Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 01:55:52 PM *
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 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Cracking the Code  (Read 7343 times)
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 28, 2013, 05:19:19 PM
 #61

Quote
[Anything and everything AnnoyMint says]

This is just another in a very long string of attempts to find the "fatal flaw" in Bitcoin.

I already found it.

Now to recap, not only is a > 50% attack very destructive as I've successfully argued and defended above, but don't forget that my first point was also that Bitcoin will be relatively easy to 50% attack once the coin rewards decline, because there is a problem with transaction fees:

In my (opinionated) analysis it is very likely to happen (when coin rewards diminish near to 0) with Bitcoin, because of a flaw in the design (transaction fees should be zero instead).

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=344154.msg3745513#msg3745513

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=342848.msg3745458#msg3745458


Mining funding will be miniscule after coin rewards end, because there is a tension with transaction fees that has no solution. If you scale tx fees as a percentage then they will become orders-of-magnitude higher than debit cards (apparently some have a flat fee), because of the very high value of BTC in fiat. Whereas, if you don't, then mining is underfunded relative to the value of Bitcoin's economy, thus a 50 - 95% attack is very likely. The only solution is to eliminate transaction fees entirely and keep coin rewards.

The stats are here, it's 0.69% of miner revenue (good guess!).

...is just $18,000 a day...

So with Transaction fees in the ~$30,000 range it looks like the fees are roughly able to pay for electricity, a somewhat surprising result actually.

You missed the failure mode.

If miner revenue is to be only a tiny fraction of commerce, then 50+% attack is extremely likely.

Only perpetual coin rewards can secure the network adequately.

Otherwise transaction fees must be too high, and also significant revenue from transaction fees allows the Transactions Withholding Attack.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513000552
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513000552

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513000552
Reply with quote  #2

1513000552
Report to moderator
1513000552
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513000552

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513000552
Reply with quote  #2

1513000552
Report to moderator
1513000552
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513000552

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513000552
Reply with quote  #2

1513000552
Report to moderator
niothor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546


Niothor


View Profile WWW
November 28, 2013, 05:22:13 PM
 #62

AnonyMint
Unignore
Re: Cracking the Code
Today at 03:13:32 PM
AnonyMint
Unignore
Re: Cracking the Code
Today at 03:28:24 PM
AnonyMint
Unignore
Re: Cracking the Code
Today at 03:38:36 PM
AnonyMint
Unignore   
Re: Cracking the Code
Today at 03:59:28 PM



Insert Bad bad bad Bear here


AnonyMint
Unignore
Re: Cracking the Code
Today at 04:06:18 PM
Show/Hide
Unignore
Re: Cracking the Code
Today at 04:13:35 PM

O yeah , interesting replies!
I got to avoid this thread! even though I sometimes see DeathAndTaxes as the last poster.

AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 28, 2013, 05:29:11 PM
 #63

No it is correct.  See I actually know how Bitcoin works.

Invalid blocks are never part of the longest chain.  Never.  Not once, not ever.   All nodes independently verify data received by other nodes.  That is the basic cornerstone of Bitcoin's security model.  If you can't get that right then why should anyone listen to any on the nonsense you are spouting.

As for your rebutal that is also nonsense.  Invalid blocks aren't included in the difficulty adjustment calculation.  They are simply dropped.  The remaining valid miners would find blocks at ~10 minute interval.

Dropped by a minority of the mining in this case. So the majority chain will grow longer even faster if the minority chain doesn't include the attacker's blocks in the calculation of the difficulty. Because we can assume the attacker will include the blocks generated by the minority chain in its longer chain.

So you are thinking that transactions will not be slower in the minority chain, but relative only to the expected 10 minute block period. The attacker's chain will be much faster.

So all my arguments to luv2drnkbr still apply. The clients will have an incentive to have faster transactions. Instead of 60 minutes for 6-confirmations in the minority chain, the 90% chain will offer it in only a few minutes.

I am sorry but you are wrong.

How you going to weasel out of this one?  Roll Eyes

Wow you're an idiot. You dont know the fck how blockchain works.
How the fck the chain can grow longer if your block was dropped by the network, not just mining nodes ?

Welcome to my ignore fcktard.

What the f$ck man can't you read? Are you really that dense?

Try to read it again more slooowly.

