Bitcoin Forum
March 28, 2023, 12:48:58 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 24.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 ... 62 »
  Print  
Author Topic: MC2: A cryptocurrency based on a hybrid PoW/PoS system  (Read 194998 times)
mr_random
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1001



View Profile
April 20, 2013, 11:02:14 PM
 #101

Also just to clarify, I just registered this forum account but have been using bitcoin for almost 2 years now. See my post history for proof.

Those suggestions of yours are awesome.

If your suggestions were combined with everything else in this topic MC2 would be amazing. Truly a Bitcoin 2.0
The forum strives to allow free discussion of any ideas. All policies are built around this principle. This doesn't mean you can post garbage, though: posts should actually contain ideas, and these ideas should be argued reasonably.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1680007738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1680007738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1680007738
Reply with quote  #2

1680007738
Report to moderator
1680007738
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1680007738

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1680007738
Reply with quote  #2

1680007738
Report to moderator
tacotime (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005



View Profile
April 20, 2013, 11:15:06 PM
 #102

Yes, I will be back to write about this soon, just really busy until after Monday

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
chriswen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 20, 2013, 11:24:51 PM
 #103

Also just to clarify, I just registered this forum account but have been using bitcoin for almost 2 years now. See my post history for proof.

Those suggestions of yours are awesome.

If your suggestions were combined with everything else in this topic MC2 would be amazing. Truly a Bitcoin 2.0

I would rather not have everything else suggested in this thread to be implemented.
Cheshyr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 20, 2013, 11:57:41 PM
 #104

There are a number of things I like about this project so far.

You've made an honest attempt at making it GPU/CPU friendly.  I'm actually very nervous about the direction of Bitcoin given the growing hashing power availability, and I'd like to see some way to keep the network power distributed.  There will always be favorable hardware.  Rotating Hashes is clever, and I like it.  Finding a way to make the algorithm deterministic while non-predictable is no small task.  There may be yet better ways, but this is a good start.

You've brought in the Proof of Stake concept from another coin, and integrated it in a new way.  Including current innovations just makes me happy in general.  I thought the major benefit of PoS was Transactions without Mining.  Either that

The difficulty adjustment system is non-standard, and should provide an extremely stable and predictable difficulty path.  Given the recent issues with TRC, I can't say I blame you.

You've given thought to all the common faults of current coins, and tried to address them.  That sounds more like prudence than anything else, but it's been overlooked a lot lately.

The democracy thing seems left field.  It seems to be an attempt to allow community feedback into the algorithm, to adjust for errors or changes in the economy.  That shows some remarkable foresight, although I'm not sold on the timeline or mechanism yet.  The idea of damped, non-automated feedback is valuable though.

The fixed block reward reduction feels flawed to me, but that's a gut reaction; I don't have any facts to back it up.  I agree that rewards need to change dynamically.  This is as good a place to start as any.

Overall this is the most thoughtful new coin I've seen in a while, but a lot of your suggestions are solutions to problems I was contemplating, so I may be biased a bit.

I'm mostly an embedded developer, but I'd be willing to help out with development where I can.
Stampbit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
April 21, 2013, 12:56:54 AM
Last edit: April 22, 2013, 05:15:43 PM by Stampbit
 #105

Democracy doesnt work, we all should know that by now.
Luckybit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 510



View Profile
April 21, 2013, 12:58:39 AM
Last edit: April 21, 2013, 01:32:19 AM by Luckybit
 #106

Link to the draft version of the whitepaper: Download

Notable things about this chain:
- Uses a new approach to secure hashing algorithms for the hash tree of a given block that should increase FPGA/ASIC resistance
- After 27 coin years it employs a democratic system of voting to manipulate the interest rate of the block chain (users act as the central bank and regulate the rate of inflation)
- Difficulty is based on the linear weighted average of the block times for the past 18 days for PoW blocks
- New block reward adjustment algorithm is given that yields an 8% decrease in block reward per year
- Simple PoS design (tried to strip it of as many complexities as possible)
- PoW and PoS systems are designed to happily coexist, with favour slightly given to the PoW system
- PoS system also intended to prevent 51% attacks

Feel free to peer-review/tear it apart.  I will be the first to say that I'm pretty terrible at math, so please correct any mistakes I've made.  I'd love to hear why you think it's a great/terrible idea, though.  Obviously I anticipate there are a lot of problems with it that I couldn't foresee, so please help me out!

