To be honest, this is why I don't go on IRC - these responses are rushed and barely intelligible. Sybil attacks are not possible. Botes cannot be forged because the top K votes are used. and then we have In that sense vote rigging can only prevent ZT confirmations. Not Harm. However the vote rigging odds are < 2%. So on the one hand he says you cannot rig votes, and then just below he gives a constant probability of rigging, which is what all these systems eventually come down to. A longer chain can never become valid since the locks remain the blocks will never be accepted. This implies that transaction locks persist forever, but this is obviously not the case, since RAM is limited. He states IF anyone could do vote rigging with tons of resources wasted all you could achieve is stopping ZeroTime transactions, thus the system waits for the default 1 confirmation. What else do you need? There is no incentive to do harm as you can't do harm. Stopping ZT is not a harm scenario just something that is less optimal since our confirmations already take a maximum of 1.5 minutes on avg. People like you heavily misinterpret how a system like this should or could work. |
|
|
|
Oh, please. Strikingly? Won't even bother responding.
Fair enough. For anyone else wondering what I mean by strikingly, here are some excerpts from the dash paper: In this paper we will introduce the masternode network as observer network, utilising a distributed consensus and locking algorithm “TX locking” Utilizing this code, we can make a deterministic list of the Masternodes that will act as the authority for the transaction lock. These will be the same nodes across the network and they will vote on the validity of the transaction lock in question https://www.dashpay.io/instantx/So, we have the same transaction locking idea, a voting system for the consensus and the idea of different classes of nodes which perform this work. For the record, instantx has exactly the same problems as zero time - sybil attack. The basic idea is that the cost of impersonating multiple different nodes is cheap / constant and once you have many such nodes at your disposal, the attack costs zero resources. The only proven solution to sybil attack is POW. John on sybil attacks regarding ZeroTime: https://talk.vanillacoin.net/topic/193/john-connor-irc-quotesIt may be possible to do it on InstantX, but you won't do it here. Also please don't compare paid masternodes to random super peers. ZeroTime is fully decentralized. Please note that the full code is available on GitHub, before trying to act professional and pasting the same attack vector that 10 people did before you (and which obviously John knows about also), do a research. Audit the code and give out your official review. |
|
|
|
You guys are aware of Dash's InstantX? Which also 'solved' this problem this problem ages ago (in a strikingly similar way, I might add).
For the record the quotes around 'solved' imply that it isn't at all solved.
Oh, please. Strikingly? Won't even bother responding. |
|
|
|
|
Bounty no longer available, ZeroTime final code is up on github and will soon be deployed in a public release. Locking the thread.
|
|
|
|
Good idea, hope more people will take part  |
|
|
|
Haha, nice. I'm also waiting for that ninja |
|
|
|
|
@TPTB_need_war full ZeroTime code is up on VNL github and the public release is around the corner. From what John talked about on IRC yesterday, non of the issues pointed out were relevant and everything has a solution in the code even if it's not detailed in the whitepaper.
Keep writing your whitepaper, which you couldn't solve in 2 years while he pushes the full code to the live network.
|
|
|
|
Hey, nice work! I would happily add it to the op if you don't mind. |
|
|
|
|
People like smooth and AnonyMint (TPTB) will probably go very silent after the live release of ZeroTime. People attacked the solution according to the whitepaper which is only a brief explanation on what the final code holds. They expect full explanations on paper instead of a perfect and stable code.
Also note that TPTB (AnonyMint) magically got enlightened on how he would solve zero confirmation transactions after reading through John's whitepaper while he suffered with his own solutions for like a year or 2. He got called out on it and no response.
People fear John's code, which anyone can review now and is fully available on GitHub. The public and live release will follow soon.
|
|
|
|
|
Seems John has already started uploading some commits regarding Dark++, I'm excited to find out what the final feature description will be.
