Bitcoin Forum
March 06, 2015, 12:02:46 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.10.0 [Torrent] (New!)
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  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 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 ... 93 »
141  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [white paper] Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain on: October 22, 2013, 05:51:12 AM
Correct. Velocity can't increase perpetually, thus eventually base money supply has to increase or bankruptcies must ensue, which is where the world is now (final peak inflection point is 2015 - 2016 probably).

It's all about the change in velocity compared to the change in debt. Obviously we can't eliminate bankruptcy unless we eliminate debt, and that is a problem I do not think is trying to be solved yet. So the issue is how to minimize the eventual bad result of a velocity/debt change. A fixed supply of currency is probably the worst case scenario anyone could come up with (mayyybe second worst to modern government fiat), but it can function without an expanding supply. Wink

Nothing in the universe operates as a flat-line equilibrium. Nature is always oscillating (wave-like) in nature.

Of course, the finer points are the amplitude and the duration, as I was getting at with that post.
142  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [white paper] Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain on: October 22, 2013, 03:42:25 AM
1. If all base money is earning an interest, then the base money supply must expand, otherwise there doesn't exist enough base money to pay the interest.

Along the same lines as I mentioned earlier, this is not accurate. One base unit of currency on average can be used to pay off more than one debt unit if the velocity of money is high enough. The problem is that it is only a matter of when the velocity will drop from previous levels and necessitate a slew of bankruptcies as lots of credit/debt money disappears, and a cycle of economic recession starts. This doesn't only affect FRB, it affects a rigid gold standard (lol) too because then instead of not lending debt digits, you're hiding gold under the mattress. If you're rich and want to stay that way, you play scared. The Fed nowadays tries to fix this by offering cheap money, etc. it always ends up being a handout to the people who got us into this to get them out of it unscathed while everyone else suffers.

Bitcoin would work even worse because you can't dig up more bitcoins than allotted, so there is nothing coming from anywhere to spur new economic activity. It won't work this way in practice though (the "deflationary spiral") because people will just switch to a clone or back to fiat. The bitcoin wiki probably still says something along the lines of "it won't happen because the rich will buy stuff".

2. Those who earn the interest are wealthy, and only spend a fraction of their passive income, thus they don't transfer it back to those who are paying interest. Thus, it is a mathematical certainty that eventually all of the money supply will be transferred to them, if we don't debase the money supply.

It's only a certainty under certain conditions. The wealthy play the game that has been passed down to them over the generations. But with a couple simple variable tweaks, you could totally change that game. For example, the idea behind demurrage and Freicoin, where money has a carrying cost, ergo not durable. I don't think it has a shot of working considering that it will (probably) never be legal tender, but if it were, the game would be played much differently.

Regardless, if all base money is earning interest and there is a fixed supply in a real world scenario, it can still work, it just involves a lot of bankruptcies in lieu of an expanding supply. Banks would find some equilibrium between bankruptcies and interest rates to be where the most profitable position is. Of course, when they fuck up, as they always will, the bankruptcies will increase significantly for some time. Bankruptcies in general are not good for anyone including the rich, so the tightly controlled system of inflation we use today is preferable. Without government spending of bitcoin to put money into motion and with more than half in the hands of the tiniest of percentage of the world's population, the trail to bitcoin adoption (or any deflationary money similar to it) can only be littered with bankruptcy.
143  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: Momentum Proof-of-Work Bounty - 30 BTC on: October 22, 2013, 12:15:41 AM
We have solved this problem by limiting the nonce search space so that the maximum amount of useful memory for gaining non-linear performance increases is around 4 GB.     Assuming you have exhausted all possible nonces you would have to clear the memory and start over.   Now it is a race to see how fast you can fill 4 GB of memory.   While an ASIC could certainly do it quickly, memory bus speeds would still be the limiting factor.   

Doesn't this mean that the PoW loses its "momentum" property then, though? I think it's probably for the better anyway, as relying on an unusual mechanic of the PoW algorithm to reduce some gameable property of bitShares is probably a short-sighted idea. Or am I mistaken about the momentum?
144  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Momentum Proof-of-Work on: October 20, 2013, 08:56:26 AM
Bitcoin will not change algorithm until it becomes unsecure.

And this is not an algorithm for Bitcoin as bytemaster has stated.

There is no reason to do so.

Yes, Bitcoin got absolutely everything right. Stop any form of progress in any way because you're just wasting your time. Roll Eyes
145  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Momentum Proof-of-Work on: October 18, 2013, 06:56:45 PM
The momentum factor prevents manipulation of the BitShares blockchain based market because miners face a major cost to 'stop mining mid block in an attempt to manipulate the market'.

I've read some of the bitshares stuff but haven't looked too deeply, but if I get this right there is no longer a nonce adjustment then with this PoW, right?

I wanted a fast validating proof of work.

There are other, very beneficial applications to this proof, which lead into...

I wanted the most decentralized proof of work I could come up with.

this. I believe you have made a very, very significant step in this direction.

