King: The problem with this system is whether trust is required on the centralized distributed computing network to not abuse the system and counterfeit. Without solving such problems it's not a serious currency system in my opinion, but on the other hand we do see existing systems in operation with centralized minting, such as DVC and FRC. So this type of systems definitely has some niche in the market.
JustaBitofTime: Shifting gears here, Jimmy asks "Q1 New: When will the development team release the official ppcoin specification? (Jimmy) Clarification “We got the paper last year, but we need a protocol specification detail similar to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification , especially for POS and the integration of POW with POS. The specification is important to developers and the general users who are interested in ppcoin.”
Sunny King: @Jimmy There is no set plans for this yet. If the demand is strong I could look into getting a summary of difference between bitcoin protocol spec and ppcoin protocol spec.
JustaBitofTime: Between 2 different coins, you obviously have your hands full. Romerun asks "Last interview sunny say if he somehow disappears Scott will fill in. But up till now we don't really know who he is, or how much commitment of him to the project / etc. There could be the issue of impostor too, so it would be benefit to the community to clear this up. And wouldn't it be better to have a few more key devs to PPC."
JustaBitofTime: My understanding was Scott was capable of filling in, however, has not worked on PPC recently?
Sunny King: That's right. For some reason Scott isn't as motivated as I am. I also look forward to having more developers with ppc, right now I think xpm team is in good shape, quite a number of people are working on xpm miners which requires a good understanding of the innerworkings of primecoin.
Sunny King: So I think as our community grows there will be more talents showing up. I am still pounding scott to be actively involved as well
JustaBitofTime: As your development team expands for XPM, Muto asks "35. Do you plan to release another currency? (Muto)"
Sunny King: @Muto 35. No such plan right now. I have recently turned down a few invitations to work on other currency projects due to my responsibility in PPC and XPM. I am committed to further improve PPC and XPM's competitiveness in the market.
JustaBitofTime: Speaking of competitiveness in the market, Romerun would like to know "What are the development priorities/future features of PPC/XMP in Sunny's mind? online wallet? ppc-blockchain.info? etc."
JustaBitofTime: I understand marketing and overall community development/involvement is a big part of the overall plan.
Sunny King: I have touched a few things last week I think, there are other things I have in mind but don't wish to talk about yet. I am constantly evaluating market situation to figure out what's the best features to compete in the market
JustaBitofTime: Let's change it up again 8. Who are your business and personal heroes? (MeBeingAwesome)
Sunny King: As to services and apps I usually leave those to the market to support. If I were to be involved in a service somehow I think it needs to have profit potential
Sunny King: and not divert too much of my resources and time
Sunny King: @MeBEingAwesome Right now I am in the business of cryptocurrency As to my heroes, I think Satoshi qualifies as one. We know that before bitcoin came into existence, several pioneers in the digital currency world have made sacrifices, such as Douglass Jackson the founder of e-gold, Bernard von NotHaus the founder of Liberty Dollar, among many others. These efforts are part of the same movement to decentralize the control of money, from potentially rising oppressive governments. Gold was demonetized to mainly facilitate centralized power, that gives governments power to do a lot more damage, to do whatever they want. Through history we can see the corruption of morality of governments, for example, in the 1860's US governement still had the integrity to return to gold standard after civil war, while in the 1930's it no longer had such integrity after an economic depression. Not only that, it developed audacity to blame the depression on gold. It's very difficult to restore morality of governments.
Sunny King: The cryptocurrency movement, arising from the lessons of e-gold and liberty dollar, gives people a powerful tool to peacefully return to the principle of limited government. We all thank Satoshi whose brilliant mind and effort enabled this movement. Of course there are a lot more things going on in the societies outside cryptocurrency world, to preserve mankind's freedom, to elevate mankind's morality and spirituality, so there are many heroes around us.
JustaBitofTime: I completely respect your desire to remain anonymous. If the code is open, that should speak for itself. With that being said, there are people that claim you might be someone involved with the Satoshi team early on. Can you speak to that rumor? Also, did you have any involvement with Satoshi directly?
Sunny King: I wish I were as that would have made me very rich I am also curious to who Satoshi really is, what led him to such great achievement. But on the other hand I also wish him a peaceful life not having to endure such hardships like NotHaus
JustaBitofTime: For those not familiar with NotHaus, please look into Liberty Dollar.
Look in the comments for the rest...
submitted by Sentinelrv to peercoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin vs. Peercoin [Extended Edition] Bitcoin Miner vs Full Node - Programmer explains Peercoin vs Bitcoin Brief comparison of Peercoin and Bitcoin Gamers Vs Bitcoin Miners  Gemo Sapiens

Peercoin vs Bitcoin — what are the differences? Peercoin’s mission is to improve the proof-of-work protocol system first established by Bitcoin. This protocol requires miners to validate transactions on a blockchain by solving complex math problems, with the winner getting a reward in the form of a few Bitcoins that were created. Both Peercoin and Primecoin are developed by pseudonymous developer named Sunny King. Both are inspired by Bitcoin, and share much of its source code and technical implementation. The main difference is that Peercoin implements a combined proof-of-stake and proof-of-work system, whereas Primecoin implements a scientific computing proof-of-work system. Bitcoin is now considered to be the most popular and most expensive cryptocurrency on the market. Bitcoin was launched on 3rd January 2009 by pseudonymous developer Satoshi Nakamoto. On the other hand, Peercoin is fairly newer. It was launched on 12th August 2012 by software developer Sunny King. Peercoin is inspired by Bitcoin, and hence shares much of its source code and Bitcoin and many of the original cryptocurrencies were born as pure proof-of-work systems. Proof-of-stake was first pioneered in 2013 by Peercoin, a project that exists to this day. Peercoin’s contribution to the popularity of PoS is likely dwarfed by Ethereum ( ETH ) and its goal to transition from PoW — which has turned out to be a very ASIC Miner profitability ranking. Power cost $/kWh. Model Release Date Hashrate Power Algo Revenue 24h Profit 24h Top Coin; Bitmain Antminer Z15: Jun 2020: 420.00 kh/s: 1510W: Equihash $26.04 $22.42 Pirate(ARRR) Equihash Innosilicon A10 ETHMaster 500Mh: Sep 2019: 500.00 Mh/s: 750W: Ethash $11.57 $9.77 Nicehash-Ethash Ethash Innosilicon A10 Pro

[index] [10483] [200] [20804] [15537] [27610] [5954] [15171] [24332] [15238] [1799]

Bitcoin vs. Peercoin [Extended Edition]

Peercoin Mining Overview - Duration: 2:49. Chronos Crypto 13,400 views. 2:49. ... What Is The Difference Between Bitcoin's "Proof Of Work" Vs. Peercoin & Nextcoin's "Proof Of Stake"? - Duration ... Inside a Bitcoin mine that earns $70K a day - Duration: 5:09. Digital Trends Recommended for you. 5:09. I'm A Teenage Bitcoin Millionaire - Duration: 4:36. BuzzFeed News Recommended for you. In this video, I discuss a recent article that goes into depth about the top 100 richest addresses in the Peercoin network. I give a report on the slow disputation of the wealth of peercoin ... BITCOIN 💥Ready to Begin CAPITULATION? 💥 ️ LIVE Crypto Analysis TA & BTC Cryptocurrency Price News - Duration: 28:27. Crypto Kirby Trading 13,097 views New bitcoin miner x2, bitcoin miner pc, bitcoin miner APK, bitcoin miner free, bitcoin price, bitcoin kurs, bitcoin news, bitcoin mining, bitcoin to usd, bitcoin wallet,

Flag Counter