[ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything (decentralized blockexplorer coming)

[Nthused]

All looks great, so far, especially the BTC full node feature.

Wait, we're actually going through with this???
I thought it was just someone's idea.

Looks like its just under investigation.

If it could be done, SPR would get so much publicity out of it it's not funny.

An altcoin supporting Bitoin? The price of servicenodes would go through the roof.

But then if Bitcoin implements those features & users get rewarded for having Servicenodes/Masternodes then the price of BTC would drop considerably since inflation will increase due to more coins being created quicker without mining.

A lot of people have stored up big on Bitcoin so I wouldn't be surprised if those kinds of people would abuse the system, then a fix would have to be issued etc, etc.

To be honest Bitcoin is fine the way it is, I don't see any coins even worth $5-$30 each these days.

Litecoin was the only coin to even gain that much momentum but the ever ongoing fad in the crypto scene is the traders as you can't control them, Buy Low, Sell High, Rinse & Repeat, that is how the game is played until they move onto the next coin as nobody wants to mine outdated things apparently.

Or I misunderstanding the whole situation ?

On another note wouldn't that still be technically PoS but only earnable through Servicenodes/Masternodes ?

[coins101]

All looks great, so far, especially the BTC full node feature.

Wait, we're actually going through with this???
I thought it was just someone's idea.

Looks like its just under investigation.

If it could be done, SPR would get so much publicity out of it it's not funny.

An altcoin supporting Bitoin? The price of servicenodes would go through the roof.

But then if Bitcoin implements those features & users get rewarded for having Servicenodes/Masternodes then the price of BTC would drop considerably since inflation will increase due to more coins being created quicker without mining.

A lot of people have stored up big on Bitcoin so I wouldn't be surprised if those kinds of people would abuse the system, then a fix would have to be issued etc, etc.

To be honest Bitcoin is fine the way it is, I don't see any coins even worth $5-$30 each these days.

Litecoin was the only coin to even gain that much momentum but the ever ongoing fad in the crypto scene is the traders as you can't control them, Buy Low, Sell High, Rinse & Repeat, that is how the game is played until they move onto the next coin as nobody wants to mine outdated things apparently.

Or I misunderstanding the whole situation ?

On another note wouldn't that still be technically PoS but only earnable through Servicenodes/Masternodes ?

There has been a consistent downtrend in full bitcoin nodes.


https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/?days=90

This proposal is not for bitcoin to adopt servicenodes, as far as I can tell.

This proposal is for servicenode operators to host full bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin holders wouldn't care much about the impact on bitcoin, other than those in the know recognizing that the security and stability of the bitcoin network is being supported by an altcoin.

[CHAOSiTEC]

All looks great, so far, especially the BTC full node feature.

Wait, we're actually going through with this???
I thought it was just someone's idea.

Looks like its just under investigation.

If it could be done, SPR would get so much publicity out of it it's not funny.

An altcoin supporting Bitoin? The price of servicenodes would go through the roof.

But then if Bitcoin implements those features & users get rewarded for having Servicenodes/Masternodes then the price of BTC would drop considerably since inflation will increase due to more coins being created quicker without mining.

A lot of people have stored up big on Bitcoin so I wouldn't be surprised if those kinds of people would abuse the system, then a fix would have to be issued etc, etc.

To be honest Bitcoin is fine the way it is, I don't see any coins even worth $5-$30 each these days.

Litecoin was the only coin to even gain that much momentum but the ever ongoing fad in the crypto scene is the traders as you can't control them, Buy Low, Sell High, Rinse & Repeat, that is how the game is played until they move onto the next coin as nobody wants to mine outdated things apparently.

Or I misunderstanding the whole situation ?

On another note wouldn't that still be technically PoS but only earnable through Servicenodes/Masternodes ?

There has been a consistent downtrend in full bitcoin nodes.


https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/?days=90

This proposal is not for bitcoin to adopt servicenodes, as far as I can tell.

This proposal is for servicenode operators to host full bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin holders wouldn't care much about the impact on bitcoin, other than those in the know recognizing that the security and stability of the bitcoin network is being supported by an altcoin.

and that is something that creates value!

[e1ghtSpace]

All looks great, so far, especially the BTC full node feature.

Wait, we're actually going through with this???
I thought it was just someone's idea.

Looks like its just under investigation.

If it could be done, SPR would get so much publicity out of it it's not funny.

An altcoin supporting Bitoin? The price of servicenodes would go through the roof.

But then if Bitcoin implements those features & users get rewarded for having Servicenodes/Masternodes then the price of BTC would drop considerably since inflation will increase due to more coins being created quicker without mining.

A lot of people have stored up big on Bitcoin so I wouldn't be surprised if those kinds of people would abuse the system, then a fix would have to be issued etc, etc.

