[ANN] Circcash has been launched

[GAZK]

I can understand what you are saying.

A second pool would absolutely be helpful, as would a second exchange.  You don't want a single point of failure in either situation.

Exchanges absolutely do get hacked, but that shouldn't be your concern.  You have to get past the first few growing pains if you want this thing to take off. A successful coin will need to be accepted by a larger audience, otherwise it's going to be relegated to the bin of thousands of other dead/almost dead coins. People aren't going to do the right thing... just to do the right thing.  Help this coin get more acceptance... the people don't necessarily need to know they are doing the right thing... it will just be a byproduct of participating in the project.  Does that make sense?

[1715339210]

1715339210

[1715339210]

1715339210

[1715339210]

1715339210

[1715339210]

1715339210

[1715339210]

1715339210

[jvanname]

I am concerned about the dilution of the volume if Circcash is on multiple exchanges right now. Right now, Circcash is only tradable with Bitcoin, so if Bitcoin becomes tradable with other cryptocurrencies, then the volume of Circcash trading will be spread out among CIRC-BTC, CIRC-LTC, CIRC-DOGE, etc. This will not be good. An optimal scenario would be for 90% of the volume of Circcash to be on one exchange only tradable with BTC while 10% will be on the other exchange so that the Circcash volume is not spread out among multiple exchanges. If the Bitsails exchange fails, then Circcash will still function. People will just have to trade some other way or hold their CIRCs until it is put on another exchange. If you want Circcash to be put on multiple exchanges, then the best thing will be to buy Circcash so that the price increases to a point so that we do not have to worry about the trading volume of Circcash being diluted.

In any case, since reversible computation is the computation of the future and since Circcash is currently the only way to invest in reversible computation right now, it is a very good idea to invest in Circcash.

"People aren't going to do the right thing... just to do the right thing.  Help this coin get more acceptance... the people don't necessarily need to know they are doing the right thing... it will just be a byproduct of participating in the project.  Does that make sense?"-You are absolutely wrong. There are plenty of benefits for doing the right thing. For example, if a person named Bob transacts in a coin with a mining algorithm that was never designed to advance science for absolutely no reason at all, then I will be suspicious of Bob. Why does Bob not care about scientific advancement? Does Bob have a low level of intelligence? Does Bob not care at all about scientific advancement because he is a bad person? In any case, I do not want to do business with Bob since I do not trust Bob. Everyone has done many business transactions that left them with bad tastes in their mouths, and in order to avoid these scenarios, I will try not to do business with dysfunctional currencies. And if Circcash does not get accepted, then I will forever be incredibly distrustful of everyone (as I should be and as you should be as well).

[GAZK]

I still feel like you are focusing on the wrong thing, but hey... it's your coin, you are the boss.

I can only state things from my point of view, I'm not anyone else.

For me, I'm 50/50 with CIRC. As I mine it, I sell half and stash half.  If I can't recoup the cost of mining it, I'm going to move on to another coin that will.  I That's where I'm at.  I would imagine I'm not the only one.  I really do not care what algorithm I'm mining, I just thought CIRC sounded interesting... but again, if I can't at least cover the cost of electricity, I'm going to find a different coin that will.

I wish you well with CIRC and I do think your algorithm is something to keep an eye on.  I'm just not tied to it.  If that makes you not trust me, then so be it.  I don't think it's a bad thing for me to be able to cover the cost of the electricity for mining a coin.

It's not that I have a low level of intelligence, or don't care about scientific advancement or any of that.  I just don't feel like it makes me a bad person to cover the electricity I use mining a coin. After all, I am using equipment that I bought, maintain and spend time tweaking... It's my hard earned cash, equipment and time I'm spending. It doesn't make me bad person to cover some of that cost.  It certainly does NOT cover all the cost.

Again, I will mention how you said "So for a price of 14 sats/CIRC, core development of Circcash is not paid enough to do much of anything. If you want better services, then please pay more than 14 sats per CIRC."

You don't want to spend any money on your own coin.  Why should I spend MY money on YOUR coin?  You can say it's the right thing to do since it will advance science, the other coin algorithms do not.  I say so what... I'm not going to spend my time and money on something if I can't at least partially cover the cost to mining it.

[jvanname]

Stashing half and selling half is a reasonable strategy. I see nothing wrong with that. I actually consider it to be quite wise (since it encourages a diversified portfolio and is often necessary to pay bills), and selling coins is necessary in a cryptocurrency ecosystem.

Whether one uses Circcash or whatever cryptocurrency or not is only one factor that I take into consideration in determining whether I should trust someone. There are plenty of other factors that one should take into consideration when determining someone's trustworthiness. However, in a business transaction, one's currency is one of the most prominent and recognizable factors in determining trustworthiness.

