[ANN][BURST] Burst | Efficient HDD Mining | New 1.2.3 Fork block 92000

[bensam1231]

...
I still make about 50-70% of what the calculator states.
...

- Can you always read/check 100% of all your plots even for fast blocks?!
- Can you look in the future to know difficulty of future blocks?!

If your answer is two times NO ... how could a calculator be exact?!

PS: You schould be able to proof it, before you call someone a thief!

Wasn't accusing anyone anymore.

Fastblocks are like 15% of the network and everyone else has trouble with them as well.

For number two you just take the difficulty at the highest difficulty (17PB) and that should cover all the low spots.

[1715439530]

1715439530

[1715439530]

1715439530

[1715439530]

1715439530

[1715439530]

1715439530

[1715439530]

1715439530

[q327K091]

added around 250,000 BURST below 170 striking price, thank you so much

someone must got spooked by ethereum wonder kid on double spending scare without any proof , soooo price went down and I swallowed it at this level it is a bargain

[bobafett]

added around 250,000 BURST below 170 striking price, thank you so much

someone must got spooked by ethereum wonder kid on double spending scare without any proof , soooo price went down and I swallowed it at this level it is a bargain

what should he say about a product from another person who steals his show?  
He has to find something to make people think that his upcoming product is still the best.....

[bobafett]

competition is good for business and risk diversification is highly recommend

-[ANNOUNCEMENT]- First Burstcoin.de Asset
New Asset with 2% Intrest a Month / 24% a Intrest a Year / Highly Secure

Asset Name – BdeBank
Total number available – 500.000
Price –  50 Burst
Asset Number (ID)– 4053085726300717216
First payout is the first of April!

2% intrest montly! This asset pays out 2% intrest monthly.  One B.deBank  Asset = 50 Burst. 2% of 50 Burst = 1 Burst / month payout.

URL: http://www.burstcoin.de/assets/asset_b.debank.pdf

Guaranteed monthly payout! Every first day of the month i will payout all intrest of the assets. Regardless how long you are owner oft them. Also if you bought the assets one day before the first.

Save Investment! The intrests are covered and backed by my mining system. If all shares are sold, i have to pay 500.000 Burst  intrest a month. My Miners make average 25.000 Burst per day, whats in a month 750.000 Burst. So the payment of intrest is secured forever. Also i am actually bring up more miners, also, look above, this is covert with my burst account with 8.4 Million Burstcoins atm.

Instant Cashout without loss! Also you can cashout anytime. I will buy back the assets from you. Therfore i will place a buy order for every sold asset with a price of 50 Burst. The price what i pay for the payback will decrease 1% every month.  Buywall will be created instantly after the first sales and adapted every first day of the month.

Burstcoin.de is the name oft the german website of burst , with mining guides, best practises, how tos, a manual for beginners, example hardwares from my miners, scripts for tracking the mining tasks, news over burst, etc. and information for the german community is actually daily added.

Bobafett is my username in Bitcointalk.org and burstforum.com.  I´m mining and investing in Burst qfilsince the beginning. I invested over 8500 Euros since now in Burst (bought with btc) and mining hardware. Until now i never sold any of my coins because i really belive this coin has a bright future.

Bobafett is the owner oft the account BURST-AJ63-3W8L-FGBT-2ALZE and now holding over 8.4 Million Burst and is now Top 11 of all Burst holders .

Bobafett is  mining with over 120TB every day and my next miner is acutally plotting. My daily minded income of burst are between 20.000 and 30.000 Burst.

Thanks again for your trust. Buy Back Order for the sold shares (27130!!!) was just created! So that anybody can instantly cash out, if he wants!

[kurairaito]

Someone can tell me the API you use to get last price of burst and total market cap?

I'm currently translating burstcoin.info to burstcoin.fr as announced a week ago.

thanks.

[Blago]

@smaxer

can you change (50 block average) to (360 block average)  at http://burstcoin.eu/calculator ?

360 blocks = 1 day

[Blago]

Someone can tell me the API you use to get last price of burst and total market cap?

