BTC/NMC merged mining available for testing

[smoothie]

The developers of NameCoin can do what the want to do.

I am saying that first because you will not hear it when I say what I have to say.

This is not a good idea.  Why?

1. NameCoin's difficulty will increase with out the market deciding if it's a good idea or not.
2. Perception is EVERYTHING and although it's not true that namecoin will cause inflation to bitcoin that's how it will be perceived.

On a personal note I like getting lots of namecoins with me 12 Ghashs I don't want to share with deepbit's 4 THashs!!!
LOL

Just my 2 bit cents.


Davinci

BTW  I think the fact that namecoin is only traded with bitcoins helps bitcoins increase in value as there is 1 thing on the market that can only be purchased with bitcoins.

Are you using all 12 GH/s to mine Namecoins?

[DavinciJ15]

The developers of NameCoin can do what the want to do.

I am saying that first because you will not hear it when I say what I have to say.

This is not a good idea.  Why?

1. NameCoin's difficulty will increase with out the market deciding if it's a good idea or not.
2. Perception is EVERYTHING and although it's not true that namecoin will cause inflation to bitcoin that's how it will be perceived.

On a personal note I like getting lots of namecoins with me 12 Ghashs I don't want to share with deepbit's 4 THashs!!!
LOL

Just my 2 bit cents.


Davinci

BTW  I think the fact that namecoin is only traded with bitcoins helps bitcoins increase in value as there is 1 thing on the market that can only be purchased with bitcoins.

Not right now but soon.  Why?
Are you using all 12 GH/s to mine Namecoins?

[smoothie]

The developers of NameCoin can do what the want to do.

I am saying that first because you will not hear it when I say what I have to say.

This is not a good idea.  Why?

1. NameCoin's difficulty will increase with out the market deciding if it's a good idea or not.
2. Perception is EVERYTHING and although it's not true that namecoin will cause inflation to bitcoin that's how it will be perceived.

On a personal note I like getting lots of namecoins with me 12 Ghashs I don't want to share with deepbit's 4 THashs!!!
LOL

Just my 2 bit cents.


Davinci

BTW  I think the fact that namecoin is only traded with bitcoins helps bitcoins increase in value as there is 1 thing on the market that can only be purchased with bitcoins.

Not right now but soon.  Why?
Are you using all 12 GH/s to mine Namecoins?

Just curious is all. How do you see namecoin in the long run playing out?

[DavinciJ15]

Just curious is all. How do you see namecoin in the long run playing out?

Bitcoin will drag it along or it will beat out bitcoin because it's required to buying domain names why bitcoin has no other function except as a currency or the perception as money.


BTW Gold and silver is money and nothing else.

[smoothie]

Just curious is all. How do you see namecoin in the long run playing out?

Bitcoin will drag it along or it will beat out bitcoin because it's required to buying domain names why bitcoin has no other function except as a currency or the perception as money.


BTW Gold and silver is money and nothing else.

Agreed.

[Iyeman]

BTW Gold and silver is money and nothing else.

Agreed.

So all that gold and silver Jewelery isn't really gold and silver?

[DavinciJ15]

BTW Gold and silver is money and nothing else.

Agreed.

So all that gold and silver Jewelery isn't really gold and silver?

Gold and silver is money and nothing else is money every thing else is credit.

[smoothie]

BTW Gold and silver is money and nothing else.

Agreed.

So all that gold and silver Jewelery isn't really gold and silver?

Gold and silver is money and nothing else is money every thing else is credit.

Platinum isn't credit though.

[DavinciJ15]

BTW Gold and silver is money and nothing else.

Agreed.

So all that gold and silver Jewelery isn't really gold and silver?

Gold and silver is money and nothing else is money every thing else is credit.

Platinum isn't credit though.

LOL good one. But tell the long dead JP Morgan crook that one he will have a good laugh.

[hashman]

You need a new Bitcoin if you want to partake in merged mining. You don't need a new one if you don't care about merged mining - older Bitcoin servers will just ignore the extra 33 bytes.

The 33 bytes are a sha256 hash (32 bytes) and one byte for the length, so, 33. The hash is the root of a merkle tree. As there is only one item in that tree today, it's equivalent to a hash of some data that ties the current namecoin block to the tree root.

You can read the details on the wiki page I posted earlier. It's a complicated technique because Bitcoin wasn't really designed for it, so it must be done in a rather roundabout manner.

Difficulty calculations on NameCoin remain the same as before. The only difference is now there'll likely be more hash power put into the chain because you don't have to choose between namecoin and bitcoin, you can do both. The difficulties are not tied together.

Thanks for trying to explain, but I still don't get it.  Sorry...     What am I missing please? 

A block submitted for solve on the bitcoin network has the hash of the previous block, as well as BTC transactions, and the BTC address of the winning miner, as well as a nonce that was varied endlessly when trying to "solve the block".  To have a valid block you need all these.  Similar for a NMC block.  Right?  Thus, if you are looking for valid BTC blocks, you are looking for BTC blocks which couldn't possibly pass as valid NMC blocks.  I don't see how that could affect NMC in any way either via reward or via helping to secure the network. 