"You don't want to spend any money on your own coin."-Well, I am surely spending much time and resources on cryptographic research which is kind of important for cryptocurrency technologies. This is the same kind of cryptographic research that gave you Circcash in the first place.

[iphone5s]

As a summary: everybody (included dev) wants milk before the cow, but nobody (included dev) dont want to pay for cow.

I saw a lot of questions that you gave above but didn't get a response from this thread, you should join the telegram group for this project to get answers, maybe the team is very busy to make a new innovation.

[jardine]

I m joined tg group long time ago, but it never be much info about project and how it s going - so i m pretty sure, things dont changed much now.  In official tg group you need to pay monthly fee just to being there, so i got banned recently

Say the truth, i m personally think about circ as dead project; hope i m wrong, because i m hold some coins.

"Buy the low, sell the high?", right? You didnt think about that price can be low all time, mm?

[jvanname]

If you think that solving the most important problem is a dead project, then please do not communicate with me ever again. Please go away. You have nothing to contribute to anything because you are an extremely bitter person. I feel bad that you lack the intellectual fortitude to understand Circcash in the first place. How pathetic! And when you leave, please sell me your CIRCs if you really have any (you have not signed your statements with your wallet, so I do not know if you own any CIRCs) because you clearly do not understand what Circcash is all about. If anything is dead, it is all the other cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin, Dogecoin, and all pre-mined ICO coins which attract anti-intellectual blowhards and scam artists.

P.S. I have rescinded the monthly fee.

[jvanname]

If any of you want to communicate with me, please SIGN all your statements with your Circcash wallets so that I have an idea of who you are and how many CIRCs you own.

[jardine]

hahahaha, i think it s all clear now for all about circcash bright future

yeah, i m not contribute, but irony of that - you will not conribute either  

so i m prefer drink my bitter lemon as bitter person and stay with useless projects like
"Bitcoin, Dogecoin, and all pre-mined ICO coins which attract anti-intellectual blowhards and scam artists"

[jvanname]

If you won't sign your messages, I must assume that you are just a hater who wants the world to be a worse place and who owns no Circcash. Please SIGN your messages. Have fun wasting resources because you have absolutely no appreciation for science. You are a terrible evil person.

P.S. You have absolutely terrible grammar because you lack intelligence. Please work on that first.

[jvanname]

Only an absolute sicko would prefer Bitcoin and would prefer to watch the world burn over Circcash. At least Circcash is once and for all proving how uneducated nearly all Bitcoiners are.

[LaaMos Seeth]

Hello.
Thinking out loud.
I like your project, because it is an innovation, a new mining algo, and it solves the scientific problem of reversible computation.
But, like any PoW algorithm, CIRC network is not protected from 51% attack.

There is another project that I like is Veriblock.
It is also an innovative and its main task - altcoins protection from the attack 51% with PoP (Proof-of-Proof) algo.

I am not a big technical specialist to speak about technical details, but as far as I understood, the implementation of PoP algo will require a change in consensus, the main core, explorers, pools, exchanges.
You are at a very early stage of project development, so it will make it easier than if you had a lot of pools, exchangrs, and so on.
Veriblock is solid project with a serious development team. And I think your project could interest them.
Maybe you will try to make contact with them?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3133450.0.
https://www.veriblock.org/
What do you think ?
In addition, it would give CIRC not only the protection against attack 51%, but also added the popularity to your project.

[jvanname]

That looks like an interesting paper. I am a big fan of posting Merkle roots of pretty much everything on proof-of-work blockchains, and the hashes of the Circcash blockchain need to be posted on other blockchains while the hashes of other blockchains need to be posted on the Circcash blockchain. I will have to look into that paper in more detail. In the meantime, Circcash allows for one to post checkpoints that can combat some long range attacks, but I have not added any checkpoints into the code yet.

[jvanname]

So, it seems like the RPlant mining pool may want to remove Circcash soon. THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO MINE SOLO. PLEASE DO NOT USE A MINING POOL! THERE IS NO POINT IN DOING THIS!

[jardine]

Hmm, why Rplant want to remove circ from his pool (which is only one pool for this coin)?

Maybe it s because for around 1 year coin dont advance in development at all? (even not have own official pool)

Or it s deal of freemasonry reptiloids, who is fight against eco-friendly crypto, because it s threat to replace btc / eth / and others pow-coins, hungry to electricity and resources of our mother Earth!

Who knows...

p. s.: why you delete official telegram group, btw?

[jvanname]

Jardine. Please come back to me once you have understood the Circcash whitepaper. You clearly have absolutely no understanding of anything because you are an absolutely terrible person.

