[ANN][DCR] Decred - Community Governance | Bitcoin Devs | Lightning Network

[anders lokka]

Launch confirmed for January 18? Time?

Please do note that the current tentative date for launch is the 25th, but this may change on the basis of testing and development.

tentative date?
I was supposing this project was developed since 2013 and announce was made when everything already tested on testnet.
Some major problems occours?

[sambiohazard]

66% needed for consensus.

66% = consensus


BTW: Are you "Sam", the "Office Manager" of Company 0?

No i am just a community member and not related to c0 in any way. I read it somewhere that devs want to reduce voting win % to 66% because with requirement of 95% + bitcoin is having hard time going anywhere. Please correct me if i am wrong.

[_ingsoc]

tentative date? I was supposing this project was developed since 2013 and announce was made when everything already tested on testnet? Some major problems occours?

Theoretical development started in 2013. Code was written in April, 2014, so that marks the date of the beginning of the practical implementation of the work. Tentative in this context does not mean 2-3 months of delay. As you know, software development is a complex process and requires a lot of testing and examination. There was a post about it here. The delay happened because of the overwhelming interest and the fact that every participant's application receives individual attention.

[rizzlarolla]

кaк пpaвильнo зapeгиcтpиpoвaть ccылкy?

Oтпpaвить мнe cooбщeниe нa фopyмe или, ecли вaм нyжнa пoмoщь взглянyть нa poccийcкoм yчacткe.

Yeah ok, thanks.

I'll take that to specifically include _ingsoc also.
(and decred multi-author, obviously)

No, I haven't been involved with NeuCoin. Yes, Decred currently has multiple developers that contribute to its codebase and the project itself hopes to grow into a "hacker" collective of sorts in the future. A collective like that would mean anyone interested in development can step forward and be part of that ecosystem. Nobody will be excluded from the development process if they are competent - it is multi-stakeholder. Decred's primary goal is to create that ecosystem and everyone will be working hard to try and make that happen once the code is public and open-source.

OK cool.

Yes, decred currently has multiple devs, all of which are c0/btcsuite? (3/4 devs)

A hacker collective would indeed include all who want to participate.
But they will not get paid.

Only 1 and a bit dev will be paid at $0.49 launch (asset allocation) price.
That is a CUT in paid dev staff on this coin.

So yeah, all join in devving, for free.
Just like the btc devs. nothing new here.

Anyone interested in a fair dev coin, this (apparently) ain't it. See my previous, unanswered analysis.
If its another shitcoin, fine but..

_ingsoc

This begs the question though, and it's a serious one, what's the alternative for a new dev in the future? Work on Bitcoin and get paid nothing? Or work in a system where you get compensated for innovation and contributions that feed back into Bitcoin as well? I know that's biased, but it's a legitimate proposal that's being formed.

...this is not forcast to actually happen any time soon, using decreds own numbers.

[_ingsoc]

...this is not forcast to actually happen any time soon, using decreds own numbers.

You are asking for things that nobody can answer for you. If Decred holds no value for anyone, then of course no development can happen. Who would want to develop something that nobody cares about? I haven't seen you go nuts about btcsuite being funded without any income, and that's survived, nay, flourished over the years to a point where it's used at the core of many organisations today. Even Ethereum based its geth implementation on btcd. My point is that you cannot get upset about numbers nobody can answer - anyone who tries to answer them for you is a false prophet because no one can know the future. Decred will adapt to what's required for it to deliver and reach its goals. What other option is there? As we speak people are getting stuck into it and working on it. You just put one foot in front of the other and work - that's what will be done in good and tough times.

[sambiohazard]

@rizzlarolla i worte a nice chunky post for you. I hope you will take my recommendation.

[NSA360]

Usually the airdrop ensures that everyone except for the community will get the Decrepit coins.

Anyways, i've just signed up, i'm in. Let's see if i have more chances of receiving this shitcoin than to win the Powerball. I doubt it.

I'm glad to see you here!  

[rizzlarolla]

...this is not forcast to actually happen any time soon, using decreds own numbers.