ZeroTime should be complete soon, we will have the perfect crypto here soon. Fast, privacy focused and FPGA mineable.
|
|
|
|
I am trying to do too much often going 18 hours nonstop day after day, week after week, so perhaps there will be effects from that. You try it sometime. Someone asked me to evaluate VNL. I would have never looked. Once I invest effort, I typically need to follow through. Also since zerotime is a direct competitor to what I am working on, I became very curious to know if he has something better or equivalent.
In any case, you will know when the white papers are released whether I am legit or not. I will go quiet. Good luck again.
So for months you could not solve your own problems regarding the lightning network and after the whitepaper of ZT got released you had a bright moment and it answered all remaining questions? Thats the way the cookie crumbles I've had similar, some issue I've tried to solve over a long period of time, get nowhere. Decide to take a break from it and work on some other stuff instead for a while, then one day you read something/see something thats not even relevant, but it inspires a solution and BAM, problem solved. This isn't something that's not relevant to what he tried to code  |
|
|
|
I too have looked at the the paper in more detail as it seems to be a hot topic and I concur TPTB's statements.
It's wide open to various gaming and DoS attack vectors as stated by him. Mainly due to there being no cost penalty at all for an attacker to perform these malicious activities.
Some kind of burn would be the simplest fix as suggested in this thread, with compensation of some kind for the nodes whose votes are accepted.
I would also say the same to you, you're a known person on this forum and have had your own project with focused discussion of your IRC so I ask of you really want to ask these questions to someone who can give a real answer. https://kiwiirc.com/client/irc.freenode.net/#VanillacoinIf you're reasonable I think he is willing to answer questions you have, it would be great for all of us, investors, Fudders, hyper to get to the bottom of this, cause a lot of accusations are being pointed at zero time and it's a massively important issue. Please take the time as many did with your project to ask questions on IRC. I think it's the fair thing to do. Attacks here at this point are more like slander than genuine efforts to ask the actual person you need to. you suffered the same in your project I should expect you understand how destructive that is. If he absolutely doesn't want to post here, why don't you ask him to write up a response and post it here on his behalf? You realize that all these people criticizing aren't just some random newbies but people who are all very knowledgeable about cryptocurrency in general and have been involved in it for many years now, right? This needs a debate, otherwise we will be bouncing around on this forever. And the only ones who can debate are the ones who 'think' they know the problems with zero time... This is almost the perfect forum for a debate though. IRC not so much imo. Is there any particular reason he won't post here? I'd really like to her his responses personally. You really think that for a debate a forum is just as well suited where you have to push reply to write up a comment and push post afterwards while refreshing the page waiting for an answer compared to a live chat client?  |
|
|
|
Apologies to harp on this thread, but it would be sneaky if I added this as an edit to a prior post. Zerotime is a very significant claim. When you make bold claims that have the potential to seriously challenge Bitcoin, you will be held to a higher standard of scholarly proof. Indeed the necessary proofs can be explained with math, computer science, and networking research. Einstein said you don't really know something until you can explain it to a n00b. The only ways I know of to squelch DoS and Sybil attacks are: - Participant expends resources.
- Participant must have a reputation.
- Participant performance can be measured.
