Bitcoin Forum
May 26, 2024, 10:29:35 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 »
381  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [ANNOUNCE] Bitcoin Proof-of-Stake on: April 27, 2014, 01:45:10 AM
Quote from: Peter R on April 26, 2014, 07:43:25 PM
Will the initial distribution of wealth in Bitcoin-PoS be exactly as per the unspent outputs in the bitcoin blockchain at a certain point in time in the future, or will you consider redistribution of wealth if you find popular support for it?

I would keep the blockchain as is. The best case for redistribution to add to Satoshi's social contract would be to make permanent the up-to-now unspent coins that Satoshi mined while alpha testing the live chain. Put this up for debate and see if Satoshi surfaces to comment. He could easily have disposed of, or overwritten, the private keys as they were used to create his stash of 980,000 according to http://bitslog.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/satoshi-s-fortune-a-more-accurate-figure/.
382  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 25, 2014, 10:11:16 PM
Quote from: lunarboy on April 25, 2014, 09:52:29 PM
Quote from: SlipperySlope on April 25, 2014, 08:17:47 PM
Quote from: lunarboy on April 25, 2014, 07:07:03 PM
@ slipperyslope

what charting site did you use to create that ?

Yes, It is a Google spreadsheet in their cloud. Anyone can read or copy it for their own modifications. Most every evening I get the Bitstamp closing price from Bitcoin Charts and post in the Calculations sheet. The three graphs get automatically updated. Risto inspired all that you see there.

That would be great. You have a link?

thanks

So sorry . . . https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArD8rjI3DD1WdFIzNDFMeEhVSzhwcEVXZDVzdVpGU2c
383  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [ANNOUNCE] Bitcoin Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 09:43:44 PM
Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 25, 2014, 07:49:18 PM
A good problem solving technique is to first solve a simpler problem.

May I suggest setting aside the issue of new coin rewards,
and simply focus on how to achieve consensus
between nodes without PoW.

It quickly becomes clear that if solvable, it is non-trivial.

The core developers stated that no one has achieved
this so far.

This is what Meni said too -- you still need PoW as
issuance mechanism.  

We are talking about a node creating a new block
and the rest of the network accepting it.

I think it may be possible with some kind of cryptographic
handshake between nodes, but my ideas on this are
vague at best.

EDIT:  If you want to simplify the problem even further, assume all nodes trust each other and are honest.
384  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 09:42:55 PM
Quote from: jonald_fyookball on April 25, 2014, 07:49:18 PM
A good problem solving technique is to first solve a simpler problem.

May I suggest setting aside the issue of new coin rewards,
and simply focus on how to achieve consensus
between nodes without PoW.

It quickly becomes clear that if solvable, it is non-trivial.

The core developers stated that no one has achieved
this so far.

This is what Meni said too -- you still need PoW as
issuance mechanism.  

We are talking about a node creating a new block
and the rest of the network accepting it.

I think it may be possible with some kind of cryptographic
handshake between nodes, but my ideas on this are
vague at best.

EDIT:  If you want to simplify the problem even further, assume all nodes trust each other and are honest.



I created the Bitcoin Proof-of-Stake Project thread . . . https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=584719.msg6397403#msg6397403.
Your advice is excellent I believe regarding solving the simplest problem first.
385  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [ANNOUNCE] Proof-of-Stake for Bitcoin on: April 25, 2014, 09:14:18 PM
The problems to address as viewed by a member of the developers email list . . .

Quote
The problem with proof of stake is essentially that there is no cost to
creating a proof-of-stake. So there are two problems here:

One is that stake voters are free to vote for multiple chains, and since
only one will be the "real" chain, i.e. the one with the longest proof of
stake, the extra votes will simply go away. So there is no cost to voting
for multiple blocks. (A way to discourage this might be to use a signature
scheme where signing multiple signatures with the same key causes the key
to be revealed. But it is not clear what should be done after the fact,
since there is no consensus on which blocks exist or are 'valid' for the
proof of stake to fall back on.)

