Is POW systematically doomed to get a huge monster in its midst?

[spartacusrex]

..I have fucking Cherokee genetics.

Well I have a Cherokee Jeep.

..an offense deserving capital punishment.  .. beat the shit out of a much larger American white boy .. They will mess you up if you do. Ever heard of the Balangiga massacre? .. ..a bounty “per head” of captured Japanese soldiers .. delivered many severed heads.. traded Japanese ears for bounty.. killed numerous men for acting with high pride. Just sliced them up with a bolo... etc etc etc..

err.. ?

If you want to stay on the technological discussion, then I leave the native tribe side of myself off to the side.

Please let's. I publicly request an end to this hostility and a return to a more jovial discussion.

-------------------------

Even if you removed transaction fees and put in a perpetual block reward, it would still centralize because of the economics of mining and the power-law distribution of wealth.

By fee-less mining I mean no fee AND no block reward. You can't pay anyone anything. Can't outsource to a third party. Otherwise fighting breaks out.. and in the end.. There can be only One (You know this..).

As far as I can see, without fees, any system would be vulnerable to DoS attack. Got any reference to prove me wrong?

A system like IOTA. The work is the fee. (But not IOTA - as it has it's own quirks. Something new.)

[1714056169]

1714056169

[1714056169]

1714056169

[vapourminer]

Dude, wakeup, there is no TRB fork.

for want of a better term, there are two coins existing in the current core chain. legacy coins (trb/satoshi/whatever you want tot call them) and segwit coins. sooner or later there will be a split to separate legacy coins out.

It is absolutely nonsense! Why should anybody suggest such a two-in-one perception at all? Why not n-in-1?.

And why should such a split occur at all and how is it going to convince people, economic majority or even a noticeable economic minority about stealing funds from SW transactions by miners for the god sake?

right now the chain core is on and the chain that trb/satoshicoin/whatever is on are the same chain. splitting it out is trivial. being here since 2011 i have seen vast amounts of fud, greed, lies, power grabs, misdirection, you name it. the amount of forks is ridiculous and any fork that can enrich some group (even by a seemingly small amount at the time) is pretty much inevitable.

i am not telling you to use any particular chain, coin or address format. thats totally up to you. i do recommend you do your own research in such things. and never underestimate power or greed.

you have the freedom to use and store coins in any way or format you wish. as i and anyone else does.

[vapourminer]

Well I have a Cherokee Jeep.

another XJ guy. cool 

[aliashraf]

Even if you removed transaction fees and put in a perpetual block reward, it would still centralize because of the economics of mining and the power-law distribution of wealth.

By fee-less mining I mean no fee AND no block reward. You can't pay anyone anything. Can't outsource to a third party. Otherwise fighting breaks out.. and in the end.. There can be only One (You know this..).

As far as I can see, without fees, any system would be vulnerable to DoS attack. Got any reference to prove me wrong?

A system like IOTA. The work is the fee. (But not IOTA - as it has it's own quirks. Something new.)

No block reward & no fees <==> tangle (IOTA)
It is true specially considering your underlined(by me) phrase: the fee being the work

IOTA and tangles are out of context. Let's put it this way and stick with our plain old blockchain technology. Note that eliminating transaction fees alone and keeping block rewards or vice versa, won't help your argument about de-incentivizing centralization attempts in bitcoin.

[monsterer2]

A system like IOTA. The work is the fee. (But not IOTA - as it has it's own quirks. Something new.)

You mean like this: https://github.com/wildbunny/docs/blob/master/T.E.T.O-draft.pdf ?

[spartacusrex]

A system like IOTA. The work is the fee. (But not IOTA - as it has it's own quirks. Something new.)

You mean like this: https://github.com/wildbunny/docs/blob/master/T.E.T.O-draft.pdf ?

 .. there you go!..  

The Mining Subsidy.. It's not clear to me quite how that works..  What Stops people fighting over it  - or do they just compete as normal ?

How long does it take for a branch to become heavy enough to be considered final ? How do you remove the need for the coordinator that IOTA uses ?

Are you knocking this up and launching ? ..


