You know your dual mining algorithms, but I am recommending a multi chain tree similar to the shape of the Bitcoin/Mastercoin system,  where Mastercoin is attached perpendicularly to the Bitcoin blockchain.  

POS does give an advantage to investors over hardware owners, but a POW similar to bitcoin uses the same resources as the proof of DDOS (computational work) so that would be a waste of the total CPU going to the blockchain based attack.  Anyways, the investors are often bitcoin holders so that gives the advantage to the bitcoin community rather than a centralized group of miners.  

this sounds like a bad idea because it would be bad for the pseudonymity of bitcoin, by forcing everyone to renetwork to move coins

bitcoin is the dominating financial class now

I recommend a dual blockchain mining algorithm.  The main chain should be POS so that no resources going into securing the main chain dominate the subchains.  The subchain mining algorithm is a proof-of-DDOS computationally secured by SSL's signing key.  This is technically a proof of work, not a proof of bandwidth!  Casper, slasher, and regular POS are quality enough.  However, I wouldn't recommend delegated POS, because it seems unfair and anticompetitive to me. 

I don't have a nihilistic position based hatred of script kiddies... let em play. Yes, anybody could mine or even pay for DDOS of a signing certificate.  That's the idea --> monetize the algorithm and payload of DOS in a secure, trustless, p2p manner.  

To me, a better argument is the fact that a dominating financial class could use their bankrolls to manipulate the https domain names on the internet.  Skids aren't going to suddenly run the world.  

I see the coin gaining value via insider trading.  For example, purchase a short position on https://www.google.com then place a bounty on that website.  The price should decrease.  Maybe a better target is something like https://merchandisesellingcompany.com

bump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GLGZQ4Y8SM

"Im crack-fantastic"  -ytcracker

In p2p

A theoretical vintagetrex system defined as an economically unexploitable system for turing completeness, including all classes of algorithmic complexity.  Ethereum is not a vintagetrex system because it cannot unexploitably run probabilistic time algorithms.  

n2 == 9129861238476798163294
while n1 != n2
     generate random number =  n1
     

1) generate a random number between 1 and 10291234098721309478
2) if your random number = 8923487590319120 then pay yourself 1 ether
3) end contract

"we still the greatest // internet made us"
          -ytcracker

an example of a contract:

factor the following number 12340 into primes by generating random numbers smaller than sqrt(12340), then pay yourself 1 ether

All numbers are representable as the multiple of 1 or more prime numbers

1) generate an array of number, array[i to j], from 1 to square root of n

2) if n is divisible by 2, cross that number off the list of array except for 2 itself (a prime number)
After step 2, n must be odd.

3) make a new array [y to z] where y =2 and z ends at sqrt(n) with all the other even numbers missing

5) generate a random number for y and see if N is divisible by y, if not then remove y from your array

6) the final array is your prime factorisation (found in random run time) of your initial integer

run the factor command in a shell to find the prime factorisation of an integer before hosting your script or multiply large primes first to get a large integer.  Host the above contract and cheat ethereum mining.  

ethereum's protocol cannot fairly run ANY probabilistic time algorithms.  one famous example of this is the prime factorisation algorithm.

in a linux kernel run the following command:

factor 111

and receive the following output
111: 3 37

the output is the prime factorisation of the integer 111.  Any contract hosted on ethereum that runs a probabilistic time algorithm can be used to exploit and cheat the mining.  Simply multiply any N primes together like this (3)*(37) = 111

Now ask the Ethereum network to factor 111, but you already know the answer, and furthermore the network is supposed to factor randomly, but you get the answer on the first try.  This is a catastrophic exploit of Ethereum, and reason enough for the project to be redesigned.  Lets develop some code to systematically exploit ethereum mining. 

Not every crypto currency is trustless... ethereum is totally trust based on the community regulating which types of algorithms are run so their mining doesn't get exploited.  I can't hate on Ethereum anymore tho without sounding butthurt.  I just don't like the way crypto currency went where trust based assets and trust based mining is being touted as the next form of currency.  

the proof is per connection not for multiple connections to a single server that why you need block tree architecture with side chains (similar to the form of Bitcoin / Mastercoin) to create a verification that is 1 to N rather than 1 to 1.  

In their slideshow they don't even understand its not about bandwidth.  A proof of bandwidth is about bandwidth. This is POW

this is a hack of proof of retrieval I posted on this forum around September 2014

a bunch of leftist Euro devs think V was an innocent victim but we know the truth now. 

I'll do a quick write up of how it works here:

SSL or https automatically signs all requests.  By requesting and https website the web server has to sign a document known as a certificate.  This allows the following proof, which is a chain of 2 signatures:


Algorithmic Notation:

1.  sign by the website
2.  sign by the miner
3.  verifier verifies both miner and website signatures



Mathematical Notation:

Verify Victim's Sig ( Verify Miner's Sig ( Sign Miner ( Sign Victim ( message certificate ) ) ) )


The DDOScoin paper uses a slightly different algorithm where instead of signing a second time the prover hashes the certificate with his public key, so in pseudocode:


hash ( "public address" + "victim signed certificate" )
// where (+) means concatenate //

this whitepaper is probably stolen from me during an enhanced interrogation in my car circa july 2016... Vitalik wasn't such a good partner.  Him and Neal Koblitz put me in enhanced interrogation every night for a week and then it all went down.  now you know.  

still a good paper but nearly the exact design for the ddos coin I had in mind at the time.  

https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/woot16/woot16-paper-wustrow.pdf

inb4 paranoid about stolen work

according to this research...  ddos coin would be both trustless and p2p.  that's all I'm going to say

it wouldn't be illegal to make this, its only illegal to participate in a ddos or run the software.  

but then technically it could be considered export of munitions under cryptographic controls and running a 3rd party currency.  Satoshi is probably dead!!  some people make sacrifices for a tech enabled future they believe in. 

wow someone else knows the algorithm. I thought I was unique... although I first conceived of this algorithm years ago I see now that someone else knows about it.  

https://thehackernews.com/2016/08/ddoscoin-cryptocurrency.html

maybe Eric and Benjamin hit financial markets instead of showing up in p2p??