[UNOFFICIAL] [VNL] Vanillacoin 0.4.1 | Instant ▱ Incentivized ▱ Innovative

[groggin]

Can we go on Bter?

  Cryptopia?  (need (hosted) pre-compiled linux bin)

                            - imho they're doing a gr8 job building their new exchange/mining/market place

[1714794978]

1714794978

[1714794978]

1714794978

[1714794978]

1714794978

[1714794978]

1714794978

[anhpt192]

http://www.jubi.com/coin/vnl/

VNL listing on jubi? 

I see a blank white page and can't find VNL from the trading menu on homepage

Chinese page, i cant read 

[kcanup]

http://www.jubi.com/coin/vnl/

VNL listing on jubi? 

I see a blank white page and can't find VNL from the trading menu on homepage

Chinese page, i cant read 

Thats chinese exchange, if you can read the digits thats enough if you dont understand chinese also Even funny in google translated page, some coins name are different than we usually hear, also coin logo so be careful while trading there lol

BTW VNL isnt listed in Jubi yet, it was somebody pranked, no real news or anything yet 

[anhpt192]

http://www.jubi.com/coin/vnl/

VNL listing on jubi? 

I see a blank white page and can't find VNL from the trading menu on homepage

Chinese page, i cant read 

Thats chinese exchange, if you can read the digits thats enough if you dont understand chinese also Even funny in google translated page, some coins name are different than we usually hear, also coin logo so be careful while trading there lol

BTW VNL isnt listed in Jubi yet, it was somebody pranked, no real news or anything yet 

thanks bro!
VNL is worth itself without some other exchanges like jubi

[jibble]

https://github.com/john-connor/papers/blob/708f488c8c17e08a12bc4bdb4fc5ac1e2aaf6e24/zerotime.pdf

[crypto research]

https://github.com/john-connor/papers/blob/708f488c8c17e08a12bc4bdb4fc5ac1e2aaf6e24/zerotime.pdf

Finally something new in the crypto world.

[monsterer]

https://github.com/john-connor/papers/blob/708f488c8c17e08a12bc4bdb4fc5ac1e2aaf6e24/zerotime.pdf

Finally something new in the crypto world.

Interesting, but it also reminds me of the way the master nodes work in Dash. Differences?

[traumschiff]

https://github.com/john-connor/papers/blob/708f488c8c17e08a12bc4bdb4fc5ac1e2aaf6e24/zerotime.pdf

Finally something new in the crypto world.

Interesting, but it also reminds me of the way the master nodes work in Dash. Differences?

Did you read the white paper? Yes or No?



The last time you got asked to move on IRC for a discussion you dropped the subject. I really don't understand you.

[monsterer]

Did you read the white paper? Yes or No?

Your trying hard aren't you?

I did read the white paper, yes. To the casual observer (i.e. me), it seems that super nodes could be equivalent to master nodes in dash, and dash uses a similar transaction output locking mechanism to achieve it's 0 confirmation consensus. There is no description of their (super nodes) function in the paper.

However, I was just wondering if there are real, obvious differences which distinguish this implementation from that of Dash's.

I have put a pull request asking for more info, if that makes you happy.

[Rols]

Did you read the white paper? Yes or No?

Your trying hard aren't you?

I did read the white paper, yes. To the casual observer (i.e. me), it seems that super nodes could be equivalent to master nodes in dash, and dash uses a similar transaction output locking mechanism to achieve it's 0 confirmation consensus. There is no description of their (super nodes) function in the paper.

However, I was just wondering if there are real, obvious differences which distinguish this implementation from that of Dash's.

I have put a pull request asking for more info, if that makes you happy.

Dont worry. Traumschiff fights everyone that asks questions. He dont know a shit about programming but he is an expert in it.  

[traumschiff]

Did you read the white paper? Yes or No?

Your trying hard aren't you?

I did read the white paper, yes. To the casual observer (i.e. me), it seems that super nodes could be equivalent to master nodes in dash, and dash uses a similar transaction output locking mechanism to achieve it's 0 confirmation consensus. There is no description of their (super nodes) function in the paper.

However, I was just wondering if there are real, obvious differences which distinguish this implementation from that of Dash's.

I have put a pull request asking for more info, if that makes you happy.

Problem is the last time you were "wondering" about an implementation I asked you atleast 2 times to jump on IRC because John is the only person who can really answer you highly technical questions. You simply skipped this (acted as nothing happened), didn't join the IRC discussion and now you jump to your next questions.

Sorry, but this attitude isn't really making me happy.

[traumschiff]

Did you read the white paper? Yes or No?

Your trying hard aren't you?

