Bitcoin Forum
November 23, 2017, 04:31:57 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][Datacoin] Datacoin blockchain start announcement (Minor code upd + logo)  (Read 159316 times)
junk1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 01:07:06 AM
 #901

Datacoin seems like a great idea for secure distributed storage. However i see couple design flaws with it and I think if these flaws are fixed we could have a really, really, really interesting coin to work with.

Current flaws:
Data is stored permanently. The problem with this is that the use of this chain for "secure temporary storage" is not applicable. I think it would be better if the "data contributor" had the option of overwriting the data, this way the chain would be useful for a much longer period of time.
The miner reward makes sense, but the final model for reward should be based on local storage and internet throughput of each client. Otherwise everyone will just use lite wallets and no one will store the data.
Data should be redundant, but each client should be able to specify the size of the chain he is going to store. This way if i choose to store 5,000TB of data chances are i will get more requests to serve that data to network, while someone who stores 100KB of data will have very few requests hence lower earnings.

Serving a block to the network "creates" a small amount of coin (100X) for the user.
Requesting a block from the network costs a smaller amount of coin (1X) to the user.
Requesting to overwrite a block with new data costs more coin (10,000X) to the requester. Only the block owner (data contributor) can request to overwrite the block.
Block owner can sell the block to a new owner via transaction like bitcoin etc.
When a new block is added to the network the miner who found the block gets a reward, say 100,000X. Then a user from "block purchase que" takes ownership of that block. This costs the new user 100,000X coins. This way new data storage can be bought via a purchase queue or existing blocks can be bought from current owners.

Part of the block stores transactions, just like bitcoin or litecoin; and another part of the block stores user supplied data. User supplied data portion can be overwritten by owner, but transactions are stored permanently.
Updating existing block is done at difficulty level much lower than current difficulty level; this way blocks can be updated with new information relatively fast, but addition of new blocks to the chain is done just like BTC or LTC.

I don't have all the answers and clearly defined protocols; rather I'd like to start a discussion on this topic to see if we, as a community, can come-up with something worthwhile...

What do yall think?
1511411517
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511411517

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511411517
Reply with quote  #2

1511411517
Report to moderator
1511411517
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511411517

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511411517
Reply with quote  #2

1511411517
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.
1511411517
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511411517

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511411517
Reply with quote  #2

1511411517
Report to moderator
rayvellest
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 89


View Profile WWW
January 07, 2014, 01:35:13 AM
 #902

Datacoin seems like a great idea for secure distributed storage. However i see couple design flaws with it and I think if these flaws are fixed we could have a really, really, really interesting coin to work with.

Current flaws:
Data is stored permanently. The problem with this is that the use of this chain for "secure temporary storage" is not applicable. I think it would be better if the "data contributor" had the option of overwriting the data, this way the chain would be useful for a much longer period of time.
The miner reward makes sense, but the final model for reward should be based on local storage and internet throughput of each client. Otherwise everyone will just use lite wallets and no one will store the data.
Data should be redundant, but each client should be able to specify the size of the chain he is going to store. This way if i choose to store 5,000TB of data chances are i will get more requests to serve that data to network, while someone who stores 100KB of data will have very few requests hence lower earnings.

Serving a block to the network "creates" a small amount of coin (100X) for the user.
Requesting a block from the network costs a smaller amount of coin (1X) to the user.
Requesting to overwrite a block with new data costs more coin (10,000X) to the requester. Only the block owner (data contributor) can request to overwrite the block.
Block owner can sell the block to a new owner via transaction like bitcoin etc.
When a new block is added to the network the miner who found the block gets a reward, say 100,000X. Then a user from "block purchase que" takes ownership of that block. This costs the new user 100,000X coins. This way new data storage can be bought via a purchase queue or existing blocks can be bought from current owners.

Part of the block stores transactions, just like bitcoin or litecoin; and another part of the block stores user supplied data. User supplied data portion can be overwritten by owner, but transactions are stored permanently.
Updating existing block is done at difficulty level much lower than current difficulty level; this way blocks can be updated with new information relatively fast, but addition of new blocks to the chain is done just like BTC or LTC.

