andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
 |
September 29, 2025, 08:52:13 PM
Last edit: October 02, 2025, 04:24:52 PM by andrepatta |
|
Welcome to Parallax Most altcoins today promise decentralization, but very few deliver it. Premines, corporate governance, foundation-controlled treasuries, or opaque token allocations have become the norm. These models concentrate power and wealth in the hands of a few, undermining the very principles that make cryptocurrency meaningful. Parallax takes a different path. Its foundation is built on ossified monetary rules, a hard-capped supply of 21 million coins, and a neutral fork-choice rule inherited from Bitcoin. There are no premine allocations, no dev taxes, and no privileged insiders. Every LAX in circulation is earned the same way Bitcoin was: through Proof-of-Work mining. The launch is designed to be as fair and permissionless as possible. Anyone with compatible GPU hardware can join at block one, contribute hashpower, and begin participating in the security of the chain. No institutions stand between the network and its participants; the rules are enforced only by open-source code. We believe you can count on one hand the coins that genuinely respect these principles of sound money. Parallax aims to be part of that select group—a project that upholds the monetary assurances of Bitcoin while providing a programmable platform for decentralized applications. At its core, Parallax is both sound money at the base layer and neutral infrastructure at the application layer—a rare combination in today’s ecosystem. From our research, Parallax is the only chain implementing Nakamoto consensus with a turing-complete scripting system. Parallax fully implements Nakamoto consensus: 10 minutes block target, the maximum supply is fixed at 21 million coins, block reward starts at 50 coins and halves every 210,000 blocks, difficulty adjustment every 2016 blocks and fork choice rule based on Proof-of-Work weight. As an EVM-compatible chain, Parallax allows developers to deploy existing Ethereum tooling and applications without modification. This combination—Bitcoin-inspired monetary rules with Ethereum’s programmability—creates a network where sound money and decentralized innovation coexist. Who is Behind Parallax? - Andre Patta -> Block chain protocol developer and researcher
Parallax is an open-source project. Contributors, miners, developers, and community members are invited to join from day one to help build and secure the network. The Parallax client is based on Geth (go-ethereum), modified to implement the Nakamoto consensus. Next Steps Read more about the Parallax protocol here: Everything at Parallax is open source, auditable and transparent. Explore the Parallax client, parallaxchain.org website, whitepaper and documentation repositories: The Parallax main network launches on October 28th, 2025.
|
|
|
|
|
1971ECPT
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 64
Merit: 2
|
|
September 30, 2025, 12:17:56 PM |
|
How can be minated? Or pre-minated?
|
|
|
|
|
andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 02, 2025, 10:08:29 PM
Last edit: October 03, 2025, 01:27:25 PM by andrepatta |
|
I'm thinking a lot about Parallax compatibility with existing Ethash GPU mining software. Ethminer for example, got it's latest release in 2022 and it's not maintained anymore since Ethereum's transition to PoS. Parallax is somewhat compatible with ethminer, however it may fail at DAG regeneration in epoch roll overs because the epoch length in original Ethash is 30,000 blocks (~5 days in Ethereum's 15-second blocks) whereas in Parallax the the epoch length is 720 blocks (resulting in a similar timespam given Parallax's 10-minute blocks). This means Ethminer software needs to be updated to regenerate the DAG every 720 blocks instead of 30,000 for optimal usage. From my testing current Ethminer crashes on new epochs expecting it to be 30,000 blocks wide. This can be fixed with a simple change in Ethminer to make sure it regenerates the DAG every 720 blocks. Mining pools might need to slightly adapt their software to account for this too. However, I'm worried about existing Ethash ASICs that would come at some point to the network, and I'd like to get your opinion on how we should proceed with this. I see two potential options here: 1) Keep Parallax's Ethash as close to the original as possible. Epoch length being the only change. 2) Further change Ethash, specifically the fnv function, creating a new PoW algorithm (can call it Laxhash) that is still mainly Ethash but explicitly breaks compatibility with existing GPU mining software and existing Ethash ASICs. With option #1, people can mine with their GPU using Ethminer from the start of the network with minor hiccups every 720 blocks, potentially needing to restart Ethminer. Ethminer can get the proper epoch number on start up so no problem here. Mining power will be concentrated on those with GPU mining-rigs. With option #2, early mining will be primarily done by CPU using the Parallax client, since Ethminer - or any other Ethash mining software - won't be compatible at all. In this alternative, GPU mining will come online in the future when these mining softwares are adjusted to mine "Laxhash". The code change required to make it compatible would involve the usage of the correct epoch length in roll over calculation (720 blocks), updating the fnv function to match what is in "Laxhash" and update mining kernels. Option #2 also means the initial coin emissions are more distributed among miners, akin to early Bitcoin years. Both options won't prevent ASICs, but option #2 makes existing Ethash ASICs obsolete on "Laxhash". Depending on the ASIC manufacturer they can ship a firmware update to make it compatible, but that seems something that will happen far in the future if at all. Since option #2 is a pretty significant change from what has been proposed for Parallax, I'd like to hear your opinion on this subject. Either option won’t delay Parallax mainnet launch. #1 is what we already have in our live testnet, and #2 can be implemented before launch on October 28th.
