BTC endgame = Mega Miner controlling everything, BTC is not "trustless"

[BADecker]

I'm writing this off the top, so you are going to be able to find all kinds of flaws in this idea, but here goes.

How about a new crypto called CaptchaCoin, that starts out with zero coins in it. There is no mining as we know it. Rather, the mining end is set up like a captcha, yet a captcha with extremely random settings, so that it is as close to TRUE random as possible.

It would work like this:
1. You launch the CaptchaCoin program on your computer;
2. You go to the CAPTCHA screen in the program;
3. You type in the long captcha that you read on the screen;
4. If you typed it correctly, when you hit ENTER, you get a coin;
5. A new captch pops up on your screen, and you start typing again;
6. Coins are loaded into the non-Bitcoin blockchain, in Bitcoin fashion, added to your CaptchaCoin address, upon Internet connection.

If you want to become rich, you need to learn how to type faster, and how to talk friends and family into working with you on the captcha project. Your kids can type while you are at work, and you give them a percentage.

100% inflation is automatically built in, because the more coins are captcha/created, the less all of them are worth. The more people who work the program, the less your coins are worth. Because of this, you need to trade your coins off frequently/regularly for gold, or land, or cars, or fiat, or whatever, just so there won't be loss due to the built-in inflation.

This kind of coin would cause everyone in the world to be in competition with everyone else. Competition makes for popularity and fame. Might even be able to make audio captchas for the deaf. Because it is easy to mine, there would be no end to the numbers of people who would want to join in. Yet the captchas could be built in such a way that it would absolutely take a human to analyze them. Government couldn't stop it in any way, because people would run right around ALL governmental authority, one way or another.

There would be no advantage to storing (hoarding) the coins. Their value would drop continually if you didn't trade them for real products of one sort or other. Bitcoin wouldn't die, at least not right away. So, CaptchaCoins could be traded for bitcoins.

Soon fiat would be entirely out of business. Trade would abound because of the inflation factor. The whole world picture would change.

Now, some of you thinkers and gurus, take this idea and work out the flaws, and program it into reality. But do it fast, because if you don't, somebody else will beat you to it.



EDIT: Hey, it took Satoshi years to develop Bitcoin into a working operation. He needed the help of the devs. Something like CaptchaCoin won't happen overnight, even though it could be built much faster than Bitcoin, because we have the Bitcoin pattern to follow.

[rapsaodan84]

One question to Bitcoin and pool experts: is it possible to recognize a block was mined by a P2Pool rather than a centralized pool?

I really want it to be.  It'd be possible to give some incentives to that kind of pools, by making some changes in the core of the bitcoin protocol.

The issue with doing this is that you are acting like a government, propping up others and giving other an incentive but not giving all the incentive. BTC isn't supposed to act like that.

But is it possible to recognize a block mined by a P2Pool?

That's the first step before even start to discuss anything about this.

[rapsaodan84]

I'm writing this off the top, so you are going to be able to find all kinds of flaws in this idea, but here goes.

...

Although I see some problems there, it's worth discussing.

But not here, you should create another thread.

[cbeast]

I'm writing this off the top, so you are going to be able to find all kinds of flaws in this idea, but here goes.

How about a new crypto called CaptchaCoin, that starts out with zero coins in it. There is no mining as we know it. Rather, the mining end is set up like a captcha, yet a captcha with extremely random settings, so that it is as close to TRUE random as possible.

It would work like this:
1. You launch the CaptchaCoin program on your computer;
2. You go to the CAPTCHA screen in the program;
3. You type in the long captcha that you read on the screen;
4. If you typed it correctly, when you hit ENTER, you get a coin;
5. A new captch pops up on your screen, and you start typing again;
6. Coins are loaded into the non-Bitcoin blockchain, in Bitcoin fashion, added to your CaptchaCoin address, upon Internet connection.

If you want to become rich, you need to learn how to type faster, and how to talk friends and family into working with you on the captcha project. Your kids can type while you are at work, and you give them a percentage.

100% inflation is automatically built in, because the more coins are captcha/created, the less all of them are worth. The more people who work the program, the less your coins are worth. Because of this, you need to trade your coins off frequently/regularly for gold, or land, or cars, or fiat, or whatever, just so there won't be loss due to the built-in inflation.

This kind of coin would cause everyone in the world to be in competition with everyone else. Competition makes for popularity and fame. Might even be able to make audio captchas for the deaf. Because it is easy to mine, there would be no end to the numbers of people who would want to join in. Yet the captchas could be built in such a way that it would absolutely take a human to analyze them. Government couldn't stop it in any way, because people would run right around ALL governmental authority, one way or another.