Another problem is that the stake voters are chosen 'randomly' but
deterministic ally by the content of earlier blocks. This gives a
voter to grind through blocks until he finds one which will give him
more votes in the future than he otherwise should get. Then the proof
of stake becomes a proof-of-work, but one that discourages consensus
since all voters will want to do this.

The problem is what wrecked Peercoin, which I understand is now
centralized (all blocks are signed by the developers to be valid). It is
also a problem with NXT, as of the last time any of us at
#bitcoin-wizards looked at their code.

I talk about this a bit in Section 5 of my document on ASICs and proof
of work:

  https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf


A goal of proof-of-stake is that it should be easy and cheap to create
a history, at least relative to proof-of-work. Perhaps people want this
for environmental reasons or some sort of "the people should own the
means of production" mentality. But this makes it easy to overwrite
history. As I described above, an attempt to force all participants to
participate in such fraud (thereby making it unfeasible) by, say, having
each block voted on by several random participants, doesn't work because
the random selection can always be gamed.

There have been fun conversations on #bitcoin-wizards about getting
random numbers from the sun, or cosmic radiation, or pulsars, since
these numbers would be both random and verifiable by many parties.
Certainly this would require expensive equipment for all verifying
parties, which intuitively is bad for Bitcoin because people verify
transactions for free and we want this to be as cheap and easy as
possible. (To the best of my knowledge nobody has suggested choosing
stake voters from such random numbers, though there have been many
ideas and I might've missed it. Pulsars are nice because they give us
a clock which everyone within several light years can agree on, which
is good for e.g. sharing the Bitcoin blockchain with Martians. This
is almost always a more popular discussion topic than PoS.)

It's also unclear that PoS can be equitable anyway, since selecting
voters based on "stake" seems to favor the very rich disproportionately.
386  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / AI Coin Development Diary on: April 25, 2014, 09:11:37 PM
[April  13, 2015]

On the advice of our diverse set of financial and regulatory attorneys, we are postponing the launch of AI Coin until such time as we have obtained the necessary money services business licenses in 48 States, and BitLicense or equivalent licenses in jurisdictions requiring them. To go forward without those in place would make our business plan a legal risk.

[October 22, 2014 - I changed the project name to AI Coin. Drew Hingorani is the co-founder and President, I am CTO]

The A.I. Coin project is a multi-year effort to achieve a no-proof-of-work mining implementation in an cryptocurrency that ...

Meets or beats the existing proof-of-work implementation with regard to securing the blockchain against attack.

Provides sub second response time when acknowledging transactions for certain incorporation into the blockchain, in contrast to Satoshi's Bitcoin which only promises best effort which takes more than a second to reach all nodes and takes minutes on average for the first confirmation.

Does not permit double-spending fraud attacks, whereas Satoshi's Bitcoin sometimes does, e.g. the BitUndo service.

Meets or beats the existing implementation with regard to no trusted third parties, as Satoshi's Bitcoin is evolving towards hashers' trust of a single, dominant industrial mining pool.

Preserves to the greatest possible extent, Satoshi's social contract between developers and users.

Specifies how a nomadic mint agent creates new blocks without effort, and allocates block creation rewards to secure the distributed network using conventional data security techniques.

Permits the issuance, relay and blockchain storage of microtransactions having 100x lower fees than Satoshi's Bitcoin.

Explicitly pays for for the creation, ongoing enhancement, and operation, of the enterprise-class, scalable, secure, and robust networking infrastructure that can accommodate all the world's financial transactions. In contrast, the Satoshi Bitcoin full node network consists of mostly unpaid volunteers.

Provides a multi-agent framework upon which human agents and intelligent software agents can be vetted, integrated and paid for skills delivered.

Note that the May 2013 whitepaper below describes a hard fork of bitcoin. That cannot possibly happen unless A.I. Coin is successful and subsequently convinces the Bitcoin community that a good alternative exists for the current industrial mining method. Furthermore, the current approach is not conventional proof-of-stake, rather the block rewards are used to pay for network infrastructure, developers and community support, e. g. through institutions such as the Bitcoin Foundation. It appears that there is no need to pay staking dividends to secure the network.

