Bitcoin Forum
November 19, 2017, 07:38:15 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 [151] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][YAC] YACoin ongoing development  (Read 349030 times)
alenevaa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 288



View Profile WWW
July 14, 2015, 12:28:54 PM
 #3001


... We should ask Cryptsy and Bter especially to de-list Yacoin until this is resolved.  

Agreed 100%. I would even sugest temporary network shutdown until this is fixed.

Disagree 200%!  Delisting can bring YACoin down to death!


I expect to have 30 khash/s worth of hashing power in the next month or two, which still won't be enough.
Beave you are real man!

I think we need at least 100 kH/s combined power just to try to take back the network.
And with 150-200 kH/s we can definitely win!

██████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
██████████████████████
|
WINGS           
Where DAO Unicorns are born
|
.
1st Bitcoin & Ethereum DAO for DAOs
1st Decentralized Chatbot to Smart Contracts Interaction System

|
.
Wings Bounties Earn Eggs
X-Blockchain DAO

1511077095
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511077095

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511077095
Reply with quote  #2

1511077095
Report to moderator
1511077095
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511077095

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511077095
Reply with quote  #2

1511077095
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
caston
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 736



View Profile WWW
July 14, 2015, 12:47:09 PM
 #3002

I think we need some kind of crazy new hardware. Crossbar tech or memristor for example.

I noticed the Yacoin.org page doesn't encourage much investor confidence right now... If you really want to put a warning up at least keep the links to the forum and block explorer.

 I originally suggested a coin that gets more memory hard over time as a concept sometime before Yacoin was developed.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61888.0

To beat the botnet we need some crazy new tech. Perhaps something like this? http://www.crossbar-inc.com/products/3d-rram/

So Beave don't sell your house... I would suggest crowd sourcing the money required to buy some high end tech for mining very memory hardcoins and then selling mining shares.

18jL18iH96BBhwUCQn27FQp7ocodSxvJAB
senj
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 118


View Profile
July 14, 2015, 05:07:06 PM
 #3003

The answer to centralized manipulation with resources is NOT centralized manipulation WITHOUT resources.
This is not something I would like to do. But it might become the only way to save yacoin if situation gets worse.

I literally just finalized an offer to sell a house so that I can expand my mining operation to stabilize the network--I'm not joking. I expect to have 30 khash/s worth of hashing power in the next month or two, which still won't be enough.
I told that to my woman, so she will go easier on me now.

What we have is an arms race where one entity has a nuclear bomb while the rest of us have rocks and sticks. We need more rocks and sticks! ...
Current chain "caretaker" mines approximately million YAC every ten 10 days. If he doesn't sell, he might gather enough funds in next couple of months to compete with higher (pure) PoW hashrate by later also minting PoS blocks and consequently raising his chain's trust.


Once we have taken back the network, it seems we can fix the issue of PoS being ignored? (I thought that was a 'chaintrust' issue, but I guess not--confused). But a fix is meaningless if 'we' don't control the network, right?
Correct - by all means honest branch should have more trust with PoS blocks included already.
But if an attacker can generate longer PoW-only chain, that one wins.
Chaintrust fix in development will mostly address issue Balthazar exposed. But fix for ignoring PoS blocks issue will make it harder/impossible for attacker to create longer PoW-only chain.


I have a pretty good feeling about what is happening now:

We build PoW+PoS+PoW chain with a trust of 10+11+20=41 for example.
Minutes later attacker broadcasts PoW+PoW+PoW+PoW+PoW (10+10+10+10+10=50) and kicks our blocks out.

But the real problem is that PoW difficulty in our branch get's adjusted towards 2 minute spacing when PoS block arives. On the other hand, attacker's blocks are stil one minute apart, so he is mining on lower difficulty, has more time and is able to overtake us eventually (before our POW difficulty readjusts back). It might be that in addition to having more hashing power.
Just one more thing to consider while refactoring GetBlockTrust method.


This is crazy talk. Even someone with over 50% can't generate bogus transactions. But he can reverse them for a short period of time. A SHORT period of time. ...
It's not about creating bogus transactions. Whoever mines all blocks can opt to exclude all transactions (except coinbase/coinstake). He has the power to stop people transacting.

What? How? If that were true, I'm pretty sure Cryptsy wouldn't have their YAC wallet up and running. If it is true, I'm not so sure that is completely a bad thing anyway. Perhaps the whole purpose is for this guy to scam bter.com and sell coins that don't actually stay in the blockchain. I'm on his side at that point. BTER.com STOLE $5000 worth of coins from me. Real life.

Every transaction sent must be eventually included in a block by a miner (PoS or PoW miner).
If there is only one miner, he decides which transactions land in the chain. Small change in code and any or all optional (not coinbase or coinstake) transactions can be left out.
This is extremely ungrateful situation, but if everything mined now get's directed towards exchanges, he, she or they must let transactions through (not all though).