To be honest Bitcoin is fine the way it is, I don't see any coins even worth $5-$30 each these days.

Litecoin was the only coin to even gain that much momentum but the ever ongoing fad in the crypto scene is the traders as you can't control them, Buy Low, Sell High, Rinse & Repeat, that is how the game is played until they move onto the next coin as nobody wants to mine outdated things apparently.

Or I misunderstanding the whole situation ?

On another note wouldn't that still be technically PoS but only earnable through Servicenodes/Masternodes ?

There has been a consistent downtrend in full bitcoin nodes.


https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/?days=90

This proposal is not for bitcoin to adopt servicenodes, as far as I can tell.

This proposal is for servicenode operators to host full bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin holders wouldn't care much about the impact on bitcoin, other than those in the know recognizing that the security and stability of the bitcoin network is being supported by an altcoin.

and that is something that creates value!

I thought we wante setting up servicenodes easy, but now the user will need to download 20GB of blockchain from bitcoin? It doesn't sound so user friendly...

[CHAOSiTEC]

All looks great, so far, especially the BTC full node feature.

Wait, we're actually going through with this???
I thought it was just someone's idea.

Looks like its just under investigation.

If it could be done, SPR would get so much publicity out of it it's not funny.

An altcoin supporting Bitoin? The price of servicenodes would go through the roof.

But then if Bitcoin implements those features & users get rewarded for having Servicenodes/Masternodes then the price of BTC would drop considerably since inflation will increase due to more coins being created quicker without mining.

A lot of people have stored up big on Bitcoin so I wouldn't be surprised if those kinds of people would abuse the system, then a fix would have to be issued etc, etc.

To be honest Bitcoin is fine the way it is, I don't see any coins even worth $5-$30 each these days.

Litecoin was the only coin to even gain that much momentum but the ever ongoing fad in the crypto scene is the traders as you can't control them, Buy Low, Sell High, Rinse & Repeat, that is how the game is played until they move onto the next coin as nobody wants to mine outdated things apparently.

Or I misunderstanding the whole situation ?

On another note wouldn't that still be technically PoS but only earnable through Servicenodes/Masternodes ?

There has been a consistent downtrend in full bitcoin nodes.


https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/?days=90

This proposal is not for bitcoin to adopt servicenodes, as far as I can tell.

This proposal is for servicenode operators to host full bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin holders wouldn't care much about the impact on bitcoin, other than those in the know recognizing that the security and stability of the bitcoin network is being supported by an altcoin.

and that is something that creates value!

I thought we wante setting up servicenodes easy, but now the user will need to download 20GB of blockchain from bitcoin? It doesn't sound so user friendly...

think of it this way, its the first test version, at some point when we have more than 1 service for the service nodes, i think the best course will be to let the service nodes decide what services they want to offer, and what services not to offer....

[coins101]

...
think of it this way, its the first test version, at some point when we have more than 1 service for the service nodes, i think the best course will be to let the service nodes decide what services they want to offer, and what services not to offer....

+1

My take is that we see if the first servicenode launch can include an automated / easy way for node operators to have a full bitcoin node start-up.

We have seen that bitcoin nodes can be tracked



Instead of starting out with a plan to verify if nodes are being closed down after they are launched, lets leave that as an issue that will be addressed at a future date. If people choose to shut down bitcoin nodes, then we can keep an audit account of IP addresses, and apply retrospective deductions in payments.

ServiceNodes can ping each other and we can create an audit log of up time of addresses, plus the version being run, from bitnodes and also from servicenodes.  The audit log does't have to be there at launch.

At first the the payment deductions will not mean much, but as services grow so will the potential losses. I personally would not want to risk that for the sake of saving a few $ on hosting costs.

This means we can launch at the end of May or start of June, with servicenodes and bitcoin full nodes.

For clarity, bitcoin full nodes, running in parallel with servicenodes, can have a zero balance.

[e1ghtSpace]

...
think of it this way, its the first test version, at some point when we have more than 1 service for the service nodes, i think the best course will be to let the service nodes decide what services they want to offer, and what services not to offer....

+1

My take is that we see if the first servicenode launch can include an automated / easy way for node operators to have a full bitcoin node start-up.

We have seen that bitcoin nodes can be tracked



Instead of starting out with a plan to verify if nodes are being closed down after they are launched, lets leave that as an issue that will be addressed at a future date. If people choose to shut down bitcoin nodes, then we can keep an audit account of IP addresses, and apply retrospective deductions in payments.

ServiceNodes can ping each other and we can create an audit log of up time of addresses from bitnodes and servicenodes.  The audit log does't have to be there at launch.

At first the the payment deductions will not mean much, but as services grow so will the potential losses. I personally would not want to risk that for the sake of saving a few $ on hosting costs.