There would be no advantage to storing (hoarding) the coins. Their value would drop continually if you didn't trade them for real products of one sort or other. Bitcoin wouldn't die, at least not right away. So, CaptchaCoins could be traded for bitcoins.

Soon fiat would be entirely out of business. Trade would abound because of the inflation factor. The whole world picture would change.

Now, some of you thinkers and gurus, take this idea and work out the flaws, and program it into reality. But do it fast, because if you don't, somebody else will beat you to it.



EDIT: Hey, it took Satoshi years to develop Bitcoin into a working operation. He needed the help of the devs. Something like CaptchaCoin won't happen overnight, even though it could be built much faster than Bitcoin, because we have the Bitcoin pattern to follow.

Just as long as I get to create the Captchas, I'm down with it. Of course, I will be the only one able to solve them.

[teukon]

I do like the fact that BTC attempts to have a way of dealing with "rogues". my worry is that it will not be enough in the end. Is there a reason it has to be 50%? Why not make the threshold 70% to be able to double spend?

Why 70%?  I would turn it up to 110% myself.

[BADecker]

Just as long as I get to create the Captchas, I'm down with it. Of course, I will be the only one able to solve them.

The creation of the captchas would, of course, be built into the program. There would always be those few who would believe in it, just as every altcoin has its believers. So, once created, it would grow at least for awhile. I'd do it just for fun, but I am not that big of a programmer.

Somebody, with additional ideas just might think of and add the thing that would make CaptchaCoin have the flair that would grab the whole Bitcoin community, and later, the world.

[iluvpie60]

Is there a reason it has to be 50%? Why not make the threshold 70% to be able to double spend?

You were given the answer to this by kendog77 just a few posts ago. It's not a variable in the code, it is an inviolable law of mathematics - 50% is half, so any more than 50% (we shorthand it as 51%) is more than half.

If one has the majority of the hashing power, then probabilistically, one will solve the majority of blocks. I.e. One will solve more blocks than the rest of the network combined.

If one is guaranteed to solve more blocks than the rest of the network combined, one may generate a blockchain which is longer than any other blockchain.

One may:
- spend a certain coin on the 'public' chain, then;
- create  transaction 'spending' the same coin in a transaction not broadcast to the network, then;
- mine privately using that second transaction instead of the first.
When one's chain is longer than the public chain (again, more than half the hash power guarantees this will happen eventually), one releases the private chain. As the previously private chain is longer than the initial chain, the entire network 'snaps' to your new longer chain - with the second spending of that coin.

The new longer chain has not the first spending of that coin, but rather the second spend of that coin.

The net effect is that the recipient of the first 'spend' of the coin has that coin ripped from his wallet, and you get double value for that coin - you have been on the buying end of two transactions involving the same coin.

IOW, it is '51%' because that is more than half.

For someone generating so much heat on this issue, it is kind of funny that this illumination is needed.

Lets see here, change the variable. Wow shockingly hard to comprehend right?

I am not sure, are you like new here and just bought your account from someone else to talk down to people about basic things? Just curious.

[cbeast]

Just as long as I get to create the Captchas, I'm down with it. Of course, I will be the only one able to solve them.

The creation of the captchas would, of course, be built into the program. There would always be those few who would believe in it, just as every altcoin has its believers. So, once created, it would grow at least for awhile. I'd do it just for fun, but I am not that big of a programmer.

Somebody, with additional ideas just might think of and add the thing that would make CaptchaCoin have the flair that would grab the whole Bitcoin community, and later, the world.

You will end up with either Hashcash or Bitcoin depending on the algorithm used to create the Captchas.

[iluvpie60]

Sorry to disagree with u. I can see the future in P2Pool. P2Pool code is now open and group of miners are joining various new P2Pool. GHash.IO will lead for some more days ...but ultimately they'll surrender to cumulative miner hashpower in P2Pools. In past, we have seen deepbit to vanish after they touched 51%. Nothing is permanent in the Bitcoin world except competition.

It is all well and great if a bunch of miners join P2P pool, but I am willing to bet you the Mega Miners who spend millions on their machines are not going to give up control to P2P pool. That is the problem I see with what you are saying. Ghash.io is already set to move forward and take even more, there is an unknown % of hashing power out there and many people speculate and seem to be right about it being Ghash.io covering it up to look "unknown". In reality they have hit 51% before a few times on their "Ghash.io" branded servers. Who knows what their other miners are called, only they do, hence the "Unknown %" issue. They most likely have been doing 60% or higher this whole time and just haven't done much yet, there was double spends before through them.

Can u plz give us a few examples of double spends that GHash.IO has made in recent past ?

There are plenty of threads that reference this, I am not paid to help you find information. I will let you find it yourself, knowledge is power.

[immortal4now]

Is there a reason it has to be 50%? Why not make the threshold 70% to be able to double spend?

