[ANN] [SUP] Supcoin, PLUCK algorithm, Just Launched, Mine Now!

[corsaro]

any news from the developer?

no particular news...  just the diff is lowered.. good time to mine sup

[ciocgun]

Does anyone know something about https://cryptnz.com?

[Chugumoto]

Does anyone know something about https://cryptnz.com?

scam?

[Shadow_Runner]

Lol, offline already? It is good I had withdraw all my coins from there.

[orgi666]

So did I

[proletariat]

....................... I got something else I'm working on (for supcoin), but I'm not going to announce it until it's done or almost done..............................

any minute now?

[arloseb]

I'm waiting for the next project.

[Coin-Moron]

....................... I got something else I'm working on (for supcoin), but I'm not going to announce it until it's done or almost done..............................

any minute now?

[ciocgun]

Any news from the Dev?

[fabula]

I was one of the main support of this coin. Hope dev will come out with new update about next project

[earlz]

I'm not dead, but supcoin kinda is, isn't it :/

I had 3 features I wanted to have in NextCoin. Two of these features I wanted to carry over to Supcoin, but I've found flaws and/or they are dangerous to implement.

I'll go ahead and name off the two features and their flaws.

1. PoW+PoS hybrid mining method. Basically the idea was to make it so instead of buying $200 of mining equipment, you could buy $200 of coins and have the same mining power. However, the only workable way for this involved computing a significant amount of cryptographic signatures with a private key that holds this large amount of coins. Because computing signatures became a portion of the process covered by mining, this might mean that some people would try to make "specialized" private keys that though less secure, could be optimized in some ways to make signatures easier to compute. Also, a huge number of cryptographic signatures means that side-channel attacks would be significantly easier to pull off.

For these reasons, I've decided to not publish the specs or any more details beyond this. It's too dangerous and feels like something that could be a hackers playground. If you're an experienced altcoin dev (a real dev, not a copy-paste dev) or even a cryptographer or some such and think you know a way around this, I'd love to talk about it. I don't want to release a flawed "good sounding" spec to the world though that some coin will try to implement and cause a lot of people to lose money by hackers.

2. PoN, Proof of node mining method. This isn't completely my own idea (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/alt_ideas), but basically my idea is to make it so that you mine by hashing previous blocks in the blockchain. By requiring careful selection of which blocks can actually be used for mining, you could ensure that only miners with a full copy of the blockchain could function as PoN miners.

The flaw with this idea is that doing such a thing would make mobile/SPV wallets significantly less secure/capable. The problem is that to validate a block you must not only check it's proof of work, you must now also be able to verify that all the blocks in the PoN hash is valid. I could change it to only use the UTXO set, rather than the blockchain... but that is not really my goal for this mining method. My goal is to make sure to reward nodes with full copies of the blockchain. This idea still has some merit and I'm still thinking about how to make it work, but it's no longer slated for being in NextCoin at launch.

I don't want to go into details of what the one Killer Feature of NextCoin will be.. But basically it involves data on the blockchain, decentralization, and censorship. (And yes, I've seen some of the data on the blockchain stuff out there... This is much more powerful than what's out there)

Now, as for Supcoin. I want to reward the Supcoin bagholders in some way. I'm still determining what would be the best way to do that, but I don't want to just leave everyone high and dry. I'm not going to promise a coin swap or anything to NextCoin.. but I also don't want to immediately say no either. Idk, we'll see. I haven't forgotten about you guys.

[proletariat]

I'm not dead, but supcoin kinda is, isn't it :/

I had 3 features I wanted to have in NextCoin. Two of these features I wanted to carry over to Supcoin, but I've found flaws and/or they are dangerous to implement.

I'll go ahead and name off the two features and their flaws.

1. PoW+PoS hybrid mining method. Basically the idea was to make it so instead of buying $200 of mining equipment, you could buy $200 of coins and have the same mining power. However, the only workable way for this involved computing a significant amount of cryptographic signatures with a private key that holds this large amount of coins. Because computing signatures became a portion of the process covered by mining, this might mean that some people would try to make "specialized" private keys that though less secure, could be optimized in some ways to make signatures easier to compute. Also, a huge number of cryptographic signatures means that side-channel attacks would be significantly easier to pull off.