Again, kudos. If this all checks out by people smarter than me, you have made a very significant contribution to the field of cryptocurrency.
146  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Momentum Proof-of-Work on: October 18, 2013, 06:36:33 PM
Not to downplay your achievement, but your idea here seems almost simple after the fact. What led you down this line of thinking? It is certainly much less complicated than scrypt as PoW, which is a bonus. But scrypt does do a fairly good job as PoW in lieu of SHA256. What need did you see that needed filling? Just a (potentially) truly CPU-dominated, botnet resistant PoW?
147  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Momentum Proof-of-Work on: October 18, 2013, 06:17:14 PM
This memory-hard hash function scales memory to the point of requiring GB of memory to efficiently find solutions, but almost no memory to verify.

I am not well-versed enough to be able to determine the veracity of this from your whitepaper, but if accurate, this is a supremely excellent achievement.
148  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [white paper] Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain on: October 17, 2013, 07:13:16 AM
Pedantically correct.

Mathematically correct. It is an often misunderstood concept and conflating the reasons for the necessity of an expanding supply is not helpful to your line of argument.

The large wealth can't seek out those little hydropower streams all over the world, because the economy-of-scale is too small for them.

This presumes that hydropower streams are somehow the end-all be-all for efficient energy production. It also ignores the very significant hardware aspect of the equation. Square peg, round hole.

Do you have a better solution that is tied to the effort and ingenuity of humans and not just a Marxist redistribution scheme?

149  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [white paper] Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain on: October 17, 2013, 03:18:58 AM
I would like to know who has 600 years to sit on idle savings for a start. There is nothing selfish about deflation, it is the natural consequence of a currency which experiences increased demand and no one should have the ability to steal that extra value from the currency. What you are basically saying is that people shouldn't be allowed to save their money and hope it goes up in value, which is obviously not the spirit of cryptocurrency.

Not in the spirit of bitcoin. Your argument about stealing is pretty funny, considering you are talking about being entitled to an increase in your wealth by the mere virtue of other people demanding to use the currency that you happen to use. Wealth is not created this way, wealth is redistributed. Wealth is created by the trading lubricant provided by money in lieu of barter. I've argued in the past that I think FRB was a key part in creating the merchant/middle class. Do I think FRB would have been the best way? Of course not, it created other types of empires and enslavement, but coincidentally or not, it does have a correlation with humanity moving away from feudalism and into a much more free society.

With a fairly objective perspective, one could argue that the US sees a much higher standard of living than it deserves, merely because of the property that its currency is the world reserve currency. The US government/fed/banking system triumvirate thoroughly enrich themselves by "printing" valueless bills in return for real goods and services and real power in the world. This, if not precisely, closely parallels how value is absorbed into the bitcoin ecosystem--by funneling it through the top. It is much more difficult to objectively see that when you (the general you) might be close to the top that this is a problem.

And mathematically loans require more money supply every year due to the interest rate. So if you only have gold, then you have no choice but to cheat and debase it with fractional reserves.

This is mathematically false. Interest does not require an ever-increasing money supply, it only requires that those who earn the interest spend it. However, there is very little incentive to actually consume wealth when it very easily buys power, and power tends to beget more power and wealth. The problem, my dear AnonyMint, with perpetual fixed debasement in a bitcoin-like blockchain design, is that competition to waste resources in pursuit of some-percentage-inflation means that little to no power will actually ever be distributed in that design. It is also a square peg in a round hole treatment that tries to address the fact that "something must be done" but "I really have no idea what." Comparing it to "this is sort of how it works today" is not particularly convincing, considering that it is the system that is trying to be fixed.
150  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [white paper] Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain on: October 16, 2013, 09:05:47 AM
Powerful argumentation, as always.
151  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [white paper] Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain on: October 16, 2013, 08:57:44 AM
We only keep N blocks of signatures so what is your point? The super peers (which keep all history) are super Wink

Sounds like centralization to me.
152  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [white paper] Purely P2P Crypto-Currency With Finite Mini-Blockchain on: October 16, 2013, 08:24:25 AM
Any scheme providing a private and public key is asymmetric cryptography. Note the use of two keys.

Signing a hash of the transaction which included a nonce (e.g. the transaction id in Bitcoin)

You still misunderstand bitcoin transactions.

The transactions would not need to be stored in a Merkel tree since the only reason for doing so is to be able to verify remaining transactions against the block header after pruning and to support simplified payment verification[10] which is unnecessary because fully verifying peers would have optimized resource requirements.

Your argument assumes that all peers will be fully verifying just because it is easier than bitcoin. It is still not easy.

Since transaction sender signature size becomes an insignificant factor (except for the super peers), the relatively insecure ECDSA of Bitcoin can be replaced with Lamport signatures with extraordinary long key lengths, e.g. 4096 bit.