   

[cablepair]

I think you are missing the point of this. I read the wiki and I believe this is the idea of this. If it will work or not I am not sure.

His idea if it were to work, would be say you are on a pool that mines on both the bitcoin network and the namecoin network simultaneously


so as your gpu's are hashing and submitting shares
instead of just submitting that share to the bitcoin network
it is also submitting that share to the namecoin network

this is assuming this would work with all bitcoin forks, which I am not sure that it would.

this seems like a really cool idea if someone could make it work.

[talldude]

From a mining perspective there is absolutely no change to the end-user. The pool has to support merged mining, that's it. Then instead of just mining NMC or BTC, you'll be mining both.

The NMC client needs to be updated to accept the new auxiliary chain. The current NMC client doesn't support this functionality, so it will be a forced update. Bitcoin will not be affected in any way.

The talk is that NMC block 19200 is going to be the launch block. Should be about a month away.

[hashman]

From a mining perspective there is absolutely no change to the end-user. The pool has to support merged mining, that's it. Then instead of just mining NMC or BTC, you'll be mining both.

The NMC client needs to be updated to accept the new auxiliary chain. The current NMC client doesn't support this functionality, so it will be a forced update. Bitcoin will not be affected in any way.

The talk is that NMC block 19200 is going to be the launch block. Should be about a month away.

Doesn't make a lick of sense to me, sorry.  I mean, I can understand a pool which switches back and forth between mining NMC and BTC or other block chains, based on market value and difficulty, but that is simply switching.  I fail to see how work done in solving one hash or share (effectively a set of lower difficulty solves on ONE block chain) can be applied to another block chain.  Auxilliary chain?  Can you point me to a description please? 

If I submit a batch of low-difficulty solved BTC blocks, which have in them the pool operator as the beneficiary, it is proof of work that I am working for the pool.  This work cannot possibly be accepted by a NMC pool as having any meaning at all in the NMC chain right? 

Ok, if you are talking about interesting pool software to give miner choices or enable intelligent switching, I understand.. however it seems you are discussing a core change to the client.  If you could figure out what I am missing here I would be greatly in your debt.  Thanks        

 

[doublec]

Can you point me to a description please? 

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alternative_Chains
https://github.com/vinced/namecoin/blob/master/doc/README_merged-mining.md

[hashman]

Can you point me to a description please? 

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alternative_Chains
https://github.com/vinced/namecoin/blob/master/doc/README_merged-mining.md

Thanks very much for your help.  I am still a little unclear on the motivation for the "merged mining" proposed change and also surprised that there is not more discussion when an official change to the protocol is being proposed in the near future. 

The wiki seems self contradictory at times; for example it states: 

"One final reason is that Satoshi was opposed to putting non-Bitcoin related data into the main chain. As creator of the system, his opinion should carry a lot of weight with anyone serious about extending it. "

This seems like an argument against such a change for merged mining.   

From section "mining" in githu docs:

"When a miner submits a solution, the solution is submitted to both chains. "

This doesn't make sense.  A solution to BTC chain includes BTC transactions and hashes of previous BTC blocks.  How could this possibly be submitted to a NMC chain or have any relevance as proof of work for the NMC network? 

Finally, what is the motivation here?  I see added complexity and no greater security for either network. 



 

[doublec]

Thanks very much for your help.  I am still a little unclear on the motivation for the "merged mining" proposed change and also surprised that there is not more discussion when an official change to the protocol is being proposed in the near future. 

Discussion on the change goes on in the namecoin forums at dot-bit.org if you want to raise questions. The actual developer of the change posts there.

[talldude]

Can you point me to a description please? 

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alternative_Chains
https://github.com/vinced/namecoin/blob/master/doc/README_merged-mining.md

Thanks very much for your help.  I am still a little unclear on the motivation for the "merged mining" proposed change and also surprised that there is not more discussion when an official change to the protocol is being proposed in the near future. 

The motivation is that NMC (and other bitcoin-like systems) can all use the same pool of processing power to verify transactions - no need to choose which coin to mine once it is included as an auxiliary chain.

The wiki seems self contradictory at times; for example it states: 

"One final reason is that Satoshi was opposed to putting non-Bitcoin related data into the main chain. As creator of the system, his opinion should carry a lot of weight with anyone serious about extending it. "

That is why NMC will be an AUXILIARY chain, not part of the main chain.

From section "mining" in githu docs:

"When a miner submits a solution, the solution is submitted to both chains. "

This doesn't make sense.  A solution to BTC chain includes BTC transactions and hashes of previous BTC blocks.  How could this possibly be submitted to a NMC chain or have any relevance as proof of work for the NMC network? 

I don't know know the technical details of the system, so I can't provide a further explanation. The NMC client will need to be updated to be compatible with merged mining.