BitShares PTS (formerly ProtoShares) Mandatory Upgrade & Snapshot Announcement

[AnonyMint]

Is there a version of the $5000 bounty thread here on BitcoinTalk?

Yes and I just claimed it:

http://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=22.msg1253#msg1253

(link to the bitcointalk thread is included in the linked post above)

[bytemaster]

Is there a version of the $5000 bounty thread here on BitcoinTalk?

Yes and I just claimed it:

http://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=22.msg1253#msg1253

(link to the bitcointalk thread is included in the linked post above)

Claiming and doing are two different things... Anonymint is a troll please ignore him.   

[AnonyMint]

Is there a version of the $5000 bounty thread here on BitcoinTalk?

Yes and I just claimed it:

http://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=22.msg1253#msg1253

(link to the bitcointalk thread is included in the linked post above)

Claiming and doing are two different things... Anonymint is a troll please ignore him.   

I try to help you and you call me a troll.

Thanks a lot.

If you really care about not wasting your time down the wrong road, you can make a simple test and confirm for yourself what I have explained to you.

I don't have a development environment for a GPU, I already told you that. I am certainly not going to go acquire one just for $5000. I have more important work to do. I have clearly explained to you already the vulnerability.

Or you can ask me questions if you need clarification.

Rather I am thinking you are not sincere.

[markm]

My 8-core (likely four cores with two hardware threads each) remote servers finally started getting some blocks so likely it was just random luck that had been making it look suspiciously like such servers were not really at least twice as good as my home machines like their hashes per minute figures were claiming.

One of them got two blocks one got one another got none.

Meanwhile a two core here at home, probably a duo, shows in listtransactions three blocks then one orphan then another three blocks, with less than half the hashes per minute of the remote servers; and another has three blocks. So it does seem likely it is mostly just a lottery aka variance.

-MarkM-

[bytemaster]

ALmost every GPU released in the past several years is able to handle OpenCL and you can develop for it for free.  

I called you a troll because you claim to read my mind.

$5000 is the minimum you could make... if you are really able to do as you say, then implement it... mine a bunch of ProtoShares... dump them on the market and then collect $5000 too.  

I have a history of paying bounties when I am proven wrong having previously paid out over $1300 in May.    You on the other hand want paid for doing something you haven't.  You are arrogant and unable to be reasoned with.  I call you a troll because of past history of you posting off topic RANTS about world events in my threads.  

[AnonyMint]

I called you a troll because you claim to read my mind.

I know very well you need fast verification time. I don't need to read your mind, I understand the design of a coin and what the tradeoffs are.

$5000 is the minimum you could make... if you are really able to do as you say, then implement it... mine a bunch of ProtoShares... dump them on the market and then collect $5000 too.  

I have a history of paying bounties when I am proven wrong having previously paid out over $1300 in May.

I gave you insight. You and I agreed from the start you would pay me whatever you felt was justified. I have explained a vulnerability. If you feel that is worth 0 and to be ignored, that is your prerogative.

However it doesn't justify calling me a troll and bringing up your spin on past events to deflect attention away from what I revealed.

You changed this from a technical discussion into a character assassination.

You on the other hand want paid for doing something you haven't.

If you feel my insight is worth 0, then so be it. The community is observing.

I don't need the money. I wanted to help you recognize your weakness early on.

You are arrogant and unable to be reasoned with.

[redacted by Anonymint, as much I would like to return his accusation in kind given what I've been told, it is not appropriate]

 I call you a troll because of past history of you posting off topic RANTS about world events in my threads.  

I thought we were doing software engineering, not politics on this bounty.

Please proceed. I am done with you.

[BChydro]

Genuine question about the protocol, correct me if I'm wrong anywhere: Bitcoin works well because it takes a huge amount of work to find a block, but only takes one hash to verify that a block is valid. So a wallet can verify thousands of blocks fairly quickly. From what I understand Protoshares works by the same concept, except one Protoshares hash takes many orders of magnitude more work to perform. Does the Protoshares wallet need to perform one hash to verify each block in the network? Seeing how most computers get ~5 hashes per min, wouldn't that take an outrageously long time to verify the block chain once it gets bigger?

[atta2k15]

am totally done with this stupid coin.
long time hashing, no blocks to be found.
Total 8 orphan on i7 980x 12GB, 1 ok.

