The talk presents Noah Feldman's view on what it takes to make a revolution. Given the number of people who want to revolutionize money with bitcoin, this talk however is based much more on political revolution. Hope someone at least enjoys it.

http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/TEDxUChicago-2012-Noah-Feldman;Featured-Talks

Higher difficulty makes a 51% attack harder because it means there's generally more people (and hash power) in the network, and it's generally harder to find a block. But no matter what the difficulty is at having 51% of the hashing power in the network still lets you do the same attack.

The 51% attack involves mining the block chain the way you want it, if you pull it off you can exclude any transaction you want, so you could for example do the following: Exclude all transactions and stop spending, exclude Alice's payment to Bob (so Alice could not pay for Bob's services), possibly double spend coins, create large number of orphaned blocks. There's likely other nasty things you can do, but it involves being able to create the longest chain and not letting everyone else work together to outperform you.

I must have missed that, be it flying or sleeping though, I can't give you any flack for having a life to deal with.

Thanks for grabbing my bid along with everyone else's. Either rationale made sense, I didn't figure it could hurt to ask at least 

There's already an "extraNonce" field that's used in the coinbase transaction, incrementing it changes the merkle root and gives you a new batch of hashes to work on. From a recently generated coinbase, this value is 4294967295.

Maybe what we need is to update the way work is fetched to allow more efficient processing. Since the other block header fields don't change much - version, prev hash, merkle root, timestamp (with the exception of rollntime), and target. Why not just package get works to include one copy of those fields and 4-100 merkle roots (depending on client speed).

As far as generating the merkle root en masse, my laptop with very average performance could do ~1.8MH/s back when that mattered, which is about 4 million sha256() rounds in a second. I'm not intimately familiar with how the merkle roots are generated (n*log(n) hashes for n transactions?) but if we call it 400 transactions we get a bit south of 4000 hashes per merkle root and with heavy rounding and lots of assumptions every step of the way gets about one thousand merkle roots generated per second on an economy two-core laptop.
Checking slush's pool shows 430 getworks/s to handle 1.2GH/s of mining power, which could be handled twice over on much less hardware than a decent server (granted the server also has to do things like handle the miners connecting and running whatever backend is required). If you want to make sure you have enough capacity I'm sure you could use a GPU to do this and get easily another order of magnitude above a CPU.

For a dedicated miner running 1TH/s you would need to supply 250 merkle roots/s, but if you're running 1TH/s you could probably afford to mine solo (at least for current difficulty, and probably for a good while). Even on a pool, a condensed request like the one above would be under 10KByte/s (56Kbit dial-up is just slightly slower).

Will pools be affected by ever-climbing hash rates? Sure. Will it matter in the long run? I doubt it. Will it require a fork or protocol change. Almost certainly not (the logistics of changing something this low-level in the blockchain would be a nightmare).
Maybe you could ask one of the large pool operators slush or giga both come to mind off hand (and I know giga is already thinking about upgrading to ASIC and the changes that requires).

Sub, and I think I'll have to reread everything already, I'm not sure there's one post with a full description anymore, just a lot of ideas that have been getting pieced together. Not to say that's bad, I just need to make sure I can parse out the current "best" proposal.

Looks like the payment from pirate hit the interest address. I expect bitfoo will be moving funds and paying dividends in the morning.

@Bitfoo
Since it matters this time, will you still be offering any bond cycles at 1.05 still? Your original post puts the rates after Tuesday at 2am EST at 1.06, but that didn't take into account pirate having to delay payment. Thanks either way.

Goat said he was buying up shares each week for everyone who wanted in at 1.02, although since the dividend hasn't been paid this week I wonder if a few people got in for cheap and get this weeks payment.

That's the plan,  I'm just trying to sort out the details now and make sure people care enough. Thanks for the interest though.

That is true, and that's where the three and a half month breakeven between FOO.PPPT and TYGRR.BOND-P came from 1.05@7% or 1.02@6.8% for FOO.PPPT and TYGRR.BOND-P respectively. Both of these bonds offer buy-in at these rates weekly, both performing around 6.667% yield as you said.

If we turn the same math onto your bond however, using the par value for the transfer fee calculations (to simplify it down some, this favors BIB.PIRATE) for your market maker system. 100 shares can be purchased for 1.022 each, and 200 for 1.012 each; with expected yields around 6.605% and 6.670% respectively.

The easiest way for me to argue it to myself is that after six months, getting the full 7% pulls ahead of any other offering at current rates.


I wish I could have gotten in sooner with all of this in general, congratulations on the good grab though.

I do want to offer trade-ins, but particularly at first there would probably be a high minimum.

I'm also not sure if I like the name BABYPIRATE or not to be honest, I'll have to figure that out. Mind if I use it though? Something like TINYPIRATE might have fewer connotations around it.

What part of the API are you waiting for? If you're just waiting to see if you've been paid the weekly dividend before reinvesting in more normal PPT bonds or put the little pieces into something like this? Or automating dividend payouts to security holders?

Sorry, I definitely have noticed your bond, it just didn't look like the best option to use as the underlying asset. The rate per bond is great for large orders as you said, but as I've had little interest so far I probably won't create a large initial offering. Your weekly rate is also lower than FOO.PPPT or TYGRR.BOND-P, which puts an obvious cut into profits for investors, myself, or both. Additionally being able to run everything though GLBSE is a bit of a plus for me, but definitely second to getting the best rates.
The best things I can see going for you across accounts of any size are that your prices fluctuate on GLBSE differently than any of the other PPT dividend bonds and that your account is older than bitfoo's (I was not able to quickly find the age of Goat's account).

Thanks for the offer though.

The big result would be that people would be less inclined to use the hot wallet. It may be easier for Nefario to as a little extra to the wallet on Monday figuring this quick use is from that.

