Discussion about Primecoin and its infra. Primecoin is a very innovative cryptocurrency, being the 1st non Hash-Cash PoW crypto, naturally scarce (not artificially), with very fast confirmations (1min), elastic readjusting reward & a useful mining (byproducts are primes). Primecoin is sustainable (miners are guaranteed to have revenues), and decentralized (ASIC/FPGA are not particularly advantaged). Sidechain for decentralized data applications (e.g. Storj) currently in development.
Primecoin is an innovative cryptocurrency, a form of digital currency secured by cryptography and issued through a decentralized mining market. Derived from Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin, Primecoin introduces an unique form of proof-of-work based on searching for prime numbers.
https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/releases/tag/126.96.36.199 Finally! After over ten months of development and testing, "Fern" has arrived! This is a whopper. 240 pull requests merged. Essentially a complete rewrite that was started with the scraper (the "neural net" rewrite) in "Denise" has now been completed. Practically the ENTIRE Gridcoin specific codebase resting on top of the vanilla Bitcoin/Peercoin/Blackcoin vanilla PoS code has been rewritten. This removes the team requirement at last (see below), although there are many other important improvements besides that. Fern was a monumental undertaking. We had to encode all of the old rules active for the v10 block protocol in new code and ensure that the new code was 100% compatible. This had to be done in such a way as to clear out all of the old spaghetti and ring-fence it with tightly controlled class implementations. We then wrote an entirely new, simplified ruleset for research rewards and reengineered contracts (which includes beacon management, polls, and voting) using properly classed code. The fundamentals of Gridcoin with this release are now on a very sound and maintainable footing, and the developers believe the codebase as updated here will serve as the fundamental basis for Gridcoin's future roadmap. We have been testing this for MONTHS on testnet in various stages. The v10 (legacy) compatibility code has been running on testnet continuously as it was developed to ensure compatibility with existing nodes. During the last few months, we have done two private testnet forks and then the full public testnet testing for v11 code (the new protocol which is what Fern implements). The developers have also been running non-staking "sentinel" nodes on mainnet with this code to verify that the consensus rules are problem-free for the legacy compatibility code on the broader mainnet. We believe this amount of testing is going to result in a smooth rollout. Given the amount of changes in Fern, I am presenting TWO changelogs below. One is high level, which summarizes the most significant changes in the protocol. The second changelog is the detailed one in the usual format, and gives you an inkling of the size of this release.
Note that the protocol changes will not become active until we cross the hard-fork transition height to v11, which has been set at 2053000. Given current average block spacing, this should happen around October 4, about one month from now. Note that to get all of the beacons in the network on the new protocol, we are requiring ALL beacons to be validated. A two week (14 day) grace period is provided by the code, starting at the time of the transition height, for people currently holding a beacon to validate the beacon and prevent it from expiring. That means that EVERY CRUNCHER must advertise and validate their beacon AFTER the v11 transition (around Oct 4th) and BEFORE October 18th (or more precisely, 14 days from the actual date of the v11 transition). If you do not advertise and validate your beacon by this time, your beacon will expire and you will stop earning research rewards until you advertise and validate a new beacon. This process has been made much easier by a brand new beacon "wizard" that helps manage beacon advertisements and renewals. Once a beacon has been validated and is a v11 protocol beacon, the normal 180 day expiration rules apply. Note, however, that the 180 day expiration on research rewards has been removed with the Fern update. This means that while your beacon might expire after 180 days, your earned research rewards will be retained and can be claimed by advertising a beacon with the same CPID and going through the validation process again. In other words, you do not lose any earned research rewards if you do not stake a block within 180 days and keep your beacon up-to-date. The transition height is also when the team requirement will be relaxed for the network.
Besides the beacon wizard, there are a number of improvements to the GUI, including new UI transaction types (and icons) for staking the superblock, sidestake sends, beacon advertisement, voting, poll creation, and transactions with a message. The main screen has been revamped with a better summary section, and better status icons. Several changes under the hood have improved GUI performance. And finally, the diagnostics have been revamped.
The wallet sync speed has been DRASTICALLY improved. A decent machine with a good network connection should be able to sync the entire mainnet blockchain in less than 4 hours. A fast machine with a really fast network connection and a good SSD can do it in about 2.5 hours. One of our goals was to reduce or eliminate the reliance on snapshots for mainnet, and I think we have accomplished that goal with the new sync speed. We have also streamlined the in-memory structures for the blockchain which shaves some memory use. There are so many goodies here it is hard to summarize them all. I would like to thank all of the contributors to this release, but especially thank @cyrossignol, whose incredible contributions formed the backbone of this release. I would also like to pay special thanks to @barton2526, @caraka, and @Quezacoatl1, who tirelessly helped during the testing and polishing phase on testnet with testing and repeated builds for all architectures. The developers are proud to present this release to the community and we believe this represents the starting point for a true renaissance for Gridcoin!
Most significantly, nodes calculate research rewards directly from the magnitudes in EACH superblock between stakes instead of using a two- or three- point average based on a CPID's current magnitude and the magnitude for the CPID when it last staked. For those long-timers in the community, this has been referred to as "Superblock Windows," and was first done in proof-of-concept form by @denravonska.
Network magnitude unit pinned to a static value of 0.25
Max research reward allowed per block raised to 16384 GRC (from 12750 GRC)
New CPIDs begin accruing research rewards from the first superblock that contains the CPID instead of from the time of the beacon advertisement
500 GRC research reward limit for a CPID's first stake
6-month expiration for unclaimed rewards
10-block spacing requirement between research reward claims
Rolling 5-day payment-per-day limit
Legacy tolerances for floating-point error and time drift
The need to include a valid copy of a CPID's magnitude in a claim
10-block emission adjustment interval for the magnitude unit
One-time beacon activation requires that participants temporarily change their usernames to a verification code at one whitelisted BOINC project
Verification codes of pending beacons expire after 3 days
Self-service beacon removal
Burn fee for beacon advertisement increased from 0.00001 GRC to 0.5 GRC
Rain addresses derived from beacon keys instead of a default wallet address
Beacon expiration determined as of the current block instead of the previous block
The ability for developers to remove beacons
The ability to sign research reward claims with non-current but unexpired beacons
As a reminder:
Beacons expire after 6 months pass (180 days)
Beacons can be renewed after 5 months pass (150 days)
Renewed beacons must be signed with the same key as the original beacon
Magnitudes less than 1 include two fractional places
Magnitudes greater than or equal to 1 but less than 10 include one fractional place
A valid superblock must match a scraper convergence
Superblock popularity election mechanics
Yes/no/abstain and single-choice response types (no user-facing support yet)
To create a poll, a maximum of 250 UTXOs for a single address must add up to 100000 GRC. These are selected from the largest downwards.
Burn fee for creating polls scaled by the number of UTXOs claimed
50 GRC for a poll contract
0.001 GRC per claimed UTXO
Burn fee for casting votes scaled by the number of UTXOs claimed
0.01 GRC for a vote contract
0.01 GRC to claim magnitude
0.01 GRC per claimed address
0.001 GRC per claimed UTXO
Maximum length of a poll title: 80 characters
Maximum length of a poll question: 100 characters
Maximum length of a poll discussion website URL: 100 characters
Maximum number of poll choices: 20
Maximum length of a poll choice label: 100 characters
Magnitude, CPID count, and participant count poll weight types
The ability for developers to remove polls and votes
[188.8.131.52] 2020-09-03, mandatory, "Fern"
Backport newer uint256 types from Bitcoin #1570 (@cyrossignol)
Implement project level rain for rainbymagnitude #1580 (@jamescowens)
Upgrade utilities (Update checker and snapshot downloadeapplication) #1576 (@iFoggz)
Provide fees collected in the block by the miner #1601 (@iFoggz)
Add support for generating legacy superblocks from scraper stats #1603 (@cyrossignol)
Port of the Bitcoin Logger to Gridcoin #1600 (@jamescowens)
Implement zapwallettxes #1605 (@jamescowens)
Implements a global event filter to suppress help question mark #1609 (@jamescowens)
Add next target difficulty to RPC output #1615 (@cyrossignol)
Add caching for block hashes to CBlock #1624 (@cyrossignol)
Make toolbars and tray icon red for testnet #1637 (@jamescowens)
Add an rpc call convergencereport #1643 (@jamescowens)
Implement newline filter on config file read in #1645 (@jamescowens)
Implement beacon status icon/button #1646 (@jamescowens)
Add gridcointestnet.png #1649 (@caraka)
Add precision to support magnitudes less than 1 #1651 (@cyrossignol)
Replace research accrual calculations with superblock snapshots #1657 (@cyrossignol)
Publish example gridcoinresearch.conf as a md document to the doc directory #1662 (@jamescowens)
Add options checkbox to disable transaction notifications #1666 (@jamescowens)
Add support for self-service beacon deletion #1695 (@cyrossignol)
Add support for type-specific contract fee amounts #1698 (@cyrossignol)
Add verifiedbeaconreport and pendingbeaconreport #1696 (@jamescowens)
Add preliminary testing option for block v11 height on testnet #1706 (@cyrossignol)
Add verified beacons manifest part to superblock validator #1711 (@cyrossignol)
Implement beacon, vote, and superblock display categories/icons in UI transaction model #1717 (@jamescowens)
Ok, A little backround. I know hardware and networking. I can build just about any config of a computer. I understand overclocking and undervolting. I can invest around 2,700 for initial investment. So do I buy hardware to build a GPU miner with at least 6 cards or more? Probably RX580 as they are cheap and I have one in my rig. More on that later. Or do I a Asic miner like this I understand a GPU miner is multiple coins and not Bitcoin, and Asic is nothing but Bitcoin. I've done the math on the Asic miner and the ROI in about 3 months with a net gain of about ~10,000 USD a year @ .13 cents per Watt. I've had a hard time finding a solid or semi way of calculating the earnings for a GPU miner. Not only because it is many coins or dedicated to one coin, but there our other variables involved. However I have more control of the hardware if it fails. I dipped my toe into mining with my own rig that has a RX580 fatboy and a AMD Phenom ii x4 955 black edition. I overclocked the GPU and undervolted the CPU to reduce heat since it was hitting 62 cel. The GPU gets 12.5 sol/s and the CPU was getting ~322 h/s. All this added up to ~170 watts and a net of .00218322 BTC/Month. This was all done using Cudo as it was easy to find and setup just to test. This was just a test to see how it would work. I wouldn't use Cudo to full scale as it is a pool and the transfer to a Wallet is pretty steep in relationship to earns. I understand that in a pool you get your share based upon how much of the "work" you did to get find block. So do I build or buy? With that much computation power do I need to join a pool? What software is best for pool or alone? I am comfortable with CLI as long as it's well documented, but would like a remote GUI. Also what is the best wallet with the best fees for transactions. Currently using uphold since I use Brave. I think I covered as much as I could, if you have any questions let me know. Any advice would be great. If I should post this else where let me know please or I could just cross post it. TIA. Be safe, stay safe! Edit: Words and BTC earning was WAY off then I first typed this.
Ok so from my knowledge I understand that miners can create new Bitcoins by utilizing processing power to complete complex mathematical calculations which rewards the miners with Bitcoins and adds new coins to the float? And I believe the new miners coins can only be able to be circulated if the miners use the Bitcoins to make a transaction? Also, when someone buys a Bitcoin from someone else, who isn’t a miner, or simply pays for something with Bitcoin, my understanding is that a proof of work (POW) has to be completed in order for the blockchain to be settled and verified? But are miners also completing the POW for these P2P transactions and receiving a reward in Bitcoins for the POW as well? Am I on the right track that complex mathematical calculations need to be performed to create new Bitcoins but also need to completed to verify transactions which also provides a reward of a Bitcoin? I guess my confusion stems from my understanding that miners could technically mine new Bitcoins but never sell them or use them to pay for anything, potentially leading to a hoarding of Bitcoins so that no coins circulate, causing a barrier to entry of new investors who aren’t miners. I know I’m confused and missing something so set me straight friends of Crypto!