I don't have all the answers and clearly defined protocols; rather I'd like to start a discussion on this topic to see if we, as a community, can come-up with something worthwhile...

What do yall think?

I agree with some of the improvements you are suggesting, specially the bit about being able to overwrite the files, I think that is a much elegant solution than simply storing all files permanently. First thing that came to my mind was: —What if I save the wrong file? That would annoy me forever! Smiley

When I first came across DTC, I actually thought we would be able to use it as some sort of reference directory, which people could use to upload torrent files. For a moment, I got insanely excited about DTC because that would make DTC the most popular coin amongst the whole crypto-currency community. THAT would be really, really, really interesting!

junk1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 02:04:44 AM
 #903

Datacoin seems like a great idea for secure distributed storage. However i see couple design flaws with it and I think if these flaws are fixed we could have a really, really, really interesting coin to work with.

Current flaws:
Data is stored permanently. The problem with this is that the use of this chain for "secure temporary storage" is not applicable. I think it would be better if the "data contributor" had the option of overwriting the data, this way the chain would be useful for a much longer period of time.
The miner reward makes sense, but the final model for reward should be based on local storage and internet throughput of each client. Otherwise everyone will just use lite wallets and no one will store the data.
Data should be redundant, but each client should be able to specify the size of the chain he is going to store. This way if i choose to store 5,000TB of data chances are i will get more requests to serve that data to network, while someone who stores 100KB of data will have very few requests hence lower earnings.

Serving a block to the network "creates" a small amount of coin (100X) for the user.
Requesting a block from the network costs a smaller amount of coin (1X) to the user.
Requesting to overwrite a block with new data costs more coin (10,000X) to the requester. Only the block owner (data contributor) can request to overwrite the block.
Block owner can sell the block to a new owner via transaction like bitcoin etc.
When a new block is added to the network the miner who found the block gets a reward, say 100,000X. Then a user from "block purchase que" takes ownership of that block. This costs the new user 100,000X coins. This way new data storage can be bought via a purchase queue or existing blocks can be bought from current owners.

Part of the block stores transactions, just like bitcoin or litecoin; and another part of the block stores user supplied data. User supplied data portion can be overwritten by owner, but transactions are stored permanently.
Updating existing block is done at difficulty level much lower than current difficulty level; this way blocks can be updated with new information relatively fast, but addition of new blocks to the chain is done just like BTC or LTC.

I don't have all the answers and clearly defined protocols; rather I'd like to start a discussion on this topic to see if we, as a community, can come-up with something worthwhile...

What do yall think?

I agree with some of the improvements you are suggesting, specially the bit about being able to overwrite the files, I think that is a much elegant solution than simply storing all files permanently. First thing that came to my mind was: —What if I save the wrong file? That would annoy me forever! Smiley

When I first came across DTC, I actually thought we would be able to use it as some sort of reference directory, which people could use to upload torrent files. For a moment, I got insanely excited about DTC because that would make DTC the most popular coin amongst the whole crypto-currency community. THAT would be really, really, really interesting!
Plus if you really wanted to store something permanently all you have to do would be to delete the wallet file which you stored data with. 
simbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 190


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 02:13:13 AM
 #904

Datacoin seems like a great idea for secure distributed storage. However i see couple design flaws with it and I think if these flaws are fixed we could have a really, really, really interesting coin to work with.

Current flaws:
Data is stored permanently. The problem with this is that the use of this chain for "secure temporary storage" is not applicable. I think it would be better if the "data contributor" had the option of overwriting the data, this way the chain would be useful for a much longer period of time.
The miner reward makes sense, but the final model for reward should be based on local storage and internet throughput of each client. Otherwise everyone will just use lite wallets and no one will store the data.
Data should be redundant, but each client should be able to specify the size of the chain he is going to store. This way if i choose to store 5,000TB of data chances are i will get more requests to serve that data to network, while someone who stores 100KB of data will have very few requests hence lower earnings.

