[BOUNTY] 🔥🔥WINNER-GETS-ALL / PROOF-OF-TRANSACTION CONSENSUS DEBATE BOUNTY!🔥🔥

[ikealyou]

TAUcoin, has proposed a brand new consensus mechanism called Proof-of-Transactions. It proposes a fast circulation currency without inflation. Users collectively maintain the network security by doing normal economical behavior - transactions through time. With the technical innovation of "Proof Of Transaction", users are incentivized to making necessary transactions by sharing the future block reward. No advantage is given to accumulating wealth and hardware.
Learn about TAUCOIN here

We believe that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus mechanism when it comes to being:

•   The most secure decentralized network
•   The fairest decentralized network
•   The most environmentally friendly decentralized network

Let’s jump to the year 2040, with the assumptions that:
1.   Internet Speed has dramatically increased, from 4G to 10G.
2.   Coins (TAU) with Proof-of-Transaction mechanism are widely distributed to billions of holders
3.   TAU foundation team has successfully developed “automatic block sizes” that allows all miners to define their size and time of block generation.

The increase of internet speed allows decentralized nodes to communicate faster. With the implementation of automatic block sizes, POT network will be able to support 1000 times more transactions than today, which is about roughly 10 billion transactions every day.

By Shannon’s theory, it is impossible for one node to collect all transactions in a world-wide competitive decentralized network. Thus, there will be thousands of “mining clubs” around the world to pick up transactions from different parts of the network. They are all competing on reducing commissions and capturing as many transactions as fast as they can. Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to form a 51% attack to obtain any significant share of the 10 billion fee based transactions daily, especially when one is trying to manipulate a massive amount of transactions in a 1 year sliding window.
*Proof-Of-Transaction Whitepaper*


Rules
1.   The debate starts today. Anyone in Bitcointalk is able to participate anytime until the end of the debate. The debate ends on the 30th of September.
2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.
3.   The community votes among the top 3 best arguments/ideas/proofs, and 1Million TAU + $1,000 worth of BTC are being awarded to the highest vote.
4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.
5.   The arguments/ideas/proofs are defined to be the first user to propose it under TAU’s bitcointalk thread, with supported evaluations.
6.   TAU foundation team’s arguments will not participate on the result voting. The winner of the debate can be anyone else, but TAU.
7.   TAU foundation team will reward users that propose an interesting point of view or idea. This is purely defined by the TAU foundation team; an act to encourage everyone to share their thinking.



Update:
Here is the finalist for our Debate bounty
- Akosipepot
- Lodyman
- Rexxarofmoknathal

Click to vote for your favourite debater, and help him win 1M TAU + $1000 worth of BTC!!!



Updates:

Upon further analysis, it has become our decision to disqualify Lodyman based on Rule No,2 "Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed."

All votes for Lodyman will not be counted and the debate vote will end on the assigned date.



Final update: Congratulations to Akosipepot for winning our debate bounty! Please get in touch with us to claim your rewards!

[bobthegrownup]

Its the first time ive ever seen a Debate bounty. Too bad I can't participate 

[Parodium]

1 MILLION TAU! AND $1,000? Now that's a generous challenge. Can't wait to see the innovative arguments and discussions people bring to the table, there's a huge amount of intelligent members here, so no doubt somebody will be able to rise to the challenge.

[tronghoa]

This is really new to me - debate bounty. Hope you will get many debate from good member here. Good luck guys.

[bobthegrownup]

This is really new to me - debate bounty. Hope you will get many debate from good member here. Good luck guys.

Don't be shy, you could be the first! Either you agree that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus or you can share your disagreement and win big!

[legendster]

All hands on deck, this could be a great marketing stunt or a great dud if not enough people show up. Let's try to get some of the heavy hitters on the forum interested in here. I'll take part for sure.


For anyone interested. I still haven't decided whether I would speak FOR Tau or AGAINST it. Even though I support the idea.

[freepellent]

I welcome this project , first of all as search for an alternative to POW and POS. The need for consensus alternative is well outlined at the start of the whitepaper.  That is , I do not want to be a trader or speculator to earn POW reward.  I do not want to collect or stake coins, I just want use crypto instead of fiat.

[bobthegrownup]

I welcome this project , first of all as search for an alternative to POW and POS. The need for consensus alternative is well outlined at the start of the whitepaper.  That is , I do not want to be a trader or speculator to earn POW reward.  I do not want to collect or stake coins, I just want use crypto instead of fiat.

This guy gets it 

[imorpheus]

Dear Ubiubi18, thank you for the nice analysis and introduce ubi space. Regarding Sybil attacks on universal basic income,ubi crypto project, Taucoin is not an ubi project but requiring user effort or money to secure coins. Accumulating transation weight needs holders pay fees and compete to be packed up in next block. One part we soon put into whitepaper is miners need to pack higher transaction fee to increase own likelyhood to generate next block, which is randomness x fee in block. Therefore, holders transfer numerous coins among own addresses will have to pay attractive fees to be recogonized. These fees collected by miners will be distribute to club members according to the history transaction weight or transaction fee weight, between these two we have not decide.
I am in line with you on not doing centralized KYC and replacing pow/pos.

-iMorpheus

[rexxarofmoknathal]

Hi, I'm excited about POT and the challenge TAU raised against - I think it is a great, innovative project.

However, I have a few remarks I'd like to share.
The first remark is about the harvest club, in particular the club leader. I understand you provide incentives for club leaders and empower the 'poor' to take part in the mining process, but the issue I see is around the idea of shifting full reward control to the club leader, who first sets aside its own reward while the rest of the reward is split among the renaming club members via the club wiring protocol.
The way I see it, this opens a manipulative window for the club leader over the club members, which could be a great concern.
The way, I'd go around this issue is by calculating harvest power percentages from each member and allocating the reward accordingly and automatically, while allowing for +5-10% extra for the club leader as added benefit.

The second remark is based around the scalability issue. While I agree that there shouldn't be an 'upper bound for block size', I fail to see how the proposed solution ('...to let harvest club leaders (full nodes) determine their optimal block size') would work given that its all dependent on future block chain technology for bringing more bandwidth and shorter delays. Here, you have to decide on your balance between decentralized and security vs scalability and centralization.

Also, the whitepaper may need revisiting, there are a couple of typos.

[imorpheus]

Dear Rexx...
Very happy to receive the two points and encouragement. The first point of setup auto payment percentage to club members to reduce club leaders manipulation is very good idea. We will do something in that fashion. The 2nd point, we are actively researching how to achieve auto size or auto time interval to increase transaction speed. We found potentially using transaction fee accumulation in the transaction pending pool to replace the time element and let size to be adjustable seems to achieve ideal scalability on chain.

[imorpheus]

Exciting to debate the Sybil attack on Tau econemy. There are two types of participants: club member and club leader(miner). For members, the future reward to the essential transactions is a good to have bonus. In POW/POS, you need to pay for transacton without reward, because it is an essential transaction anyway.
When someone wants to benifit from transactions, they have to be miner or club leader. I will argue due to market compeitition to be leader for receiving profit is so intense, the overall profit will nearly equal to the cost of being a miner just similar to online stock brokers fee merely covering their cost. Even more, lead may have to subsidize the club for attract transactions. The business model of miners is not  from profittng on transaction reward but from other value add services as “reputation and brand” of leader is higher than members. Through leader reputation, you can issue credit, derivatives or insurance.
Another antiSybil layer in TAU, we use accumulative history transactions as weight rather than short time window, this creates additional difficulty in time horizon for attackers to build up weight.
Thanks to your suggestion, we do plan to switch using transaction fee than transaction numbers for weight accounting.

[akosipepot]

it is very difficult to form a 51% attack to obtain any significant share of the 10 billion fee based transactions daily, especially when one is trying to manipulate a massive amount of transactions in a 1-year sliding window.

Proof-of-transaction incentivizes users from an early stage to join a harvest club with the most harvest power. Because of this, it is unlikely that by the year 2040 there will be several thousand separate harvest clubs, as it is likely that one of the early large harvest clubs will become a majority pool, sucking up most of the new users that enter the network. In my estimation, by 2040 there will only be a few very large harvest clubs.

Potential resolution: Limit the number of members per harvest club to ~5,000.

Potential resolution 2: Require a physical authenticator for transactions.

Therefore, holders transfer numerous coins among own addresses will have to pay attractive fees to be recogonized. These fees collected by miners will be distribute to club members according to the history transaction weight or transaction fee weight.

I notice that later you state that you'll be using weighted transaction fee, rather than relative transaction number to determine the odds of who gets to mine the new block and receive the reward. However, this does not resolve the Sybil attack, it simply changes the nature of the attack. You assume that the the purpose of the sybil attack is to manipulate the network for financial gain, however, it can also be used to discredit the worth of the TAU blockchain and poison it from within. For example, if a bad actor with particularly deep pockets were to exclusively send high fee transactions in the scope of the 1-year window, then he would have the greatest chance of mining the new block. If the discrepancy between the transaction fees of the bad acting harvest club, and average harvest club is high enough, then they could mine and perhaps manipulate a significant fraction of the market, producing a situation where small, or poorly funded clubs simply cannot compete, and reducing the utility of the TAU blockchain for these individuals. A sudden increase in the transaction fees of one of the larger harvest clubs would also

Potential resolution: Limit the rate of change possible between the largest harvest clubs to ensure no club can suddenly (out-fee) the rest of the network.

We found potentially using transaction fee accumulation in the transaction pending pool to replace the time element and let size to be adjustable seems to achieve ideal scalability on chain.

Why not just fix the scaling to the relative change in transactions each month, or three months? And the relative change in the number of miners on the network.

For example if there was a 50% increase in number of transactions (A) in a 1 month period, and 50% increase in number miners (B), then there will be no scaling required. However, if either side of this is unbalanced (A /= B), then the percentage of block size increase can be calculated as A / B, if the number is below 1, then the block size is scaled down proportionally, if it is above 1, then it is scaled up proportionally

You also mention that TAUcoin is the fairest blockchain because it uses normal transactional activity in order to determine who has the highest chance of mining the next block and hence receiving their deserved fraction of the reward. However, this doesn't truly fit the definition of fair, as TAU essential inherits the biases in the users spending power. For example, a wealthy user and a poor user both start using TAU for their daily activities, the wealthy user is able to send more transactions as they have more disposable income and can afford to pay higher fees, whereas a poorer user will typically make fewer transactions, of smaller size and hence smaller fee. This system is therefore biased towards high net worth and high spending individuals.