Whitepaper: Bitcoin Cooperative Proof-of-Stake Stephen Reed

A hard-fork reconfiguration of the peer to peer Bitcoin network is described that substitutes tamper-evident logs and proof-of-stake consensus for proof-of-work consensus. The block creation rewards and transaction fees are reallocated to establish and staff a secure financial data network capable of handling the world’s transactions with sub-second response time. The new system pays dividends to stake-offering bitcoin holders. In contrast to Satoshi Nakamoto’s mesh network consisting of competing peers, this system uses an enterprise class network that is efficient, robust, and scalable, consisting of cooperating peers. The network backbone nodes host trustless nomadic agents. Thousands of distributed full nodes are paid to replicate a singleton blockchain built upon every 10 minutes by a nomadic mint agent whose actions are verified by its peers. This arrangement enables immediate acknowledgment to an issuing node that its transaction has been accepted. Less effort means that subsidized transaction costs will be lower. Network reconfiguration enables the processing of numerous microtransactions. Stake-weighted distributed consensus is achieved when necessary with less than one-half arbitrarily faulty nodes. Important invariants of the Satoshi Social Contract between core developers and users are maintained: The reward schedule, the blockchain format, the fixed number of bitcoins, and the decentralized, trustless protocol  are untouched. The system remains a global distributed database, with additions to the database by consent of the majority, based on a set of transparent rules they follow.

GitHub: TexaiCognitiveArchitecture



stephenreed@yahoo.com
LinkedIn: stephenreed
mobile: 1-512-791-7860


Descriptive posts . . .


Project Development Approach . . .

  • Migrate the Texai cognitive architecture project to a public GitHub repository.
  • Write software agents to sandbox the Bitcoin Core program - bitcoind, demonstrating the smallest possible network.
  • Write additional software agents to complete the verification of peers, migration of responsibilities, and network operations.

Reading List, the current situation . . .


Reading List, suggested improvements to the Bitcoin network . . .


Reading List, the incumbent competition . . .


Reading List, proof-of-stake . . .


Reading List, misc altcoin ideas . . .


Reading List, global networking . . .

  • Global Networks: Engineering, Operations and Design, G. Keith Cambron

Reading List, super-peer network introduction . . .


Reading List, super-peer network service discovery . . .


Reading List, network security and fault tolerance . . .


Texai Cognitive Architecture


Developer bookmarks . . .


GitHub & SourceForge Developer bookmarks . . .
387  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 25, 2014, 08:17:47 PM
Quote from: lunarboy on April 25, 2014, 07:07:03 PM
@ slipperyslope

what charting site did you use to create that ?

Yes, It is a Google spreadsheet in their cloud. Anyone can read or copy it for their own modifications. Most every evening I get the Bitstamp closing price from Bitcoin Charts and post in the Calculations sheet. The three graphs get automatically updated. Risto inspired all that you see there.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArD8rjI3DD1WdFIzNDFMeEhVSzhwcEVXZDVzdVpGU2c
388  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: BldSwtTrs on April 25, 2014, 06:10:49 PM
In pure PoS, coins are not generated. For example Bitshares will have a fixe initial supply of 4 millions shares, and the network will to PAY transaction fees to holder by DESTROYING shares (5%/yr), the money supply will decline over time. PoS coins are truly deflationnist, Bitcoin is inflationnist despite everyone are saying (until 2140).

If you compare the features of Bitcoin vs Bitshare, you cannot come to the conclusion that the price will not be affected:
- Bitcoin increase it money supply by 10% each year
- Bitshare will decrease it money supply by 5% each year

Everything else being equal, prices will reflect that huge difference of returns.
 
You are reasoning based on a false premise: coins are not generated in PoS. Peercoin is not representative at all.