For these reasons, I've decided to not publish the specs or any more details beyond this. It's too dangerous and feels like something that could be a hackers playground. If you're an experienced altcoin dev (a real dev, not a copy-paste dev) or even a cryptographer or some such and think you know a way around this, I'd love to talk about it. I don't want to release a flawed "good sounding" spec to the world though that some coin will try to implement and cause a lot of people to lose money by hackers.

2. PoN, Proof of node mining method. This isn't completely my own idea (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/alt_ideas), but basically my idea is to make it so that you mine by hashing previous blocks in the blockchain. By requiring careful selection of which blocks can actually be used for mining, you could ensure that only miners with a full copy of the blockchain could function as PoN miners.

The flaw with this idea is that doing such a thing would make mobile/SPV wallets significantly less secure/capable. The problem is that to validate a block you must not only check it's proof of work, you must now also be able to verify that all the blocks in the PoN hash is valid. I could change it to only use the UTXO set, rather than the blockchain... but that is not really my goal for this mining method. My goal is to make sure to reward nodes with full copies of the blockchain. This idea still has some merit and I'm still thinking about how to make it work, but it's no longer slated for being in NextCoin at launch.

I don't want to go into details of what the one Killer Feature of NextCoin will be.. But basically it involves data on the blockchain, decentralization, and censorship. (And yes, I've seen some of the data on the blockchain stuff out there... This is much more powerful than what's out there)

Now, as for Supcoin. I want to reward the Supcoin bagholders in some way. I'm still determining what would be the best way to do that, but I don't want to just leave everyone high and dry. I'm not going to promise a coin swap or anything to NextCoin.. but I also don't want to immediately say no either. Idk, we'll see. I haven't forgotten about you guys.

thanks for the update, looks like holding SUP will actually pay off -------- it hasn't been easy for those of us still holding since launch   

Hopefully someone with a bright mind will stumble upon your post and will suggest an alternative workaround for the tech you're developing. Looking forward for future updates, hopefully less spread apart.

[coin43.com]

Hello, how is Supcoin doing? Please consider donating to SUP faucet.
Thank you!
http://faucet.coin43.com/supcoin/

[Hippie Tech]

WARNING !!! --> http://quttera.com/detailed_report/earlz.net

[earlz]

WARNING !!! --> http://quttera.com/detailed_report/earlz.net

Wow, that's some good scareware you found there. For reference, the offending post on my blog is this: http://earlz.net/view/2011/05/20/0040/emf-analysis

And the reason is that I used the http://is.gd URL shortner.

Nice try though

EDIT:

For reference, it says a few other common sites are dangerous too.

Stackoverflow: http://quttera.com/detailed_report/stackoverflow.com
Google: http://quttera.com/detailed_report/google.com
Github: http://quttera.com/detailed_report/github.com (this one is even "blacklisted")

[Hippie Tech]

WARNING !!! --> http://quttera.com/detailed_report/earlz.net

Wow, that's some good scareware you found there. For reference, the offending post on my blog is this: http://earlz.net/view/2011/05/20/0040/emf-analysis

And the reason is that I used the h t t p : / / is. gd URL shortner.

Nice try though

EDIT:

For reference, it says a few other common sites are dangerous too.

Stackoverflow: http://quttera.com/detailed_report/stackoverflow.com
Google: http://quttera.com/detailed_report/google.com
Github: http://quttera.com/detailed_report/github.com (this one is even "blacklisted")

A shortner with a bad reputation.

Read the comments section.
https://www.virustotal.com/en/url/d92eb9fedadf8ef87d077931d558dbb058bc35f38251ddefc6cc4addba929439/analysis/1426470325/

[baxto]

I'm not dead, but supcoin kinda is, isn't it :/

I had 3 features I wanted to have in NextCoin. Two of these features I wanted to carry over to Supcoin, but I've found flaws and/or they are dangerous to implement.

I'll go ahead and name off the two features and their flaws.

