[WDC] Worldcoin | 0.17.1 Released! | AuxPoW w/ LWMA diff algorithm. Resync Req.

[Berzeck]

That's the problem, BTC has to implement over complex, over engineered solutions because they can not change inner block chain technology.
PoW is not the future no matter if segregate witness gives more time. This means that sooner or later BTC will need to change again or another technology will supersede
The best strategy is to wait to the real solution and implement that, (as I said hyperledger is a candidate) meanwhile we prepare the environment and framework for that day
I understand that investors won't have happy days short term, but it's the best way to use scarce resources

[1714784330]

1714784330

[1714784330]

1714784330

[1714784330]

1714784330

[1714784330]

1714784330

[1714784330]

1714784330

[1714784330]

1714784330

[CryptoJohn]

I tried to withdraw WDC from Cryptopia, trans id didn't even show up on explorer

[Berzeck]

Id?

[CryptoJohn]

Id?

NVM, maybe cryptopia was having issues last night. Withdraw was in wallet this morning when i opened wallet.

[elbandi]

Pools? pool list broken... 

[shveicar]

Now the wait for a WDC transaction takes 40 minutes, strange it does not bother anyone..
Already today there is a proven technology with the use of Masternodes allowing to implement instant transactions.
But who then still believes that reforms are unnecessary?

[cryptohunter]

anyone ever going to upgrade or do something to make wdc at all relevant again?

I see

quark, dgc, mec all talking up some kind of comeback and price up rising but wdc not so much?

the 2013 leading alts have been sleeping are they all about to wake up for this new wave on incoming crypto enthusiasts?

[shveicar]

anyone ever going to upgrade or do something to make wdc at all relevant again?

I see

quark, dgc, mec all talking up some kind of comeback and price up rising but wdc not so much?

the 2013 leading alts have been sleeping are they all about to wake up for this new wave on incoming crypto enthusiasts?

The matter is that now on the Chines exchangers the withdrawal of BTC and LTC is closed (pause for withdrawal to 15 days)
Fearing the strengthening of government pressure, people buy altcoins and try to withdraw money through them.
Btc38 is the largest volume for WDC.
And there are the same restrictions with output.

To WDC again began to really grow in price, we need network reforms.
But as Berzeck said, he does not consider them necessary at the moment.
In addition, his remarks about the lack of interest in the opinions of investors, just will not add  the status for current state of affairs.

I sold some of my WDC, but still own 500k coins.
If I do not see reforms in the near future, then I will sell the rest.
I like coins where developers listen to investors and not vice versa.

[cryptohunter]

anyone ever going to upgrade or do something to make wdc at all relevant again?

I see

quark, dgc, mec all talking up some kind of comeback and price up rising but wdc not so much?

the 2013 leading alts have been sleeping are they all about to wake up for this new wave on incoming crypto enthusiasts?

The matter is that now on the Chines exchangers the withdrawal of BTC and LTC is closed (pause for withdrawal to 15 days)
Fearing the strengthening of government pressure, people buy altcoins and try to withdraw money through them.
Btc38 is the largest volume for WDC.
And there are the same restrictions with output.

To WDC again began to really grow in price, we need network reforms.
But as Berzeck said, he does not consider them necessary at the moment.
In addition, his remarks about the lack of interest in the opinions of investors, just will not add  the status for current state of affairs.

I sold some of my WDC, but still own 500k coins.
If I do not see reforms in the near future, then I will sell the rest.
I like coins where developers listen to investors and not vice versa.

Agree you have to give them what they want else they invest elsewhere and those projects will develop with the funds you could have had.

[shveicar]

anyone ever going to upgrade or do something to make wdc at all relevant again?

I see

quark, dgc, mec all talking up some kind of comeback and price up rising but wdc not so much?

the 2013 leading alts have been sleeping are they all about to wake up for this new wave on incoming crypto enthusiasts?

The matter is that now on the Chines exchangers the withdrawal of BTC and LTC is closed (pause for withdrawal to 15 days)
Fearing the strengthening of government pressure, people buy altcoins and try to withdraw money through them.
Btc38 is the largest volume for WDC.
And there are the same restrictions with output.

