Bitcoin Forum
February 25, 2021, 03:05:49 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: [BOUNTY] 🔥🔥WINNER-GETS-ALL / PROOF-OF-TRANSACTION CONSENSUS DEBATE BOUNTY!🔥🔥  (Read 3986 times)
Diced90
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 513


Get'em boys


View Profile
September 29, 2018, 09:57:49 AM
 #121


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.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1614222349
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1614222349

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1614222349
Reply with quote  #2

1614222349
Report to moderator
lodyman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 186
Merit: 101


if you need help , drop me a pm


View Profile
September 29, 2018, 11:27:37 AM
 #122

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 Grin "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  Wink

Diced90
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 513


Get'em boys


View Profile
September 29, 2018, 04:36:54 PM
 #123

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
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 186
Merit: 101


if you need help , drop me a pm


View Profile
September 29, 2018, 04:57:49 PM
 #124

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  Wink



Diced90
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 513


Get'em boys


View Profile
September 29, 2018, 05:48:06 PM
 #125

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  Wink




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
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 164
Merit: 10

TAUCoin - fast, fair and secure


View Profile WWW
September 29, 2018, 06:37:12 PM
 #126

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
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
October 10, 2018, 07:24:36 PM
 #127

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
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 13
Merit: 0


View Profile
October 20, 2018, 08:07:26 PM
 #128

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!

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!