In the "just crazy enough to work" line of thought, if there was a hot wallet fee, why not alert and allow other people to add funds to the hot wallet to claim the fee for themselves. The setup and implementation would be a pain more than likely, but it might lower the time for the wallet to fill up again. (The fee should keep people from gaming the system).

What about a small fee (0.05%?) For hot wallet transactions and free cold transactions within whatever timeframe Nefario wants to offer.

Any thoughts?

Would anyone be interested in a Pirate pass through in the 10, 50, or 100 mBTC range? (0.01, 0.05, 0.1 BTC respectively)

I'm stealing the idea from an earlier proposal that planned to offer very small mining bonds, but what currently makes the most sense to me is offering a 0.05 BTC based share so that even someone owning a single PPT share at 1 BTC can buy a whole share of something with the proceeds; this also keeps the price fairly low without adding a crazy number of shares.

The other issue is that investing with pirate directly isn't easy, and as I have neither a referral, huge sums to deposit myself, or huge reputation to stake into getting any of the above (and there is already a solid report of pirate sending money back on new accounts). Investing through another PPT security may be the easiest way to go about things. Currently FOO.PPPT offers the highest rate but weekly buy in only gets as cheap as 1.05 for the full 7%, and TYGRR.BOND-P has weekly buy in at 1.02 to get 6.8% (these even out at about three and a half months time).

tl;dr - Would you be interested in buying a 0.05 (or 0.01 or 0.1) BTC share of a larger PPT on GLBSE?

Subscribing, interesting topic and I hope more of it gets answered soon.

Are there any state laws to worry about as well? Or possibly even smaller governments that you may have to answer to (county, city, etc)

Thanks. I wasn't able to find this before, though it wasn't the first thing I had been looking for. Maybe something useful to add to the primary post?

Do you not get anything for second level referrals then I'm assuming?

Looking at the numbers again, they make sense if you knock them down an order of magnitude.

This would mean 4 Jalapeno's would cost ~$600, and produce 1.4GH/s, and assuming it used two usb ports for power (as do some USB hard disks and other high power USB equipment) turn 1,400MH/J into 70MH/J, which seems believable to me for the generation jump, it also represents about a 50% jump in H/s/$ in addition to a huge jump in efficiency.

I have to keep reminding myself that it's not the first day of April, I'm torn between the fact that it's on a legitimate news site, and the facts that the main site has not been updated, you called it a "coffe warmer" and it has 3.5GH/s at 22MH/s/$.

Other than the obvious wondering when they'd be scheduled to ship and the details of the buyback program, what's the power use?

I'm wondering if anyone would be interested in a Pyramining pass through share. After playing with a very small amount on pyramining I think it would be an interesting place to throw more funds into, but without the free change myself to really pay off (payout is over 8-9 months in 1 BTC increments) , I'd want to attempt to gather more interest to give more frequent payouts.

My current plans :
-Establish fund and become verified (Skipping social networks unless there is good reason not to)
-Offer 1000 shares at 1 BTC each
-Start off a small account with no sponsors (<=1 BTC)
  *Allows top account to start with the 10% signing bonus
  *Keeps the fund from paying 30% of generation to sponsors up the chain (This would not affect total payout at all).
-Put everything into Pyramining in 10 100 BTC chunks
  *This gives 9 accounts referrals starting out (theoretically boosting bonus to 20%)
  *Reduces frequency of payouts in favor of higher eventual returns
  *Allows multiple sell orders and investment to start as soon as
-Publish information allowing verification of deposits
-All payouts would be paid out as dividends
-Once the bonus has been reached and everything is paid out all shares will be bought back without payment and the security will either end there or restart again.
-I will provide and update referral links so that anyone who wants to increase the accounts bonus can increase the payout of the fund.

-Expected return is about 1190 (or 19%) over the life of the security. The security will depreciate in value as it pays out until it is worthless (after paying out via dividends).
-This security would allow people to join or exit as they wish, avoiding the lock-in normally associated with Pyramining.
Fee:
-I'm thinking 1 BTC per week for the first 10 weeks, this pays the security setup fee and 2 BTC to me.
-Possibly a bonus based on additional referrals.

Cons:
-When block reward halves payment term will be extended. Full payout may take 11-12 months including this.
-Assumes no default on the part of Pyramining, while I don't expect this I would not be providing any insurance.
-I'm a fairly new member to the forums so my current trust is low (Everything would however be simple to verify).

Needing input:
-Any ideas on increasing Pyramining bonus?
-Does anyone think the fee should be adjusted?
-How often would you like to see dividends payed out, keeping in mind that a specific payout per time isn't very easy to establish.
-Would it be better to have 10 accounts that pay out to the fund directly, or 1 that pays out directly and 9 that feed into the previous account in the chain (so that each deposit counts multiple times, but greatly extends payout time)?
-Should I forward funds to myself (in case of unlikely chance of GLBSE losing their wallet and do things more manually), or keep everything inside GLBSE?
-Please ask any other questions you might have.

EDIT 6/15: Modified title to indicate interest only.

I've thrown in a very small amount because I like the idea, though I had a few questions as well.

What's your lead time for adding new hardware once the BTC are added to pay for it?

Do you mind disclosing how much hashing power you have on reserve for new accounts, in terms of hashing power or deposit amount?

I saw psy mentioning his bonus going down as he added to his initial deposit, what specifics are you willing to provide about how and when the bonus declines?

I've found their customer support to be very responsive, if you send them an email I'm sure they'll tell you what the current lead time on all of their products is.

FWIW as of three weeks ago lead time on the singles was 9 weeks (Order placed on 5/25 is expected to be shipped around 8/1)