 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
|
3
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: [ANN] CryptoConnect: Desktop App to Get Account Info from an Exchange
|
on: November 20, 2013, 03:08:33 AM
|
Where is the source code?
After a little research, I'm supposing that I would classify it as Freeware, not Open Source. This is my very first attempt ever to create any type of program. The Code is sloppy, but effective. I can see where this not being Open Source would be a large issue amongst the Cryptocurrency community given their inherent suspicious nature and extreme need for anonymity. Funny thing is, on the " real" ForEx markets, they tend to trust the application developers and that they aren't secretly keeping a backdoor into their published app or maybe trying to spread malware or steal their account info or any other nefarious something . However, I do understand these concerns as legitimate when it comes to the Frontier of emerging technologies. And before reading further, a friendly REMINDER: one of the fundamental philosophies behind Bitcoin is TRUST. We all Trust that "Satoshi Nakamoto" will not mess with the Blockchain Code, steal funds at random, or possibly send a kill code to delete the entire Blockchain. And this holds true for ALL cryptocurrencies. That said...... Just like Meta Trader 4, Swordfish, Adobe, Microsoft, Bethesda, EA Games, Sony Entertainment, Valve, and so on, and on, and on.... I'm not going to share my code with anyone, unless they either work for me OR are willing to sign a Legally Binding Non-Disclosure Agreement. In the mean time, I will just have to let the product speak for itself, and word of mouth will be my best advertisement. Everyone's gotta start somewhere. After enough people have used CryptoConnect for long enough, then they gain confidence in my products and I will have built a reputation for honesty and integrity... Therefore, it's in my best interest to have integrity and be honest. With that in mind, I am glad that this app I made is only of limited use. It only retrieves information, prints it to Excel, and loses the API Keys each time.... As for Contact Info... The actual Download is from my personal Google Drive, so my personal email isn't hidden nor is my real identity, which is plainly visible in the lower right corner of the app window. People can download it if they want, or not. When I come out with v2.0 and other products, I may be able to actually learn how to implement hella better security features, and maybe Product Keys so that I can sell them directly. At least that's the plan. So, in summation: "CryptoConnect(Beta) is Freeware/Shareware, released As-Is, and the Developer (meaning me) is Held Harmless and Indemnified. In the event of a Bug, please leave a comment at the Download page." ....or here in this thread. |
|
|
|
|
4
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: [ANN] CryptoConnect: Desktop App to Get Account Info from an Exchange
|
on: November 18, 2013, 02:33:02 AM
|
Someone asked me about Open Source and Contact Info... Didn't really know how to reply. So, here was my response: As the Dev for this App, I made it Free to Use by anyone who want's it. As it is my very first program built, I know that I have a lot to learn about, like End User permissions and such. Any suggestions in this area will be welcomed. Should I attach a ReadMe that states the permissions? The only Security Feature is that you have to input your API Keys each time. As for Contact Info... What would you suggest? The actual Download is from my personal Google Drive, and anyone is free to leave comments there. Is that sufficient? Again, any suggestions will be welcomed. Honestly, I made the App at the request of another Cryptsy user, and over the 2 weeks that it took me to figure it all out, he and I emailed back and forth about 35 times. Should I set up a different email account for the Apps I decide to make? I really am in the dark when it comes to the Release side of things. Here's the fuller conversation on Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qv5ha/ann_cryptoconnect_desktop_app_to_get_account_info/ |
|
|
|
|
6
|
Bitcoin / Project Development / [ANN] CryptoConnect: Desktop App to Get Account Info from an Exchange
|
on: November 14, 2013, 12:14:52 AM
|
 Announcing the release of CryptoConnectŠ(Beta). Here's what it does: "CryptoConnect(Beta) - Account Info is pretty straight forward: 1) Type in your API Keys, or Copy/Paste... >>You can get and Enable your API Keys from your User Settings page.<< 2) Click on "Retrieve Account Information".... >>Balances, Current Orders, Trade History, and Deposits/Withdrawals<< 3) Pay attention to the annoying popups. 4) CryptoConnect then prints your Account Information to an MS Excel Workbook. 5) All done...."  Currently, CryptoConnectŠ is only useful for Cryptsy.com. Download the Zip file, extract to wherever, Run the Setup. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx-jVizEnjcScXNRVTl6WkxnYXc/edit?usp=drive_webCan be Uninstalled from Control Panel > Programs > Uninstall a Program I am working on adding other Exchanges so that CryptoConnect will be an All-in-One Desktop Account Information Retrieval App. **Plans for this App: - Add more Exchanges: BTCe, Bter, CoinEx, Crypto-Trade, mcxNow, Vircurex, And Others
- Login Security Features
- Offer to Save API Keys and other User Preferences
- Checkboxes to Select specific Account Info
- Print to Notepad, MS Word, or directly to a Printer
- Preview Screen
Please feel free to comment and make suggestions for this or other ForEx-style Desktop Apps you'd like to see. Well, that's it for now. And of course, if you appreciate the App.... donate  |
|
|
|
|
7
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Viability of centrally issued P2P Cryptocurrency - best answers tipped!
