Bitcoin Forum
December 16, 2019, 11:15:53 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 ... 199 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [SKY] Skycoin Launch Announcement  (Read 379702 times)
Coinmin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 469
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 14, 2015, 03:46:59 AM
 #1681

Excuse me but what happen if something happen to you and the 98% coins

Then the skycoins in circulation become 50 times more valuable  Grin

But the dev is anon
If something bad happen to him or if he just disappear like satoshi
Who's gonna invest in this coin in the futur
It's 98% in his hands

I am sure the dev will find solution.
1576494953
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576494953

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576494953
Reply with quote  #2

1576494953
Report to moderator
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1576494953
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576494953

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576494953
Reply with quote  #2

1576494953
Report to moderator
1576494953
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576494953

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576494953
Reply with quote  #2

1576494953
Report to moderator
1576494953
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576494953

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576494953
Reply with quote  #2

1576494953
Report to moderator
bitwhizz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 14, 2015, 12:35:23 PM
 #1682

Thank you Skycoin for the post, one of the most interesting posts i have read this year
skycoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 498
Merit: 500


View Profile WWW
February 16, 2015, 04:28:51 AM
 #1683

I cant rule out putting up the Skycoin bot and then five minute later someone looting all the coins with an exploit. It is impossible to rule out and it is almost certain that such an exploit exists. Instead of finding and fixing exploits like this, we need to determine the preconditions that rule them out. I do not believe that it is currently possible to store coins in an online wallet without them eventually being stolen.

If you create a paper wallet being offline the whole time and just track the transactions to that address isn't that safe?

Yes. If the wallet was generated on a computer that is not compromised. Many people buy a $200 laptop and generate addresses from computer that has never been connected to the internet.

This used to be secure. You could keep the private keys on one computer, then create a transaction by hand on the computer not connected to the internet and then put it on a USB drive and carry it to computer connected to the internet, where it will be injected into the bitcoin network for execution (addition to a new block).

However, recent malware like Stuxnet and more advanced malware has been able to infect systems over USB and hop from system to system. We are worried about a USB 3.0 DMA exploit. USB is very dangerous for windows users because auto-execute. This makes these attacks possible for 95% of script kiddies. Attacking a linux to linux USB transfer will be more difficult but cannot be ruled out.

The trojans that did this, used to be files on the USB stick. It was a program that was automatically executed when the device was plugged in, that installed a backdoor to the computer and starts scanning for bitcoin wallets or connects to a botnet control center for additional instructions. It might install ad toolbars for ad money, scan for bitcoin wallets, fix security holes on your system so other hackers could not take over the system (king of the hill) or install a key logger and begin grabbing email passwords, credit card numbers and bank account details.

The new trojans are hidden in the firmware of the USB drive itself. They cannot be seen on the file system. You can pass out a USB stick at a Bitcoin conference, someone formats it, thinks its safe but there could be anything in the firmware. If your computer is infected and any USB device is plugged in, that device could potentially be infected itself and spread to any other computer it is plugged into.

Here is an article on USB security and BadUSD: http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

Offline Wallets:

Skycoin will have some more features for doing offline wallets or wallets on computers not connected to a network. You for instance, may generate a wallet and seed on a computer not connected to any internet. Your "cold wallet". Then you send the coins to the first address in the code wallet. Then you load the unspent output hash by hand (typing it into the computer).

To send coins out of the code wallet, without connecting the computer to the internet,  the wallet generates a transaction on the computer not connected to the network and produces a QR code you scan with a cell phone to injection that transaction into the network.

There should be a way of doing this safer than USB. Maybe coupling a cell phone app to a laptop over speaker/microphone.

IPO Security

We ended up generating a wallet with a few thousand addresses, using a computer that has never been connected to the internet and then encrypting the addresses (lock the wallet). Then transferring that to the computer running the IPO bot. So even if the bot is hacked (very difficult but cannot be ruled out) the Bitcoin private keys are safe and locked. We have all incoming ports firewalled and the bot is in a memory safe language, so buffer overflow vulnerabilities are not possible (except through one c library dependency).

So the bot can receive coins and check balances, but cannot send coins and even if hacked, cannot loot the Bitcoin (unless they can unlock the wallet). The Skycoin can be looted, but there is a receipt system, so can handle it.

Bitcoin has several security problems. Bitcoind does not allow you to check address balances, unless the public/private keys are loaded into the wallet. You used to be able to just load the pubkey, but that is deprecated. It is designed to force you to do things in ways that increase the risk of theft or loss of coins.

The problem is that people can lose coins because of factors that are not under their control (software bugs, bad usability, bad design, unexpected behavior in the wallet with change addresses, wallets not really be deleted on SSD, buffer overflow attacks). Every factor has to be brought under control. Its exhausting.

Skycoin Exchange Proof of Concept

We think
1> All exchanges should have a common API
2> Exchanges should not be holding balances of coins. The coins should automatically be withdrawn back into the users wallet. The user should be holding the private keys, not the exchange.

In this type of exchange, an exchange is a publickey hash, you add exchanges you trust to a list. The wallet queries the exchanges on the list and looks for the best bid/ask on each coin. Then you do trades and settlement and clearing.

