Fomo3D 简介及操作教程
官方游戏界面https://exitscam.me/6856
前言：如果智能合约代码设计的无缝可击，那么这就是一个没庄的 zijinpan 游
戏，韭菜们完全不用担心被收割不用担心官方跑路。目前由于以太坊太卡，潜力
完全没发挥出来。个人觉得它会超越加密猫，成为一个现象级的应用，第一轮会
持续几个月甚至一年。此游戏一出，感觉吊打 3m，完全没玩其他盘的兴趣。前
期玩家的 key 光靠分红就会赚很多。但是不可能结束不了，后期 key 的价格很
贵，比如到 1eth 一个 key，风险收益比让玩家不敢再玩下去，游戏就结束了。
最牛逼的是一般这种游戏原本是最后一个玩家买单，fomo3D 却是最后一个玩
家能把资金池所有 ETH 都收了，非常有趣的博弈。
一、前期准备工作
1、安装Google 浏览器
2 、 下 载 metamask 钱 包 插 件 ，
https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/releases
选择最上面的 4.8.0.zip，然后解压到文件夹

3、在谷歌浏览器输入 chrome://extensions 进入扩展页面，将下
载的文件拖到这个扩展页面进行安装或者选择开发者模式，然后点击
加载已解压的扩展程序。安装完之后会在右上角生成一个新的狐狸头小
图标，类似如图所示。

4、点击 MetaMask 的狐狸头图标，安装后第一次使用时会出一些提
示，一直点接受，如图所示。

5、进入钱包登录界面，这里用户有两种选择，一种是创建一个新的
DEN（DEN 是在 MetaMask 用密码加密存储的钱包），另一种是导
入已经存在的 DEN。这里先以创建为例，在上面的两个密码输入框
中输入一密码， 点击图中 “CREATE” 图标， 就创建了一个
MetaMask 钱包。MetaMask 会为用户创建 12 个英文助记词，一
定要保存好这些助记词，一定要保存好这些助记词，一定要保存好这些
助记词，在其他钱包导入这个新创建的账户的时候有可能需要这些助记
词。保存好这些助记词之后，点击下面的按钮，进入钱包页面，
如图所示。最后就可进行充币了。

二、游戏简单操作方式
1、用装有 metamask 的 Google 浏览器打开官方游戏界面。
http://exitscam.me/6856  （教程编写不易，请尽可能用此链接注
册多多给予支持）。
2、游戏页面上会显示当前局奖金池累计的 eth 数量，当前每个 key
的购买价格，游戏的倒计时间等
3、各个按钮的解释如下。
4、以PC 电脑端操作为例，选择要购买的 key的数量（1,2,5,10,100）
后，点击“Send ETH”按钮，自动弹出 MetaMask 钱包的确认页面
5、点击“SUBMIT”后耐心等待此次交易被以太坊矿工确认。
6、买入key 后就坐等系统分红，持有key 的玩家会从系统每一笔
Key 的订单中获得收益。
7、只要有人买入 key，游戏倒计时间便会被重置。
8、选准时机做最后一个买入 key 的玩家，游戏倒计完毕，从而赢取
大奖（奖金池里 48%的 eth）


三、游戏细节介绍
fomo3D 是一款部署在以太坊网络上的乐透游戏类（Dapp）。
游戏相关的智能合约代码完全公开，游戏开发人员对游戏没有修改和
作弊的权限。
这款 DAPP 是完全去中心化的，一直可以运行直到以太坊网络
挂掉。无论奖金池里的资金有多么诱人，系统只会按照智能合约写定
的规则来进行分配。
游戏规则：
1、一局游戏开始,系统自动按 24 小时开始倒计时。
2、玩家可以花eth 买入一个或者多个key，key 就是分红权,key 越
多，得到的分红越多。
3、只要有人成功购入 key 时，游戏倒计时便会被重置，即重新从 24
小时开始倒计时。
4、玩家购买 key 所花费的 eth 会充入奖金池，之前买入过 key 的玩
家会从奖金池获得分红。
5、随着游戏的进行，key 的价格会越来越高，购买一个key 所需的
eth 会变多。
6、没人购买 key 游戏倒计时便不会被重置，24 小时倒数完毕，游戏
结束。
7、游戏结束，最后一个购买key 的玩家为最终获胜者，其赢得资金
池里 48%的 ETH。
8、资金池里的 ETH 48%分配给获胜者， 2%分配给社区基金会，剩
余的 50%按照四种团队模式进行分配
四、游戏运行逻辑
1、为什么要买入key？
买入key 意味着拥有了分红权，拥有的 key 越多，能从奖金池获得
的分红就越多。
新人不间断分红不间断,分红可以随时提取。
2、怎么保证后来者甘心花高价买 key?
当 key 的价格高到咂舌时，还会有人买入 key 吗？
按照系统规则，当无人购买 Key，游戏时间倒计完毕，奖金池里剩余
的资金会全部归最后一个购买key 的玩家所有。
资金池剩余的资金是一个很可观的数字，这会刺激胆大的玩家搏一把。
3、游戏什么情况下结束？
当 key 的价格高到一定程度，再也没有人愿意买入 key 时，游戏倒
计时便也不会被重置了。
24 小时倒计时完毕，游戏结束，最后一个购买 key 的玩家为获胜者，
会赢得 48%的 eth。
获胜者拿走48%的ETH,社区基金拿走2%,剩余的50%按照团队模式
进行分配。
4、游戏结束后会怎样？
只是这一局结束了。新的一局会再次开启，周而复始。
隐藏细节：持有P3D 币获得游戏分成
当没人买入key，游戏倒计时耗尽，奖金池里累计的 ETH 开始分配。
48%分配给游戏获胜者，2%分配给游戏的社区基金，剩余的 50%按
照团队模式来分，四种团队模式对应的分配模式不一样，这 50%有
如下几种分配可能。