|
on: November 03, 2013, 10:56:29 AM
|
Had to think on this for a while before responding. First, in response question posed in the thread topic itself, I have come to the current position that anyone publishing a cryptocurrency is technically the "centrally issuing" party. However, as the question was expanded upon in the OP, the question seems to be relative to a central government of some kind being the issuing party. Could this be viable? In the most general use of terms, the only answer is, "Yes." I think the more relevant question, and the one you were aiming at, is: Without outlawing all other forms of currency, would the populace at large come to use this government created cryptocurrency as the preferred medium of exchange? And what could be done to make it the preferred medium of exchange? How would pre-mining affect its popularity? These all assume, I think, the standard cryptocurrency model (Bitcoin) as the template. I think any issuing government could pre-mine as much as they needed if the coin had no max production cap, and as much as 20% if there is a max production cap. However, they could only use these pre-mined coins for self-funding, not as a direct means of inflation/deflation control: they could only add large sums of currency to the economy (decreasing purchasing power), but not remove large sums from the economy (increasing purchasing power). Of course, part of (or all of) the inherent transaction fees/taxes could be directed to a central wallet as a means of temporarily extracting currency from the economy, but this trickle effect wouldn't have the necessary impact during a time that needed an immediate adjustment. In order to have the power to immediately remove large sums of a cryptocurrency from the economy, they would have to be able to directly change features of the blockchain, the minting algorithm, and/or any other features whenever they wanted/needed to..... effectively negating the very principles of being a cryptocurrency and, instead, making it nothing more than a digital fiat currency. In summary: A government could publish digital currency can call it a cryptocurrency, buy no one would be able to fully trust the issuing government or put their full faith behind the currency itself for the reasons explained above. And just in case I won  BTC: 1EMj11KZKQYryLwksQrURLANjME2F9WA1e LTC: LZrtsbuttz1wVM5b4936hLCPeFAP5uc7Wy |
|
|
|
|
8
|
Other / Beginners & Help / Re: [VBNET] Need help with BTER API (0.5 BTC bounty)
|
on: November 02, 2013, 08:05:02 AM
|
Hopefully that Bounty is Still open. This works in Visual Studios 2010 Ultimate. You can refer to the BTCe API stuff for more details. I just deleted the Functions and replaced the "random" definition: Imports System.Net
Imports System.Text
Imports System.IO
Imports System.Security.Cryptography
Public Class Form1
Private Sub Form1_Load_1(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load
LstType.Items.Add("buy")
LstType.Items.Add("sell")
LstPair.Items.Add("ltc_usd")
LstPair.Items.Add("ltc_btc")
LstPair.Items.Add("btc_usd")
lstmeth.Items.Add("Trade")
lstmeth.Items.Add("getinfo")
End Sub
Private Sub Button1_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Button1.Click
Dim postData As String
Dim postReq As HttpWebRequest = DirectCast(WebRequest.Create("https://www.cryptsy.com/api"), HttpWebRequest)
Dim randomn As String
Dim keyer As String = LCase("YourKey") 'your key goes here
Dim secret As String = "YourSecretKey" 'your secret goes here
randomn = CLng(DateTime.UtcNow.Subtract(New DateTime(1970, 1, 1)).TotalSeconds)
postData = "method=" & lstmeth.SelectedItem & "&nonce=" & randomn
Dim KeyByte() As Byte = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(secret)
Dim HMAcSha As New HMACSHA512(Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(secret))
Dim messagebyte() As Byte = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(postData)