Serving a block to the network "creates" a small amount of coin (100X) for the user.
Requesting a block from the network costs a smaller amount of coin (1X) to the user.
Requesting to overwrite a block with new data costs more coin (10,000X) to the requester. Only the block owner (data contributor) can request to overwrite the block.
Block owner can sell the block to a new owner via transaction like bitcoin etc.
When a new block is added to the network the miner who found the block gets a reward, say 100,000X. Then a user from "block purchase que" takes ownership of that block. This costs the new user 100,000X coins. This way new data storage can be bought via a purchase queue or existing blocks can be bought from current owners.

Part of the block stores transactions, just like bitcoin or litecoin; and another part of the block stores user supplied data. User supplied data portion can be overwritten by owner, but transactions are stored permanently.
Updating existing block is done at difficulty level much lower than current difficulty level; this way blocks can be updated with new information relatively fast, but addition of new blocks to the chain is done just like BTC or LTC.

I don't have all the answers and clearly defined protocols; rather I'd like to start a discussion on this topic to see if we, as a community, can come-up with something worthwhile...

What do yall think?

I agree with some of the improvements you are suggesting, specially the bit about being able to overwrite the files, I think that is a much elegant solution than simply storing all files permanently. First thing that came to my mind was: —What if I save the wrong file? That would annoy me forever! Smiley

When I first came across DTC, I actually thought we would be able to use it as some sort of reference directory, which people could use to upload torrent files. For a moment, I got insanely excited about DTC because that would make DTC the most popular coin amongst the whole crypto-currency community. THAT would be really, really, really interesting!

I know what you mean, I have the same thinking some time back, but due to the structure of blockchain, temporary storage is not possible as this will break the chain.

To achieve what you suggested, the data will need to be stored at a third party location & transaction submitted into the blockchain, but that is like you buy storage space from an online storage vendor with DTC. Or there is a secondary chain that store the data, but even that, to achieve what you suggested, there will need to have a blockchain for every data storage. As far as I know 'personal chain' is work in progress, maybe that can shed some light into this.


BattleTitans.io  ▼  Mobile PvP Arena of the Future  ▼  BattleTitans.io
The Most Promising ICO in October    [Join Now!]

▼  [FB]  ▬  [TW]  ▬  [TG]  ▬▬▬  [YU]  ▼
junk1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 02:57:01 AM
 #905

Here is how i propose it will work:
A block has 6 segments
0. Block ID (sequential #)
1. Data
2. Public key
3. Address hash
4. Transactions (just like BTC or LTC)
5. Append

Two block chains exist, a full chain, which has the data block and a lite chain, which has no data block. A given node has full lite chain and as many blocks of full chain as user specified space allows.

Network will accept a request to "change block segments 1 through 3" only from the node that has address which is the result of hashing the published hash using the published key. (think RSA asymmetric keys here)


When ownership of the block is being transferred:

1. Owner, who currently has the private key generates such a hash that when encrypted with public key results in the address of the buyer. (basically owner has to decrypt new address using his 2 private primes)
2. Owner submits the block to the network for update.
3. Miners find such an "append" string that the contents of the parts 1 through 5 match a standard hash.
4. When append is found the block is now accepted by the network.
5. At this point the buyer can request the network to update the block again, but this time the new owner will provide new public key and new hash for his own address, which match his private keys. Owner can also provide new contents for the "Data" segment.

What yall think?

simbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 190


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 03:26:50 AM
 #906

Here is how i propose it will work:
A block has 6 segments
0. Block ID (sequential #)
1. Data
2. Public key
3. Address hash
4. Transactions (just like BTC or LTC)
5. Append

Two block chains exist, a full chain, which has the data block and a lite chain, which has no data block. A given node has full lite chain and as many blocks of full chain as user specified space allows.

