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

[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.