Dim hashmessage() As Byte = HMAcSha.ComputeHash(messagebyte)
Dim Sign As String = BitConverter.ToString(hashmessage)
Sign = Sign.Replace("-", "")
postReq.Method = "POST"
postReq.KeepAlive = False
postReq.Headers.Add("Key", keyer)
postReq.Headers.Add("Sign", LCase(Sign))
postReq.ContentType = "application/x-www-form-urlencoded"
postReq.UserAgent = "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; ru; rv:1.9.2.3) Gecko/20100401 Firefox/4.0 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)"
postReq.ContentLength = messagebyte.Length
Dim postreqstream As Stream = postReq.GetRequestStream()
postreqstream.Write(messagebyte, 0, messagebyte.Length)
postreqstream.Close()
Dim postresponse As HttpWebResponse
postresponse = DirectCast(postReq.GetResponse(), HttpWebResponse)
Dim postreqreader As New StreamReader(postresponse.GetResponseStream())
Dim thepage As String = postreqreader.ReadToEnd
thepage = thepage.Replace(Chr(34), Chr(39))
MsgBox(thepage)
End Sub
End Class
And just in case :-P BTC: 1pJJjL7CsujpmBTkhwjoDDEkhDCKt9nna |
|
|
|
|
9
|
Economy / Trading Discussion / Absurd Request concerning API, VBA, and Excel
|
on: October 28, 2013, 10:53:26 AM
|
I'm trying to have MS Excel use a VBA macro to get my account information from Cryptsy and arrange it all in a bunch of nice, pretty tables. I know there are probably more effective ways to go about this, but I just want to know how to do it. So, if you would like to tell me about all the "better ways," I will appreciate the suggestions. Or you can just see this as a Challenge in Programming. Whatever floats your boat, I guess. That said.... I already have a macro that loops through BTCe's Public Tickers and changes colors based on cell values. I think BTCe's Tickers update often enough for this to be somewhat informative, even if it's not fast enough to be very useful (3 seconds for full loop before restart). I use it mostly to know when I need to jump on the site when it seems more activity is happening. I also already have a macro that pulls Cryptsy's Public SingleMarket Orders and sets up those nice tables for me..... However, the problem is that Cryptsy's Public APIs only update every ~5 minutes.... but the Private API is live. (Why Cryptsy? Just learning the in's and out's of day trading. Seemed like as good a place as any, especially as they don't yet trade in fiat currencies.) Here's the basic VBA (for free) that I'm looking to transform from a "GET" to a "POST"........ Sub MarketInfo()
Dim XML: Set XML = CreateObject("MSXML2.XMLHTTP")
XML.Open "Get", "http://pubapi.cryptsy.com/api.php?method=singlemarketdata&marketid=3", False
XML.send
Dim Resp As String: Resp = XML.ResponseText
Dim SellPrc As Integer: SellPrc = InStr(1, Resp, "sellorders") + 23
Dim SellQty As Integer: SellQty = InStr(SellPrc, Resp, "quantity") - 3
Dim sPrice As String: sPrice = Mid(Resp, SellPrc, SellQty - SellPrc)
Sheets("Sheet1").Range("C2").Value = sPrice
Dim BuyPrc As Integer: BuyPrc = InStr(1, Resp, "buyorders") + 22
Dim BuyQty As Integer: BuyQty = InStr(BuyPrc, Resp, "quantity") - 3
Dim bPrice As String: bPrice = Mid(Resp, BuyPrc, BuyQty - BuyPrc)
Sheets("Sheet1").Range("D2").Value = bPrice
End Sub
What I need help with is inserting the nonce, API Keys, Headers, etc. in order to access my account in the URL line. Not interested in making trades via Excel, just wanting to look at my account's stats for bookkeeping reasons. I just can't seem to Google the answers anywhere (and Bing is even worse). Here's a link for more information about Cryptsy's API protocols: https://www.cryptsy.com/pages/apiShort question: What follows after " https://www.cryptsy.com/api"? |
|
|
|
|
10
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Perfect Altcoin?
|
on: October 26, 2013, 07:20:25 AM
|
I share the conventional Austrian View.
