### CWI-Thread - SpreadCoin Thread | UnOfficial Monitored Thread

[gjhiggins]

I don't want to continue to be name called for FUD and Trolling. Its rather tiresome when I feel I'm asking perfectly constructive questions.

I admit to being less constructive but other than that, you reflect my sentiments exactly.

My continued interest in the different stances adopted by the disparate elements of the original inclusive Spreadcoin community is based on my respect for the perspicacity of the original community members. Broadly, if they were savyy back then about Mr Spread's take on things, then they'll be just as savvy today - possibly about things that I don't yet have a good understanding of and it behooves me to pay heed.

I (like to think that I) ask questions (of myself, of the corpus of empirical work, of knowledgeable others) in an effort to deepen my understanding of the techno-socio-econo-political phenomenon that is the shared ledger. Whenever I get “pushback” from that activity (myself including), it invariably means the vulnerability is profound and reaches right down into the foundations of the effort. (Being equally harsh with own fanciful notions helps me keep my feet closer to where I think the ground might be).

I seem to have an unfortunate facility for pressing georgem’s button. It’s not the first time I’ve encountered this in my technical career, far from it (as you might reasonably suspect).  The contradiction between the position he affects and the immaturity of his communication style is significant and not one that I ignore.

As to revitalising the original Spreadcoin project as an alternative development path (to be pursued independently of - but not necessarily excluding -  whatever georgem and his funding group decides to work on/release) ...

I’m not aware of any well-founded arguments for the continued development of the 0.8.X clone versus focusing the development on one of the clones of Bitcoin Core, so I'm assuming an underpinning Bitcoin Core implementation.

But which? Each version brings its own improvements and enhancements which are just as useful to users of a cloned alt such as SPR as they are to BTC holders. To segwit or not to segwit is the question being discussed elsewhere (c.f. Blockchain mechanic, LItecoin, et al.) Can Mr Spread's 0.8.X-hosted implementation of an overlay network be readily refactored/upgraded to be integrated with 0.13.2 or does the mass of accumulated changes to the core implementation class structure present a significant barrier in terms of technical knowledge and effort? (hint: yes, it does).

Where is the “competition” and what problems are they aiming to solve (in order to be able to mount a defence against - “why bother, just switch to a more promising horse”)

An influential PIVX member and code contributor posted this as their alt's set of attributes:

Here's something I posted on Slack a while back for the newcomers to PIVX. (slightly updated)
It's just a list of stuff as I see it. I tried to stick with facts only. Hopefully it's useful to some.

What sets apart PIVX from other digital currencies? (or just good in general)

01. PIVX is a open source crypto currrency based on DASH so it inherited its core technologies such as Masternodes, Private transactions and Instant Transactions.
02. PIVX uses Blackcoin's improved Proof of Stake 2.0 protocol instead of Proof of Work. So it is more efficient in keeping the network secure than PoW.
03. PIVX had no ICO nor existing pre-mine as it was publicly burnt.
04. PIVX is based on Bitcoin 0.10.x core (and currently going to 0.13.2) which means it is more up to date than most other PoS digital currencies that commonly use a lower Bitcoin core version.
05. PIVX employed a professional media company for its new logo and website development. (Go live ETA end of Feb)
06. PIVX uses an innovative variable Seesaw Reward Balance System that dynamically adjusts its reward to masternodes and staking nodes.
07. There is a technical whitepaper for the above feature. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G58gtDdQtT-8kV8Fu7_764Fxn0i5fs0jGURvz8KJlTE/
08. PIVX has an active community on multiple social networking sites such as BCT, Slack, Reddit, Twitter, Riot etc.
09. PIVX community also uses Trello for publicly accessible task planning and management.
10. PIVX has a highly active, accessible and responsive development team. (always open to new devs)
11. PIVX is available to trade on multiple exchanges including Bittrex with plans to be added to larger exchanges.
12. PIVX currently has a monthly decreasing block reward inflation with it reaching its final low inflationary rate of approx. 4.8% pa beginning mid-May 2017.
13. PIVX has a repository of guides with more planned including video guides and materials. https://darknet-crypto.atlassian.net/wiki/display/DG/Darknet+Guides
14. PIVX has had consistently higher profitability percentage compared to other digital currencies utilizing masternodes such as DASH since launch and even now.
15. PIVX will remove coinjoin method of DASH and implement a modified libzerocoin protocol and will be used full-time. It will utilize performance degradation.