这几天听了李笑来的录音，虽然早就知道他不是什么好东西，还是被恶心到了，区块链之所以不同于郁金香泡沫，不同于传销，是因为它确实有实际的用途，确实能提高生产效率，目前虽然有泡沫，这也再所难免，就像当初的互联网泡沫一样，长期来看价值投资终将回归。

Tezos Beta版上线，虽然还是测试版，但是现在发生的交易可以带进主网，Gate.io上也能交易了。
非官方Telegram：https://t.me/tezosplatform

Grid+获得德州能源零售许可证，目前了解到的只有Grid+获得了这个许可证，有潜力成为下一个独角兽
https://twitter.com/gridplus_energy?lang=en&lang=en

In my opinion, Nimiq is a very potential coin, what's your opinion, did you heard of it?

The essence of the security of the QuarkChain ledger consensus system is presented in §3.4 Consensus Algorithm on pg. 19 of the whitepaper.

In 2015, I had contemplated this (c.f. also) exact design of a root (master) layer proof-of-work blockchain controlling numerous proof-of-work blockchain shards. I quickly discarded the design idea because it’s so egregiously insecure.

And sub-seconds confirmations aren’t possible in proof-of-work because the block period must be orders-of-magnitude greater than the network latency (and network latency isn’t scaling by Moore’s law). Otherwise the orphan rate becomes too high (c.f. the derivation) such that the chain might not even converge on a longest.

The QuarkChain whitepaper claims that the percentage of hashrate needed to double-spend drops from just over 50% in Bitcoin’s Nakamoto proof-of-work to (at worst1) just over 25%, which is already a horrible reduction in security (and selfish mining would be 17%). But the actual security is even worse.

There are numerous game theory security vulnerabilities related to incentives compatibility, transaction fees, and the ability of the miners to move their hashrate around at-will between root chain and any of the shards. Which include vulnerabilities similar to those that Byzcoin attempts but fails to fix about Nakamoto proof-of-work, as well as the failure modes of Byzcoin which I cited in my analysis of OmniLedger. Additionally I describe another vulnerability as follows.

Unlike with Nakamoto proof-of-work where all miners have a vested interest in not defecting and they all thus validate the blocks of each other, QuarkChain destroys that Nash Equilibrium because with control just over 50% of the hashrate of a shard, the attacker can censor shard transactions and/or extort high transaction fees. With 10 shards splitting 50% of the system hashrate that remains from the 50% for the root chain, the attacker would only need 5% of the system hashrate to wreck such havoc. With 50 shards, the attacker only needs 1% of the system hashrate. Rented hashrate attacks on proof-of-work altcoins are quite plausible. Verge is a recent example that such attacks aren’t just theoretical.

To prevent DoS attacks which destroy the scalability of the sharding wherein an attacker simultaneously issues a transaction to spend on every shard (note for scalability that shards don’t validate other shards and root chain miners don’t validate any shards), the hostage UTXO must only be spent on another shard after recording in the root chain a lock commitment. The committed shard can then validate the hostage UTXO lineage before accepting the transaction. Yet the attacker’s hashrate could move to the targeted shard to sustain the censorship/extortion indefinitely.

The double-spending protection claimed by the QuarkChain whitepaper is impotent against the above attack, because it only records the shard’s block hashes in the root chain. Only the shard’s miners validate and determine the contents of the blocks in the shard.

Merkle tree based fraud proofs issued by honest observers can’t prove anything about censorship of transactions.