The problem is that Bitcoin takes 10 minutes for settlement, while a person may enter in ten trades per second. If Skycoin achieves 1 second transaction times, then you can do settlement but wont have the Bitcoin in your wallet for 10 minutes. However the Bitcoin will be stored locally and cannot be stolen if the exchange goes down.

It is possible to do instant settlement with Bitcoin without waiting 10 minutes or going through the blockchain at all
- You place your Bitcoin in a multisig transaction, where moving the coins requires your signature and requires the exchange's signature.
- To send the Bitcoin to the exchange, you merely disclose the private key for that Bitcoin address.
- Now the exchange can authorize transactions with the Bitcoin but you cannot
- The exchange cannot steal the coins without your permission
- If you exchange discloses the private-key to you, now you own the coins and you can move the coins but the exchange cannot

So it is possible to do "instant" settlement of Bitcoin off the blockchain. However
- exchanges can hold your coins hostage (sign this transaction giving us 50% of the coins you get nothing)
- if the exchange forgets or loses the private key then you cannot get access to the coins

To get around this, you set a timer and make the signature check short circuit after 30 days. So if the coins are not moved, within thirty days they return to the person who owns the privatekey for the first address. This prevents the coins from being held hostage or prevents coins from being lost if the exchange forgets the privatekey.

To implement that, you would need a bitcoin scripting language op code that can read the time in the blockchain header for the current block and compare it to a target value. Or which can compare block depth of current block to a target value.

Bitcoin/crypto Infrastructure

So the exchange problem has been solved for a while, but no one has implemented the solution. It requires a series of libraries, scaffolding and infrastructure that does not exist and which no one is building.

I see Bitcoin/crypto as a sort of "money operating system" and it a platform with missing core libraries and capacities. Just like the standard library for "open file", "read file", "write data to file", there are a set of standard operations for Bitcoin. Private key generation, signature verification, communication, settlement/clearing and dozens of others. Bitcoin only implements "check balance" and "send" and has a very crude implementation of a fraction of the capacities or libraries needed.

Some of these core operations overlap with the standard library for the operating system. Why you connect to an IP address, you have no idea if the traffic is being intercepted or man-in-the-middle attacked. Any router between you and the destination can intercept and redirect the traffic. The  IP addresses does not actually identify anything in the real world.

When you are on OkCoin or an exchange and you send an HTTP request for "withdraw my coins to this address", what stops someone from sitting in the middle and replacing the address you wanted the coins withdrawn to, with their own address? What prevents them from withdrawing all your coins to themselves? Nothing. HTTPS sometimes (but in practice not, depending on your browser, your ISP and the security of the exchanges HTTPS private keys). Instead of hacking OkCoin, you can hack a frontend server, bribe and employee, get the private key for HTTPS and then hack any router between the user and the exchange and then steal all their coins by intercepting their traffic and withdrawing the coins to your address once they have logged in. How many coins could one person steal with a single BGP hijack and the HTTPS privatekeys for one exchange, without even having to hack the exchange itself or grab the private keys for the Bitcoin.

When you replace IP addresses by a pubkey hash, then unless the person has the private key for that pubkey, they cannot even read the messages you are sending.

You can guarantee that the end-point, if it is able to respond, at-least knows the private key for the publickey. Once you have that, you would deprecate the use of UDP/TCP/IPv4/IPv6 for all Bitcoin applications, because there is no reason you would use those protocols because they only have relative disadvantages in every category for security and do not offer superior performance. Eventually, it moves up the protocol stack and the operating system itself deprecates UDP/TCP/IPv4/IPv6.

So I want Skywire to replace
- UDP
- TCP
- IPv4
- IPv6
- HTTPs
- SSH
- SSL/TLS
- BGB
- MPLS
- TOR
- IPsec
- VPN protocols
- ...

Ironically, Skycoin started as a universal token for traffic settlement in the Skywire protocol. However, Skycoin itself began to require Skywire itself to meet security guarantees for higher level protocols.

This is very boring to most users. Very difficult to sell. People take for granted infrastructure like water and electricity, until it goes out. I think people will eventually end up using it in a way that is invisible to the user. No one thinks or cares whether they are using IPv4 or TCP/IP or HTTPS  when they open a Facebook page.

Another thing to consider is that Facebook makes less than $2 per year on each user and that between cell phone service, cable television and internet each person easily spends $3000 per year.

The real world is like H.G. Wells The Time Machine. Except that the above ground is where Facebook and 98% of users live in comfort and luxury without any concern for where anything they consume comes from, but there is no money here. All the money in the world is in the lairs of the morlocks laboring underground running the tubes and broilers, everything the Facebook users take for granted.

Bitcoin's market cap right now, is 3 billion dollars. Three billion a year is like level of tax evasion by single person or a divorce settlement. A single sovereign wealth fund or dictator trying to stash money where it cannot be seized, is more than the whole Bitcoin market cap. That means everyone here is still early. Bitcoin is already up ten million times from five years ago, but to go to 2 trillion is merely another 600x increase. 1% of global assets in crypto.

However, the state of the technology and computing is not ready for that type of society. The thefts would go from 2 million to 2 billion per month, the mining costs would go from 1 million a day to 600 million a day and drain the money back out of the system. There are technological upper bounds on Bitcoin's market cap. The mining overhead and the overhead from theft, have equal contributions to deflating Bitcoin's marketcap.

