Bitcoin Mining mit dem Raspberry Pi » elektronX

BiblePay (BBP)

BiblePay (BBP) is a Charity Christian Cryptocurrency that donates 10% of coins to Charity every month, sponsoring orphans
[link]

Zhuoer Jiang: Talk about the difference between BTC, BCH and BSV

Zhuoer Jiang: Talk about the difference between BTC, BCH and BSV

https://preview.redd.it/kcdq7qrjnyd51.jpg?width=570&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=af67bd46683fbe3ffa6c081d490d69598dd83bbb
1. When do you contact Bitcoin? What do you think of the blockchain industry?
I came into contact with Bitcoin in October 2013. At that time, I was making game aids, which involved the issue of collecting money from Taiwan and Southeast Asia.
The reason for cultivating the blockchain industry is that blockchain is the only industry that can provide economic freedom. The blockchain is decentralized and has no control center, so no one can eliminate it, so it provides economic freedom. The counter-example is Qvod player. Although Qvod player also has tens of thousands of nodes, it is centralized. As long as the control center is killed, the Qvod player network will die. (QvodPlayer is a Chinese-based video-on-demand playback software, using P2P technology, users can watch online film and television programs through buffering. In mainland China, QvodPlayer has a huge number of users. Due to the use of a dedicated transmission protocol, QvodPlayer is used by some users to download banned videos, such as violent or pornographic videos, and politically sensitive videos. In addition, pirated movies are rampant in QvodPlayer)
I am not a Bitcoinist. As long as other tokens provide economic freedom, I will buy them with real money. My position portfolio is BCH 40% + BTC 30% + ETH 20% + economically free innovative currency 10%, and I think that ETH is likely to exceed BTC in total market value in this bull market.
2. What is the difference between BTC, BCH and BSV?
The easiest thing to see is the difference in block size. BTC blocks have been locked at about 1MB, while BSV advocates infinite blocks. BCH advocates a moderate block size, which cannot exceed the carrying capacity of an ordinary computer. The current value is about 32MB.
Both BTC and BSV have gone to extremes. The BTC development team, Core, pursues extreme decentralization, resulting in too small blocks and high transaction fees. In the last bull market, a transaction fee was as high as hundreds of thousands of yuan, which caused a large number of BTC users to flow out to BCH, ETH and other tokens.
Some people think that BTC can rely entirely on stored-value users instead of using users to survive. This is impossible. If there are no users, there are no stored value users. For example, gold is obviously more suitable for storing value, but almost everyone has bank deposits, except for the elderly, almost no one uses gold to store value. To
People usually use paper money to store value, and naturally they also use paper money to store value. It is impossible to use paper money to store value with gold, and it is impossible to use paper money for small transactions and gold for large transactions. Currency has a scale effect, and it must be a winner takes all.
BSV has gone to the other extreme. The blockchain is enough to store transaction data, but if the blockchain is used as cloud storage, no amount of space is enough. Think about how many resources the world has to store. The result is that the performance requirements are too high, the number of nodes is drastically reduced, and the foundation of the blockchain, which is decentralization, is lost. In the end, it falls into the same fate as the Qvod player. To
Behind the different block sizes are the differences in the spirit of the three. Just like during the Opium War, the difference between Britain and China's Qing Dynasty was not a superficial weapon, but a complete political, economic, and technological gap behind it.
Both BTC and BSV are irrational and religious to a certain extent. BTC advocates a deadlock block size, and BSV advocates a deadlock protocol. The two are very similar.
In terms of rational development and serving users, BCH has won. For example, the issuance of tokens is an important function and rigid demand of the blockchain. Tokens can already be issued on BCH through several protocols such as Wormhole and SLP, while BTC and BSV cannot yet. This is a huge difference in development.
3. Under what circumstances can BCH exceed BTC?
BCH has to wait for users to slowly develop until the number of users and transactions exceed BTC. Although under normal circumstances, the currency has a scale effect, this situation is unlikely to happen, but BTC made a fatal mistake, and locked the block and locked the user.
What if BTC expands like BCH?
First of all, BTC cannot be expanded because the expansion requires a hard fork, regardless of whether it is within the community or the Core, it must adhere to 1MB, insist on extreme decentralization, and BTC must be able to run on the Raspberry Pi. The result is that the expansion advocates in BTC and Core re-hard fork.
Isn't this the plot of the hard fork of BCH from BTC in 2017? So what are these "advocates" doing hard forking again? Just go straight to BCH.
Therefore, BTC must undergo a hard fork to expand, so it cannot be expanded.
So BCH only needs to catch up, which is a fixed goal. I estimate that in this bull market, BCH can exceed the number of users. At that time, BCH had a solid foundation of users and communities. The price increase only increases the price of BCH, the value of BCH is determined by the number of users, and the price fluctuates around the value.
4. Will BCH hard fork happen? What impact will it have on us later?
The BCH community has recently had a lot of discussions on the issue of miner donations, which reflects the decentralization of BCH.
If BCH is controlled by bitmain, why it took a long time for bitmain to implement this problem? Conversely, if CSW wants to modify something on BSV, it can be passed immediately.
5. Do you think BCH is worth long-term ownership?
I often say: "Ask God in the short term, and the number of users in the long term."
The longer the time, the more worth holding BCH. BCH is developing rapidly due to the correct route. I just gave an example. There are already several schemes for issuing tokens on BCH, but neither BTC nor BSV have one. Part of it is because BSV locks the protocol and is not convenient for development. The other part It is because the BSV community has inherited the characteristics of CSW and only speaks big words and does not do practical things.
Therefore, it is definitely worth holding for 1 to 2 years, and the rate of increase is likely to be higher than that of BTC. I predict that the highest point of this round of bull market for BCH will rise from about 3.6% of BTC to 10% to 20% of BTC.
8. Free Q&A
"Will Bitcoin die due to quantum computers or other reasons?"
Certainly not, at best, replace a quantum-resistant algorithm. Looking at it now, quantum computers will not be practical for a long time. And I think quantum computers may not be able to solve the NP problem, that is, the current asymmetric encryption problem, which may not be possible mathematically.
"The impact of the proliferation of contract transactions on currency prices?"
The currency price is ultimately determined by the number of users, not by speculative users. The proliferation of futures trading has happened long ago. From 2016 to 2017, in the presence of a large number of futures trading, BTC rose 100 times.
"Will you be notified when you escape?"
I will definitely not inform. I have already made predictions. I think the bull market may end in the second half of 2021. Or conversely, this bull market may last for two to three years, and two years are more likely.
Why not notify? Most of my clients are miners, and the currency price directly affects the income of the miners. If the currency price drops due to my notification, the interests of my clients will be damaged.
"Recommended regular investment in 2019, what strategy is recommended in 2020?"
This year's bull market has begun, and it must be a full position investment. The cost of regular investment to buy coins later is very high.
"Is it better to speculate or to mine now?"
Most people can't insist on holding the token from start to finish. Most people are in the middle of the bull market, or even sell it at the beginning, and then miss the entire bull market.
Only miners, no matter what level of miners, will hold the token from beginning to end. During the entire bull market, miners are very profitable. Miners will certainly not sell the goose that lays golden eggs like mining machines in the bull market, so miners tend to make more. The earliest miners are basically still active in the market, and their wealth is free, while the earliest holders of coins are almost gone.
submitted by paulcheung1990 to Bitcoincash [link] [comments]