You are asking for things that nobody can answer for you. If Decred holds no value for anyone, then of course no development can happen. Who would want to develop something that nobody cares about? I haven't seen you go nuts about btcsuite being funded without any income, and that's survived, nay, flourished over the years to a point where it's used at the core of many organisations today. Even Ethereum based its geth implementation on btcd. My point is that you cannot get upset about numbers nobody can answer - anyone who tries to answer them for you is a false prophet because no one can know the future. Decred will adapt to what's required for it to deliver and reach its goals. What other option is there? As we speak people are getting stuck into it and working on it. You just put one foot in front of the other and work - that's what will be done in good and tough times.

One can theorise.

Q. How many of these community devs will be paid, if decred was valued at or below $0.49?

A. 1 and a bit, or less.


I just want this to be clear to any "new devs working on btc for free, looking to get paid work here"

[EmilioMann]

please stop paying attention to rizzlarolla
he's just a troll, a bitcoin fanboy trying to bother with endless questions.
He will never stop while receiving answers
He's on a thread called "answer de question above with a new question" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55701.msg13467853#msg13467853

And please answer this technical question posted by me here:

why was blake chosen instead of any of the other sha3 finalists? What does it have that is better for decred than skein or keccak, for example?

It was asked by the dev who created the first optimized miner for X11, on brazilian facebook decred group that already has 200 members for now (and growing). All of then really interested in investing in that currency.

He wondered if was some technical reason for the choice of blake256 instead the sha3 winner which is keccak.
There are in decred technical brief the advantages in relation to SHA2, but not in relation to sha3.

Here's the original question in brazilian portuguese: https://www.facebook.com/groups/667062416769204/permalink/667072613434851/?comment_id=667131273428985&reply_comment_id=667136583428454&comment_tracking=%7B"tn"%3A"R9"%7D

Thanks

[_ingsoc]

please stop paying attention to rizzlarolla
he's just a troll, a bitcoin fanboy trying to bother with endless questions.
He will never stop while receiving answers
He's on a thread called "answer de question above with a new question" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55701.msg13467853#msg13467853

And please answer this technical question posted by me here:

why was blake chosen instead of any of the other sha3 finalists? What does it have that is better for decred than skein or keccak, for example?

It was asked by the dev who created the first optimized miner for X11, on brazilian facebook decred group that already has 200 participants for now, really interested in investing in that currency.

He wondered if was some technical reason for the choice of blake256 instead the sha3 winner which is keccak.
There are in decred technical brief the advantages in relation to SHA2, but not in relation to sha3.

Here's the original question in portuguese: https://www.facebook.com/groups/667062416769204/permalink/667072613434851/?comment_id=667131273428985&reply_comment_id=667136583428454&comment_tracking=%7B"tn"%3A"R9"%7D

Thanks

I appreciate this. I'm going to make a note and get a detailed answer for you. There are obviously some relatively intense pressures on getting this ready, so if I can't get you an adequate answer soon, I will get you one later, and share it here so everyone can see it. I apologise for missing this too, it can get a bit difficult to spot every question. Thanks for bringing it to light! There is also work being done on formulating an FAQ-type document, and this should be addressed alongside that as well.

[EmilioMann]

...

I appreciate this. I'm going to make a note and get a detailed answer for you. There are obviously some relatively intense pressures on getting this ready, so if I can't get you an adequate answer soon, I will get you one later, and share it here so everyone can see it. I apologise for missing this too, it can get a bit difficult to spot every question. Thanks for bringing it to light! There is also work being done on formulating an FAQ-type document, and this should be addressed alongside that as well.

Thanks  
I can't wait to create a post on that group saying: "COMPREM!" (BUY!)

[dbt1033]

please stop paying attention to rizzlarolla
he's just a troll, a bitcoin fanboy trying to bother with endless questions.
He will never stop while receiving answers
He's on a thread called "answer de question above with a new question" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55701.msg13467853#msg13467853

And please answer this technical question posted by me here:

why was blake chosen instead of any of the other sha3 finalists? What does it have that is better for decred than skein or keccak, for example?

It was asked by the dev who created the first optimized miner for X11, on brazilian facebook decred group that already has 200 participants for now (and growing). All of then really interested in investing in that currency.

He wondered if was some technical reason for the choice of blake256 instead the sha3 winner which is keccak.
There are in decred technical brief the advantages in relation to SHA2, but not in relation to sha3.

Here's the original question in brazilian portuguese: https://www.facebook.com/groups/667062416769204/permalink/667072613434851/?comment_id=667131273428985&reply_comment_id=667136583428454&comment_tracking=%7B"tn"%3A"R9"%7D

Thanks

Not sure if this helps, but blake-256 is faster and smaller than keccak.  

