Transparent mining, or What makes Nxt a 2nd generation currency

[Come-from-Beyond]

And you have not yet said what that error is.  In fact you flatly refused to on several occasions.  The supposed error does not in fact exist. 

You were right when you said that the artificial situation of just two accounts exaggerated the effect; That doesn't mean there was an error -- the bias unquestionably exists. 

Nope, sorry.  Remember, You flatly refused to explain. You don't get to flatly refuse to explain, and then claim that you did. 

The model is correct; The only question is, does it matter?   And the answer given the broader simulation above is, probably not. With many accounts no one having more than a small fraction of the total money, the bias is very small.  But it definitely does exist.

The error I'm talking about is an attempt to model forging with 2 accounts only.

Bias does exist, I was always saying this when discussed with other guys who asked the same questions. But it's very small to pay attention, close to dispersion (subject to account balances). I refused to explain coz practice proves my position and it's YOU who is supposed to prove that ur model is correct.

[1714834840]

1714834840

[1714834840]

1714834840

[etlase3]

I refused to explain coz practice proves my position and it's YOU who is supposed to prove that ur model is correct.

So if practice proves your position, and I flip heads 10 times in a row, that means I will never flip tails? Practice proves that the coin always lands on heads.

[Come-from-Beyond]

I refused to explain coz practice proves my position and it's YOU who is supposed to prove that ur model is correct.

So if practice proves your position, and I flip heads 10 times in a row, that means I will never flip tails? Practice proves that the coin always lands on heads.

It's the 2nd time u post nonsense in an Nxt thread.

[etlase3]

I think your nonsense indicator is badly broken.

[Come-from-Beyond]

I think your nonsense indicator is badly broken.

Thank u for ur competent opinion.

[klee]

I think your nonsense indicator is badly broken.

Thank u for ur competent opinion.

It is the n-th time you say this - I will put you on my ignore list for 6.8 days!
 

[ZeroTheGreat]

So if practice proves your position, and I flip heads 10 times in a row, that means I will never flip tails? Practice proves that the coin always lands on heads.

If there's a model that predicts HUGE difference, there'd be some numbers for that in statisticks, don't u think? For now it seems, difference not exist at all (we've not too much data and topology non-optimized), but if we'll follow the logic (there're 100s of 2^N-dices and only 1 winner), difference'd be incredible small at longer distance. I'm comfortable with that.

[Cryddit]

Come-from-Beyond, I don't know how to interact with you. 

When demonstrating a bias, the first thing to do is always to identify the case where returns deviate very sharply from expectations.  That was the case you pooh-poohed. 

Then I went on to demonstrate that even in much larger simulations the bias, though its effects are reduced, is still present.  That you took as an admission that I was wrong.

You flatly refused to explain yourself, then later refused again with the claim that you had explained yourself and don't care to do it again.

You're also responding to technical truths as personal attacks, and trying to deal with facts as though they were merely social conventions, with bluff and aggressiveness and fabrications rather than other facts.

It seems to me as if your brain is somehow broken, and I don't know where the edges of rationality that I can converse with might be.  Interacting with you makes me angry and I tend to snap at you; I'm sorry for that, but I can't otherwise seem to communicate with you at all.   

[Come-from-Beyond]

Then I went on to demonstrate that even in much larger simulations the bias, though its effects are reduced, is still present.  That you took as an admission that I was wrong.

No, I said that u r wrong when used a model with 2 accounts only. U r right, there is a bias. And I stated this a lot of times.

[opticalcarrier]

ok, in order to meet 1Mtps, wont blocks be forged much more frequently than 1 per minute?  Is this necessarily a "bad" situation, or just out of the "normal" figure of 1 block per minute?

And what exactly does it mean to "send transactions directly to the next-scheduled forger"?  How is this accomplished? Are these forgers going to have to act as some kind of service provider where their public IPs are known?

[Come-from-Beyond]

ok, in order to meet 1Mtps, wont blocks be forged much more frequently than 1 per minute?  Is this necessarily a "bad" situation, or just out of the "normal" figure of 1 block per minute?

And what exactly does it mean to "send transactions directly to the next-scheduled forger"?  How is this accomplished? Are these forgers going to have to act as some kind of service provider where their public IPs are known?

Gap between blocks will be exactly 1 minute.

Yes, these forgers have to announce IP address for transactions.

[ChuckOne]

If they miss their chance to mine a block they'll be penalized. Stakeholders r supposed to protect Nxt, not just sit and wait for 1 NXT = 1,000,000 USD day.

NB: The only penalty is inability to mine blocks within some period of time. They still can decide not to bother with mining, but their "hashing" power will be distributed to those who do protect the network.

When will this penalty be implemented?

No ETA yet.

Any news on that one?

[jl777]

It seems one of BCNext plans tackles this stuff?

Yes, but he is upset that community doesn't wish to review and develop his ideas. Anon136 is the only one who does.

I think the majority of people here are interested in reviewing and developing his (BCNext) ideas, we just need a little structured guidance, this thread is so massive.

yup. same here. I am barely hanging on with hanging on.

I guess we should head over to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=364218.0 and discuss our TF ideas.

(Re)starting discussion on reviewing and developing TF

If BCNext likes what you are doing, you will get added to NXT credits API!

James

[Come-from-Beyond]

If BCNext likes what you are doing, you will get added to NXT credits API!

BCNext likes every attempt to review his ideas.

[ChuckOne]

Alice rolls 1000-face die. Bob rolls 1000-face die.
Alice wins if she gets 1 or 2 (her balance is 100k), Bob wins if he gets 1 (his balance is 50k).

How many times Alice will win if she rolls the die 1000 times?
How many times Bob will win if he rolls the die 1000 times?

Could anyone answer the questions above?

Let me think about this.

One roll of a die is a Bernoulli trail, so we should have two binomial distributions B(1000, 0.002) and B(1000, 0.001).

The expected value should be 2 and 1 respectively if I am not completely mistaken.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Let me think about this.

One roll of a die is a Bernoulli trail, so we should have two binomial distributions B(1000, 0.002) and B(1000, 0.001).

The expected value should be 2 and 1 respectively if I am not completely mistaken.

I think u r right.

[jl777]

If BCNext likes what you are doing, you will get added to NXT credits API!

BCNext likes every attempt to review his ideas.

If he likes "attempt" then I have attempted a LOT! Just havent felt like I truly understand it well enough to be able to analyze it, let alone develop new ideas.

My hope is that I will be able to present specific functionality that can only be properly implemented using TF. Even if I cant understand TF fully, I hope that it will spur others who do to figure out how to properly implement the new functionality.

James

[ChuckOne]

Let me think about this.

One roll of a die is a Bernoulli trail, so we should have two binomial distributions B(1000, 0.002) and B(1000, 0.001).

The expected value should be 2 and 1 respectively if I am not completely mistaken.

I think u r right.

So, how do we continue? You said we make it step by step.

[Come-from-Beyond]

So, how do we continue? You said we make it step by step.

Cryddit already showed that forging is ok - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=364218.msg4861016#msg4861016

[ChuckOne]

So, how do we continue? You said we make it step by step.

Cryddit already showed that forging is ok - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=364218.msg4861016#msg4861016

Err, so this thread can be closed?

EDIT: a simulation suffices?