I should be excited by the IPO, I should feel like its 1994 again and its the Netscape IPO again. However, I feel numb because I see how much work is left. A week passed and I did not even notice. I feel like there are two days left of work and its so near, but never seem to get closer because of billions of small details

In a race, the quickest runner can never overtake the slowest, since the pursuer must first reach the point whence the pursued started, so that the slower must always hold a lead. – Aristotle, Physics VI:9, 239b15

An open source, volunteer model does not work effectively. I am going to hire more developers, set priorities, then transitioning away from coding directly and will just be doing code review.

cryptrol
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 638
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 08:11:17 AM
 #1684

... Every factor has to be brought under control. Its exhausting. ...
That's because you can't have every factor under control. Even if you do a damn fine job, there will always be things like social engineering and targeted malware. This is unstoppable (ask the banks that has just lost 300M USD).
monkeygang
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 08:16:03 AM
 #1685

where can we buy this damned buttcoin already?? bittrx whats going on im getting scared again

monkeygang.. you cant join. your already a member
skycoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 498
Merit: 500


View Profile WWW
February 16, 2015, 08:25:38 AM
 #1686

- Choose a memory safe subset of LLVM IR. This should be the standard for executables and be flexible for compilation to a variety of new CPU/GPU architectures. Linux equivalent of Microsoft's CIL specification.
- Implement a virtual machine/emulator for a simplified x86/x64 instruction set that is memory safe.
- Prototyping new CPU architectures on FPGA, building simulators, testing framework and bench-marking (eventually, but first target is ARM, x64)
- Push as much out of the kernel as possible into user space.
- Create memory safe version of C and compile all of linux against it, with a new compiler. Must achieve deterministic builds.
- Achieve deterministic builds for all linux packages in debian with the above method. Without deterministic builds we cannot confirm that the build servers are not adding backdoors into packages.
- Moving away from monolithic computing architectures. CPU/RAM should be a unipro module. Sound card should be a unipro module. Networking card should be a unipro module. GPU should be unipro module. USB interface should be a unipro module. We need to compartmentalize hardware to avoid DMA and guarantee security of the platform even if individual chips or firmware is backdoored. The current CPU architecture allows firmware from the bios, hard disc, networking, graphics card or sound card or USB controller to overwrite the kernel with DMA access. this needs to end. This has added advantage of being able to just add more CPUs or GPU units by popping in more modules. The baseboards for unipro for ARA are almost here.
- the modules are also good because we can put them inside of block of aluminum to control tempest emissions and have immersion cooling.
The above is required for a secure computing platform. This is a two to four year project. Realistically fifteen years. I am not doing the coding, but know very good people who can staff some of the sub-projects. Writing C compiler and the LLVM virtual machine, I know someone who can do that very well.

Talking about a new CPU structure, I wonder if you are interested the Jinn project (a modern ternary general purpose processor) which CfB is working on -
https://nxtforum.org/news-and-announcements/(ann)-jinn/
https://nxtforum.org/jinn/


Quote
Jinn processor is a bunch of independent cores. A piece of code (entity) running on a core does some computations and can interact via messages with other entities running on other cores. A single task may require to send millions messages between thousands entities. In some cases the order of these messages doesn't matter, in some - does.

If we set a strict order of the interactions then we may lose concurrency and in the worst case a processor with 1000 cores will utilize only 1 core at a single moment of time. On the other hand, it's very hard (if possible at all) to split a task into pieces of code that can run in any order. Jinn provides a way to set the sequence of interactions within desirable limits. Some interactions may happen in random order, some may wait for special conditions. This is one of the main contracts of Jinn - to ensure a particular order of interactions within a single processor box and among several processors working in tandem all over the world.

There were math co-processors speeding up floating-point operations in the past. Now we have GPUs that are used to render 3D scenes. Jinn has its specific usage too, it's designed to lower interaction latency of distributed computations

This is interesting. Their website is down, so I cannot access the documents. Otherwise would want more information. This could be useful.

iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 09:28:38 AM
Last edit: February 16, 2015, 10:17:22 PM by iamback
 #1687

Someone PM'ed me links to the OP and the following two posts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=380441.msg10445540#msg10445540
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=380441.msg10475089#msg10475089

I formerly posted under the usernames AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, and UnunoctiumTestacles (and a couple others I don't recall). I have particularly relevant post in the On the Longest Chain Rule thread.

The skycoin author appears to be possess considerable technical knowledge. And he writes clearly with high information density.

Many of his goals mirror mine. I am also an accomplished programmer.

However, it only took me a few seconds to see several issues that I believe ruin any chance of his success. I speak from experience in coding and marketing million user commercial software projects. I hope he takes this as constructive criticism and not as an attempt to hurt his project. I currently have no investments nor vested interest in any competing crypto-currency.

1. A non-PoW consensus is DOA, because there isn't enough time to thresh out the issues and trust it before the global economy begins to collapse in 2016. For example, the selfish mining attack wasn't discovered (or let's say widely proven and recognized) until years after Satoshi published PoW. Thus, the serious marketplace isn't going to trust a novel non-PoW consensus. Instead I have designed a PoW system which resolves many of the issues that plague Bitcoin, including ASIC economics. Some hints are in my linked post above.