If for some reason this would stop, we can conclude there is malevolence behind and attacker does not really care for any loss incured due transaction system "halt".
In that case we should temporary shutdown and possibly restart from past point to alleviate attacker's influence over large currency supply portion later.

...
I think we need at least 100 kH/s combined power just to try to take back the network.
And with 150-200 kH/s we can definitely win!
I think we need some kind of crazy new hardware. Crossbar tech or memristor for example.
...

We need to fix yacoin. If that goes well, we will get more attention and miners.

YAC: YGZRDNuey8MnN6GHVR1x7D3UY5TjDz2HCL
NineEleven
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 181


View Profile WWW
July 14, 2015, 06:13:15 PM
 #3004

I think we can manage the hasrate if we try harder

If you all wanna try to ghet the network back by overpower the hasrate
count me in 

I mine solo whit 7khs

and i have a public pool running also

so let do it ?

http://jornalbitcoin.pt/ , Noticias em Portugues
Joe_Bauers
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 783


GCVMMWH


View Profile
July 14, 2015, 06:52:25 PM
 #3005

What we have is an arms race where one entity has a nuclear bomb while the rest of us have rocks and sticks. We need more rocks and sticks!

Finally you're starting to make sense.
Beave162
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 701



View Profile
July 14, 2015, 06:55:26 PM
 #3006

I think we can manage the hasrate if we try harder

If you all wanna try to ghet the network back by overpower the hasrate
count me in  

I mine solo whit 7khs

and i have a public pool running also

so let do it ?

I'm at full steam ahead at the moment: 7 khash/s on the pool and 6 khash/s solo. My solo wallet is staking like a mother as well. I think we have control at the moment but that will surely change tonight per the usual routine.

YaCoin: YL5kf54wPPXKsXd5T18xCaNkyUsS1DgY7z 
BitCoin: 14PFbLyUdTyxZg3V8hnvj5VXkx3dhthmDj
Joe_Bauers
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 783


GCVMMWH


View Profile
July 14, 2015, 06:56:04 PM
 #3007

I think we can manage the hasrate if we try harder

If you all wanna try to ghet the network back by overpower the hasrate
count me in 

I mine solo whit 7khs

and i have a public pool running also

so let do it ?

What is your pool address again? I will put it on the website and tweet it out as well. You'll need to (hopefully) be ready for any high volume that comes in. Also, probably getting ddosed.
Beave162
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 701



View Profile
July 14, 2015, 06:57:50 PM
 #3008

What we have is an arms race where one entity has a nuclear bomb while the rest of us have rocks and sticks. We need more rocks and sticks!

Finally you're starting to make sense.

I could have said you were right after your first comment on the matter--but that wouldn't have been fun.  Tongue

YaCoin: YL5kf54wPPXKsXd5T18xCaNkyUsS1DgY7z 
BitCoin: 14PFbLyUdTyxZg3V8hnvj5VXkx3dhthmDj
caston
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 736



View Profile WWW
July 14, 2015, 11:25:19 PM
 #3009

If we can't get some new bleeding edge state of the art mining tech for memory hard calculations then the quick and dirty solution is to reset the N factor back to 1 and have a big relaunch and invite all the GPU miners back in.

Additionally you may decide to reset PoS payments to 1% a year but make them increase with N. e.g. when N factor gets 5 PoS is 5% again N = 6 then PoS = 6% etc

Hopefully by the time we get back to our current N factor (which would take a couple of years) then the technology to mine at the higher N factors will exist.

My third suggestion is that while we upgrade the security of our PoS tech we also change the payout intervals from three montly to weekly.

Will GPU miners mine a coin with 60 million already in existence?

They will if it is profitable.

The difficulty will probably have to be increased.

18jL18iH96BBhwUCQn27FQp7ocodSxvJAB
Thirtybird
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 693



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 05:09:03 AM
 #3010

If we can't get some new bleeding edge state of the art mining tech for memory hard calculations then the quick and dirty solution is to reset the N factor back to 1 and have a big relaunch and invite all the GPU miners back in.

Additionally you may decide to reset PoS payments to 1% a year but make them increase with N. e.g. when N factor gets 5 PoS is 5% again N = 6 then PoS = 6% etc

Hopefully by the time we get back to our current N factor (which would take a couple of years) then the technology to mine at the higher N factors will exist.

My third suggestion is that while we upgrade the security of our PoS tech we also change the payout intervals from three montly to weekly.

Will GPU miners mine a coin with 60 million already in existence?

They will if it is profitable.

The difficulty will probably have to be increased.


