|
Title: Can we implement Nick Szabo's Bit Gold? Post by: Bizmark13 on August 17, 2014, 08:31:13 AM Before Bitcoin, there was Bit Gold. Bit Gold had pretty much all of the the basic features that Bitcoin now has except for two few key differences:
1. The consensus group for Bitcoin is hashing power. Bitcoin relies on the idea that the majority of the network's hashing power is controlled by nodes that are not hostile to the network. In order to successfully execute a double spend, one must own a majority of the hashing power of the network. Bit Gold is different in that the consensus group is the total number of nodes. What is a node? Well, by running Bitcoin Core, you are running a node. Bit Gold relies on the majority of the nodes in the network to be non-hostile. 2. Bit Gold is not technically fungible. Unlike Bitcoin, it lacks a difficulty-adjusting algorithm which means that advancements in solving the proof-of-work calculations required to "mine" Bit Gold (e.g. by designing an ASIC) can result in more proof-of-works being solved and more I think Nick Szabo's Bit Gold is sufficiently different from Bitcoin that it might be worth implementing his ideas into an altcoin. What do you think? Title: Nick Szabo as Author of Bitcoin Post by: Spoetnik on August 17, 2014, 09:15:10 AM ya i heard of this before and some talk about Nick's possible involvement with making Bitcoin or helping with it.
the Bitgold white paper was deliberately post dated to say it came out after Bitcoin i think.. http://www.coindesk.com/linguistic-researchers-name-nick-szabo-author-bitcoin-whitepaper/ with no difficulty adjustment if i got that right then i don't like the coin idea. Title: Re: Can we implement Nick Szabo's Bit Gold? Post by: digitalindustry on August 17, 2014, 07:24:07 PM Before Bitcoin, there was Bit Gold. Bit Gold had pretty much all of the the basic features that Bitcoin now has except for two few key differences: 1. The consensus group for Bitcoin is hashing power. Bitcoin relies on the idea that the majority of the network's hashing power is controlled by nodes that are not hostile to the network. In order to successfully execute a double spend, one must own a majority of the hashing power of the network. Bit Gold is different in that the consensus group is the total number of nodes. What is a node? Well, by running Bitcoin Core, you are running a node. Bit Gold relies on the majority of the nodes in the network to be non-hostile. 2. Bit Gold is not technically fungible. Unlike Bitcoin, it lacks a difficulty-adjusting algorithm which means that advancements in solving the proof-of-work calculations required to "mine" Bit Gold (e.g. by designing an ASIC) can result in more proof-of-works being solved and more I think Nick Szabo's Bit Gold is sufficiently different from Bitcoin that it might be worth implementing his ideas into an altcoin. What do you think? if it can be done - do it. Title: Re: Can we implement Nick Szabo's Bit Gold? Post by: digitalindustry on August 17, 2014, 07:24:58 PM I can't say i fully understand it from many vectors but do it and see if its gamed.
|