To WDC again began to really grow in price, we need network reforms.
But as Berzeck said, he does not consider them necessary at the moment.
In addition, his remarks about the lack of interest in the opinions of investors, just will not add  the status for current state of affairs.

I sold some of my WDC, but still own 500k coins.
If I do not see reforms in the near future, then I will sell the rest.
I like coins where developers listen to investors and not vice versa.

Agree you have to give them what they want else they invest elsewhere and those projects will develop with the funds you could have had.

Crypto currency is primarily a financial system.
It must obey certain rules.
If there are no investors, then there will be no system.
I'm not a poor man, and could have long ago hired a programmer to change the WDC code.
But I do not want to organize a revolution.
And I believe that any problems can be solved through dialogue..

[Berzeck]

anyone ever going to upgrade or do something to make wdc at all relevant again?

I see

quark, dgc, mec all talking up some kind of comeback and price up rising but wdc not so much?

the 2013 leading alts have been sleeping are they all about to wake up for this new wave on incoming crypto enthusiasts?

The matter is that now on the Chines exchangers the withdrawal of BTC and LTC is closed (pause for withdrawal to 15 days)
Fearing the strengthening of government pressure, people buy altcoins and try to withdraw money through them.
Btc38 is the largest volume for WDC.
And there are the same restrictions with output.

To WDC again began to really grow in price, we need network reforms.
But as Berzeck said, he does not consider them necessary at the moment.
In addition, his remarks about the lack of interest in the opinions of investors, just will not add  the status for current state of affairs.

I sold some of my WDC, but still own 500k coins.
If I do not see reforms in the near future, then I will sell the rest.
I like coins where developers listen to investors and not vice versa.

Agree you have to give them what they want else they invest elsewhere and those projects will develop with the funds you could have had.

Crypto currency is primarily a financial system.
It must obey certain rules.
If there are no investors, then there will be no system.
I'm not a poor man, and could have long ago hired a programmer to change the WDC code.
But I do not want to organize a revolution.
And I believe that any problems can be solved through dialogue..

What I explicitly told everyone including you is that current block chain technology does not solve the problems that crypto have, they are only patches that give more time to developers to find the ultimate solution, therefore I won't invest my personal time on patches, just in real solutions. BUT if you have money to hire a developer that's excellent! because I will coordinate with him and will help to implement the patch or temporary solution. I do not have any problem with that. No revolution needed!!!
So let me know when can we start working and I will post updates in this forum and on official web page

[shveicar]

anyone ever going to upgrade or do something to make wdc at all relevant again?

I see

quark, dgc, mec all talking up some kind of comeback and price up rising but wdc not so much?

the 2013 leading alts have been sleeping are they all about to wake up for this new wave on incoming crypto enthusiasts?

The matter is that now on the Chines exchangers the withdrawal of BTC and LTC is closed (pause for withdrawal to 15 days)
Fearing the strengthening of government pressure, people buy altcoins and try to withdraw money through them.
Btc38 is the largest volume for WDC.
And there are the same restrictions with output.

To WDC again began to really grow in price, we need network reforms.
But as Berzeck said, he does not consider them necessary at the moment.
In addition, his remarks about the lack of interest in the opinions of investors, just will not add  the status for current state of affairs.

I sold some of my WDC, but still own 500k coins.
If I do not see reforms in the near future, then I will sell the rest.
I like coins where developers listen to investors and not vice versa.

Agree you have to give them what they want else they invest elsewhere and those projects will develop with the funds you could have had.

Crypto currency is primarily a financial system.
It must obey certain rules.
If there are no investors, then there will be no system.
I'm not a poor man, and could have long ago hired a programmer to change the WDC code.
But I do not want to organize a revolution.
And I believe that any problems can be solved through dialogue..

What I explicitly told everyone including you is that current block chain technology does not solve the problems that crypto have, they are only patches that give more time to developers to find the ultimate solution, therefore I won't invest my personal time on patches, just in real solutions. BUT if you have money to hire a developer that's excellent! because I will coordinate with him and will help to implement the patch or temporary solution. I do not have any problem with that. No revolution needed!!!
So let me know when can we start working and I will post updates in this forum and on official web page

Ok, if you agree to recognize that the situation with the network is disturbing and we need a solution, then I propose to hold a vote on this issue.
Maybe this makes sense in the forum.worldcoin.global?