I already stated that I don't know how to do #3 for his proposed lock protocol, because there is no verified correct vote on a lock. Disagreement isn't a verified crime in this protocol. I already stated that I don't know how to do #1 for his protocol, because transaction fees can't be taken in the lock stalemate case where Sybil attack applies. Others suggested burning resources (I assume the voting nodes) and I responded saying which nodes would participate in voting if they must burn resources? If instead you require every transaction to burn or include a proof-of-work hash or fee, then the innocent spender is penalized by any lock stalemate. So that leaves us with reputation. But again how do we measure performance in order to assign reputation? And then there are other problems with reputation. There is a reason that solving the Byzantine Generals Problem remained unsolved until Satoshi invented proof-of-work. The problem is essentially that there is no reference point, because either value is correct and incorrect at the same time (e.g. lock or not lock) because we can't prove the network is reliable. It is as if John isn't aware of how significant Satoshi's accomplishment was. Or somehow John thinks he has a clever improvement, but hasn't yet proven it to us. Btw, I think I have a solution of how to achieve zerotime. But I do it an entirely different way and my solution doesn't require all peers to see all transactions, so even if John fixes his, I've still got him beat (assuming my white paper comes together which is not finished yet). Prove everyone you really aren't scared of Johns Knowledge compared to yours and go on irc, cut and paste this post and the come back and give us his answer. Otherwise you are simply wasting everyone's time.. All that effort to post this, it will take a second to go there and ask....Bulshit is called until you do. Have to agree with this. You are attacking John's solution while you are 100% sure that he won't post here. Debate him on IRC, in a live manner (this forum isn't suited for a debate) and we can post the irc logs on pastebin. |
|
|
|
A "logical reason" would be people wanting to stay the hell away from an anonymous developer who's few public actions include ripping off Bitcoin's source code, bugs and all, stripping off the attributions, reformatting it, and passing it off as "built entirely from scratch". https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151160.msg12128046#msg12128046Wake up people. It's way too easy for scumbags to operate and to scam in this environment, where people throw money at anything that claims to solve the world with no due diligence. Be more discriminating. Your efforts are starting to look depressing, I stopped commenting in your shitcoins thread after 24 hours because trolling is just not for me, but it seems you can cope with being a troll. Or, perhaps, you were trolling and I am not. Look at the code. You gave John a negative trust rating on BCT, and I quote: "at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code" You know that Bitcoin had no POS code in it to begin with? You know that it's not a lightly edited code to begin with? You can call it whatever you want, but this negative trust rating is complete trolling. There is a link to a reference there. The reference cites specific sections of code, which are, at best, lightly edited (but mostly just reformatted). I never claimed, nor do I claim that the entirety of VNL is copied from Bitcoin or Peercoin or anywhere else, but portions of it certainly are, and are both missing the required (and ethical) attributions and also is misrepresented as "built from scratch in it's entirety" (emphasis added here). If after reading this you believe my trust is inaccurate in some specific factual way let me know and I will consider modifying it. Indeed I will modify it if you make valid points and I find them credible. It is not trolling, it is factual, and it is relevant. "at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code" This was your comment with the negative trust rating. Read it again. Stop fabricating explanations on your trolling when someone points it out. I modified the negative trust rating to clarify that significant portions of the code are ripped off from Bitcoin, and not the whole thing. It still points to the reference page where additional supporting details and evidence are posted. Thank you for pointing how the manner in which it was previously (though unintentionally) unclear. So now that you have seen the huge bias that you have versus the project, read the whole trust rating again and delete it. |
|
|
|
I really couldn't care less about missing mining Dash. I've done fine with mining other coins, and crypto constant trolling on this forum is all a hobby to me anyway.
FTFY. And of course i tried really hard not to laugh Of course, what you refer to derisively as "trolling" because it happens to threaten your bag, I refer to as calling out bullshit, scams, fraud, and rip-offs. Aside from the characterization, that is indeed a hobby of mine. No. You feel, that you are threatened by ''my bag''  and that you have to do something about it. ROFL. No. I don't worry about all of this ape-shit trolling of yours.
You didn't call it a bullshit before, when it didn't have any attention nor market cap (which in cryptoland is quite decent).
Cutting your self-called competitor's heads to feel taller is what your hobby is.