These are the proposed changes for option #2 (ethash -> laxhash): https://github.com/microstack-tech/parallax/commit/f42f3d8fd242e1855cefc418b95461245e1171e2TLDR; change the partially implemented FNV function from original Ethash to the actual FNV-1 specs; change legacy sha3 (keccak) to the actual finalized sha3 specs: add Parallax magic into DAG seed. |
|
|
|
|
zsky
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 33
Merit: 0
|
|
October 03, 2025, 10:10:48 AM |
|
I'm thinking a lot about Parallax compatibility with existing Ethash GPU mining software. Ethminer for example, got it's latest release in 2022 and it's not maintained anymore since Ethereum's transition to PoS. Parallax is somewhat compatible with ethminer, however it may fail at DAG regeneration in epoch roll overs because the epoch length in original Ethash is 30,000 blocks (~5 days in Ethereum's 15-second blocks) whereas in Parallax the the epoch length is 720 blocks (resulting in a similar timespam given Parallax's 10-minute blocks). This means Ethminer software needs to be updated to regenerate the DAG every 720 blocks instead of 30,000 for optimal usage. From my testing current Ethminer crashes on new epochs expecting it to be 30,000 blocks wide. This can be fixed with a simple change in Ethminer to make sure it regenerates the DAG every 720 blocks. Mining pools might need to slightly adapt their software to account for this too. However, I'm worried about existing Ethash ASICs that would come at some point to the network, and I'd like to get your opinion on how we should proceed with this. I see two potential options here: Keep Parallax's Ethash as close to the original as possible. Epoch length being the only change.Further change Ethash, specifically the fnv function, creating a new PoW algorithm (can call it Laxhash) that is still mainly Ethash but explicitly breaks compatibility with existing GPU mining software and existing Ethash ASICs. With option #1, people can mine with their GPU using Ethminer from the start of the network with minor hiccups every 720 blocks, potentially needing to restart Ethminer. Ethminer can get the proper epoch number on start up so no problem here. Mining power will be concentrated on those with GPU mining-rigs. With option #2, early mining will be primarily done by CPU using the Parallax client, since Ethminer - or any other Ethash mining software - won't be compatible at all. In this alternative, GPU mining will come online in the future when these mining softwares are adjusted to mine "Laxhash". The code change required to make it compatible would involve the usage of the correct epoch length in roll over calculation (720 blocks), updating the fnv function to match what is in "Laxhash" and update mining kernels. Option #2 also means the initial coin emissions are more distributed among miners, akin to early Bitcoin years. Both options won't prevent ASICs, but option #2 makes existing Ethash ASICs obsolete on "Laxhash". Depending on the ASIC manufacturer they can ship a firmware update to make it compatible, but that seems something that will happen far in the future if at all. Since option #2 is a pretty significant change from what has been proposed for Parallax, I'd like to hear your opinion on this subject. Either option won’t delay Parallax mainnet launch. #1 is what we already have in our live testnet, and #2 can be implemented before launch on October 28th.
These are the proposed changes for option #2 (ethash -> laxhash): https://github.com/microstack-tech/parallax/commit/f42f3d8fd242e1855cefc418b95461245e1171e2TLDR; change the partially implemented FNV function from original Ethash to the actual FNV-1 specs; change legacy sha3 (keccak) to the actual finalized sha3 specs: add Parallax magic into DAG seed. option #2 is good! |
|
|
|
|
hugeblack
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3052
Merit: 4331
|
|
October 03, 2025, 11:27:32 AM |
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is mining only done via the Parallax client?
