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

[stonehedge]

I'm looking forward to getting spreadcointalk tidied up and updated so its ready for testnet discussions 

[georgem]

I'm looking forward to getting spreadcointalk tidied up and updated so its ready for testnet discussions 

Have fun, let me know about your ideas!

[e1ghtSpace]

I was lying in bed trying to get some sleep when a solution to making PoBN real came to me!

So here it is:

Your node will be tested to see if they indeed do have the whole Bitcoin blockchain stored locally.
Your node will be asked to sign a message of a hash of the whole (or part of the recent) blockchain with the private key to their collateral or whatever it was called.

This stops someone from creating a service that will supply the... Oh... The hash... Damnit this isn't going to work. My original idea was that they need to sign the whole (or part of the recent) blockchain with their private key to their collateral. I guess that would work. But would the signature be really long? I don't really know much about signing messages. I was thinking of using a hash of the blockchain to shorten the message but then someone could supply the hashes to your node. Anyway, yeah, did I solve the problem?


Oh god, while I was writing this I heard a mousetrap go off in the room next to mine. I keep hearing Noises in the room now.

[coins101]

53g.

Please post in the spreadcointalk thread, or you won't get a chance to win.

http://spreadcointalk.org/index.php?topic=722.0

I'm keen to maintain spreadcointalk for technical support only - for the foreseeable future.

[e1ghtSpace]

coins101 posted his amazing PoBN whitepaper on spreadcoin.info

please enjoy:

http://spreadcoin.info/news/proof-of-bitcoin-node-white-paper/

There was a step that has been bugging me since June. I figured out how to overcome the issue, so I have updated the white paper and also the press release.

I didn't see the part where you overcame the issue. Was that in regards to making sure that the node did have a copy of the blockchain?

[coins101]

coins101 posted his amazing PoBN whitepaper on spreadcoin.info

please enjoy:

http://spreadcoin.info/news/proof-of-bitcoin-node-white-paper/

There was a step that has been bugging me since June. I figured out how to overcome the issue, so I have updated the white paper and also the press release.

I didn't see the part where you overcame the issue. Was that in regards to making sure that the node did have a copy of the blockchain?

No. Not directly.

It was an issue about Bitcoin miners using their ASICs processing power to fulfill a data mining request on behalf of a data buyer.

> Mine block > Process Transactions > Mine Data > Get paid. This means Bitcoin miners carry out proof of work, process transactions and get paid by data buyers, which means we can supplement transaction fees when there are data buyers. It still needs a bit of work.

Georgem and Chaos seem to have the PoBN to hand. Plus, remember that we have collateral to put off fake nodes and the data market will highlight full nodes that are not providing extra non-blockchain held data to miners, so we can isolate fake nodes that way and kick them out of the data market and the overlay network.

[rhinomonkey]

Discovered what may be a typo in the WP. On page 46, second to last paragraph - "With Bitcoin nodes approach 10,000, these node numbers would yield more valuable...pockets of regional financial activities."

I'm assuming an "ing" was missing after approach. 

[stonehedge]

Discovered what may be a typo in the WP. On page 46, second to last paragraph - "With Bitcoin nodes approach 10,000, these node numbers would yield more valuable...pockets of regional financial activities."

I'm assuming an "ing" was missing after approach. 

Gah...no matter how many times you proof read a document, something always slips through 

Cheers!

[georgem]

53g.

Please post in the spreadcointalk thread, or you won't get a chance to win.

http://spreadcointalk.org/index.php?topic=722.0

I'm keen to maintain spreadcointalk for technical support only - for the foreseeable future.

But remember the times when BCT went offline again and again?

That's the main reason for having a secondary forum, .... because you can't really rely on BCT only.

[coins101]

Discovered what may be a typo in the WP. On page 46, second to last paragraph - "With Bitcoin nodes approach 10,000, these node numbers would yield more valuable...pockets of regional financial activities."

I'm assuming an "ing" was missing after approach. 

That's great, thanks.

The WP is still a 'draft' because we need to get general feedback. The bulk of the work was also done in June and part of July, and with the blockchain debate still unresolved we want to have some flexibility to update the WP before issuing a final version. The main approach won't change, just details around the edgers.

PM your addy for a bug bounty of 101 SPR. If you don't claim it, I'll send it to the devs.

[georgem]

Discovered what may be a typo in the WP. On page 46, second to last paragraph - "With Bitcoin nodes approach 10,000, these node numbers would yield more valuable...pockets of regional financial activities."

I'm assuming an "ing" was missing after approach. 

That's great, thanks.

The WP is still a 'draft' because we need to get general feedback. The bulk of the work was also done in June and part of July, and with the blockchain debate still unresolved we want to have some flexibility to update the WP before issuing a final version. The main approach won't change, just details around the edgers.

PM your addy for a bug bounty of 101 SPR. If you don't claim it, I'll send it to the devs.

Why don't you create a thread in the spreadcointalk forum so we can discuss and dissect your WhitePaper?

People can then post about typos, pros/cons and ask when they don't understand something.