You were given the answer to this by kendog77 just a few posts ago. It's not a variable in the code, it is an inviolable law of mathematics - 50% is half, so any more than 50% (we shorthand it as 51%) is more than half.

If one has the majority of the hashing power, then probabilistically, one will solve the majority of blocks. I.e. One will solve more blocks than the rest of the network combined.

If one is guaranteed to solve more blocks than the rest of the network combined, one may generate a blockchain which is longer than any other blockchain.

One may:
- spend a certain coin on the 'public' chain, then;
- create  transaction 'spending' the same coin in a transaction not broadcast to the network, then;
- mine privately using that second transaction instead of the first.
When one's chain is longer than the public chain (again, more than half the hash power guarantees this will happen eventually), one releases the private chain. As the previously private chain is longer than the initial chain, the entire network 'snaps' to your new longer chain - with the second spending of that coin.

The new longer chain has not the first spending of that coin, but rather the second spend of that coin.

The net effect is that the recipient of the first 'spend' of the coin has that coin ripped from his wallet, and you get double value for that coin - you have been on the buying end of two transactions involving the same coin.

While you are guaranteed to doublespend with 51%, you can sometimes successfully doublespend even with less % hashrate (under 50%), the less you have, the lower the chance though

[BADecker]

Just as long as I get to create the Captchas, I'm down with it. Of course, I will be the only one able to solve them.

The creation of the captchas would, of course, be built into the program. There would always be those few who would believe in it, just as every altcoin has its believers. So, once created, it would grow at least for awhile. I'd do it just for fun, but I am not that big of a programmer.

Somebody, with additional ideas just might think of and add the thing that would make CaptchaCoin have the flair that would grab the whole Bitcoin community, and later, the world.

You will end up with either Hashcash or Bitcoin depending on the algorithm used to create the Captchas.

Perhaps, a little. The idea in CaptchaCoin is to bypass the mining machines altogether, and use people labor instead. Now, I wouldn't join a mining pool with captchaCoin, unless I were a slow typist. But we'd ALL be slow typists in a pool, because fast typists would make more coins typing on their own.

This is a PEOPLE JOB, not a machine-used mining gimmick. All it does is to free up employment for multitudes of BitcoinTalkers who don't have anything better to do than sit around and wait for Bitcoin to do something big. With CaptchaCoin, they can sit around and earn money by working, all the while keeping an eye on what is happening to Bitcoin.

[iluvpie60]

I do like the fact that BTC attempts to have a way of dealing with "rogues". my worry is that it will not be enough in the end. Is there a reason it has to be 50%? Why not make the threshold 70% to be able to double spend?

Why 70%?  I would turn it up to 110% myself.

Well, technically the number could be anything. Could be 99.9999% of miners have to agree and "blah" happens...

I don't really see the point of it being 50% or higher to begin with, it would be much harder to exact a higher percentage attack, like say a 71% attack(at least right now it would be almost impossible). If people are serious about BTC staying around it needs to have a super majority agree on it like 70% to 80%, no more 50% agreement on things is what I say.

In the end there won't be a BTC Guild and a "blah blah" Guild. It will be a few really powerful Super Miner Guilds left, then you would really need to set the bar higher. Only guess what? if there is 3 miners left lets say who are mega size. For example.

Miner A has 65%
Miner B has 30%
Miner C has 5%

So in this example of the near future or a few years away future, Miner A is control now. Guess what? Everyone agrees to raise the threshold to 71% now, but guess what? Miner A does not accept the change so it does not go through.

What happens if Miner B and C accept the change? Chaos. Now two miners are in control.

Miner B now has about 85% of total miner power
Miner C now has 15% of total miner power.

Miner B controls the network now instead of Miner A, threshold is again voted to be raised to a 91% attack is now needed to double spend...

See how the problem just keeps going with stupid things like this? It needs to be changed to a higher number NOW before the Miners become a more powerful oligopoly.


Miners don't always have to act in the best interests of anyone... Look at MTGOX and other countless examples. Hacking can easily ruin miners too, why not?

[iluvpie60]

Just as long as I get to create the Captchas, I'm down with it. Of course, I will be the only one able to solve them.

The creation of the captchas would, of course, be built into the program. There would always be those few who would believe in it, just as every altcoin has its believers. So, once created, it would grow at least for awhile. I'd do it just for fun, but I am not that big of a programmer.

Somebody, with additional ideas just might think of and add the thing that would make CaptchaCoin have the flair that would grab the whole Bitcoin community, and later, the world.

You will end up with either Hashcash or Bitcoin depending on the algorithm used to create the Captchas.

Perhaps, a little. The idea in CaptchaCoin is to bypass the mining machines altogether, and use people labor instead. Now, I wouldn't join a mining pool with captchaCoin, unless I were a slow typist. But we'd ALL be slow typists in a pool, because fast typists would make more coins typing on their own.

