Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 06:40:42 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Proposal: An Alternative Currency that doesn't "waste" energy  (Read 4226 times)
tombc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25


View Profile WWW
December 13, 2011, 03:57:32 PM
 #61

I'll release a currency (not a bitcoin fork, no premining etc..., there will be a beta period) mixing proof-of-work and proof-of-stake early 2012, many problems have been solved, i'm working alone for the moment but i'll open once implementation is stable, stay tuned.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480876842
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480876842

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480876842
Reply with quote  #2

1480876842
Report to moderator
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Director of Bitcoin100


View Profile
December 13, 2011, 04:22:17 PM
 #62

Rassah: there's a problem with your reasoning
if you have 1,000,000 bitlesscoins by taking over the chain and doublespending and stuff, the price of bitlesscoins will plummet and your bitlesscoins will be worthless unless you are able to exchange them for another currency before people notice the hacking

But that's exactly what the Fed does, taking over the USD chain through proof of stake, having the largest reserves and control, and just printing money to lend. Who cares if I am making my money worthless bit by bit, as long as I can keep converting it into other assets? It's not like others will just dump all their money because it's slowly losing value. They wont have a choice but to keep using it if it is sufficiently established.  They already do that with USD.

mckoss
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52



View Profile WWW
December 15, 2011, 04:08:19 PM
 #63

I've not seen any way to resolve the problems with my original proposal; it seems too easy to use a large amount of cash to reach back arbitrarily far in the block chain to re-write history (and hence, invalidate transactions where you spent money).

... or, even worse, invalidate competing proof-of-stakes.

I might like proof-of-stake schemes better if somebody has a good plan for how to get them started-- you've got a genesis block, so the creator starts with 100% stake.

Now what, exactly, happens to create block number 2 for proof-of-stake systems?


I would propose that you could destroy some Bitcoin in exchange for coins in the new currency.  It easy to create a blackhole address such that you can be certain that no one will have the private key.

Mike Koss
Seattle, WA
1MCKossESxvzkT11txy7eDrtDJQLHySzHC
cunicula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756


Stack-overflow Guru


View Profile WWW
December 17, 2011, 07:49:33 PM
 #64

I've not seen any way to resolve the problems with my original proposal; it seems too easy to use a large amount of cash to reach back arbitrarily far in the block chain to re-write history (and hence, invalidate transactions where you spent money).

... or, even worse, invalidate competing proof-of-stakes.

I might like proof-of-stake schemes better if somebody has a good plan for how to get them started-- you've got a genesis block, so the creator starts with 100% stake.

Now what, exactly, happens to create block number 2 for proof-of-stake systems?


Sorry for the late response. Subject to temporary ban for trolling libertarians.

Gavin's question about the initial distribution should not be a sticking point. There are many possible answers. Here is one.

I suggested that mixed proof of work and proof of stake may be a promising option.
 
In a mixed work-stake implementation, the initial distribution system could resemble other cryptocurrencies. Proof-of work could operate similar to bitcoin, with the key exception that difficulty criteria would be individual specific. An individual's target difficulty would be a decreasing function of that individual's stake. However, system rules would specify a finite difficulty target even for individuals with zero stake. Initially, there would be no stakeholders, so everyone would share the same difficulty target. Over time, people would accumulate stakes based on their historical mining and trading behavior. This would generate inequality in difficulty targets across individuals. Stakeholding would then become an important determinant of mining ability.
 



▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁
        AltCoinInternalExperts                Get Your Altcoin Promoted On Social Media       
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
December 18, 2011, 10:04:41 AM
 #65

Howabout an AbacusCoin? That would certainly not take any electricity. We could just employ child labor in China to run the calculations.  Wink

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
old_engineer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 387


View Profile
December 30, 2011, 11:18:59 AM
 #66

I still like the idea of embedding bitcoin ASICs into mass-produced, standalone 1kW baseboard heaters, giving the heaters away for free to homes that have WiFi, then splitting the mining profits to defray the costs of the electric bills.  People are consuming GWh on electric heaters right now: might was well do something useful with those electrons.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
December 30, 2011, 03:51:36 PM
 #67

Howabout an AbacusCoin? That would certainly not take any electricity. We could just employ child labor in China to run the calculations.  Wink

Yeah but the H/c (hashes per calorie) really sucks.
Etlase2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


View Profile
January 15, 2012, 01:00:46 PM
 #68

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=49683.0

doesn't waste energy because energy isn't required to secure the network, but rather a system of merchant reputation. I have other ideas that never made it in to the wiki because of lack of interest

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

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!