[Berzeck]

Ok, if you agree to recognize that the situation with the network is disturbing and we need a solution, then I propose to hold a vote on this issue.
Maybe this makes sense in the forum.worldcoin.global?

Sadly what you say is not true and is obvious you don't know what you are talking about in technical terms, BUT what I recognize is that having a temporary patch (for a problem we  don't have yet) won't hurt, long term nothing will change because we will need to switch again so if you are serious about your proposal I don't have a problem, it also may attract traders so volume should be increased
Please confirm that you are really committed with this and I will put a thread on forum with general guidelines so we make a poll in the future with block chain tech candidates. The way voting will go on is: people who have more WDC have more power vote on proportional means, the exact mechanism to control this can be discussed

[shveicar]

Ok, if you agree to recognize that the situation with the network is disturbing and we need a solution, then I propose to hold a vote on this issue.
Maybe this makes sense in the forum.worldcoin.global?

Sadly what you say is not true and is obvious you don't know what you are talking about in technical terms, BUT what I recognize is that having a temporary patch (for a problem we  don't have yet) won't hurt, long term nothing will change because we will need to switch again so if you are serious about your proposal I don't have a problem, it also may attract traders so volume should be increased
Please confirm that you are really committed with this and I will put a thread on forum with general guidelines so we make a poll in the future with block chain tech candidates. The way voting will go on is: people who have more WDC have more power vote on proportional means, the exact mechanism to control this can be discussed

I wonder what it means I do not understand what I'm talking about?
There are clear specifications for different coins, with source codes available on github.
If we take into account the system masternodes then you can see about it here - https://github.com/evan82/dashpay

But this implies a serious network change with the opening of masternodes.
If people approve this system and we move on to it, it means setting a certain amount of WDC to open one masternode.
If people invest in this system and buy for this worldcoin, (for example 100k for opening one MN) then how are you going to cancel it later?
It's like telling them that your contribution to the bank will be annulled after a while..

[Berzeck]

Ok, if you agree to recognize that the situation with the network is disturbing and we need a solution, then I propose to hold a vote on this issue.
Maybe this makes sense in the forum.worldcoin.global?

Sadly what you say is not true and is obvious you don't know what you are talking about in technical terms, BUT what I recognize is that having a temporary patch (for a problem we  don't have yet) won't hurt, long term nothing will change because we will need to switch again so if you are serious about your proposal I don't have a problem, it also may attract traders so volume should be increased
Please confirm that you are really committed with this and I will put a thread on forum with general guidelines so we make a poll in the future with block chain tech candidates. The way voting will go on is: people who have more WDC have more power vote on proportional means, the exact mechanism to control this can be discussed

I wonder what it means I do not understand what I'm talking about?
There are clear specifications for different coins, with source codes available on github.
If we take into account the system masternodes then you can see about it here - https://github.com/evan82/dashpay

But this implies a serious network change with the opening of masternodes.
If people approve this system and we move on to it, it means setting a certain amount of WDC to open one masternode.
If people invest in this system and buy for this worldcoin, (for example 100k for opening one MN) then how are you going to cancel it later?
It's like telling them that your contribution to the bank will be annulled after a while..

It means that bitcoin has using version 0.8.x up to december 2013 (and many nodes up to 2014) with tens of times more transactions, nodes, etc  than wdc and network was not 'disturbing' even then. Many changes that came after that, patches scalability problem giving more time to the network; we do not have those problems right now because number of transactions are very very low in comparison,  if you change to a PoW + PoS scheme that should secure a little more the network for a hashrate attack but what you do not realize is that performing a sybill atack is hundreds of times cheaper and easier to destroy a network something even btc is susceptible to. So you want fortify the front door with reinforced steel but you leave the back window open; feeling more secure.
As a side note: PoW will be changed in the future because its an enormous waste of power, the trend technology improves is always in the other direction; there are many experimental schemes that do not waste so much power that will supersede PoW, therefore securing hashrate is definitely a temporary solution because it will be changed again in the future.