Network will accept a request to "change block segments 1 through 3" only from the node that has address which is the result of hashing the published hash using the published key. (think RSA asymmetric keys here)


When ownership of the block is being transferred:

1. Owner, who currently has the private key generates such a hash that when encrypted with public key results in the address of the buyer. (basically owner has to decrypt new address using his 2 private primes)
2. Owner submits the block to the network for update.
3. Miners find such an "append" string that the contents of the parts 1 through 5 match a standard hash.
4. When append is found the block is now accepted by the network.
5. At this point the buyer can request the network to update the block again, but this time the new owner will provide new public key and new hash for his own address, which match his private keys. Owner can also provide new contents for the "Data" segment.

What yall think?



2 blockchains Huh Maybe you need to check with DTC developer.

Btw, to remove/change a data in any chain, you have to destroy the chain, not just change the block. Changing a block in a chain will changed the whole chain & in turn, split the chain.

Your suggestion is a bit different from my colored chains structure. Not sure about DTC's "personal chain" as not much news about it have been released.

For my "colored chains", there is a base chain where everyone operate on & the other "colored chains" are linked to the individual features. There will be a storage chain where the data is stored, & referenced to in the base chain transaction. To achieve "temporary storage" we will need to create sub colored chain which will be destroy when there is a removal/change of the data.

BattleTitans.io  ▼  Mobile PvP Arena of the Future  ▼  BattleTitans.io
The Most Promising ICO in October    [Join Now!]

▼  [FB]  ▬  [TW]  ▬  [TG]  ▬▬▬  [YU]  ▼
cryptrol
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 637


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 07:33:02 AM
 #907

When I first came across DTC, I actually thought we would be able to use it as some sort of reference directory, which people could use to upload torrent files. For a moment, I got insanely excited about DTC because that would make DTC the most popular coin amongst the whole crypto-currency community. THAT would be really, really, really interesting!

Nothing stops you from uploading a torrent to the blockchain.
maxsolnc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


DTC unofficial team


View Profile WWW
January 07, 2014, 10:44:18 AM
 #908

Guys, I've seen several concepts for overwriting\deleting 'old' or 'unnecessary' files. But it breaks the whole concept of Datacoin. Look: someone uploaded some kind of Wikileaks archive to Datacoin, then hackers who work for government accessed his computer got his keys and deleted this info. It will be practically the same as Dropbox\GDrive storage: if someone gets your credentials, he can delete any info he wants, it breaks the whole concept.
And I've talked many times about 'proof-of-storage', just now there are no ways to avoid cheating like creating bunch of VPS that are linked to one blockchain - 'I have 1000 machines with Datacoin', and actually it will be 1 copy of blockchain and many virtual machines linked to it.

Talking about colored chain - will it be secure and reliable?

I'm not arguing with you, it is just my point of view. I'm not head developer, maybe he will read our threads and see some features to implement. But just now I have opinion as described above.

DTC: DMcKNp47fNtgM7sritK9GfJEQ1DzME5nwk
BTC: 1FgUGra685ZwkrX5VnRvfaYp4bHJhC7x4H
simbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 190


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 11:48:59 AM
 #909

Talking about colored chain - will it be secure and reliable?

Yes. But not for "temporary" storage(if I ever implement it), temporary storage is never reliable nor secure. Same as datacoin, my coin also have no intention to implement temporary storage function.

BattleTitans.io  ▼  Mobile PvP Arena of the Future  ▼  BattleTitans.io
The Most Promising ICO in October    [Join Now!]

▼  [FB]  ▬  [TW]  ▬  [TG]  ▬▬▬  [YU]  ▼
extro24
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 312


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 11:56:14 AM
 #910

Simbo, why don't you fork the Datacoin repository on Github and implement these concepts in your branch?  If the lead dev finds it interesting he can accept your pull requests.

I have done that and started to play around with the code, because that is how Bitcoin advanced.

simbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 190


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 12:10:47 PM
 #911

I already have my own coin, if the dev find it interesting, he can always port it over to datacoin.

BattleTitans.io  ▼  Mobile PvP Arena of the Future  ▼  BattleTitans.io
The Most Promising ICO in October    [Join Now!]

