To quote Satoshi's paper: If the majority were based on one-IP-address-one-vote, it could be subverted by anyone
able to allocate many IPs. I think this needs to be taken into serious consideration when developing the new PoT algorithm. Also, for a solution that depends on pings from active nodes to record uptime, how does one prove that they were actually running a node to secure the network, and not running a script that sends out pings? IP addresses are expensive in most areas and you would need a lot more than just a unique IP to secure a vote. That is part of why the 1000 XCR requirement exists. These are all barriers to keep people from gaining majority control of the network. In regards to the ping statement, I don't think you could do a simple ping. You need to include a hash value based on the last block or something along those lines. okay interesting.. Look forward to getting a solution to our pot problem.. Regards, Brian |
|
|
|
|
This coin sure has fallen from grace. I guess part of it would be due to lack of developments..
But I still hold some of this coin granted not much at today's prices..
|
|
|
|
Below are more details on option 2 of PoT, the iterative probabilistic method. 1. Separate transaction processing from block generation, so transactions can be confirmed by consensus quickly without being held back by verification of node uptime for block generation. 2. Divide fees proportionally among all nodes according to individual weights for each block instead having one node take all for the block. 3. Have nodes confirm each others' timestamps and transactions by iterative random sample with consensus. a. first sample, 10 for example must have 100% consensus. For a sample size of 10 with 10% bad nodes on network, odds of fail are .1^10 =0.00000001% or 1/10 billion. b. if first sample is not 100% consensus, second larger sample is taken, for example, 100, requiring 90% consensus. For a sample size of 100 with 10% bad nodes on the network, odds of a fail with 90 or more nodes being bad are effectively 0 (my calculator calculates the sum of the probabilities of 90 through 100 nodes being bad as 0. This may continue through further iterations with increasing numbers of nodes and lower consensus requirements as a failsafe against network attacks by floods of bad nodes. (for number of nodes N is much larger than sample size, using Binomial Distribution as approximation instead of sampling without replacement, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution) c. The above sample sizes can be adjusted so probability of step a failing is equivalent to probability of step b failing. 4. flag nodes with consistently disagreeing results as bad a. ignore in confirmations b. alert owners node is malfunctioning c. maybe auto-restart node when flagged as bad d. too many flags and restarts blacklists node permanently. 5. Since fees are split proportionally, block may be forged randomly with highest difficulty to select valid forks as chains having highest difficulty. Overall, this amounts to a quality and reliability engineering approach to crypto. Ideally, the weight should reflect the quality of a node. Currently the metrics are its reliability as expressed in uptime and its activity in the amount it spends. More metrics may be added, such as the speed and accuracy of its results in processing transactions and reaching consensus, the accuracy of its time stamping, and the speed with which it responds to queries from its peers for consensus. The random sampling of nodes may be dynamically weighted to sample nodes of known higher quality more frequently than nodes of lower or unknown quality to improve the reliability of the network. The probabilistic model is a reliability problem. The required reliability is determined as length of time the network must run with an acceptable probability of failure. If it does fail, it must do so in a graceful manner without catastrophic results, with full recovery possible. In crypto, a graceful failure is degradation of performance, less graceful is a full halt with no data or transaction loss or error. Least graceful is error requiring rollback of the blockchain for recovery. Any fails beyond this are unacceptable as they would be catastrophic, and even a rollback must be avoided. To anticipate and avoid problems, a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failure_mode_and_effects_analysis) will be needed to identify all possible failure modes and what effects they would have on network reliability and its users. The parameters of the probabilistic iterations may be adjusted to achieve the required reliability. It is what is known in reliability engineering as a standby redundant system, where if a primary module fails, a secondary takes its place, and further iterations of consensus act as additional standby redundancy. what are you a coder or something?  Thanks for the feedback, Brian |
|
|
|
A heads up to you guys trying to game the system by running multiple nodes on the same IP. It doesnt work.
I am talking to you:
104.131.159.247
104.131.24.219
104.131.25.48
106.187.42.214
109.73.224.63
109.73.224.74
109.73.224.76
some of you guys are running 20 nodes per IP#
The nodes have to be on unique IP #s, othewise they are treated as one node.