This is a PEOPLE JOB, not a machine-used mining gimmick. All it does is to free up employment for multitudes of BitcoinTalkers who don't have anything better to do than sit around and wait for Bitcoin to do something big. With CaptchaCoin, they can sit around and earn money by working, all the while keeping an eye on what is happening to Bitcoin.

They do have bots that solve captchas at a pretty reliable rate.

[BADecker]

They do have bots that solve captchas at a pretty reliable rate.

Good point. Can the bots be made good enough to do the job on really difficult captchas?

For example, the captcha could be made with parts of the captcha string located all over the captcha screen. There would be guiding numbers that suggest which captcha symbol would have to be typed next, the one in this block of the screen or the one in that block. The guiding numbers would change, randomly, each time a symbol was typed. This in addition to goofy looking symbols that bots would have a hard time reading or recognizing.

There is no Javascript here. We are open to anything that we can program. The devs would have a team designing new kinds of captcha types for the next version of CaptchaCoin. Users who felt that they had been discriminated against by fellow users, would be ready to point out flaws. Complicated captchas would slow down the whole process of typing in the symbols. This would keep CaptchaCoin inflation from rising too fast.

CaptchaCoin is an idea. If it's not practical, it will fall by the wayside. But don't be surprised...

[jbreher]

Is there a reason it has to be 50%? Why not make the threshold 70% to be able to double spend?

You were given the answer to this by kendog77 just a few posts ago. It's not a variable in the code, it is an inviolable law of mathematics - 50% is half, so any more than 50% (we shorthand it as 51%) is more than half.

Lets see here, change the variable. Wow shockingly hard to comprehend right?

Not sure if serious. O.o

Please refer to the bolded portion above. And for god's sake, think before spewing.

Re: "Talk down" - you're the one who waded into this with guns blazing.

[jbreher]

Is there a reason it has to be 50%? Why not make the threshold 70% to be able to double spend?

While you are guaranteed to doublespend with 51%, you can sometimes successfully doublespend even with less % hashrate (under 50%), the less you have, the lower the chance though

While true, this is of limited value in answering the question of 'why 50%?'.

[teukon]

Well, technically the number could be anything. Could be 99.9999% of miners have to agree and "blah" happens...

I don't really see the point of it being 50% or higher to begin with, it would be much harder to exact a higher percentage attack, like say a 71% attack(at least right now it would be almost impossible). If people are serious about BTC staying around it needs to have a super majority agree on it like 70% to 80%, no more 50% agreement on things is what I say.

Certainly, a 71% attack would be quite a lot harder to mount than a 51% attack.  However, I don't see how such a "super majority" mechanic could work here.  Are you suggesting something like: transactions only get confirmed if they are backed by 70% of the network?  If so, couldn't a pool with 40% of the hashing power attack the network by vetoing all transactions?

[StevenS]

If a pool having 51% + has negative aspect on the price, why would the pool to continue to operate in such a manor ? it sounds counter productive.

It was suggested that Ghash.io split some of its hashers into a new "unknown" pool in order to appear to have less than 50%. This shows they may be thinking the same way you are.

[torrentheaven]

If a pool having 51% + has negative aspect on the price, why would the pool to continue to operate in such a manor ? it sounds counter productive.

It was suggested that Ghash.io split some of its hashers into a new "unknown" pool in order to appear to have less than 50%. This shows they may be thinking the same way you are.

I think Ghash.io didnt even think about option they will be so successfull to have 51% at some time. Otherwise they started running second seemingly independed pool when around 30%

[phillipsjk]

Is there a reason it has to be 50%? Why not make the threshold 70% to be able to double spend?

You were given the answer to this by kendog77 just a few posts ago. It's not a variable in the code, it is an inviolable law of mathematics - 50% is half, so any more than 50% (we shorthand it as 51%) is more than half.

Lets see here, change the variable. Wow shockingly hard to comprehend right?

Not sure if serious. O.o

Please refer to the bolded portion above. And for god's sake, think before spewing.

Re: "Talk down" - you're the one who waded into this with guns blazing.

Ironically, they are the one that pointed out the "backfire Effect" earlier in the thread.
Suggestions on the linked page are to let tempers cool down a bit, or if it suits your purposes, make them look like an idiot.

Edit: on the original topic: Bitcoin is supposed to avoid the mega-miner scenario by lowering the barriers to entry. I don't think Satoshi anticipated the rise of mining pools where people blindly point hash-power at a few "trusted" entities.
If the hashers don't smarten up, something will happen to crash the price. Hopefully after 2-3 years of sliding value, hashers and pool operators will know to not concentrate hash-power again.