The block is not dropped by the > 50% miners who are controlled by the attack. And you don't top-down control all of the non-mining peers and their incentives. The longer block chain will be processing transactions up to an order-of-magnitude faster than the minority chain.

It only takes some non-mining clients that recognize the longer chain as valid (open source remember! don't expect every node to run your source code), to throw an entire monkey wrench into which spends are valid. Then you have chaos. The market will vote and the vote won't be 100% for either chain.

And I will place my bets on the masses preferring faster transactions than a few coins which don't affect them in any way.

The clients don't wag the miners. The miners are either consistent else the clients are free to choose.

P.S. I see your ignore is brown too.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
megastacks
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
November 28, 2013, 05:48:29 PM
 #64

One thing I will say is thay with this much money involved and the value continuing to rise, there is a HUGE incentive for people to try and find a way to do an attack.  Since it is web based anyone in the world can try to attempt this.  Think of all the mafia groups all over the world. 

I do not fully understand the way bitcoin works enough to say if it is possible or not but it is certainly something we should all think about.

It would be nice if this could be a constructive discussion instead of resorting to name calling.
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 28, 2013, 06:14:34 PM
 #65

What timeframe would you give for the >50%attack to occur from this point in time?

When the coin rewards decline to near 0 roughly 2040ish, then my discovery is that the transaction fees rewards can not scale as a percentage of the commerce, because the transaction fee in comparative dollars would be much higher than fiat alternatives. Thus mining will be underfunded relative to the value of the Bitcoin economy to be gained by attacking it.

Even if transaction fees were scaled up (ignoring fiat alternatives or if I am mistaken about fee structure of fiat alternatives), if miners are funded significantly from transaction fees (and no longer primarily from coin rewards), then Bitcoin is subject to takeover by cartels due to the Transactions Withholding Attack (search the forum for it).

Thus the target date for Bitcoin to be taken over technically is 2040ish, perhaps 2033 earliest.

Realize it could be taken over much sooner than that by governments, since Bitcoin is not anonymous, they can attack the users with taxes, treble penalties, etc.. Rogue governments can do anything in crazy economic implosions, e.g. communist Wiemar Germany followed by Nazis, Stalin, China's purge of 57 million people, etc.. I believe such an economic implosion is coming globally after 2015. But I think the government has a more clever plan for takeover.

I believe Bitcoin will fail much sooner than that being a ponzi-pyramid-variant-bubble (no exact name for the scheme Bitcoin is, but it has NO INTRINSIC VALUE because transactions can't scale due to the concentration of ownership of the coin and the fact that the rich can't spend, they must cash out). This is covered in great detail in my posts, so if you want to dig into that, click my name and read posts in November. Basically I see the world government (G20 + IMF + World Bank + UN, etc) moving in after the ponzi collapse to clawback all the gains to provide justice to all the old ladies who were destroyed by Bitcoin's collapse.

Do you believe there is an altcoin that does not have these concerns or could one be developed?

As far as I know there is not one now without any major concerns, except I am aware of Freicoin but apparently demurrage is negative to some or most but I am not saying they should be and I haven't studied Freicoin closely nor have I monitored its price and adoption.

I believe one is being developed.

Lastly, although u seem to have a high number of ignores, I do prefer to listen to those that can backup their arguments, and although the conversations can somewhat deteriorate at times, it seems to be more so than frustration than inability to understand other points of view.

Yes they are frustrated with me and I am frustrated with them.

I don't know if novices can follow the upthread debate. I doubt it.

Basically what it has boiled down to is if the > 50% attacker modifies the protocol then the rest of the network has to choose which protocol rule it keeps:

a. longest (i.e. faster) chain wins
b. other protocol priority (e.g. coin rewards schedule) wins

My antagonists claim they control 100% of the non-mining clients and force them to do #b. I am saying they are insane if they think they control anything 100% that is open source and/or involves a billion actors.

Once the miners disagree (#a or #b), then the clients are free to do what ever fits each one of them best. Are they likely to converge to a consensus (#a or #b) or diverge into a Tragedy of the Commons (incompatible double-spend mess mix of #a and #b)? It would behoove those who are large and have control over many clients to push it in the direction that is most advantageous for the most customers, thus likely to converge rather than diverge.

The danger is that some large outfit such as Amazon would seize that opportunity have faster transactions (i.e. choose #a) than its competition since it will likely control the client its customers employ (integrated into the Amazon website).