Also I have some mathematical intuition that avoiding the 51% attack will always tradeoff security in another facet.

2. Afaics, he has absolutely no marketing acumen. He wants to go directly to replacing the internet infrastructure without a viable marketing scheme for ramping up.

3. He doesn't have the most essential quality of success in software, which is to ship something in high demand first. Instead he wants to tinker with every feature under the moon.

4. If I was improving Tor, I'd make it high latency and make is more secure, not less secure for higher bandwidth.

Time is of the essence. I am interested in working with highly talented authors, but unfortunately philosophical differences and differences in understanding how to succeed usually preclude such close working relationships.

Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
cryptrol
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 638
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 10:08:15 AM
 #1688

Time is of the essence. I am interested in working with highly talented authors, but unfortunately philosophical differences and differences in understanding how to succeed usually preclude such close working relationships.
I am sure your arrogance also plays a role.
chompyZ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 291
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 12:03:29 PM
 #1689

Time is of the essence. I am interested in working with highly talented authors, but unfortunately philosophical differences and differences in understanding how to succeed usually preclude such close working relationships.
I am sure your arrogance also plays a role.


I do not know iamback, or whether he is who he claims to be [or trying to impersonate?], but I can only add to the conversation that I remember AnonyMint from the very very early of Darkcoin when only a few believed that anonymous mixing can be achieved in a decentralized manner without wallets getting emptied. 
AnonyMint came into the discussion out of nowhere when masternodes already worked (beta), claimed to be an internationally renowned programmer, and was not willing to talk to boyscouts. He drew a lot of antagonism from users.
Yet within a few posts and discussions with Evan (Darkcoin founder), he was quick to find weaknesses and attack vectors that no-one else saw, and how to bypass them. He gave several solutions, pointed to what he thought was the best (which was actually implemented later), and went on his way. He later came only once for 1-2 posts and disappeared again.

If this is really AnonyMint, I suggest you judge his input, rather than the style of writing, or his claims of accomplishments.
There were a few high-calibre coders in Darkcoin, and AnonyMint didn't seam to be any less, to say the least...

My 2 cents.
illodin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 1003


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 12:34:50 PM
 #1690

Yes, I am sure that iamback == AnonyMint.

Also even if I think he is super smart and knows a lot, sometimes I feel like he dismisses a lot of stuff with good potential too quickly. This probably stems from having too little time and so much to do. Or maybe he is just that good.
chompyZ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 291
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 02:15:55 PM
 #1691

... sometimes I feel like he dismisses a lot of stuff with good potential too quickly.

Yes, in Darkcoin's case I remember him also kind of dismissing it, but also contributing some great feedback.
Skycoin already has a top-notch dev. If there are good ideas, I'm sure he'll acknowledge them and they'll find their way in. As to community noise, OP has proven that he can disregard this and continue efforts in line of his beliefs.
Momimaus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 762
Merit: 500

Never back down !!!


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 03:51:05 PM
 #1692



1. A non-PoW consensus is DOA, because there isn't enough time to thresh out the issues and trust it before the global economy begins to collapse in 2016. For example, the selfish mining attack wasn't discovered (or let's say widely proven and recognized) until years after Satoshi published PoW. Thus, the serious marketplace isn't going to trust a novel non-PoW consensus. Instead I have designed a PoW system which resolves many of the issues that plague Bitcoin, including ASIC economics. Some hints are in my linked post above.


Why do you think it is too late when the economy crushes?
Cause there will be winning cryptocurrency?
Or cause BTC will skyrocket?
Or crypto goes bust accordingly?
So it´s the endgame? :-)

CoinTracking.info - Your personal Profit / Loss Portfolio Monitor and Tax Tool for all Digital Coins
CoinTracking is analyzing all your trades and generates in real time tons of useful information such as the profit / loss of your trades, your balances, realized and unrealized gains, reports for tax declaration and many more. For Bitcoin and over 3000 altcoins, assets and commodities.
Get 10% discount for all packages or create your own affiliate link to get 20% for every sale.
iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 08:18:15 PM
Last edit: February 16, 2015, 08:53:14 PM by iamback
 #1693

Time is of the essence. I am interested in working with highly talented authors, but unfortunately philosophical differences and differences in understanding how to succeed usually preclude such close working relationships.
I am sure your arrogance also plays a role.

In my prior post, I was just saying that the likelihood of the skycoin author and I agreeing on the various priorities is rare. That is not boasting, rather it is lamenting the fact that very smart programmers are difficult to find, and finding two that can work closely together is even more rare. Especially when I've already identified that although he and I share the long range idealistic goals, I have some very different ideas about priorities of how to realistically arrive at the end goal. That doesn't mean he is wrong, rather it means I expressed my opinion. I recognize it is your prerogative, if you want to dismiss my opinion as being not worthy of your attention.

I felt obligated to post my opinion because of some who PM me occasionally to ask my opinion of altcoins. Also by implying I am potentially interested to work with him (but no promises) if priority set can be agreed upon, I am implying I think he is smarter than me in some areas where my skills are weaker (specifically he appears to be more erudite on the math of cryptography than I am), because I prefer to work with people who complement my strengths. Some of the technical terminology he uses is foreign to me, suggesting he has deeper knowledge than I do in cryptography and relevant research. What I bring to the table is experience, especially in achieving million user success. I am turning 50 years old in June 2015. So my age is also working against me at this juncture. I have a blog.