I'm currently translating burstcoin.info to burstcoin.fr as announced a week ago.

thanks.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=731923.msg10682625#msg10682625

[daWallet]

Hey guys... I want to mention the ARM support Crowdfund! It's end is only 300 Blocks away.
Anybody want to mine Burst with their free mobile phone space while charging?    Not seriously though

It's about Raspberry and Banana Pi support! Please consider backing that up!

[mmmaybe]

We now have our mainsite burstcoin.info, but with the help of boba we are now also featured on German: burstcoin.de.

We think this will be a step to spread the word of BURST to a wider audience. The sites should be hosted on independent vpser, amd offer a good translation of the content of burstcoin.info (NO GOOGLE!!)

For each of the translations I off 25,000 BURST.

Anyone want to add to the price pool is free to do so, to increase the incitements to actual do the more. If we got this 100,000 BURST, I believe the work to done soon. Updates will be presented in this post. If you want to contstribute and to what PM me.

The language translation we are especially interested be:

- Chines          25,000
- India            25,000
- Italian          25,000
- Spain           25,000  
- Portuguese   25,000
- France         25,000
- Polish          25,000

Help will installation can be requested. Help with domain buys and vps rent can be requested.



So how important do you think these marked could be for BURST? Please donate some coins and let the development/translation begin:D

Reserve polish translation to me. I will start tommorow. Do you need only translation or complete copy of translated website?

Thanks, I'll get back to you tomorrow

***And bump...***

[tokeweed]

A friend of mine mentioned that Vitalik Buterin of Ethereum said that POC has a flaw and that someone can attack the network and cause a double spend.  He said it was posted on Reddit.  But I can't find it anywhere.  Is this true?  If so can someone post the link?  ty

I read what he posted on https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/cryptocurrency-burst-makes-smart-contracts-reality-happened-ethereum/ and normally I would say FUD but you have to look at who it is and think not but then again the article pokes butthurt at his invention so....

It would be nice for the BURST Dev to comment on this for the record.

Vitalik Buterin zash • a month ago

I'll copy my post from Reddit:

> Okay, I thought about POC for 15 minutes, and...
>
> wow, congrats, these guys have managed to create an algorithm which
simultaneously has a nothing at stake vulnerability AND is economically
inefficient.
> The problem is this. It seems as though the intent of the algorithm
is for the bulk of the cost to be storing the hard drive, and for the
hard drive to be able to "idle" after it scanned through the entire
plot. However, this means that once the plots are built, there is very
little cost to redoing the scan multiple times on multiple forks. Hence,
if an attacker could either (i) convince miners that its fork had a
>0.1%* chance of succeeding or (ii) bribe miners 0.001x the block
reward, miners all have the incentive to double-vote.
> * In order for the algo to be storage-bound and for a shortcut attack
involving recomputing everything not to exist, we need reading from the
hard drive to take less time than recomputing the data. But then we
want a 1000x safety margin if we want that condition to hold true
against potential ASIC implementations, hence reads need to be 1000x
cheaper than the plot computation step. Hence, reading more than one
time would have a marginal incremental cost of only 0.1%.

Things are this are why we didn't launch in Jan 2014

Same here.  I think it would be nice to hear from the BURST dev.

[epg]

Hey guys, been on this for a while, and now it's ready for realease with ByteEnt!!!

It's a blockexplorer, not on the fastest hosting atm, so not at 100% speed(but still quick). It's main features are:

- Asset explorer (even has candle stick charts)
- Currency change // Change the currency you see prices in(as well as burst of course).
- Accounts page messages and asset transactions listed clearly
- Search for accounts based on a part of their RS ID or part/all of thier account's name.
- API // Not much here yet....just these 2 calls:

....

oops, forgot the link :/

HTTPS://BLOCK.BUSTCOIN.INFO

I think you left out the R in the URL. https://block.burstcoin.info/

[almond]

Hey guys, been on this for a while, and now it's ready for realease with ByteEnt!!!