The competition would then need to react else lose customers. So #a is going to win and #b is fantasy of those geeks who think they control something that they don't. They fundamentally don't understand free markets.

personally commend you for providing not only various probable weaknesses within the bitcoin DNA but also back that up with what seems to be competent evidence with merit.

I'm sure mr satoshi when completing his white paper did not allow for human greed and power!

When contemplating whether you are full of shit or have valid argument, one only has to understand that to be the minnow on one side of the battle is honourees in itself, win or lose, so should be given credence.

Appreciate your efforts and personally enjoy your posts, although with your obvious strength in economics and also coding, it is certainly at time hard to understand the various Swazi language, but guess we all have our s and w.

It is difficult to be the minnow. If I am wrong, let them present an argument. I will admit when I am wrong. Thus far they either just don't see my point (some of them) or they will disagree with the unlikelihood that they can exert 100% top-down control.

I hope I didn't embarrass you in any way by answering your post late, after the landscape of the debate had changed. My antagonists made some strong rebuttals, but they didn't expect that I am more knowledgeable than they thought. Some of them still don't get my point, and of course an idiot views a genius as being an idiot.

If you think it is difficult for you to follow the debate, imagine that even some of them who are reasonably expert on the block chain can't quite get my point.

This is far above the pay grade of most Bitcoiners.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
Pente
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 492



View Profile WWW
November 28, 2013, 07:30:03 PM
 #66


So perhaps you are the 63rd Bitard who clicked out of 10,000 users on the forum. And so statistically that means what exactly?


Only ignores by members above a certain level count Smiley

I was just trying to inject some humor into the conversation. No one is on my ignore list. Although, I do not consider all opinions to be valid, I do consider them to be interesting. It is important to be aware of other people's misconceptions. Besides, you never know when they may have a valid point.

Bitlend
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 65


View Profile
November 28, 2013, 11:07:59 PM
 #67

When you see this kind of setup below in the link, you can start to see the serious business of miners.

Only take one of these massive outfits to be offered incentives to form alliances and suddenly have potential problems I guess.

http://hongwrong.com/hong-kong-bitcoin/
Kouye
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


Cuddling, censored, unicorn-shaped troll.


View Profile
November 28, 2013, 11:28:01 PM
 #68

When the coin rewards decline to near 0 roughly 2040ish, then my discovery is that the transaction fees rewards can not scale as a percentage of the commerce, because the transaction fee in comparative dollars would be much higher than fiat alternatives.
Either this is a typo, or you beleive there will still be debt-based government backed currencies in 2040.


[OVER] RIDDLES 2nd edition --- this was claimed. Look out for 3rd edition!
I won't ever ask for a loan nor offer any escrow service. If I do, please consider my account as hacked.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1694


GUNBOT Licenses -20% with ref. code 'GrumpyKitty'


View Profile WWW
November 28, 2013, 11:43:04 PM
 #69

Quote
[Anything and everything AnnoyMint says]

This is just another in a very long string of attempts to find the "fatal flaw" in Bitcoin.  Remember his claim that ASICs would cause the downfall of Bitcoin?  This is just his "fatal flaw" du jour.

Use your ignore button.  His rantings are the reason it is there.
Didn't see that claim. Well done, at least I will read less nonsense in the future.

I also highly doubt that the code would get cracked soon, if ever.


          ▄▄█████▌▐█████▄▄
       ▄█████████▌    ▀▀▀███▄
     ▄███████████▌  ▄▄▄▄   ▀██▄
   ▄█████████████▌  ▀▄▄▀     ▀██▄
  ▐██████████████▌  ▄▄▄▄       ▀█▌
 ▐███████████████▌             ▀█▌
 ████████████████▌  ▀▀▀█         ██
▐████████████████▌  ▄▄▄▄         ██▌
▐████████████████▌  ▀  ▀         ██▌
 ████████████████▌  █▀▀█         ██
 ▐███████████████▌  ▀▀▀▀        ▄█▌
  ▐██████████████▌  ▀▀▀▀       ▄█▌
   ▀█████████████▌  ▀▀█▀     ▄██▀
     ▀███████████▌  ▀▀▀▀   ▄██▀
       ▀█████████▌    ▄▄▄███▀
          ▀▀█████▌▐█████▀▀
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
      ▄▄▄
 ▄▄█████████▄▄
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
   █▌▐█ █▌▐█
   █▌▐█ █▌▐█
 ▄███████████▄
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄






▄█████████████▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███████████████
██▀▀█▀▀████████
▀█████████████▀
Buffer Overflow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652



View Profile
November 28, 2013, 11:44:32 PM
 #70

I am going to destroy BitCON (there is no light, it is fatally doomed as it lacks distribution) and you will buy from me.

