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

[coins101]

2. The collateral was intended to avoid sybil attacks in the future. Well, if we limit the cap now and that dictates the price of servicenodes, we still get protection from sybil attackers. A sybil attacker would have to ask the market to purchase servicenode seats.

Why not find cryptographic ways of preventing sybil attacks, instead of artificially limiting the access to the overlay network by making it dependend on how much money you got?

You can't. Everyone has tried. The only thing that works, let's say at the moment, is cold hard digital cash. If an attacker has to spend money, you reduce those that are motivated to attack. If you don't require collateral of some sorts, people will just spend their lives on their computers trying to find ways to break in.

[coins101]

4. Servicenodes are intended to be business units - servers. The collateral is just a protection mechanism.

No, it isn't really. Well, not in the same way that a collateral supposedly secures the Dash network from sybil attacks.

The collateral serves a different purpose in spreadcoin/servicenodes.

The most interesting thing about letting the servicenode collateral be decided by the free market (spreadcoin protocol)
is that every person will be allowed to run a servicenode with the least amount of collateral the market let's you get away with.

As long as there are empty seats in the amount of allowed Servicenodes and no one is willing to bet more than you (to kick you out of your "cheap seat"),
you can run a servicenode basically for free.
At least for a while, because running a cheap servicenode will be risky.

You understand that this will also be the reason why we will get many interested persons to run servicenodes intitially, by basically allowing everybody to run one.
(contrast that with DASH where early investors pretty much control the masternode network)

Only after all seats are filled (which are dynamically increased pretty much every other day so as to ALWAYS welcome newcomers) will the weakest servicenode operators (and only they) see their servers being kicked, which hopefully will ignite a slow and steady price discovery to find the most "efficient" collateral.

Yes, this also means that our overlay network must have true cryptographic protection against sybil attacks and other unwanted activities, making it more complex to realize.

devils advocate.

So, we are all happily creating service nodes. Then one day, a great service goes live. Big businesses like the idea of the service and decide to dip into their deep pockets and hoover up cheap service nodes and then only big businesses will be able to operate a node.

The little man in the housing projects will never be able to outspend JP Morgan.

What are we going to do about them apples?

[georgem]

devils advocate.

So, we are all happily creating service nodes. Then one day, a great service goes live. Big businesses like the idea of the service and decide to dip into their deep pockets and hoover up cheap service nodes and then only big businesses will be able to operate a node.

The little man in the housing projects will never be able to outspend JP Morgan.

What are we going to do about them apples?

That's where the maximum coinsupply comes in. Mr. Spread and I have explained that countless times.

If you wanted to take over all the already established Servicenodes you would need multiple times the whole coinsupply.

If you want your Servicenode to be secure even against a JPMorgan Takeover, just put more SPR in it than the average joe.

If your SPR is well positioned, JPMorgan needs to take away ....

1) ... all the seats below you,
2) ... lift their position higher than you by putting MORE SPR (than you have in yours) in EACH ONE of those servicenodes...

... and only then will they be able to kick you out.

The math is on our side, not on JPMorgans.

Also, I repeat, as I currently look at it, kicking out merely means "not getting payed anymore".
Since the goal is to cryptographically secure the decentralized services, it is not unthinkable that we will let basically everyone join our network as "free servicenodes", as long as they follow our protocol, why not?
That's an interesting thought, isn't it?  

I am not sure yet, testnet will tell.

[georgem]

2. The collateral was intended to avoid sybil attacks in the future. Well, if we limit the cap now and that dictates the price of servicenodes, we still get protection from sybil attackers. A sybil attacker would have to ask the market to purchase servicenode seats.

Why not find cryptographic ways of preventing sybil attacks, instead of artificially limiting the access to the overlay network by making it dependend on how much money you got?

You can't. Everyone has tried. The only thing that works, let's say at the moment, is cold hard digital cash. If an attacker has to spend money, you reduce those that are motivated to attack. If you don't require collateral of some sorts, people will just spend their lives on their computers trying to find ways to break in.

I am sure that some form of validation can help prevent sybil attacks.
We surely can "challenge" the joining servicenodes in a different way than simply checking the amount of SPR in their collateral.

Let them solve a puzzle, or something.... I see there are some promising papers out there.... somebody has already done the theoretical research for us, it seems...

[coins101]

devils advocate.

So, we are all happily creating service nodes. Then one day, a great service goes live. Big businesses like the idea of the service and decide to dip into their deep pockets and hoover up cheap service nodes and then only big businesses will be able to operate a node.

The little man in the housing projects will never be able to outspend JP Morgan.

What are we going to do about them apples?

That's where the maximum coinsupply comes in. Mr. Spread and I have explained that countless times.

If you wanted to take over all the already established Servicenodes you would need multiple times the whole coinsupply.

If you want your Servicenode to be secure even against a JPMorgan Takeover, just put more SPR in it than the average joe.

If your SPR is well positioned, JPMorgan needs to take away ....

1) ... all the seats below you,
2) ... lift their position higher than you by putting MORE SPR (than you have in yours) in EACH ONE of those servicenodes...