I have also complimented him in prior post, as well as pointing out a terse overview on some flaws I think exist in his priority set. Note I didn't expend more than a few minutes analyzing the situation, because indeed I am very overloaded on other matters at this time and because I didn't see much hope of anything fruitful coming from investing my time here. If I receive some signal otherwise, I might invest more time here by reordering my priorities on my existing todo list.

Here is a photo of myself (Shelby Moore) in 1993 - 1995 when I worked on Fractal Design Painter (world's first commercial million user natural media simulation painting app) which is now marketed as Corel Painter. You can find my name listed on the Painter 3.1 splash screen at the aforementioned link and also find my name as a contributor to the design of CSS2.1. Also you can verify my photo below is hosted at coolpage.com and verify for example at Download.com (only one of the download sites) that Cool Page attained 700,000 downloads from 1998 to 2003 (when the internet was 1/10 the population).


Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 09:07:08 PM
Last edit: February 16, 2015, 09:25:49 PM by iamback
 #1694


1. A non-PoW consensus is DOA, because there isn't enough time to thresh out the issues and trust it before the global economy begins to collapse in 2016. For example, the selfish mining attack wasn't discovered (or let's say widely proven and recognized) until years after Satoshi published PoW. Thus, the serious marketplace isn't going to trust a novel non-PoW consensus. Instead I have designed a PoW system which resolves many of the issues that plague Bitcoin, including ASIC economics. Some hints are in my linked post above.

Why do you think it is too late when the economy crushes?
Cause there will be winning cryptocurrency?
Or cause BTC will skyrocket?
Or crypto goes bust accordingly?
So it´s the endgame? :-)

Yes either crypto-currency is superseded by some fiat electronic currency[1] or there will be an insurmountable inertia for a crypto-currency (probably Bitcoin) with the rise in "off the grid" Private Assets (gold, Bitcoin, real estate, collectibles, etc) that will accompany the Sovereign Big Bang October 2015. I follow Martin Armstrong's computer model (which tracks 32,000 global political-economic variables and had $100+ million of investment in historical data) which hasn't been wrong since it was created in the early 1980s.

Note I currently believe the most likely outcome is a global fiat digital currency and Bitcoin will become one in the same[1][2][3].

There can only be one winner for a global electronic currency.

If you did some digging into my archives for my prior usernames, you'd see I correctly predicted all the major turning points price moves in Bitcoin and also gold. I even publicly nailed the big moves in silver in 2011 a year before.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.0

[2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=365141.msg10475702#msg10475702

[3] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=160612.0

Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
Momimaus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 762
Merit: 500

Never back down !!!


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 09:40:33 PM
 #1695


1. A non-PoW consensus is DOA, because there isn't enough time to thresh out the issues and trust it before the global economy begins to collapse in 2016. For example, the selfish mining attack wasn't discovered (or let's say widely proven and recognized) until years after Satoshi published PoW. Thus, the serious marketplace isn't going to trust a novel non-PoW consensus. Instead I have designed a PoW system which resolves many of the issues that plague Bitcoin, including ASIC economics. Some hints are in my linked post above.

Why do you think it is too late when the economy crushes?
Cause there will be winning cryptocurrency?
Or cause BTC will skyrocket?
Or crypto goes bust accordingly?
So it´s the endgame? :-)

Yes either crypto-currency is superseded by some fiat electronic currency[1] or there will be an insurmountable inertia for a crypto-currency (probably Bitcoin) with the rise in "off the grid" Private Assets (gold, Bitcoin, real estate, collectibles, etc) that will accompany the Sovereign Big Bang October 2015. I follow Martin Armstrong's computer model (which tracks 32,000 global political-economic variables and had $100+ million of investment in historical data) which hasn't been wrong since it was created in the early 1980s.

Note I currently believe the most likely outcome is a global fiat digital currency and Bitcoin will become one in the same[1][2][3].

There can only be one winner for a global electronic currency.

If you did some digging into my archives for my prior usernames, you'd see I correctly predicted all the major turning points price moves in Bitcoin and also gold. I even publicly nailed the big moves in silver in 2011 a year before.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=557732.0

[2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=365141.msg10475702#msg10475702

[3] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=160612.0


Alrigth, thank you.
You have obviously an insane amount of knowledge about Bitcoin and economics.
And I haven´t read everything, but what I read sounds absolutely possible.

But lets take it a bit further. I think that this whole currency/ fight fiat thing is doomed to fail.
But what I find really interesting, are projects which don´t focus on the currency side but rather on the functional side.
So if I may ask, what do you think about Ethereum/Maidsafe/Skycoin and maybe NXT?
All this projects aim a purpose and not so much the currency aspect.


@DEV:  Maybe you should consider sending a signal. ;-)  Could be a huge opportunity.