LOL Cheesy

Can't resist bringing this up now and again.

Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1694


GUNBOT Licenses -20% with ref. code 'GrumpyKitty'


View Profile WWW
November 28, 2013, 11:48:01 PM
 #71

I am going to destroy BitCON (there is no light, it is fatally doomed as it lacks distribution) and you will buy from me.

LOL Cheesy

Can't resist bringing this up now and again.

Just for him:

 Cheesy


          ▄▄█████▌▐█████▄▄
       ▄█████████▌    ▀▀▀███▄
     ▄███████████▌  ▄▄▄▄   ▀██▄
   ▄█████████████▌  ▀▄▄▀     ▀██▄
  ▐██████████████▌  ▄▄▄▄       ▀█▌
 ▐███████████████▌             ▀█▌
 ████████████████▌  ▀▀▀█         ██
▐████████████████▌  ▄▄▄▄         ██▌
▐████████████████▌  ▀  ▀         ██▌
 ████████████████▌  █▀▀█         ██
 ▐███████████████▌  ▀▀▀▀        ▄█▌
  ▐██████████████▌  ▀▀▀▀       ▄█▌
   ▀█████████████▌  ▀▀█▀     ▄██▀
     ▀███████████▌  ▀▀▀▀   ▄██▀
       ▀█████████▌    ▄▄▄███▀
          ▀▀█████▌▐█████▀▀
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
▬◉▬
      ▄▄▄
 ▄▄█████████▄▄
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
   █▌▐█ █▌▐█
   █▌▐█ █▌▐█
 ▄███████████▄
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄






▄█████████████▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███████████████
██▀▀█▀▀████████
▀█████████████▀
Jan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1043



View Profile
November 28, 2013, 11:59:16 PM
 #72

AnonyMint, the first 3 times you think you understand Bitcoin you are wrong. Lots of us have been there. It is a harsh, but amazing trip.

Mycelium let's you hold your private keys private.
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 02:14:51 AM
 #73

AnonyMint, the first 3 times you think you understand Bitcoin you are wrong. Lots of us have been there. It is a harsh, but amazing trip.

I don't know why you think I don't understand Bitcoin. I did not lose the argument upthread.

I am going to destroy BitCON (there is no light, it is fatally doomed as it lacks distribution) and you will buy from me.

LOL Cheesy

Can't resist bringing this up now and again.

I am going to enjoy very much. You will eat humble pie.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 02:30:46 AM
 #74

When the coin rewards decline to near 0 roughly 2040ish, then my discovery is that the transaction fees rewards can not scale as a percentage of the commerce, because the transaction fee in comparative dollars would be much higher than fiat alternatives.
Either this is a typo, or you beleive there will still be debt-based government backed currencies in 2040.

If we don't replace Bitcoin (which I do believe we will, I'm encouraged to see Litecoin's price rising to $36 with $1.2 billion mcap, although Litecoin has probably all the same vulnerabilities), then I do very much think there will be an electronic currency that was morphed from a failure of Bitcoin and is tied in with a government fiat system. The powers-that-be have already announced their plans. And it is very clear to me that Bitcoin has been planted with certain key design flaws that enables the takeover.