In the current block chain world, there are mainly two ways of record preservation, UTXO mode and Account mode. Bitcoin adopts UTXO model, Ethereum/EOS adopts Account model, and WisdomChian also adopts Account model. Today we will explain in detail why WisdomChian also adopted the account model. Before introducing the UTXO model and the Account balance model, we have to first introduce the most important concepts and data structures in their two or even all block chain applications, that is, Block. The block chain is actually made up of a list of growing chains, which contains many records, that is, blocks. 📷 UTXO model In the UTXO model, transactions only represent changes in the UTXO collection. The concept of accounts and balances is a higher abstraction on the UTXO collection. The concept of accounts and balances only exists in wallets. Let's look at some examples to understand the difference. First, Bitcoin UTXO can not be partially expended. If a user wants to spend 0.5 Bitcoins, but he has 1 Bitcoins in his UTXO collection.He has to send half a Bitcoin to himself to get change at the same time as he sends half a Bitcoin to someone else. If he doesn't send it to himself, he will pay 0.5 Bitcoin to the miner. 📷 Second, Bitcoin itself does not store account balances. Users only need to sign these UTXO with the private key to spend Bitcoins. The digital wallet makes the Bitcoin blockchain look like it has the function of user account balance. This is not the case. How visual wallets work in Bitcoin Bitcoin's UTXO system works well, partly because digital wallets can help to accomplish most of the work related to transactions. Including but not limited to: a) Processing UTXO b) Storage key c) Set transaction costs d) Provide change address e) Aggregated UTXO (display available, pending and total balance) Trading in the UTXO model is similar to paper currency. Each account shows how much money it has by calculating the sum of all the paper money (UTXO) in the wallet (corresponding to the wallet address). When we want to spend money, we need to use one or more UTXO with enough cost and we may get a new UTXO. Each UTXO can only be used once, because once UTXO is expended, it will be deleted from the UTXO pool. All in all, we know that: Bitcoin blockchain does not store account balance Bitcoin Wallet Holds secret key If it is included in the transaction, it will cost the entire UTXO (in some cases, the change is in the form of a new UTXO). WisdomChain WisdomChain adopts the same Account transaction structure as ETH. Unlike Ethernet, there are two very different data in Ethernet: permanent data and temporary data. An example of permanent data is a transaction, which, when fully confirmed, will be recorded in the transactiontrie and will never change. An example of temporary data is the balance on a specific Ethereum account address. The balance of the account address is stored in statetrie and will be changed whenever the transaction of the particular account changes. In Ethereum, permanent data (such as mined transactions) and temporary data (such as account balances) are stored separately. Ethereum uses trie data structure to manage data. And about WisdomChain, when the transaction is initiated, the node will calculate the status information after transaction based on the current state information and transaction content in the virtual machine, and store the relevant hash value of the state information along with the transaction. When the transaction is packaged by a miner, the remaining nodes store data on the Merkletrees to ensure that the state information of their nodes and other nodes in the network is consistent. So WisdomChain's records are kept like banks. Similar to using ATM / debit cards, banks track the amount of each debit card. When we need to spend money, the bank checks its records to make sure we have enough balance before confirming the transaction. Of course, WisdomChain uses the Account transaction structure, which inevitably leads to the problems of the Account transaction structure itself. First, there is no dependency between Account model transactions, so the problem of replay attacks needs to be solved. Second, for the realization of lightning network, Plasma and so on, users need more complex Proof mechanism to produce evidence. The state transfer of sub chains to the main chain requires more complicated protocols.
Voici LA chronique à découvrir, intitulée: La guerre contre Bitcoin. Idéal pour comprendre certains tenants et aboutissants
Voici LA chronique à découvrir, intitulée: La guerre contre Bitcoin. Idéal pour comprendre certains tenants et aboutissants… Bonne découverte. La guerre contre Bitcoin Bitcoin est peut-être le meilleur outil de liberté économique de cette génération, et peut-être depuis plusieurs générations. Malheureusement, Bitcoin a été furieusement étouffé par une guerre civile brutale depuis environ cinq ans maintenant; menée par des ingénieurs sociaux professionnels de certaines des entreprises les plus puissantes de l'espace des médias sociaux. Leur talent dans l'art et la science de la manipulation a permis aux "Bitcoiners" de se battre largement entre eux plutôt que de chercher à créer des modèles commerciaux innovants basés sur les données qui pourraient révolutionner l'économie mondiale via Bitcoin. À la suite de la guerre civile de Bitcoin, trois versions concurrentes de Bitcoin ont vu le jour (BTC, BCH et Bitcoin SV ), mais il en est de même pour environ 3000 autres projets et jetons de « crypto-monnaie » se faisant passer pour des entreprises légitimes - jusqu'à un "exit scam" presque garantie, le fait de disparaitre du jour au lendemain avec tout l'argent des utilisateurs. Le principal bienfaiteur de la guerre civile Bitcoin a été Ethereum: une machine à états mondiale qui permet un déploiement facile de tokens et de contrats intelligents, mais le protocole Ethereum ne peut pas évoluer, et parmis les milliers de projets lancés, seule une poignée pourrait même être présentée comme avoir les ingrédients nécessaires pour devenir des entreprises légitimes. La plupart des autres sont des stratagèmes de Ponzi ou des émissions d'actions illégales - enrichissant les développeurs et escroquant les investisseurs amateurs. C'est dans ce contexte que les défenseurs de BTC et de BCH, les porte-parole d'Ethereum et les altcoiners de tous bords s'alignent pour attaquer sans cesse le protocole Bitcoin préservé uniquement par le réseau BSV. Une industrie composée presque entièrement de criminels, de fraudes et d'arnaqueurs s'est unie contre BSV citant (et c'est là l'ironie) une prétendue fraude et arnaque présumée qui est l'existence même de BSV. Nous devons nous demander pourquoi ? Quel est le différenciateur clé de BSV? Pourquoi tous les arnaqueurs se sont-ils unis contre lui? Je suis fermement convaincu que pour la plupart, la motivation est la peur de la capacité de BSV à absorber l'économie mondiale et tous les autres projets «crypto» qui vont avec. Pour les autres, ou ceux qui ne comprennent pas le pouvoir du Bitcoin, ils sont entraînés dans une guerre culturelle qu'ils ne comprennent pas. Il est essentiel de comprendre les pouvoirs en jeu et leurs implications pour Bitcoin et l'économie mondiale. Une histoire brève Bitcoin a été lancé avec un "livre blanc" sur la liste de diffusion de cryptographie en 2008. Le pseudonyme « Satoshi Nakamoto » a déclaré une solution au problème de la double dépense. Or le problème de la double dépense de tous les précédents systèmes de paiement électronique était le seul facteur limitant l'adoption d'une monnaie électronique fonctionnelle. Il était impossible de prouver exactement qui possédait quelles unités d'argent sur leurs registres distribués, de sorte que les systèmes ne pouvaient pas faire confiance, et ces projets mourraient assez vite. Bitcoin a résolu ce problème avec un concept appelé « preuve de travail». Il poste la question: qui a brûlé le plus de puissance de calcul pour résoudre des énigmes arbitraires afin de rendre compte de l'état du registre d'une manière qui coûte de l'argent, de sorte qu'il y ait une incitation économique à tenir un compte honnête des avoirs de chacun. Ce processus est souvent appelé « exploitation minière » car les nœuds honnêtes qui maintiennent l'état du registre sont récompensés pour leur travail avec des Bitcoins toutes les dix minutes - un peu à la même manière d'un mineur d'or qui est récompensé par de l'or en échange de son travail. Étant donné que Bitcoin n'avait aucune valeur lors de son lancement, il était extrêmement facile à miner et également gratuit d'envoyer des tonnes de transactions. En théorie, il s'agissait d'un vecteur d'attaque par déni de service (DoS). Une attaque DoS ou DDoS se produit lorsque les nœuds sont inondés de plus de données qu'ils ne peuvent en gérer et qu'ils plantent. Sur un jeune réseau Bitcoin, un crash comme celui-ci aurait été considéré comme un échec du réseau, donc un plafond de 1 Mo de données pour chaque dix minutes de temps de transaction a été codé en dur dans le logiciel - semant la première graine de la guerre civile Bitcoin . De 2009 à 2017, cette limite de 1 Mo sur le total des transactions était l'aspect technique le plus controversé du bitcoin. Pourquoi est-ce important? Une seule et simple transaction Bitcoin est relativement petite du point de vue des données, donc 1 Mo toutes les dix minutes donne environ trois à sept transactions par seconde avant que le réseau ne devienne trop encombré. Satoshi Nakamoto a plaidé pour un nombre de transactions au niveau de Visa, ainsi que son successeur direct en tant que développeur principal du projet, Gavin Andresen! Certains des premiers Bitcoiners influents comme Mike Hearn et Jeff Garzik ont également plaidé pour plus de données par bloc pour permettre à Bitcoin de se développer pour rester un simple système de paiement électronique. Ils étaient pour des «gros blocs» contrairement au camp des «petits blocs» qui préconisaient une permanence de la limitation de 1 Mo de Bitcoin. Le camp des "petits blocs" estiment que Bitcoin n'est pas un réseau de paiement, mais plutôt qu'il s'apparente davantage à une banque décentralisée conçue pour stocker des Bitcoins qui ne bougent jamais: une sorte de coffre-fort d'or numérique. Ils voulaient que la limite de taille des blocs de 1 Mo reste permanente sous les auspices de chaque personne exécutant un «nœud bitcoin complet» sans avoir à payer trop d'espace sur le disque dur. Cela signifierait qu'en période de congestion, les frais de transaction deviendraient absurdement élevés, mais cela n'aurait pas d'importance car le bitcoin ne devrait pas être négocié sauf en grosses quantitées de toute façon. L'autre problème est que s'il est bon marché de rejoindre la gouvernance de Bitcoin, alors le réseau est facile à attaquer par sybil, et je dirais que BTC est régi par des sybilles à ce jour. Le camp des "gros-blocs" estime que tout le monde sur terre devrait être en mesure d'échanger et de faire ses affaires sur Bitcoin. Les "petits-blocs" pensent que tout le monde devrait être en mesure de gérer soi-même le registre mondial chez soi, mais que seules certaines personnes très riches devraient pouvoir effectuer des transactions. Après des années de querelles, en 2017, Bitcoin s'est scindé en deux chaînes distinctes, et en 2018, il s'est à nouveau divisé. Alors quelle est la différence entre ces versions ? BTC est actuellement la version qui a le prix le plus élevé, avec la plus petite taille de bloc et la plus grande puissance de calcul. Malheureusement, il est régi par des développeurs de logiciels et des sybilles qui contrôlent le consensus grâce à une utilisation intelligente de logiciels malveillants appelés «soft-fork» qui leur permet de saper les règles du Bitcoin. Ils utilisent ce pouvoir pour changer les règles des transactions en mentant aux nœuds et en leur disant de les valider quand même. Toute la culture BTC consiste à acheter du BTC afin de le conserver jusqu'à un moment dans le futur où il sera vendu. Les paiements avec BTC ou les transactions de toute nature sont méprisés. BCH est un réseau basé sur Bitcoin qui pense que les blocs devraient être à peine légèrement plus grands, mais ils ont également des développeurs en charge des règles, tout comme BTC, et ils pensent que Bitcoin devrait être catégorisé pour être utilisé uniquement pour le commerce de détail, mais rien de plus. Le réseau change de règles tous les six mois. Les transactions non commerciales sont en général méprisées. BSV est la version restaurée du protocole Bitcoin original avec tous les paramètres ouverts afin que les nœuds honnêtes puissent s'engager dans un consensus conformément au livre blanc de Bitcoin - par preuve de travail ! Le protocole est gravé dans la pierre afin que les développeurs de logiciels ne puissent pas bricoler les règles. Cela permet aux entreprises de planifier des décennies d'utilisation du réseau et d'investir en toute confiance. En tant que seul réseau bitcoin totalement sans autorisation, le commerce de toute nature est encouragé sur BSV. Tout, allant des réseaux sociaux aux expériences de science des données météorologiques ou aux tests de disponibilité du réseau, est encouragé. Paiements de détail, tokenisation, ou tout autre type de contrat intelligent est simple à déployer sans limitations. Bitcoin SV n'a aucun limite sauf l'esprit humain et l'esprit d'entreprise. Et c'est la racine de la haine envers BSV. Les "petits-blocs" ont investi toute leur réputation et leurs moyens de subsistance sur la notion que le bitcoin est incapable de s'adapter. Pendant des années, des experts présumés ont convaincu de nombreuses personnes que les limites de taille de bloc de 2 Mo, 8 Mo ou 22 Mo casseraient littéralement Bitcoin. Ils ont furieusement mis en jeux leur réputation sur ces fausses notions. Et ensuite, BSV a eu de nombreux blocs de plus de 100 Mo. En fait, il y en a même eu quelques-uns de plus de 300 Mo! prouvant que les petits-blocs se trompent sur les limites du réseau. Mais cette prise de conscience est une menace pour l'hégémonie du récit de Bitcoin. Depuis 2015, lorsque le Dr Craig Wright est apparu sur les lieux pour expliquer que le bitcoin avait en réalité ZERO limitations, il a créé un tollé massif parmi l'intelligentsia des petits-blocs. Les leaders d'opinion de l'époque étaient payés pour prendre la parole lors de conférences où ils expliquaient à tort que Bitcoin n'était rien d'autre qu'une réserve de valeur rare sans autre utilité. Le Dr Wright parlait de l'échelle illimitée du réseau, de son exhaustivité de Turing et d'autres notions inconcevables (à l'époque) sur Bitcoin. Sa passion et ses connaissances se sont heurtées à des calomnies et des railleries. Ils se sont concentrés sur l'attaque de son personnage au lieu de discuter de Bitcoin! C'est devenu l'une des principales méthodes d'attaque des petits-blocs. Lorsque de gros-blocs parlent des capacités de Bitcoin, ils sont ridiculisés en tant qu'escrocs et le sujet est toujours dirigé très loin de la discussion technique, car les petits-blocs savent bien qu'ils sortiraient perdants. Ils fouillent les dossiers personnels et cherchent des moyens de faire taire les gens du camp des grands-blocs de Bitcoin de la même manière que les guerriers de la justice sociale s'engagent dans la culture d'annulation contre leurs ennemis politiques. Qui est le Dr Craig Wright et que fait-il? Si vous ne le savez pas, Craig Wright est le scientifique en chef d'une société de recherche sur Bitcoin au