1. PoW+PoS hybrid mining method. Basically the idea was to make it so instead of buying $200 of mining equipment, you could buy $200 of coins and have the same mining power. However, the only workable way for this involved computing a significant amount of cryptographic signatures with a private key that holds this large amount of coins. Because computing signatures became a portion of the process covered by mining, this might mean that some people would try to make "specialized" private keys that though less secure, could be optimized in some ways to make signatures easier to compute. Also, a huge number of cryptographic signatures means that side-channel attacks would be significantly easier to pull off.

For these reasons, I've decided to not publish the specs or any more details beyond this. It's too dangerous and feels like something that could be a hackers playground. If you're an experienced altcoin dev (a real dev, not a copy-paste dev) or even a cryptographer or some such and think you know a way around this, I'd love to talk about it. I don't want to release a flawed "good sounding" spec to the world though that some coin will try to implement and cause a lot of people to lose money by hackers.

2. PoN, Proof of node mining method. This isn't completely my own idea (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/alt_ideas), but basically my idea is to make it so that you mine by hashing previous blocks in the blockchain. By requiring careful selection of which blocks can actually be used for mining, you could ensure that only miners with a full copy of the blockchain could function as PoN miners.

The flaw with this idea is that doing such a thing would make mobile/SPV wallets significantly less secure/capable. The problem is that to validate a block you must not only check it's proof of work, you must now also be able to verify that all the blocks in the PoN hash is valid. I could change it to only use the UTXO set, rather than the blockchain... but that is not really my goal for this mining method. My goal is to make sure to reward nodes with full copies of the blockchain. This idea still has some merit and I'm still thinking about how to make it work, but it's no longer slated for being in NextCoin at launch.

I don't want to go into details of what the one Killer Feature of NextCoin will be.. But basically it involves data on the blockchain, decentralization, and censorship. (And yes, I've seen some of the data on the blockchain stuff out there... This is much more powerful than what's out there)

Now, as for Supcoin. I want to reward the Supcoin bagholders in some way. I'm still determining what would be the best way to do that, but I don't want to just leave everyone high and dry. I'm not going to promise a coin swap or anything to NextCoin.. but I also don't want to immediately say no either. Idk, we'll see. I haven't forgotten about you guys.

Thanks for the reply, i really hope you do come to a solution to reward holders of Supcoin since we did take a chance on this one based on the potential.

[earlz]

So, there is one more thing I want to do with Supcoin. The hashing algorithm used has some properties that I would consider bugs. I wouldn't say it's anything that would compromise security, but it's not the final version of the hashing algorithm I want.

I want to try to do a soft-fork for the algorithm change. I would tune the desired algorithm to ensure that it is faster than the current algorithm, as that is another thing I want to have.

How it would work is that the wallet would be soft-forked to accept either hashing algorithm. So, if you mine a block using PLUCK it'll be accepted, or if you mine a block using PLUCK2.0 (or whatever name I come up with) then it'll be accepted.

Using this, there would be a clear incentive to port GPU miners to PLUCK2.0, as you could achieve faster hashing rates. But while there is only CPU miners you could potentially choose to use PLUCK on your GPU for mining, and PLUCK2.0 on your CPU. This also has a nice side effect of appeasing the CPU miner people out there, temporarily. When AMD and Nvidia miners are ported, it is expected that all pools will drop off their PLUCK1.0 support (as it will be slower and less effecient) and at this point the wallet will have a mandatory update that will turn off PLUCK1.0 support completely.

So, ideas and thoughts on this? I know changing PoW algorithm is one of the most difficult things to coordinate and I wish to use this new soft-forking method as a way to make the transition as simple as possible.

[CryptoDatabase]

Your coin and it's information has now been added to Crypto Database. It is listed under the S category found here.

If any information is missing or inaccurate please let me know via private message or by posting on my thread found here.

Regards,
Crypto Database
http://cryptodatabase.net

[Hippie Tech]

Mo flags.

Malicious files:  2
Suspicious files:  5

http://quttera.com/detailed_report/cryptodatabase.net