Potential resolution: Rather than using simply the velocity of money as the main determinant of harvesting power, instead implement a second associated measure called transaction power. High power transactions would be those sent between high fee harvest clubs, and can hence be associated with high net worth. The true harvest power would be a ratio between the transaction power and transaction velocity, with transaction power acting to reduce harvest power, and transaction velocity acting to increase it. Though, overall this might incentivize network spam with low fee transactions.

[imorpheus]

Harvest club concentration is a potential problem. I am not sure 5000 limit could resolve it, since concentrator could run many nodes under one control. I wish the freedom for users to switch club can metigate the leadership risk. Physical authenticator is very centralized.
Sudden transaction fee massive increase is a problem for non-economical person. This is an area to dig into. Thanks for that.
Regarding to use transactions to replace time interval, most protocols such BTC and ETH have target block time interval to fit the network latency and allow information to arrive most of the nodes. Transactions missed past block has to wait until new block comes. This reduce the speed of the blockchain progress and cause traffic jam like red lights. In fact, the blockchain growth is  counted in block numbers rather than time. The content of a block is mostly transactions record. We propose using transaction numbers threshold to replace time interval for block generation. Transactions does not have to wait new time comes to be packed up. It just wait until the threshold, such as 5000 transactions packed. When there are lots of transactions in the pool, this will speed up the block generation. If there is less transactions, we use a bottom line time interval to allow the block to be generate.

- iMorpheus

[genie854]

Proof-of-transaction incentivizes users from an early stage to join a harvest club with the most harvest power. Because of this, it is unlikely that by the year 2040 there will be several thousand separate harvest clubs, as it is likely that one of the early large harvest clubs will become a majority pool, sucking up most of the new users that enter the network. In my estimation, by 2040 there will only be a few very large harvest clubs.

Potential resolution: Limit the number of members per harvest club to ~5,000.

Potential resolution 2: Require a physical authenticator for transactions.

Very deep insight into the mechanism.

I'd like to mention that the harvest power of the club you join doesn't affect your expected harvest reward, as long as the club is always harvesting. Harvest power and reward is exactly in linear proportion to transaction count. For this reason, putting limit on a single harvest club probably will not work, since splitting one harvest club into two will not change its combined harvest power (exactly the same chance of generating new block).

[imorpheus]

I agree there are always possibility on Sybil attack especially when the powerful Sybil purpose is to destroy network rather than making economical profit. This is the same as POW and POS 51% attack. Assuming the purpose is to destroy by 51% attack, the TAU foundation is always monitoring network and do best to counter 51% behavior. TAU has a bounty program and ICO program potentially runing for 20 years, during that process, TAU foundation accumulated massive transaction numbers and coins to resist 51%. I agree that for long period of time, TAU foundation itself has the power of 51% to destroy the network. But the goal of creating TAU by the foundation is not to destroy it but to promote it. There are certain trust has to be there to the foundation not destroy network by themself.
For recaptcha human verification, i think that is more for dAPP. On mainnet, we need to support programmable coins wiring API, it will cause huge infliction to enforce recaptcha onchain.
Thanks UBI18.

[bobthegrownup]

Potential resolution: Limit the rate of change possible between the largest harvest clubs to ensure no club can suddenly (out-fee) the rest of the network.

Reminds me of Grin coin and Cuckoo cycle POW. Nice recommendation

[akosipepot]

I agree there are always possibility on Sybil attack especially when the powerful Sybil purpose is to destroy network rather than making economical profit. This is the same as POW and POS 51% attack. Assuming the purpose is to destroy by 51% attack, the TAU foundation is always monitoring network and do best to counter 51% behavior. TAU has a bounty program and ICO program potentially runing for 20 years, during that process, TAU foundation accumulated massive transaction numbers and coins to resist 51%. I agree that for long period of time, TAU foundation itself has the power of 51% to destroy the network. But the goal of creating TAU by the foundation is not to destroy it but to promote it. There are certain trust has to be there to the foundation not destroy network by themself.
For recaptcha human verification, i think that is more for dAPP. On mainnet, we need to support programmable coins wiring API, it will cause huge infliction to enforce recaptcha onchain.
Thanks UBI18.

How will TAU intervene if a potential 51% attack is suspected? What mechanisms do you have in place to prevent a Sybil from disrupting the network if it manages to gain a majority share of the blocks or harvest power? Perhaps you could include a selective network rollback feature?

There are also some issues with TAUcoin being the fairest decentralized network, though it does depend on your definition of fair. According to Google's definition, fairness means "impartial and just treatment or behaviour without favouritism or discrimination." However, by using the number of transactions, or average fee of transactions per window time (e.g. 1 year), you inadvertently favor tholse who either have more money to spend, or are more actively engaged in crypto spending. It could be argued that the differences in opportunity for these TAU users means the distribution of block rewards will never be fair. Rather than favoring those with investment power such as POW or POS coins, POT instead favors those with spending power. Although you could argue that that they fairly earned these coins as per the rules set out in Proof-of-transaction, the truth is the distribution inherits the inequalities found in life.

You also mention that TAUcoin is the most environmentally friendly blockchain, this means that the effects of its operation must be smaller than any other blockchain currently operating. However, because TAUcoin requires harvest club leaders to run a full node, there is an additional carbon footprint associated with its operation, which may not be necessary. There are a number of other blockchains that do not require specialist hardware to operate nodes, for example, using mobile devices instead. Until TAU can move to a similar system, without requiring the production of additional dedicated hardware, it cannot claim to be the most environmentally friendly.

I also suspect that the TAU network will be unusually vulnerable to denial of service attacks, by requiring only the harvest club leader to run a full node, the reduce the number of attack points to just a few. Even if we have 10,000 harvest clubs each with 100,000 members (total 1B users by 2040), there would still only be 10,000 points of attack. This means that a particularly large harvest club could instigate a DDOS attack on its nearest competitors to quite easily achieve a 51% share of the network harvest power. I think this could be potentially resolved by having only the harvest leader require a full node, whilst also having 3-5 oracles per harvest club run a partial node to achieve majority consensus if the club leader gets taken down. The IPs of these oracles should be masked to prevent a DDOS. Ideally, these oracles should be running a partial node on a mainstream device, perhaps being built into the wallet application on iOS/PC/MAC and Android. It would be quite simple to implement a centralization attack on a network with so few nodes, as the harvest club power will automatically lead to users gravitating towards the clubs with the largest harvest power, hence leading to just a few very large harvest clubs by 2040.  

I recommend limiting the size of harvest clubs to prevent centralization attacks, whilst adding a backup to the club leader in the form of 3-5 oracles running a partial node.

[imorpheus]

Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.

[rudox]

I believe it good to be forward looking as TAUCoin is already planing ahead for the what will happen when the internet speed will be improved upon as regards speed, the project is taking a proactive action by introducing POT which will match the upcoming technology and have the client of TAUCoin benefit therefrom.

[genie854]

You also mention that TAUcoin is the most environmentally friendly blockchain, this means that the effects of its operation must be smaller than any other blockchain currently operating. However, because TAUcoin requires harvest club leaders to run a full node, there is an additional carbon footprint associated with its operation, which may not be necessary. There are a number of other blockchains that do not require specialist hardware to operate nodes, for example, using mobile devices instead. Until TAU can move to a similar system, without requiring the production of additional dedicated hardware, it cannot claim to be the most environmentally friendly.

I also suspect that the TAU network will be unusually vulnerable to denial of service attacks, by requiring only the harvest club leader to run a full node, the reduce the number of attack points to just a few. Even if we have 10,000 harvest clubs each with 100,000 members (total 1B users by 2040), there would still only be 10,000 points of attack. This means that a particularly large harvest club could instigate a DDOS attack on its nearest competitors to quite easily achieve a 51% share of the network harvest power. I think this could be potentially resolved by having only the harvest leader require a full node, whilst also having 3-5 oracles per harvest club run a partial node to achieve majority consensus if the club leader gets taken down. The IPs of these oracles should be masked to prevent a DDOS. Ideally, these oracles should be running a partial node on a mainstream device, perhaps being built into the wallet application on iOS/PC/MAC and Android. It would be quite simple to implement a centralization attack on a network with so few nodes, as the harvest club power will automatically lead to users gravitating towards the clubs with the largest harvest power, hence leading to just a few very large harvest clubs by 2040.  

For environmental friendliness, I think TAU is close to the best possible. It is running on already existing platforms such as PC and mobile phone. Energy consumption is significantly lower than POW with hash calculation. Yes, there is project with even lower hardware/energy requirement, but the difference is small.

For DDOS attack, TAU currently follows Bitcoin's communication protocol and transaction pool rules. As of today, nearly 10,000 Bitcoin full nodes are running and DDOS is not a major concern.

[jdeanne92]

This would be the best way to know more about this type of consensus mechanism since i only know POW and POS. And by the way the site is very user friendly.
I just be sitting in the corner and reading all the ideas shared on.

[imorpheus]

If anyone wants to be miner for TAU upcoming mainnet, we will help you and provide nice coins to start. Just message me....

[Snaguit321]

If anyone wants to be miner for TAU upcoming mainnet, we will help you and provide nice coins to start. Just message me....

I believe there are some sort of club and harvest right? will that be considered as staking?

I am amaze with the concept and the ease of transaction with TAU. The only concern im having right now is when its massively adopted will the transaction be the same as what we are seeing right now?

As far as I know all type of wallet that are shared over the network are still hackable.. Im looking forward to also let the team create a offline wallet.

[konstant111]

Well, how can I participate in what you say, in General, if you want some help from me, what is in my power to help you for your token, thank you

[TheMobius8]

So, as I have been posting on the telegram Convo...

I think that the PoT needs a small scale initial application where keeping track on a network specific transaction, such as school lunch sales could benefit. The Tau tokens would be purchased and used to buy the lunches at an initial rate of value. Then as the market of tau fluctuates the accounts would up/down as dictated by market.

