[ANN][XCN] Cryptonite | 1st mini-blockchain coin | M7 PoW | No Premine

[iCEBREAKER]

Well I just had a quick glance at the recent sidechain paper and they describe a "two way peg" mechanism, meaning coins could be sent to the sidechain and back to the parent chain at a later point in time. Cryptonite may be limited to a "one way peg" system because once the coins have been locked by setting the withdrawal limit to 0 you can't unlock them at a later point in time, which is required in order to send them out of the sidechain and back into the parent chain. However they do mention in the sidechain paper that Bitcoin would need to undergo a soft fork for their sidechain proposal to work, so right now even Bitcoin cannot support a two way peg mechanism. So I guess if we wanted to add support for a two way peg mechanism in Cryptonite we could do the same thing and implement a soft fork by adding some new type of special transaction which increases the withdrawal limit. Although it may not be so easy for us, a hard fork may be required. You have to keep in mind that their sidechain proposal locks and unlocks coins using the scripting system, but with Cryptonite we have to approach the problem in a different way because we don't use scripts. But yes, I believe sidechains could be possible.

Thanks to the unprecedented rancor and division in the BTC community created by the sidechain proposal, XCN has a golden (apple) opportunity to capitalize on the strife.

XCN could serve as a testing ground for sidechains, to the benefit of both coins.  And doing so would turn the setlimit0 bug into a hot new feature.

Let's add it to the roadmap!   

[ltcnim]

This time I let Bitcoin and Cryptonite get out of sync by 12 days. Started both at the same time and Bitcoin won by 20 minutes.
Bitcoin currently has a huge amount of transaction activity compared to Cryptonite yet it still is faster.

Bitcoin still has its problems though. When I first downloaded the entire block chain, it took 34 hours. Of course to avoid that, and the 10 minute transaction time, they recommend using a third party like Coinbase. This of course flys in the face of one of the primary reasons for Bitcoin. No need for a trusted third party. Such trusted third parties can disappear with all the coins, be hacked, or shutdown. The latest example being Justcoin in Norway. They had to shutdown because all banks in Norway started to refuse businesses dealing with digital currencies. This demonstrates the need for decentralized payment networks, yet Bitcoin is moving in the opposite direction.

did you assign each client the same CPU resources? for a real test, you would need to assign 2 cores to walletA and 2 cores to walletB (in case you have a 4 core CPU). If somehow the bitcoin wallet gets higher priority, the test will not be objective (same goes for number of connections/RAM/banwidth etc.).

[dogsAloud]

@bitfreak! I thought I was done bothering you about withdrawal limits, but another potentially tricky situation occurred to me...

Suppose someone sets the withdrawal limit for an address to the minimum transaction fee.  No problem there, they can raise the limit any time by executing another setlimit transaction and waiting the required 100 blocks.  However, now suppose at some point in the future the minimum transaction fee is raised.  Do you now have an address that becomes effectively burned because its withdrawal limit is now less than the new minimum transaction fee?  Never mind why you would or wouldn't raise the fee, or how unlikely you think it is.  The future is hard to predict, and the goal is to think very long term and to assume that Cryptonite becomes successful beyond our wildest dreams.

We've been referring to this situation as the zero withdrawal limit feature, but after thinking about it some more, it occurred to me that the minimum transaction fee acts like the event horizon for a black hole.  Once you cross that line there's no going back.  I think this situation starts to make the second solution mentioned above look more attractive, because it fixes the problem once and for all and removes the hidden dependency between transaction fees and withdrawal limits.

Just to be clear, and to save you from having scroll back in this thread, the second solution was:  Make it so that the minimum fee is paid for a setlimit transaction regardless of the withdrawal limit.

Another way to think about this is to say that the withdrawal limit simply does not apply to the minimum transaction fee. I think it should also be noted that only the minimum transaction fee should be exempted.  Allowing an arbitrarily large transaction fee to be exempted would potentially provide an avenue for a hacker to circumvent the withdrawal limit.

I would also like to request clarification on your comment about needing to change the protocol.  My understanding is that Cryptonite added the concept of withdrawal limits in the first place (a nice innovation, IMO), effectively making a significant alteration to the Bitcoin protocol (not to mention separating the block chain into three different data structures to implement the mini-blockchain).  So I'm not following why what seems like a slight change in the way you handle withdrawal limits is really a big departure from what you've already done.  I really am asking, so please forgive my complete lack of understanding for how the protocol works under the hood.  I would also appreciate any good reading material you could point me to.