NXT doesn't generate new coins (and doesn't pay dividends).
Bitshare doesn't generate new coins AND pay dividends with the transaction fees (by destroying shares/coins which is equivalent of a shares buyback).

Please focus this conversation for my purposes. I would like to define the problem to be solved as the simplest modification to Bitcoin that enables the riddance of wasteful PoW using efficient PoS.

I desire the result to become the Bitcoin brand by virtue of recognized lowest vulnerability and broad acceptance. Within the framework of PoS, I want to keep every other aspect of Satoshi's social contract with users that binds today's Bitcoin core developers. There is more freedom with respect to mining pools, which I now believe can replace the stratum protocol with something else that has full nodes as clients and fairly pays daily bitcoin dividends at the 10% annual rate. Bitcoin core developers do not, as a whole, maintain mining pool software and there are fewer obstacles for radical change.
389  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 25, 2014, 04:46:06 PM
Quote from: liexel on April 25, 2014, 04:18:30 PM
Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on April 25, 2014, 04:06:50 PM
Quote from: rpietila on April 25, 2014, 07:37:57 AM
Just make sure you always buy low and sell high, we absolutely need more such people because the current volatility is so high (and buying low, selling high reduces it!)

I still don't get the sell high part and end hodling all the time, so please use a megaphone here with 48pt red font when it's sell time.

yes please.

I, for one, will make such a observation, it could be too low though, as was the case for the November 2013 peak. I will be combining a measure of super-exponential growth, namely days to double the price, plus a new measure of distance from the average trend line in a manner similar to rpietila.

I plan to sell via a spread of orders, about 30-40% of my stake, when and if the below graph indicates a value of +0.4, with buy-back orders placed 50% or so lower depending on the exchange's depth charts. If enough traders did this then the bubble would be lessened or have a stronger sawtooth pattern on the way up, as traders easily learn from patterns. With bitcoin, many new traders do not have the experience we do, and so the next bubble may be similar in shape to the preceding two . . .
390  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 02:43:06 PM
Quote from: rpietila on April 25, 2014, 11:53:20 AM
It does not change the price any way, other things being equal. Proof: If we assume that at present supply = demand, which means that newly mined coins must be exactly absorbed by somebody. Mining cost = price, so all of the new demand is "burnt" as expenses. In the PoS case, same amount of coins is generated, but it is doled out to existing holders, inflating the money supply. New demand must buy the coins from them. By buying the same number of coins, it is able to keep their price stable. Net difference is that previous owners get the money.

Because many miners liquidate their rewards to replace obsolete equipment and to pay power bills, I expect the net sales of daily mined bitcoins to be less under proof-of-stake. Your argument about inflating the money supply is unclear.
391  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 02:38:05 PM
Here is the most substantial response from the bitcoin developers mail list to my initiative . . .

Quote

It's not "prohibited", it simply does not work. We have no proof that it
can't work, so all the power to you trying to develop it, but bear in
mind that nobody has been able to achieve distributed consensus using
proof-of-stake, despite many claims to the contrary.

Nobody is going to tell you not to fork Bitcoin; you are perfectly free
to and it is only your own time that you'll be wasting. Indeed, it will
force you to develop your ideas precisely enough to see the sort of
problems that proof-of-stake based consensus schemes encounter.


An attacker modifying a past block would have to redo the proof-of-stake of the block and all blocks after it and catch up with and surpass the effort of honest nodes, as Satoshi wrote for proof-of-work. I need to ensure that proof-of-stake works for this.

I will move the continuing technical side of this discussion over to a new thread in the Project Development sub-forum.
392  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 25, 2014, 10:58:41 AM
Here is the latest Huobi chart at 3-day resolution to show more clearly the short-term trend reversal at the long term resistance trend line. The trendline perhaps did not predict the reversal but perhaps was a landmark so to speak for traders who routinely draw such trends on the own charts.