This would also be a great test case for speed and volume since schools would be processing a few hundred transactions at a time and the tau coins could be used at any school utilizing the system. (Currently most commercial solutions limit the amounts in accounts to be spent a one school or district).

[cryptolandlords]

The term handling this project are good term which will have to make sure that this new concept come to reality because developing a new concept is not easy. We are only familiar with proof-of-stake and proof-of-work. good luck.

[bobthegrownup]

So, as I have been posting on the telegram Convo...

I think that the PoT needs a small scale initial application where keeping track on a network specific transaction, such as school lunch sales could benefit. The Tau tokens would be purchased and used to buy the lunches at an initial rate of value. Then as the market of tau fluctuates the accounts would up/down as dictated by market.

This would also be a great test case for speed and volume since schools would be processing a few hundred transactions at a time and the tau coins could be used at any school utilizing the system. (Currently most commercial solutions limit the amounts in accounts to be spent a one school or district).

Keeping my eye on this idea. Deserves more attention because it talks about use case -- something that needs alot more discussion

[Inskchen]

If anyone wants to be miner for TAU upcoming mainnet, we will help you and provide nice coins to start. Just message me....

I want to be a miner for the TAU of the upcoming network.
To do this, I need a static IP?

[cryptotycoon33]

TAUcoin, has proposed a brand new consensus mechanism called Proof-of-Transactions. It proposes a fast circulation currency without inflation. Users collectively maintain the network security by doing normal economical behavior - transactions through time. With the technical innovation of "Proof Of Transaction", users are incentivized to making necessary transactions by sharing the future block reward. No advantage is given to accumulating wealth and hardware.
Learn about TAUCOIN here

We believe that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus mechanism when it comes to being:

•   The most secure decentralized network
•   The fairest decentralized network
•   The most environmentally friendly decentralized network

Let’s jump to the year 2040, with the assumptions that:
1.   Internet Speed has dramatically increased, from 4G to 10G.
2.   Coins (TAU) with Proof-of-Transaction mechanism are widely distributed to billions of holders
3.   TAU foundation team has successfully developed “automatic block sizes” that allows all miners to define their size and time of block generation.

The increase of internet speed allows decentralized nodes to communicate faster. With the implementation of automatic block sizes, POT network will be able to support 1000 times more transactions than today, which is about roughly 10 billion transactions every day.

By Shannon’s theory, it is impossible for one node to collect all transactions in a world-wide competitive decentralized network. Thus, there will be thousands of “mining clubs” around the world to pick up transactions from different parts of the network. They are all competing on reducing commissions and capturing as many transactions as fast as they can. Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to form a 51% attack to obtain any significant share of the 10 billion fee based transactions daily, especially when one is trying to manipulate a massive amount of transactions in a 1 year sliding window.
*Proof-Of-Transaction Whitepaper*


Rules
1.   The debate starts today. Anyone in Bitcointalk is able to participate anytime until the end of the debate. The debate ends on the 30th of September.
2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.
3.   The community votes among the top 3 best arguments/ideas/proofs, and 1Million TAU + $1,000 worth of BTC are being awarded to the highest vote.
4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.
5.   The arguments/ideas/proofs are defined to be the first user to propose it under TAU’s bitcointalk thread, with supported evaluations.
6.   TAU foundation team’s arguments will not participate on the result voting. The winner of the debate can be anyone else, but TAU.
7.   TAU foundation team will reward users that propose an interesting point of view or idea. This is purely defined by the TAU foundation team; an act to encourage everyone to share their thinking.

I think TAU Proof of Transaction's consensus mechanism is quite an innovative idea which has come to revolutionized the global financial economy through the blockchain technology,even though there is no complete perfect ecosystem in the universal, the 21st century innovation will improve on the 2 oldest consensus mechanisms; POW and POS by increasing the transactional incentives of users and the velocity of money through a very fair process of mining with a little degree of knowledge and low level of investment outlay. This is a welcome development to the cryptocurrency space. Thanks

[genie854]

If anyone wants to be miner for TAU upcoming mainnet, we will help you and provide nice coins to start. Just message me....

I want to be a miner for the TAU of the upcoming network.
To do this, I need a static IP?

Mining client is under development and will be on-line next week. The version will support Ubuntu only.

[imorpheus]

If anyone wants to be miner for TAU upcoming mainnet, we will help you and provide nice coins to start. Just message me....

I want to be a miner for the TAU of the upcoming network.
To do this, I need a static IP?

I will message u for setup.

[commander11]

CLICK THE IMAGE TO PARTICIPATE

[commander11]

CLICK THE IMAGE TO PARTICIPATE ON THE AIRDROP!

[blueguy78]

i suggest you that everything about ico must be clear at yhe beginning.Just a suggestion

[TheMobius8]

So, as I have been posting on the telegram Convo...

I think that the PoT needs a small scale initial application where keeping track on a network specific transaction, such as school lunch sales could benefit. The Tau tokens would be purchased and used to buy the lunches at an initial rate of value. Then as the market of tau fluctuates the accounts would up/down as dictated by market.

This would also be a great test case for speed and volume since schools would be processing a few hundred transactions at a time and the tau coins could be used at any school utilizing the system. (Currently most commercial solutions limit the amounts in accounts to be spent a one school or district).

Keeping my eye on this idea. Deserves more attention because it talks about use case -- something that needs alot more discussion

Another thought occurred to me on creating a simple qr reading register app to do the transaction. Student shows wallet qr, register app (on phone or register terminal) reads the transactions similar to how the Dunkin or mcdonalds app reads its gift cards and coupons.

[Miles123]

It's wonderful if that speed of the internet will be true in the future and I am looking forward for that. Yes, it can really help everyone to have a quick transaction or don't have any delay. And everyone can benefit on that.

[john1010]

Any product, company and corporation who've undergo an intense debate and criticism is the company of success.. I'd like to eat in some restaurant that have a prepared box for comments, suggestion and criticism , you know why? they want to improve their service to their clients.. Same with this project!

I don't want to be part of this debate, coz i'm not good in debate.. lol!

[imorpheus]

Any product, company and corporation who've undergo an intense debate and criticism is the company of success.. I'd like to eat in some restaurant that have a prepared box for comments, suggestion and criticism , you know why? they want to improve their service to their clients.. Same with this project!

I don't want to be part of this debate, coz i'm not good in debate.. lol!

Tau foundation has learned a lot from debate. Already actions taken according to debate.
At same time, We welcome new miners and will do best keep miner happy and easy to setup. Will you be interested in being a mining club leader?

[cryptotycoon33]

Any product, company and corporation who've undergo an intense debate and criticism is the company of success.. I'd like to eat in some restaurant that have a prepared box for comments, suggestion and criticism , you know why? they want to improve their service to their clients.. Same with this project!

I don't want to be part of this debate, coz i'm not good in debate.. lol!

I think you can participate in the debate because what you have suggested above about product, company and corporation is part of debate, there is nothing so peculiar about debating, so put in your best and read the whitepaper so as to contribute to the topic whether against or for. Thanks

[makarios]

Telegram username : @Makarios91

Tau wallet add:TPzz1XUd9HVQDXPyr7DFZUfySe2exNj8px

[yoman55]

Proof of Authentication
Telegram Username : @BinaSarkar55
TAU wallet address : TDYugHcDU6HnXB82v4YJDZaZifBvwFCfMz

[jpnl0002]

the idea of proof of transaction consensus is just saying or sending a different signal about the technology. i can imagine how cold it will be if the life in entirety will be like a cold classroom where everyone goes to school to learn an age old tradition, in such cases, there is no development or advancement in such fields or areas.

[Snaguit321]

the idea of proof of transaction consensus is just saying or sending a different signal about the technology. i can imagine how cold it will be if the life in entirety will be like a cold classroom where everyone goes to school to learn an age old tradition, in such cases, there is no development or advancement in such fields or areas.

This is definitely the first and one of a kind coin, that is not implemented yet. We have POW and POS - TAU is proudly representing POT (Proof of Transaction)

Sounds great yea? All fields can always be a success of each development it matters only on how the team will accelerate and fasten the implementation of the platform.

[kallingal03]

TAUcoin, has proposed a brand new consensus mechanism called Proof-of-Transactions. It proposes a fast circulation currency without inflation. Users collectively maintain the network security by doing normal economical behavior - transactions through time. With the technical innovation of "Proof Of Transaction", users are incentivized to making necessary transactions by sharing the future block reward. No advantage is given to accumulating wealth and hardware.
Learn about TAUCOIN here

We believe that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus mechanism when it comes to being:

•   The most secure decentralized network
•   The fairest decentralized network
•   The most environmentally friendly decentralized network

Let’s jump to the year 2040, with the assumptions that:
1.   Internet Speed has dramatically increased, from 4G to 10G.
2.   Coins (TAU) with Proof-of-Transaction mechanism are widely distributed to billions of holders
3.   TAU foundation team has successfully developed “automatic block sizes” that allows all miners to define their size and time of block generation.

The increase of internet speed allows decentralized nodes to communicate faster. With the implementation of automatic block sizes, POT network will be able to support 1000 times more transactions than today, which is about roughly 10 billion transactions every day.

By Shannon’s theory, it is impossible for one node to collect all transactions in a world-wide competitive decentralized network. Thus, there will be thousands of “mining clubs” around the world to pick up transactions from different parts of the network. They are all competing on reducing commissions and capturing as many transactions as fast as they can. Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to form a 51% attack to obtain any significant share of the 10 billion fee based transactions daily, especially when one is trying to manipulate a massive amount of transactions in a 1 year sliding window.
*Proof-Of-Transaction Whitepaper*


Rules
1.   The debate starts today. Anyone in Bitcointalk is able to participate anytime until the end of the debate. The debate ends on the 30th of September.
2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.
3.   The community votes among the top 3 best arguments/ideas/proofs, and 1Million TAU + $1,000 worth of BTC are being awarded to the highest vote.
4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.
5.   The arguments/ideas/proofs are defined to be the first user to propose it under TAU’s bitcointalk thread, with supported evaluations.
6.   TAU foundation team’s arguments will not participate on the result voting. The winner of the debate can be anyone else, but TAU.
7.   TAU foundation team will reward users that propose an interesting point of view or idea. This is purely defined by the TAU foundation team; an act to encourage everyone to share their thinking.