Royaume-Uni appelée nChain : une société de 150 à 200 informaticiens. Craig dirige l'équipe qui étudie les possibilités de Bitcoin et de ses applications dans le monde. Il est l'un des experts en criminalité numérique les plus reconnus au monde avec les certifications SANS et GIAC ainsi que les titres GSE CISSP, CISA, CISM, CCE, GCFA, GLEG, GREM et GSPA. En outre, il est un polymathe multidisciplinaire de troisième cycle: un doctorat en informatique, économie et théologie et titulaire d'une maîtrise en statistique et en droit commercial international. En 2015, il a également été exposé par une publication conjointe de WIRED et Gizmodo en tant que Satoshi Nakamoto, le créateur de Bitcoin. Quelques jours après cette révélation, les gens qui le soutenaient ont vu leurs clés d'accès au code révoquées, et de nombreux autres ont été instantanément bannis. Craig a été mis sous enquête par le bureau des impôts australien pour ce qu'il considérait être une erreur de comptabilisation probable de ses bitcoins. Les retombées ont été agressives et rapides, avec une gigantesque armée de petits-blocs, organisée sur Reddit et autres forums, et nouvellement financée par l'argent de la startup pro-petits-blocs appelée «Blockstream». Leur message était clair: Bitcoin doit garder de petits blocs. Le Bitcoin ne peut pas évoluer, et toute personne proche de Craig Wright sera harcelée pour se conformer à une armée de comptes Twitter anonymes et sans visage. Au cours des années suivantes, Ira Kleiman, frère du défunt Dave Kleiman, a poursuivi Craig Wright pour sa part du prétendu «Partenariat Satoshi Nakamoto», affirmant que Dave était plus impliqué qu'il ne l'était réellement, et l'affaire est en cours actuellement, jusqu'à courant 2021. Ira Kleiman pense que Craig est Satoshi et a investi une fortune incalculable et a obtenu l'argent d'investisseurs extérieurs pour poursuivre sa poursuite. Il est clair que les bailleurs de fonds d'Ira pensent que Craig est également Satoshi. Les critiques qualifient souvent la révélation publique et le procès public de Wright de ternir énormément sa réputation, mais il convient de noter que les deux sont arrivés à Wright et qu'il ne souhaitait clairement pas être pris dans l'une ou l'autre situation. Au lieu de cela, Craig est un défenseur passionné de la vision d'un Bitcoin avec de gros blocs, appelant à la professionnalisation, à la légalisation et à l'utilisation mondiales de Bitcoin pour une utilisation à tous les niveaux du commerce. La réponse à la passion de Craig et à ses affirmations a été d'attaquer sa réputation et d'endosser Internet avec le surnom de «Faketoshi». Lorsque de simples brimades ont échoué contre le Dr Wright, des attaques ont été intensifiées pour remettre en question ses divers diplômes, des pétitions aux universités pour enquêter sur lui pour plagiat dans divers travaux, y compris des thèses de doctorat, etc. Wright a même revendiqué des menaces contre la vie des membres de sa famille et il y a plus qu'une petite preuve que, selon Ian Grigg, une des légendes de la cryptographie: «des gens sont morts pour Bitcoin, vraiment, des gens sont morts». Les attaques en cours Cela ne peut être assez souligné: la communauté des petits-blocs est construite autour de tactiques d'ingénierie sociale professionnelle. Gregory Maxwell, co-fondateur de la société Blockstream, a été formé à la pratique de l'ingénierie sociale et l'a utilisé de manière si subversive comme un outil de propagande pendant son mandat en tant que modérateur rémunéré de Wikipedia, qu'il a finalement été démis de ses fonctions avec les journaux d'administration citant une litanie d'infractions, notamment: «Gmaxwell s'est engagé dans la création de faux comptes en masse…» - Alhutch 00:05, 23 janvier 2006 (UTC) «Menaces, insultes grossières, usurpations d'identité d'un administrateur», -Husnock 03:18, 25 janvier 2006 (UTC) «Son comportement est scandaleux. Franchement, il est hors de contrôle à ce stade. Son comportement d'intimidation doit cesser.» - FearÉIREANN 19:36, 22 janvier 2006 (UTC) «Sa liste de contributions est hors de propos. C'est du vandalisme. C'est un comportement auquel je m'attendrais d'un éditeur en furie, ce que, franchement, Gmaxwell est.» - Splashtalk 20h00, 22 janvier 2006 (UTC) «Prétend être un administrateur, menaçant de bloquer les personnes qui ne sont pas d'accord avec lui, fait régulièrement des attaques personnelles» - SlimVirgin (talk) 12h22, 22 janvier 2006 (UTC) Il passe beaucoup de temps sur Reddit et d'autres forums à semer la peur sur les dangers des gros blocs, et il a été surpris en train de faire semblant d'être plusieurs comptes à la fois en train d'avoir de très longues discussions techniques sur Reddit destinées à submerger les nouveaux arrivants avec ce qui ressemble à un débat intellectuel. Qui d'autre est attaqué? L'autre cible commune de la machine de guerre anti-BSV est Calvin Ayre: le milliardaire à la tête de l'empire du groupe Ayre. Calvin est un entrepreneur canadien et antiguais qui a lancé un incubateur Internet à Vancouver au tout début du boom Internet. Fils d'un éleveur de porcs, Ayre est surtout connu en dehors de l'économie Bitcoin pour la création et la professionnalisation de l'industrie du jeu d'argent sur Internet. Plus particulièrement, sous la marque Bodog, Ayre a aidé à moderniser les lois financières américaines compliquées et obsolètes en poussant les limites dans les marchés gris qui existent où les dollars américains sont utilisés à travers les frontières pour s'engager dans un commerce juridiquement compliqué comme le jeu d'argent. Son travail dans ce domaine lui a valu une petite fortune et un passage sur une liste des «plus recherchés» pour blanchiment d'argent. C'est un point sur lequel les petits-blocs aiment se concentrer, mais ils le sortent complètement de son contexte. Calvin a finalement plaidé coupable à une accusation de délit, mais a été le fer de lance de la modernisation des lois et règlements américains qui existent aujourd'hui sur les marchés complètement ouverts et fonctionnels. Il est respecté pour son travail dans l'industrie du jeu, les médias et la philanthropie. Calvin est certainement le bienvenu aux États-Unis malgré la critique souvent citée et dépassée selon laquelle il est une sorte de hors-la-loi. Calvin Ayre Dans l'économie Bitcoin, Ayre est une figure de proue dans la gestion de nœuds Bitcoin honnêtes pendant plusieurs années sous les marques CoinGeek et TAAL, et il est un investisseur dans nChain ainsi que plusieurs startups dans l'espace BSV. Bien qu'il soit probablement le plus gros investisseur, il n'est pas le monolithe que les petits-blocs laisseraient croire aux critiques. Il est important de comprendre que des segments entiers de l'écosystème BSV existent complètement en dehors de son influence. Twetch, par exemple, est une entreprise indépendante appartenant à l'écosystème BSV, célèbre pour ses attaques contre les médias sociaux centralisés. Ils sont même connus pour se moquer des entreprises qui acceptent l'argent d'Ayre, en plaisantant que Calvin possède tout sauf Twetch. Bien sûr, ce n'est pas vrai. Un autre excellent exemple est l'investisseur / entrepreneur indépendant Jack Liu : ancien dirigeant de Circle et OKEX. Liu possède la marque de hackathons CambrianSV ainsi que des propriétés précieuses dans l'espace BSV telles que RelayX, Streamanity, Output Capital, FloatSV et Dimely. Les autres acteurs clés sont MatterPool Mining et leur écosystème Mattercloud: une joint-venture entre des acteurs indépendants de l'écosystème BSV, avec des connexions directes aux protocoles BoostPOW et 21e8 et des relations avec des développeurs BSV indépendants. Bien sûr, il existe également des marques précieuses financées par Ayre. Il s'agit notamment de la propriété partielle via l'investissement dans HandCash, Centi, TonicPow et Unwriter's Planaria Corp. Une autre mesure importante à prendre en compte est la distribution de la puissance de hachage. Alors qu'à un moment de l'histoire, les entreprises appartenant à Ayre représentent une quantité importante de hachage sur bitcoin, BSV est aujourd'hui en grande partie exploité par des mineurs concurrents de Binance, F2Pool, OKEX et ViaBTC - dont aucun n'est «ami» de BSV ou d'Ayre, mais beaucoup sont ennemis. Ces mineurs soulignent cependant la nature ouverte et sans permission de BSV pour permettre à quiconque de participer. Ayre est un acteur important, mais en aucun cas un contrôleur de la direction de la blockchain ou des entreprises indépendantes dans l'économie BSV. Mais pourquoi Craig poursuit-il tout le monde en justice ? Tout d'abord, et c'est crucial, le procès le plus important de Craig est l'affaire Kleiman. Les autres cas existent uniquement à cause de la diffamation publique du Dr Wright. Le hashtag #CraigWrightIsAFraud circule largement, poussé en grande partie par un mélange de personnages anonymes sur Twitter. Plus particulièrement Magnus Granath AKA «Hodlonaut» a été averti qu'une accusation publique de fraude courait à son encontre. La carrière du Dr Wright est en informatique et en criminalistique numérique, donc le déclarer publiquement une fraude cause un préjudice financier au Dr Wright dans son domaine d'expertise commerciale. Puisque «Hodlnaut» a refusé de cesser, on lui a envoyer une requête pour être vu au tribunal. Cela a causé le célèbre podcasteur de petits-blocs Peter McCormack à mendier d'être poursuivi aussi - en augmentant la rhétorique diffamatoire contre le Dr Wright. À la demande de McCormack, il a lui aussi été attaqué en justice pour être vu au tribunal. Cette ère de service a engendré la campagne #DelistBSV menée en grande partie par «CZ», le PDG charismatique de Binance Exchange. Divers autres échanges comme Shapeshift et Kraken ont publié des sondages publics demandant s'ils devaient emboîter le pas, et des petits-blocs bien organisés ont voté en masse pour retirer BSV de leurs échanges - citant la toxicité du Dr Wright pour avoir intenté des poursuites en diffamation contre Hodlonaut et McCormack. Finalement, BSV a été retiré de Binance, ShapeShift et Kraken. Il a également été noté publiquement par Coinbase et Gemini qu'ils ne soutiendraient pas du tout cette version de bitcoin à la suite du drame public. Au fur et à mesure que les choses progressaient, le fondateur de Bitcoin.com, Roger Ver, a également réalisé une vidéo publique déclarant Wright comme arnaqueur. C'était après avoir travaillé sournoisement avec les développeurs Bitcoin ABC pour coder des points de contrôle dans le logiciel ABC de Bitcoin Cash, divisant de manière permanente le réseau Bitcoin pour la deuxième et dernière fois - un acte pour lequel Roger est également poursuivi par d'autres parties privées en Floride. Roger Ver a été averti que des problèmes juridiques similaires se présenteraient à sa porte pour avoir diffamé le Dr Wright, mais les critiques publiques ont persisté jusqu'à ce que Roger soit également entendu devant le tribunal et fournisse la preuve de la fraude de Wright, sous peine de sanctions pour diffamation publique. Son cas est en instance à Antigua-et-Barbuda, où il est récemment devenu citoyen. Et ensuite il se passe quoi ? Nous avons établi l'histoire du Bitcoin, de la guerre civile, des attaques publiques contre Wright, Ayre et BSV. Au moment d'écrire ces lignes, nous pouvons revenir sur les attaques contre Thomas Lee, Tim Draper et Jimmy Wales pour avoir eu une proximité avec BSV. Malgré la pression sociale, le rapport Fundstrat de Lee a rendu un examen élogieux du protocole fixe et de l'évolutivité infinie de BSV. Lee et son équipe étaient heureux de prendre la parole lors des événements précédents de CoinGeek, même après le tollé public. Pour la conférence CoinGeek 2020 à New York, McCormack, Hodlonaut, « Arthur Van Pelt » et d'autres acteurs tels que le Dan Held de Kraken et une cacophonie de trolls anonymes sur Twitter ont mis à profit leur expérience de la culture d'annulation à la bolchevique pour faire pression sur les orateurs Gary Vaynerchuk , et d'autres orateurs prévus afin de les forcer à annuler leur participation à la conférence. Cette attaque sociale contre BSV, Dr. Wright, Ayre et les autres entreprises qui utilisent le réseau BSV pourrait être un cas gigantesque de fraude à la consommation. Ils trompent activement les gens en leur faisant croire que le protocole fixe et l'évolutivité infinie de Bitcoin SV sont en quelque sorte dangereux, alors qu'en fait, le protocole et le réseau sont imperméables à toutes les attaques, à l'exception de leur ingénierie sociale. Bitcoin SV s'est développé professionnellement avec un portefeuille de brevets de classe mondiale. Il est utilisé par des entreprises indépendantes pour réaliser des profits et il est exploité sur le marché libre par un groupe décentralisé de nœuds honnêtes qui se font concurrence. Le réseau est fixe, sécurisé et en croissance grâce aux investissements de petites entreprises et de gestionnaires de capitaux mondiaux. Les mensonges au contraire sont basés sur une campagne massive de dénigrement perpétrée par les communautés d'autres cryptomonnaie qui craignent l'adoption mondiale de BSV comme outil de commerce et ce que cela signifiera pour eux. L'histoire ne sera pas gentille avec ces manipulateurs et leurs réseaux qui sont financés par les fraudes probables des échanges de crypto-monnaies off-shore, le (très probablement) frauduleux Tether Stablecoin, et l'économie de "pump-and-dump" qui sous-tend 95% du volume de négociation de l'ensemble de l'économie cryptomonnaie actuelle. C'est une guerre civile. Il y aura toujours des victimes, mais alors que BTC et BCH se concentrent sur les ragots et les affaires illicites, BSV veut que le monde entier soit plus libre, plus souverain et plus capable de coopérer sur le registre mondial de la vérité afin que les entrepreneurs du monde puissent s'engager dans les grandes entreprises ou de simples nano-services sont rendus possibles uniquement par Bitcoin. Bitcoin est un test d'intelligence. Au fil du temps, les personnes intelligentes pourront voir à travers le brouillard de distorsion de la réalité créé pour confondre les innocents et reconnaître cela pour ce que c'est, une attaque coordonnée pour tenter de supprimer une technologie supérieure qui les rendrait obsolètes. Des exemples d'applications Bitcoin que vous pouvez essayer dès aujourd'hui gratuitement ? Si vous vous sentez prêt à faire le premier pas dans le futur vous êtes libres de tester les meilleurs applications du Metanet sur https://metastore.app/apps?sort=money Le site le plus populaire du Metanet à ce jour est bit.ly/twetchapp, une version de twitter incensurable sur la blockchain, allez jeter un oeil ! _______________________ sources: traduit et inspiré de https://coingeek.com/the-war-on-bitcoin/ image : https://imgur.com/1Yb0Yle
I am working with a friend to set up a bitcoin mining rig our university. I'm a business major, but my friend is in engineering and has unlimited free access to a 220v power supply. Would it be worth buying 100 AntMiner S9's on eBay and making our own rig? The math breaks down as follows according to https://www.cryptocompare.com/mining/calculatobtc?HashingPower=1350&HashingUnit=TH%2Fs&PowerConsumption=137500&CostPerkWh=0&MiningPoolFee=1 1350 TH/s hashrate (with 100 S9s at 13.5 TH/s for each unit) Electricity cost is zero. Predicted payout is $3,390/month. Am I missing something? It seems too good to be true, making 4k/month with only 10k up front. EDIT: Assume the rig was well hidden and not discovered for a few years.