I can't even read that. Sorry. He's saying that he doesn't worry about your trolling [about instamines] because you never trolled about it until it had attention and market cap. You're hobby is just to 'cut of the heads of your competitors to feel smaller' i.e. try to reduce their market cap to raise your own. Well okay. The reality is that I never paid any real attention at all to Dash until it did the whole rename/takeover thing with dashcoin. That is a fact. I was aware of its existence, aware that it used a masternode concept that I don't like at a technical level, but that's all. Only after drk->dash/dashcoin did I even start looking into it and find out about the instamine, etc. It had zero to do with marketcap. I don't even know what its market cap was then compared to now (or before). From researching it, you only 'pay real attention' when their value goes up or your value goes down. Why else? Case in point on Dash, the rebrand caused a big price surge, you and the 'gang' then headed straight for the Dash threads. I explained to you how, when, and why I became interested. You can ignore what I said and make up your own reasons if you like. I can't help you. Yes and excuse me if I don't take you on your (constantly changing) word Smooth, when we have 1000s of posts of you attacking that goes up and down in waves in direct correlation to the market cap / volume of your largest competitors (or in many cases just with a big XMR price change). Honestly, I never seen such a toxic community as XMR's. Even though I'm not invested into DASH and have my opinion on the way things were handled I constantly read the BCT discussion and see them trolling there. Same goes for the VNL topic, out of the few trolls we had so far, atleast 80% were from the XMR topic. |
|
|
|
Also I read today that John has been caught turning the mining off and on, thus the test net is not a unprotected P2P network where the adversary can apply all his potential powers.
That was the live network, people agreed on it, it was needed for testing purposes. TestNet is untouched since deployed. Either read over stuff properly or don't comment on them at all.
All we asked was for him to explain how he would handle Sybil and DoS attacks
You would probably know by now that John isn't here to answer the question. Jump on IRC (#vanillacoin) or send him a message through BM. |
|
|
|
A "logical reason" would be people wanting to stay the hell away from an anonymous developer who's few public actions include ripping off Bitcoin's source code, bugs and all, stripping off the attributions, reformatting it, and passing it off as "built entirely from scratch". https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151160.msg12128046#msg12128046Wake up people. It's way too easy for scumbags to operate and to scam in this environment, where people throw money at anything that claims to solve the world with no due diligence. Be more discriminating. Your efforts are starting to look depressing, I stopped commenting in your shitcoins thread after 24 hours because trolling is just not for me, but it seems you can cope with being a troll. Or, perhaps, you were trolling and I am not. Look at the code. You gave John a negative trust rating on BCT, and I quote: "at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code" You know that Bitcoin had no POS code in it to begin with? You know that it's not a lightly edited code to begin with? You can call it whatever you want, but this negative trust rating is complete trolling. There is a link to a reference there. The reference cites specific sections of code, which are, at best, lightly edited (but mostly just reformatted). I never claimed, nor do I claim that the entirety of VNL is copied from Bitcoin or Peercoin or anywhere else, but portions of it certainly are, and are both missing the required (and ethical) attributions and also is misrepresented as "built from scratch in it's entirety" (emphasis added here). If after reading this you believe my trust is inaccurate in some specific factual way let me know and I will consider modifying it. Indeed I will modify it if you make valid points and I find them credible. It is not trolling, it is factual, and it is relevant. "at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code" This was your comment with the negative trust rating. Read it again. Stop fabricating explanations on your trolling when someone points it out. |
|
|
|
A "logical reason" would be people wanting to stay the hell away from an anonymous developer who's few public actions include ripping off Bitcoin's source code, bugs and all, stripping off the attributions, reformatting it, and passing it off as "built entirely from scratch". https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1151160.msg12128046#msg12128046Wake up people. It's way too easy for scumbags to operate and to scam in this environment, where people throw money at anything that claims to solve the world with no due diligence. Be more discriminating. Your efforts are starting to look depressing, I stopped commenting in your shitcoins thread after 24 hours because trolling is just not for me, but it seems you can cope with being a troll. Or, perhaps, you were trolling and I am not. Look at the code. You gave John a negative trust rating on BCT, and I quote: "at best, lightly-edited Bitcoin code" You know that Bitcoin had no POS code in it to begin with? You know that it's not a lightly edited code to begin with? You can call it whatever you want, but this negative trust rating is complete trolling. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