CoinTracking.info - Your personal Profit / Loss Portfolio Monitor and Tax Tool for all Digital Coins
CoinTracking is analyzing all your trades and generates in real time tons of useful information such as the profit / loss of your trades, your balances, realized and unrealized gains, reports for tax declaration and many more. For Bitcoin and over 3000 altcoins, assets and commodities.
Get 10% discount for all packages or create your own affiliate link to get 20% for every sale.
iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 09:57:53 PM
Last edit: February 24, 2015, 11:40:11 PM by iamback
 #1696

But lets take it a bit further. I think that this whole currency/ fight fiat thing is doomed to fail.


The linked post mentions my hope for a bifurcation of currency due to a rising active capital Knowledge Age and dying passive capital Industrial Age (c.f. the "Economic Devastation" and "Dark Enlightenment" threads) because the latter will be trying to parasite on the former (NSA et al) thus a break away currency can rise orthogonal to the inevitable global economic currency. I view Bitcoin as a Trojan Horse that (perhaps planted to?) siphons off inertia towards the former that would be truly anonymous and fast enough for micropayments. But Bitcoin is also a reserve currency for altcoins and provides liquidity (easier to do a decentralized exchange to/from BTC than fiat), so it can also be leveraged by an upstart former.

I would approach the marketing of an altcoin with such a goal in mind.

But what I find really interesting, are projects which don´t focus on the currency side but rather on the functional side.
So if I may ask, what do you think about Ethereum/Maidsafe/Skycoin and maybe NXT?
All this projects aim a purpose and not so much the currency aspect.

Yes the Knowledge Age needs certain functionality. Priorities need to be set based on which are the largest and most realistic markets.

I analyzed MaidSafe and formulated a negative opinion.[1]

I have strong reasons to prefer competing merge mined chains instead of Ethereum's "everyone computes everything" morass.

NXT is proof-of-share which I believe is DOA (in terms of scaling to take over the world, no way to distribute more coins).

[1]https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=877398.msg9690423#msg9690423
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=864659.msg9594071#msg9594071
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=883512.msg9759657#msg9759657

Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 10:27:58 PM
 #1697

The fact that it is a meshnet/darknet and messaging system, comes for free. Its just a very stripped down version of Multiprotocol Label Switching in a cryptographic namespace. It also replaces BGP and the whole thing is 2000 lines.

The government has been trying to push BGPSEC to replace BGP. The internet is currently a network of independent networks peered over BGP. BGPSEC replaces the peer-to-peer internet with a hierarchical central certificate authority. It allows the government to use court orders to shut off internet traffic for non-compliant hosts.

Here is my post from Oct 2010 on the BGPSEC threat:

http://goldwetrust.up-with.com/t112p90-computers#3789


Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 16, 2015, 11:12:09 PM
Last edit: February 16, 2015, 11:23:57 PM by iamback
 #1698

... sometimes I feel like he dismisses a lot of stuff with good potential too quickly.

Yes, in Darkcoin's case I remember him also kind of dismissing it, but also contributing some great feedback.
Skycoin already has a top-notch dev. If there are good ideas, I'm sure he'll acknowledge them and they'll find their way in. As to community noise, OP has proven that he can disregard this and continue efforts in line of his beliefs.

I still think Darkcoin can't scale, but I also thought it was worthwhile experiment to thresh out the limitations of CoinJoin (which I btw was the first to point out in Gmaxell's CoinJoin thread) and I like Evan so I tried to help out.

I am not dismissing without having a reason for doing so. Have I been proven wrong (on altcoins, gmaxell has caught me in technical errors) even once yet? (I don't think so).

Agreed the dev of skycoin ostensibly has skills I don't have and has similar concerns as I do about the future. That is why I am bothering to post here. For example, Gmaxell has those research level cryptography skills I don't have, but he doesn't have the same concerns that I do (and I also find him abrasively closed-minded). Note I am autodidactic so I can attain the skills I need, but as I wrote, "time is of the essence". Maximum division-of-labor applies in spades here.

Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
skycoin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 498
Merit: 500


View Profile WWW
February 17, 2015, 06:31:09 AM
Last edit: July 05, 2017, 05:40:09 AM by skycoin
 #1699

Someone PM'ed me links to the OP and the following two posts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=380441.msg10445540#msg10445540
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=380441.msg10475089#msg10475089

I formerly posted under the usernames AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, and UnunoctiumTestacles (and a couple others I don't recall). I have particularly relevant post in the On the Longest Chain Rule thread.

The skycoin author appears to be possess considerable technical knowledge. And he writes clearly with high information density.

Many of his goals mirror mine. I am also an accomplished programmer.

However, it only took me a few seconds to see several issues that I believe ruin any chance of his success. I speak from experience in coding and marketing million user commercial software projects. I hope he takes this as constructive criticism and not as an attempt to hurt his project. I currently have no investments nor vested interest in any competing crypto-currency.

1. A non-PoW consensus is DOA, because there isn't enough time to thresh out the issues and trust it before the global economy begins to collapse in 2016. For example, the selfish mining attack wasn't discovered (or let's say widely proven and recognized) until years after Satoshi published PoW. Thus, the serious marketplace isn't going to trust a novel non-PoW consensus. Instead I have designed a PoW system which resolves many of the issues that plague Bitcoin, including ASIC economics. Some hints are in my linked post above.

Also I have some mathematical intuition that avoiding the 51% attack will always tradeoff security in another facet.

