Bitcoin Forum
August 01, 2021, 09:44:59 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.1 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 »
161  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 19, 2014, 03:26:48 PM
Mining costs are ramping up with a speed of lightning and reward for block finding is going down. At some point there is no way to enter this economy since there are "top miners" who will simply outmine you.
"Free Entry" does not mean "low capital requirements".

http://yadayadayadaecon.com/concept/free-entry-and-exit/

I fail to understand why an attacker has to choose which chain to participate in.
The built-in fundamental premise of PoS is that the stakers will mostly behave themselves because they have a lot of stake. Ultimately, if they misbehave the "trustworthy" will roll it back to their preferred chain.

The mechanism by which this roll back takes place in NXT is through trusted peer lists and a 720 block fork limit. (Not through formal "checkpoints" like I expected.)

So PoS does not achieve trust-free globally decentralized consensus, which is the entire point of the N@S criticism.

http://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf

Though I think I'm preaching to the choir...
162  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: A Decentralized Exchange? on: November 18, 2014, 04:49:17 PM
Exchanges are already "decentralized". There has got to be at least a half-dozen decent exchanges. They can be started by pretty much anyone, anywhere, at any time. If you don't like or trust current exchanges, you can start your own and show everyone how it's done, or if you don't like that, you can exchange directly person to person.

There is trust involved with exchanges, but I don't see why I should care. When I buy something from Amazon I need to trust them. I don't lose sleep at night wondering if Amazon is going to run away with my money.

In order to make an exchange that achieves decentralized trust-free consensus you'd have to build a program that is similar to Bitcoin and then only currencies that rigidly follow certain design patterns would be allowed to be traded on the platform (Fiat never works), and then at the end of the day it would be much more expensive and slow to use than a traditional centralized exchange.

Another solution looking for a problem...
163  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: November 17, 2014, 04:58:46 PM
snip

You sound like Mr. DumbASS to me.

duhm-bee-froo-eet
164  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Funding network security in the future on: November 17, 2014, 04:46:23 PM
Mining isn't even profitable right now. Competition drives down profit margins as it increases efficiency.

Correct -- all mining profits will be competed away to 0 in the long run (absent a cartel), since mining is close to perfect competition. But odolvlobo's argument can be recast to say that an attack would be "costless" instead of profitable, since if an attacker could use his mining investment to mine he at least would come out somewhat near breaking even (again assuming his attack didn't wreak too much havoc).
So the competitors in mining would lose nothing by colluding, but could significantly gain, absent consumer boycotting.
Perhaps instead of fighting market forces, mining collusion should be encouraged. If the collusion is detrimental to it's consumers, then the consumers have plenty of other places to go.
Instead of decentralization of Bitcoin, we could think of decentralization in the broader sense of a currency marketplace.
That's pretty much the same as throwing in the towel, but at least it can be recognized that the death of individually decentralized currency isn't the death of decentralized currency marketplaces.

It's depressing to think about mining companies getting together to try to decide what the appropriate transaction fee should be. That's certainly not the vision I bet most of us had when we first learned about Bitcoin.
165  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: November 17, 2014, 04:07:01 PM
Ok. I was just trying to be funny with your name, Mr. DumbFruit. hehehe.

How dare you! My user name is serious business. My sense of humor is very dry and very sarcastic, which are two forms of humor that pretty much don't work on the internet. The whole Thomas Jefferson thing wasn't very serious. (It doesn't have any legal merit, even though I find it very interesting.)

I'm with you Dabs, I think a couple of years is more than enough time for people to pick up their coins. If you have several hundred bitcoins in someone else's care and you don't bother to check them for years, you're either stupid or dead.

"...a foole and his money is soone parted." -Defence of the Government of the Church of England, 1587
166  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Funding network security in the future on: November 14, 2014, 09:53:38 PM
My point is not to point out the particular attack that was described. The point is that as long as mining is profitable there are attacks or exploits that are not protected by the cost of mining, now or in the future.
Mining isn't even profitable right now. Competition drives down profit margins as it increases efficiency. I wouldn't worry too much about that. There's no way for mining to be perpetually profitable.