Figure 2 also doesn't want to display with the Y-axis title correct, not sure why that is/too tired to fix this (been working on this/thinking about it for almost 11 hours now).

DONATIONS (will be refunded to the address from which they were sent if this doesn't pan out):
BTC: 12HWFAsv1ojTuw5FzoP9T3SnyjZew5hFDL
LTC: Lb8ESE4NW6kcQVb8uqYS3oRumWSj1gGuza


Lead developer
Tacotime
Potential developer list:
TheBigYak
RauBan
CryptoJunky

If you're working with Python then list me as someone who may occasionally contribute code. What languages are you working with?

I have two questions, how many coins will there be? If it's 11 million total for instance then I think this would be ideal. If it's more than it wont ever be as valuable as Bitcoin and so how will you get early adopters to support this?

I asked the same question to SunnyKing about PPcoin. But yes I'm definitely interested in contributing to the project whether with code or in other ways depending on what you decide to do. Right now I'm familiarizing myself with the Bitcoin code but it's fairly straightforward from what I've seen of the Python implementations.

There are a number of things I like about this project so far.

You've made an honest attempt at making it GPU/CPU friendly.  I'm actually very nervous about the direction of Bitcoin given the growing hashing power availability, and I'd like to see some way to keep the network power distributed.  There will always be favorable hardware.  Rotating Hashes is clever, and I like it.  Finding a way to make the algorithm deterministic while non-predictable is no small task.  There may be yet better ways, but this is a good start.

You've brought in the Proof of Stake concept from another coin, and integrated it in a new way.  Including current innovations just makes me happy in general.  I thought the major benefit of PoS was Transactions without Mining.  Either that

The difficulty adjustment system is non-standard, and should provide an extremely stable and predictable difficulty path.  Given the recent issues with TRC, I can't say I blame you.

You've given thought to all the common faults of current coins, and tried to address them.  That sounds more like prudence than anything else, but it's been overlooked a lot lately.

The democracy thing seems left field.  It seems to be an attempt to allow community feedback into the algorithm, to adjust for errors or changes in the economy.  That shows some remarkable foresight, although I'm not sold on the timeline or mechanism yet.  The idea of damped, non-automated feedback is valuable though.

The fixed block reward reduction feels flawed to me, but that's a gut reaction; I don't have any facts to back it up.  I agree that rewards need to change dynamically.  This is as good a place to start as any.

Overall this is the most thoughtful new coin I've seen in a while, but a lot of your suggestions are solutions to problems I was contemplating, so I may be biased a bit.

I'm mostly an embedded developer, but I'd be willing to help out with development where I can.

The democracy factor is interesting but how to implement? Digital signatures built into wallets which have a certain amount of coins in order to vote? I have no idea how to go about implementing it but it's certainly a good idea to have democratic elements.

The other thing I'm thinking about (unrelated to this) are artificial intelligence elements. AI and cryptocurrencies go well together and would be symbiotic but I'm not knowledgeable enough yet on AI or on cryptocurrencies to code it myself. An AI expert who understands the Bitcoin code could give some insight here and then anyone can code based around those insights but I'm not that expert.

Count me in.

Have you considered starting a project on a crowd funding site like kickstarter ? With all the news around BTC at the moment I think you could get a large amount of funding rather easily.

You're absolutely right. This should be on Kickstarter. Why not?
I do think however that he should not rush through the design process / white paper peer review. It looks good, but if there are any ideas which can improve it then now is the time to do that since the coin doesn't yet have a name.

He seems to be taking the best innovations of each coin and combining them then adding
Any solution to the byzantine consensus problem with a hybrid PoW-PoW stake system that further introduces fault-tolerance and enhances network security with no real net increase in computation power should be a better solution, not a worse one (main tradeoff is chain bloat, but I'm sure people find this acceptable).  