It's a blockexplorer, not on the fastest hosting atm, so not at 100% speed(but still quick). It's main features are:

- Asset explorer (even has candle stick charts)
- Currency change // Change the currency you see prices in(as well as burst of course).
- Accounts page messages and asset transactions listed clearly
- Search for accounts based on a part of their RS ID or part/all of thier account's name.
- API // Not much here yet....just these 2 calls:

....

oops, forgot the link :/

HTTPS://BLOCK.BUSTCOIN.INFO

I think you left out the R in the URL. https://block.burstcoin.info/

Isn't bustcoin a fork of titcoin ?

[seasonw]

Isn't bustcoin a fork of titcoin ?

Is this a joke? 

My 30 seconds wasted to check on titcoin at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=853781.0 

[burstcoin]

A friend of mine mentioned that Vitalik Buterin of Ethereum said that POC has a flaw and that someone can attack the network and cause a double spend.  He said it was posted on Reddit.  But I can't find it anywhere.  Is this true?  If so can someone post the link?  ty

I read what he posted on https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/cryptocurrency-burst-makes-smart-contracts-reality-happened-ethereum/ and normally I would say FUD but you have to look at who it is and think not but then again the article pokes butthurt at his invention so....

It would be nice for the BURST Dev to comment on this for the record.

Vitalik Buterin zash • a month ago

I'll copy my post from Reddit:

> Okay, I thought about POC for 15 minutes, and...
>
> wow, congrats, these guys have managed to create an algorithm which
simultaneously has a nothing at stake vulnerability AND is economically
inefficient.
> The problem is this. It seems as though the intent of the algorithm
is for the bulk of the cost to be storing the hard drive, and for the
hard drive to be able to "idle" after it scanned through the entire
plot. However, this means that once the plots are built, there is very
little cost to redoing the scan multiple times on multiple forks. Hence,
if an attacker could either (i) convince miners that its fork had a
>0.1%* chance of succeeding or (ii) bribe miners 0.001x the block
reward, miners all have the incentive to double-vote.
> * In order for the algo to be storage-bound and for a shortcut attack
involving recomputing everything not to exist, we need reading from the
hard drive to take less time than recomputing the data. But then we
want a 1000x safety margin if we want that condition to hold true
against potential ASIC implementations, hence reads need to be 1000x
cheaper than the plot computation step. Hence, reading more than one
time would have a marginal incremental cost of only 0.1%.

Things are this are why we didn't launch in Jan 2014

Same here.  I think it would be nice to hear from the BURST dev.

Nothing at Stake(NaS) is a theoretical attack typically talked about for Proof of Stake(PoS) systems. The general idea stems from the fact that since PoS mining/staking requires negligible work, users can vote(mine) on as many chains as they want with their full voting/mining power, unlike with PoW where their mining power would have to be split to be used on multiple chains. Some people argue that this property weakens the system as smart miners should mine every chain instead of just the one they think is best, as it costs them nothing to mine on the extras and if the other one happens to win they stand to gain, or that someone wanting to attack a coin could pay miners to multi-vote. Users multi-voting this way would reduce the amount of hashpower required to do a 51% attack. As far as I know this has never caused problems to a coin, but it is an interesting and commonly discussed property. This applies to all PoS coins, and it also applies to Burst.
He is criticizing the fact Burst requires work to be done in it's mining, and NaS applies to it, saying it's taking an undesirable property each from PoW and PoS. He's not wrong and I've previously discussed NaS in this thread, however both of those undesirable properties do apply less then than they do in their normal implementations(the work while mining limits the amount of multi-voting you can do, and the work you do is far less than mining PoW coins). Personally I don't see this as a problem.

[bobafett]

Thanks for the statement!

[smaxer]

@smaxer

can you change (50 block average) to (360 block average)  at http://burstcoin.eu/calculator ?

360 blocks = 1 day

Hi Blago,

i will add this later. Thanks for your suggestion.

[tokeweed]

A friend of mine mentioned that Vitalik Buterin of Ethereum said that POC has a flaw and that someone can attack the network and cause a double spend.  He said it was posted on Reddit.  But I can't find it anywhere.  Is this true?  If so can someone post the link?  ty

I read what he posted on https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/cryptocurrency-burst-makes-smart-contracts-reality-happened-ethereum/ and normally I would say FUD but you have to look at who it is and think not but then again the article pokes butthurt at his invention so....