Trade Bot Mining - the value proposition for the ANY token
At first glance the ANY token looked completely worthless to me from a tokenomic standpoint. It had a very low initial supply and was launched in a constant product market which quickly injected the value due to the high demand of hype. In seconds it reached about 350x evaluation compared to its proposed starting value, after quickly stabilizing at around 100x. Further its only planned pairing is with FSN, the main liquidity providing token for the AnySwap Exchange. A situation that would mean the the FSN in the FSN/ANY pool would likely be decreasing as more and more coin pairings are added to the AnySwap Exchange. A situation that's absolutely super bearish for ANY. To top this off ANY has very heavy reward handouts every Fusion block (8.5 ANY every block, which is 3 times as much as FSN, for example). The rewards are split between liquidity miners, AWN nodes, swap traders, AnySwap Company, and AnySwap team. All these handouts are surely bound to add extra selling pressure on ANY. The only apparent value ANY has is as a governance token. That holders of ANY hold actual power over the exchange. Deciding which coins to list, and who gets to run the AWN nodes as well as decisions regarding general direction and policy of the exchange. But can this power truly make up for all the selling pressure? It is doubtful... Especially since quite a bit of the ANYs ended up in very few hands, making it less 'democratic' than many had hoped for. So is there ANYthing else that could save ANY? A day into the exchanges history we've seen two interesting things that might actually save ANY and it comes from quite an unexpected direction.
There seems to be quite a high interest among CEXs to list ANY. One of which even has offered to provide a high amount of liquidity on AnySwap Exchange.
Trading bots have began to "swap mine" ANY, by swaping FSN and ANY back and forth in order to grab the 2.5 ANY awarded swap traders every block.
Quick calculations showed that these bots (atm) are yielding several 1000x returns/year. Of course this can't hold up as more pairings gets added, the price of ANY droping and more bots enter the swap frenzy competition. CEXs are the masters of trading bots and they are probably quickly going to push their bots into DEXs if that is where the new action happens, and especially if there's great chances of making profit. But what happens when the equation stops adding up. When trading volume has reached the point of those 1000x returns barely looking like a 1x. Well... at that point the practice is probably so established that the action just keeps going and eventually pushes the price ANY up so that it becomes profitable again (exactly in the same way as Bitcoin value is backed by the the cost of its mining operations). It isn't certain this is happening. But there is some potential that ANY could become the 'Bitcoin' of "swap bots".
First update to the guide "Building a 6Gpu Mining Rig for Ethereum" - Let's talk about Claymore. This update supplements and does not replace the Guide to Build a 6GPU Mining Rig for Ethereum published on our site. The substantial differences are due to the installation of the latest version of the Windows 10 Operating System, the mining on the Ethermine pool (in our opinion simpler than Dwarfpool) and the use of the XFX RX 580 8gb GPUs. The first variant is found in Part 4 of the guide: the environment variables are not to be entered as they will be integrated directly into the bat file to start mining. The second variant is found in Part 7 of the guide and leads us to "mine" on a different pool using the Claymore software. Download the latest version at the following link: https://github.com/Claymore-Dual/Claymore-Dual-Miner Once downloaded, unzip everything on a folder on your desktop and open the start.bat file with notepad. Clear the contents and copy the following command: start config.dll -epool eu1.ethermine.org:14444 -ewal "your ETH wallet address" -epsw x -worker "worker" EthDcrMiner64.exe Where instead of "your wallet address" you will have to put your Ethererum wallet - obviously without the quotes - and instead of worker you will put an identification number in case you build more RIGs (such as RIG1, RIG2, etc ...). We opted for the eu1 pool even if some on the discussion forums believe that the us1 is more profitable. At the following link, many other useful commands for your Rig: https://github.com/Claymore-Dual/Claymore-Dual-Miner The Ethermine pool offers a very well crafted and descriptive interface. In the Payouts section, after only 5 minutes of mining, you can decide the minimum amount of Ether to be transferred to your wallet by simply entering the IP address of the RIG. We have decided to mine directly on the Ethereum address of our Exodus wallet. It is not recommended to mine directly on Coinbase, as reported on the site itself. Sin. Nothing should be left to chance when you decide to build a mining rig for Ethereum. The third variant is the most difficult of all. Once you have reached Part 5 of the guide, you can decide whether to continue or follow this update / variant. If you are here it is probably because you have run into some problem that the guide does not allow you to solve. With the latest version of Windows 10, you may run into a kernel conflict between the operating system and AMD's Radeon Software Crimson ReLive Edition Beta for Blockchain Compute drivers. This conflict will prevent you from using Atiflash after installing the drivers. Important: Before making any changes to the BIOS, please backup each GPU. Important: first of all flash the GPUs with the original bios if for any reason you are forced to reinstall the operating system. Still on Atiflash. The advice would therefore be to flash the GPUs and then install the AMD drivers. Let's say it would be because you may run into another problem this time related to the GPUs themselves. Since each video card is different from any other, the bios mod of the GPU could crash the operating system showing the classic blue screen and displaying an error related to the Atimkdag.sys file. This could be due to the fact that some GPUs have significantly higher performance in the calculation phase than others. We could call it a factory overclock but not using them for gaming we cannot say it with absolute certainty. Having assessed these two drawbacks, the only safe solution is to flash all the GPUs, disconnect them except for the first one, install the Blockchain drivers (plus Atimkdag patch) and launch the mining command verifying that the operating system does not go into crash in the next 5 minutes. Turn off the rig again and connect the second GPU so on up to the sixth. In the event that one or more video cards should crash the system, disconnect them. After that, it uses DDU from the provisional mode and flashes these GPUs with their original bios. At this point, connect them again, reinstall the Blockcain drivers (plus Atimkdag patch) and start mining definitively. All the operations related to the use of Atiflash, DDU and driver installation are reported in Part 5 and Part 6 of our guide. A little bit of Overclocking. You will certainly find significant differences in performance between the GPUs. At this point all that remains is to "operate" with an overclocking software. We opt for OverdriveNtool. Our constantly updated guide is available at the following link: https://www.cryptoall.it/2019/10/12/complete-guide-to-overdriventool/ Link to the official YouTube channel for verification: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdE9TTHAOtyKxy59rALSprA GPUs with modified bios will not leave much room for modification. You will have to proceed with the most extreme overclocking on those that mount the original bios; obviously always in small steps by saving the profile for each GPU. Our guide explains in detail how to do it. Hoping to have been of help, we give everyone an appointment for the second part of the update on how to build an Ethereum mining rig in which we will explain in detail the dual mining on the Ethermine pool. See you soon. If you liked this article and would like to contribute with a donation: Bitcoin: 1Ld9b165ZYHZcY9eUQmL9UjwzcphRE5S8Z Ethereum: 0x8D7E456A11f4D9bB9e6683A5ac52e7DB79DBbEE7 Litecoin: LamSRc1jmwgx5xwDgzZNoXYd6ENczUZViK Stellar: GBLDIRIQWRZCN5IXPIKYFQOE46OG2SI7AFVWFSLAHK52MVYDGVJ6IXGI Ripple: rUb8v4wbGWYrtXzUpj7TxCFfUWgfvym9xf By: cryptoall.it Telegram Channel: t.me/giulo75 Netbox Browser: https://netbox.global/PZn5A
Step by Step Guide to Starting Smart Mining of ViaBTC
In order to help our miners to get the best possible profits, now we present you the step by step guide to starting Smart Mining of ViaBTC. No time for hesitation, try Smart Mining now! Smart mining consists of two different mining modes, namely as “Manual Switch” and “Auto Switch”. Auto Switch provides an automated way of profitable mining using the designated algorithm to monitor the real-time status of possible returns. In comparison to manual switch, it’s more flexible and easier to keep tracking of your mining returns. 1. Enable Auto Switch It now supports BTC、BCH and BSV, besides, your assets in your account can also be converted into BTC on an hourly basis automatically. Before enabling auto switch mode, you’re required to configure smart mining URL: stratum+tcp://bitcoin.viabtc.com:3333; Enable Manual Switch This supports Bitcoin pool (BTC, BCH, BSV, FCH) and Ethereum pool (ETH, ETC). One-click switch address is different from the stratum URL for a specified coin. Details for one-click switch URL are listed as following: BTC/BCH/BSV/FCH: stratum+tcp://bitcoin.viabtc.com:3333 ETH/ETC: stratum+tcp://ethereum.viabtc.com:3333 Noted: Port 25 or 443 is available as an alternative option. 2. Go to www.viabtc.com then click [Settings] from the drop-down menu on your right hand side. https://preview.redd.it/6rvece3anm551.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=bf1365d690542a9d49712fecf1c117e5e94c74f4 Click [Switch mining pool] under the [Mining Settings] to select a new coin type. https://preview.redd.it/8ag76racnm551.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=2b79ffb7dfde4e0b7ab51bb584815a1b8b91f30c Select “Mode” and “Coin Type” https://preview.redd.it/7zmjh3ienm551.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=2c2ff5f99265402def95717f4a28de71ffe17b32 Frequently Asked Questions What is the unique feature of Auto Switch compares to Manual Switch? It’s more flexible and easy to set up, SHA-256 mining algorithm compatible. How long will it take to be activated after enabling Auto Switch? Once Auto Switch is on, system will monitor the possible return rate of all compatible coins using a designated algorithm and switch to the one with higher profits, you may go to the Pool panel for more accurate mining status. Why I can’t see my earnings increased after enabling Auto Switch mode? Auto Switch mode demands high-efficiency when it switch between the current mined coins to the new one with possible high returns, specified using designated algorithm and current difficulty, thus it’s not a guarantee pass for high returns when “Auto Switch” is on. Is there any requirements of MIN. limit of hashrate before enabling Auto Switch? There is no minimum limit of hashrate in your account before enabling Auto Switch in your account. Which type of coins are supported in Auto Switch mode? Currently all types of coins in Bitcoin Pool are supported in Auto Switch mode, including BTC, BCH and BSV. When will the mining rewards distributed to my account? Rewards distribution are varies for different mining modes, and distribution time remained unchanged compares to the one in Manual Switch mode. Can I use part of hashrate to mine a designated coin after enabling Auto Switch? After enabling Auto Switch, hashrate connecting to your account will switch from one to the other automatically using a designated algorithm. Will I receive hashrate fluctuation notification after enabling Auto Switch? You’re required to set hashrate fluctuation notification for all compatible coins by the time enabling Auto Switch, more detailed guideline can be found here. How to check your current mining preference？ Go to www.viabtc.com first then enter [Pool] panel to check your current mining preference. When should I change my mining preference? It is recommended to use profit calculator to get a general idea of the theoretical earnings outcome when selecting mining preference.