Here are the links about the plans of the powers-that-be on enforcing negative interest rates on money by locking everyone into an electronic currency and eliminating cash. You must read all the links to gain a big picture understanding and you see there was a grand plan for many years as it all fits together:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/17/negative-interest-rates-eliminating-cash-the-summers-solution/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/18/15800/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/19/congressional-hearings-on-bitcoin/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/20/the-bitcoin-hearing/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/20/hyperinflation-all-just-hype/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/negative-interest-rates-coming-soon-to-a-bank-near-you/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/20/the-tree-has-been-cut-electronic-money-will-force-an-underground-economy-based-on-barter/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/27/downs-of-negative-rates-the-fed/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/22/land-of-confusion-negative-rates-may-cause-the-phase-transition-in-equites/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/24/confidence-in-the-economy-is-changing-from-public-to-private/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/27/the-2-3-trillion-nobody-mentions-about-quantitative-easing/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/23/china-the-dollar/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/15/chinas-reform-push-for-2020/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/15/china-a-new-era/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/25/can-states-go-bankrupt-are-there-exceptions-to-the-unfunded-pensions/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/25/unfunded-pensions-are-our-doom/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/15/muni-implosion/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/23/tax-revolts-and-that-309-year-cycle/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/23/real-estate-3/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/22/real-estate-collapse-or-liquidity-crisis-2015-75-2020-05/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/23/real-estate-outside-usa/
www.forbes.com/sites/jessecolombo/2013/11/21/heres-why-the-philippines-economic-miracle-is-really-a-bubble-in-disguise/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/23/capital-flows-currency-flows/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/capital-flows-the-key-to-everything/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/death-always-creeps-in-from-the-periphery-of-an-organism/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/15/expect-riots-rise-of-nationalism-after-2015-75-to-pick-up-steam/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/15/rise-of-dictatorship-in-germany/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/14/merkel-rejects-referendums-in-germany/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/13/euro-germany-trade/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/14/france-economic-numbers-show-decline-3rd-quarter/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/15/us-will-pass-russia-by-2015-as-top-oil-producer/

My intuition that Bitcoin was a Trojan planted (probably by the NSA at the behest of some powers-that-be) started when I noticed in Satoshi's whitepaper that he was pitching it as a better gold, because gold coin rewards continue forever. Gold's above ground supply has always increased throughout the history of man. Immediately I smelled a scam, where he was going to induce all those liberty lovers (many of whom where already looking for alternatives to fiat, such as gold and silver) to become euphoric and illogical. It was very clever marketing, because it is obvious that he realized their suspicion and better judgment would be clouded and they would not notice the vulnerabilities caused by that decision to set a hard limit of 21 million coins. The ponzi result is the most glaring result of that design decision. Then other vulnerabilities also derive from that design decision as explained below. It is so ironic that what the investors love most about Bitcoin, is precisely why it is evil. Also couple this with most of you don't understand monetary economics well. And you think that debasement is bad or somehow connected to expansive Keynesian government spending. You don't realize that the government exists to stop the hoarding of the 3% because otherwise the economy would go into gridlock (the gridlock you will see as Bitcoin reaches the tip of its ponzi bubble). Either we debase decentrally or the government does it. And when the government does it, it becomes Keynesian:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/22/gold-can-still-be-fiat/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/war-on-gold/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/gold-to-be-or-not-to-be/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/hyperinflation-definition/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/will-electronic-money-be-deflationary/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/13/medicare-is-seizing-estates-of-anyone-over-55/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/11/crabs-in-a-bucket/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/11/keynesianism-monetarism/

But I also think Satoshi was smarter than his handlers. He hid the decentralized solution inside of a Trojan. All we have to do is change a few of the design parameters, then we eliminate the main reason government exists; we eliminate the power vacuum. And we the people win. I have a historic example of the scientists lying through their teeth to DARPA, otherwise we would not have the internet today:

World Without Web.

Satoshi appears to have done the same outsmarted his handlers at the NSA, giving us the key insights and market excitement to do the correct design.

Bitcoin vulnerabilities:

a. Massive $trillions mcap Ponzi market failure, world's governments will be forced to clawback for "public good". Because the design of the coin is to not distribute to spenders, rather to create an asset bubble with no intrinsic value because it is impossible to distribute to spenders and become a currency. The math/logic for this is in the November archive of my posts in other threads.

b. Not anonymous, very easy to identify all the users in order to tax and clawback. People are ignorant of the vulnerabilites of Tor, VPNs. Mixers are nonsense without widespread strong IP anonymity and some way to be sure spenders aren't revealing their identities to vendors, because they can be honeypotted and over time you are discovered probabilistically as the others in the mixers screw up and revealed their identities in the downstream chains of the coins. The problem of taint is huge, because if the government knows the identity of just one person in the chain of the coin's history, it can compel that person to be responsible for all activity on the coin backwards and forwards in all time, until that person reveals the identities and transactions from whom the coin was purchased and spent to.

