|
I believe this project is far from being dead
It is revolutionary to use DPoS mechanic on EVM and make it work even before ETH 2.0 London fork was proposed.
This is just the depression phase of market cycle, which will end -I speculate- very soon
Recently I've tried filling my bag again with no luck on stex as it's delisted, but surely will do that as soon as I get the chance
B.S.: I'm an early adopter/supporter of this coin
|
|
|
|
|
As of the small block size
i think consider how will we store the tx data on the blockchain with the least possible space
so i suggest using account based model instead of UTXO model
Here is a small comparison between the two
UTXO "used by BTC"
The tx size can be calculated like this
inputs*180 + outputs*34 + ~10 extra bytes
example : 4*180+2*34 = 798 bytes
UTXO has kinda added pseudo-anonymity and the flexibility to change addresses
while anyone with some free time can get the tree of all the txs based from the same source of BTC
Account based model "used by ETH as example"
The tx size is around 109 bytes
and it consists of
f86b length
80 nonce (0: this is the minimum an account can have)
85 0ba43b7400 gas price
82 5208 gas limit (this is fixed for simple payments)
94 7917bc33eea648809c285607579c9919fb864f8f (address, always 20 bytes)
87 03baf82d03a000 (value, in theory this can be shrunken to zero)
80 (data, already zero length)
25 (V, one byte)
a0 067940651530790861714b2e8fd8b080361d1ada048189000c07a66848afde46 (R)
a0 69b041db7c29dbcc6becf42017ca7ac086b12bd53ec8ee494596f790fb6a0a69 (S)
Account based model uses less addresses
and less size per TX
also changing addresses too often will lower the potential of accumulating mining power
|
|
|
|
WTB 50$ FB ads
please pm me the details
Sent you a PM. All went smooth . He started Campaign based on the requirements . will report back with insights . |
|
|
|
|
WTB 50$ FB ads
please pm me the details
|
|
|
|
|
WTB facebook ads coupon 50$ or 100$ for best offer
Payment method BTC/ETH/ETC
Escrow required
|
|
|
|
Challenging someone who is challenging the consensus is the same as supporting the consensus... how can you even argue this? the devs have done the right thing by disqualifying you as you didnt follow the rules. Breaking down the fee distribution is not a challenge... you are again supporting it by saying 1 tau per day for each miner is a great incentive..... you also simply rehashed the sybil issue that was mentioned by multiple people before you..... again violating rule 5 as you were not the first to say it....
- my proposed solution to the same issue (address spam / sybil ) was not like what other people presented so it's a unique argument . - that question was sarcastic question (that is the opposite of supporting something ) as 1 TAU is too little incentive while 10bln coins is the total supply . BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilized at all . Name calling is easy you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper . i wonder if 2=1 ? .. if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_biasLook at the way you debate how can you even be in the running? since you like posting logical fallacies why not look at your straw man arguments and loaded questions.... you are clearly not of sound mind. That was clearly a sarcasm loaded note of how you were talking in your previous replies and how non-cevilized your replies was and i meant to prove that it's easy to use name calling without looking at an evidence like what you did when you called me a cheater I even ended my reply with this sentence : but i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that  |
|
|
|
Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX "not forever as XRP as that's called theft  "and will still allow painless micro-payments .
Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing . that was an issue in the consensus ., and the potential resolution that could potentially prevent spamming of addresses or at-least decrease it by 90% Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses ,
100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards .
and that was mathematical model to appose akosipepot's claims ..
If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day
this was also a mathematical model for fee distribution and incentives which is also a major part of the consensus BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilizedat all . Name calling is easy you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper . i wonder if 2=1 ? .. if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_biasbut i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that |
|
|
|
Greedy Flock Problem
False Incentives
Those attacks are almost impossible by the current Design ..,As the harvest clubs can increase their harvest power by increasing their number of members it will be almost balanced forever as more and more people joining a specific club increasing it's harvest power to take over the most incentives ., that incentive will be divided into more people leading to equilibrium state at the end of the day Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses , 100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards . The Bait and Switch
Again after people switch from the club to another the incentive which is payed to the club leader will be decreased as his number of signals will decrease at the same time the other clubs's signals will increase leading again to the point where he only gets what he deserves Identification vulnerability
Nope !! People won't give a potato who is the club owner as long as he pays *not even manually * And that voting system is a already a core feature of TAU . and that timer and self destruct is a good idea TBH Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX "not forever as XRP as that's called theft "and will still allow painless micro-payments . Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing . It's pretty obvious that @Diced90 is using the last trick he got in the bag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem either he have an answers for this .. or he shall prove that was kind of jealousy for having an opponent |
|
|
|
2. Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.
Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I dont think he should win or even be taking part.... Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results as twitter polls end up becoming cheating contests Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family.... Archiving this thread for later https://archive.is/UCtjRhttps://archive.is/P0Co6https://archive.is/mDQOXMy answer is .. how about takin a look back to this reply Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.
1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !! As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks .. besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ? 2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ? who are they ? can anyone be one of them ? what do they do exactly ? how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation? If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day my reply was clearly a challenge .. should i be disqualified upon the opinion of somebody who couldn't even answer my reply?? |
|
|
|
Greedy Flock Problem
False Incentives
Those attacks are almost impossible by the current Design ..,As the harvest clubs can increase their harvest power by increasing their number of members it will be almost balanced forever as more and more people joining a specific club increasing it's harvest power to take over the most incentives ., that incentive will be divided into more people leading to equilibrium state at the end of the day Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses , 100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards . The Bait and Switch
Again after people switch from the club to another the incentive which is payed to the club leader will be decreased as his number of signals will decrease at the same time the other clubs's signals will increase leading again to the point where he only gets what he deserves Identification vulnerability
Nope !! People won't give a potato who is the club owner as long as he pays *not even manually * And that voting system is a already a core feature of TAU . and that timer and self destruct is a good idea TBH Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX "not forever as XRP as that's called theft "and will still allow painless micro-payments . Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing . |
|
|
|
Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.
1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !! As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks .. besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ? 2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ? who are they ? can anyone be one of them ? what do they do exactly ? how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation? If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day |
|
|
|
|
CONSENSUS DEBATE BOUNTY!
kinda thrilled with that title *thumb up*
i was thinking about why do we need to store all previous tx ..
how about crunching every epoch of say 100,000 blocks in a balance block and previous hash as the genesis of the next epoch and so on
wouldn't that make it more efficient and usable till the year 2040 ..
probably few petabytes hard disks will be available on the markets by then but why not decreasing the foot print further
|
|
|
|
|
هذه الفكرة تتلاشى الكثير من عيوب الطرح المبدأي العادي و هي ازمة قلة الثقة بين المستثمر و الشركات الناشئة
و لكنها ايضا قد تسمح للاخبار الكاذبة بأن تخرب مشروعات تحتاج فقط الى وقت اكبر لكي يصل مشروعهم لمرحلة MVP
|
|
|
|
|
the current price is the absolute minimum IMHO next we must go up
i think it will maintain 120-150 for a while and then 500-600 as the new top "@ 45k BTC"
maybe even more if BTC surpassed this expectations
|
|
|
|
I do not think ETC is a very good coin, of course it can still bring some profit in a short time, but I find that it is not suitable for long-term investment. Better ETH.
On the long term ETH will switch to POS and miners will shift to ETC to use the same hardware also no ICOs yet but soon people will realize it's way cheaper to operate their smart contracts on ETC chain instead of ETH i know i'm a bit bullish on ETC and my opinion is a bit biased also as it made me a good sum of money before but stating the facts and running simple math we can see that on the worst case scenario we all know it'll reach at least in 30$ the next few weeks when coinbase buyers get used to seeing it and according to marketcap we can predict ~60$ on the next bull run and a maximum of around ~120$ as the next ATH |
|
|
|
ETC is certainly one of my favorite crypto projects out there and this is my third thread about it and previously made me good amount of money .. although i bought some of my holdings on +25$ i still didn't lose from it as i sold near the all time high of +40$ So.. what do you think about it , all predictions and opinions are welcomed even if it's against my opinion Previous threads (reference of what i published before): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2591360.0https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2469266.0
|
|
|
|
|
Good Coin .,wallet working perfectly and nodes are fast in Sync.., only issue is liquidity and i think it's going to fixed soon
as soon as it gets listed on better exchanges
|
|
|
|
|
what are the system requirements of VPS to run such MN ??
|
|
|
|
|
Are inforgraphics videos welcomed
|
|
|
|
So excited about the preview .. signed up and waiting  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