But we do not need to argue about this, because as I said if someone else will invest time in temporal improvements I do not have a problem with that. We will coordinate and make the improvements

But some guidelines first:
 *We won't use alpha status code (like your last proposal), that would be crazy and very reckless (to say the least)  move.because it can kill the network. Changing core crypto functions is hard, changing it correctly with a decent QA is EXTREMELY HARD; it would be suicide if we try to implement alpha code for a new scheme and try to perform QA (Quality Assurance) ourselves
Whats more how exactly this proposal changes the 'disturbing' status of the network?!?!?!?
 *We won't change to some experimental scheme which is a project of a single coin (related to point 1)
 *The candidate schemes should be currently used and proved to work in production code (Pow + PoS for example)
 In the past you wanted to change to some established PoW + PoS which can't hurt (done right of course), other proven schemes could work too

About voting:
Example:
  suppose there are 4 options:
  we will send to your address 0.1 wdc for option 1, 0.2 wdc for option 2 and so on (to whatever you put your vote).
  you have to send us back the amount for your vote to count
  the address used to send the coins will be checked for the amount of WDC you have in it.
  
  More coins more vote power.
  

[shveicar]

It means that bitcoin has using version 0.8.x up to december 2013 (and many nodes up to 2014) with tens of times more transactions, nodes, etc  than wdc and network was not 'disturbing' even then. Many changes that came after that, patches scalability problem giving more time to the network; we do not have those problems right now because number of transactions are very very low in comparison,  if you change to a PoW + PoS scheme that should secure a little more the network for a hashrate attack but what you do not realize is that performing a sybill atack is hundreds of times cheaper and easier to destroy a network something even btc is susceptible to. So you want fortify the front door with reinforced steel but you leave the back window open; feeling more secure.
As a side note: PoW will be changed in the future because its an enormous waste of power, the trend technology improves is always in the other direction; there are many experimental schemes that do not waste so much power that will supersede PoW, therefore securing hashrate is definitely a temporary solution because it will be changed again in the future.

But we do not need to argue about this, because as I said if someone else will invest time in temporal improvements I do not have a problem with that. We will coordinate and make the improvements

But some guidelines first:
 *We won't use alpha status code (like your last proposal), that would be crazy and very reckless (to say the least)  move.because it can kill the network. Changing core crypto functions is hard, changing it correctly with a decent QA is EXTREMELY HARD; it would be suicide if we try to implement alpha code for a new scheme and try to perform QA (Quality Assurance) ourselves
Whats more how exactly this proposal changes the 'disturbing' status of the network?!?!?!?
 *We won't change to some experimental scheme which is a project of a single coin (related to point 1)
 *The candidate schemes should be currently used and proved to work in production code (Pow + PoS for example)
 In the past you wanted to change to some established PoW + PoS which can't hurt (done right of course), other proven schemes could work too

About voting:
Example:
  suppose there are 4 options:
  we will send to your address 0.1 wdc for option 1, 0.2 wdc for option 2 and so on (to whatever you put your vote).
  you have to send us back the amount for your vote to count
  the address used to send the coins will be checked for the amount of WDC you have in it.
 
  More coins more vote power.
 

Before we start vote, we need to agree on technical changes and only then vote for them.
You argue that any change with the addition of masternodes can lead to a catastrophe.
Then let's look at the my old sentence and then how the nearest coins to us (for example Potcoin, and scrypt algo) went to the POW + POSv mechanism https://github.com/potcoin/Potcoin-Seeder
Personally, I do not see that this coin is experiencing network problems, such as we now see at WDC.

I also propose to translate this discussion into a slack channel, that would not fill this forum with different ideas and reflections.

