|
shit, I didn't know things have gone so bearish in bitstamp
|
|
|
|
|
this whole trolling thing is starting to get old..
|
|
|
|
The original idea is very good. In January I transfered 100 euros worth of bitcoins to a certain e-shop that only accepts bitcoin. During the next months I got to actually spend 1000 euros worth of bitcoins  , so the a good approach would be just owning some pocket money in bitcoins and by spending it on goods you are basically taking out the returns in non-fiat way. |
|
|
|
|
I think the idea of PedoCoin is pretty cool, it sure is better than ButtCoin.
|
|
|
|
I'd like to see the world banksters admitting that there is literally nothing that they can do to control bitcoin and this getting into mainstream media |
|
|
|
|
rLcHJmjoeN1ctrUi67mbUz7asJ51x96FEo
|
|
|
|
Can't believe that someone just named these weekly lows "crashes". WTF, even the 270 -> 60 drop can be argued that it was a crash or not. I remember times when bitcoin was 10$ and it fluctuated 1$ up or down sometimes. Now it is 100$ and it changes 10$ up or down sometimes. Same shit different day. |
|
|
|
If it went from 10 to 300, it will go from 100 to 3000 no problem. 4 digit prices are the ones that I'm after as they make me rich as fuck  |
|
|
|
Parabolic rise, here we go again |
|
|
|
|
linux mint 15 is better than windows 8
|
|
|
|
|
I started to use Linux pretty much when I started to use bitcoins. This is because I find Linux security far better than Windows and I cannot afford having my private keys stolen by some typical windows trojan.
|
|
|
|
|
bitcoin will rise 1000% soon because I need to buy myself an apartment. I'm tired of being my mom's basement dweller. therefore, bitcoin has to rise.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not that I'm trying to solve any certain problem with super coins but rather throwing out an idea that there can be a crypto coin that depends on other coins and does not have its own "proof of work" needed for mining.
The fact that there can be infinite amount of PPCoins for example doesn't change anything because the share is calculated from the currently existing coins rather than the maximum limit. Destroying the input coins is crucial to avoid circular allocation of new super coins.
Also, let's say bitcoin developers come up with a new and much better protocol for bitcoins. How would you transfer the old bitcoins to the new system? One possibility is creating v2.0 bitcoins only if the corresponding amount of v1.0 bitcoins get destroyed.
|
|
|
|
|
1. IP Coin
The coin would be made so that it would distinguish between the IPs that originated new blocks. If a block is found from the same IP several times in some time period then it would be somewhat banned for finding new blocks until some certain time passes. This would make using mining pools pretty much useless and also having a garage full of ASICs. The 51% attack would be less likely and the key for mining is not only having a great processing power but also finding IPs that are not yet used for mining.
2. Super Coin
This coin would combine a set of existing and valuable coins. To mine super coins one must mine all the supported coins. Each coin it supports, provides one dimension to the user's coin vector. For example, if the super coin contained Bitcoin, Litecoin and P2P Coin then the coin vector would have 3 dimensions.
If the user has 3 bitcoins, 3000 litecoins and 10000 P2P coins then the super coin looks how many bitcoins, litecoins and P2P coins are out there currently, so if the total number of these coins is as follows:
BTC: 10 000 000
LTC: 40 000 000
PPC: 100 000 000
then in that context the user has:
BTC: 3 / 10 000 000 = 0.0000003
LTC: 3000 / 40 000 000 = 0.000075
PPC: 10000 / 100 000 000 = 0.0001
The share of super coins would be the vector length of the user's coin vector:
Sqrt( 0.0000003*0.0000003 + 0.000075*0.000075 + 0.0001*0.0001 ) = 0.000126491
This would be multiplied with some constant to make it look human friendly, so for example the amount of super coins that corresponds to the given coin vector would be: 126.491 SPC
Or ( 0.0000003 * 0.000075 * 0.0001 ) * 1 000 000 000 000 000 000 = 2250
1 000 000 000 000 000 000 is just a constant
To get supercoins one must have all its component coins. To spend super coins, the component coins will be destroyed and the super coins will be sent to the receiver as normally coins are sent.
Having said that, these are just ideas. Feel free to propose corrections or generally discuss what you think of my ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
How to create a bitcoin alternative that has its proof of work algorithm randomly changing (self-modifying) so that no ASICS could ever be built for mining?
I propose embedding some scripting language like Lua (or completely custom) to the coin. The script would be saved in the blockchain once and all the next blocks can be mined only with the algorithm described in that script.
If a block is found then the reward for the next block would decrease if a miner used the same script. This means that miners can use the same algorithm only a couple of times and should be constantly proposing new and different algorithms for mining.
The algorithm should be randomly generated and there should be limitations for it. For example the size cannot be larger than 1KB.
Knowing that it's proven to be impossible to make a program that could find out if another program really does what it is supposed to do I suspect that such altcoin remains utopic. However, the problem statement is still there and maybe the means for finding a solution can be changed to achieve the same goal. Discuss.
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking that maybe it would be possible to make an altcoin that has its proof of work algorithm randomly changing so that it would be impossible to make an ASIC for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