This means we can launch at the end of May or start of June, with servicenodes and bitcoin full nodes. If people don't have a bitcoin full node service running (this can be part of the rating system, possibly) they will get fewer rewards, maybe skewed a little against them vs. what other nodes get?

I personally hate the idea of having to run a bitcoin full node. I really don't want to download 20GB. Please don't implement this idea. I don't see how a masternode can verify the servicenode's chain anyway. They can always steal the information from a website.

[coins101]

...
think of it this way, its the first test version, at some point when we have more than 1 service for the service nodes, i think the best course will be to let the service nodes decide what services they want to offer, and what services not to offer....

+1

My take is that we see if the first servicenode launch can include an automated / easy way for node operators to have a full bitcoin node start-up.

We have seen that bitcoin nodes can be tracked



Instead of starting out with a plan to verify if nodes are being closed down after they are launched, lets leave that as an issue that will be addressed at a future date. If people choose to shut down bitcoin nodes, then we can keep an audit account of IP addresses, and apply retrospective deductions in payments.

ServiceNodes can ping each other and we can create an audit log of up time of addresses from bitnodes and servicenodes.  The audit log does't have to be there at launch.

At first the the payment deductions will not mean much, but as services grow so will the potential losses. I personally would not want to risk that for the sake of saving a few $ on hosting costs.

This means we can launch at the end of May or start of June, with servicenodes and bitcoin full nodes. If people don't have a bitcoin full node service running (this can be part of the rating system, possibly) they will get fewer rewards, maybe skewed a little against them vs. what other nodes get?

I personally hate the idea of having to run a bitcoin full node. I really don't want to download 20GB. Please don't implement this idea. I don't see how a masternode can verify the servicenode's chain anyway. They can always steal the information from a website.

If we can come up with a workable model, I think we will attract some help from Bitcoin devs to help push this forward, possibly some of the bitcoin core devs now at the MIT Labs - let them work on making it work.

Like any service running on servicenodes, if after 3 or 6 months it wasn't adding any value to the network, then we can drop the service.

What are the costs of a good VPS with unlimited data?  Providers and plans here http://lowendbox.com/



The potential risk vs. reward makes a trial worth a go, IMO.

[GilAlexander]

I personally hate the idea of having to run a bitcoin full node. I really don't want to download 20GB.

40GB ATM.

[stonehedge]

One thing we need to discuss is that whilst the original SPR masternode test was extremely easy to use, allowing multiple MNs per wallet, we can't really have a model where you could in theory have an unlimited number of masternodes on the same PC or laptop. 

Perhaps one public IP per service node?  A point to be discussed.  I suppose it depends on whether it would be allowable for somebody to have 50+ service nodes sitting on their PC at home and whether they'd be able to provide a decent quality of service (whatever that service is).

[georgem]

I thought we wante setting up servicenodes easy, but now the user will need to download 20GB of blockchain from bitcoin? It doesn't sound so user friendly...

33 Gbyte....
and yes, that about reflects how important bitcoin is.

we have to face this, bitcoin has problems, and if bitcoin crumbles, we can all kiss our sideproject's asses goodbye.

think of it this way, its the first test version, at some point when we have more than 1 service for the service nodes, i think the best course will be to let the service nodes decide what services they want to offer, and what services not to offer....

But then I am not sure how we are going to give the people a score...

We can't have someone install say 10 different services and get payed the same amount as someone who only wants to install 1 service.

Yes, we can give people the freedom to participate in those projects (say if someone doesn't want to run full bitcoin nodes)... but this would then mean that they will recieve a smaller SN payment.

[CHAOSiTEC]

I thought we wante setting up servicenodes easy, but now the user will need to download 20GB of blockchain from bitcoin? It doesn't sound so user friendly...

33 Gbyte....
and yes, that about reflects how important bitcoin is.

we have to face this, bitcoin has problems, and if bitcoin crumbles, we can all kiss our sideproject's asses goodbye.

think of it this way, its the first test version, at some point when we have more than 1 service for the service nodes, i think the best course will be to let the service nodes decide what services they want to offer, and what services not to offer....

But then I am not sure how we are going to give the people a score...

We can't have someone install say 10 different services and get payed the same amount as someone who only wants to install 1 service.

Yes, we can give people the freedom to participate in those projects (say if someone doesn't want to run full bitcoin nodes)... but this would then mean that they will recieve a smaller SN payment.

it should be possible, if it was set as a weighted value so if we set the value of hosting a full node to 40% and someone does not want to host, then their earnings would be 40% less, i think it should be possible, also if we build an api on top of the service nodes, it would be easier to add in services... i know it requires foot work, but the end result would be the better

[georgem]

If we can come up with a workable model, I think we will attract some help from Bitcoin devs to help push this forward, possibly some of the bitcoin core devs now at the MIT Labs - let them work on making it work.

Like any service running on servicenodes, if after 3 or 6 months it wasn't adding any value to the network, then we can drop the service.