Themis (MIS) Launches Pledge Mining Platform, New Opportunity Occurs to Grow Wealth
With the development of blockchain technology, obtaining data on the chain only is no longer satisfying and how to bridge the real world and the blockchain world has always been the direction of the technological breakthrough. Under this background, Oracle Machine came to our attention. In particular, with the popularity of the DeFi concept, the industry starts to witness a boom of the application of Oracle Machine in financial derivatives, trading platforms, gambling games, and prediction markets. At present, Oracle Machine represented by Themis is developing fast with a good momentum, leading the trend of the development of Oracle Machine and continuing to consolidate the basic technical support for the DeFi revolution. Themis’ mining system has been launched in the market, which is refreshing and appealing (see https://themisoracle.com/#/credit for details on the Themis mining). 90% of MIS, the native token of Themis, will be used for mining output. The entire mining mechanism runs through a distributed oracle protocol, which sets up three roles: data provider, data validator, and arbitration node. Reward and punishment mechanisms are applied to ensure the smooth ecological operation. How does Themis mining work? Is it a new way to become wealthy? What are the characteristics? To answer these questions, we need to analyse the distribution mechanism, mining mechanism, and token value of Themis. With a fairer mining mechanism, small and medium-sized miners can enjoy better benefits One of the core values of blockchain is fairness and justice, and allowing everyone in the network to play a role in the system without permission. However, Bitcoin mining is now monopolized by several mining machine vendors such as Bitmain, leaving little space for other miners to participate. If those old PoW public chains, such as Bitcoin, has formed the head effect in mining, what about those new projects? Let's take Cosmos as an example. Since Binance joined its validator node, it has instantly ranked top with the strong financial strength and user base of the top exchange, making the small and medium nodes hard to participate. After comparison, we can find that the mining mechanism of MIS is very friendly to ordinary users. Assuming that there are 12 mining transactions in a block, the ranking according to the MIS pledged by each transaction would be as follow: https://preview.redd.it/1kfccgps2pg51.png?width=832&format=png&auto=webp&s=bf6c7f614c600826006bc2bf8a6026292c3b328c The pledge ranking is based on the jump ranking weighting algorithm rather than the weighted average of the user pledge amount, which can prevent MIS from being controlled by a small number of people, avoid monopoly, creating a win-win situation in the Themis community. https://preview.redd.it/pme9tcd62pg51.png?width=832&format=png&auto=webp&s=049f899d2a5ee3ce64007d5cc0ae3ed6167c2b3a Compared with other mining projects, Themis has introduced a unique pledge ranking method in the mining design. Users in the best ranking area will get the most benefits, which is a good mechanism guarantee for attracting more users to participate in mining. At the same time, it can lead to the decentralization of data providers, ensuring the decentralization of the oracle system and the positive development of the community. How can miners join in Themis mining? The answer is to become a part of the ecology by playing the role of either data provider, data validator, or arbitration node. The data provider is mainly responsible for providing various types of data, and the data validator verifies and challenges the data offered by the data provider and provides new data. The arbitration node arbitrates the query raised by the data validator and come up with the final result. Both the data providers and validators of Themis need to pledge MIS to obtain the qualifications, and the caller of external data also needs to pay MIS assets when accessing the data of Themis oracles. If the data has been verified as correct, data providers and validators will receive mining rewards, and the more they pledge, the more rewards they will receive. In the mining design of Themis, miners can acquire MIS by providing verifiable random number or offering the price of in-chain assets. Whenever miners call mining contracts, the system will charge no service fee (excluding the service fee of ETH). In addition, if no mining transaction occurs within a certain period of time, the first newly-emerging block containing mining transactions will acquire all the MIS rewards. In this way, miners can be encouraged to continue mining and maintain the ecological stability of Themis. The number of MIS mining for each mining transaction of miners is calculated as follows: First, calculate the number of MIS mining rewards N contained in the block of the packaged mining transaction. If the height difference between the block and the previous block containing the mining transaction is y, then N = y * 20. The MIS mining quantity of this mining transaction is M, then M=Xi/(📷)×N. Among them, X is the ranking of the MIS pledge amount in the block, and those who pledge the same amount of MIS have the same ranking. Few official pre-mining, while 90% belongs to the community Based on the official announcement, the distribution of MIS is: The total amount of MIS is 1 billion, 10% is reserved for early project promotion, the remaining 90% are produced by mining, in which 75% are directly awarded to data providers, 10% to developers, and 5% as reward for arbitration nodes and ecological incentive. The production of mining will be progressively decreased and released with ETH. For some current popular VC-invested projects, institutional holdings hold more than half of blocks and unlock the block every month, which is a huge stress for ordinary pledge users. Many projects also went wrong because institutional investors do not abide by the rules. For MIS, because there is fewer official pre-mining, the selling pressure will be smaller, which is more in line with the value of the blockchain. The release plan of developer and arbitration node and ecological incentive is as follows: https://preview.redd.it/nld8k8gb2pg51.jpg?width=926&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8c2435c993cf86b2bf6b0c4d2a1935708734de97 The release plan of data provider incentive is as follows: https://preview.redd.it/kgia5n6d2pg51.jpg?width=982&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad1bfe7796fdaec58f3caede2f2a2083c0a07724 The MIS awarded per block reduces by 10% in every 4 million blocks, and the reward per block at present is 20 MIS. We can see that the allocation of MIS follows the following principles. First of all, as MIS is the platform certificate of Themis, it is very reasonable to reserve 10% of MIS for early project promotion. Secondly, 90% of MIS is produced through sustainable mining. This proportion can motivate contract users and miners to conduct contract mining, truly implementing the spirit of win-win community and token economy. Finally, among the 90% of MIS, better incentive mechanisms have been adapted, mining reward ratios are subdivided, which can attract more investors to participate in mining. Reasonable mining mechanism highlights the project value of Themis Themis, as a public chain that provides a mechanism to solve the problems in Oracle Machine, has a unique charm in the value of MIS. From the perspective of the number of tokens, the total amount of MIS is 1 billion, and the total mining pool is 900 million. 90% of the tokens are generated by mining, and the mining output gradually decreases its release with the Ethereum block, showing a great potential in its future added value. The earlier you participate in mining, the more profit you can gain. From the perspective of Themis’s ecological design, Themis is committed to the original intention of building a price oracle. The data provider pays on-chain fees and pledges a certain amount of MIS, and determines the income obtained according to the scale of the pledge; the validator can make profit from challenging the data. Also, any smart contract developer or user need to pay the corresponding fee when calling Themis, and this part of the profit will be distributed to the data provider in proportion. Through this design, a logical closed loop is completed to ensure the healthy operation of the entire ecology and achieve the goal of mutual benefit. In Themis, all parties in the ecology can work together to grow more wealth. In all, MIS has a huge potential for future development and arbitrage, and of course, a great profit potential as well. Today, public chains like Themis are not just a technology platform, but also a symbol of future economic operation mode which connect between the blockchain and the real world. Themis, with a fair, justice and open network through mining, is building a strong token ecology, connecting external chain data and the systems, realising data interaction between blockchain and the real world, and more importantly, creating a new mode of token economy.
08-10 07:44 - 'Who is forking Filecoin?' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/paulcheung1990 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 6-16min
''' Forking Filecoin is a $500 million to $1 billion business? On July 17, cryptocurrency analyst Bitfool mentioned via Weibo: “Recently, people who forked Filecoin in the market have been undercurrents; as far as I know, there are 4-5 teams. From a strategic point of view, the project Teams, investors, and miners get two of the three to successfully fork; one of the three can steal 5-10% of the market value. Therefore, Filecoin's fork is a $500 million to $1 billion Business." "It's even more awesome, full of courage, and ready to build a team to fork Fliecoin. Well done, famous in the world, poor done, and scorned by thousands of people." Sun Ming, a partner of Fenbushi Capital, mentioned in an interview: "Miners who have invested a lot of hardware resources are promoting the fork of Filecoin. Hu Feng, operating partner of the FILPool mining pool, said: "Currently, big miners have ideas, but it will only be possible after the mainnet is online. Filecoin economic model is not friendly to miners At the beginning of the establishment of the Filecoin economic model, a pledge and reward and punishment mechanism was proposed, which has undergone many adjustments. The last three adjustments have made the mechanism increasingly stringent. In April of this year, the Filecoin project team introduced their thinking on the economic model and refined the reward and punishment mechanism. Miners who complete file storage can get corresponding block rewards, and fail to store files within the promised period will be punished. This fine is imposed on the Filecoin collateral pool (locked funds) provided by each storage miner. Locked funds include a small amount of early FIL tokens and token rewards obtained from miners. Miners need to mortgage a certain amount of tokens in the early stage. If the amount of mortgage is too large, it will cause a shortage of FIL tokens in the early stage. The improvement made by the economic model is to transfer some of the early-stage costs to future block rewards. The severe punishment mechanism made some miners dissatisfied, and some miners commented that the mechanism was too "crude". In May, Filecoin made major adjustments to its economic model. This adjustment raises the threshold for miners to leave. Filecoin continues to strengthen the miner's mortgage mechanism, and part of the rewards mined by the miners will be locked. The penalty mechanism has also been changed accordingly. Only when the task of file hosting is completed can the mining reward be unlocked. If miners want to profit, they need to have strong computing power and be able to provide stable storage services for a long time. If this is acceptable to miners, the recent "pre-mortgage" mechanism has left miners at a loss. "Pre-mortgage" is proposed in the latest Calibration version of Filecoin, which means that every sector encapsulated requires a certain amount of FIL to be pledged in advance, and the pledged token needs to be locked for 180 days and then released in 180 days. The consequence of "pre-mortgage" is that FIL token has worse liquidity in the early stage. A large number of FIL mortgages are required in the early stage, which will force miners to find the official to buy coins, and the long lock-up period causes most miners to choose to sell coins instead of encapsulation. "The miners have put their money in the hardware, where can they go out and buy coins?" Since there is not enough funds to buy coins as collateral, it loses the qualification for mining. Even if the mortgage funds are saved, it is almost impossible to pay back with the small amount of currency in the early period. Sun Ming said: "The mining output is too small, making it difficult for early miners to maintain operations." The adjustment of the economic model continues to compress the income of early miners, and the voice of miners proposing to fork Filecoin is also getting louder. Sun Ming believes: "On the one hand, it is the protest of the miners against ProtocolLabs (requesting it to modify the economic model), and on the other hand, it is also the desperate fight of the miners forced to do nothing." Li Bai posted a circle of friends to express his attitude. As shown below: [link]1 Another very important point is that, according to the current reward mechanism, Filecoin competition in China is tantamount to "college entrance examination". Take the Filecoin big miner test competition as an example, miners can only be rewarded if they are ranked in the top 50 in their area or in the top 100 among all miners. Looking at the situation of Chinese miners, 9 of the top 10 nodes in the world are from China. According to people familiar with the matter, about 80% of Filecoin miners are concentrated in China. The fierce competition can be imagined. Wang Qingshui expressed his concern: more than 90% of miners may not make money. Many miners saw that they couldn't make money, and they had the idea of opening up Filecoin "other tracks". Therefore, the call for a Filecoin fork is the strongest in China. Unaffordable mining costs and thresholds In addition to Filecoin's economic model, another point that miners complain about is Filecoin's threshold and cost. The cost of Filecoin mining input and the technical threshold of operation are beyond the reach of many miners and mines. Filecoin has a severe punishment mechanism, which can ensure the safety of the data party, but at the same time it will bring a high threshold for mining professionalism and operation and maintenance stability. In order to ensure uninterrupted power and no disconnection, it must be hosted in a high-level IDC computer room. In order to ensure mining efficiency, the network, computing power, and storage hardware must not be poor. Therefore, miners need to use a large sum of money to purchase high-end hardware equipment. Instant window-POST verification and submission requires high algorithms and error repair capabilities, and requires professional algorithms and operation and maintenance teams. In addition, the threshold for Filecoin mining may be above 10TB or even higher. Entry mining has a threshold for storage and technical maintenance, and a lot of money is needed to purchase hardware equipment. Earlier, a blogger did a cost calculation. With 30 mining machines as a cluster calculation, the expenditure for purchasing mining machines alone was as high as 6 million. Coupled with the cost of computer room construction, operation and maintenance, Filecoin mining costs may be more than 10 million yuan. Wang Qingshui also mentioned the flaws: “Many ordinary miners and even servers cannot participate, which is contrary to the original intention of the project.” Some people in the community expressed their concerns: "I have invested so much. What if something goes wrong after Filecoin goes online? Wouldn't it be a loss?" So some miners are thinking, can they lower the threshold of mining while ensuring safety? Some miners pointed out that not all mining machines need to be hosted in the IDC computer room, which is costly and prone to waste of resources. If it can be hosted in different computer rooms according to the performance of each type of mining machine, it can not only ensure safety, but also reduce costs. Judging from the interview, many industry insiders are on the sidelines of the Filecoin fork. Li Bai said: "There are many people who have ideas, but few people can put them into action." Wang Qingshui believes that any popular big project will be forked. Are BTC and ETH forked less? But how many forks can surpass the original version? Some miners think that the fork is just talking: "Someone will follow the official game.", "Who wrote the code for you after the fork? Do you dare to use the code you wrote?" The Filecoin fork is "undercurrent". As the Filecoin mainnet approaches, miners' actions will become more frequent, and we will continue to report. What do you think of the Filecoin fork? Please let us know in the comments section. ''' Who is forking Filecoin? Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: paulcheung1990 1: ****ie*.redd***/4l6*p**nn4g51.jpg*width=676&*forma**pjpg&am**auto=*e*p&***c*16a*61e2*0d1a*4*3f9f*9c8*fdfcebfdb*d3 Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
