Bitcoin Forum
July 02, 2022, 11:41:19 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 23.0 [Torrent]
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / [pre-ANN] Splash: Ripple without the pre-mine on: December 15, 2013, 10:40:32 PM
(...or "pre-non-mine", or whatever it should be called exactly).

EDIT 2014-05-04: I'm throwing this open to the community, since I have to concede large software development defeats me. I'm recommending Peter R's "spin-off" concept as the best style for Splash, but anyone who wants to do it my originally intended way is welcome too. See message immediately following this one for my grand announcement putting the Splash names / slogans up for grabs.

(original message resumes here...)

I'm currently developing a fork of Ripple which may be of interest to readers of the alts section of the forum. I call it "Splash: Ripple without the pre-mine".

There's been a lot of talk recently about possible forks of Ripple - in particular, is it possible to do without the built-in ripples (XRP), and have only IOUs with counterparties, denominated in external currencies? Well, maybe that's possible, and if someone wants to have a go, it should be an interesting experiment. But for myself, I quite like the existence of XRP. It has useful path-shortening and anti-spam functionality, which would be difficult to achieve with only externally-defined IOUs. And it's nice to have something counterparty-free in the system.

The thing I don't like about Ripple's XRP, though - and I know I'm not alone in this! - is that it's "pre-[non-]mined": created by software fiat in one big bang at the start, and allocated to accounts controlled entirely by RippleLabs. RippleLabs then starts behaving something like a central banker, introducing it into circulation as it sees fit. All users must play guessing games about just how fast or slow they'll be in doing this.

It would be so much more in keeping with our community's traditions if XRP could instead come into existence gradually, by proof of work mining, asymptoting towards a ceiling quantity on a fixed schedule everyone knows in advance - i.e. like Bitcoin.

The Ripple folks have stated that their consensus algorithm is not compatible with proof of work. Well, I'll take their word for it - and in Splash I'm leaving the Ripple consensus algorithm alone: I'm not trying to introduce proof of work there.

The exciting news is: I've found a way to introduce proof of work at transaction level, rather than ledger (block) level. Thus, barring any unexpected hitches in the development process, I hope to unleash Splash on the world soon.

Splash will be just like Ripple in its core user functionality - it'll have both a built-in pure cryptocurrency ("splashes", XSP), and the ability to manage IOUs with counterparties, denominated in other, external currencies. All the Ripple trading and order book features will be present unchanged. The difference will be that no XSP will exist initially. All XSP will be born by decentralized, anonymous miners submitting a special kind of transaction to the network: one with proof of work embedded in its syntax, which, when accepted by the Splash consensus algorithm into a ledger, causes new XSP to be born at whatever address the miner chooses.

I'm hoping to launch around late February 2014. In the meantime, I've put a Splash page on the wiki: (still very introductory for now). I'd be delighted if any Ripple gateway folk would be interested in running a Splash gateway too. For example, perhaps the good folks at DividendRippler ( might like to run a "DividendSplasher" too?

This is, as I say in the title, not so much an ANN as a pre-ANN. I hope to say more as development progresses, either here or on the above wiki page (or both). Wish me luck!
2  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Proof of burn - a potential alternative to proof of work and proof of stake on: December 17, 2012, 12:32:56 AM
Readers of this section of the forum may be interested in my proposal for a new core mining protocol for cryptocurrency, "proof of burn" - a potential alternative to proof of work and proof of stake (though perhaps closer in spirit to the latter), with many interesting properties and economic consequences.

Comments and feedback welcome.
3  Bitcoin / Press / 2012-10-26 Generic Viagra Industry Is Pro-Choice In Payments on: October 26, 2012, 05:49:46 PM
EDIT: merged into Stephen Gornick's similar thread. (I can't delete my own topic starting message - moderators please delete.)

Jon Matonis discusses payment processors' attack on merchants who step outside the sandbox of transaction types the processors consider legitimate. He points out something also pointed out by Peter Surda at the recent London Bitcoin conference: all this effort at control only increases the overall awkwardness to merchants of using these traditional payment channels, and can be expected to accelerate the adoption of methods to route around them, such as Bitcoin.

(Peter was talking about AML/KYC efforts increasing the transaction costs of using the banking system, not "transaction type monitoring" efforts doing the same to the payment processor network, but the punchline is the same in both cases: the comparative advantage of Bitcoin is improved.)
4  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Is the blockchain available somewhere as one giant JSON object? on: August 02, 2012, 03:30:59 AM
Hello folks... is the blockchain available somewhere as one giant JSON object? I'd like to try my hand at some analysis of its structure (bitcoin days destroyed, lengths of txout/in/out/in chains, that sort of thing), and the Satoshi client's Berkeley DB format is utterly beyond me.
5  Other / Beginners & Help / Proof of stake, done right, can maybe, just maybe, eliminate even >>50% attacks! on: May 21, 2012, 05:57:39 PM
(new non-newbie location for this post:
Pages: [1]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!