how the fuck do see peopels ip ROFLMAO and post them here dumbfucker  nice safe 0.5 xcr txids HAHAHAHA not 1 cheap fucks Forum 8 views  Seriously.. Don't you have something better to do? |
|
|
|
Add NOBL & Diamond please
+1 great recommendation |
|
|
|
Don't you have anything better to do? I mean seriously... Bring up things and twist them
Regards,
Brian
SHEESH!!! you guys complain about everything..................... I bet you wont be complaining about the price come January or February. i dont think they here then so yes no complain. u tell me 10000 sat after win wallet then when no code work you say 3 ore 4k after wallet and now are hassling the guys complaining tell me how im happy with you you play off like pro now and say long term and not pump after all lost and mens in thread dont say something cuz they not do anything anyway you only want community for money!!! the ipos.then bye bye..scoundrel you say wait 3 month every month . now listen him. wait january then another fault so wait may or maybe in one year. you worry for manipulater on buy wall!! i saw ur bloody pre mine touched and sold of 3 and half Milion of it ! scoundrel ! not want buy wall with that ? scum dumper ! when i am sell mine bought in 2660 for lousy 600 satoshi with mine heard earned money you cannot even keep your fatfingers from selling when you already got the 750 btc from us ! you bloody greedy lier basterd ! karma come for you ! we need a Chinese thread |
|
|
|
|
My message was directed towards: starik69. Not you
|
|
|
|
Are you saying that practice of buying back shares of real companies in real world is "counter-intuitive to the IPO"? ??
Yes, any expense of IPO funds lessens the available funds for development. Lately, real world companies are buying back their stock because the top management are issued options to buy stock at low prices as part of their pay package. Using company funds to purchase stock raises the stock price. The managers then either sell the options or buy/sell the stock. In publicly traded companies, any purchase/sale of stock by top management is required to be reported immediately to the SEC, and thus the public.
Sorry, i dont see an answer in your words. What you said is not a mystery and there is no any "counter-intuitive to the IPO" in your argument. Strange you are speaking about SEC with concern of Crypti, anyway proposed wall must be public Are you saying 650BTC (=750-100) is not enough to "pay for work to be done on Crypti, such as design work etc"?  The budget right now goes out 1 full year for development. Depending on the complexity of the problems, and the issues to be funded, the budget has been changing every week. We have to be careful not to exhaust to overspend and exhaust the funds before accomplishing our goals. We are not Apple.... our funds are much more limited. Ok, Crypti has no budget on that 
Are you saying that practice of buying back shares of real companies in real world is "counter-intuitive to the IPO"? ??
Yes, any expense of IPO funds lessens the available funds for development. Lately, real world companies are buying back their stock because the top management are issued options to buy stock at low prices as part of their pay package. Using company funds to purchase stock raises the stock price. The managers then either sell the options or buy/sell the stock. In publicly traded companies, any purchase/sale of stock by top management is required to be reported immediately to the SEC, and thus the public.
Sorry, i dont see an answer in your words. What you said is not a mystery and there is no any "counter-intuitive to the IPO" in your argument. Strange you are speaking about SEC with concern of Crypti, anyway proposed wall must be public Are you saying 650BTC (=750-100) is not enough to "pay for work to be done on Crypti, such as design work etc"? The budget right now goes out 1 full year for development. Depending on the complexity of the problems, and the issues to be funded, the budget has been changing every week. We have to be careful not to exhaust to overspend and exhaust the funds before accomplishing our goals. We are not Apple.... our funds are much more limited. Ok, Crypti has no budget on that Or... Hey! You said "the budget has been changing every week." Why not this week to change it for a wall? Do you understand that buying 100BTC Crypti at half ipo price and selling them on ipo price will bring devs new 100BTC?
Or may be you do not think that Crypti price will ever reach ipo level again?  DO you understand that that would be artificial market manipulation? If we were buying XCR lower than IPO and selling later at higher prices, we would then be accused by the community of rigging the market. No, there could be no manipulation when all is done openly and transparently.  As there is no manipulation when companies buy back their shares.  Your first two examples are irrelevant because that already in the past, third could not happen because of the wall Or... Hey! You said "the budget has been changing every week." Why not this week to change it for a wall? Do you understand that buying 100BTC Crypti at half ipo price and selling them on ipo price will bring devs new 100BTC?
Or may be you do not think that Crypti price will ever reach ipo level again? DO you understand that that would be artificial market manipulation? If we were buying XCR lower than IPO and selling later at higher prices, we would then be accused by the community of rigging the market. No, there could be no manipulation when all is done openly and transparently. As there is no manipulation when companies buy back their shares. Your first two examples are irrelevant because that already in the past, third could not happen because of the wall Don't you have anything better to do? I mean seriously... Bring up things and twist them. Regards, Brian Edit: My message was directed towards: starik69 |
|
|
|
Nice wallet.  LOL, that looks kind of familiar.. |
|
|
|
ITO tab no longer on CoinGateway.
Yep....just checked. You are correct. I asked them to remove the tab until 5 AM EST at which point the ITO markets will open why so damn early? |
|
|
|
When is the ITO live?
In about 4 1/2 hours. Why the hell would they schedule it for 5 AM (my time anyhow)? |
|
|
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong. But the BlockNet will be a fixed price of 000.25 BTC until November 5 or if all tokens are sold. So a person could buy on November 4 and still buy at the same price?