c. Dominated by ASICs means if the world's governments (or even a few large corporations) put their combined resources into sequestering all ASIC production and ramping it up, they can easily obtain > 50% of the mining hash rate at any time. Dominated by ASICs is much more vulnerable than dominated by PCs (CPUs) if care is taken to eliminate botnets.

d. As a backup plan if the above three doesn't make it a reality sooner, the design of Bitcoin is a dearth of funding for mining as coin rewards decline. Thus either facilitating a 50 - 95% attack or if transaction fees are significant, then a Transactions Withholding Attack takeover by cartels, especially with legal force of governments to help the cartels take form. Orthogonal to that catch-22 dilemma, my logic is that Bitcoin's fees will spiral up thus enabling the Transactions Withholding Attack while also demotivating transactions.

e. On top of this, Bitcoin has nothing in its design which motivates pools to be small. And I recently refuted gmaxell's claim (from the 50% attack thread in 2012) that P2Pool can't be attacked.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 03:27:25 AM
 #75


So perhaps you are the 63rd Bitard who clicked out of 10,000 users on the forum. And so statistically that means what exactly?


Only ignores by members above a certain level count Smiley

I was just trying to inject some humor into the conversation. No one is on my ignore list. Although, I do not consider all opinions to be valid, I do consider them to be interesting. It is important to be aware of other people's misconceptions. Besides, you never know when they may have a valid point.

My apologies then. That you for the clarification. Peace be with us.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 04:54:45 AM
 #76

Then why not tend towards something like devcoin where coins are unlimited and you will have hash go nonstop especially as its merge mined so when 2140 hits people can switch to devcoin to mine and people can use it as it will be safe from 51% attacks from merged mine pools. Brilliant!

Since money supply doesnt scale at 50k per block indefinetily but miners getting  5k per block 45k going to paying for work (isnt this the point of a medium of exchange?), You may see an initial inflationary spiral in price as you see today it flopped down under pressure...however the silver lining is that it would just prove tobe a great opportunity as math would tellus its actually very deflationary by design without losing incentive to mine!

Think about it as userbase grows and the growth of supply year over year shrinks ie amount of coins vs total supply gets less and less the coin becomes deflationary as population grows.. At some point saturation sets in and gdp will drive price. A semi deflationary mechanism that keeps a network secure while providing a way for work to be paid by community donation (mining) may be better than something freicoin?

Other alts what about ppc? Based on drmand supply but with static tx fees you may have an issue once they get so high in terms of price of goods that people may stop transacting based on a high tx fee.. Raising ming rewards? Maybe good? I still like the idea of a known static growth since we all know that herd mentality sets in on surprises... Dynamic block rewards creates incentivd to hack the system to raise rewards and the. Hoarding coins...

Sorry I tried to put this in lehmans terms without the technical jargon I would love for everyone to get in on this discussion... You dont have to be a visionary.

★☆★Syscoin - Decentralized Marketplace and Multisig Platform
Pay with Bitcoin, ZCash and many more
For more visit Syscoin.org  ★☆★
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 05:11:40 AM
 #77

Then why not tend towards something like devcoin where coins are unlimited and you will have hash go nonstop especially as its merge mined so when 2140 hits people can switch to devcoin to mine and people can use it as it will be safe from 51% attacks from merged mine pools. Brilliant!

If you reread my long post above, I am asserting if we wait, it will be too late. Once the $trillions ponzi-bubble collapses (2015-2016 is my guesstimate based on the 12X per annum increase in market cap), the government takes over moving the world into a morphed Bitcoin protocol electronic currency. Then there won't be any way to transfer wealth into another altcoin.

I have not studied Devcoin nor merge mining in depth, but my thought is devcoin being merged-mined with Bitcoin is vulnerable when Bitcoin is.

And giving away the funding that should be for miners to secure the network is going to make it more vulnerable if ever it is independent of Bitcoin.

For me it is a hair-brained economic concept. Sorry to criticize another altcoin and I do love open source, but I think this is wrong and harmful.

Since money supply doesnt scale at 50k per block indefinetily but miners getting  5k per block 45k going to paying for work (isnt this the point of a medium of exchange?),

Giving away for free what isn't free, hasn't ever not created failure.

