Well done!

Testing with the dog before we do the real thing, where have I heard that before...





We are in good company.

brilliantly summarized by stonehedge.

Thanks.


merge-mining is only possible within the same hashing algorithm, in our case SpreadX11 only.

I was thinking that in the future, since spreadcoin is solo-mineable and pretty hard to mine, we can introduce merge mining that will allow other future coins (that are based on SpreadX11) to be merge-mineable with eachother (or atleast with Spreadcoin).
This will give solo-miners a little bit more income possibilities.

There will be a special solo-miner software that will bring all SpreadX11 coins together, facilitating merge-solo-mining.

Since spreadcoin can be considered a think tank, when we have a nice idea that can't make it into spreadcoin (for whatever reason), why not create an additional coin, and make it merge-mineable with spreadcoin?
This is all just speculation, but a possible path we could walk. (Just opening doors and windows here....)

VanGen Competition is definitely going to happen. But we will already have a servicenode network by then.

I left the round2 masternode client unchanged.
Only corrected master and newwallet.

I just realized there is sometimes a problem with the wallet (both old and new) and how it connects to the 9 Fallback-Nodes.
Seems to be a problem that has been here since atleast when Spreadcoin started over a year ago.

I fixed it, both in the master and newwallet branch, and the sourcecode is updated.

https://github.com/spreadcoin/spreadcoin/commit/2d96865d6bd4faa0a22318989bccb9186fd2c60e
https://github.com/spreadcoin/spreadcoin/commit/50122c5b299705407074dcc96efcf66b4a571c02

Give me a few hours to also recompile all the wallets and then the Connectivity with Fallback-Nodes will work much better than it used to.
So that's why we still get some people complaining about no block source. But this is now a thing of the past.

(What did I do? I Reduced waiting time for considering Fallback-nodes to 20 sec (instead of 60 sec),
plus there was an error in the condition that triggers Fallback-nodes....
if addrman.size()==0 doesn't make sense because sometimes the program will even consider 127.0.0.1 (localhost connection with itself) an address (and sometimes even [:::] - whatever it thinks that is), and then addrman.size() is already  = 1 or 2 and the condition to connect with the Fallback-Nodes will never be met, that's why I changed it to addrman.size<=2)

in your own words:


Maybe I read you wrong here.

This is centralized talk, it's not up to you or me to decide what other people care about.

This is a no-go!


I think we are going to need servicenodes (that have the ability to access supervised bitcoin nodes) to make this work.
Not only because this will obviously add value to SPR, but because it will help us creates schemes ("pattern codes") that are not required to be debased in SPR, but can also use BTC (etc) in their program logic.

I see, I didn't even think about the legal problems yet.
Good thing we have you in our team.

"Find Satoshi Nakamoto" is certainly a great idea

but we can't make it work as it is.

This all ties back into what the servicenode API should help people accomplish

Creating schemes of this sort

1) setup a goal with a few rules
2) let the wallet scan the code for logical errors, send to other nodes
3) if miners validation also says "ok" embed this as "pattern code" into the blockchain
4) use this to instruct servicenodes that will "run the scheme"
5) $$$

the one who creates "pattern code" isn't even required to be a servicenode operator.

he/she will only be required to pay a certain fee (that will go to the servicenodes), maybe depending on how complex the "pattern code" is.

BTW, I call it "pattern code" because of that PDF article called "A Pattern Language for Overlay Networks in Peer-to-Peer Systems."

it's all about patterns for sure

Changing block reward to finance this scheme is when decentralization ends.