I can understand the need for compromise but where in your paper is this tradeoff made explicit and it's security/efficiency improvement analyzed ? You simply assert that proof of stake is Good, and build from there. The same for the PPC paper, it's all hand-waving spiced with low level implementation details. Don't view it as an attack on you or your objectives, I am a fan of getting rid of wasteful hashing; however this is a very hard computer science problem (Byzantine consensus vs. the Sybil attack) and I expect a hairy analytical paper with all sort of funny symbols and equations, not implementation details.

It seems to me the cryptocurrency community needs more thinkers than doers. Not enough analysis goes into these bitcoin forks, and the results up to now are half baked and flaky.


Quote
Yes, I'm adding more hash algorithms -- but there is no simple way to implement them all together with an ASIC or FPGA without using a massive number of logic units.  You're looking at maybe 35k gates with a scrypt ASIC while this would easily require 100k+ to hit all encryption algorithms.  

So what ? A modern FPGA can include over ten million gates (virtex 7). A large 22nm ASIC can contain hundreds of millions of simple gates. Indeed it's a bit more work to get the first device done (a fixed cost), but once you have the mask the marginal cost to multiply it is the same as a simple Bitcoin mask which uses a single type of hash. What you should be targeting for is that each chip cannot be much more efficient than a CPU, and scrypt, a password derivation technique, is NOT a proper primitive for this task, the same for you multi-hash scheme.

This is a post I agree with but what books or academic papers do you suggest must be required reading so that we can build a knowledge basis to conduct this level of contemplation and analysis?

We should probably put it on Lesswrong or a similar Wikisite and let people learn the required theoretical knowledge, have the discussions which need to be discussed, worth out the mathematics and equations like you say, and then do a proper peer review. I think you're absolutely right the peer review process is important but if all the people with deep understanding aren't willing to explain that esoteric knowledge or write a book on the subject then nothing can change.
 an innovation of his own.
daemol
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 75
Merit: 10



View Profile
April 22, 2013, 02:45:42 AM
 #107

It would be nice if the system can adjust the network charges as a function of time and difficulty. While, the exchange rate is also important, I think it would be very difficult to implement something based on exchange rate.

When talking about democracy, all our posts are example of how democracy will work Smiley . Everyone will have their own wishlist and in order to move forward, there should be someone who would choose what all features need to be there in the proposed coin. The challenges of democracy will start right away. Cheesy
CoinHoarder
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456
Merit: 1025

In Cryptocoins I Trust


View Profile
April 22, 2013, 11:52:49 PM
 #108

Good idea TacoTime.

I applaud you for creating an ALT coin that actually provides innovation to the ALT coin ecosystem, rather than just copying an existing chain like the others.

I will be following closely.
chriswen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 22, 2013, 11:56:52 PM
 #109

Actually calling this a democratic cryptocurrency is really throwing off a lot of people.  In this plan the democracy part won't be implemented till 27 years later.  Actually tacotime, if you could get some democracy implemented sooner that might be a better idea.
Stampbit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
April 22, 2013, 11:58:42 PM
 #110

Unless you plan on asking for ID, your democracy will be gamed.
chriswen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 500


View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:01:35 AM
 #111

Unless you plan on asking for ID, your democracy will be gamed.

if you read the whitepaper the democracy is based off of solving blocks.
tacotime (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005



View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:05:06 AM
 #112

Actually calling this a democratic cryptocurrency is really throwing off a lot of people.  In this plan the democracy part won't be implemented till 27 years later.  Actually tacotime, if you could get some democracy implemented sooner that might be a better idea.

It can easily be implemented sooner -- for instance, the vote bits in the block header could be used to adjust the rate at which supply distribution decreases.  This could be implemented as soon as the currency begins -- but it was my guess that during the initial few years miners would act as selfishly as possible to try to decrease the reward, so I wasn't sure if it was a good idea or not.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
Stampbit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:05:55 AM
 #113

Unless you plan on asking for ID, your democracy will be gamed.

if you read the whitepaper the democracy is based off of solving blocks.