If I die and take my Bitcoin to the grave, there is less Bitcoin to go around, in effect the productivity I contributed to the economy (my savings = Deferred consumption) is not realised, the Bitcoin economy as a whole benefits.
This can go on until there is just 1 Bitcoin left, and as it is infinitely divisible the system continues.
How does having less of anything benefit a whole community/world economy? As in less air, less water, less food... less usable currency? By the time there is only one BTC left, no one will value it, and before it ever gets too small of a quantity in circulation, another form of currency will have taken it's place. If it is "infinitely" divisible, then sill no one could spend it because of the Transaction Fee for too few bytes. The beauty of this digital age and that of having a digital currency, as long as our species can produce electricity and microchip-thingies, we no longer need to live in a world of lack. We have seen time and again that those who "save" (deferred consumption) a large quantity of resources in a system of finite resources inevitably leads to a greater divide and disparity between the Haves and the Have-Nots. As long as the currency is based in the physical, then currency will always be a limited resource... doled out at the whim of a central and "wise" authority (when in fact, they could simply print as much as they want, because it's all based on "faith" anyway). A True Universal Cryptocurrency need not follow in the erroneous footsteps of its material predecessors. We have the opportunity to create something completely new.... and Bitcoin, as the beta test it was intended to be, has show us the what could be possible, but Bitcoin, as in all evolutionary processes, is just the first in a whole new species. I will stand by the idea of a self-healing currency of unending supply but of reasonably scarce generation; & one that encourages use/motion over a currency that only gains value from non-use/stagnation. I prefer to live for a future of, if not infinite resources, then one of perceived vast abundance, expansion, and more-ness. |
|
|
|
|
11
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Perfect Altcoin?
|
on: October 25, 2013, 07:46:40 PM
|
I think something of increasing importance is that mining it does something useful. Right now we have so much energy being wasted mining bitcoin, when nothing is achieved by mining.
I am nice and warm today. If the waste heat from mining wasn't used you may have a point. (On the topic of keeping warm it isn't wasted if I value it.) @ Rogue5pawn, once Britain has an empire and an almost monopoly on gold it stagnated while the new world switched to silver prior to WW1. Money is what it does and an economy is the measure. To think of the economy as a thing leads to the thought that it aught to be managed. This forum is full of debate about inflationary economics v fixed value (aka deflationary economics) so not worth discussing here. a finite unit of measure is needed if the Money meme is to persist, for those invested in Bitcoin this 21M cap is the holy grail. 21M cap minus 600k (thank you DPR and the FBI)..... minus an unknown quantity due to human error (spilled coffee on computer, fried hard drive and lost all backup wallet.dats, for example).... minus intentional destruction due to malice or whim.... and so on until so few remain that it fails as both a commodity and a currency. How does the blockchain heal from such things? Or do we just accept the fact of a dwindling oil supply... I mean "cryptocoin supply" as finite such that we will just have to create a new cryptocurrency once this one has failed? Philosophically speaking, scarcity means limited resources, which in turn encourages a world view of lack, and what follows is a desire to hoard and not share, not spend... a detriment to all. Ideas on this?: There has to be a way for the blockchain to heal over time and retain value by balancing scarcity with surplus.... I can only think of the suggestions I have made so far. Your thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
12
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Perfect Altcoin?
|
on: October 25, 2013, 10:42:19 AM
|
|
I applaud your thinking on the matter and I will give it some thought before offering critique and making adaptations to my own thinking on the matter.
As for being "Silver to Bitcoin's Gold,".... I would politely remind people that all nations went off the gold/silver standards for a very good reason. The Great Depression in the USA happened, in part, because the country did not get off those metals as a standard soon enough. The short version for this was that the value of the medium became in hoarding rather than using/spending. We are beginning to see evidence of this concerning BTC on the exchanges. My measly .07 BTC, if I hold it, will likely be of more value than if I were to spend it. Of course, buy low, sell high. If I had sold my pitiful quantity of BTC right before the September free fall (I didn't own any BTC at that time), I could have then re-invested back into BTC as it started to climb back up. Basic commodities trading 101. However, the desire is for one of the cryptocurrencies to rise above the others as a currency, something that has value in being used more often than being held, rather than being/becoming a repository for fiat value.