What are the costs of a good VPS with unlimited data?  Providers and plans here http://lowendbox.com/



The potential risk vs. reward makes a trial worth a go, IMO.

Definitely,

I was never a fan on those 5-10$ per month servers... sure 10 years ago, but since I want my servers to do some real heavylifting I can't expect them to be that cheap.

E.g. ATM I run two servers with 24 GB ram each, and 1 Terabyte of space. (each has a 2x2Ghz CPU), and I pay about 60$ for each of them each month.

I did a test a few months ago, about how many daemons I could run successfully on such a machine, and I was very well able to run 20 daemons of 20 different coins simultaneously.

If you add more you then start running into problems.

But I think a single bitcoin daemon shouldn't eat away more then 10% of the ressources of such a machine, and even run on a low end server.

[georgem]

I personally hate the idea of having to run a bitcoin full node. I really don't want to download 20GB.

40GB ATM.

33Gb

https://blockchain.info/de/charts/blocks-size

[georgem]

it should be possible, if it was set as a weighted value so if we set the value of hosting a full node to 40% and someone does not want to host, then their earnings would be 40% less, i think it should be possible, also if we build an api on top of the service nodes, it would be easier to add in services... i know it requires foot work, but the end result would be the better

I'd rather make it simple for now (we can always make it more complex in the future),
and make people NEED to run every newly introduced service on their servers or recieve a penalty (lower payment) for every service they deliberately ommit.

This would have two benefits:

1) It would encourage people to move away from those low end servers that will not be of much use to our service network anyway.

2) It would guarantee that any new service has automatically a strong network behind it, and not just a handful of nodes that decide to run it.

[coins101]

If we can come up with a workable model, I think we will attract some help from Bitcoin devs to help push this forward, possibly some of the bitcoin core devs now at the MIT Labs - let them work on making it work.

Like any service running on servicenodes, if after 3 or 6 months it wasn't adding any value to the network, then we can drop the service.

What are the costs of a good VPS with unlimited data?  Providers and plans here http://lowendbox.com/



The potential risk vs. reward makes a trial worth a go, IMO.

Definitely,

I was never a fan on those 5-10$ per month servers... sure 10 years ago, but since I want my servers to do some real heavylifting I can't expect them to be that cheap.

E.g. ATM I run two servers with 24 GB ram each, and 1 Terabyte of space. (each has a 2x2Ghz CPU), and I pay about 60$ for each of them each month.

I did a test a few months ago, about how many daemons I could run successfully on such a machine, and I was very well able to run 20 daemons of 20 different coins simultaneously.

If you add more you then start running into problems.

But I think a single bitcoin daemon shouldn't eat away more then 10% of the ressources of such a machine, and even run on a low end server.

If SPR can support 10% - 30% of the Bitcoin network, that would be big news. It would also be big news on a regular basis.

That's basically a very productive marketing budget.

[georgem]

I personally hate the idea of having to run a bitcoin full node. I really don't want to download 20GB. Please don't implement this idea. I don't see how a masternode can verify the servicenode's chain anyway. They can always steal the information from a website.

I hear you.

But, proving to the network that a server is running a service is one of the most elementary things we have to know how to do if we want to proceed with spreadcoin's service apps.

So running a "24/7 supervised" bitcoin node sounds like a perfect contender for this test we need to do.

Sounds like the most perfect "first app"...

This doesn't mean it's the last, or the most important.
People can decide to not run this service and receive a small penalty depending on how many additional services they keep running.

[georgem]

This proposal is for servicenode operators to host full bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin holders wouldn't care much about the impact on bitcoin, other than those in the know recognizing that the security and stability of the bitcoin network is being supported by an altcoin.

and that is something that creates value!

Absolutely.

And although I am a big fan of fierce competition, I do love the fact that we are steping outside this game for a moment,
by creating something that would help other coins too for a change.  

Most other coins are trying to outrun competition (sometimes even by going closed source for a while   because they hate open source in that moment  ),
but in our case, if we make this work, when other people then copy our code, it would only help bitcoin (or other coins) even more?

Wasn't there a name in circulation a few months/weeks ago?

Spreadnodes?

Well, that's what spreadnodes do in principle: spread crypto nodes.

We can call this first project "Spread the Nodes".

BTW, spreadnodes.com/net/org is free if someone from the community wants to grab them.

(hurry)

[georgem]

If SPR can support 10% - 30% of the Bitcoin network, that would be big news. It would also be big news on a regular basis.

That's basically a very productive marketing budget.

coinsupply/2880 is also the amount of bitcoin nodes we can then provide.

[coins101]

I'm not sure buying domains is that big of an issue if we have one or two already. Domains are for information only, in a decentralized network.

If not, maybe:

SpreadBitcoinNodes.com

SpreadBitcoinNetwork.com