It would be nice for the BURST Dev to comment on this for the record.

Vitalik Buterin zash • a month ago

I'll copy my post from Reddit:

> Okay, I thought about POC for 15 minutes, and...
>
> wow, congrats, these guys have managed to create an algorithm which
simultaneously has a nothing at stake vulnerability AND is economically
inefficient.
> The problem is this. It seems as though the intent of the algorithm
is for the bulk of the cost to be storing the hard drive, and for the
hard drive to be able to "idle" after it scanned through the entire
plot. However, this means that once the plots are built, there is very
little cost to redoing the scan multiple times on multiple forks. Hence,
if an attacker could either (i) convince miners that its fork had a
>0.1%* chance of succeeding or (ii) bribe miners 0.001x the block
reward, miners all have the incentive to double-vote.
> * In order for the algo to be storage-bound and for a shortcut attack
involving recomputing everything not to exist, we need reading from the
hard drive to take less time than recomputing the data. But then we
want a 1000x safety margin if we want that condition to hold true
against potential ASIC implementations, hence reads need to be 1000x
cheaper than the plot computation step. Hence, reading more than one
time would have a marginal incremental cost of only 0.1%.

Things are this are why we didn't launch in Jan 2014

Same here.  I think it would be nice to hear from the BURST dev.

Nothing at Stake(NaS) is a theoretical attack typically talked about for Proof of Stake(PoS) systems. The general idea stems from the fact that since PoS mining/staking requires negligible work, users can vote(mine) on as many chains as they want with their full voting/mining power, unlike with PoW where their mining power would have to be split to be used on multiple chains. Some people argue that this property weakens the system as smart miners should mine every chain instead of just the one they think is best, as it costs them nothing to mine on the extras and if the other one happens to win they stand to gain, or that someone wanting to attack a coin could pay miners to multi-vote. Users multi-voting this way would reduce the amount of hashpower required to do a 51% attack. As far as I know this has never caused problems to a coin, but it is an interesting and commonly discussed property. This applies to all PoS coins, and it also applies to Burst.
He is criticizing the fact Burst requires work to be done in it's mining, and NaS applies to it, saying it's taking an undesirable property each from PoW and PoS. He's not wrong and I've previously discussed NaS in this thread, however both of those undesirable properties do apply less then than they do in their normal implementations(the work while mining limits the amount of multi-voting you can do, and the work you do is far less than mining PoW coins). Personally I don't see this as a problem.

Thanks for the clarification.  So I guess we can only hope no bad actor attacks BURST...?

[equipoise]

ATDevelopmentFund AT was executed. What was the total fee consumed by the AT from its start? How many blocks it was spread through?

[xizmax]

Thanks for the clarification.  So I guess we can only hope no bad actor attacks BURST...?

That is all you can hope for in any system, the only difference is how hard it is to mount an attack. Burst is not unprotected, so to speak, all these points were discussed in this thread and elsewhere on this forum.

From my 15 minute musings (hi Vitalik), I believe that NaaS is more of a theoretical toy, than a real attack vector for Burst. However, speaking for crypto in general, this is not something that should be approached solely from the "software" side of things and in 15 minute increments. It has to do as much with game theory (cooperation/competition) as with software development. Perhaps I should spend some more time thinking of miners as entities with "fitness" and looking at it through an evolutionary perspective, hmmm...

[vbcs]

ATDevelopmentFund AT was executed. What was the total fee consumed by the AT from its start? How many blocks it was spread through?

First of all, I would like to thank everyone for the support in funding the ATDevelopmentFund.

The total fees consumed for the AT from its start is 4.3bursts. They were distributed amongst 2 blocks. The first 1.1 fees consumed when the AT had run for first time. When the CF AT runs for first time it goes for "sleep" until the block height which is going to decide if the project is funded or not. The rest 3.2 fees consumed when the AT "woke up" ( block height 74905) and was time to decide.