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Proposed Altcoin Chargeback System for Businesses
|
on: October 25, 2013, 10:15:45 AM
|
Sounds good.
I think it will basically be companies acting as different escrows.
Kind of like SquareTrade for eBay.
Users will lean towards a particular escrow company based on reputation and fairness. If an escrow makes too many unpopular decisions regarding chargebacks, word will spread.
So are you for the Escrow as the Third Party.... or the Business Wallet? Something to note: The Escrow Service will take a % of every transaction, thus $$ that the Business will never see, and so The Business will raise their prices to offset this loss of income, effectively passing the fee to the customer. The Business Wallet version lets the Business see every single cryptocoin, and only loses out if they are found at fault in a valid claim. If the Chargeback Agency is government funded, then this Agency would be (should be) a neutral Third Party with no vested interest to make a profit. |
|
|
|
|
14
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Viability of centrally issued P2P Cryptocurrency - best answers tipped!
|
on: October 24, 2013, 01:38:39 AM
|
Ok, governments don't mine. I actually prefer that. With POS and the gvt holding/receiving a portion of every transaction fee (and the remainder destroyed) and the "interest earned" on their Reserve Balance, as well as the usual taxation practices already in place, I think they could easily stay well ahead of the curve. (Reminder: In order to manage a 51% Attack under a POW /w POS system, the attacker would have to have both 51% of all coins in circulation and 51% of the network hashrate.) As for keeping the circulation amount stable, I think it would have to do with how the blockchain's algorithms were laid out. Just as difficulty is adjusted every so many blocks, the fee/tax rate could easily fluctuate higher or lower as the system required in order to maintain a relatively steady rate of growth, and the POS Interest could also fluctuate as needed even to the point of demurrage (use it or lose kind of thing) if it's held in reserve too long. Also, some of the current altcoins already have a variable block reward (PPC has had a historical low of, I think, 7 coins from a block and as high as 1010). Some of these variables could rely on such information as: quantity in reserve balances, value/volume of all transaction over a period of time, target block time vs actual block time, and figuring out how many coins have simply gone MIA due to human error (accidentally reformatted hard drive and lost all backup wallet.dat files, for example). It is actually the human error side of permanently lost coins that causes me to suggest no max limit to mined coins. If Mr. Pirate really does have 600k BTC that the kind people at the FBI are holding for him, then that's 600k absolutely missing and gone from circulation forever, 21,000,000 - 600,000 = 20,400,000 BTC to ever be seen in circulation, not to mention all the uncounted lost coins from other human practices and error. I'm not a programmer by any means and have no idea how any or all of this could be implemented within the blockchain info and mining algorithms, but I do love my math and spreadsheets and mathematics professor friends. In the end, it's a just a program, and programs can be made to do whatever we want them to do. ---------------------------------------- As for that 49% thing, I'm helping a friend decide if it's worth buying four of those 2Th/s January pre-order Cointerras. At 8Th/s on a network of 3000Th/s, if one were to Solo Mine, 8/(3000+your h/s) = 0.2659% of the total network h/s... and so it is foolish to Solo Mine. But with that same 8Th/s on a coin that is currently at 10Th/s, then you would have 8/18ths of the network h/s, or 44.444% of the network h/s and so you would average to find 44% of the blocks over a period of time. I understand this over simplifies things, but it's an effective way to get numbers across to people that don't have a head for such things. Cases in Point: BTC Guild holds around 32% of the total network h/s and finds blocks at about that rate, while BitMinter only has around 16% of the total h/s and finds blocks at that as an average rate. (Nice Pie Chart here: http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/) |
|
|
|
|
15
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Viability of centrally issued P2P Cryptocurrency - best answers tipped!