A Glance at the Heart: Proof-of-Authority Technology in the UMI Network
https://preview.redd.it/vhvj6v093df51.jpg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=00c0c223d9758edec8ed49a8cb9024f96d3ee343 Greetings from the UMI Team! Our Whitepaper describes in detail the key pros and cons of the two mechanisms which the great majority of other cryptocurrencies are based on: ● Proof-of-Work (PoW) — mining technology. Used in Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Monero, etc. ● Proof-of-Stake (PoS) and its derivatives — forging technology. Used in Nxt, PeerCoin, NEO, PRIZM, etc. As a result of a careful analysis of PoW and PoS, which are designed to fight against centralization, there came a conclusion that they both fail to perform their main mission and, in the long run, they lead to the network centralization and poor performance. For this reason, we took a different approach. We use Proof-of-Authority (PoA) algorithm coupled with master nodes, which can ensure the UMI network with decentralization and maximum speed. The Whitepaper allows you to understand the obvious things. This article will give you a clear and detailed explanation of the technology implemented in the UMI network. Let's glance at the heart of the network right now. Proof-of-Authority: How and Why It Emerged It's been over a decade since the first transaction in the Bitcoin network. Over this time, the blockchain technology has undergone some qualitative changes. It's down to the fact that the cryptocurrency world seeing the emerging Proof-of-Work defects in the Bitcoin network year after year has actively searched for ways to eliminate them. PoW decentralization and reliability has an underside of low capacity and scalability problem that prevents the network from rectifying this shortcoming. Moreover, with the growing popularity of Bitcoin, greed of miners who benefit from high fees resulting from the low network throughput has become a serious problem. Miners have also started to create pools making the network more and more centralized. The “human factor” that purposefully slowed down the network and undermined its security could never be eliminated. All this essentially limits the potential for using PoW-based cryptocurrencies on a bigger scale. Since PoW upgrade ideas came to nothing, crypto community activists have suggested cardinally new solutions and started to develop other protocols. This is how the Proof-of-Stake technology emerged. However, it proved to be excellent in theory rather than in practice. Overall, PoS-based cryptocurrencies do demonstrate a higher capacity, but the difference is not as striking. Moreover, PoS could not fully solve the scalability issue. In the hope that it could cope with the disaster plaguing all cryptocurrencies, the community came up with brand new algorithms based on alternative operating principles. One of them is the Proof-of-Authority technology. It was meant to be an effective alternative with a high capacity and a solution to the scalability problem. The idea of using PoA in cryptocurrencies was offered by Gavin Wood — a high-profile blockchain programmer and Ethereum co-founder. Proof-of-Authority Major Features PoA's major difference from PoW and PoS lies in the elimination of miner or forger races. Network users do not fight for the right to be the first to create a block and receive an award, as it happens with cryptocurrencies based on other technologies. In this case blockchain's operating principle is substantially different — Proof-of-Authority uses the “reputation system” and only allows trusted nodes to create blocks. It solves the scalability problem allowing to considerably increase capacity and handle transactions almost instantly without wasting time on unnecessary calculations made by miners and forgers. Moreover, trusted nodes must meet the strict capacity requirements. This is one the main reasons why we have selected PoA since this is the only technology allowing to fully use super-fast nodes. Due to these features, the Proof-of-Authority algorithm is seen as one of the most effective and promising options for bringing blockchain to various business sectors. For instance, its model perfectly fits the logistics and supply chain management sectors. As an outstanding example, PoA is effectively used by the Microsoft Azure cloud platform to offer various tools for bringing blockchain solutions to businesses. How the UMI Network Gets Rid of the Defects and Incorporates the Benefits of Proof-of-Authority Method Any system has both drawbacks and advantages — so does PoA. According to the original PoA model, each trusted node can create a block, while it is technically impossible for ordinary users to interfere with the system operation. This makes PoA-based cryptocurrencies a lot more centralized than those based on PoW or PoS. This has always been the main reason for criticizing the PoA technology. We understood that only a completely decentralized product could translate our vision of a "hard-to-hit", secure and transparent monetary instrument into reality. Therefore, we started with upgrading its basic operating principle in order to create a product that will incorporate all the best features while eliminating the defects. What we’ve got is a decentralized PoA method. We will try to explain at the elementary level: - We've divided the nodes in the UMI network into two types: master nodes and validator nodes. - Only master nodes have the right to create blocks and confirm transactions. Among master node holders there's the UMI team and their trusted partners from across the world. Moreover, we deliberately keep some of our partners — those who hold master nodes — in secret in order to secure ourselves against potential negative influence, manipulation, and threats from third parties. This way we ensure maximum coherent and reliable system operation. - However, since the core idea behind a decentralized cryptocurrency rules out any kind of trust, the blockchain is secured to prevent master nodes from harming the network in the event of sabotage or collusion. It might happen to Bitcoin or other PoW- or PoS-based cryptocurrencies if, for example, several large mining pools unite and perform a 51% attack. But it can’t happen to UMI. First, the worst that bad faith master node holders can do is to negligibly slow down the network. But the UMI network will automatically respond to it by banning such nodes. Thus, master nodes will prevent any partner from doing intentional harm to the network. Moreover, it will not be able to do this, even if most other partners support it. Nothing — not even quantum computers — will help hackers. Read our post "UMI Blockchain Six-Level Security" for more details. - A validator node can be launched by any participant. Validator nodes maintain the network by verifying the correctness of blocks and excluding the possibility of fakes. In doing so they increase the overall network security and help master nodes carry out their functions. More importantly, those who hold validator nodes control those who hold master nodes and confirm that the latter don't violate anything and comply with the rules. You can find more details about validator nodes in the article we mentioned above. - Finally, the network allows all interested users to launch light nodes (SPV), which enables viewing and sending transactions without having to download the blockchain and maintain the network. With light nodes, any network user can make sure if the system is operating properly and doesn't have to download the blockchain to do this. - In addition, we are developing the ability to protect the network in case 100% of the master nodes (10,000 master nodes in total) are "disabled" for some reason. Even this is virtually impossible, we've thought ahead and in the worst-case scenario, the system will automatically move to PoS. By doing so, it will be able to continue processing transactions. We're going to tell you about this in our next publications. Thus, the UMI network uses an upgraded version of this technology which possesses all its advantages with drawbacks eliminated. This model is truly decentralized and maximum secured. Another major drawback of PoA-based cryptos is no possibility to grant incentives to users. PoA doesn't imply forging or mining which allow users to earn cryptocurrency while generating new coins. No reward for maintaining the network is the main reason why the crypto community is not interested in PoA. This is, of course, unfair. With this in mind, the UMI team has found the best solution — the unique staking smart-contract. It allows you to increase the number of your coins up to 40% per month even with no mining or forging meaning the human factor cannot have a negative impact on the decentralization and network performance. New-Generation Proof-of-Authority The UMI network uses an upgraded version of PoA technology which possesses all its advantages with drawbacks virtually eliminated. This makes UMI a decentralized, easily scalable, and yet the most secure, productive, profitable and fair cryptocurrency, working for the sake of all people. The widespread use of UMI can change most aspects of society in different areas, including production, commerce, logistics, and all financial arrangements. We are just beginning this journey and thrilled to have you with us. Let's change the world together! Best regards, UMI Team!
Bull market is back… Another wave of hacker attacks starts again?
The picture from COINDESK related reports On Aug. 2, Ethereum Classic Labs (ETC Labs) made an important announcement on ETC blockchain. ETC Labs said due to network attack, Ethereum Classic suffered a reorganization on August 1st. This has been the second attack on the Ethereum Classic Network this year. Did renting-power cause the problem again? In this ETC incident, one of the miners mined a large number of blocks offline. When the miner went online, due to its high computing power, and some versions of mining software did not support large-scale blockchain mergers, the consensus failed. Therefore, the entire network was out of sync, which produced an effect similar to a 51% attack. Finally, it caused the reorganization of 3693 blocks, starting at 10904147. The deposit and withdrawal between the exchanges and mining pools had to be suspended for troubleshooting during this period. Media report shows that the blockchain reorganization may be caused by a miner (or a mining pool) disconnected during mining. Although it has been restored to normal after 15 hours of repair, it does reflect the vulnerability of the Proof of Work (PoW) network: once the computing power of the network is insufficient, the performance of one single mining pool can affect the entire network, which is neither distributed nor secure for the blockchain. Neither does it have efficiency. At present, most consensus algorithms of blockchains are using PoW, which has been adopted over 10 years. In PoW, each miner solves a hashing problem. The probability to solve the problem successfully is proportional to the ratio of the miner’s hash power to the total hash power of mainnet. Although PoW has been running for a long time, the attack model against PoW is very straightforward to understand, and has attracted people’s attention for a long time: such an attack, also known as double-spending attack, may happen when an attacker possesses 51% of the overall network hash power. The attacker can roll back any blocks in the blockchain by creating a longer and more difficult chain and as a result, modify the transaction information. Since hash power can be rented to launch attacks, some top 30 projects have suffered from such attacks. In addition to this interference, the main attack method is through the computing power market such as Nice Hash. Hackers can rent hashpower to facilitate their attacks, which allows the computing power to rise rapidly in a short time and rewrite information. In January of this year, the Ethereum Classic was attacked once, and it was also the case that hackers can migrate computing power from the fiercely competitive Bitcoin and Ethereum, and use it to attack smaller projects, such as ETH Classic. The picture shows the cost of attacking ETH Classic. It can be seen that it costs only $6,634 to attack ETH Classic for one hour. The security of one network is no longer limited by whether miners within the main net take more than 51% of the total hash power, rather it is determined by whether the benevolent (non-hackers) miners take more than 51% of the total hash power from the pool of projects that use similar consensus algorithm. For example, the hash power of Ethereum is 176 TH/s and that of Ethereum Classic is 9 TH/s. In this way, if one diverts some hash power from Ethereum (176 TH/s) to Ethereum Classic, then one can easily launch a double-spending attack to Ethereum Classic. The hash power ratio for this attack between the two projects is 9/176 = 5.2%, which is a tiny number. https://preview.redd.it/qj57vgmgb9f51.png?width=699&format=png&auto=webp&s=39c1efc3645f268dbf1c73e1b373d532d5461006 As one of the top 30 blockchain projects, Ethereum Classic has been attacked several times. Therefore, those small and medium-sized projects with low hash power and up-and-coming future projects are facing great potential risks. This is the reason that many emerging public chain projects abandon PoW and adopt PoS. Proof of Stake (PoS) can prevent 51% attack but has problems of its own In addition to PoW consensus, another well-adopted consensus algorithm is Proof of Stake (PoS). The fundamental concept is that the one who holds more tokens has the right to create the blocks. This is similar to shareholders in the stock market. The token holders also have the opportunities to get rewards. The advantages of PoS are: (i) the algorithm avoids wasting energy like that in PoW calculation; and (ii) its design determines that the PoS will not be subjected to 51% hash power attack since the algorithm requires the miner to possess tokens in order to modify the ledger. In this way, 51% attack becomes costly and meaningless. https://preview.redd.it/rf65o1vhb9f51.png?width=685&format=png&auto=webp&s=9d7a9f9dab6ce823a224e91afa9d116310cf27e1 In terms of disadvantages, nodes face the problem of accessibility. PoS requires a permission to enter the network and nodes cannot enter and exit freely and thus lacks openness. It can easily be forked. In the long run, the algorithm is short of decentralization, and leads to the Matthew effect of accumulated advantages whereby miners with more tokens will receive more rewards and perpetuate the cycle. More importantly, the current PoS consensus has not been verified for long-term reliability. Whether it can be as stable as the PoW system is yet to be verified. For some of the PoW public chains that are already launched, if they want to switch consensus, they need to do hard fork, which divides communities and carries out a long consensus upgrade and through which Ethereum is undergoing. Is there a safer and better solution? QuarkChain Provide THE Solution: High TPS