And bandwidth constraints are completely disacknowledged for the cherry on top. Replace storage unscalability with bandwidth unscalability and pretend no one notices? Right.
153  Economy / Economics / Re: Ripple-like systems a threat to Bitcoin? on: September 27, 2013, 08:34:33 PM
- The IOU thing is idiotic. Unless you want to create a massive debt apparatus

I am not well-versed in Ripple, but I understand some parts of what it can accomplish in a LETS type system. There are businesses that trade products with each other using credit for their products. e.g. I will buy some TP from you now, and you can buy an equal value of paper towels from me later--with no cash exchanged, no sales tax paid, etc. I think Ripple hopes to achieve this on a much bigger scale. If you avoid focusing on the cash side of things, these types of systems can be quite useful and highly advantageous to trade.
154  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: NSA and ECC on: September 22, 2013, 02:48:11 PM
(and I think there were additional constraints as well— it certainly would have been nice if the authors had given concrete figures rather than requiring the readers to fuddle through the math themselves…).

Super math geeks, what do you expect? Tongue Hopefully the more cryptography enters into the public eye, cryptographers will be more apt to write papers that are digestible by a wider audience. Is it possible to simply avoid getting into the situations described by the paper? Or would doing so effectively reduce the security by the same amount?
155  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Will ASIC adoption bring PPC to the forefront of alt currency? on: September 21, 2013, 07:49:26 PM
we're looking at massive supply deflation in the next sixth months, and a subsequent mass increase in valuation against fiat.

I do not think that this is a guaranteed result by any stretch. Bitcoin has the network effect going for it, PPC does not. Strangling the supply so early on in its adoption could result in it simply being avoided.
156  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: NSA and ECC on: September 21, 2013, 07:31:05 PM
Maybe this needs its own thread, but there are a lot of crypto-smart people in this thread who will see it and it needs some discussion I think:

"Some Lattice Attacks on DSA and ECDSA"

Abstract: In this paper, using the LLL reduction method and computing the
integral points of two classes of conics, we develop attacks on DSA and
ECDSA in case where the secret and the ephemeral key and their modular
inverse are quite small or quite large.

I wasn't able to find any papers or discussion referencing it. The authors conclude that the attacks can be "quite efficient".
157  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: on average, how much HD space does bitcoin-qt consume per day on: September 20, 2013, 01:40:08 AM
Satoshi envisioned that eventually only few copies of the entire blockchain will be stored for archive purposes, and large miners and pool operators (and wealthy hobbyists/supporters) will be the only ones keeping copies of the blockchain, with the general users just relying on the light clients that only request address balances, and sign/transmit transfers to the network.

I don't think he "envisioned" that as much as "saw" that it was the only way it would work. It does not scale particularly well, and this is a weakness, not a feature. How weak a weakness is certainly debatable.
158  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [NEWS] eMunie: Some general news and 100% Anonymity on: September 19, 2013, 03:49:14 PM
You think you can change over a 100 years of brainwashing and programming with some software? No, that is not how it works and you must be incredibly ignorant to think it can.

Kids are instilled with this idea that fiat money "makes sense" when it doesn't. The first time you tell a kid about fiat money they don't know how it can be so, but a few years later it's accepted as reality. To change this reality is near impossible, like changing someone who is muslim to atheism. Such programming takes many years to change, it's very gradual.

I don't think people are brainwashed into believing fiat money makes sense, I think the majority of people don't know and don't care how it works. Although one could probably argue this has to do with the fact that very, very little is taught about it in school, so people just assume that "it works." The problem with bitcoin is that its following is great about educating people about the ills of fiat, but not so good about the problems of deflation. Hell, even Lew Rockwell had an oft-cited article around here for awhile reinforcing the "goodness of deflation" by using the example of computers and appliances, because clearly deflation due to technological and productivity increases in an inflationary currency is the same as general deflation.

It seems to me that an outside observer would see bitcoin proponents attempting to "brainwash" new recruits in the same way you accuse the educational/government(?) system of doing. It's astonishing how quickly I see some newbie posters regurgitate some of the bitcoinomics arguments I've seen and heard refined here over the last couple of years.

What I do know is you etlase2 have been talking down others work for year(s) now and still haven't done anything about it. Why is this? Do something if you think others can do what you say is possible. Show us the (right) way.

How is designing and discussing alternatives not doing anything about it? Rome and Bitcoin weren't built in a day.
159  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [NEWS] eMunie: Some general news and 100% Anonymity on: September 19, 2013, 02:41:47 PM
Can I ask honestly for clarification on why you believe the PoW and blockchain principal of cryptocurrency a long con?


 where do you see the main problems ?

It is not PoW or the blockchain that I have the major issues with, though those are terribly inefficient. The main issue I have is with this notion that a pyramid distribution of currency where 50% or more is distributed to a few thousand people will succeed at doing anything but creating the next Wall Street or London. I do not see exchanging one boss for another with grandiose promises of "this time, it's different" as anything other than a way to relieve the ignorant of their money.

When currencies start appearing that break this trend, I believe you will see a strong run to the bottom for all of the currencies that require an influx of new suckers to maintain the charade of the sustainability of closed, pyramid money supplies. And somebody with a fat stack of bitcoins is probably going to speed the process along leaving thousands holding the bag.
160  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: NSA and ECC on: September 18, 2013, 09:27:42 PM
Very interesting, thanks for that Burt.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 ... 93 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!