Clearly Huobi is leading Bitstamp lower.
393  Economy / Speculation / Re: SecondMarket Bitcoin Investment Trust Observer on: April 25, 2014, 10:51:47 AM
Quote from: njcarlos on April 25, 2014, 05:53:34 AM
They've been buying into the 1000s haven't they? God they must be taking massive losses. Wouldn't be surprised if they're the ones with these fake walls trying to inflate the depths for quick dumps.
They solicit coin off-exchange too. I have an account set up for 25 bitcion minimum sale and purchase with one of their VPs. I read somewhere the rumor that they solicit bitcoin from BitPay, whose bitcoin-accepting vendors may immediately sell bitcoin for dollars.
394  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 10:00:48 AM
Quote from: theFork on April 25, 2014, 08:32:18 AM
cough cough....PeerCoin
I will be examining PPC, NXT and whitepapers for ideas that I can implement in such a way as the result can be called Bitcoin. The difference would be the absence of wasteful Proof-of-Work, and the presence of mining rewards distributed to full nodes in proportion to the amount of bitcoin each is willing to expose to the network. Coin age is a good starting point.

I should leave alone the coinbase transaction whose output sends the reward to a single recipient and depend upon an envisioned reference peer-to-peer pool or other pool to fairly distribute daily dividends to pool members.
395  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 06:25:14 AM
Quote from: raskul on April 25, 2014, 06:14:56 AM
why is it that I get a feeling of impending doom? a - perhaps, desperation to bring in something new?

4000BTC have been dumped on bitstamp in the past few hours. Whoever it was, clearly don't have Bitcoin in their best interest list and it is sellers, like this, who too, would also have no interest in holding their coins for PoS.

Regardless of the algorithm used to create Bitcoin, we will always see would-be-stock-traders cashing out at ~whatever price they can achieve.

EDIT: the dump is more than BTC7k and it's not just on bitstamp, but across many exchanges. You are simply not going to persuade people like that to hold their coins, for any %.

Bitstamp was up earlier in the day and I felt the opposite emotion for a while. Here my analysis of the moment with a chart . . .

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.msg6385540#msg6385540
396  Economy / Speculation / Re: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) on: April 25, 2014, 06:21:11 AM
Here is the Huobi chart at 30-minute resolution. The resistance trend line is one I drew days ago - which extends back to the November 2013 peak. Note the trend reversal immediately after the Bitstamp-led rally of the preceding hours failed to punch through the trendline that any trader could draw. I suppose that technical traders, and perhaps algorithmic bots were triggered then to squeeze other traders who had long margin positions.

I will be visiting my local Robocoin ATM to get some more coin in the morning.
397  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 05:38:03 AM
Quote from: raskul on April 25, 2014, 05:14:40 AM
The only thing a PoS system in Bitcoin would do, is widen the gap.

Bitcoin Core developers share this intelligent concern, namely "the rich get richer" problem. Indeed Europe and the USA are reading an economic best seller on this topic - that I have downloaded from a tip on this forum to my kindle.

This gets quickly into a defense of the freedom of capital to seek its wisest custodian, including the dumb wisdom of never selling an income-producing asset.

I concede your point utterly, claiming without proof, that the political process will evolve to fairly mitigate this problem. It is bigger than even Bitcoin and will be solved or otherwise dealt with by various jurisdictions worldwide in the fullness of time.

Meanwhile, I for one, favor the concentration of great wealth in the hands of those saved it up and boldly spend it to advance our civilization as they see fit - even to Mars.
398  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 05:26:06 AM
Quote from: raskul on April 25, 2014, 04:34:23 AM
. . . for a small miner like myself, watching who is top of the pile. If you introduce PoS into Bitcoin, then you will see value plummet, Bitcoin accumulation lifespan shortened and interest lost.

It's not a good idea, whatsoever.