As long as you're referring to profits and not revenue, that is...
167  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: November 14, 2014, 09:44:18 PM
snip

I can it hard to understand you.

If a debt expires after an average lifespan, and an average lifespan is 78 years, then doesn't the debt expire after 78 years? How is my age related to any of this?
I just described the rule wrong to begin with.
Jefferson argued that debts should not be contracted that would last past the debtor's current average life expectancy, because it's unethical to expect later generations to take up debts that they didn't agree to.

Therefore if you're 8 years old, you couldn't acquire debt that lasts more than 70 years. If you're 20 years old, you couldn't acquire a debt that lasts more than 58 years, and so on. If you're older than 78 then you shouldn't be getting into debt for any period of time, since you could keel over at any moment.
168  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 08:46:41 PM
The purpose of this milestones code is "an optimization to speed up finding out what is the last common block you share with a peer." (c) JeanLucPicard
But requesting milestones from peers only checks back 1440 blocks for 10 "jumps", so if the closest common milestone is further than that, then it would just be unable to find a common block.
Wrong. This happens in a while(true) loop. It will just request the next 10 milestone blocks, and keep going back until Genesis if no common block is found.
Ok, so I misread it. The milestones just save time finding a shared block, but the client doesn't allow forks further than 720 blocks, so it's kind of a moot point anyway. "Whichever chain has the most people using it" is the ultimate arbitrator.

Quote from: DumbFruit
At which point, as far as I can tell, the client needs to start over with a node that is passed to him from the NxT domains.
If it cannot download the blockchain from the current peer, it will switch to another peer. Peers exchange their known peers lists with each other all the time, there is no mechanism that will lock your node to only download from certain peers, let alone from hardcoded Nxt domains.
But how do you know which one is an appropriate blockchain when the the stakers can stake on any particular chain? It seems to me that you'd see your server has forked, and so you look at which fork most people are on and switch over, in the meantime any transactions that you had on your blockchain are reversed. Which is pretty much the same effect as if your chain reorganized.
Sure, the peer lists change, but the first peers you see point you to the chain that you're going to end up downloading. The "chain with the most stake" doesn't really work, because again, anyone could make a NxT chain with more stake on it, and a few people could do it even with the genesis block you're currently using.
169  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 08:24:53 PM
There are no NXT domains, there are peers which all share a copy of the blockchain. If you think all the blockchain is downloaded from one centralized service, well, you need to check your facts again. Installing the client, downloading the blockchain, and looking at the peers tab would be one simple way of doing it.
When you first download the client, NXT domains provide a "random" list of peers. We don't really know if they're random and they're only on their list to begin with because they've decided to trust them.

There's no particular reason why we couldn't see several large stake chains because forgers can forge on multiple chains without any problem.

There's nothing that I see that can automatically move nodes to a valid chain. If you happen to be on the "forked" chain, then eventually you just need to reinstall the server and load up the node from the "right" ones, which seems to be determined by whichever nodes the NXT domains point you to.
170  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 07:19:03 PM
The purpose of this milestones code is "an optimization to speed up finding out what is the last common block you share with a peer." (c) JeanLucPicard
But requesting milestones from peers only checks back 1440 blocks for 10 "jumps", so if the closest common milestone is further than that, then it would just be unable to find a common block. That would happen either because it had forked 14400 blocks ago, or because the peers had gotten 14400 blocks ahead.
At which point, as far as I can tell, the client needs to start over with a node that is passed to him from the NxT domains. That seems like a pretty clear "checkpoint" in all but name.

Although, the server "won't allow" forks after 720 blocks, so I guess it only looks for older milestones in case the server was just offline for less than 10 days. I don't really understand the point of that rule, since all it seems to accomplish is making forks permanent.