Presumably as a coordination mechanism to override the above attack, QuarkChain proposes the mechanism of super-nodes in §5.1 Horizontal Anti-Centralization Scalability Expansion on pg. 24 with the union of super-nodes providing validation for the root and all shards. What the QuarkChain designers apparently don’t realize (or don’t want us to realize) is that these super-nodes must collectively possess just over 50% of the system hashrate for their decisions on validation to be adhered to. So in essence QuarkChain must be run by an oligarchy of whales who coordinate their validation of the entire system. Centralizing a ledger is a way of obtaining scalability, yet a distributed and centralized database isn’t accomplishing anything for trustlessness and permissionlessness. The antifragility vulnerabilities of centralized cartel control are:

a single-point of weakness that can be attacked, e.g. by the government regulators.

the cartel wants to maximize the extraction of rents from the system.

such maximization may turn against the best interest and desired features the users of the system want and need.

OmniLedger which I analyze below resolves this problem by creating shards which have a PBFT consensus algorithm instead of proof-of-work (which has a higher security threshold of 67%) and the set of validators is randomized2 so that the attacker can’t target a specific shard so as to weaken the security below that of the root chain’s 50% proof-of-work security threshold. One disadvantage of the OmniLedger design is that the liveness drops to 33% which is one of the weakness of any deterministic Byzantine agreement protocol such as PBFT.

As shocked as I am that (Ethereum's Casper design team lead by) Vitalik expended 3+ years to produce a totally flawed slashing proof-of-stake design (c.f. also), I am perhaps even more shocked at the blatantly obvious insecurity of the Quark[Quack]Chain design considering the number of PhDs listed in the §9 Development Team on pg. 35 and §Advisors on pg. 37. But really this should be expected from an opportunity cost economics analysis in the current gold-rush FOMO (fear-of-missing-out) race to extract a slice of the greater fool, agape n00bs speculative bubble. Even dozens of celebrities are pimped in the gold-rush.

Seriously, QuarkChain is more or less as useful as any of the series of shitcoin parodies such as the 100% Useless Token and those [ANN]ounced by the outrageously hilarious Gleb Gamow, which include the Bitcoin Pussy “The Wife of Dick” and YuTü.Co.in “Catering to YouTube 📷 Creators”.

As I proceed below responding to the QuarkChain whitepaper’s summary analysis of competing attempts to design a scalable, decentralized, secure ledger consensus system, I’ll explain the tradeoffs in the extant, published designs for other projects such as Bitcoin (Nakamoto proof-of-work), Lightning Networks, Ethereum, EOS (DPoS including STEEM) , OmniLedger, and other proof-of-stake derivatives such as NEM, Nxt, NEO, Qtum, etc.. And hybrids such as Dash and PIVX.

In a subsequent section I’ll cover the DAGs such as Byteball, Hashgraph’s Swirlds, Iota, and SPECTRE. And finally hopefully I will add a section on reputation-based designs such as Radix (formerly named Emunie) and Stellar’s SCIP consensus systems.

1 The 25% presumes a large number of reasonably equivalently hashrate weighted shards that divides the other 50% into a very small percentage. Thus the 25% rises to for example ~30% if there are only 10 shards. That is in the presumptions of their (incomplete and inadequate) conceptual security model.

2 Note it wouldn’t be secure to randomize the validator sets for the proof-of-work shards of QuarkChain because unlike deterministic Byzantine agreement protocols, proof-of-work isn’t one vote per cryptographic identity (i.e. per validator). There’s no way to limit or know the hashrate of each such identity and that’s why it’s useless to even assign identity to miner validators in proof-of-work.

区块链的这三个特性按重要性排序应该是
去中心化：这也是区块链存在的原因
吞吐量：要想支持大规模应用，吞吐量是必须跨过去的门槛
易用性：区块链普及的基础，就像DOS用的人很少，Windows开始普及一样
如果一个项目必须要在三者之间权衡折中的话，理想的权重是去中心化5，吞吐量3，易用性2。

[Rank]

All the main ranks that can be handed out to normal users are: Brand New, Newbie, Jr. Member, Member, Full Member, Sr. Member, Hero Member and Legendary.
In addition to the main rankings, there are also sub-rankings that can be applied, and those are: Donator, and VIP.
Finally, staff sub-rankings are as follows: Staff, Moderator, Global Moderator, Administrator, and Founder.