Lets talk as miners then, as my very first posts on this forum concerned mining. Here is a photo of one of my three mining rigs. This open design rig has 6 x 5770 cards that hash at a total 0.98 MH/s performing altcoin scrypt-mining for renters. They pay me in bitcoin, which indeed subtracts from the altcoin economy and adds to our Bitcoin economy. These cards despite their age, mined tens of bitcoins for me back when BTCGuild was just getting started. I abandoned mining when SHA-256 ASICs arrived to begin the exponentially soaring difficulty that continues to this day. I did not then, and will not now pre-order ASIC rigs whose return on investment is so uncertain. I will migrate the litecoin-compatible scrypt-mining rigs to Vertcoin-compatible scrypt-N when scrypt-ASICS arrive this year. I will keep running those loved rigs for a long time when I move them to Colorado to heat my mountain home.



I ask you, as a small scale bitcoin miner, have you run the numbers to determine whether you would be better off simply holding bitcoin instead spending cash on  ASIC rigs?

But I think your main objection is belief that bitcoin values will drop if PoS is introduced into Bitcoin. In the best possible world, PoS adds great value to bitcoin as less of daily mining reward gets sold to pay for power and new rigs. Holders are motivated not to sell and that lifts prices. Interest will heighten, especially when 401-K investment funds observe that not only does bitcoin appreciate, it also pays high dividends.
399  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 04:25:10 AM
Quote from: Siegfried on April 25, 2014, 04:10:38 AM
I find it ironic that Peter is arguing so strongly in favor of the seemingly inferior PoW system, when he is the one who recently proposed the perfect solution for shifting from one blockchain to another.

The adoption of Bitcoin is apparently mathematically chaotic in the sense that certain small changes to the present situation lead to large and unexpected consequences. There is simply no precedent for Bitcoin, and therefore we depend upon argued imagination.
400  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Annual 10% bitcoin dividends if mining were Proof-of-Stake on: April 25, 2014, 03:56:13 AM
Quote from: wachtwoord on April 25, 2014, 03:23:21 AM
You can always create and altcoin with the same addresses as Bitcoin and with the same distribution of existing Bitcoins over those addresses. Than everyone can choose which Bitcoin to use (or both). I would personally feel safer using both concurrently than to change the existing social contract of the original Bitcoin. When the first change is made, the discussion for the 21M limit will surely start as well ....

I believe that is the spin-out proposed by Peter_R. While there is any chance of retaining the Bitcoin brand and its connected customers, I will work entirely in the framework proposed by Satoshi who allowed for changes via a consensus of full node miners. There are about 8300 of those today, and a million wallets at Blockchain.info.

In a possible world a couple of years from now, there is a peer-reviewed and invulnerable Proof-of-Stake version of Bitcoin Core - not yet deployed but running great on a large scale Bitcoin testnet. The sales pitch to Blockchain.info is simple. Blockchain.info arranges to lease m3.large instances from Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud that support Bitcoin Proof-of-Stake Bitcoin Core full node instances for an online wallet. Blockchain.info makes an offer to its million customers to pay a minimum of annual 10% bitcoin dividends to each online wallet that chooses Proof-of-Stake on the condition that at least 50,000 enroll. Blockchain.info keeps a fee of 2% of the earned rewards.

50,000 low-latency, well-connected full nodes on the new Proof-of-Stake version easily outvote 8,300 full nodes on the old Proof-of-Work version and on the pre-announced day, the blockchain forks. Ordinary bitcoin users are unaffected. Suppose at that time bitcoin is valued at $10,000. The daily mining reward is 3,600 bitcoin divided among the 50,000 Blockchain.info enrolled wallets. Blockchain.info's daily commission is $720,000 from which they pay for the Amazon instances at $72,000 daily, a gross profit margin of 90%. The deal is great for the 50,000 enrollees who get daily dividends each of bitcoin worth on average $705. Of course these numbers are for the early adopters. Once the remainder of the million online wallets enroll, the average daily dividends drop by a factor of 20 yielding a daily average dividend of $35 dollars.

From a simplified, possible world business case such as this example, it is clear to me that a very large opportunity exists to disrupt the disrupter. The challenge is to create an invulnerable and broadly acceptable Bitcoin Core Proof-of-Stake.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!