I need to see how this thing isn't getting drowned in orphans. Ostensibly it's because no large stakeholder has bothered to try to mess with it. That's the goal, I know, but good grief, if I wanted to trust rich people that much I'd stay with fiat.
171  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: November 14, 2014, 06:34:39 PM
Hm. If you want to go really hardcore, you could follow the advice of Thomas Jefferson and keep them until the average lifespan has ended. By that time the debt should be wiped out, since the land is ruled by the living and not by the dead.

So you're presumably at least 8 years old, and the average lifespan in the US is 78 years, so you just need to hang on to those coins for another 70 years. You can think of it as a really late retirement account.

I think your math is wrong. I'd have to keep the coins for 78 years, until I'm 78+8 years old.

And I'm a lot older than 8.

Only if you're a nation, which I guess I haven't ruled out (A nation would be a flat 78). Otherwise you subtract your age from the average lifespan.

Quote from: Thomas Jefferson
At 21. years of age they may bind themselves and their lands for 34. years to come: at 22. for 33: at 23. for 32. and at 54. for one year only; because these are the terms of life which remain to them at those respective epochs.

Dumb Fruit. Ninja?
If all ninjas are dumb fruits, then maybe not. If all dumb fruits are ninjas, then I must be.
172  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 05:12:42 PM
Why do you read the code from a few months ago by the way?
Here is the latest release for analysis:
https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/src

I didn't know there were two repositories. But anyway, it's the same damn thing;
https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/src/88073b26bd65e89ddb074181c5f50f6701e7b177/src/java/nxt/peer/GetMilestoneBlockIds.java?at=master

Did I incorrectly describe the purpose of Milestones?
173  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 03:24:12 PM
Who?
What happens after 10 1440 block "jumps" and it hits the "limit"?

No, don't ask me. You claim that there are centralized checkpoints or whatever you claim there is, prove the flaws, it's your job.

It's not a "flaw", it's a checkpoint every 14400 blocks, which equates to 10 days. So if your server goes offline, or forks, for longer than that, then you need to download the chain from a trusted party, which usually comes from nxtcrypto.org or nxtbase.com (Or nodes that are trusted by them.). Did I read something wrong?
174  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 03:00:54 PM
Who?
What happens after 10 1440 block "jumps" and it hits the "limit"?
175  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 02:46:38 PM
Actually I called your bluff, as apparently you're not familiar with what crypto has what and only parrot other people's opinions, not based on math.
lol! I'm pointing at the damn source code.
Here is where getting the MileStoneBlockId's is defined;
https://github.com/Blackcomb/nxt/blob/master/src/java/nxt/peer/GetMilestoneBlockIds.java

Who do you suppose provides these MileStones every 1440 blocks to ensure an improper reorg doesn't occur before them? Hm?

I'll give you a hint;

Quote
           String lastMilestoneBlockIdString = (String) request.get("lastMilestoneBlockId");
            if (lastMilestoneBlockIdString != null) {
                Block lastMilestoneBlock = Nxt.getBlockchain().getBlock(Convert.parseUnsignedLong(lastMilestoneBlockIdString));
                if (lastMilestoneBlock == null) {
                    throw new IllegalStateException("Don't have block " + lastMilestoneBlockIdString);
                }
                height = lastMilestoneBlock.getHeight();
                jump = Math.min(1440, Nxt.getBlockchain().getLastBlock().getHeight() - height);
                height = Math.max(height - jump, 0);
                limit = 10;
            } else if (lastBlockIdString != null) {
                height = Nxt.getBlockchain().getLastBlock().getHeight();
                jump = 10;
                limit = 10;
            } else {
                peer.blacklist();
                response.put("error", "Old getMilestoneBlockIds protocol not supported, please upgrade");
                return response;
            }

edit: Erm, I'm pretty sure it's 14400 blocks, actually.
176  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 02:29:01 PM
So if you suddenly learned that there is no centrally managed checkpoint system in NXT, which reason for this attack not going on would you be able to come up with? The sooner you'll start thinking of this new reason, the better, because someone will be sure to say soon enough that there is no centrally managed chekpoint system in NXT )

Oh please. It's all well and good to have a built-in rolling checkpoints, but that doesn't help a new client figure out which one is the right blockchain. Again, I could boot up a new NxT tomorrow that could do rolling checkpoints, that can't help new clients figure out which blockchain is correct, unless you erroneously suppose that the majority of nodes will always provide the appropriate checkpoints. (See Sybil attack.)