[lodyman]

CONSENSUS DEBATE BOUNTY!

kinda thrilled with that title  *thumb up*

i was thinking about why do we need to store all previous tx ..
how about crunching every epoch of say 100,000 blocks in a balance block and previous hash as the genesis of the next epoch and so on
wouldn't that make it more efficient and usable till the year 2040 ..
 probably few petabytes hard disks will be available on the markets by then but why not decreasing the foot print further

[lodyman]

Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.

1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !!

As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks ..
besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ?

2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ?

who are they ?
can anyone be one of them ?
what do they do exactly ?
how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation?


If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day

[Sone11]

Any product, company and corporation who've undergo an intense debate and criticism is the company of success.. I'd like to eat in some restaurant that have a prepared box for comments, suggestion and criticism , you know why? they want to improve their service to their clients.. Same with this project!

I don't want to be part of this debate, coz i'm not good in debate.. lol!

I think you can participate in the debate because what you have suggested above about product, company and corporation is part of debate, there is nothing so peculiar about debating, so put in your best and read the whitepaper so as to contribute to the topic whether against or for. Thanks

Yeah. The debate will just start if someone opposes your suggestion or opinion about the project. I like this marketing campaign to know more about the project and what are the strength and weaknesses that could lead to some improvements and adjustments if spotted early on.

[shainasaz]

TAUcoin made by consensus mechanism called POT. It proposed a fast circulation without inflation and deflation. By doing it, users can easily access their network security transactions on time.

[cryptocurrenciesboom]

Let me ask one provocative question, what is the reason for the tight binding of the wallet to the account on Facebook? And is the loss of a Facebook account a threat of losing or stealing funds from my wallet?

[imorpheus]

Let me ask one provocative question, what is the reason for the tight binding of the wallet to the account on Facebook? And is the loss of a Facebook account a threat of losing or stealing funds from my wallet?

This is for initial launch of web wallet. App wallet will release in one week. That does not need Facebook logon.

[TheMobius8]

Let me ask one provocative question, what is the reason for the tight binding of the wallet to the account on Facebook? And is the loss of a Facebook account a threat of losing or stealing funds from my wallet?

Actually I wondered of a FB linked web wallet might make it easier to integrate Tau into other applications such as FB linked games or apps (casino games!)

[imorpheus]

Let me ask one provocative question, what is the reason for the tight binding of the wallet to the account on Facebook? And is the loss of a Facebook account a threat of losing or stealing funds from my wallet?

Actually I wondered of a FB linked web wallet might make it easier to integrate Tau into other applications such as FB linked games or apps (casino games!)

Wallet of tau eventually will be App Store. Any ones can build their wallet. We will be welcome everyone build wallet and App Store.

[Balti143]

Telegram Username: @Zuhair123
TAU Wallet Address: TUWM8MLirFyx6N5Fe18jGzVziX7nAse5iu

[cryptocurrenciesboom]

Is it really so serious a problem with the electricity consumed by mining centers to maintain pow? With each new year, the mining hashrates is only increasing, and there have been no serious statements about this problem, besides, it did not lead to black out. May be mining stimulate the growth of electricity power industry?

[shainasaz]

The speed of internet allows decentralized nodes to communicate it fster, POT network will be available to support 1000 times transactions, which is equivalent to 10 billion transactions every day.

[cryptocurrenciesboom]

If I correctly understood the algorithm of the Harvest Club, the first published application on tau, especially if it is popular, like CryptoKitties, will collect around itself the target audience and will be collect the main awards of the network. That is, the first developed applications will collect the main awards, as well as create an unfavorable and non-competitive atmosphere for the blockchain, but with the growth in the number of such applications, there should be some kind of balance. Explain to me if I'm wrong?

[imorpheus]

If I correctly understood the algorithm of the Harvest Club, the first published application on tau, especially if it is popular, like CryptoKitties, will collect around itself the target audience and will be collect the main awards of the network. That is, the first developed applications will collect the main awards, as well as create an unfavorable and non-competitive atmosphere for the blockchain, but with the growth in the number of such applications, there should be some kind of balance. Explain to me if I'm wrong?

Very interesting perspective to view harvest club is an app. I never thought so, but from this line. Our onchain voting and delegation signal system could prsent some interesting apps. We focus on one currency only. Tau focus on chain solutions for mining, speedup, voting and transaction.

[imorpheus]

Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.

1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !!

As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks ..
besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ?

2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ?

who are they ?
can anyone be one of them ?
what do they do exactly ?
how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation?


If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day

Thanks for all feedback. Hashing history transactions off chain is in our plan, since we just started, those are already established plan, we will for to use that down the road, thanks for the reminder.
Removing hardware arms race brings concern on how secure it is to avoid 51%. This is the area we are experimenting to use transacion fee as accumulated weight, fee has a cost to prevent sybil. TAU coin started with 5 nodes running by foundation different team member independantly. We see more nodes coming. In intial stage, fundation need to perform protection for 51% attach, once the coins are distributed widely and normal transaction arises. We believe foundation nodes no longer need to be existing.
Our upcoming white paper talks about mining leader and its voting and delegation system. In short, users delegate mining power to leader, leaders mining and voting.
The transaction fee ratio is totally up to the market, it is hard to say how much transaction fee it is in future. Half of the transaction fee will be “club wiring” to all users, half will be “club wiring” to local club and the leader. With auto block time interval, we donot have a daily cap for transactions.

[imorpheus]

Is it really so serious a problem with the electricity consumed by mining centers to maintain pow? With each new year, the mining hashrates is only increasing, and there have been no serious statements about this problem, besides, it did not lead to black out. May be mining stimulate the growth of electricity power industry?

Most advanced technology are solving more problems with less energy. Bitcoin seems to using more energy to do less transaction. From my gut feeling, it can not be right.
Tau aims to deal with huge amout of transaction using less computing power, the more transaction, the faster the network.
Using off-chain hardware to form up security will always cause arms race in the real world, energy and material is burned to select leader endlessly in every block. I also rather than compare POW and POT, it is more efficient to focus to getting POT better without concern of POW existing.

[kunanii]

Of course,  TAUcoin the most secure, fair and environmentally friendly blockchain network. Everyone will realize that later. I hope that Taucoin dev will take us to Moon soon.

Telegram Username : @kunina

[rudox]

Is it really so serious a problem with the electricity consumed by mining centers to maintain pow? With each new year, the mining hashrates is only increasing, and there have been no serious statements about this problem, besides, it did not lead to black out. May be mining stimulate the growth of electricity power industry?

The issue of energy spent on mining being high and affecting energy available for other uses is becoming alarming and is the one reasons haters of bitcoins are giving . But there are other sources of energy s like solar, wind and hydro sources which can also give energy, why not we exploit  these sources of energy?

[cryptolandlords]

I can see the progress of the debate. This term is wise to open flood for this type of activity. It will give room for amendment of some lapse which will be observed in the process of this debate. Best of luck.

[imorpheus]

Is it really so serious a problem with the electricity consumed by mining centers to maintain pow? With each new year, the mining hashrates is only increasing, and there have been no serious statements about this problem, besides, it did not lead to black out. May be mining stimulate the growth of electricity power industry?

The issue of energy spent on mining being high and affecting energy available for other uses is becoming alarming and is the one reasons haters of bitcoins are giving . But there are other sources of energy s like solar, wind and hydro sources which can also give energy, why not we exploit  these sources of energy?

I want to build a consensus without need major energy part just like we can achieve major project without human labor as in egypt pyramids. Digital abundance provides way to achieve that. Trx info is digital abundance. Allow cell phone to run full node is the plan.

[imorpheus]

Is it really so serious a problem with the electricity consumed by mining centers to maintain pow? With each new year, the mining hashrates is only increasing, and there have been no serious statements about this problem, besides, it did not lead to black out. May be mining stimulate the growth of electricity power industry?

The issue of energy spent on mining being high and affecting energy available for other uses is becoming alarming and is the one reasons haters of bitcoins are giving . But there are other sources of energy s like solar, wind and hydro sources which can also give energy, why not we exploit  these sources of energy?

I want to build a consensus without need major energy part just like we can achieve major project without human labor as in egypt pyramids. Digital abundance provides way to achieve that. Trx info is digital abundance. Allow cell phone to run full node is the plan.

This is kinda absurd actually. You want an automatic life saver consensus that really work out all. This is what you called dominance advancement. Consensus incorporated to improve system of the blockchain. Maybe you can use AI to simplify things but having a command button to do it all is quite impossible or too good to be true. Maybe year 2050. The POT introduced by Taucoin isnt an all out problem solver but has contain interesting features which blockchain needed. Its like an improve PoW system with an added option like of PoS. This can be like the next EOS if the team can commit on further development. I like their mining pool club option though still need improvements.

I understand there are pain for btc lover like me to removing POW, however doing less transaction with more energy just not the future. We implemented onchain voting to adjust interval, block size, weight window rather than AI. I believe community, collection of human wisdom, is smarter than machine. The plan is to implement functions, but leave parameters to voting by club leaders, which bitcoin has some initial implementation on package upgrade, we want to make it more systematic. I thinking smart contract system is creating several markets of tokens on same block, this will favour particular usage to over-shadow other application, such as crowd sourcing function dominating all other potentials.

[imorpheus]

Tau white paper 0.3, please comments.

https://www.taucoin.io/whitePaper/TAU%20White%20Paper%20v0.1.pdf

[smt_red]

I support the idea.  I want to be a miner for the TAU of the upcoming network.   

[imorpheus]

I support the idea.  I want to be a miner for the TAU of the upcoming network.   

Please join our dev group for being a miner.
https://t.me/joinchat/ID4hShB8tUxBMpzRwGZuYg

[cryptolandlords]

In the proof of stake consensus the more coins that are kept, coins are being given in the wallet so in this proof of  transaction consensus mechanism the more transaction that an individual make the more profit an individual suppose to earn.