Regards
Brian
|
|
|
|
Why not devs to place a huge 50 or 100 BTC buying wall at half of ipo price and let all panic dumpers sell? And when Crypti will became more alive and promoted devs can sell again on ipo price. Good proposal Although, that's not a terrible idea. I'll just be patient and wait for the team to deliver. If the team delivers, the price should appreciate modestly.. I don't know what all the panicking is about.. I guess people want a solution NOW. I'll just continue to hold, whether that makes be smart or dumb. We won't know for some time.. Regards, Brian |
|
|
|
What's going on in here? Utahjohn, I don't think you need to take such drastic actions specially when you have been a devoted member of DMD community. Simply keep your posts straight to the point. No need to threaten anyone. We all have the same objectives here. Hope you can overcome the anger and understand the reasons for moderation. We care about your input but it is best if you can group all your thoughts in one post instead of writing 10th of posts one after the other. As far as I can tell there hasn't been any attack on the network, so not sure where this is coming from, or perhaps you meant something else? There was not attack on blockchain, and thank you my friend from Thailand Cryptonit mis-read. Utah John, please move along.. I think the community has put up with enough.. There is 100's of other coins. Maybe you can find a coin that is more suited towards you. Best regards, Brian USA |
|
|
|
Hello,
I have an account with Bitfinex.com and was using Bluestacks with Google authenticator. But I have a hard drive crash and need to have the 2 FA reset. So I can log back in and make some trades. I did contact support a couple days ago. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Regards,
Brian
okay, since there isn't Same here, email sent a week ago --> no answer yet
Any update about this? I asked specifically if you guys could provide some more info? I don't even have the email address to search for your email. That being said, support has said they do not have any backlog. okay, I provided a pretty good summary above and since there doesn't sound like a backlog. My email was titled "lost Google authenticator key". I'll be glad to provide any details in regards to my account and trading activity. Thanks for your time, Brian Hey Brian, I found the email, it looks like it was responded to. I'm not sure if there was an issue after that. Specifically, John asks you to send the request from the email associated with the account, this is one of security measures in place to ensure that only the account holder can make a change to 2FA settings. I am looking into this further, but it appears, since John asked for an email from the address registered with the account, that the email you used was not it. Could you try to send an email to support from the other email address you mentioned in your email? I will check the support emails, and make sure to hurry this along, but it appears that we are just waiting on an email from the email address associated with the account. -Josh I'm sorry, I had to have 2FA disabled on Bittrex as well.. I got the emails confused and yes you guys did contact me that day. Sorry about the inconvenience.. Regards, Brian |
|
|
|
Hello,
I have an account with Bitfinex.com and was using Bluestacks with Google authenticator. But I have a hard drive crash and need to have the 2 FA reset. So I can log back in and make some trades. I did contact support a couple days ago. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Regards,
Brian
okay, since there isn't Same here, email sent a week ago --> no answer yet
Any update about this? I asked specifically if you guys could provide some more info? I don't even have the email address to search for your email. That being said, support has said they do not have any backlog. okay, I provided a pretty good summary above and since there doesn't sound like a backlog. My email was titled "lost Google authenticator key". I'll be glad to provide any details in regards to my account and trading activity. Thanks for your time, Brian |
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I have an account with Bitfinex and was using Bluestacks with Google authenticator. But I had a hard drive crash and need to have the 2 FA reset. So I can log back in and make some trades. I did contact support a couple days ago. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Regards,
Brian
|
|
|
|
– I've been here since the start of the IPO, and despite my criticism, I'm still a Crypti supporter. I still hold all my XCR from the IPO (those, that I've sold I've bought back at a lower price), and will continue to hold far into the future... – I hold the same view. I look for good things and that worried about daily fluctuations. It's more about the long-term. If they deliver, the price will appreciate modestly |
|
|
|
|
Give me a break. I wouldn't invest a penny..
|
|
|
|
Keep in mind I can't give set timelines right now and those are best guesses at fairly positive, no issue development timelines. Rarely do you ever NOT run into issues so we will just have to keep you all updated on how things are going and hopefully we can all be patient and understand that at the end of all of this, we will have a much stronger foothold in the industry.
Many Thanks for the detailed update, GreXX. Just a humble opinion : We community members should be patient with crypti devs and not demand updates in every 2 days, though it seems to be the norm in crypto. I'm happy even if there are weekly detailed updates and targets about permanent PoT, CMBs, logo, web-design, etc. Asking for updates every 2 days results in guesstimate timelines & increased expectations which then leads to frustration when the said timeline is not met due to new code issues which always seem to raise their ugly head in last moments. It would be much better if we come into an agreement with devs to issue weekly updates on a predetermined day in the week, say Monday.
Then we can all look forward to Monday each week to get all relevant updates.I would like us to be realistic and not set false expectations to ourselves about the future. Hope it makes sense. Thats a good idea! Having weekly updates on choosen day, so we dont have to ask all the time. Anyway, im not selling my hard earned XCR so low! +1 I concur that is a good idea. A set date for future updates.. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