Here is the genesis block;
https://github.com/Blackcomb/nxt/blob/master/src/java/nxt/Genesis.java

And here is where it defines the "MileStone Block" (A rose by any other name...)
https://github.com/Blackcomb/nxt/blob/master/src/java/nxt/BlockchainProcessorImpl.java

So I'm just going to call your bluff on that one.
177  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 02:11:05 PM
any NEW user would download MY CHAIN.

Bob has a client that only downloads valid chains.
He sees 99 nodes with invalid chain and 1 node with valid chain (more stake involved).
Which one does he download?

My node knows which chain is valid, the one with more stake involved.

You need to build a valid longer chain without majority of stake. Which, as we are discussing, requires extreme amounts of computing power (calculations pending).
What calculations?
Look, if stakeholders can calculate an appropriate chain in real time right now without PoW on their PC's, why in the Seven Hells would it be impossible to do the same thing in a 51% stake attack? At most it would require an additional PC, and it probably doesn't even require that.

And you keep saying things like "My node knows which chain is valid, the one with more stake involved." even though if a reorg attack happens, the wrong chain would be specifically built to have more stake involved, that's why it's a 51% stake attack. (Or could be a N@S 51% stake attack.)

Hell, I could boot up a brand new NxT coin tomorrow and build a chain that looks like it had more coins moving around on it, and had more stake involved because I would just give myself all the coins. The only reason this attack isn't going on right now is because of the centrally managed checkpoint system.

And I guess that's fine, if that's what you want out of your currency, but it is absolutely not a blanket improvement on PoW. The beauty of PoW, and the reason I ever bothered with Bitcoin to begin with, is that it requires zero trust to reach consensus all around the world. As far as I've seen, PoS is light-years behind PoW when it comes to decentralized consensus.

If you're willing to give up decentralized consensus, then it begs the question; Why bother with PoS? Why not use something similar to the battle-tested Public Key Infrastructure that we use today to secure internet communications? Then it would be a real technocratic currency, and you wouldn't have to worry about what exchanges, governments, hackers, or the wealthy elite do with the large wallets they have (or had), you'd just have to trust the root authorities.
178  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: PoS is far inferior to PoW - why are so many people advocating switching to PoS on: November 14, 2014, 12:56:11 AM
What I wrote about Bitshares was obviously not some security analysis. I was demonstrating the clear overwhelming complexity that PoS brings in order to "solve" a problem that is solved very well and very simply with PoW.

Basically, I have no idea what's going on here, it sounds pretty unworkable.
179  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: November 13, 2014, 09:27:54 PM
I was thinking you could give them to an escrow so that no one would think that you just took the remaining coins without allowing the owners to take them. Though it is pretty pointless since the owners could easily prove they were theirs if they kept the keys they used to send them to you. You also have a point, since they trusted you and not the escrow.

Hm. If you want to go really hardcore, you could follow the advice of Thomas Jefferson and keep them until the average lifespan has ended. By that time the debt should be wiped out, since the land is ruled by the living and not by the dead.

So you're presumably at least 8 years old, and the average lifespan in the US is 78 years, so you just need to hang on to those coins for another 70 years. You can think of it as a really late retirement account.

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch2s23.html

Edit: Canada has a life expectancy of 81, so adjust accordingly.
180  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Service Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game on: November 13, 2014, 09:01:09 PM
Seems like the most logical thing to do is to put up those coins with an escrow for a year or two, after which they are forfeit and you can claim them. That way everyone knows you acted in good faith.

Or send them to 1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!