[Snaguit321]

Is it really so serious a problem with the electricity consumed by mining centers to maintain pow? With each new year, the mining hashrates is only increasing, and there have been no serious statements about this problem, besides, it did not lead to black out. May be mining stimulate the growth of electricity power industry?

The issue of energy spent on mining being high and affecting energy available for other uses is becoming alarming and is the one reasons haters of bitcoins are giving . But there are other sources of energy s like solar, wind and hydro sources which can also give energy, why not we exploit  these sources of energy?

Exploiting these kind of resources can be an option to build, but most of miners aren't yet into this maybe a large scale of mining with enough budget to afford a solar / wind / hydro is not an option for a small scale miners.

Hence, With TAU we solve all the current issue of Bitcoin, Tau will likely overcome bitcoin in the near future.

[Snaguit321]

In the proof of stake consensus the more coins that are kept, coins are being given in the wallet so in this proof of  transaction consensus mechanism the more transaction that an individual make the more profit an individual suppose to earn.

Yes, The balance of your wallet will give you a equal hash rate. Holding the token as a long term is an option thats an advantage I can see with TAUcoin.

Unlike POW, they are costly, TAU provide fair approach to the community as well as to the small and large scale miners.

[john1010]

All of the successful man and woman even the company will become successful now is handling this such of difficulty question, they've collected the bad side and after that they improve their services.. That's what I'm seeing now to this project.

[john1010]

proof of transaction puzzle satisfy the basic conditions for constructing Scratch of fpuzzle [MKKS15]. Based on proof of transaction puzzle that designed PoTcoin that have good performance, such as strengthening the network topology and facilitating the circulate of PoTcoin. In the proof of transaction system, the adversary can try to guess the signature value he needs without calling the signing oracle, just as in[SKR+11], after calling the signing oracle k times, allowing the adversary to guess the signature value.

So this my little knowledge that I've been researched

[imorpheus]

proof of transaction puzzle satisfy the basic conditions for constructing Scratch of fpuzzle [MKKS15]. Based on proof of transaction puzzle that designed PoTcoin that have good performance, such as strengthening the network topology and facilitating the circulate of PoTcoin. In the proof of transaction system, the adversary can try to guess the signature value he needs without calling the signing oracle, just as in[SKR+11], after calling the signing oracle k times, allowing the adversary to guess the signature value.

So this my little knowledge that I've been researched

POTcoin uses very different system called sequencial signature generation. That require all address participating mining to be active to be selected at randomness. Our proof of transaction is inheriting NXT Style.

[Ted King]

Is it really so serious a problem with the electricity consumed by mining centers to maintain pow? With each new year, the mining hashrates is only increasing, and there have been no serious statements about this problem, besides, it did not lead to black out. May be mining stimulate the growth of electricity power industry?

Most advanced technology are solving more problems with less energy. Bitcoin seems to using more energy to do less transaction. From my gut feeling, it can not be right.
Tau aims to deal with huge amout of transaction using less computing power, the more transaction, the faster the network.
Using off-chain hardware to form up security will always cause arms race in the real world, energy and material is burned to select leader endlessly in every block. I also rather than compare POW and POT, it is more efficient to focus to getting POT better without concern of POW existing.

POW becomes really more energy-consuming in comparison with POT, but I'm wondering how the developer will fight spam in the network?

[goldkingcoiner]

I would love to participate in this debate but first I would like to clarify for myself and everyone whether or not it is possible to post more than 1 argument? Does it have to be the same or can it be a completely different argument? Can we post any arguments we want regardless or must we submit only 1?

[ikealyou]

Can we post any arguments we want regardless or must we submit only 1?

You are not limited to only one, feel free to post any arguments that you think is valid.

Does it have to be the same or can it be a completely different argument?

Evaluation, and furthering a previously made argument is always welcomed. However, if the argument/evaluation goes into the final voting session, the final prize will go to the first user that brought it up in this thread.

To encourage everyone in sharing their thinking, TAU foundation will externally reward users that propose interesting evaluation. So please feel free to share whats in your mind!

[imorpheus]

POW becomes really more energy-consuming in comparison with POT, but I'm wondering how the developer will fight spam in the network?

TAUcoin.io published 0.3 version white paper heavily discuss how to prevent this. In short, using trx fee, number , club wiring and time to fight spam.this is the most important work.

[chan555]

Telegram Username: chan5555
TAU Wallet Address: TQQqUur4F1SPB6SbuaEtBMJLf4S6w9Vxex

[jpnl0002]

I can not but hope and wish this projects comes to reality and cause another disruption in the way and manner people validate transactions. we have been faced with the proof-of-work and also the proof-of-stake protocol but this is obviously a different approach and i guess it will be welcomed as a new innovation

[Jipy jipy]

the sybil attack is still possible, but using some kind of  recaptcha would indeed make a sybil attack much harder and more expensive for the attacker. Maybe even some decentralized authentication is possible for transactions? https://medium.com/@linonetwork/proof-of-human-engagement-on-decentralized-networks-6a87f50d7d55

[Sone11]

Let me ask one provocative question, what is the reason for the tight binding of the wallet to the account on Facebook? And is the loss of a Facebook account a threat of losing or stealing funds from my wallet?

Actually I wondered of a FB linked web wallet might make it easier to integrate Tau into other applications such as FB linked games or apps (casino games!)

Wallet of tau eventually will be App Store. Any ones can build their wallet. We will be welcome everyone build wallet and App Store.

Good to know that this is the likely trajectory of the project as connecting to a webwallet or not using separate application would be just lame. You have to build an environment like that of apple on a security level but still more of decentralized and open in other means without compromising security.

[bobthegrownup]

PLEASE USE THIS THREAD ONLY FOR DEBATING

There are many ideas that we have to look at and evaluate. The noise and clutter isn't helping

There are no incentives to posting to this thread so for the love of Satoshi, please think before posting here. If you want to praise the project, feel free to do so on the main ANN thread or in Telegram but keep this space reserved to debating and discussing the merits of Proof-of-Transaction

[imorpheus]

Most advanced technology are solving more problems with less energy. Bitcoin seems to using more energy to do less transaction. From my gut feeling, it can not be right.
Tau aims to deal with huge amout of transaction using less computing power, the more transaction, the faster the network.
POW becomes really more energy-consuming in comparison with POT, but I'm wondering how the developer will fight spam in the network?

We have discussed heavily in white paper to fight spam.
https://www.taucoin.io/whitePaper/TAU%20White%20Paper%20v0.1.pdf

[imorpheus]

Debating on a good coin … the more the faster and lower cost
It is hard to predict what a good crypto coin is. We can compare to some currently successful consumer products.
iPhone, less energy and price to get more power. LED TV, less space, energy and cost to get more size and color. Hybrid car, less gas to more mileage.
If we look at proof of work consensus coin, one BTC transaction cost the electricity equal to one American weekly consumption and keep on going up. 9 years ago, it cost almost nothing to run BTC transactions. Will you feel right this is the best way to support currency future?
Sign of a good technology is reducing cost to get more utility and speed when more and more people adopt it.
Therefore, the consensus TAU foundation is constructing and believing must have following features:
when more people use,
The faster the transaction
The lower the transaction cost
The more secure the currency
The less energy it uses
The more pervasive full nodes are

[imorpheus]

Am I right? Proof of Transaction can be considered as PoW itself but consuming super less energy. The condition for this is to how to set up the consensus protocol on the blockchain itself. Someone send me taucoin with 15k coins I estimated the time it was received was 5mins utmost. If the transaction for 15k coin is at time like that how about sending millions? Can be worth while to receive or will be the same?

POT is different from POW that energy to solve puzzle is zero. Block chain does not know it is 15k or 1m, all it cares is how much bites this amount takes. It protects 1m as secure as 1cent, or if 1 cent is corrupted, the whole 10billion is corrupted. Tau foundation is lucky to open up the line of research in proof of transaction. We found it is a fast, fair, secure and light consensus.

[imorpheus]

On the record list below the balance the transaction made connected doesnt show on the record list. I think it should be like what on ethereum etherscan that all transactions should be visible. I get that the wallet is connected yet on facebook but can I know if once the wallet is released on octobet 1 this kind of features will provided by taucoin wallet. I think should be!

our web based blockchain explorer is in very beginning. Will upgrade for sure.

[imorpheus]

TAU Exchange (TAU-X) built for the community

TAU-X is a swapping program between BTC pool and TAU pool every 360 blocks. Any user can freely invest BTC or TAU into relative pool to receive opposite coins on each swap.

It was a hard choice for the foundation to decide ICO or TAU-X. ICO is an established funds raising method to obtain resources. However, it does not do too much for the community. In most ICOs, none of the proceedings go to community.

I believe the most important fact for a coin to be successful is the community satisfaction. Especially many community members collect coins through bounty working program like helping translating, you-tubing and promotion. Rather than ICO, Tau foundation chose to operate TAU-X and invite all members to participate from day one. In each swap, the foundation only puts 60,000 TAUs into the pool and looks forward to seeing community to put much more to exchange available BTCs.

TAU-X starts supporting BTC/TAU exchange with potential to add more exchange pairs. In total TAU coins, 82% is allocated to bounty programs and exchange sale. While bounty programs reduces entry barrier for common people obtain TAUs, TAU-X program increases liquidity for existing TAU currency holders and provides a fair investment option for BTC holders. Everyone can access TAU-X from their web wallet.

[TheMobius8]

Why not every 628 blocks (tau day) instead of 360. Tau is radian not degree related!

[imorpheus]

Why not every 628 blocks (tau day) instead of 360. Tau is radian not degree related!

What is a tau day?

[cryptocurrenciesboom]

It was a hard choice for the foundation to decide ICO or TAU-X. ICO is an established funds raising method to obtain resources. However, it does not do too much for the community. In most ICOs, none of the proceedings go to community.

So, it turns out you decided to completely remove the idea of ​​carrying out the program ico, replacing it with an exchanger TAU-X. Then it turns out that the final terms for the distribution of tokens are completely absent. Is that right? Again a question arises that is especially important for potential investors: how to track how many tokens have already been sold and how much money has the project collected?