2. Afaics, he has absolutely no marketing acumen. He wants to go directly to replacing the internet infrastructure without a viable marketing scheme for ramping up.

3. He doesn't have the most essential quality of success in software, which is to ship something in high demand first. Instead he wants to tinker with every feature under the moon.

4. If I was improving Tor, I'd make it high latency and make is more secure, not less secure for higher bandwidth.

Time is of the essence. I am interested in working with highly talented authors, but unfortunately philosophical differences and differences in understanding how to succeed usually preclude such close working relationships.

There are two aspects of marketing
1. Getting people to use it
2. Public relations, media relations
3. Community relations

For #1. If people are not using it because it is useful and because It meets a need they have, then its useless and no amount of marketing will ensure adaption.

I was one of the first bittorrent users. I was downloading television episodes with bitornado when the client looked like this.



Bitorrent did not succeed because it was the best marketed program. The usability was horrible. It succeeded because it met a need that people had and because it worked. Does Bitcoin or Dogecoin or Ripple or Ethereum meet a need people have? In some sense, Dogecoin is more legitimate than Bitcoin and has been more successful at achieving adaption and building a community and user base.

"Failure" is also relative. The infrastructure for Skycoin is useful to me personally and I would still use it, even as the only user. Skycoin could have 10x the number of users of Bitcoin and still be considered a failure, by most criteria. There is not even a single cryptocoin to date that has more users than Farmville. In that sense, every single coin that exists is a failure.

- What is Bitcoin's user acquisition strategy and what does Bitcoin do to drive new users?
- Why would someone use Bitcoin over using a credit card?
- Why would someone use Bitcoin over fiat, when a stable currency like USD is available?
- Is there a reason to own Bitcoin or has Bitcoin and the alts become a real money forex trading game. Did Satoshi invent a legitimate challenger to fiat currency or did he invent a fantasy football altcoin trading game? The way I see people using Bitcoin, the new users and how they trade back and forth between Dogecoin, Litecoin and Bitcoin and thrive on volatility suggests a gambling, fantasy football like behavior rather the use of Bitcoin/alts as a tool for facilitating real economic exchange or production.

Different measures of success exist
- Is the coin and software useful for the people who use it, does it a satisfy a need they have. Is this something they will use or something they will download and open once and forget about.
- How many users does the coin have, how widely is it used
- What is the price or marketcap for the coin


1. A non-PoW consensus is DOA, because there isn't enough time to thresh out the issues and trust it before the global economy begins to collapse in 2016. For example, the selfish mining attack wasn't discovered (or let's say widely proven and recognized) until years after Satoshi published PoW. Thus, the serious marketplace isn't going to trust a novel non-PoW consensus. Instead I have designed a PoW system which resolves many of the issues that plague Bitcoin, including ASIC economics. Some hints are in my linked post above.

Also I have some mathematical intuition that avoiding the 51% attack will always tradeoff security in another facet.


Yes. In Skycoin the 51% attack does not matter. The network could be 51% attacked twenty times a day and almost no one would care.

Skycoin has different mathematical properties than Bitcoin and is stricter. If you are trading coins back and forth between five people in a closed network, the 51% attack does not affect them. You need a private key of someone in the transaction chain to do any damage in a Skycoin 51% attack. There is no transaction malleability in Skycoin. Almost ever will have exactly the same outputs and same balances and same transaction histories on both the original chain and the fork, except the attacker and people they were trading coins with. If there is a fork in the chain, it just copies the transactions over from the other chains.

The 51% attack is only going to affect people day trading with shady people and gambling sites.  It will not affect commerce transactions very much. If an exchange follows best security practices and keeps the user wallets segregated, there worse attack is pretty mild.

Bitcoin is doing 100 million dollars a day transaction volume. Total transaction volume in Bitcoin is about 200,000 Bitcoins. Bitcoin has transaction malleability, this means that if someone 51% attack and rolls back transactions in the last hour, then about 4 million dollars and 10,000 Bitcoin in transactions balances will be screwed up. A rollback attack going back 24 hours could be 100 million in damages and up to 200,000 Bitcoins. An attacker can roll back any transaction in Bitcoin.

In Skycoin, they cannot affect or modify a transaction chain without knowing a private key for an address used in that chain of transactions. So if five banks are just trading back and forth between each other for settlement and they all have good wallet security, the 51% attack would not even be noticed. Their balances are the same. That is assuming, the 51% attack is even mathematically possible, that someone bothers expending the resources to attempt it and that it succeeds.

If someone manages to 51% attack Skycoin (which may be possible, but is mathematically unlikely) merchants will sing and dance with great rejoicement because losses will be so much less than for a Visa charge back. Many merchants sell laptops and make less than 5% margin on each laptop. Someone claims they didnt get the laptop and the merchant loses $1000, does not get the laptop back AND has to pay Visa an $80 fee. The company has to sell 25 laptops to make back the cost of the loss of a single fraud. If someone steals a credit card and buys a laptop with it, Visa does not take the loss, Visa tries to push the loss on the merchant.

The Skycoin consensus algorithm and the ledger are separate. The consensus system is modular and can be swapped out. If there is a better algorithm five years from now, we can just swap out the consensus for the new one. The ledger and coin balances will be completely unchanged.