SHA-256 uses the Merkle–Damgård construction method
Blake-256 uses the HAIFA construction method which an improved Merkle–Damgård
Keccak uses the sponge construction method

SHA-256 is weak against length extension that's why they use a double hash as it is suposed to give resistance to that attack, Blake-256 is resistant to length extension due to the HAIFA construction method and Keccak is immune to length extension that's why they picked it for SHA-3 not for its speed

This is cool ref and will give you the background on different construction methods:
http://theglobaljournals.com/paripex/file.php?val=MTExNA==

Looks like FPGA implementation with blake-256 is much easier too (because of its simplicity/size)

Keccak was only chosen as SHA-3 finalist because it met the criteria better than blake-256.  This doesn't mean it is a better cryptocurrency hashing algo.

Fun fact:  Maxcoin quietly changed their algo from Keccak to blake-256 because it's a better hashing algo for crypto due to its speed/size.

We need FPGAs and eventually ASICS to create a sustainable long term network, so it seems this was a reasonable decision for Decred.

[EmilioMann]

 ...

Not sure if this helps, but blake-256 is faster and smaller than keccak.  

SHA-256 uses the Merkle–Damgård construction method
Blake-256 uses the HAIFA construction method which an improved Merkle–Damgård
Keccak uses the sponge construction method

SHA-256 is weak against length extension that's why they use a double hash as it is suposed to give resistance to that attack, Blake-256 is resistant to length extension due to the HAIFA construction method and Keccak is immune to length extension that's why they picked it for SHA-3 not for its speed

This is cool ref and will give you the background on different construction methods:
http://theglobaljournals.com/paripex/file.php?val=MTExNA==

Looks like FPGA implementation with blake-256 is much easier too (because of its simplicity/size)

Keccak was only chosen as SHA-3 finalist because it met the criteria better than blake-256.  This doesn't mean it is a better cryptocurrency hashing algo.

Fun fact:  Maxcoin quietly changed their algo from Keccak to blake-256 because it's a better hashing algo for crypto due to its speed/size.

We need FPGAs and eventually ASICS to create a sustainable long term network, so it seems this was a reasonable decision for Decred.

Thanks a lot

[dbt1033]

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6IDpD-2WO8qSnpCNmRpMmNsMlE/edit  Paper on Sha-3 finalists

http://bench.cr.yp.to/results-sha3.html  Sha-3 candidate testing/benchmarks


Seems like blake-256 is a more fair algo for a wide variety of mining devices.  The margins between cpu/gpu/fpga are much more reasonable than keccak.

It uses a lot less memory as well.



edit:  Keccak asics seem faster than blake-256 asics...but are also MUCH more expensive.

The dev team has obviously done it's homework.  Me likey.

[hopped]

I am very intrested in the concepts of this

[kenshirothefist]

Simple GPU miner - A simple AMD GPU miner that connects to a local daemon will be available before launch. In the future, proper getblocktemplate functionality will be enabled and pool software will be made available.

@decred, I would like to get some detailed clarification about mining.

First of all, why a new miner and why not support for pooled mining from the beginning?

There are already GPU miners available:

For AMD GPUs:

https://github.com/Griffitsj/cgminer-saffron/

Code:

cgminer --blake256 -o stratum+tcp://...

p.s.: this should be migrated to the newer sgminer, otherwise it's just fine

For NVIDIA GPUs:

https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer or https://github.com/sp-hash/ccminer

Code:

ccminer.exe -a blake -o stratum+tcp://...

These two miners implements Blake256 algo with 14 rounds, the same as Decred is using. So mining software is already here, why not simply use it? Are you planing to make any changes in the algorithm (if yes, why?)? Or will these miners be able to mine on Decred out-of-the-box once pools are out? Also, are you planning to go some non-standard way or will Decred be fully compatible with the standard stratum protocol for pooled mining?

Thanks for the answers!

[CryptoWitch]

Really like this project and will keep a rig ready 

[EmilioMann]

@dbt1033 thanks again. Very well explained

[dbt1033]

@dbt1033 thanks again. Very well explained

Always brother

Glad to help

[Ch3wbacca]

Suppose I mine with my 5 year old laptop that has 4gb ram, Intel Core i5 and 500gb disk space.

Would it mine just as efficiently as a GPU and would i get the same number of coins mined?