I did read the white paper, yes. To the casual observer (i.e. me), it seems that super nodes could be equivalent to master nodes in dash, and dash uses a similar transaction output locking mechanism to achieve it's 0 confirmation consensus. There is no description of their (super nodes) function in the paper.

However, I was just wondering if there are real, obvious differences which distinguish this implementation from that of Dash's.

I have put a pull request asking for more info, if that makes you happy.

Dont worry. Traumschiff fights everyone that asks questions. He dont know a shit about programming but he is an expert in it.  

Yup, I can't code, but that doesn't hold me down from answering most peoples requests since 70 pages. Problem?

Oh, I remember you. This is your quote: "Its you clueless people that put up the coin in exchanges before it was ready." after c-cex lost peoples Vanillas with the 3rd corrupted wallet.

[SquidsIn]

I like Vanilla 

Me too.  I'd like it even more if I could figure out how to get MinerPP working with Cairnsmore CM1's and/or Ztex 1.15y.

Anybody here got any pointers?

[ocminer]

I like Vanilla 

Me too.  I'd like it even more if I could figure out how to get MinerPP working with Cairnsmore CM1's and/or Ztex 1.15y.

Anybody here got any pointers?

You'd have to compile the .vcf as there is currently no Binfile and/or Bistream for those boards.

I'm waiting for them too

[YarkoL]

Interesting, but it also reminds me of the way the master nodes work in Dash. Differences?

As I understand it... Masternodes are basically mixer nodes, but VNL does not
employ this kind of anonymity. Also the paper cites as reference
the "transaction locking" feature that was added later to masternodes,
but the mechanism is different, as with VNL the locking happens
through synchonization of "global transaction pool".

However, the paper speaks about "storage nodes" and "slots" without
defining them. A node (an "ordinary" one, I presume) must get information
about a given transaction from a set of storage nodes before it can consider the
transaction safe to spend.

A nonprofessional in P2P technology like myself can certainly get an impression
that the storage nodes are some kind of masternodes with special functions and privileges.
But perhaps they are simply the same as full nodes in Bitcoin, ie nodes that relay and retain transactions.

[maccaspacca]

Interesting, but it also reminds me of the way the master nodes work in Dash. Differences?

As I understand it... Masternodes are basically mixer nodes, but VNL does not
employ this kind of anonymity. Also the paper cites as reference
the "transaction locking" feature that was added later to masternodes,
but the mechanism is different, as with VNL the locking happens
through synchonization of "global transaction pool".

However, the paper speaks about "storage nodes" and "slots" without
defining them. A node (an "ordinary" one, I presume) must get information
about a given transaction from a set of storage nodes before it can consider the
transaction safe to spend.

A nonprofessional in P2P technology like myself can certainly get an impression
that the storage nodes are some kind of masternodes with special functions and privileges.
But perhaps they are simply the same as full nodes in Bitcoin, ie nodes that relay and retain transactions.

The way I read it is that you are on the right track with "global transaction pool". The whole pool is a distributed p2p pool of ordinary nodes and at any one time some nodes act / emulate "super peers", "storage nodes" etc. They are not distinct or permanant entities and the roles move around between nodes as time progresses. The network as whole therefore acts as a distributed p2p application in real time and therefore is a truly distributed p2p decentralised system.

[traumschiff]

Interesting, but it also reminds me of the way the master nodes work in Dash. Differences?

As I understand it... Masternodes are basically mixer nodes, but VNL does not
employ this kind of anonymity. Also the paper cites as reference
the "transaction locking" feature that was added later to masternodes,
but the mechanism is different, as with VNL the locking happens
through synchonization of "global transaction pool".

However, the paper speaks about "storage nodes" and "slots" without
defining them. A node (an "ordinary" one, I presume) must get information
about a given transaction from a set of storage nodes before it can consider the
transaction safe to spend.

A nonprofessional in P2P technology like myself can certainly get an impression
that the storage nodes are some kind of masternodes with special functions and privileges.
But perhaps they are simply the same as full nodes in Bitcoin, ie nodes that relay and retain transactions.

The way I read it is that you are on the right track with "global transaction pool". The whole pool is a distributed p2p pool of ordinary nodes and at any one time some nodes act / emulate "super peers", "storage nodes" etc. They are not distinct or permanant entities and the roles move around between nodes as time progresses. The network as whole therefore acts as a distributed p2p application in real time and therefore is a truly distributed p2p decentralised system.

My 2 cents: This seems to be accurate. Also there will probably be no financial gain implemented into the system for superpeers (ie masternode and their bonus from tx's) so there should also be no entry barrier for peers (ie coins needed for masternodes).