So that the person with the bigger hashrate has more say, sounds like the democracy we already have.
Cheshyr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:06:28 AM
 #114

It seems the intent of the democracy is to enable human feedback into what is otherwise a fixed algorithm.  The word Democracy carries too much baggage; we should probably change it to be more literal... I can only think of engineering terms at the moment, but it's just a community feedback module.
Stampbit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:08:23 AM
 #115

It seems the intent of the democracy is to enable human feedback into what is otherwise a fixed algorithm.  The word Democracy carries too much baggage; we should probably change it to be more literal... I can only think of engineering terms at the moment, but it's just a community feedback module.

Human intervention is exactly what systems like bitcoin are trying to protect against.
Cheshyr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:15:09 AM
 #116

It seems the intent of the democracy is to enable human feedback into what is otherwise a fixed algorithm.  The word Democracy carries too much baggage; we should probably change it to be more literal... I can only think of engineering terms at the moment, but it's just a community feedback module.

Human intervention is exactly what systems like bitcoin are trying to protect against.
I believe that a currency that is fully programmatically controlled is doomed to failure.  We need some means of correcting for errors, societal changes, technological changes, etc.  We're only human; we can't see the future.
psybits
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:29:55 AM
 #117

I am watching this closely.
Stampbit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
April 23, 2013, 12:35:40 AM
 #118

It seems the intent of the democracy is to enable human feedback into what is otherwise a fixed algorithm.  The word Democracy carries too much baggage; we should probably change it to be more literal... I can only think of engineering terms at the moment, but it's just a community feedback module.

Human intervention is exactly what systems like bitcoin are trying to protect against.
I believe that a currency that is fully programmatically controlled is doomed to failure.  We need some means of correcting for errors, societal changes, technological changes, etc.  We're only human; we can't see the future.

That is up to the developers to implement and the network to accept. Or you could have a settings free for all like Qubic, you cant get more democratic than the everyone-is-an-island model.
Joerii
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1050



View Profile WWW
April 23, 2013, 02:19:08 AM
 #119

Been thinkin' about names. Just brainstorming.

The name of this coin doesn't have to follow the cheesy format of : " Use a noun that describes the difference with bitcoin and add the "-coin" suffix. The name doesn't even have to describe what it does. Here are some things I think are important :

It's...

-Memorable,
-Unique

I've been looking at names of coins for some inspiration. What I think would be cool is to name it after an ancient coin, or a substance/material with some nice attributes. The latter would also provide ideas for nice icons.

How about :

Electrum

It's the alloy that was used for -what is believed to be- the oldest coin in history, the first coin. http://oldestcoins.reidgold.com/article.html


Wouldn't it be cool if it became the name of the first true mainstream cryptocoin ?



Hypercube - get the attention you deserve
Cheshyr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 23, 2013, 02:24:10 AM
 #120

It seems the intent of the democracy is to enable human feedback into what is otherwise a fixed algorithm.  The word Democracy carries too much baggage; we should probably change it to be more literal... I can only think of engineering terms at the moment, but it's just a community feedback module.

Human intervention is exactly what systems like bitcoin are trying to protect against.
I believe that a currency that is fully programmatically controlled is doomed to failure.  We need some means of correcting for errors, societal changes, technological changes, etc.  We're only human; we can't see the future.

That is up to the developers to implement and the network to accept. Or you could have a settings free for all like Qubic, you cant get more democratic than the everyone-is-an-island model.
That's.. actually a terrifying and highly amusing idea.  What if various settings were tweaked weekly, by a very small amount, based on votes collected as user settings in their wallet... assuming a minimum balance and all that.  Sure, the system could be gamed and manipulated, but each wallet only gets one vote, regardless of balance.  And if the settings were collected upon the completion of pseudorandom block generation so you never knew exactly when they would be collected...  use PoS blocks instead of PoW blocks, to ensure maintenance isn't based on mining...  

I dunno.  Just thinking out loud.

edit:  wallet votes gets ugly.  you'd have to make it prohibitive to own a ballet-swinging number of wallets...  min balances, x number of transactions in the past x days...  i dunno. with the potential for intelligent scripting, that gets really messy.  this actually seems like the perfect use for a weekend coin or other short term coin, to see how the community would muck with it.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 ... 62 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!