... and only then will they be able to kick you out.

The math is on our side, not on JPMorgans.

Also, I repeat, as I currently look at it, kicking out merely means "not getting payed anymore".
Since the goal is to cryptographically secure the decentralized services, it is not unthinkable that we will let basically everyone join our network as "free servicenodes", as long as they follow our protocol, why not?
That's an interesting thought, isn't it?  

I am not sure yet, testnet will tell.

I think I get it. Let's see.

So I start with a servicenode that has 500SPR (for the sake of discussion).

over time, all the seats for a given coin supply fill up.

So now, we all have the same 500 SPR. Someone wants to take a seat and decided to put in 501 SPR. My servicenode is not looking healthy, so I'm in danger of moving out of the revenue generation seats.

To overcome this, I buy 5 SPR and bump myself up into a safe zone.

So, what if I can't afford to keep buying SPR?

[coins101]

2. The collateral was intended to avoid sybil attacks in the future. Well, if we limit the cap now and that dictates the price of servicenodes, we still get protection from sybil attackers. A sybil attacker would have to ask the market to purchase servicenode seats.

Why not find cryptographic ways of preventing sybil attacks, instead of artificially limiting the access to the overlay network by making it dependend on how much money you got?

You can't. Everyone has tried. The only thing that works, let's say at the moment, is cold hard digital cash. If an attacker has to spend money, you reduce those that are motivated to attack. If you don't require collateral of some sorts, people will just spend their lives on their computers trying to find ways to break in.

I am sure that some form of validation can help prevent sybil attacks.
We surely can "challenge" the joining servicenodes in a different way than simply checking the amount of SPR in their collateral.

Let them solve a puzzle, or something.... I see there are some promising papers out there.... somebody has already done the theoretical thinking for us, it seems...

I have a thread on sybil attacks and all the papers out there......

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1098205.0

[operabit]

SPR I often get in bittrex 

[georgem]

So, what if I can't afford to keep buying SPR?

If it so should happen that you own 1 or more Servicenodes but can't afford to keep buying SPR (because SPR price has risen too much)... it means you are rich.  

Next step is to enjoy your new wealth.

[georgem]

I have a thread on sybil attacks and all the papers out there......

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1098205.0

Awesome man, glad to have you on the team.

[coins101]

I have a thread on sybil attacks and all the papers out there......

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1098205.0

Awesome man, glad to have you on the team.

3-4 steps ahead 

[coins101]

So, what if I can't afford to keep buying SPR?

If it so should happen that you own 1 or more Servicenodes but can't afford to keep buying SPR (because SPR price has risen too much)... it means you are rich.  

Next step is to enjoy your new wealth.

Actually, what I an others will probably do is use servicenode revenue to buy SPR and keep the price artificially high 

[georgem]

I think I get it. Let's see.

So I start with a servicenode that has 500SPR (for the sake of discussion).

over time, all the seats for a given coin supply fill up.

So now, we all have the same 500 SPR.

But this will never happen, that we all have the same amount of SPR.
There will always be people that play it more risky (and go with lower collateral so that they can create more Servicenodes to make more profit) and others that are less willing to take risk (and will put more "cushion" in their collateral)....
...and everything in between. That's essentialy THE SPREAD. And in my opinion what will give the coin its name identity and symbolism.

Someone wants to take a seat and decided to put in 501 SPR. My servicenode is not looking healthy, so I'm in danger of moving out of the revenue generation seats.

To overcome this, I buy 5 SPR and bump myself up into a safe zone.

So, what if I can't afford to keep buying SPR?

[coins101]

I think I get it. Let's see.

So I start with a servicenode that has 500SPR (for the sake of discussion).

over time, all the seats for a given coin supply fill up.

So now, we all have the same 500 SPR.

But this will never happen, that we all have the same amount of SPR.
There will always be people that play it more risky (and go with lower collateral so that they can create more Servicenodes to make more profit) and others that are less willing to take risk (and will put more "cushion" in their collateral)....
...and everything in between. That's essentialy THE SPREAD. And in my opinion what will give the coin its name identity and symbolism.

Someone wants to take a seat and decided to put in 501 SPR. My servicenode is not looking healthy, so I'm in danger of moving out of the revenue generation seats.

To overcome this, I buy 5 SPR and bump myself up into a safe zone.

So, what if I can't afford to keep buying SPR?

OK. I think I can make this work to deliver on my action.

[georgem]

So, what if I can't afford to keep buying SPR?

If it so should happen that you own 1 or more Servicenodes but can't afford to keep buying SPR (because SPR price has risen too much)... it means you are rich.  

Next step is to enjoy your new wealth.

Actually, what I an others will probably do is use servicenode revenue to buy SPR and keep the price artificially high  

Yes, but don't call it "artificial".

JPMorgan does "artificial" stuff, since they can just create money out of thin air... lol  

Nothing in crypto and free market is "artificial" if you ask me. You as a seller can only keep the price artificially high if there are people voluntarily willing to buy at those prices.
And you will always have to fight against the miners who are in the business of dumping fast, and will always underbid your "artificially high" offers.
(but again, why call it artificial, I think you are allowed to sell your SPR at whatever price you wish.   )

The dynamic will be interesting to observe.