Skycoin
- fixes existing problems with Bitcoin
- future proofs Bitcoin
- eliminates the death spiral conditions that Bitcoin has engineered in


1. A non-PoW consensus is DOA, because there isn't enough time to thresh out the issues and trust it before the global economy begins to collapse in 2016. For example, the selfish mining attack wasn't discovered (or let's say widely proven and recognized) until years after Satoshi published PoW. Thus, the serious marketplace isn't going to trust a novel non-PoW consensus. Instead I have designed a PoW system which resolves many of the issues that plague Bitcoin, including ASIC economics. Some hints are in my linked post above.

Also I have some mathematical intuition that avoiding the 51% attack will always tradeoff security in another facet.


It is 100% true. There are severe tradeoffs. There are tradeoffs, faster consensus times for Skycoin type relational consensus means that a smaller number of nodes are required to DDoS the network. However, people can react and remove the nodes from their trust lists.

There will be issues and they will need to be worked out.

Look at Skycoin Coinjoin
- https://github.com/skycoin/skycoin/blob/master/src/coin/transactions.go

A transaction is just
1> A list of output hashes, being spent
2> A list of signatures authorizing the outputs to be spent (signature of hash of inner part of transaction)
3> A list of outputs to be created

Coins cannot be created or destroyed. The number of coins in has to equal number of coins out. Transaction fees are in "coinhours".

There is no difference between normal and coinjoin transactions.
- Two people choose the outputs they want to spend, the outputs they want to create, send to remote server.
- The server creates a transaction and scrambles orders of outputs in/out. Then sends it to each person
- Each person sends the signatures for their outputs to the server
- The coinjoin server injects the transaction into the network

- The coinjoin server cannot steal the coins
- only the coinjoin server knows how many people are involved (1, 2, 4?)
- only the coinjoin server knows which outptus belong to who
- there is no difference between coinjoin and normal transactions (they look exactly the same)

The signature in the ith slot is for the address owning the ith output. The inner hash of the transaction is hashed with hash of output being spent, then this is signed with the private key owning the output.

So it is very simple compared to other coinjoin systems.

iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 17, 2015, 07:38:31 AM
 #1700

If there is a fork in the chain, it just copies the transactions over from the other chains.

PoW can do this too and (probably) with similar limitations.

Bitcoin is doing 100 million dollars a day transaction volume. Total transaction volume in Bitcoin is about 200,000 Bitcoins. Bitcoin has transaction malleability, this means that if someone 51% attack and rolls back transactions in the last hour, then about 4 million dollars and 10,000 Bitcoin in transactions balances will be screwed up. A rollback attack going back 24 hours could be 100 million in damages and up to 200,000 Bitcoins. An attacker can roll back any transaction in Bitcoin.

I had linked to the math of my solution to short-term (rented hardware) 51% attacks for PoW. Long-term 51% attacks are not a threat, because the community will organize against them politically.

The Skycoin consensus algorithm and the ledger are separate. The consensus system is modular and can be swapped out. If there is a better algorithm five years from now, we can just swap out the consensus for the new one. The ledger and coin balances will be completely unchanged.

Ditto for PoW altcoins, so why not start with PoW first since it is more proven?

If you are counting on the consensus algorithm driving adoption of your coin beyond a limited set of hardcore zealots, I think you have not done your marketing research.

Also I have some mathematical intuition that avoiding the 51% attack will always tradeoff security in another facet.

It is 100% true. There are severe tradeoffs. There are tradeoffs, faster consensus times for Skycoin type relational consensus means that a smaller number of nodes are required to DDoS the network. However, people can react and remove the nodes from their trust lists.

There will be issues and they will need to be worked out.

Exactly.

Skycoin
- fixes existing problems with Bitcoin
- future proofs Bitcoin
- eliminates the death spiral conditions that Bitcoin has engineered in

Yawn. This is an example of how to NOT do marketing communication.

For #1. If people are not using it because it is useful and because It meets a need they have, then its useless and no amount of marketing will ensure adaption.

...

Bitorrent did not succeed because it was the best marketed program.

Correct except you seem to not understand that marketing research is part of the process of making sure your product fulfills critical need in the market. Marketing is not about hyperbole salesmenship. Marketing is about research, planning, and strategy.

- Why would someone use Bitcoin over using a credit card?
- Why would someone use Bitcoin over fiat, when a stable currency like USD is available?

Cool That is marketing.

The way I see people using Bitcoin, the new users and how they trade back and forth between Dogecoin, Litecoin and Bitcoin and thrive on volatility suggests a gambling, fantasy football like behavior rather the use of Bitcoin/alts as a tool for facilitating real economic exchange or production.

One man's game is another man's profession. Any activity that people spend money on is bonafide, but we also have to ask is it sustainable (e.g. productive).

Look at Skycoin Coinjoin

CoinJoin doesn't scale and/or it leaks anonymity (e.g. to the masternodes). It is not an autonomous block chain mixing thus it is inferior to one ring signatures. One time ring signatures can be implemented to be prune-able.

Bitcoin and Dogecoin are the only assets that the government cannot seize.

I disagree. The governments can regulate  (51% of the network hashrate) the non-anonymous miners, then they can control which traceable coins can not transact.

When you are ready to get serious, send me your BitMessage public key.

Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 ... 199 »
  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!