|
on: October 23, 2013, 09:53:29 PM
|
Perhaps we can have this discussion on two threads, as I had started a similar thread posing the question: What would the Perfect Altcoin be? Unfortunately I cannot offer a prize due to lack of funds. (I started day trading on Cryptsy about 2 weeks ago, and have gone from 0.00079625 BTC to a whopping 0.07283193 BTC via Cryptsy's mini-money market... *brags* a whole factor of 8000)(hope that's something to brag about, because I really have no reference points) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=315835.0Please, take a look at that and see if it qualifies as part of this discussion.... or just check it out and let me know what you think over there. In the mean time, I will carefully consider your reply and get back to you soon. Cheers |
|
|
|
|
16
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Proposed Altcoin Chargeback System for Businesses
|
on: October 23, 2013, 08:57:14 PM
|
|
Point of fact, I do actually like the Escrow idea as they are one of the most heavily regulated financial services in the world (having bought a house, I can attest as to just how painfully regulated they are). I can see this working for large value transactions as being of interest to established Escrow companies. You, the private customer, make a purchase and send the funds to the business's Escrow company. Upon satisfactory receipt, you inform the Escrow Service to release your funds to the company; or if the Escrow service doesn't hear a complaint from you within a certain number of days, the funds are released to the business. If there is a complaint from the customer, the Escrow company initiates an investigation, and releases the held funds to whomever it has determined to be the correct party. Yes, this can work for large value purchases, but not for things under a certain value (say $500? because the Escrow company wouldn't see any significant profit in this range of numbers?) or for day-to-day kinds of things like buying a DVD from Walmart or getting a cup of coffee.
Other than the Business Wallet suggestion I have made (which, by the way would unfortunately have to be a government agency or a government funded private business), how would/could disputes over those lesser value transactions be resolved?
I sincerely agree, in general, with the world view you have presented and wish things weren't the way they are. Unfortunately, the World is the way it is (and getting better imho).
Oh, yeah, I hope I didn't imply that the chargeback system were to be automated. Hells, no! Quite the opposite, in fact. Private people would (hopefully) have to talk to real live people (once all the right buttons were pushed in the automated answering machine system), who would in turn be required to perform a rigorous investigation, and then have to manually initiate a remote transaction of the business's wallet in order to get the customer their refund, assuming an intransigent business and the customer is in the right. This is all intended, of course, as a last resort, no-other-options-available method of reimbursement. And a process that should be just daunting enough to enter into in the first place so as to lessen the likelihood of false claims.
--------------------
On a side note, I must say I am happy to see you engaging in the conversation, instead of just nay-saying, as many others are wont to do. I really appreciated your reply. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Proposed Altcoin Chargeback System for Businesses
|
on: October 23, 2013, 06:47:59 PM
|
I disagree that this is a feature that should be included in a cryptocurrency. As I understand it (and like to think of it) Bitcoin, as a currency, is equivalent to giving someone cash. I don't like the idea of someone giving me a $20 bill and then being able to yank it back whenever they want.
This is something that needs to be implemented by third parties, similar to the credit card / banking systems that the fiat currencies use.
I don't have a good answer, but I disagree with the idea you're proposing.
These are my sentiments exactly; this is one of Bitcoin's better qualities, I don't believe we should work to remove it. I don't want my Bitcoin with strings attached to them. First, thank you for engaging in the conversation at hand instead of just trolling :-) Next, although I, too, would like to think of cryptocurrencies as "cash," the unfortunate reality is that "cash" will always be a physical medium of exchange, and cryptocurrencies are digital, therefore fall under the guise of an electronic medium of exchange. 1. That said, I completely agree when it comes to Personal Wallets. 2. I strongly think that Business Wallets should be different, and subject to regulatory measures. 3. I am in no way suggesting any change to, let alone removing, any feature of any cryptocoin's features...... only in making a change to the "business as an end user's" wallet. This feature could be implemented today, and no private individual would notice any difference.... except when it came to having the ability of getting their coins back from a business that did them wrong (like the in the case of BFL). |
|
|
|
|
18
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Viability of centrally issued P2P Cryptocurrency - best answers tipped!