Frankly, although there aren't many POW coins, it seems the Parallax project is a copy of everything related to Bitcoin + EVM-compatible chain, with no unique features or anything that makes mining it better than Bitcoin and since POS options are more profitable, I don't expect it to generate much buzz.
|
|
|
|
|
andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 03, 2025, 02:19:03 PM |
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is mining only done via the Parallax client? You can mine with your CPU using the built-in Parallax client miner, or mine with GPU using Ethminer on either your local node (solo mining) or on mining pools. If we proceed with the proposed change (option #2 in above post), initial mining will be primarily be done via CPU using the built-in Parallax miner in the early days of the network. But still possible to GPU mine as long as Ethminer - or any other Ethash mining software - is adjusted to the "laxhash" specs. If we continue with #2 I'm going to eventually release a compatible GPU miner, along with the complete "laxhash" specs for easier pool integration. Frankly, although there aren't many POW coins, it seems the Parallax project is a copy of everything related to Bitcoin + EVM-compatible chain, with no unique features or anything that makes mining it better than Bitcoin and since POS options are more profitable, I don't expect it to generate much buzz. From a technological standpoint, I'd say you are correct. Parallax, at its current stage, does not offer any technical innovations in comparison to other EVM-based chains. However, if you're willing to dive deeper into a philosophical discussion, things can get interesting. I do think that proof-of-work and the fork choice rules implemented in Bitcoin are the optimal solution to the double-spending problem without compromising other aspects that make it a decentralized and permissionless peer-to-peer cash system. Not many people understand Satoshi's real invention wasn't digital money, but rather the solution to the double-spending problem that don't require any trust at all in the network participants. Going deeper into the rabbit hole, I think that the 10-minute block timing proposed by Satoshi wasn't arbitrarily chosen. He wrote an e-mail to the cryptography mailing list with the following: ...
They use a proof-of-work chain to solve the problem. Once each general receives whatever attack time he hears first, he sets his computer to solve an extremely difficult proof-of-work problem that includes the attack time in its hash. The proof-of-work is so difficult, it's expected to take 10 minutes of them all working at once before one of them finds a solution. Once one of the generals finds a proof-of-work, he broadcasts it to the network, and everyone changes their current proof-of-work computation to include that proof-of-work in the hash they're working on. If anyone was working on a different attack time, they switch to this one, because its proof-of-work chain is now longer.
After two hours, one attack time should be hashed by a chain of 12 proofs-of-work. Every general, just by verifying the difficulty of the proof-of-work chain, can estimate how much parallel CPU power per hour was expended on it and see that it must have required the majority of the computers to produce that much proof-of-work in the allotted time. They had to all have seen it because the proof-of-work is proof that they worked on it. If the CPU power exhibited by the proof-of-work chain is sufficient to crack the password, they can safely attack at the agreed time.
...
He says that the Byzantine General Problem is solved once the solution is hashed by a chain of 12 proofs-of-work. In a more practical example, this means that the solution to the double spending is only considered valid after a set period of time, or rather by how many blocks are on top of a given transaction. Most other proof-of-work altcoins our there don't get that, if you reduce the block times the solution to the double-spending problem would theoretically require more blocks to be considered solved. For example, if we consider a theoretical PoW block chain with 5-minute block target, in Satoshi's view it would require 2 hours for a transaction to be hashed by a chain of 24 proofs-of-work and only then be considered safe from a double-spending perspective. The rabbit hole is more deeper than that, but maybe that's for another day. About proof-of-stake though, these chains aren't decentralized at the first place in my opinion. There are several extreme theoretical cases where a PoS system can fail, whereas a PoW chain wouldn't. Yes, the monetary incentives might be better than mining. Nothing wrong in choosing a PoS over PoW chain if you're only interested in monetary returns. But from a conceptual stand-point, proof-of-stake is not something I consider ideal solution to a permissionless and decentralized peer-to-peer cash system. Other altcoins went even further with PBFT - or variants - for their consensus. These are strictly permissioned systems where a set of validators control the network. Not going to develop more on those. To conclude this extremely long answer I want to acknowledge that, in its current state, Parallax doesn't offer any technical breakthroughs. However, I think the crypto landscape is flooded with complex solutions to nothing, as a digital cash system must be strictly decentralized, permissionless, peer-to-peer and scarce in its nature. The vision I have for Parallax is clear: an open source protocol for P2P programmable cash system. This means it must always follow the Nakamoto rules, must be decentralized, must be permissionless and ultimately it must be scarce. Parallax unites the best of both worlds: the Nakamoto consensus introduced by Satoshi; and a turing-complete scripting system introduced by Vitalik. I've not seem this combination anywhere else. I don't know where we will be in a few years from now in terms of adoption, and that's not under my control. But I'm happy I can share my thoughts about what I think digital money should ultimately be. |
|
|
|
|
|
bogdanb
|
|
October 03, 2025, 06:44:27 PM |
|
Looking forward to seeing #Option2.
I hope Option 2 will be much better than #Option1.