 

[aliashraf]

As I said before, better to focus on blockchain technology.
My Proposal for improving bitcoin to fix pooling pressure problems, Proof of Collaborative Work (PoCW) is an exemplary instance of what PoW is capable of and, back to op and this topic, is not doomed to centralization.

I'm not assuming that proposal as being 100% correct (I have yet to implement and prove it practical, I admit) but I suppose it is already a proof for what I  want to put an emphasis on: PoW is new technology and a lot of opportunities exist for it to be improved and fixed to resist ways more effective against centralization threats.

[monsterer2]

.. there you go!..  

The Mining Subsidy.. It's not clear to me quite how that works..  What Stops people fighting over it  - or do they just compete as normal ?

Everyone on the path of greatest cumulative difficulty gets a mining reward proportional to their chosen difficulty. The big departure from bitcoin is there is no competition to mine the best block, since only the sender of the single transaction within the block can 'mine' it.

How long does it take for a branch to become heavy enough to be considered final ? How do you remove the need for the coordinator that IOTA uses ?

Are you knocking this up and launching ? ..

How long in real time is hard to quantify, but its very easy to quantify finality - it's simply when enough PoW gets built on top of the transaction in question to make any attack B/E, where 'enough' is equal to the sum of all the block rewards above the transaction.

This doesn't need coordinators because it has a mining incentive.

I'm not planing on taking this any further as a cryptocurrency - simply because it doesn't support lite nodes. No DAG design can support lite nodes without extra centralisation. As @anunymint noted previous, satoshi didn't make any mistakes - blocks are essential for adoption.

[spartacusrex]

Everyone on the path of greatest cumulative difficulty gets a mining reward proportional to their chosen difficulty. The big departure from bitcoin is there is no competition to mine the best block, since only the sender of the single transaction within the block can 'mine' it.

This would be a perpetual subsidy - not one that runs out ?

Is there no competition to mine the most max POW transactions, and accrue the most mining subsidy ? A professional miner as you say in your paper.

[spartacusrex]

Sorry - zero sum..

The subsidy is equal to the cost of mining..

I see.

[Wind_FURY]

Dude, wakeup, there is no TRB fork.

for want of a better term, there are two coins existing in the current core chain. legacy coins (trb/satoshi/whatever you want tot call them) and segwit coins. sooner or later there will be a split to separate legacy coins out.

It is absolutely nonsense! Why should anybody suggest such a two-in-one perception at all? Why not n-in-1?.

And why should such a split occur at all and how is it going to convince people, economic majority or even a noticeable economic minority about stealing funds from SW transactions by miners for the god sake?

right now the chain core is on and the chain that trb/satoshicoin/whatever is on are the same chain. splitting it out is trivial. being here since 2011 i have seen vast amounts of fud, greed, lies, power grabs, misdirection, you name it. the amount of forks is ridiculous and any fork that can enrich some group (even by a seemingly small amount at the time) is pretty much inevitable.

i am not telling you to use any particular chain, coin or address format. thats totally up to you. i do recommend you do your own research in such things. and never underestimate power or greed.

you have the freedom to use and store coins in any way or format you wish. as i and anyone else does.

But it would be safer and better to use a legacy address for cold storage if anyone does not want to miss out on more "air drops", forked coins, or whatever they call it. You have nothing to lose but maybe some to gain.

I disagree with many of anunymint's ideas, but storing your coins in a legacy address is good advice.

[monsterer2]

This would be a perpetual subsidy - not one that runs out ?

Is there no competition to mine the most max POW transactions, and accrue the most mining subsidy ? A professional miner as you say in your paper.

The subsidy is perpetual, yes. There is no competition to mine a particular block; all miners can mine their own max difficulty blocks - they just have to be careful not to do so outside the path of most cumulative difficulty. Doing it like this maximises PoW efficiency, since no PoW is 'wasted' in orphans, it all adds to the security of the DAG.

[thejaytiesto]

I bet you someone comes up with a fee-less POW based chain that doesn't centralise the mining. That'll be our little contest.

This sounds the same as someone coming up with a perpetual motion machine. "fee-less POW" probably breaks some fundamental laws of physics. I can't even finish an IQ test and see these things as obvious, cmon now. Maybe try again in a couple 100 years and we may have some mind blowing stuff which allows for very reduced fees at big volume transactions without compromising security and decentralization but certainly not "fee-less".