Everything else I agree with. And it really is an excellent PR opportunity for spreadcoin. ("Find Satoshi Nakamoto" sounds phenomenal)  

We can make this work once we have something similar like a crowdfunding mechanism in spreadcoin.
We absolutely need to make all this work mathematically, no bookies, no middlemen, no nothing. Not even the van gen wallet will be mandatory. (In anticipation that people will start creating optimized versions for sure)

It needs to work something like this:

• 1) Everyone who wants to participate should not have any control over the 500 SPR anymore. He can't even take the money back.
  He can just prove later that he has control over the address he used to pay the 500 SPR.
• 2) Everybody will have to pay that amount into the same SPR address, called the jackpot address, so that everybody can see at all times how big the jackpot is at the moment. (this will help get more people on board the juicier the jackpot looks)
  Preferably NO human being is in control of this jackpot address. (So this must be some sort of scripted address whose private key is never known to anybody (its creation was merely triggered by a dev), and this scripted address somehow waits for somekind of event to be triggered.   )
• 3) There is some kind of fancy mechanism that allows to access the money in the jackpot address by using a privatekey (for an address that starts with SatoshiNakamoto) combined with the privatekey for the pay-in-address that proves you payed 500 SPR into the jackpot.

Point 2) and 3) is the hard part. This is not trivial.

This is the only way this would work in a decentralized trustless way, and the cost to set this up is NOT virtually nil.
I don't even know if mechanisms for 2) and 3) exist at the moment?  

This would require extending the blockchain's script language if I am not mistaken. Or "Servicenodes", which is the answer to all questions anyway. lol

That we want to decentralize everything.
We can't have people creating funds etc... and even if, we would need to give other people (especially miners) the ability to disagree with all that and not comply if they don't want to partake in those projects.
We want competition enabled at every step in the game.

Listen, I am not even sure about this 30% reward for SNs , this will need a lot of thinking before we are sure we are not going against the very principles we stand for.

Just an idea, but what if we let this % of mining reward fluctuate aswell?

We haven't even started yet, this will get very interesting as we move forward.

Yeah, every game is just a set of rules,
but some games have an element of random chance (e.g. dice) others don't.

Plus, some games require some form of accounting, so that people can play for money without being able to cheat.

If we could one day create a servicenode API where everyone with a servicenode can create his own "games" simply by defining the game and accounting rules,
well that would be great.  

Yes, all this can be done now already.

But all this is not enforceable, so if you would actually want to make this scheme work, you would need to adjust the whole protocol and blockchain to make it run in a "crypto" way.
(meaning those who look for the SatoshiNakamoto-Address are then like "the miners" of this new blockchain, solving Address-Finding-Problems while they secure the blockchain.)


Alternative: wait for the servicenode API sometime in the far future, where you can simply create and run your plot as part of the overlay network as proposed by e1ghtspace.

Please start a separate thread in the spreadcointalk forum.

Projectname "Find Satoshi nakamoto",

and I will create a separate spreadcoin clone to test this idea.
If successful we can make such sideproject coins merge-mineable with spreadcoin.

I generally like your idea, but it needs some more brainstorming.

I think this would be a good case for a separate testing round (separate blockchain with adjustment to experiment what it would take to run "this lottery" - I know it's the wrong word.)...
... and if successful we can create the "find satoshi nakamoto" - coin. But I would never advocate to put all this into spreadcoin.
Taking 30% Mining reward from spreadcoin is reserved for servicenodes, and nothing else. We can't just start subsidising every side project by taking from the miners.
Upcoming Servicenodes are the only exception to that rule.

I am still preparing everything for the upcoming testnet storm, please stay tuned everybody.

To have any validity, everything must be verified thru the blockchain and nothing else. (auto-import is just a simple qt-wallet function)

Look at it as if all possible addresses already exist somewhere in the "ether"...

It's not about if an address has been created (they don't have creation dates), but if someone has knowledge about the privatekey of that address.

You can't really know if (or when) someone knows a specific privatekey (maybe they lie or collaborate with someone else who is the real owner),
you can only know with 100% certainty if you yourself know the privatekey or not, and when exactly you aquired it.

Well, what you generally can do is demand that people make a payment to themselves from a certain SPR address back to the same SPR address, this can be a good way to prove possession of an address.

But I guess what I am saying is, that with crypto you can never really be sure that a certain user has control over a certain address.


Somekind of decentralized crowdfunding address where all payed in money is held, until some specific event happens.

hm, I need to do some thinking...

There is no reliable way to tie a wallet to a certain address.

To the blockchain, wallets and addresses don't even really exist. (only their derived signatures or publickeys do)