Protection + PoSW Consensus For new-born projects, and some small or medium-sized projects, they all are facing the problem of power attack. For PoW-based chains, there are always some chains with lower hash power than others (ETC vs. ETH, BCH vs BTC), and thus the risk of attack is increased. In addition, the interoperability among the chains, such as cross-chain operation, is also a problem. In response, QuarkChain has designed a series of mechanisms to solve this problem. This can be summed up as a two-layer structure with a calculation power allocation and Proof of Staked Work (PoSW) consensus. First of all, there is a layer of sharding, which can be considered as some parallel chains. Each sharding chain handles the transactions relatively independently. Such design forms the basis to ensure the performance of the entire system. To avoid security issues caused by the dilution of the hash power, we also have a root chain. The blocks of the root chain do not contain transactions, but are responsible for verifying the transactions of each shard. Relying on the hash power distribution algorithm, the hash power of the root chain will always account for 51% of the net. Each shard, on the other hand, packages their transactions according to their own consensus and transaction models. Moreover, QuarkChain relies on flexibility that allows each shard to have different consensus and transaction models. Someone who wants to launch a double-spending attack on a shard that is already contained in the root chain must attack the block on the root chain, which requires calling the 51% hash power of the root chain. That is, if there are vertical field projects that open new shards on QuarkChain, even with insufficient hash power, an attacker must first attack the root chain if he or she wants to attack a new shard. The root chain has maintained more than 51% of the network’s hash power, which makes the attack very difficult. https://preview.redd.it/rxpohs7jb9f51.png?width=674&format=png&auto=webp&s=e2df1307a1753542472f2b6da88e7a4022b30884 As illustrated in the diagram, if the attacker wants to attack the QuarkChain network, one would need to attack the shard and the root chain simultaneously. PoW has achieved a high level of decentralization and has been verified for its stability for a long time. Combining PoW with the staking capability for PoS would make use of the advantages of both consensus mechanisms. That is what QuarkChain’s PoSW achieves exactly. PoSW, which is Proof of Staked Work, is exclusively developed by QuarkChain and runs on shards. PoSW allows miners to enjoy the benefits of lower mining difficulty by staking original tokens (currently it’s 20 times lower). Conversely, if someone malicious with a high hash power and does not stake tokens on QuarkChain, he will be punishable by receiving 20 times the difficulty of the hash power, which increases the cost of attack. If the attacker stakes tokens in order to reduce the cost of attack, he/she needs to stake the corresponding amount of tokens, which may cost even more. Thus, the whole network is more secure. Taking Ethereum Classics (ETC) as an example, if ETC uses the PoSW consensus, if there was another double-spending attack similar to the one in January, the attacker will need at least 110Th/s hash power or 650320 ETC (worth $3.2 million, and 8 TH/s hash power) to create this attack, which is far greater than the cost of the current attack on the network (8Th/s hash power) and revenue (219500 ETC). Relying on multiple sets of security mechanisms, QuarkChain ensures its own security, while providing security for new shards and small and medium-sized projects. Its high level of flexibility also allows the projects to support different types of ledger models, transaction models, virtual machines, and token economics. Such great degrees of security and flexibility will facilitate the blockchain ecosystem to accelerate growth of innovative blockchain applications. Learn more about QuarkChain Website https://www.quarkchain.io Telegram https://t.me/quarkchainio Twitter https://twitter.com/Quark_Chain Medium https://medium.com/quarkchain-official Reddit https://www.reddit.com/quarkchainio/ Community https://community.quarkchain.io/
Mining is one of the key concepts in the crypto world. Everyone who comes into contact with this sphere somehow wonders about the mining of coins. How profitable is mining in 2020, and what are the current trends? by StealthEX Crypto mining is a process during which a computer solves mathematical problems, resulting in the release of new blocks of information. This gives its owners a certain amount of coins, which is deposited in the total pot and registered in the public “ledger”, so-called blockchain. Machines in the network are also checking transactions with existing coins, adding this information to the blockchain as well. As for the issue itself, the most well-known algorithm of mining is Proof-of-Work (PoW), used in the networks of Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum and many others. During the mining process, the latest transactions are verified and compiled into blocks. It is usually a series of calculations with an iteration of parameters to find a hash with the specified properties. The node which first solves this problem receives a reward. This approach was specifically designed to encourage those who provide the computing power of their mining machines to maintain the network and mine new coins. It is usually no need for a newcomer to know and understand all the complicated details of the mining process, just how much they can earn with certain equipment and electricity costs. Everything is designed in such a way that the complexity of calculations is steadily increasing, which then requires a constant increase in the computing power of the network. In 2009-2010, for mining bitcoin, miners only had to download and run the software on their personal computers, but very soon the network became so complicated that even with best PCs with a powerful processor, mining became unprofitable. That’s why miners started to use more effective video cards (graphics processing units or GPUs) and join them in so-called “farms”. In most systems, the number of coins is determined in advance. Also, many networks are gradually reducing rewards for miners. Such emission restrictions were built into the algorithm to prevent inflation. Thus, the cost of mining for smaller participants no longer pays off, which makes them turn off their hardware or switch to another coin where they can still make their profit. In particular, on the evening of May 11, 2020, a halving took place in the bitcoin network, the reward for mining was halved, from 12.5 to 6.25 BTC. In June, the revenue of bitcoin miners decreased by 23%, to the lowest since March 2019. However, in mid-June, the difficulty of bitcoin mining showed a record growth over the past 2.5 years. Mining the first cryptocurrency has become 15% more difficult. Although, by the beginning of July, the complexity had stabilized. The growing difficulty of mining the first cryptocurrency indicates that new miners have joined its network. Previously, some of them turned off the equipment, as it became less profitable to mine the coin due to a decrease in its cost and halving. Now the absolute majority of new coins are generated by industrial mining. This is done by large data centers equipped with specialized computers based on the ASIC architecture. ASICs are integrated circuits that were initially optimized for a specific task, namely the mining of cryptocurrencies. They are much more productive than CPUs and video cards, and at the same time consume much less electricity. ASIC computers are the main type of equipment for the industrial production of crypto. So now, after the halving, BTC coin mining has become even less profitable. For beginners, mining the first cryptocurrency is unlikely to be suitable. It is more often earned by large companies that have all the necessary equipment, access to cheap rental conditions, electricity and maintenance. Hence newbies are better off starting with mining altcoins. It is even more profitable to work in a pool, that is, together with other miners. This can help to place farms in one place and negotiate a favourable price for electricity, so you can get a small but stable income dux to the total capacity of the pool. Therefore, it has become much more difficult for regular users who have only non-specialized equipment at their disposal to generate virtual money. However, GPU developers have significantly increased the performance of their devices in recent years, so mining on a video card is still common. Another important event that changes the situation in the mining sphere will be the hardfork of the Ethereum network with the turn to the Proof-of-Stake algorithm. For now, Ethereum is the most popular altcoin for GPU mining, but Ethereum 2.0 will not require using such powerful equipment, so then it switches to PoS, GPU owners will have to look for alternative coins to mine. At the moment the most popular altcoins for mining on GPUs are Ethereum (ETH), Ethereum Classic (ETC), Grin (GRIN), Zcoin (XZC), Dogecoin and Ravencoin (RVN). There are actually a lot of mining programs that automatically determine which coin is more profitable to mine at the moment. In the coming years, the market is waiting for a race of technologies. Manufacturers are investing in finding ways to increase hashing speed and reduce power consumption. Mining pools will play an increasing role. The market will also be affected by applications for mining cryptocurrencies on smartphones that require low computing power, such as Dash or Litecoin. And remember StealthEX supports more than 250 coins and constantly updating the list, so you can easily swap your crypto haul to more popular altcoins. Our service does not require registration and allows you to remain anonymous. Why don’t you check it out? Just go to StealthEX and follow these easy steps: ✔ Choose the pair and the amount for your exchange. For example ETH to BTC. ✔ Press the “Start exchange” button. ✔ Provide the recipient address to which the coins will be transferred. ✔ Move your cryptocurrency for the exchange. ✔ Receive your coins. Follow us on Medium, Twitter, and Reddit to get StealthEX.io updates and the latest news about the crypto world. For all requests message us via [email protected]. The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision. Original article was posted onhttps://stealthex.io/blog/2020/07/28/mining-today/
07-31 09:14 - 'DEMOS: Staking Always Continue to Move Forward' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/Satoshilol removed from /r/Bitcoin within 206-216min
''' [link]1 Staking (Staking Mining) has been very popular recently. It seems that you can’t say hello to others in the currency circle without knowing that Staking. Staking is essentially a product that is similar to the fixed income of the currency circle. The bear market environment has given it the soil for its development. It provides scenarios that users can accept in the short term, such as node services, especially the special time when the exchange joins. The public knows better that 2019 is the first year of Staking. Staking is a verification process under the POS consensus mechanism. In the POS mechanism, all nodes need to pledge tokens to participate in the consensus. At the same time, the public chain network verifier is also the holder of the token, and the pledger needs to lock their tokens as collateral , In exchange for the right to verify blocks and mining rewards. In the POS consensus mechanism project, all miners must hold coins, and anyone can participate in staking to “earn coins” through encrypted asset mortgage lock-up. If POW tokens used to provide rewards through calculations, then POS participates in staking through encrypted asset mortgage lock-up. Although there are still people who are skeptical about whether staking can make money, it has to be said that instead of letting “digital assets” lie quietly in their wallets, most people choose to do staking to increase the share of Token in the entire network. Share. In order to make this income truly reach a positive value, DEMOS, which has the advantage of a public chain, adopts a democratic voting method to provide high income from staking. The process is as follows: Users who want to participate in staking first need to open a democratic certificate, bind the corresponding mining pool, and then use DOS to buy votes (refer to the figure below for the detailed process). DEMOS adopts a POW+POS dual consensus mechanism, and it is set that when POW miners generate each block, at least 5 votes are required for confirmation, and there can be up to 20 votes. 30% of the DOS rewards for block generation will be shared equally by the selected voters, 60% of the rewards will be obtained by POW miners, and the remaining 10% will be entered into the community account as a community fund. The process from voting to the selection of a vote is called a smashed vote. If the smashed vote is successful, the principal and rewards will be credited to the account at once. As of the time of publication, the ticket price is about 321.86DOS, the unit’s blast ticket reward is about 37.32DOS, and the rate of return is as high as 11.6%. Since voting is randomly selected, the vote-popping cycle is also random. Participants can purchase multiple tickets to increase their vote-popping rate. DEMOS’s mature ticket mechanism (that is, the ticket pool can only hold up to 40960 tickets at the same time) guarantees that the cycle of votes will not exceed 142 days. Tickets that have not been selected after this time will be returned. The selection rate is only 0.5%. According to the feedback from the DEMOS community, the average cycle of the current vote burst is about 28 days, and the vote burst in the fastest day. The DEMOS autonomous community has a mining pool freely formed by participants. The role of the mining pool is to vote on behalf of miners when they need to vote, and vote online 24 hours a day. As of the publication time of this article, DEMOS has 13 mining pools with a total pledge amount: 848,048. The largest mining pool pledge amount is 374,069, which shows the popularity of DEMOS Staking. For the cryptocurrency industry, staking in the POS mechanism has two main functions, namely, maintaining security and incentivizing user participation. Just like the founder of Babbitt said: “The biggest significance of staking is to increase community participation, because when participating in staking, the vast majority of token holders and project parties are communities of interest.” DEMOS Staking On the one hand, the marketization of revenue encourages users to participate in DOS voting (staking) to increase revenue, and on the other hand, it also provides effective guarantees for the decentralization and security of DEMOS. Staking economy has become an emerging model for blockchain participants to obtain stable income. As more and more investors pour into this track, it is foreseeable that Staking proceeds will eventually sink into the community economy, and the hidden value will inevitably be unlimited. DEMOS, as the global basic public chain, is here the track is bound to go straight ahead. **Website: [link]2 ''' DEMOS: Staking Always Continue to Move Forward Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: Satoshilol 1: pr***ew.re*d.it/*c*yvfuv*4e5*.*ng?w*dth=700&**p*f*rm*t*png&a*p;au*o=webp&*m*;s=70b1195*aec**a9**6*37*f7b2**758c5f30d5*e 2: www.doschain.org** Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
So I was discussing this last week and honestly it all felt too simple, so I'm trying to get some stronger counterpoints to this argument. Goes something like this. You have some pool miner that wants to do a 51% attack. Lets assume the attack has three phases, the first phase is to try to accumulate 51% of the hashing power, next is the accumulation of more hashing power by ejecting other pools from through reorg. Finally when they aquired enough mining power they could blacklist exchange hotwallets or all manner of nefariousness. Lets further assume that everyone will act purely in their own self interest. For simplicity lets call the attacker "Spectre Pool".