What would be required and how long would it take for an independent Spreadcoin development effort to be able to match (at least) most of those statements?

Cheers

Graham

[gjhiggins]

From the main thread:

... just a little happy spread tidbit (i take my alt coin crypto very seriously doncha know, )
a few months back i posted that i couldn't get that damn vanity gen thing working.
...
ShitQUc37GvDwVce9DP6D326A4gAw8y61z

The vanity generator address feature is one that, as a cognitive psychologist with extensive knowledge of and experience in UI principles, I would strongly dis-recommend for adoption in any independent development effort because, in the context of WIF-serialised addresses, it is a UI antipattern.

Vanity addresses open up an opportunity to exploit the fact that human memory is in fact a dynamically reconstructive process, not a lookup table.

An agent could offer an apparent-seeming match: ShitQUjQfAHjSHnmw9Qf3W2T3YQTjTtjBf (either maliciously or inadvertently) which would be vulnerable to known limitations of attentional resources and optimisation “features” of the perceptual process to the extent that it would effectively promote the “fooling” of a momentarily-inattentive user into not double-checking the address and potentially sending coins to a destination different to that intended.

Vanity addresses are dis-recommended from a security perspective too, as they leak information about the trading activities of the holder of the privkey.

Co-incidentally, I haven’t yet managed to come up with a plausible-seeming answer to my (self-imposed) question of: what role do vanitygen addresses have in an HD-capable wallet such as Bitcoin Core 0.13.2 that offers full BIP32 functionality?

In the same arena, would anyone be up for having a go at generating the appropriate SPR BIP32 version bytes? The version bytes are hard-coded into the protocol so the prefix is common and cannot be readily (ab)used as an exploit.

Cheers

Graham

[stonehedge]

I think the fork idea has promise.

Having said that that, some of us came to the same conclusions as you and decided that a newer core version was desirable but didn't have the stomach for the histrionics that comes with the Spreadcoin territory. We decided to take our plans to another project instead.

I have been contacted by a few people lately asking about the feasibility of a rival fork to SPR. It seems that other people have had the same thoughts.

From my perspective, I haven't got any time to be involved but I'd look on with pseudo academic interest.

[stonehedge]

What would be required and how long would it take for an independent Spreadcoin development effort to be able to match (at least) most of those statements?

I have just seen a project with a small team do a Bitcoin core update, implement some Dash features, drop in a few other features such as sha256 merge mining and speed on down the road of independent development in less than six months.

With a handful of people with the right skills and motivation, nothing would stop SPR from doing the same.

[coins101]

..
What would be required and how long would it take for an independent Spreadcoin development effort to be able to match (at least) most of those statements?

Cheers

Graham

You know what a lot of these projects lack?

Vision.

Sure there are lots of features in there. But drill down into what they mean and it's a list of items that bring the project into the 'me too' category at best.

Even DASH's Evolution is based off my vision for making crypto easy to use and more like internet banking.

[chrysophylax]

..
What would be required and how long would it take for an independent Spreadcoin development effort to be able to match (at least) most of those statements?

Cheers

Graham

You know what a lot of these projects lack?

Vision.

Sure there are lots of features in there. But drill down into what they mean and it's a list of items that bring the project into the 'me too' category at best.

Even DASH's Evolution is based off my vision for making crypto easy to use and more like internet banking.

i agree to an extent ...

i guess most have some sort of vision for the coin / project that they have - but most devs prefer the short term btc pile up ...

we at cwi have a simple vision - that the wallets and payments are simplified so much so that any layman / laywoman can purchase pretty much anything anytime anywhere ... this simple approach means that the complexities of the systems involved need to be simplified also ...

a huge task indeed ... but is a necessary accomplishment for granite to be a good choice for payments ... as for spreadcoin - well georgem looks like he is setting his sights on the accomplishment of things that were and have been - which is not a bad thing ... i would like to see it all come to fruition also - so will see how it all comes about ...

this whole distribution to patrons only though - that will get it all undone in my opinion ... patrons / payers / customers / users alike really should have full access to the wallets - but that is up to georgem and his approach to it all i guess ...