[dogsAloud]

@bitfreak! regarding your query on marketing ideas, I would like to repeat my offer of my nearly 20k LTB coins to contribute toward a sponsor token.  Maybe there are others here in this forum that have LTB coins they would be willing to contribute?  We could buy a spot on the flagship LTB podcast to get a brief message to a huge audience and put Cryptonite back on peoples radar.  I honestly don't know what sponsor tokens are going for these days, but if you want to pursue this I'll check into it.

[kalon]

@bitfreak! regarding your query on marketing ideas, I would like to repeat my offer of my nearly 20k LTB coins to contribute toward a sponsor token.  Maybe there are others here in this forum that have LTB coins they would be willing to contribute?  We could buy a spot on the flagship LTB podcast to get a brief message to a huge audience and put Cryptonite back on peoples radar.  I honestly don't know what sponsor tokens are going for these days, but if you want to pursue this I'll check into it.

I've got about 6k I'd be happy to put in. Unfortunately, I need to figure out why my Counterparty seed seems to resolve to the wrong address now.

[bitfreak!]

Suppose someone sets the withdrawal limit for an address to the minimum transaction fee.  No problem there, they can raise the limit any time by executing another setlimit transaction and waiting the required 100 blocks.  However, now suppose at some point in the future the minimum transaction fee is raised.  Do you now have an address that becomes effectively burned because its withdrawal limit is now less than the new minimum transaction fee?  Never mind why you would or wouldn't raise the fee, or how unlikely you think it is.  The future is hard to predict, and the goal is to think very long term and to assume that Cryptonite becomes successful beyond our wildest dreams.

Well if we ever wanted to increase the minimum tx fee we'd have to ensure that it didn't conflict with any existing withdrawal limits. As you mentioned the 2nd option could allow the withdrawal limit to be bypassed if not done carefully and as I mentioned it could mess up the sidechain mechanism and prevent it from working, so there's many good reasons not to go with the 2nd  option.

I would also like to request clarification on your comment about needing to change the protocol.  My understanding is that Cryptonite added the concept of withdrawal limits in the first place (a nice innovation, IMO), effectively making a significant alteration to the Bitcoin protocol (not to mention separating the block chain into three different data structures to implement the mini-blockchain).  So I'm not following why what seems like a slight change in the way you handle withdrawal limits is really a big departure from what you've already done.  I really am asking, so please forgive my complete lack of understanding for how the protocol works under the hood.  I would also appreciate any good reading material you could point me to.

Any change to the protocol will usually require a hardfork and I'd prefer to avoid any such fork if possible. They can be very disruptful because they require everyone to update to a new client and those who don't update get left behind on an invalid fork. That's why Bitcoin only undergoes a hardfork when it's absolutely necessary, for example a bug is discovered and everyone is forced to update, which has happened in the past.

[bitfreak!]

@bitfreak! regarding your query on marketing ideas, I would like to repeat my offer of my nearly 20k LTB coins to contribute toward a sponsor token.  Maybe there are others here in this forum that have LTB coins they would be willing to contribute?  We could buy a spot on the flagship LTB podcast to get a brief message to a huge audience and put Cryptonite back on peoples radar.  I honestly don't know what sponsor tokens are going for these days, but if you want to pursue this I'll check into it.

I've got about 6k I'd be happy to put in. Unfortunately, I need to figure out why my Counterparty seed seems to resolve to the wrong address now.

I've never actually heard of LTB coins but it sounds like a good way to promotion Cryptonite on the LTB podcast. Mad Bitcoins is another good show on YouTube which I might seek to use as a platform for promotion. We need to seek out some of the most popular cryptocurrency shows/podcasts and do some targeted marketing.

[dogsAloud]

@bitfreak!  LTBcoins are a Counterparty asset that Adam Levine created several months ago that he now uses to run his network on.  Individuals earn LTBcoins for participation in and contributions to the LTB network and the coins are issued on a regular schedule based on a formula that uses various statistics they collect on their site.  There are different tokens that LTBcoins can be auctioned and/or traded for, such as SPONSOR (for a 1 minute audio ad during a podcast), LTBDISPLAY (for a front page display ad), and HOURCONSULT (for a one hour Skype consultation with Adam).  There is also a market where LTBcoins can be purchased for bitcoin so that those that have LTBcoins they don't need can sell them to those that do.  Sometimes the SPONSOR tokens, etc. may also become available for purchase directly with bitcoin if someone aquires one and then decides to sell it or auction it.