The new AMD GPU's are coming with 8 GB of memory on the 390's.  The Fury's are only 4GB, but it's newer fabbed stuff called HBM (High bandwidth memory) and it has substantially more memory bandwidth of GDDR5 (I think it's double-ish).  Should see 8GB cards with the stuff in the future as AMD is really pushing 4K gaming, which necessitates more memory.  Don't despair about N - there's always the cpu miner Wink

YACMiner: https://github.com/Thirtybird/YACMiner  N-Factor information : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aj3vcsuY-JFNdC1ITWJrSG9VeWp6QXppbVgxcm0tbGc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
BTC: 183eSsaxG9y6m2ZhrDhHueoKnZWmbm6jfC  YAC: Y4FKiwKKYGQzcqn3M3u6mJoded6ri1UWHa
caston
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 736



View Profile WWW
July 15, 2015, 07:04:41 AM
 #3011

Well what are the reasons for or against an N reset?

And why would we do this instead of just starting again with a new coin?

18jL18iH96BBhwUCQn27FQp7ocodSxvJAB
NineEleven
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 181


View Profile WWW
July 15, 2015, 07:52:39 AM
 #3012

I think we can manage the hasrate if we try harder

If you all wanna try to ghet the network back by overpower the hasrate
count me in 

I mine solo whit 7khs

and i have a public pool running also

so let do it ?

What is your pool address again? I will put it on the website and tweet it out as well. You'll need to (hopefully) be ready for any high volume that comes in. Also, probably getting ddosed.


http://yac.erlog.pt/


the night was great

the pool successfule mined 5,504.02000000 yac
but  hours ago the orphan return

my solo mining also confimr 3567 yac over the night

I think we can do this

http://jornalbitcoin.pt/ , Noticias em Portugues
caston
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 736



View Profile WWW
July 15, 2015, 01:12:56 PM
 #3013

Would something like this help? 16 gb HMC

http://wccftech.com/intel-14nm-knight-landing-xeon-phi-co-processor-omni-path-100/

18jL18iH96BBhwUCQn27FQp7ocodSxvJAB
Thirtybird
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 693



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 02:43:10 PM
 #3014

Well what are the reasons for or against an N reset?

And why would we do this instead of just starting again with a new coin?

I'm not sure why you would even think this a valid strategy.  Starting over on N IS making a new coin. 

We don't jump to NF=18 for a whole year, so don't start stocking your survival shelter yet.  By the time it arrives, YAC will have been on NF=17 for nearly 1/3 of its existence and it will just be "normal".  Is NF=17 hard on our GPU's? It is.  Is it any different from any NFactor change in the past?  No.  Every change in NFactor is met with confusion, frustration, and HW errors.  This difference is that we have years of understanding now instead of days, or weeks, or months. 

We've known for a while that CPU would become competitive to GPUs again at this NFactor, we just need to figure out how to keep the hashrate spread out so that there's no 51% network ownership.  We had this situation for a long, lone time with coinmine.pl having >51%, but everyone was okay with it because that's where most of the miners were.  During that period, solo mining was difficult because the pool would get most of the blocks and people not on the pool would see orphans.  Now, we have someone who has quite the mining capacity, but he's solo-mining, but only during specified hours, leaving the pools with orphans.  It's quite possible that this is not even malicious intent (other than likely using computers that aren't his or hers), but just that much hashpower that it dominates the network. 

YACMiner: https://github.com/Thirtybird/YACMiner  N-Factor information : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aj3vcsuY-JFNdC1ITWJrSG9VeWp6QXppbVgxcm0tbGc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
BTC: 183eSsaxG9y6m2ZhrDhHueoKnZWmbm6jfC  YAC: Y4FKiwKKYGQzcqn3M3u6mJoded6ri1UWHa
caston
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 736



View Profile WWW
July 15, 2015, 03:13:01 PM
 #3015

Well I hope you are right. Remember I was optimistic and then the other guys started to freak me out. I'm not going to sell my coins not matter what happens though.

18jL18iH96BBhwUCQn27FQp7ocodSxvJAB
Beave162
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 701



View Profile
July 15, 2015, 06:23:22 PM
 #3016

Well what are the reasons for or against an N reset?

And why would we do this instead of just starting again with a new coin?

I'm not sure why you would even think this a valid strategy.  Starting over on N IS making a new coin.  

We don't jump to NF=18 for a whole year, so don't start stocking your survival shelter yet.  By the time it arrives, YAC will have been on NF=17 for nearly 1/3 of its existence and it will just be "normal".  Is NF=17 hard on our GPU's? It is.  Is it any different from any NFactor change in the past?  No.  Every change in NFactor is met with confusion, frustration, and HW errors.  This difference is that we have years of understanding now instead of days, or weeks, or months.  