[cryptocurrenciesboom]

TAU Exchange (TAU-X) built for the community
TAU-X is a swapping program between BTC pool and TAU pool every 360 blocks. Any user can freely invest BTC or TAU into relative pool to receive opposite coins on each swap.

Maybe I'm in a lot of hurry, while the wallet is being developed for TAU storage, what additional functionality is planned to use? Will it be possible to store other tokens on my wallet? (then the wallet would be an independent product from the implementation of the project itself) Will atomic swaps be maintained? (can TAU-X idea help to do this?) Can be added gate for communication with traditional currencies? etc

[Sone11]

It was a hard choice for the foundation to decide ICO or TAU-X. ICO is an established funds raising method to obtain resources. However, it does not do too much for the community. In most ICOs, none of the proceedings go to community.

So, it turns out you decided to completely remove the idea of ​​carrying out the program ico, replacing it with an exchanger TAU-X. Then it turns out that the final terms for the distribution of tokens are completely absent. Is that right? Again a question arises that is especially important for potential investors: how to track how many tokens have already been sold and how much money has the project collected?

What do you mean distribution? Some bounty rewards have been distributed already. I think they have to do a lot of distributions to keep transactions running.

To add i'm not sure if i'm in the right thread but anyone is open for any opposition. That this project should create more system of transaction to get things running. I don't know like burning a very small portion of every transactions to make another transaction.

[imorpheus]

It was a hard choice for the foundation to decide ICO or TAU-X. ICO is an established funds raising method to obtain resources. However, it does not do too much for the community. In most ICOs, none of the proceedings go to community.

So, it turns out you decided to completely remove the idea of ​​carrying out the program ico, replacing it with an exchanger TAU-X. Then it turns out that the final terms for the distribution of tokens are completely absent. Is that right? Again a question arises that is especially important for potential investors: how to track how many tokens have already been sold and how much money has the project collected?

82% coins goes to bounty and tau exchange(tau-x) in a faucet fashion. We will create all kind of bounty program around the global to get people coins, at same time, each 360 block, foundation will sell 60,000 tau to keep lights on.
At this moment, the project is fully funded by team, not yet receive external money. The coin distribution data need to be shown on website, good idea. I shall do that.

[imorpheus]

TAU Exchange (TAU-X) built for the community
TAU-X is a swapping program between BTC pool and TAU pool every 360 blocks. Any user can freely invest BTC or TAU into relative pool to receive opposite coins on each swap.

Maybe I'm in a lot of hurry, while the wallet is being developed for TAU storage, what additional functionality is planned to use? Will it be possible to store other tokens on my wallet? (then the wallet would be an independent product from the implementation of the project itself) Will atomic swaps be maintained? (can TAU-X idea help to do this?) Can be added gate for communication with traditional currencies? etc

The current core function for app wallet is the security storage. We use web wallet for lots of fun stuff.
True atomic swap need to be supported by both chain such as tau and bitcoin, this will take time. Web wallet swap is always supported, maybe extent to app wallet. We currently do not plan to add traditional fiat in wallet, that cause too much kyc/aml issue.

[imorpheus]

What do you mean distribution? Some bounty rewards have been distributed already. I think they have to do a lot of distributions to keep transactions running.
create more system of transaction to get things running. I don't know like burning a very small portion of every transactions to make another transaction.

Distribution is through bounty and tau-x for long time. Getting more people taucoins is important.
We are not burning coins.

[Sone11]

What do you mean distribution? Some bounty rewards have been distributed already. I think they have to do a lot of distributions to keep transactions running.
create more system of transaction to get things running. I don't know like burning a very small portion of every transactions to make another transaction.

Distribution is through bounty and tau-x for long time. Getting more people taucoins is important.
We are not burning coins.

It's just one of the suggestions but you have to create some system to pour in more transactions. Won't harm to introduce creative marketing stuff that can be in place permanently. Hope I sound right 

[akosipepot]

I would also like to know how TAU is protected against the following hypothetical attacks:

Greedy Flock Problem

I notice you have now changed the whitepaper to say that harvest power is now determined by the cumulative transaction fee paid in a pre-defined window. However, in the early days of the TAU network, this can easily be exploited by a determined individual to gain majority control over the block rewards. For example, if there a total of 10 harvest clubs existing of equal size (in terms of harvest power per unit time), then we would expect the rewards distributed to each of these clubs to be approximately equal. However, if one of these clubs suddenly offers a large incentive for users to switch (the early bird), then this will lead to a massive reduction in number of harvest clubs as everybody flocks to the single incentivized club. This would essentially easily allow one relatively high net worth individual to take over the entire network by incentivizing harvest club switching.

False Incentives

You mentioned previously that some harvest clubs would profit more on reputation rather than the transaction fees, which might actually lead them to incentivize club members by taking a loss. However, this leads them open to being sniped by other malicious groups which offer false incentives to get new members, e.g. $100 BTC per member, then chooses to ignore signal transactions to lock them in. If properly designed, this scam could lead to the creation of high harvest power clubs which members cannot escape from easily, whilst the club leader takes the entire reward.

Potential Resolution: Terms of the harvest club should be displayed to club members via a signal transaction from the club leader. This signal transaction would include data pertaining to the harvest reward schedule offered by the club.

The Bait and Switch

Under the new cumulative fee window system, there is an additional possible attack where a harvest club leader can achieve almost entire monopoly over the harvest rewards. Imagine a scenario where a successful harvest club manages to achieve among the highest cumulative fee, therefore achieving a sizeable fraction of future rewards. The club leader can then simply claim that the harvest club is shutting down, leading everybody to leave the club to join another. However, this was simply a bait, once all the club members have left, the club leader will then be in full control over the club, and hence be the sole beneficiary of the block rewards.

Potential Resolution: Implement a voting system to force change the harvest club leader.

Overall, I feel like the signal transaction concept is under utilized. Signal transactions should also be used to carry information relating to the parameters of the harvest club to its members and notify them of any changes. It would also be a good idea to allow people to set a timer on their harvest power delegation, either by automatically sending another signal transaction on X data (via the wallet), or by including a self-destruct parameter in the signal itself.

Identification vulnerability
I suspect that the signal transaction feature, though quite useful for the purposes of TAU, will also enable global blockchain analysis companies to easily track and identify relationships between wallet holders, as signal transactions can be considered a more intimate transaction than a standard one, therefore highlighting friendships, business relationships and partnerships, rather than commerce transactions. I suspect public visibility of signal transactions on the blockchain will eventually lead to a much more complete database of ID/Wallet holders compared to other similar projects such as Bitcoin. I think this can be resolved by ommitting one-half of the wallet details on the blockchain (or possibly both halves).

Also, there are issues whereby the harvest club leader can force its club members to collude with it for nefarious purposes by holding the block rewards hostage. For this reason I think a voting system is definitely necessary.

[imorpheus]

I would also like to know how TAU is protected against the following hypothetical attacks:...

Amazing analysis. We are digesting hard now, and thanks for the potential solution and the voting system upgrade, which is our big next step.

[lodyman]

Greedy Flock Problem
False Incentives

Those attacks are almost impossible by the current Design ..,

As the harvest clubs can increase their harvest power by increasing their number of members it will be almost balanced forever as more and more people joining a specific club increasing it's harvest power to take over the most incentives .,
that incentive will be divided into more people leading to equilibrium state at the end of the day

Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses ,
100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards .

The Bait and Switch

Again after people switch from the club to another the incentive which is payed to the club leader will be decreased as his number of signals will decrease at the same time the other clubs's signals will increase leading again to the point where he only gets what he deserves

Identification vulnerability

Nope !!

People won't give a potato who is the club owner as long as he pays *not even manually * And that voting system is a already a core feature of TAU .
and that timer and self destruct is a good idea TBH

Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX  "not forever as XRP as that's called theft "and will still allow painless micro-payments .
Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing .

[imorpheus]

Hello is it okay if the token holder of taucoin will only be bounty hunters? I know you will introduce tau x to introduce liquidity and investors can acquire token through the pool. But ICO will commence on October 18 right? Is it too early to release the exchanger without conducting ICO first? Can you stipulate the advantage of releasing it prior to ICO? Or you will relay all funds accumulation through private or sandbox investments? Sorry but these questions are really important to me to know, hopefully you can feedback with my inquiry thank you.

We decide no longer do ico and stay as community coin. Please check my writing on this.
https://medium.com/@davidwu_30530/tau-exchange-tau-x-built-for-the-community-3c33b8874d8?source=linkShare-24d178ec058f-1537160997

[imorpheus]

I would also like to know how TAU is protected against the following hypothetical attacks:

Greedy Flock Problem

I notice you have now changed the whitepaper to say that harvest power is now determined by the cumulative transaction fee paid in a pre-defined window. However, in the early days of the TAU network, this can easily be exploited by a determined individual to gain majority control over the block rewards. For example, if there a total of 10 harvest clubs existing of equal size (in terms of harvest power per unit time), then we would expect the rewards distributed to each of these clubs to be approximately equal. However, if one of these clubs suddenly offers a large incentive for users to switch (the early bird), then this will lead to a massive reduction in number of harvest clubs as everybody flocks to the single incentivized club. This would essentially easily allow one relatively high net worth individual to take over the entire network by incentivizing harvest club switching.
> Being a club leader is a profitable business in TAU, so someone try to recruite customers is possible. However there is competition to balance such concentration, TAU foundation will maintain 25% power in early stage such as now.

False Incentives

You mentioned previously that some harvest clubs would profit more on reputation rather than the transaction fees, which might actually lead them to incentivize club members by taking a loss. However, this leads them open to being sniped by other malicious groups which offer false incentives to get new members, e.g. $100 BTC per member, then chooses to ignore signal transactions to lock them in. If properly designed, this scam could lead to the creation of high harvest power clubs which members cannot escape from easily, whilst the club leader takes the entire reward.

Potential Resolution: Terms of the harvest club should be displayed to club members via a signal transaction from the club leader. This signal transaction would include data pertaining to the harvest reward schedule offered by the club.
> There shall be a Yelp listing to rate those club leaders.