[aliashraf]

For very low fees, No need to wait 100 years. I think I'm coming to something, will keep you informed 

[spartacusrex]

I bet you someone comes up with a fee-less POW based chain that doesn't centralise the mining. That'll be our little contest.

This sounds the same as someone coming up with a perpetual motion machine. "fee-less POW" probably breaks some fundamental laws of physics. I can't even finish an IQ test and see these things as obvious, cmon now. Maybe try again in a couple 100 years and we may have some mind blowing stuff which allows for very reduced fees at big volume transactions without compromising security and decentralization but certainly not "fee-less".

Fee as in financial fee.. no perpetual motion required, users will obviously have to put something in (probably POW.. who knows.. maybe user based POCW)

T.E.T.O.  (^^ above) has a fee-less POW based chain (DAG) that doesn't centralise the mining (AND no coordinator). It has it's particular issues ( seem like generic DAG issues ).. but it's pretty close. (Congrats to Monstererer2! for coming up with an original design)

IOTA has no fees, doesn't centralise the mining, and almost works, but they have the Coordinator issue.

2 down.. and only an infinite number of different fee-less blockchain algos still to go..

..

It won't take 100 years to crack this nut 

ps - I admit I am also working on a coin (fee-less) - aren't we all !? (win or lose - It's just too much fun)

[aliashraf]

I bet you someone comes up with a fee-less POW based chain that doesn't centralise the mining. That'll be our little contest.

This sounds the same as someone coming up with a perpetual motion machine. "fee-less POW" probably breaks some fundamental laws of physics. I can't even finish an IQ test and see these things as obvious, cmon now. Maybe try again in a couple 100 years and we may have some mind blowing stuff which allows for very reduced fees at big volume transactions without compromising security and decentralization but certainly not "fee-less".

Fee as in financial fee.. no perpetual motion required, users will obviously have to put something in (probably POW.. who knows.. maybe user based POCW)

OR user assisted PoCW 

[snowwhitc01]

I'm not so updated with the latest pos evolutionเล่นไพ่ออนไลน์:p

[Traxo]

Every post from @anunymint apparently was deleted. The thread is now very difficult to understand because a significant portion of the discussion is missing.

Some of this thread was archived here and here.

[spartacusrex]

Every post from @anunymint apparently was deleted. The thread is now very difficult to understand because a significant portion of the discussion is missing.

.. that's not cool.

[thejaytiesto]

I bet you someone comes up with a fee-less POW based chain that doesn't centralise the mining. That'll be our little contest.

This sounds the same as someone coming up with a perpetual motion machine. "fee-less POW" probably breaks some fundamental laws of physics. I can't even finish an IQ test and see these things as obvious, cmon now. Maybe try again in a couple 100 years and we may have some mind blowing stuff which allows for very reduced fees at big volume transactions without compromising security and decentralization but certainly not "fee-less".

Fee as in financial fee.. no perpetual motion required, users will obviously have to put something in (probably POW.. who knows.. maybe user based POCW)

T.E.T.O.  (^^ above) has a fee-less POW based chain (DAG) that doesn't centralise the mining (AND no coordinator). It has it's particular issues ( seem like generic DAG issues ).. but it's pretty close. (Congrats to Monstererer2! for coming up with an original design)

IOTA has no fees, doesn't centralise the mining, and almost works, but they have the Coordinator issue.

2 down.. and only an infinite number of different fee-less blockchain algos still to go..

..

It won't take 100 years to crack this nut  

ps - I admit I am also working on a coin (fee-less) - aren't we all !? (win or lose - It's just too much fun)

Im not discouraging anyone to stop trying. However, remember that something only works when it's worth several billion dollars over a span of 10+ years, can handle state-sponsored attacks and so on.

I would like to see these alts in the #1 spot taking all the heat. #1 spot = gets the most attacks by hackers and attackers all over the world. Ultimate street creed if you fuck up the #1 crypto, so you must be prepared for that.

Every post from @anunymint apparently was deleted. The thread is now very difficult to understand because a significant portion of the discussion is missing.

What happened?

anyway there is an archive of his posts here:

https://archive.fo/lNr2W