[jvanname]

There are certainly way too many people here who hate science and hate any cryptocurrency that supports scientific advancement. Seriously. You all look just as bad as the FLAT EARTHERS! You have absolutely no place in modern society. To back to the Stone Ages!

[jvanname]

I have taken a look at VeriBlock, and the idea behind it seems to be very interesting. I am a big fan of submitting timestamps (Merkle roots) to proof-of-work blockchains in order to prove that the data that is being timestamped has not been tampered with after a certain point of time. These timestamps on blockchains should be a standard practice whenever security is important (for example, the data collected at a nuclear powerplant must be timestamped in order to prevent a cover up after a meltdown like there was at Chernobyl; the data collected at the Wuhan Institute of Virology also needed to be timestamped since this affects me).

But I do have some criticisms about VeriBlock including the following:

1. The cost of submitting a proof-of-proof should be nearly trivial if one does this properly. Therefore, since the cost should be trivial, there should not be a need to submit proofs of proofs. Therefore, VeriBlock has a possibly unnecessarily complicated protocol to reward people for doing something that can be done for free.

2. I like how VeriBlock is resistant to some hard forks, but VeriBlock is certainly not resistant to all hard forks. For this reason, I would not recommend to permanently use VeriBlock at the protocol level. VeriBlock is also not resistant to failures to the security providing blockchain.

3. I don't think I have seen any mention about VeriBlock being used to list new blockchains as security providing blockchains. To maximize security, as many blockchains as possible should be listed as security providing blockchains. Of course, this may be difficult to do at the protocol level.

4. If a coin that uses a protocol similar to VeriBlock has a very low hash rate, then people will not want to submit proof-of-proofs since that will cost resources and require one to transact in both the security providing and security inheriting blockchains.

5. The proof of proofs can be used to prove that a blockchain existed before a certain period in time, but can proof of proofs also prove that a blockchain was publicly available before that period in time (if may be hard to forge a blockchain this way because a forger may not have access to very many private keys and coins at the time of the split, but a forger can bribe users for their old keys, so this is a problem)?

In any case, implementing the features of the VeriBlock protocol to any cryptocurrency that does not already have the VeriBlock protocol requires a hard fork, and that is not acceptable at the moment. Here is what can and should happen instead.

i. Checkpoints should be posted on the Circcash source code. I have not done this yet, but it should not be too difficult.

ii. The Circcash protocol should make the nodes occasionally submit proof-of-proofs of Circcash to various blockchains. This does not require a fork, so there should not be an issue here. However, this does require quite a bit of extension to the Circcash source code (and probably a bit of computer science research as well).

iii. The Circcash protocol should warn users if they are on an unverified chain (a chain without a proof-of-proof) or on a chain that has not been verified in a while or whether there are gaps in the proof-of-proofs. Users may therefore choose whether to accept the unverified chain or choose a chain which has been verified.

Let me know if I got anything wrong about the VeriBlock protocol and about posting proofs of proof.

[jvanname]

The people at the Circcash Discord Server have nothing but hate for Circcash because they are evil and stupid!

[jvanname]

In case people have questions about the cryptographic security of Circcash's mining algorithm Hashspin, there is something I can do to prove that Hashspin is probably a secure mining algorithm (or at least secure enough; Hashspin only needs 16 bits of security anyways). It is probably not to difficult to me to show that the round functions for Hashspin generate the alternating group.  Let me explain. One of the first things that people learn about permutations is that there are two different kinds of permutations, namely even permutations and odd permutations. Half of all permutations are even while the other half are odd permutations. In cryptography, almost all round functions are even permutations because odd permutations do not add much security while they make the cryptosystems very inefficient.  The group consisting of all even permutations is known as the alternating group, and the group generated by the odd permutations is known as the symmetric group. For a cryptosystem, the round functions need to generate the alternating group or else they do not provide much security. However, if one can prove that the round functions do in fact generate the alternating group, then such a proof is good evidence that the cryptosystem has at least some cryptographic security.

I probably should have done this well before Circcash was ever launched, but back then I did not have much of an idea about how to prove that the round functions generate the alternating group, but now I know I have read up on group theory enough to conclude that proving this should be easy. In fact, I can probably write code that takes the round functions for an arbitrary block cipher as input and returns whether these round functions generate the alternating group or the symmetric group as long as the block cipher has a small block size. Of course, since Circcash has such a low market cap (which is quite disheartening and which also shows the complete lack of positive attributes of the cryptocurrency community; Circcash solves the most important scientific problem and people don't realize this because they are foolish), I am not willing to embark on this research right now.