The Bait and Switch

Under the new cumulative fee window system, there is an additional possible attack where a harvest club leader can achieve almost entire monopoly over the harvest rewards. Imagine a scenario where a successful harvest club manages to achieve among the highest cumulative fee, therefore achieving a sizeable fraction of future rewards. The club leader can then simply claim that the harvest club is shutting down, leading everybody to leave the club to join another. However, this was simply a bait, once all the club members have left, the club leader will then be in full control over the club, and hence be the sole beneficiary of the block rewards.

Potential Resolution: Implement a voting system to force change the harvest club leader.
> there is one tech detail, when member leaves the club, they will bring away the portion of future reward. So when leader cuts off all connections, it gets nothing.

Overall, I feel like the signal transaction concept is under utilized. Signal transactions should also be used to carry information relating to the parameters of the harvest club to its members and notify them of any changes. It would also be a good idea to allow people to set a timer on their harvest power delegation, either by automatically sending another signal transaction on X data (via the wallet), or by including a self-destruct parameter in the signal itself.
> signal transaction is a powerful tool, we are still in exploration.

Identification vulnerability
I suspect that the signal transaction feature, though quite useful for the purposes of TAU, will also enable global blockchain analysis companies to easily track and identify relationships between wallet holders, as signal transactions can be considered a more intimate transaction than a standard one, therefore highlighting friendships, business relationships and partnerships, rather than commerce transactions. I suspect public visibility of signal transactions on the blockchain will eventually lead to a much more complete database of ID/Wallet holders compared to other similar projects such as Bitcoin. I think this can be resolved by ommitting one-half of the wallet details on the blockchain (or possibly both halves).
> TAU applys every wiring changing address for sender, this will be much relieved.
Also, there are issues whereby the harvest club leader can force its club members to collude with it for nefarious purposes by holding the block rewards hostage. For this reason I think a voting system is definitely necessary.
> AGREE

[cryptocurrenciesboom]

The coin distribution data need to be shown on website, good idea. I shall do that.

Due to the fact that in the world of cryptocurrency cases of fraud are frequent, the openness of the project reduces this risk to the investor. So auditing a smart contract on the ethereum platform, allows you to track the amount of collected funds and the address of their storage during the ICO. But since you use TAU-X to raise funds, it may be a great step towards transparency of the project (although many will still have questions about the reliability of the information provided on the site and how to check it)

[Thishastoend]

What if malicious club leaders set up 0 rewards for themselves effectively luring enough people to execute attack on chain with purpose of destroying chain? It doesn't require a lot to run a node so this type of attack might be lucrative for competing chains to execute.

Also what stops rich holders sending billions of transactions between their own addresses ammasing mining power of their wallets?

[imorpheus]

What if malicious club leaders set up 0 rewards for themselves effectively luring enough people to execute attack on chain with purpose of destroying chain? It doesn't require a lot to run a node so this type of attack might be lucrative for competing chains to execute.

Also what stops rich holders sending billions of transactions between their own addresses ammasing mining power of their wallets?

We have discussed these attack on long paragraph in whitepaper, please check out. Thanks.

[Thishastoend]

What if malicious club leaders set up 0 rewards for themselves effectively luring enough people to execute attack on chain with purpose of destroying chain? It doesn't require a lot to run a node so this type of attack might be lucrative for competing chains to execute.

Also what stops rich holders sending billions of transactions between their own addresses ammasing mining power of their wallets?

We have discussed these attack on long paragraph in whitepaper, please check out. Thanks.

uh, I guess I had to read at least 4th time to understand it
But it kinda sprung another question. Its unrealistic but anyway, if you reach your mining cap, but there are no other miners, where block reward would go?

[imorpheus]

if you reach your mining cap, but there are no other miners, where block reward would go?

If there is no miners, the block chain will stop. If there are miners, the reward goes to club members and club leader.

[imorpheus]

Any plans to change it? I saw tau ticker being traded on idex. I think its better to alter it before tau x launches.

I love name of TAU, even we change, it will not stop other people to use whatever same ticker we choose. We need smart investors to at least figure out what is right ticker.

[Thishastoend]

if you reach your mining cap, but there are no other miners, where block reward would go?

If there is no miners, the block chain will stop. If there are miners, the reward goes to club members and club leader.

Then I think I might found a problem. If there will be users outside of mining clubs they will eventually run miners into reaching their mining cap and there will be no miners left, so blockchain will stop. Am I right on this one, or am I missing something crucial here?

[imorpheus]

if you reach your mining cap, but there are no other miners, where block reward would go?

If there is no miners, the block chain will stop. If there are miners, the reward goes to club members and club leader.

Then I think I might found a problem. If there will be users outside of mining clubs they will eventually run miners into reaching their mining cap and there will be no miners left, so blockchain will stop. Am I right on this one, or am I missing something crucial here?

There will be transactions fee to support incentives for miners. Hope this clarifies.

[ikealyou]

Thanks everyone for the participations!

Here is the finalist for our Debate bounty!
Vote for your favourite and help him win 1M TAU + $1000 worth of BTC!
@Akosipepot
@lodyman
@rexxarofmoknathal

The results will be finalised on 1st October, 2018!

[nonconformist]

Too bad, I can't join anymore... Is there another debate bounty like this?

[imorpheus]

Too bad, I can't join anymore... Is there another debate bounty like this?

A bigger “consensu upgrade” debate is about to start when new white paper is out. We are going to debate, fee accumulation and distribution, mobile mining, epochs, club wiring, block interval ... very exciting.

[Diced90]

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.

Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I dont think he should win or even be taking part....

4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.

Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results as twitter polls end up becoming cheating contests

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX

[bobthegrownup]

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.

Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I really think that tau must be trying to cheat a kabayan brother out of his prize.

4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.

Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results are obviously rigged.

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX

Hi Diced90 -- thanks for your feedback. You've pointed out some valid concerns and we are going to start looking into whether Lody should be disqualified from the vote.

It is obvious that you are friends with akosipepot since you've never been involved with any of our threads and the discussion before. That's ok....friends should support each other...but saying the competition is rigged is a shithead move. We have ZERO incentive to do that... it would obviously be counterproductive to do so.

The decision to have the vote on twitter vs telegram was an operational one. There are plenty of ways to manipulate voting on most any medium on Earth.

We will have the team evaluate and will either support our decision for Lody's participation as a finalist or his disqualification.

[ikealyou]

Upon further analysis, it has become our decision to disqualify Lodyman based on Rule No,2

Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.

All votes for Lodyman will not be counted and the debate vote will end on the assigned date.

[lodyman]

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.

Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I dont think he should win or even be taking part....

4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.

Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results as twitter polls end up becoming cheating contests

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX

My answer is .. how about takin a look back to this reply

Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.

1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !!

As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks ..
besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ?

2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ?

who are they ?
can anyone be one of them ?
what do they do exactly ?
how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation?


If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day

my reply was clearly a challenge  .. 

should i be disqualified upon the opinion of somebody who couldn't even answer my reply??

[lodyman]

Greedy Flock Problem
False Incentives

Those attacks are almost impossible by the current Design ..,

As the harvest clubs can increase their harvest power by increasing their number of members it will be almost balanced forever as more and more people joining a specific club increasing it's harvest power to take over the most incentives .,
that incentive will be divided into more people leading to equilibrium state at the end of the day

Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses ,
100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards .

The Bait and Switch

Again after people switch from the club to another the incentive which is payed to the club leader will be decreased as his number of signals will decrease at the same time the other clubs's signals will increase leading again to the point where he only gets what he deserves

Identification vulnerability

Nope !!

People won't give a potato who is the club owner as long as he pays *not even manually * And that voting system is a already a core feature of TAU .
and that timer and self destruct is a good idea TBH

Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX  "not forever as XRP as that's called theft "and will still allow painless micro-payments .
Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing .

It's pretty obvious that @Diced90 is using the last trick he got in the bag
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
either he have an answers for this .. or he shall prove that was kind of jealousy for having an opponent 

[Diced90]

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.

Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I dont think he should win or even be taking part....

4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.

Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results as twitter polls end up becoming cheating contests

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX

My answer is .. how about takin a look back to this reply

Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51%. One potential way during mean time is simply keeping foundation nodes to stay above 40% transaction mining power, this makes it very hard to achieve 51%. (Our current labor is focusing on mainnet, balance system, wallet, signal voting and removing time. )
It is our goal to have PC be able to intermittently run full nodes since there is no heavy computing neither storage work engaged. PC is getting more powerful everyday.
The way I understand TAU fairness is not by equalizing everyone, but reducing the entry barrier to common people. Both tau technology and coin econemy address fairness in following way: we are running bounty program for very long time to allow mininum effort to get on board TAU, hope 20 years from my perspective. We keep coin out of inflation. We reward common people essential behavior, spending money for living, rather than rich people racing on hardware and asset hoarding. I would claim we are more fair than POW and POS, but never want to claim the best and abosolute, even thought that is our long term mission.
For DDOS resistance, our mining signal system can easily allow mining leaders to randomly delegate to different address to avoid DDos. Here it is, mining club leader rent 1,000,000 IP addresses, each address associate to one TAU wallet address, then using TAU signal system randomly assign mining power to one of those 1,000,000 address, because DDos never knows club randomness to find IP to attack. I always trust randomness algo, which bitcoin is designed around, than oracles. It is our design purpose use TAU onchain signal system efficiently resist DDos and many other cool things.

1- Tau foundation has not fixed up plan to control minging club to operate under 51% !!

As it doesn't require no heavy computing neither storage work engaged it might be easy for someone who have more servers than the foundation nodes to make easy chain splits and 51% attacks ..
besides why should we trust the foundation nodes at the first place ., what if it failed ?!! would the coin be dead ?

2- Mining leaders , Mining club leader ?

who are they ?
can anyone be one of them ?
what do they do exactly ?
how are they get chosen ? votes ? delegation?


If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day

my reply was clearly a challenge  .. 

should i be disqualified upon the opinion of somebody who couldn't even answer my reply??

you asked questions about the mining algorithm and made some statements. very different from challenging the consensus algo.

the rule says you must challenge proof of transaction, you didnt, very simple.

statements are not the same as a challenge nor are questions. next time dont cheat.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define+challenge&oq=define+challenge&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.2257j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[Diced90]

2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.