Coin rewards should go to miners to secure the network. How does creating open source benefit the security of the Devcoin chain? And who gets to choose which open source projects are funded? That is antithesis of decentralization.

A semi deflationary mechanism that keeps a network secure while providing a way for work to be paid by community donation (mining) may be better than something freicoin?

I think so. Wink

Other alts what about ppc?

I have some recent discussion on Peercoin:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330230.msg3753624#msg3753624
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330230.msg3761408#msg3761408

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 05:37:13 AM
 #78

Then why not tend towards something like devcoin where coins are unlimited and you will have hash go nonstop especially as its merge mined so when 2140 hits people can switch to devcoin to mine and people can use it as it will be safe from 51% attacks from merged mine pools. Brilliant!

If you reread my long post above, I am asserting if we wait, it will be too late. Once the $trillions ponzi-bubble collapses (2015-2016 is my guesstimate based on the 12X per annum increase in market cap), the government takes over moving the world into a morphed Bitcoin protocol electronic currency. Then there won't be any way to transfer wealth into another altcoin.

I have not studied Devcoin nor merge mining in depth, but my thought is devcoin being merged-mined with Bitcoin is vulnerable when Bitcoin is.

And giving away the funding that should be for miners to secure the network is going to make it more vulnerable if ever it is independent of Bitcoin.

For me it is a hair-brained economic concept. Sorry to criticize another altcoin and I do love open source, but I think this is wrong and harmful.

Since money supply doesnt scale at 50k per block indefinetily but miners getting  5k per block 45k going to paying for work (isnt this the point of a medium of exchange?),

Giving away for free what isn't free, hasn't ever not created failure.

Coin rewards should go to miners to secure the network. How does creating open source benefit the security of the Devcoin chain? And who gets to choose which open source projects are funded? That is antithesis of decentralization.

A semi deflationary mechanism that keeps a network secure while providing a way for work to be paid by community donation (mining) may be better than something freicoin?

I think so. Wink

Other alts what about ppc?

I have some recent discussion on Peercoin:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330230.msg3753624#msg3753624
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330230.msg3761408#msg3761408

Yes but it is a static reward and scales with the price so mining incentive is still there I mean you can also actually do some work to recieve coins like its designed for. Didnt adam smith say you win as a team not individual? Apply it here.

Population growing demand grows supply remain static thats all the deflation we need. i know what you mean that if we wait they will essentially milk the system by transfering trillions over to their new system like qe where they essentially writeoff their own debt by calling qe when usd is high buy low sell high.

Just disregard the fact that a small pct is given to miners because that doesnt really affect the incentive long run.. I think it actually makes sense because your allocating resources to get work done ala resource based economy.. Your generating wealth via a miner efficiency cycle. This allocation may make sense as you would want to get some actual work for all that used power kind of like PoS PoW... But in a totally subtle way.

Devcoin is simple 20% miners 80% workers bounties are created and givin coins once people do them as writers are also paid for writing etc

Suply increases staticically which would avoid panic.. Anytime you dont know supply demand or it shifts you will have panic and therein incentive to skew demand supply essentially breaking a dynamic block reward.

★☆★Syscoin - Decentralized Marketplace and Multisig Platform
Pay with Bitcoin, ZCash and many more
For more visit Syscoin.org  ★☆★
AnonyMint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 05:56:25 AM
 #79

Who decides which open source projects are funded?

If it is the miners, they can find ways to pay it to themselves.

If it is the coin foundation, they can similarly game it, just as our politics is gamed by vested interests.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666


View Profile
November 29, 2013, 06:03:30 AM
 #80

Who decides which open source projects are funded?

If it is the miners, they can find ways to pay it to themselves.

If it is the coin foundation, they can similarly game it, just as our politics is gamed by vested interests.

Besides the point we speaking about economic ramifications... Im sure it can evolve to be democratic in decisions.. If it doesnt Ill just make my own that works democraticaly through an electoral process so even I need to fight to keep leader position etc.

Actually anyone can suggest bounties but we vote for which ones are important... Ideally this will evolve to something more efficient but its the idea that counts. miners are paying via electricity. Later a bounty exchange can be created to match vendors with developers like workforcrypto.com

★☆★Syscoin - Decentralized Marketplace and Multisig Platform
Pay with Bitcoin, ZCash and many more
For more visit Syscoin.org  ★☆★
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 »  All
  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!