A new consensus mechanism

[Simple8.1]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate. I'm thinking if there are ways that ppl can get reward when they only have a mobile phone, when they live in remote areas that have little resources or slow,unstable internet connection.

[farhanma]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate

A new mechanism called the bitcoin in terms of energy expense is required to ensure the safety of the consensus  process.consenus mechanism from bitcoin or designed expected to be consensus system employ alternative of consensus mechanism

[seizetehday5]

That is an interesting concept you came up with and I actually enjoy it and think it should be implemented. As far as I know there is something called Proof of Activity and Decred implements that on their blockchain but it isn't well recognized or it hasn't caught on yet. It seemingly is a similar thing to yours but I prefer POP over POA anyday .

[ManaMan]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate

Nobody is staying infront of you if you want to develop this new concept. There are other concepts except PoW, thing that holds with bitcoin now is that it is one of the most recognizable crypto and most trusted. Because with current hash rate it has held the bitcoin a good security and we simply know it can't be manipulated. Although we have centralization with miners and pools if you can call it that.

You could try to develop this, although I will be skeptic to follow you on this path. Show me wrong if you thing you idea is revolutionary.

What you are suggesting could be abused, with increase amounts of IOT devices you could potentially buy tons of them to try to "mine" and get participant reward or you could go and HACK as many devices as you can, which some people do nowadays to mine coins.

[benalexis12]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate

You have an awesome Idea, try to figure it out! your mind is your success. Try to develop this concept, i suggest to attend some blockchain forum and find developer with you that will develop your concept.

[Simple8.1]

Not bad idea, but how to verify that someone is use/donate their time, computing power or mining hashrate while without makes nodes work too hard which could risk decentralization. Furthermore, how would the reward is calculated based on users time?
If you simply want to stop mining centralization, you could propose to change bitcoin mining algorithm with other algorithm which only can be mined with CPU/GPU (whether it has GPU advantage or not) which can reduce mining centralization.

That is an interesting concept you came up with and I actually enjoy it and think it should be implemented. As far as I know there is something called Proof of Activity and Decred implements that on their blockchain but it isn't well recognized or it hasn't caught on yet. It seemingly is a similar thing to yours but I prefer POP over POA anyday .

Proof of Activity only combine Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS) which won't solve the problem OP mentioned if bitcoin still use algorithm which can be mined with ASIC.

so u mean if I want to implement this POP thing, the only option is to create a new coin???

[franky1]

all these people trying to promote new 'proofs' for bitcoin. do not care about consensus. they just want to find a way to get free coins without it costing them much electric/equipment cost

things they do not consider/think about
1. the difficulty/strength/rebustness of the immutable blockchain locks that prevent outsiders editing the data via brute force/outpacing the blockheight
2. no matter what 'proof' people think will benefit the little guy.. usually ends up revealing that big guys just multiply the 'effort' by either running multiple instances of the program. spreading funds over multiple addresses to pretend to be several people with stake. or just hoard alot of stake in one address to exceed the little guys smaller stake.

all of this not actually helping the little guys get free coin because its just going to become a new type of 'pooling' resources.. and also reducing the security of the immutable chain.

[Simple8.1]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate

Nobody is staying infront of you if you want to develop this new concept. There are other concepts except PoW, thing that holds with bitcoin now is that it is one of the most recognizable crypto and most trusted. Because with current hash rate it has held the bitcoin a good security and we simply know it can't be manipulated. Although we have centralization with miners and pools if you can call it that.

You could try to develop this, although I will be skeptic to follow you on this path. Show me wrong if you thing you idea is revolutionary.

What you are suggesting could be abused, with increase amounts of IOT devices you could potentially buy tons of them to try to "mine" and get participant reward or you could go and HACK as many devices as you can, which some people do nowadays to mine coins.

So instead of IOT, I'd go for Fog of internet. Unlike IoT devices, devices operating on the chain are distributed and cannot be identified, just like a foggy network. the network provides computational power to process data and can be analogized to GPU in an ordinary computer.

[UsernameBitcoin]

all these people trying to promote new 'proofs' for bitcoin. do not care about consensus. they just want to find a way to get free coins without it costing them much electric/equipment cost

things they do not consider/think about
1. the difficulty/strength/rebustness of the immutable blockchain locks that prevent outsiders editing the data via brute force/outpacing the blockheight
2. no matter what 'proof' people think will benefit the little guy.. usually ends up revealing that big guys just multiply the 'effort' by either running multiple instances of the program. spreading funds over multiple addresses to pretend to be several people with stake. or just hoard alot of stake in one address to exceed the little guys smaller stake.

all of this not actually helping the little guys get free coin because its just going to become a new type of 'pooling' resources.. and also reducing the security of the immutable chain.

Exactly. This mechanism does not make sense because it does not result in a consensus. Proof of Work and Proof of Stake are both there for a reason.

[penig]

Proof of work is proof of participation (or activity), its just the original algorithm was flawed in how easy it was to specialise and scale with dedicated hardware.

What is needed, and been done a dozen times already, is a method that uses less easily scaled hardware, i.e. memory, harddisk. etc.

[Rodge182]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate. I'm thinking if there are ways that ppl can get reward when they only have a mobile phone, when they live in remote areas that have little resources or slow,unstable internet connection.

Isn't that what mining pools are doing? Collecting the all the possible hashing power and rewarding the community for their contribution? Anyhow, this can't be done with a just mobile phone or any low specs computer because the difficulty rate is very high.

[bug.lady]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate. I'm thinking if there are ways that ppl can get reward when they only have a mobile phone, when they live in remote areas that have little resources or slow,unstable internet connection.

Isn't that what mining pools are doing? Collecting the all the possible hashing power and rewarding the community for their contribution? Anyhow, this can't be done with a just mobile phone or any low specs computer because the difficulty rate is very high.

it seems you yourself in the third sentence contradicted your first and second sentences.

I think the OP may be onto something, and I encourage him to follow his idea. If he reads the comments of the critics carefully, they are all very good and valid points, and I encourage the OP to read them not as points that must be downplayed in order to prove his idea is right, but rather as indications of weak spots of the idea that may need some more thought and enforcement before the idea can be accepted by the community.

[Slava79]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate. I'm thinking if there are ways that ppl can get reward when they only have a mobile phone, when they live in remote areas that have little resources or slow,unstable internet connection.

Raiblocks implemented interesting approach to initial coin distribution - they asked users to solve captcha in order to receive coins.

[Rodge182]

Since the current industry is dominated by centralized mining giants, simple users don't have any say in proposal changes. but what if we have a new mechanism called POP, proof of participance. As long as u donate your time, or computing, or mining hashrate, u can get rewarded. Just let we users instead of solely miners or developers decide and participate. I'm thinking if there are ways that ppl can get reward when they only have a mobile phone, when they live in remote areas that have little resources or slow,unstable internet connection.

Isn't that what mining pools are doing? Collecting the all the possible hashing power and rewarding the community for their contribution? Anyhow, this can't be done with a just mobile phone or any low specs computer because the difficulty rate is very high.

it seems you yourself in the third sentence contradicted your first and second sentences.

I think the OP may be onto something, and I encourage him to follow his idea. If he reads the comments of the critics carefully, they are all very good and valid points, and I encourage the OP to read them not as points that must be downplayed in order to prove his idea is right, but rather as indications of weak spots of the idea that may need some more thought and enforcement before the idea can be accepted by the community.

No, I am not contradicting anything. I am just indicating the problems it will encounter with this kind of Idea. Idea is good but the implementation might need some considering.