Rank	Description	Tag
Brand New:	0 posts, gets 1 gold coin under his name.
Newbie:	(none), gets 1 gold coin under his name.
Jr. Member:	Activity: 30, gets 1 gold coin under his name.
Member:	Activity: 60, gets 2 gold coins under his name.
Full Member:	Activity: 120, gets 3 gold coins under his name.
Sr. Member:	Activity: 240, gets 4 gold coins under his name.
Hero Member:	Activity: 480, gets 5 gold coins under his name.
Legendary:	Activity: the Legendary membergroup has no universal activity requirement. You are guaranteed to become Legendary somewhere between 775 and 1030 activity, but the exact point in this range at which you become Legendary is random per user. Gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half dark blue.
Sub-Rank	Description	Tag
Donator:	Manually applied by administration after 10 BTC donation, and gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half green. 5 coins are shown regardless of post count when user is a Donator.
VIP:	Manually applied by administration after 50 BTC donation, and gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half purple. 5 coins are shown regardless of post count when user is a VIP.
Staff Rank	Description	Tag
Staff:	Shown when moderators (see next point) post outside of the sections that they moderate. The tags under their usernames are dependent on their post group.	variable
Moderator:	Shown when moderators of specific sections post within those sections. Gets 5 gold coins, of which the last is shown as half faded-out green.
Global Moderator:	Applied to Staff that have moderation privileges in all boards. Gets 5 gold coins, of which the last is half teal colored.
Administrator:	Has all available permissions and can appoint moderators and perform other administrative tasks. Gets 5 gold coins, of which the last is shown half red regardless of post count.
Founder:	Reserved for Satoshi, gets 5 platinum coins under his name.

Nimiq is a very potential coin, I predict mining profit would be x10 at least in few months, if you are interested, please check their website nimiq.com

大家最近都在挖什么币，有没有推荐的，用CPU挖矿的币。

I am a Legendary now, what is the next level?

这个币团队很强大，昨天主网上线并开始挖矿，前景不错，第一个基于浏览器的币，还要实现闪电网络，跨链什么的，官网是nimiq.com，国人一般在天池挖:nimiq.skypool.org

大家给长长眼，我这个号值多少钱？

As I know, when Lisk select 101 nodes at the beginning, many candidates vote to each other, finally they are all selected as an official node, such thing would happen in EOS nodes selection too, candidate can buy notes without regulation, how DPOS is able to avoid conspiration, corruption etc in nodes selection just like in real world? There are conspiration, corruption if there are profits.

Is there any other tech like Bitcoin in 2009? I would like to invest in such tech.

This self-moderated thread is only for posting XDAG BUY/SELL offers.

This self-moderated thread is only for posting BUY/SELL offers.

I deposited hundreds of ETH into Poloniex, but it was not credited into my account after there are 100+ confirmations, time is money, I missed some coins in low price, very bad user experience, anyone hit the same problem with me?How did you solve it?

I don't know how much money is needed to develop EOS but apparently the money raised in first crowdsale is tooooooooooooo much to complete it, and there are still one ICO every 23 hours and it will last one year, this is like a super vampire, most money in the market will be absorbed by this super vampire, what EOS team needs to do is only using a little money from investors to hype the market, EOS guys should go to jail especially BM and lixiaolai,they harmed the whole cryptocurrency market.

Official ANN is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1730273.0, but I think this is the better place for a new coin announcement:

I would like to announce a new project I have been working on called the Quantum Resistant Ledger (QRL).

The QRL will be a cryptocurrency ledger which is designed from the outset to be resistant to both classical and quantum computing attack. It uses a different system of cryptography to bitcoin (and all other altcoins) known as hash-based digital signatures which are quantum-resistant.  The ledger will be the first to experiment with quantum-resistant signatures whilst providing an ultra secure backup store of value in the event of a sudden advance in quantum computing (rendering bitcoin, ethereum etc vulnerable to attack). The initial aim of the chain is to offer a low volume of ultra secure transactions in the first iteration with guaranteed longevity.

Proposed technical details can be found in the white paper on the website at the bottom of the post.

The project is small at present and at an early stage being lead by myself with two post-doc phd's in an advisory role. We are seeking a website designer and a C++ programmer to complement the team with a view to a launch in the coming months. Anyone wishing to get involved in an exciting conceptual project at an early level please PM me or email me via the website below.  

Regarding coin issuance we may follow a three-pronged approach (though subject to change): 1) a small ICO to help with project costs (<5% supply), 2) bitcoin balance importation at 1:1 ratio for first 3 months (signing a QRL address with a bitcoin private key to a valid address and balance), 3) mining of remaining supply to hard ceiling of at 21x10^6 coins via an exponential decline.

Feel free to ask any questions.

Many thanks,

Inca

Whitepaper: http://theqrl.org/whitepaper/QRL_whitepaper.pdf
Website: http://theqrl.org
Team's profile: https://theqrl.org/presale/team.html
Subreddit: www.reddit.com/r/QRL
Slack: https://qr-ledger.slack.com/messages/C2Z8YG2Q2/
Github: https://github.com/theQRL/qrl