Also nice to see a proof of work,
but I don't see a proof of payment.

its not worth it,
good luck with it

[testz]

Block 6048, rewards drop by 5%, from now 42.86875 PTS

[AnonyMint]

Genuine question about the protocol, correct me if I'm wrong anywhere: Bitcoin works well because it takes a huge amount of work to find a block, but only takes one hash to verify that a block is valid. So a wallet can verify thousands of blocks fairly quickly. From what I understand Protoshares works by the same concept, except one Protoshares hash takes many orders of magnitude more work to perform. Does the Protoshares wallet need to perform one hash to verify each block in the network? Seeing how most computers get ~5 hashes per min, wouldn't that take an outrageously long time to verify the block chain once it gets bigger?

bytemaster apparently designed Momentum PoW and didn't use Scrypt for PoW for precisely that reason, but by making verification faster than finding a hash, I assert he opened a vulnerability that makes it easy to parallelize the finding of a hash and thus not CPU-only. See the link to my claim on the bounty and judge for yourself.

And when (if) someone does implement a faster GPU miner for this coin, please kindly acknowledge I was correct. You don't have to tip me anything, the acknowledgement would be more than enough.

[digitalindustry]

Lol found another block on my piece of crap Celeron...nothing for 2 days on the i7 

lol how many hpm you getting on that celeron ?

[Snard]

Went from 24 hours with nothing but stales blocks to 2 blocks mined within an hour on different computers.  Go figure.

New to mining in general. How many confirmations till a transaction is considered mature?

[Hilux74]

Lol found another block on my piece of crap Celeron...nothing for 2 days on the i7 

lol how many hpm you getting on that celeron ?

5 haha. 2.5 per core.

[digitalindustry]

Lol found another block on my piece of crap Celeron...nothing for 2 days on the i7 

lol how many hpm you getting on that celeron ?

5 haha. 2.5 per core.

Thats great ! And great to hear ,  no one really knows why yet , but I think this discussion is healthy.

Its good that we have a focus on the vulnerability aspect this early.

It remains to be seen if there is an implementation. 

[BChydro]

Genuine question about the protocol, correct me if I'm wrong anywhere: Bitcoin works well because it takes a huge amount of work to find a block, but only takes one hash to verify that a block is valid. So a wallet can verify thousands of blocks fairly quickly. From what I understand Protoshares works by the same concept, except one Protoshares hash takes many orders of magnitude more work to perform. Does the Protoshares wallet need to perform one hash to verify each block in the network? Seeing how most computers get ~5 hashes per min, wouldn't that take an outrageously long time to verify the block chain once it gets bigger?

bytemaster apparently designed Momentum PoW and didn't use Scrypt for PoW for precisely that reason, but by making verification faster than finding a hash, I assert he opened a vulnerability that makes it easy to parallelize the finding of a hash and thus not CPU-only. See the link to my claim on the bounty and judge for yourself.

And when (if) someone does implement a faster GPU miner for this coin, please kindly acknowledge I was correct. You don't have to tip me anything, the acknowledgement would be more than enough.

bytecoin said "This new proof of work can require gigabytes of memory to solve, but almost no memory to verify and as a result the ideal ASIC is memory" in a post but didn't give any further details. I imagine it would explain in the white paper but I haven't read it

[FreeTrade]

bytecoin said "This new proof of work can require gigabytes of memory to solve, but almost no memory to verify and as a result the ideal ASIC is memory" in a post but didn't give any further details. I imagine it would explain in the white paper but I haven't read it

Yes - imagine going to your local mall and trying to find two people who share a birthday. It would take you a long time, but it could be verified that you succeeded very quickly.

[jerrybusey]

bytecoin said "This new proof of work can require gigabytes of memory to solve, but almost no memory to verify and as a result the ideal ASIC is memory" in a post but didn't give any further details. I imagine it would explain in the white paper but I haven't read it

Yes - imagine going to your local mall and trying to find two people who share a birthday. It would take you a long time, but it could be verified that you succeeded very quickly.

It shouldn't take that long unless you're incredibly socially awkward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

[digitalindustry]

bytecoin said "This new proof of work can require gigabytes of memory to solve, but almost no memory to verify and as a result the ideal ASIC is memory" in a post but didn't give any further details. I imagine it would explain in the white paper but I haven't read it

Yes - imagine going to your local mall and trying to find two people who share a birthday. It would take you a long time, but it could be verified that you succeeded very quickly.

It shouldn't take that long unless you're incredibly socially awkward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem

So could an effective workaround for this algorithm be ;

a HD 5850 ATI hooked up to a PA system ? !

With a mic gaffe taped out the end?

A bad suite, a slick back hairstyle and a game show smile... ??

[cryptrol]

.... but by making verification faster than finding a hash, I assert he opened a vulnerability that makes it easy to parallelize the finding of a hash and thus not CPU-only ...

Having a cheap verify function is a must for a proof of work, otherwise loading the blockchain would take forever. BTW, I have yet to see any evidence or proof of concept of your claims. Ranting is ok, especially in this subforum, but bear in mind that for this very same reason, people in here are used to start taking things seriously only when an evidence is provided, not before.

[Carra23]

Restarted the client and it is 6 behind.

No blocks for 2 1/2 days now.