[coins101]

There is no reason why we can't extend PoBN to Proof of Litecoin Node as well. We can leave that up to individuals to add additional blockchain services.

The issue they would have is the extra hosting costs. Litecoin nodes would need to deliver valuable transaction data in order to fund the hosting costs, so the current number of transactions would not make that worth while, I don't think.

Also, we could enable Proof of DASH Nodes. A second tier operating a second tier. Why you'd want to do that, I don't know. But its an interesting idea. Sort of like Inception, a layer within a layer, within another layer.

The idea actually came from thinking about the type of contracts data people would want to mine. Ethereum is primarily focused on contracts, therefore, we might have to extend PoBN to other blockchains in order to cross-mine data.

Something for 2017/18 I think.

[minerpage]

extend PoBN to other blockchains in order to cross-mine data.

Fascinating idea, I'm currently researching the challenges posed by contracts secured by the blockchain.

Some companies are researching creating their "own" blockchain to secure the contracts/transactions/voting but guess what: it needs to be backed by hash power to prevent 51% takeover. Now there's a service to the business world: SPR SN provides secure chains for whichever currency floats your boat. Security on demand?

Perhaps no need to wait till 2017/18 

[sulfurtank]

extend PoBN to other blockchains in order to cross-mine data.

Fascinating idea, I'm currently researching the challenges posed by contracts secured by the blockchain.

Some companies are researching creating their "own" blockchain to secure the contracts/transactions/voting but guess what: it needs to be backed by hash power to prevent 51% takeover. Now there's a service to the business world: SPR SN provides secure chains for whichever currency floats your boat. Security on demand?

Perhaps no need to wait till 2017/18 

Everyone keeps talking about the hash rate of the network, and how relevant it is to keep the network secure, but it is often omitted that the total number of full nodes is just as important to keep it safe. So better get a full node. Think of it as your "civic duty", like going to vote in the elections.

[stonehedge]

extend PoBN to other blockchains in order to cross-mine data.

Fascinating idea, I'm currently researching the challenges posed by contracts secured by the blockchain.

Some companies are researching creating their "own" blockchain to secure the contracts/transactions/voting but guess what: it needs to be backed by hash power to prevent 51% takeover. Now there's a service to the business world: SPR SN provides secure chains for whichever currency floats your boat. Security on demand?

Perhaps no need to wait till 2017/18 

Everyone keeps talking about the hash rate of the network, and how relevant it is to keep the network secure, but it is often omitted that the total number of full nodes is just as important to keep it safe. So better get a full node. Think of it as your "civic duty", like going to vote in the elections.

Its a good point.  Sadly its not easy to convince everybody to be a good citizen and support the system by paying their taxes.

[georgem]

It's done!
Mr. Spread's weight is 63 grams!

I am surprised that Mr. Spread is heavier than I expected!
I'll probably need to put him on a diet!













Now, let's check who the winner is!

[georgem]

A user named mstang83 guessed 58 grams and is therefor the nearest!

http://spreadcointalk.org/index.php?topic=722.msg3765#msg3765

Congratulations, mstang83!

Please contact stonehedge to receive the prize of 1000 SPR!

[stonehedge]

A user named mstang83 guessed 58 grams and is therefor the nearest!

http://spreadcointalk.org/index.php?topic=722.msg3765#msg3765

Congratulations, mstang83!

Please contact stonehedge to receive the prize of 1000 SPR!

I had a sneaky suspicion he was a fat hamster and they weren't just close up photos

[georgem]

A user named mstang83 guessed 58 grams and is therefor the nearest!

http://spreadcointalk.org/index.php?topic=722.msg3765#msg3765

Congratulations, mstang83!

Please contact stonehedge to receive the prize of 1000 SPR!

I had a sneaky suspicion he was a fat hamster and they weren't just close up photos

Yeah, he hasn't used the hamster wheel in weeks...
But he likes to climb...
... but only when there is food waiting up there... lol

ok... I see now... 

[georgem]

There is no reason why we can't extend PoBN to Proof of Litecoin Node as well.

Totally. And now think a step further: nobody says it even has to be a coin/blockchain.
There could be allkinds of services / programs, for example we can imagine a renderfarm (Rendering on Demand), where we need to prove that a servicenode has the opensource 3D program blender installed and running.
People could then pay SPR to render their large animations on the Servicenode network....

Or ffmpeg? Convert your videos on demand?

Etc.... solving the problem of ProofOfX opens the door to a whole universe.

the business world: SPR SN provides secure chains for whichever currency floats your boat. Security on demand?

Security on demand?
That sounds awesome!

Everyone keeps talking about the hash rate of the network, and how relevant it is to keep the network secure, but it is often omitted that the total number of full nodes is just as important to keep it safe. So better get a full node. Think of it as your "civic duty", like going to vote in the elections.

We here agree wholeheartedly 100%... that's the main reason for doing PoBN.
It will benefit both BTC and SPR, since any Servicenode will need to run both a full BTC node and a full SPR node.