Lodyman clearly did not meet the rules for this. he does not challenge tau anywhere in his one post in this thread. I really think that tau must be trying to cheat a kabayan brother out of his prize.

4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.

Loool just checked the polls, akosipepot has 54% of the poll and lodyman has 44%, how is this even a competition? akosipepot quite clearly deserves to win this, lodyman is obviously cheating as he didnt even debate?! glad I never participated in this so called debate as the results are obviously rigged.

Why is the vote on twitter anyway it should be on telegram where it cant be manipulated by friends and family....

Archiving this thread for later

https://archive.is/UCtjR
https://archive.is/P0Co6
https://archive.is/mDQOX

Hi Diced90 -- thanks for your feedback. You've pointed out some valid concerns and we are going to start looking into whether Lody should be disqualified from the vote.

It is obvious that you are friends with akosipepot since you've never been involved with any of our threads and the discussion before. That's ok....friends should support each other...but saying the competition is rigged is a shithead move. We have ZERO incentive to do that... it would obviously be counterproductive to do so.

The decision to have the vote on twitter vs telegram was an operational one. There are plenty of ways to manipulate voting on most any medium on Earth.

We will have the team evaluate and will either support our decision for Lody's participation as a finalist or his disqualification.

Sorry didn't mean to come across so harsh, I should have worded it carefully. my main issue is that the rules were not followed which left lodyman open to cheat which is not fair since he should not be in the debate since he didn not follow the rules.

[lodyman]

Although the current system isn't flawless and have room for some manipulations with TX spam and mass addresses owners .. all that can be fixed if a number of TAUs will be locked for a certain amount of blocks for each new address and for each created TX  "not forever as XRP as that's called theft "and will still allow painless micro-payments .
Also the harvest power should be automatically decreased if the node isn't always online or under-performing . 

that was an issue in the consensus ., and the potential resolution that could potentially prevent spamming of addresses or at-least decrease it by 90% 
   

Let's say we have a greedy club leader having 25% of all signals and total number of addresses that can provide signals are 400k addresses ,
100k Signal TXs / 100k club member ., so if they have 25% of all network votes the rewards will be payed to the club members automatically and equally so that will make the rewards almost equal to another club which owns 1% of signals and having 1% of the rewards .
 

and that was mathematical model to appose akosipepot's claims ..

If mining only gets the tx fee and the tx fee was worth 0.1 TAU with average of 50k tx per day that will sum to 5k tau
which means if there is 5k miners each one will take 1 TAU a day would that be a great incentive in a 10bln coin
on 100X of number of TX which is near the current daily cap and 10X number of miners it will still sum to 10 TAUs a day
 

this was also a mathematical model for fee distribution and incentives which is also a major part of the consensus

 




BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilizedat all .
 Name calling is easy
you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper  .
i wonder if 2=1 ?
..
if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

but i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that 

[Diced90]

Challenging someone who is challenging the consensus is the same as supporting the consensus... how can you even argue this? the devs have done the right thing by disqualifying you as you didnt follow the rules. Breaking down the fee distribution is not a challenge... you are again supporting it by saying 1 tau per day for each miner is a great incentive..... you also simply rehashed the sybil issue that was mentioned by multiple people before you..... again violating rule 5 as you were not the first to say it....

if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

should i be disqualified upon the opinion of somebody who couldn't even answer my reply??

Look at the way you debate how can you even be in the running?

since you like posting logical fallacies why not look at your straw man arguments and loaded questions.... you are clearly not of sound mind.

[lodyman]

Challenging someone who is challenging the consensus is the same as supporting the consensus... how can you even argue this? the devs have done the right thing by disqualifying you as you didnt follow the rules. Breaking down the fee distribution is not a challenge... you are again supporting it by saying 1 tau per day for each miner is a great incentive..... you also simply rehashed the sybil issue that was mentioned by multiple people before you..... again violating rule 5 as you were not the first to say it....

- my proposed solution to the same issue (address spam / sybil ) was not like what other people presented so it's a unique argument .
- that question was sarcastic question (that is the opposite of supporting something ) as 1 TAU is too little incentive while 10bln coins is the total supply .

BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilized at all .
 Name calling is easy
you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper  .
i wonder if 2=1 ?
..
if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Look at the way you debate how can you even be in the running?

since you like posting logical fallacies why not look at your straw man arguments and loaded questions.... you are clearly not of sound mind.

That was clearly a sarcasm loaded note of how you were talking in your previous replies and how non-cevilized your replies was
and i meant to prove that it's easy to use name calling without looking at an evidence like what you did when you called me a cheater
 
I even ended my reply with this sentence :

but i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that 

[Diced90]

Challenging someone who is challenging the consensus is the same as supporting the consensus... how can you even argue this? the devs have done the right thing by disqualifying you as you didnt follow the rules. Breaking down the fee distribution is not a challenge... you are again supporting it by saying 1 tau per day for each miner is a great incentive..... you also simply rehashed the sybil issue that was mentioned by multiple people before you..... again violating rule 5 as you were not the first to say it....

- my proposed solution to the same issue (address spam / sybil ) was not like what other people presented so it's a unique argument .
- that question was sarcastic question (that is the opposite of supporting something ) as 1 TAU is too little incentive while 10bln coins is the total supply .

BS : it won't make any of us look cooler if we started name calling which isn't civilized at all .
 Name calling is easy
you seem to be not able to read my responses just like how akosipepots didn't read the ongoing white-paper  .
i wonder if 2=1 ?
..
if you are out of the game why are you still talking ?! maybe you are akosipepots or akosipepots's friend as the Confirmation bias is obvious here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Look at the way you debate how can you even be in the running?

since you like posting logical fallacies why not look at your straw man arguments and loaded questions.... you are clearly not of sound mind.

That was clearly a sarcasm loaded note of how you were talking in your previous replies and how non-cevilized your replies was
and i meant to prove that it's easy to use name calling without looking at an evidence like what you did when you called me a cheater
 
I even ended my reply with this sentence :

but i don't like name calling so let's not dive into that 

maybe you should look again what consensus algorithm means;

"A consensus algorithm is a process in computer science used to achieve agreement on a single data value among distributed processes or systems. Consensus algorithms are designed to achieve reliability in a network involving multiple unreliable nodes."

none of your arguments challenge the way Tau achieves consensus. keep throwing up your straw men. derivatives, cheating and breaking the rules how can you still be arguing you deserve to win?

[imorpheus]

A nice article talking about the importance of decentralization. That is the next goal we are want to work on. POW leads to working power centralization, POS leads to asset centralization, what POT leads to in the terms of centralization. We are thinking using epoch to create container of serial blocks, so one super permission less miners can win in all the blocks in one containment, but will not exert power in next container coming up. Just beginning of the thought, excited ...
https://medium.com/multicoin-capital/why-decentralization-matters-a-response-6b4b9a31367f?source=linkShare-24d178ec058f-1538245887

[jmlimaa]

I would like to suggest that the work I have tried to start with the translations has been expanded. Expanded to a possible translation of the site, and even the white paper in the main languages. Today, I can not find anything even talking about the TAU in my language, and I believe that the lack of translations mainly on the site discourages some potential users, like Japanese and Russians for example.

[Badalazad]

TAUcoin, has proposed a brand new consensus mechanism called Proof-of-Transactions. It proposes a fast circulation currency without inflation. Users collectively maintain the network security by doing normal economical behavior - transactions through time. With the technical innovation of "Proof Of Transaction", users are incentivized to making necessary transactions by sharing the future block reward. No advantage is given to accumulating wealth and hardware.
Learn about TAUCOIN here

We believe that Proof-of-Transaction is the best consensus mechanism when it comes to being:

•   The most secure decentralized network
•   The fairest decentralized network
•   The most environmentally friendly decentralized network

Let’s jump to the year 2040, with the assumptions that:
1.   Internet Speed has dramatically increased, from 4G to 10G.
2.   Coins (TAU) with Proof-of-Transaction mechanism are widely distributed to billions of holders
3.   TAU foundation team has successfully developed “automatic block sizes” that allows all miners to define their size and time of block generation.

The increase of internet speed allows decentralized nodes to communicate faster. With the implementation of automatic block sizes, POT network will be able to support 1000 times more transactions than today, which is about roughly 10 billion transactions every day.

By Shannon’s theory, it is impossible for one node to collect all transactions in a world-wide competitive decentralized network. Thus, there will be thousands of “mining clubs” around the world to pick up transactions from different parts of the network. They are all competing on reducing commissions and capturing as many transactions as fast as they can. Under these circumstances, it is very difficult to form a 51% attack to obtain any significant share of the 10 billion fee based transactions daily, especially when one is trying to manipulate a massive amount of transactions in a 1 year sliding window.
*Proof-Of-Transaction Whitepaper*


Rules
1.   The debate starts today. Anyone in Bitcointalk is able to participate anytime until the end of the debate. The debate ends on the 30th of September.
2.   Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed.
3.   The community votes among the top 3 best arguments/ideas/proofs, and 1Million TAU + $1,000 worth of BTC are being awarded to the highest vote.
4.   The vote will happen in TAUcoin’s telegram group on 1st October, and the result is finalized on the 24th hour.
5.   The arguments/ideas/proofs are defined to be the first user to propose it under TAU’s bitcointalk thread, with supported evaluations.
6.   TAU foundation team’s arguments will not participate on the result voting. The winner of the debate can be anyone else, but TAU.
7.   TAU foundation team will reward users that propose an interesting point of view or idea. This is purely defined by the TAU foundation team; an act to encourage everyone to share their thinking.



Update:
Here is the finalist for our Debate bounty
- Akosipepot
- Lodyman
- Rexxarofmoknathal

Click to vote for your favourite debater, and help him win 1M TAU + $1000 worth of BTC!!!



Updates:

Upon further analysis, it has become our decision to disqualify Lodyman based on Rule No,2 "Users are required to challenge Proof of Transaction’s consensus mechanism, with no limitation to proofs, arguments and ideas. Mathematical models are welcomed."

All votes for Lodyman will not be counted and the debate vote will end on the assigned date.



Final update: Congratulations to Akosipepot for winning our debate bounty! Please get in touch with us to claim your rewards!