Assuming Spectre Pool can hit something like 41% of the hashing power, the first goal is to accumulate more resources to hit 51%. Since pool mining is a commodity market, all Spectre has to do in this imaginary world is offer more than the market rate. Since they are already at 41% hashrate, they need to entice another 10% of the market to come to their pool. The obvious way to do this would be to offer a "new customer bonus" or something like that. Some promotion where they pay 1% above market price for the hashing power of pool members. So, given a network hashrate of 116.73 EH and a market rate of 0.101 USD/TH per day, the cost they would have to bear to offer a 1% promotion to entice 10% of the network would be: 116.73_EH / 0.101_USD/TH * 10% * 1% = 1,155,742 USD per day for each 1% "bonus" So, assuming they were willing to spend that much on "marketing", and that all miners worked in their own self interest, eventually they could lure enough miners over to achive 51%. Once they hit this threshold they could scale back on the "marketing" and thus reduce their daily burn.
Once at 51%, the next attack of Spectre will be to put their smallest competitor out of buisness. Lets call that the "Bond Pool", and pretend that Bond has 1.5% of the network hashing power. To put Bond out of buisness, with 51%, Spectere will need to reorg whenever Bond wins a block. By reorging to a chain without Bond, this will put Spectre one block behind and they will need to catch up. Once the reorg begins, Spectre will need to produce the longest chain on its own while starting one block behind. So we need to determine how long (statisticly) it will take Specter to produce n+1 blocks and compare that to how long (statisticly) it will take Bond to win one block. Although this can be hammered out in an iterive calculation, a better approach will be an algebraic solution. Lets walk through the equations:
d - The delta above majority. So at 51%, d=1%
n - The length of reorg that the minority pool could attempt
t - The pre-attack blocktime based on hashrate (assume 10 min)
M (aka Mp) - The percent of hashpower held by minority (49%)
S (aka Sp) - The percent of hashpower held by Spectre (51%)
m (aka Mt) - The blocktime durring attack on the minority chain
s (aka St) - The blocktime durring attack on the Spectre chain
n*m = s*(n+1) - Break even, when minority mines n at the same rate Spectre mines n+1
You can put the following into a GeoGebra CAS calculator to substitute and simplify the equations solve(n*m = s*(n+1), n) M = 1/2-d S = 1/2+d m = t/M s = t/S solve(n*m = s*(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = m*M/p solve(b = s*(n+1),p) This will produce the following equations for the values we are interested in. m(t,d): t/(1/2-d) # from `m` define s(t,d): t/(1/2-d) # from `s` define n(s,m): s/(m-s) # from `n` solve d(n): 1/(4*n+2) # from `d` solve p(d): 2*d # from `p` solve b(t,p): t/p # from `b` define Plugging the equations into excel produces the following (assuming t=10)
So once d=0.98%, Specture will have 50.98% of the hashing power, allowing him to eject 1.96% of all blocks mined at will. Of course this is all statistical, so Spectre will want some margin for randomness. So it would make sense to attach 1.5% of the blocks when Spectre reaches 51% So once Spectre reaches 51% he has enough hashing power to prevent any of Bonds blocks (1.5%) from being included. Spectre can win a reorg (statistically) every 8.5 hrs and Bond can only produce a block (statisticly) every 11.1 hours. So once this attack starts, Spectre simply flashes his promotion to lure the miners in the Bond pool (who are receiving no reward) over to the Spectre pool. If he only gets one third of them, then he can increase his influence to 52% Doing the same math again, with 52% Spectre can ice out any pool who has up to 4% of the hashing. Then running the promotion, Spectre will try to get 40% of the "homeless miners". Now Spectre's power grows to 55% giving him the power to ice out 10% of his competitors. This can cascade on and on until Spectre is the only public pool left. Now, at 51% the attack and reorgs take many hours, but as more and more pools get targeted, more and more miners will jump ship and end up at Spectre so long as they can hold the promotion. Bond's only choice would be to either close up, or leverage everything and mine at a loss for weeks hoping that Spectre eventually drops below the threshold for his attack. Of course Spectre has even more tremendous expenses. To offer the 1% promo to 10% of the network would cost Spectre $1.16 million / day, or 3.52 million per month for each percent of miners it lures over. So going from 41% to 61% would cost Spectre $70.3 million / month, but at that point he can attack 20% of the network giving him a reach of about 80% which is pretty much the entire pooled mining capacity today. Seems like $70 million is a small price to pay to buy the entire bitcoin network. Other expenses Spectre would accrue would be related to the attacks and reorgs. The early attacks will take hours and throughout Spectre needs to continue payouts to the pool even though he is generating no BTC durring the attack. So long as his chain is orphaned, his blocks have no value. Only after the attack and reorg when his chain becomes longest will he be able to claim the block reward for all the blocks he minded. This (in my opinion) will the the hardest challenge. The first attack and 25 block reorg will require Spectre to put his entire 51% hashing power on an orphaned chain for 8 hours requireing $208.6 million in payouts. Once he wins the attack and the chain reorgs he can cover his expeses with the block reward, but borrowing $208 million for 8 hours is still a very difficult thing to pull off. The interest alone on the attack is over $40,000 (20% interest compounded continually). Below is a table of the calculations
Levrg / Block
Of course, once Spectre gets 2/3 of the hashing power he controls the entire chain since he can include or exclude any block he wants. So this "Total Self Interest" simulation of a 6 day attack puts Spectre's expenses at $10.3 million in promotions and $71,000 in interest, or about $10.4 million total. 1 - All "hashes" are hashes per second 2 - TH = 1012 or 10004 hashes per second 3 - EH = 1018 or 10006 hashes per second 4 - Assume a market rate of 0.101 USD / TH / day 5 - Assume an average daily network hashrate of 116.73 EH
TH = 1012 = 10004 hashes_per_second EH = 1018 = 10006 hashes_per_second 21.113 0.101 daily USD per TH/s 116.73 EH/s So I was discussing this last week and honestly it all felt too simple, so I'm trying to get some stronger counterpoints to this argument. Goes something like this. You have some pool miner that wants to do a 51% attack. Lets assume the attack has three phases, the first phase is to try to accumulate 51% of the hashing power, next is the accumulation of more hashing power by ejecting other pools from through reorg. Finally when they aquired enough mining power they could blacklist exchange hotwallets or all manner of nefariousness. Lets further assume that everyone will act purely in their own self interest. For simplicity lets call the attacker "Spectre Pool".
Assuming Spectre Pool can hit something like 41% of the hashing power, the first goal is to accumulate more resources to hit 51%. Since pool mining is a commodity market, all Spectre has to do in this imaginary world is offer more than the market rate. Since they are already at 41% hashrate, they need to entice another 10% of the market to come to their pool. The obvious way to do this would be to offer a "new customer bonus" or something like that. Some promotion where they pay 1% above market price for the hashing power of pool members. So, given a network hashrate of 116.73 EH and a market rate of 0.101 USD/TH per day, the cost they would have to bear to offer a 1% promotion to entice 10% of the network would be: 116.73_EH / 0.101_USD/TH * 10% * 1% = 1,155,742 USD per day for each 1% "bonus" So, assuming they were willing to spend that much on "marketing", and that all miners worked in their own self interest, eventually they could lure enough miners over to achive 51%. Once they hit this threahold they could scale back on the "marketing" and thus reduce their daily burn.
Once at 51%, the next attack of Spectre will be to put their smallest competitor out of buisness. Lets call that the "Bond Pool", and pretend that Bond has 1.5% of the network hashing power. To put Bond out of buisness, with 51%, Spectere will need to reorg whenever Bond wins a block. By reorging to a chain without Bond, this will put Spectre one block behind and they will need to catch up. Once the reorg begins, Spectre will need to produce the longest chain on its own while starting one block behind. So we need to determine how long (statisticly) it will take Specter to produce an n+1 blocks and compare that to how long (statisticly) with take Bond to produce another block. Although this can be hammered out iterive calculations, a better approach will be an algebraic solution. Lets walk through the equations:
d - The delta above majority. So at 51%, d=1%
n - The number of blocks the majority can reorg
t - The pre-reorg blocktime based on hashrate (10 min)
M (aka Mp) - The percent of hashpower held by minority (49%)
S (aka Mp) - The percent of hashpower held by Spectre (51%)
m (aka Mp) - The blocktime durring attack on the minority chain
s (aka Mp) - The blocktime durring attack on the Spectre chain
n*m = s*(n+1) - Break even, when minority mines n at the same rate Spectre mines n+1
You can put the following into a GeoGebra CAS calculator to substitute and simplify the equations solve(n*m = s*(n+1), n) M = 1/2-d S = 1/2+d m = t/M s = t/S solve(n*m = s*(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = m*M/p solve(b = s*(n+1),p) This will produce the following equations for the values we are interested in. m(t,d): t*(1/2-d) # from `m` define s(t,d): t*(1/2-d) # from `s` define n(s,m): s/(m-s) # from `n` solve d(n): 1/(4*n+2) # from `d` solve p(d): 2*d # from `p` solve b(t,p): t/p # from `b` define Here's a table
solve(nm = s(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = m*M/p ``` Tb = The avg time between blocks won by Bond durring the reorg Ts = The avg time for Spectre to produce a block durring the reorg Tm = The avg time for the main chain to produce a block durring the reorg n = The number of blocks Specter will need to reorg Tb = 10_min / 49% / 3% = 10.89 Hrs Ts = 10_min / 51% = 19.61 Min Tm = 10_min / 49% = 20.41 Min Solve for the amount of blocks Specter can reorg Tmn > Ts(n+1) Tnn > Tsn + Ts n > Ts/(Tn - Ts) n > 24.5 Therefore: Spectre can produce 26 blocks faster than the main chain can produce 25. Specter has to win the reorg before Bond produces another block Assert: Ts * (n+1) < Tb 19.61_min * 26 < 10.89_hrs 8.50_hrs < 10.89_hrs ``` So once Spectre reaches 51% he has enough hashing power to prevent any of Bonds blocks from being included. Spectre can win a reorg (statistically) every 8.5 hrs and Bond can only produce a block (statisticly) every 10.89 hours. So once this attack starts, Spectre simply flashes his promotion to lure the miners in the Bond pool (who are receiving no reward) over to the Spectre pool. If he only gets one third of them, then he can increase his influence to 52% Doing the same math again, with 52% Spectre can ice out any pool who has up to 7% of the hashing. Then running the promotion, Spectre will try to get 40% of the "homeless miners". Now Spectre's power grows to 55% giving him the power to ice out 16% of his competitors. This can cascade on and on until Spectre is the only public pool left. 1 - All "hashes" are hashes per second 2 - TH = 1012 or 10004 hashes per second 3 - EH = 1018 or 10006 hashes per second 4 - Assume a market rate of 0.101 USD / TH / day 5 - Assume an average daily network hashrate of 116.73 EH ``` solve(nm = s(n+1), n) M = 1/2-d S = 1/2+d m = t/M s = t/S solve(nm = s(n+1), d) n = s/(m-s) b = mM/p solve(b = s(n+1),p) m(t,d): t(1/2-d) # from m define s(t,d): t(1/2-d) # from s define n(s,m): s/(m-s) # from n solve d(n): 1/(4n+2) # from d solve p(d): 2d # from p solve b(t,p): t/p # from b define ```
Algorithm: SHA-256 Block time: 9m 54s Last block: 655,777 Bl. reward: 6.25 Bl. reward 24h: 6.25 Difficulty: 254,491M Difficulty 24h: 258,402M Difficulty 3 days: The Bitcoin.com mining pool has the lowest share reject rate (0.15%) we've ever seen. Other pools have over 0.30% rejected shares. Furthermore, the Bitcoin.com pool has a super responsive and reliable support team. The Bitcoin price is rising at a slightly lesser 0.3403% per day over the past year. We suggest you enter a custom Bitcoin price into our calculator based on what you expect the average price to be over the next year. The price has gone down for most of the past year, which is a factor that should be strongly considered in your calculations. SlushPool. Pros: Established medium+ pool, score-based method reduces risk of cheating, user-friendly dashboard Cons: 2% fee may be too much for some people Announced in 2010, SlushPool was the very first Bitcoin mining pool and undoubtedly led the way for many other mining pools to come. Founded by SatoshiLabs current CEO Marek Palatinus (aka Slush), it’s based in the Czech Republic and ... Bitcoin mining calculator Summary. Enter the hash rate of your Bitcoin mining hardware (mandatory). Enter additional optional information, such as pool fees, electricity costs, etc. The more information you enter, the more accurate the result will be.
How to Mine Bitcoin-Gold with Awesome Miner & Mining Pool ...
Mine Bitcoin: https://secure.iqmining.com/tiny/zBYaH What is Bitcoin Mining? Bitcoin Mining is a peer-to-peer computer process used to secure and verify bitc... Signup for Bitcoin.com Pool Mining Here: http://bit.ly/mybitcoinpool Earn online passive income with Bitconnect: http://bit.ly/ckbitconnect Mine your Bitcoin... Bitcoin Miner Tutorial - SlushPool Dashboard Bitcoin & Cryptocurrency Mining Pools Explained Best Mining Pools PPS vs PPLNS - Duration: 18:17. VoskCoin 6,118 views. 18:17. Mix Play all Mix - Crypto Rick YouTube; LIVE ... This video is the twelfth in a series of videos showing you how to mine a single coin with Awesome Miner and Mining Pool Hub. Episode 12 is Bitcoin-Gold. Thi...