|
on: October 23, 2013, 12:20:30 PM
|
Well.... seeing as this a thought experiment game AND there is a reward for the best thinker... Hmm... lets see.... Let's assume that the government is also going to be mining the currency after publication/distribution of the blockchain, for both profit and regulatory purposes, and only the citizens of that country will be allowed to participate in the mining process (how this can be legislated and enforced is one for the programmers, likely special wallets and machines limited to the regions IP range). In order to prevent a 51% attack, the government should regulate the distribution of the mining equipment and themselves so that the citizens as a collective will maintain 51% of the hashrate. Also, Proof-of-Stake could be used in the design along with other mechanisms that encourage spending rather than hoarding. Include a few deflationary measures, such as a variable ranged fee per transaction that is destroyed, and there would be no need to put a cap on the ultimate number if coins to be created. This is just a quick thought on what the coins and their creation could entail. As for Premine: given no maximum coin creation number, a % of Premine based on the max coin count could not be determined. However, knowing the expected time to block (10-20 minutes?), the block reward (50-100? people like round numbers and multiples of 5 :-P ), the government's expected rate of income from mining, and what the network hashrate will be soon after release... I think these numbers could indicate how much to Premine. The % could be figured according to, say, keep the government ahead of the curve. Without sitting down to do the math, and knowing that the government's chance to find a block will be a near constant of not more than 49%, they could Premine somewhere between the first 1000 and 5000 blocks. Using my min/max numbers, that would give them 50k/500k coins to start. Even with a predetermined max coin count and the government participating in the mining process as already mentioned, I would guesstimate a mere 10% of the grand total would be advisable to mine because they would still continue to have 49% of the hashrate and be generating blocks at a much faster rate than any other Pool Thanks for letting me play, Hope I win! |
|
|
|
|
19
|
Economy / Economics / Re: Perfect Altcoin?
|
on: October 23, 2013, 10:23:04 AM
|
|
Private, Personal, Individual PEOPLE wallets would never be, could never be connected to whatever, whomever the regulating agency happened to be.
On the flip side, this hypothetical regulating agency could use shh tunneling and rpcallow to cause BUSINESS-CORPORATE-INSTITUTION non-people wallets to initiate a new transaction so as to cause a refund to the real, live person/customer, if and only if all other attempts had failed in dispute resolution AND the customer had been found to be the aggrieved party.
This system is already currently in place for ALL fiat accounts, both corporate AND private, and is generally referred to as a chargeback. Cryptocurrencies have finally created a way for PRIVATE individuals to not be subjugated to this system, but BUSINESS do not have (or at least should not have) the same rights as live people do.
Please re-read Point 7.... it only refers to BUSINESSES "handing control over to" an outside agency, just in case push comes to shove and the business is in the wrong.
Point 7 in no way affects your wallet or your money in any way.... except as the recipient address for a refunded transaction.
----------------------------------
Given how all cryptocurrency wallets function right now, I could set up my wallet on my home PC so that, from any predefined/pre-allowed IP in the world, I, and only I, can cause my home PC wallet to send my money to any other wallet. I'm just suggesting that a Business Version of a wallet have those config features built into it, so that a specific agency with a specific IP could initiate a remote transaction of the business's wallet IF that business were to be found at fault.
I think all those people that sent BTC to BFL would like to have gotten their BTC back from BFL if there had been a way to do it. As it stands, it just isn't possible. Thus, Point #7.
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Smart Miners: @ Difficulty Jump, it's often more profitable to mine PPC vs BTC
|
on: October 23, 2013, 09:20:34 AM
|
As BTC prices currently don't keep up with its difficulty rise, it can sometimes make sense to make a mining switch.
Remember, price controls difficulty. Not the other way around. And everything is a complete mess right now, and will continue to be so for a least a few more months. I would concur that price and difficulty could be considered correlative, but there are other factors involved like media exposure, for esample. The more BTC makes the news, the more people get interested and believe that they could see some benefit from their home PC's.... Of those, some will quit and others will invest in better hardware. It is the latter that increase the Network hashrate along with current miners that need more/better hardware to continue to remain profitable, which in turn causes the difficulty to increase every 2016 blocks (which will be, as I write this, in 655 more blocks at an average rate of ~ 8.25 blocks per hour). http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/On the other hand, difficulty is determined by expected block time versus actual block time in a very fun formula explained quite well here: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/5838/how-is-difficulty-calculated/5840To find out what the current Network hash rate is: found/expected*diff*2^32/600. You can find input values for this formula from the previous links. So, yes, for those of us who can no longer compete even by being with one of the large pools, switching to other coins is proving to be more sustainably profitable over time.... until those Scrypt ASICs hit the market..... then the race starts all over again. http://majesti.co/cryptonerd/new-scrypt-asic-miner-announced/ |
|
|
|
|