#bogdanb
|
|
|
|
|
andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 04, 2025, 03:45:42 PM
Last edit: October 06, 2025, 07:30:58 PM by andrepatta |
|
I’m also leaning towards #2, still waiting on more feedbacks and opinions though. In the meantime I’ll create a proper code change for Ethash -> Laxhash (also considering calling it “Lynx”) and package release binaries for testnet when I get back to my pc on Sunday. Im afraid I can’t squeeze in proper code change to transition testnet from ethash to laxhash, so I asked people running nodes and miners and they are okay with a clean network reset.
UPDATE:I've just released new binaries for Parallax client v0.1.3 with the new proof-of-work algorithm (XHash), which is option #2 in the above discussion. In accordance with users, node operators and miners in our Telegram channel, we've decided to start the testnet from a new genesis block with XHash enabled. You can download the Parallax client in our releases page below and help test XHash ahead of mainnet launch on October 28. https://github.com/microstack-tech/parallax/releases/tag/v0.1.3 |
|
|
|
|
andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 29, 2025, 02:11:00 AM |
|
Just a quick update: Parallax launched today. We've seen a huge influx of miners on day one with peer count reaching 120 online public nodes. Estimate number of people mining is around 60 based on wallet addresses. I'll write a more detailed summary about Parallax launch in a later date, but for now: - https://parallaxchain.org- https://explorer.parallaxchain.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 29, 2025, 08:00:34 PM |
|
Discord invitation link is now resolved.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
markm
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3332
Merit: 1233
|
|
October 30, 2025, 05:42:03 AM |
|
To conclude this extremely long answer I want to acknowledge that, in its current state, Parallax doesn't offer any technical breakthroughs. However, I think the crypto landscape is flooded with complex solutions to nothing, as a digital cash system must be strictly decentralized, permissionless, peer-to-peer and scarce in its nature. The vision I have for Parallax is clear: an open source protocol for P2P programmable cash system. This means it must always follow the Nakamoto rules, must be decentralized, must be permissionless and ultimately it must be scarce. Parallax unites the best of both worlds: the Nakamoto consensus introduced by Satoshi; and a turing-complete scripting system introduced by Vitalik. I've not seem this combination anywhere else. I don't know where we will be in a few years from now in terms of adoption, and that's not under my control. But I'm happy I can share my thoughts about what I think digital money should ultimately be.
I had the impression this is exactly the combination SYScoin long long ago implemented? Is that not the case or is it simply that SYScoin somehow fell through the cracks of your research into what has already been done? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 30, 2025, 06:48:38 AM |
|
I had the impression this is exactly the combination SYScoin long long ago implemented?
Is that not the case or is it simply that SYScoin somehow fell through the cracks of your research into what has already been done?
-MarkM-
Isn't SYScoin a Bitcoin L2? I don't remember hearing about them back in the ICO mania. |
|
|
|
|
symplink
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
|
|
October 30, 2025, 06:59:00 AM
Last edit: October 30, 2025, 03:24:15 PM by symplink |
|
Discord invitation link is now resolved.
Thanks.
Thank you |
|
|
|
|
markm
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3332
Merit: 1233
|
|
October 30, 2025, 06:49:49 PM |
|
I had the impression this is exactly the combination SYScoin long long ago implemented?
Is that not the case or is it simply that SYScoin somehow fell through the cracks of your research into what has already been done?
-MarkM-
Isn't SYScoin a Bitcoin L2? I don't remember hearing about them back in the ICO mania. I thought ICOs weren't invented until much later too? SYScoin goes back a long way... -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
VasilyS
|
|
October 30, 2025, 10:28:21 PM |
|
An interesting but controversial project. It could either take off in the short term or quickly fade into oblivion. Review is here: https://www.cryptoprofi.info/?p=18202 |
Information site about technology, cryptocurrencies, radio electronics and other interesting things: |
|
|
Ms_Mining
Member
Offline
Activity: 244
Merit: 98
✔️ Telegram @miningrelease
|
|
October 30, 2025, 11:14:32 PM |
|
An interesting but controversial project. It could either take off in the short term or quickly fade into oblivion. Trading has already begun on the exchange. Soon the coin's price will hit rock bottom and no one will be interested in it. |
🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴 Telegram channel witn announcement of new coins for GPU mining - @miningrelease 🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴 |
|
|
|
|
|
gameparadise007
|
|
October 31, 2025, 08:21:11 AM |
|
This looks good. The mining algo is it some changes down to Ethash or done from scratch? |
|
|
|
|
andrepatta (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
October 31, 2025, 08:31:16 AM |
|
This looks good. The mining algo is it some changes down to Ethash or done from scratch? XHash is Ethash-based with minimal changes to make existing Ethash ASICs incompatible. Technical details about XHash can be found here: SRBMiner already have implemented XHash support on their closed-source miner: https://github.com/doktor83/SRBMiner-Multi/releases |
|
|
|
|
|