An entry barrier could be a strong bandwidth or visibility settings (firewall,no VPN, whatever) so you can hold a high number of connections to the network. This would be therefore a decentralized network with volunteers that can be randomly chosen as superpeers. You just have to hit certain criteria, but this can be easily achieved for most people already in the modern world.

[jibble]

Interesting, but it also reminds me of the way the master nodes work in Dash. Differences?

As I understand it... Masternodes are basically mixer nodes, but VNL does not
employ this kind of anonymity. Also the paper cites as reference
the "transaction locking" feature that was added later to masternodes,
but the mechanism is different, as with VNL the locking happens
through synchonization of "global transaction pool".

However, the paper speaks about "storage nodes" and "slots" without
defining them. A node (an "ordinary" one, I presume) must get information
about a given transaction from a set of storage nodes before it can consider the
transaction safe to spend.

A nonprofessional in P2P technology like myself can certainly get an impression
that the storage nodes are some kind of masternodes with special functions and privileges.
But perhaps they are simply the same as full nodes in Bitcoin, ie nodes that relay and retain transactions.

The storage nodes will all tie into DarkPP , hosting a sort of tor like network, hosted completely on these storage nodes of vanilla coin.

They will likely have special functions, not just relaying and retaining transactions but all sorts of information , websites and the likes. i would assume they wouldn't have any special privileges as such  , Most likely nodes hosting information are likely to be unable to know what information it is exactly they are transmitting (this is for security reasons and safety) having all information sent across the nodes being encrypted.  

[YarkoL]

The storage nodes will all tie into DarkPP , hosting a sort of tor like network, hosted completely on these storage nodes of vanilla coin.

They will likely have special functions, not just relaying and retaining transactions but all sorts of information , websites and the likes. i would assume they wouldn't have any special privileges as such  , Most likely nodes hosting information are likely to be unable to know what information it is exactly they are transmitting (this is for security reasons and safety) having all information sent across the nodes being encrypted.  

Thanks for shedding light on this!

Although now I'm again somewhat lost on why full nodes that do
retain transactions in mempool and database need to depend
on these storage nodes, since the global tx pool was supposed to
do away with forking and double spend issues.

Personally I find a system with nodes that have special statuses (like masternodes)
a little lacking in aesthetics since decentralization to me implies an
equality of sorts among nodes. But if the barrier for entry/exit to
a special status is very low, then that is not a big deal... like in
Millenniumcoin, where you just announce your intention to become
a special node (not shilling here... just mentioning for illustration)

Furthermore, I strongly feel that the storage nodes ought to have either
privileges or some other incentives. In the case of Tor, there is a continuous
dearth of relaying nodes, which leads to a serious vulnerabilities, and this is
because (sadly!) there are too few people who are ready to share out their
resources for purely idealistic reasons. I don't think for a second that
this could work in crypto, so some rewards are needed.

[jibble]

The storage nodes will all tie into DarkPP , hosting a sort of tor like network, hosted completely on these storage nodes of vanilla coin.

They will likely have special functions, not just relaying and retaining transactions but all sorts of information , websites and the likes. i would assume they wouldn't have any special privileges as such  , Most likely nodes hosting information are likely to be unable to know what information it is exactly they are transmitting (this is for security reasons and safety) having all information sent across the nodes being encrypted.  

Thanks for shedding light on this!

Although now I'm again somewhat lost on why full nodes that do
retain transactions in mempool and database need to depend
on these storage nodes, since the global tx pool was supposed to
do away with forking and double spend issues.

Personally I find a system with nodes that have special statuses (like masternodes)
a little lacking in aesthetics since decentralization to me implies an
equality of sorts among nodes. But if the barrier for entry/exit to
a special status is very low, then that is not a big deal... like in
Millenniumcoin, where you just announce your intention to become
a special node (not shilling, but mentioning for illustration)

Furthermore, I strongly feel that the storage nodes ought to have either
privileges or some other incentives. In the case of Tor, there is a continuous
dearth of relaying nodes, which leads to a serious vulnerabilities, and this is
because (sadly!) there are too few people who are ready to share out their
resources for purely idealistic reasons. I don't think for a second that
this could work in crypto, so some rewards are needed.

From my understanding , Bitcoin nodes relay transactions, the transactions are all different depending on which nodes relay which transaction until it reached the blockchain.

With vanilla all node transactions are synced together, they all relay the same transactions using UDP tables to sync them all up before pushing forward into the blockchain. so when a transaction is relayed , all nodes in the network are aware of the transaction at the same time, this prevents collusion between bad acting nodes trying to push thru false transactions or making a longer chain to compete and take over /double spending