▼  [FB]  ▬  [TW]  ▬  [TG]  ▬▬▬  [YU]  ▼
extro24
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 312


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 12:17:04 PM
 #912

What is your coin?

simbo
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 190


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 12:20:43 PM
 #913

Siriuscoin

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=394146.0

BattleTitans.io  ▼  Mobile PvP Arena of the Future  ▼  BattleTitans.io
The Most Promising ICO in October    [Join Now!]

▼  [FB]  ▬  [TW]  ▬  [TG]  ▬▬▬  [YU]  ▼
extro24
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 312


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 12:45:56 PM
 #914

Simbo:

Thank you very much.

I always wanted a coin that can send messages and store data.  I believe that Datacoin is "The One" and that groups of developers will gather around to make it so.

I am trying to send messages in the balance using base58 encoding.  And perhaps help to add a little proof of stake to attract some late adopters and encourage people to keep their wallets open to provide the data services.

The developer is working on personal chains for the nodes to take the data off the main chain.  That will limit chain bloat and allow much greater storage.


Junk1:

Quote
The miner reward makes sense, but the final model for reward should be based on local storage and internet throughput of each client. Otherwise everyone will just use lite wallets and no one will store the data.
Data should be redundant, but each client should be able to specify the size of the chain he is going to store. This way if i choose to store 5,000TB of data chances are i will get more requests to serve that data to network, while someone who stores 100KB of data will have very few requests hence lower earnings.

This will be addressed by the private chains of the nodes.  Junk, if you like coding, set up your own branch of Datacoin on Github and add these ideas.

olinnebit
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 01:26:53 PM
 #915

Guys, I've seen several concepts for overwriting\deleting 'old' or 'unnecessary' files. But it breaks the whole concept of Datacoin. Look: someone uploaded some kind of Wikileaks archive to Datacoin, then hackers who work for government accessed his computer got his keys and deleted this info. It will be practically the same as Dropbox\GDrive storage: if someone gets your credentials, he can delete any info he wants, it breaks the whole concept.
And I've talked many times about 'proof-of-storage', just now there are no ways to avoid cheating like creating bunch of VPS that are linked to one blockchain - 'I have 1000 machines with Datacoin', and actually it will be 1 copy of blockchain and many virtual machines linked to it.

Talking about colored chain - will it be secure and reliable?

I'm not arguing with you, it is just my point of view. I'm not head developer, maybe he will read our threads and see some features to implement. But just now I have opinion as described above.

What you are saying about whistle-blowers and data stored forever is what makes DTC so unique. No one can remove the info, it is the ultimate freedom of speech. I do not believe big government is going to become "kinder" and more people friendly. I am not saying they are out to get me, I am just saying  they aren't there to cuddle with me.

GreekBitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428


getmonero.org


View Profile WWW
January 07, 2014, 01:28:57 PM
 #916

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=397540.0;topicseen

I am just leaving this here if anyone wants to vote for Datacoin Smiley
extro24
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 312


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 01:45:01 PM
 #917

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=397540.0;topicseen

I am just leaving this here if anyone wants to vote for Datacoin Smiley

Voted.

GreekBitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428


getmonero.org


View Profile WWW
January 07, 2014, 01:48:55 PM
 #918

http://www.reddit.com/r/Namecoin/comments/1ulp6s/if_you_like_namecoin_i_think_youd_be_interested/

kaja wrote a nice thread there. There are asking some questions. Specifically why Datacoin over Namecoin. So if anyone wants to asnwer...
Snard
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 02:11:31 PM
 #919

Chain browser have some simple problems recently, like http://www.chainbrowser.com/datacoin/address/DD38QeAXrD2QqkjJ1mqMrpTrmiRTQhhC27/. Or maybe its not a bug, but feature Wink

Will take a look today and see if I can figure out whats going on.  Been out of town the last few weeks.
extro24
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 312


View Profile
January 07, 2014, 02:20:27 PM
 #920

And please Snard, start your own branch of the Datacoin client on Github.  It will really help the coin.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 »
  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!