#crysx

[gjhiggins]

ISTR someone observing (correctly at the time) that Spreadcoin lacked a “public vision”.

I pondered that for a long time and eventually arrived at some conclusions:

i) a “vision” can be misleading - ANNs for pump-and-dump runs typically feature ambitious (albeit spurious) visions, presumably to draw in the punters
ii) the notion of an overall directing “vision” is untenable in the context of a peer-to-peer networked cryptocurrency
iii) a functioning Teal organisation will evolve its own vision common purpose as an emergent property of the social consensus

Visions have an unfortunate habit of vaporising when the dev loses interest (examples abound). I'd argue that they signify an elevated risk of failure, the more detailed and extensive the vision, the more damage if/when it proves vacuous.


Cheers

Graham

[chrysophylax]

ISTR someone observing (correctly at the time) that Spreadcoin lacked a “public vision”.

I pondered that for a long time and eventually arrived at some conclusions:

i) a “vision” can be misleading - ANNs for pump-and-dump runs typically feature ambitious (albeit spurious) visions, presumably to draw in the punters
ii) the notion of an overall directing “vision” is untenable in the context of a peer-to-peer networked cryptocurrency
iii) a functioning Teal organisation will evolve its own vision common purpose as an emergent property of the social consensus

Visions have an unfortunate habit of vaporising when the dev loses interest (examples abound). I'd argue that they signify an elevated risk of failure, the more detailed and extensive the vision, the more damage if/when it proves vacuous.


Cheers

Graham

yup! ...

what he said ...

...

#crysx

[coins101]

ISTR someone observing (correctly at the time) that Spreadcoin lacked a “public vision”.

I pondered that for a long time and eventually arrived at some conclusions:

i) a “vision” can be misleading - ANNs for pump-and-dump runs typically feature ambitious (albeit spurious) visions, presumably to draw in the punters
ii) the notion of an overall directing “vision” is untenable in the context of a peer-to-peer networked cryptocurrency
iii) a functioning Teal organisation will evolve its own vision common purpose as an emergent property of the social consensus

Visions have an unfortunate habit of vaporising when the dev loses interest (examples abound). I'd argue that they signify an elevated risk of failure, the more detailed and extensive the vision, the more damage if/when it proves vacuous.


Cheers

Graham

nah.

It all goes south when the dev thinks he knows everything - usually when there is a laser sharp focus on technical issues, whilst ignoring the end user.

[entropycoin]

I like this fork idea where spreadcoin exists as a separate entity for georgem's tinkering and the main branch having an updated codebase that functions with a greater emphasis on coin's vision.

[gjhiggins]

I like this fork idea where spreadcoin exists as a separate entity for georgem's tinkering and the main branch having an updated codebase that functions with a greater emphasis on coin's vision.

It sounds sensible until one begins to pick apart the entailments:

Firstly, it would risk making an orphan of georgem's work unless the efforts were synchronised, which is not on the table because georgem needs pretty much total freedom in order to meet his responsibilities to his Patreon funders.

Secondly, as has been recently mentioned: what vision?

Cheers

Graham

[coins101]

..Secondly, as has been recently mentioned: what vision?
..

Well, this one to start with

Good summation, it lacks when he mentioned he would be working exclusively on spreadcoin full time...As an early adoper, it's beyond the point of frustration or believability. Georgem is taking a more holistic approach rather than building on anything and as a result the price has suffered and confidence has wavered to the point where delisting from the only exchange it's currently on remains a possibility. There are some great minds behind this project though, like coins101- a visionary in this space, who was instrumental in the early success of dash.

 It ultimately is a coin of low risk high reward potential. Let's look at its price history. Servicenodes in testnet before mr. Spread's departure .0003. A mere mention of georgem's implementation within reach .00018; Almost an order of magnitude from where we currently stand. Imagine where we will be once, 100 more soons from now, servicenodes are actually released to mainnet.

People involved in crypto are generally myopic. That's a dim game to play. I'd rather georgem not address any of this and keep doing what he's doing. I'll wait.