If you want, you can start a new slack channel or join the fact that I discovered worldcoin-group.slack.com (For me it does not matter)

[Berzeck]

It means that bitcoin has using version 0.8.x up to december 2013 (and many nodes up to 2014) with tens of times more transactions, nodes, etc  than wdc and network was not 'disturbing' even then. Many changes that came after that, patches scalability problem giving more time to the network; we do not have those problems right now because number of transactions are very very low in comparison,  if you change to a PoW + PoS scheme that should secure a little more the network for a hashrate attack but what you do not realize is that performing a sybill atack is hundreds of times cheaper and easier to destroy a network something even btc is susceptible to. So you want fortify the front door with reinforced steel but you leave the back window open; feeling more secure.
As a side note: PoW will be changed in the future because its an enormous waste of power, the trend technology improves is always in the other direction; there are many experimental schemes that do not waste so much power that will supersede PoW, therefore securing hashrate is definitely a temporary solution because it will be changed again in the future.

But we do not need to argue about this, because as I said if someone else will invest time in temporal improvements I do not have a problem with that. We will coordinate and make the improvements

But some guidelines first:
 *We won't use alpha status code (like your last proposal), that would be crazy and very reckless (to say the least)  move.because it can kill the network. Changing core crypto functions is hard, changing it correctly with a decent QA is EXTREMELY HARD; it would be suicide if we try to implement alpha code for a new scheme and try to perform QA (Quality Assurance) ourselves
Whats more how exactly this proposal changes the 'disturbing' status of the network?!?!?!?
 *We won't change to some experimental scheme which is a project of a single coin (related to point 1)
 *The candidate schemes should be currently used and proved to work in production code (Pow + PoS for example)
 In the past you wanted to change to some established PoW + PoS which can't hurt (done right of course), other proven schemes could work too

About voting:
Example:
  suppose there are 4 options:
  we will send to your address 0.1 wdc for option 1, 0.2 wdc for option 2 and so on (to whatever you put your vote).
  you have to send us back the amount for your vote to count
  the address used to send the coins will be checked for the amount of WDC you have in it.
  
  More coins more vote power.
 

Before we start vote, we need to agree on technical changes and only then vote for them.
You argue that any change with the addition of masternodes can lead to a catastrophe.
Then let's look at the my old sentence and then how the nearest coins to us (for example Potcoin, and scrypt algo) went to the POW + POSv mechanism https://github.com/potcoin/Potcoin-Seeder
Personally, I do not see that this coin is experiencing network problems, such as we now see at WDC.

I also propose to translate this discussion into a slack channel, that would not fill this forum with different ideas and reflections.

If you want, you can start a new slack channel or join the fact that I discovered worldcoin-group.slack.com (For me it does not matter)

Friend, we obviously  have a problem of communication, what I am arguing is that the link you put as a reference clearly states that it is ALPHA code, and clearly states that it still needs a lot of testing BEFORE putting it in production; its nuts to use that code in our network
I also clearly state that I am OK with PoW + PoS (please, we really need to read carefully to avoid misundertstandings)

It would be better to use the official forum to backup the arguments before the poll. Also this first thread that will be put is just choosing candidates (like PoW + PoS)

[shveicar]

Friend, we obviously  have a problem of communication, what I am arguing is that the link you put as a reference clearly states that it is ALPHA code, and clearly states that it still needs a lot of testing BEFORE putting it in production; its nuts to use that code in our network
I also clearly state that I am OK with PoW + PoS (please, we really need to read carefully to avoid misundertstandings)

It would be better to use the official forum to backup the arguments before the poll. Also this first thread that will be put is just choosing candidates (like PoW + PoS)

Ok, then you can open a separate topic on this issue on the forum.worldcoin.global

[Berzeck]

Friend, we obviously  have a problem of communication, what I am arguing is that the link you put as a reference clearly states that it is ALPHA code, and clearly states that it still needs a lot of testing BEFORE putting it in production; its nuts to use that code in our network
I also clearly state that I am OK with PoW + PoS (please, we really need to read carefully to avoid misundertstandings)

It would be better to use the official forum to backup the arguments before the poll. Also this first thread that will be put is just choosing candidates (like PoW + PoS)

Ok, then you can open a separate topic on this issue on the forum.worldcoin.global

Those who are interested http://forum.worldcoin.global/index.php?/topic/428-switching-block-chain-tech-candidates/

[Berzeck]

Back to China! http://forum.worldcoin.global/index.php?/topic/430-back-to-china/