To make use of these assets you simply need to create a free Counterparty wallet at https://counterwallet.io.  You will need some bitcoin dust in your wallet in order to spend any Counterparty assets, so keep that in mind.

Here is the link to the LTB page that explains sponsorships, etc.:

     http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/sponsor-advertise-contest

You and Arthur Falls did an excellent job on the Beyond Bitcoin podcast awhile back, but I think it is also worth pursuing an interview on the flagship program with Adam Levine, Stephanie Murphy, and Andreas Antonopoulos, although I honestly don't know how difficult that is at this point.  It would be especially useful, IMO, to have Andreas Atonopoulos participate in that interview because of his technical skills and his ability to explain technical subjects to a wide audience.  Also, simply because of his considerable reputation in the bitcoin community, if Mr. Antonopoulos speaks favorably regarding the technical merits of cryptonite that could be a huge boost.

[mirny]

Is this the last version?
win64_cryptonite-qt_14091021

because I'm stuck 6 days, an all transactions are unknown,
with red squares.

[bitfreak!]

@dogsAloud: thanks for the info, I'll look into it.

@mirny: try running -resync or try syncing with cryptonited.

[ltcnim]

btw. is someone working on an android/iOs port?

[bybitcoin]

btw. is someone working on an android/iOs port?

Perhaps if bitfreak gets the browser based client complete (fully encrypted), we won't need that for a while.

[bitfreak!]

btw. is someone working on an android/iOs port?

Perhaps if bitfreak gets the browser based client complete (fully encrypted), we won't need that for a while.

Yeah I'll try to get around to it some time this month. Not sure exactly how hard it's going to be but it shouldn't take me too long.

[CasualSam]

Can anyone help me getting a slightly modified version of Catia's cuda miner built for windows?

Link is http://github.com/spacebux-project/spacebux-cudaminer

This is for an open source pool with the reference implementation donating all 2% of profits to the cryptonite project.

Reference implementation: http://spacebux.io (currently running on testnet)
Pool source: http://github.com/spacebux-project/spacebux-pool

[himmelsfaller2]

I mined trough the night and then I checked the wallet and it was ok.
Now 3 hours later it shows blue squares starting 35 hours ago....
I'm on win 8.1 and never had problems. it seems not to sync,
nor it gets any mined coins since 3 hours.....
any idea what to do.....?
is it possible to put the wallet on mac after installing an syncing there the mac wallet?


ok found some help. I'm trying to get it resynced

ok resync goes until 7 days ago then it stucks with Downloading headers.....have I to wait some hours?
tried also a rescan but with same result. I have copied the wallet before. Is there a possibility to
import the copied encrypted wallet in a new wallet? I saw something in the debugwindows.
will try.

so finally got actual wallet again. opened it on os x and everything seems ok. just learned something

[digicoin]

Is there any TODO list for this project?

[bitfreak!]

Is there any TODO list for this project?

The current development roadmap looks something like this:

1. web wallet improvement
  - create variant of wallet with client side encryption
  - add more extensive multi-sig transaction tools
2. block explorer improvement
  - add list of pruned blocks
  - add charts and more info
3. "slice sharing" optimization
4. bug squishing (eg wallet corruption, syncing issues)
5. consider move to rpc wallet
6. add chain pruning command
7. block mixing, side chains, etc

[andyge]

why the price so low??

[hero18688]

why the price so low??

They don't care

[WowWtf]

Is there any TODO list for this project?

The current development roadmap looks something like this:

1. web wallet improvement
  - create variant of wallet with client side encryption
  - add more extensive multi-sig transaction tools
2. block explorer improvement
  - add list of pruned blocks
  - add charts and more info
3. "slice sharing" optimization
4. bug squishing (eg wallet corruption, syncing issues)
5. consider move to rpc wallet
6. add chain pruning command
7. block mixing, side chains, etc

I say skip all the other steps and go straight to 6. and 7.