Crypto is as "free market" as it gets.
JPMorgan and friends can only do their "artificial stuff" because they can use government regulation to do so.

[minerpage]

The dynamic will be interesting to observe.

Standing by for testing 

[coins101]

One of the better comments I've found in cryptoland:

'So was it worth the wait? We think so. As a bitcoin exchange we don’t always have the ability to “fail fast” or the freedom to “hack” our way through product development, security or licensing. When you are dealing with money — especially other people’s money — you simply cannot assemble the rocket ship mid-flight.'


https://blog.gemini.com/and-were-live/

[rhinomonkey]

http://www.coindesk.com/21-inc-pledges-support-to-bitcoins-vanishing-nodes/


Is this a recent development?

[CHAOSiTEC]

Matematically sybil attacks cannot be prevented, what you can do is make it expensive to do sybil attacks, which will make it increasingly more expensive as more servicenodes come online. and lets for the sake of arguement say i want to do a sybil attack.

first thing i need is spr, so i start buying up spr, as i buy more and more, less is being sold, which means the price of spr goes up, exponentially, so basically as i get closer and closer to own a big enough amount of servicenodes, i will end up having to pay increasingly more and more for adding more nodes.

second part is logisitics, the more service nodes i want running for this, the more server infrastructure i will need to buy, which is a hidden cost not too obvious in the beginning.

now im ready to try and do a sybil attack, problem is, i can never own enough service nodes to garantie a success before the network will start to look on my servicenodes as suspicious, and i can end up with all my nodes being kicked off for misbehaving..

since the servicenode network needs a system to protect itself, it will use the power of voting, where each node has 1 vote, majority will always win, and end up overruling the nodes i have set up to try attacking the network.

so, i need 50.1 % of all servicenodes to do this to win the voting element, how expensive is this going to be, will determinate if it would be feastable to try attacking the servicenode network, and get it to do my bidding..

that, is the power of collateral.

[stonehedge]

http://www.coindesk.com/21-inc-pledges-support-to-bitcoins-vanishing-nodes/


Is this a recent development?

Its not a new initiative but it looks like it is being expanded slightly.  Under the old scheme only a few qualifying nodes were selected randomly to receive a payment which at the time was possibly less than the cost of running a node at the time.    Coins101 referenced the scheme in our Whitepaper as an example of an attempt to incentivise full bitcoin nodes.

Its quite encouraging to see that the desire to do so is still there.

Now, if only somebody could come up with a sustainable and decentralised way to do it 

[coins101]

Matematically sybil attacks cannot be prevented, what you can do is make it expensive to do sybil attacks, which will make it increasingly more expensive as more servicenodes come online. and lets for the sake of arguement say i want to do a sybil attack.

first thing i need is spr, so i start buying up spr, as i buy more and more, less is being sold, which means the price of spr goes up, exponentially, so basically as i get closer and closer to own a big enough amount of servicenodes, i will end up having to pay increasingly more and more for adding more nodes.

second part is logisitics, the more service nodes i want running for this, the more server infrastructure i will need to buy, which is a hidden cost not too obvious in the beginning.

now im ready to try and do a sybil attack, problem is, i can never own enough service nodes to garantie a success before the network will start to look on my servicenodes as suspicious, and i can end up with all my nodes being kicked off for misbehaving..

since the servicenode network needs a system to protect itself, it will use the power of voting, where each node has 1 vote, majority will always win, and end up overruling the nodes i have set up to try attacking the network.

so, i need 50.1 % of all servicenodes to do this to win the voting element, how expensive is this going to be, will determinate if it would be feastable to try attacking the servicenode network, and get it to do my bidding..

that, is the power of collateral.

It was an interesting discussion about sybil attacks and preventing them.

I like that Georgem wants to explore ideas to prevent sybil attacks. Proof of work was invented to stop email spam, but it has led to Bitcoin; so who knows where a new sybil attack approach might take us.

Still, I like collateral as a prevention tool. The current attack on Bitcoin is an example of smart people attacking something simple because they can and there is no cost to doing so.

So this guy is attacking Bitcoin at the moment (he says the attack is on pause), because 'he can' but he won't do it if he has to spend funds:

Oh, thanks for the clarification. That seems a bit surprising though, seeing how cheap and efficient the method you detailed would be for a 'stress test'.

I do not want to spend even 0.1 btc for stress-testing even with "cheap" method
I am not so rich as coinwallet.eu
 

What if there is another wave of malleability attack whilst the spam attack is underway, it could really turn things upside down.  

Should we test this case?
I can resume malleability stress-test in any moment

Without a node with modified code how does one get around to doing what you're doing in an automated way?

Some kind of pseudo-node. No code from any other client.

Also, a follow up question, what are your main reasons behind this?
Are you doing this to prove a point, like with the transaction spam attacks?

Just because I am able. Isn't it funny? I have not any other reason today. But... I have some ideas for future.
Why did Satoshi invent bitcoin? I really think he had the same reason - because he was able to do it.