From my perspective, 10m people use Blockchain.info to host a Bitcoin wallet (or they have 10m wallets, whatever your specific point of view), which is a sign something is wrong when you consider there are about 5,500 full Bitcoin nodes.

This is, by its very definition, a market imbalance. Not in terms of technical fear of the network not being able to cope. While there is that. My point of view is that this is a f huge opportunity. It's not a technical imbalance its a market distortion waiting for a solution.

* People don't want to run full nodes. But it's the safest option.

* People do want to run SPV's, in particular through their mobile, but it's the least safe option.

Do you see what I see in that diametrically opposed position?

No?

There are about 1.5bn PC's, but we are approaching 2.5bn smart phones. While PC adoption will plateau, the smart phone will continue to grow towards 5bn users.

So my design for a decentralized (bloody American spell checker on BCT) servicenode network that will create an encrypted link between an SPV and a full node, and then have those full nodes on a super fast rely network, is smack bang in the right space.

In fixing the SPV security model, you fix the Bitcoin lack of full nodes security model. The two positions are no longer diametrically opposed, they are aligned. You've fixed the market distortion, in a decentralized way.

So, I'm waiting to see what will happen before releasing this whitepaper.

The whitepaper is done, I've checked for available technology, it's a great commercial opportunity and it looks like it can address a market distortion enough to generate a business model around it.

Which is why I say, one way or another it will be built.

But lets see what happens next.

I think this is a fantastic direction. Georgem, where are you at with everything? I'd be willing to contribute to a bounty to enlist outside help if necessary.

[coins101]

....Secondly, as has been recently mentioned: what vision?
..

More longer-term, this one (an idea which DASH copied and is now called Evolution....you can trace the dates and see I posted this thought through idea several months before Evolution was announced as the future direction of DASH)....

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1sKlPh19aAGPGD-DuwPH_FMIJVbqjTzEPweKkvFS0TxY/edit#slide=id.p

[gjhiggins]

..Secondly, as has been recently mentioned: what vision?
..

Well, this one to start with

More longer-term, this one

I would not characterise these as visions but as (perfectly valid and rational) technical development directions because they don't focus on the user but on the technology/service.

For me, a vision needs to be i) user-focused and ii) something “other”.

Cheers

Graham

[coins101]

..Secondly, as has been recently mentioned: what vision?
..

Well, this one to start with

More longer-term, this one

I would not characterise these as visions but as (perfectly valid and rational) technical development directions because they don't focus on the user but on the technology/service.

For me, a vision needs to be i) user-focused and ii) something “other”.

Cheers

Graham

I have assumed that you didn't really read the whole thing or understand the outcome (ie you didn't get it - which is a failure of communications)



The whole point of all this was to create an easy on-ramp solution for the average Joe's family including grandparents, while removing central points of failure.

The thing about visions is you either see it or you don't  

[entropycoin]

..Secondly, as has been recently mentioned: what vision?
..

Well, this one to start with

More longer-term, this one

I would not characterise these as visions but as (perfectly valid and rational) technical development directions because they don't focus on the user but on the technology/service.

For me, a vision needs to be i) user-focused and ii) something “other”.

Cheers

Graham

Semantics aside, it's a direction that starkly contrasts the current state of the the project. In its current form, spreadcoin directly serves the interest of a single individual. These concepts, regardress of where they are realized, have the potential to strengthen an entire ecosystem.

[coins101]

As this thread is actually called 'spreadcoin', I've created a new thread (what? another bloody spreadcoin thread?)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1809278.msg18021096#msg18021096

please come and troll us there.

[chrysophylax]

As this thread is actually called 'spreadcoin', I've created a new thread (what? another bloody spreadcoin thread?)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1809278.msg18021096#msg18021096

please come and troll us there.

hehehe ...

and we KNOW why i called it the unofficial spreadcoin thread ...

trolling ... which is not supported here ...

would you like a namechange for the thread mate? ... ...

eitherway - i like the ideas - but i feel the direction is becoming more and more branched and skewed ...

if you would like to continue with your the new thread - and the rest of the community prefers to converse there also - ill lock this one and be done with it ...

would make it much easier to moderate as well ...

#crysx