prophetx
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1010
he who has the gold makes the rules
|
 |
January 02, 2015, 10:44:58 PM |
|
Adam,
1. what's your view on the maximum #SC's that can reasonably be MM'd by the Bitcoin mining network? i'm not aware of any capable mining software in existence today that would allow multiple SC MM'ing besides the simple Namecoin experiment, which is a public service altcoin afaic.
2. given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?
3. we've already seen a 10x drop in the prices of mining hardware as a result of the stiff competition and profit crunch. this is a natural cyclic effect of the game theory which drives competition for BTC rewards and tx fees. you say that SC's can help these profits by helping to extend demand (possibly). but the fact is, you're compensating for what is a natural result of the incentive structure as the rules are currently written. you're changing the rules of the game, midstream, that changes the market assumptions behind mining. i actually consider these extremely thin marginal profits to be in an exquisite balance today. considering only the positives of this change while ignoring the possible negatives is naive as this is an extremely complex topic.
4. 51% attacks will be much more profitable and tempting with SC's, imo, as they don't risk destroying mining pools main source of income, the MC. short selling the to be attacked SC on an exchange while stealing its scBTC at the same time could be quite a profitable scheme.
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
what is an "SC" and an "MM"? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Bitcoin: mining our own business since 2009" -- Pieter Wuille
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 10:45:43 PM |
|
2. given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?
What solo miners? you know, the solo miners. the one's who are left. kinda like all the assumed dead addresses out there with coin. |
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 10:47:44 PM |
|
Adam,
1. what's your view on the maximum #SC's that can reasonably be MM'd by the Bitcoin mining network? i'm not aware of any capable mining software in existence today that would allow multiple SC MM'ing besides the simple Namecoin experiment, which is a public service altcoin afaic.
2. given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?
3. we've already seen a 10x drop in the prices of mining hardware as a result of the stiff competition and profit crunch. this is a natural cyclic effect of the game theory which drives competition for BTC rewards and tx fees. you say that SC's can help these profits by helping to extend demand (possibly). but the fact is, you're compensating for what is a natural result of the incentive structure as the rules are currently written. you're changing the rules of the game, midstream, that changes the market assumptions behind mining. i actually consider these extremely thin marginal profits to be in an exquisite balance today. considering only the positives of this change while ignoring the possible negatives is naive as this is an extremely complex topic.
4. 51% attacks will be much more profitable and tempting with SC's, imo, as they don't risk destroying mining pools main source of income, the MC. short selling the to be attacked SC on an exchange while stealing its scBTC at the same time could be quite a profitable scheme.
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
what is an "SC" and an "MM"? Sidechain dictionary: SC=sidechain MM=merge mining MC=mainchain (Bitcoin blockchain) scBTC=reanimated BTC on SC that have passed thru the 2wp ZC=zerocoin or zerocash TC=Truthcoin |
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
January 02, 2015, 10:49:02 PM |
|
2. given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?
What solo miners? you know, the solo miners. the one's who are left. Okay fair point. "Unknown" is 18%, which is a lot higher than I remember. I guess that is mostly farms with their own private pools, not really what I think of as solo miners, but technically they are. |
|
|
|
|
|
CryptAxe
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:16:05 PM |
|
2. given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?
What solo miners? you know, the solo miners. the one's who are left. Okay fair point. "Unknown" is 18%, which is a lot higher than I remember. I guess that is mostly farms with their own private pools, not really what I think of as solo miners, but technically they are. They probably have their own stratum servers anyways, but its the closest to the old solo mining that there is |
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:17:35 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:20:01 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
|
Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
|
|
|
|
dakota neat
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:21:49 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. |
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:27:38 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
dakota neat
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:32:46 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
Damn, don't be a tool. Who cares about the US? |
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:33:39 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
That doesn't sound very promising |
Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
|
|
|
Odalv
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1000
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:34:17 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
- you are using tooo much "if"s - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM |
|
|
|
|
|
LOBSTER
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:38:51 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
That doesn't sound very promising Yes you are right. Not very promising and shady too! |
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:44:47 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
That doesn't sound very promising Yes you are right. Not very promising and shady too! Lobster my man, this was honestly the first thing that crossed my mind on reading the paper. I don't know why it isn't being addressed |
Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2348
Eadem mutata resurgo
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:46:07 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
introducing regulatory/political drawbacks into a technology is sure to compromise its function and benefits to humanity. would you have lawyers/politicians design/build 747's for you to cross the Atlantic in? design/build nuclear power stations to power your cities? leave technology to the technologists unless you want bad outcomes. money is a value information technology not a political tool, it needs to be the best technology it can be to maximally benefit humanity, not a compromised, politicised, perverted tool for oppression and dubious agendas. |
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:46:19 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
Damn, don't be a tool. Who cares about the US? i neither approve or disapprove of this. this is just my observation. the reality of the matter is that US pools are in a very difficult situation. BTCGuild and Eleuthria sold out b/c he wasn't about to go against possible US regulation as he didn't want to go to jail. |
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:47:06 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
- you are using tooo much "if"s - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM what are they besides federated servers? |
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:48:11 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto. Adam,
5. if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally. given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
That doesn't sound very promising Yes you are right. Not very promising and shady too! apparently not for LukeJr and Eligius! |
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1115
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:48:49 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
introducing regulatory/political drawbacks into a technology is sure to compromise its function and benefits to humanity. would you have lawyers/politicians design/build 747's for you to cross the Atlantic in? design/build nuclear power stations to power your cities? leave technology to the technologists unless you want bad outcomes. money is a value information technology not a political tool, it needs to be the best technology it can be to maximally benefit humanity, not a compromised, politicised, perverted tool for oppression and dubious agendas. I see your point |
Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
January 02, 2015, 11:50:31 PM |
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
introducing regulatory/political drawbacks into a technology is sure to compromise its function and benefits to humanity. would you have lawyers/politicians design/build 747's for you to cross the Atlantic in? design/build nuclear power stations to power your cities? leave technology to the technologists unless you want bad outcomes. money is a value information technology not a political tool, it needs to be the best technology it can be to maximally benefit humanity, not a compromised, politicised, perverted tool for oppression and dubious agendas. marcus, in your opinion does that include SC's for Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