We've known for a while that CPU would become competitive to GPUs again at this NFactor, we just need to figure out how to keep the hashrate spread out so that there's no 51% network ownership.  We had this situation for a long, lone time with coinmine.pl having >51%, but everyone was okay with it because that's where most of the miners were.  During that period, solo mining was difficult because the pool would get most of the blocks and people not on the pool would see orphans.  Now, we have someone who has quite the mining capacity, but he's solo-mining, but only during specified hours, leaving the pools with orphans.  It's quite possible that this is not even malicious intent (other than likely using computers that aren't his or hers), but just that much hashpower that it dominates the network.  

+1!!!

It looks like we can take the day, but this unknown miner still owns the night (Pacific Time).

In the spirit of not wasting hashpower on orphans and reorgs, I think people should direct their miners on a daily routine during the time this guy(s) is not active. We want everyone who mines YAC to get richer, not poorer at their own expense for this guy's benefit. It is a weird workaround that I think works until 'we' can gather more hashpower. I would think it would be best to time any changes during this time as well to help prevent a fork?

It would be great to see more small miners at http://yac.erlog.pt/. NineEleven, thank you so much! Hashrates are now displayed in hash/s. Joe_Bauers, thanks for displaying that info on the website.

Looking at explore.grokonet.com, I'm noticing a lot of extremely small PoS blocks. It seems a bit odd to me considering I still have a lot of larger inputs ready and waiting to be staked, but perhaps that is an issue with my wallet processing slowly? I'm reminded of your comment senj, "Currently it does not give different trust value to PoS blocks with different stake, as it was before no-two-consecutive-PoS-blocks fix." Perhaps that is a factor as well?

By the way...

I have a pretty good feeling about what is happening now:

We build PoW+PoS+PoW chain with a trust of 10+11+20=41 for example.
Minutes later attacker broadcasts PoW+PoW+PoW+PoW+PoW (10+10+10+10+10=50) and kicks our blocks out.

But the real problem is that PoW difficulty in our branch get's adjusted towards 2 minute spacing when PoS block arives. On the other hand, attacker's blocks are stil one minute apart, so he is mining on lower difficulty, has more time and is able to overtake us eventually (before our POW difficulty readjusts back). It might be that in addition to having more hashing power.
Just one more thing to consider while refactoring GetBlockTrust method.

Really? This concept seems to bolster the value of your changes--increasing PoW difficulty following PoW block. I hope that can be implemented, released soon.

YaCoin: YL5kf54wPPXKsXd5T18xCaNkyUsS1DgY7z 
BitCoin: 14PFbLyUdTyxZg3V8hnvj5VXkx3dhthmDj
platinum4
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 472



View Profile
July 16, 2015, 10:22:00 AM
 #3017

This is an incredibly interesting scenario that has occurred, very intriguing to follow.
NineEleven
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 181


View Profile WWW
July 16, 2015, 10:24:14 AM
 #3018

REORGANIZE: Disconnect 527 blocks; 000006019877795975fc..736809c28fb519b7d3ab
REORGANIZE: Connect 896 blocks; 000006019877795975fc..000002dd430b8f924423
REORGANIZE
REORGANIZE: Disconnect 527 blocks; 000006019877795975fc..736809c28fb519b7d3ab
REORGANIZE: Connect 896 blocks; 000006019877795975fc..000002dd430b8f924423

http://jornalbitcoin.pt/ , Noticias em Portugues
alenevaa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 288



View Profile WWW
July 16, 2015, 10:47:16 AM
 #3019

...Now, we have someone who has quite the mining capacity, but he's solo-mining, but only during specified hours, leaving the pools with orphans.  It's quite possible that this is not even malicious intent (other than likely using computers that aren't his or hers), but just that much hashpower that it dominates the network. 

It's clearly malicious intent!
Code:
REORGANIZE
REORGANIZE: Disconnect 527 blocks; 000006019877795975fc..736809c28fb519b7d3ab
REORGANIZE: Connect 896 blocks; 000006019877795975fc..000002dd430b8f924423

Even hardcoded 520 confirmations doesn't help! What the f..k!?

██████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
█████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
██████████████████████
|
WINGS           
Where DAO Unicorns are born
|
.
1st Bitcoin & Ethereum DAO for DAOs
1st Decentralized Chatbot to Smart Contracts Interaction System

|
.
Wings Bounties Earn Eggs
X-Blockchain DAO

NineEleven
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 181


View Profile WWW
July 16, 2015, 01:56:13 PM
 #3020

And my wallet is forked
cant sync

I've go to  recover the blockchain  from a backup

http://jornalbitcoin.pt/ , Noticias em Portugues
Pages: « 1 ... 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 [151] 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!