Epic Cash AMA Recap with CryptoDiffer Community

CryptoDiffer team Hello, everyone! We are glad to meet here: Max Freeman (@maxfreeman4), Project Lead at Epic Cash Yoga Dude (@Yogadude), PR&Marketing at Epic Cash Xenolink (@Xenolink), Advisor at Epic Cash
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash Thanks Max, we are excited to be here!
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash Hello Everyone! Thank you for having us here!
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash Thank you to the CryptoDiffer team and CryptoDiffer community for hosting us!
CryptoDiffer team Let`s start from the first introduction question: Q1: Can you introduce yourself to the community? What is your background and how did you join Epic Cash?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Hello! My background is Marketing and Business Development, I’ve been in crypto since 2011 started with Bitcoin, then Monero in 2014, Ethereum in 2015 and at some point Doge for fun and profit. I joined Epic Cash team in September 2019 handling PR and Marketing.
I saw in Epic Cash what was missing in my previous cryptos — things that were missing in Bitcoin and Monero especially.
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Hello Cryptodiffer Community, I am not an original co-founder nor am I a developer for the Epic Cash project. I am however a community member that is involved in helping scale this project to higher levels. One of the many beauties of Epic Cash is that every single member in the community has the opportunity to be part of EPIC’s team, it can be from development all the way to content producing. Epic Cash is a community driven project. The true Core Team of Epic Cash is our community. I believe a community that is the Core Team is truly powerful. EPIC Cash has one of the freshest and strongest communities I have seen in quite a while. Which is one of the reasons why I became involved in this project. Epic displayed some of the most self community produced content I have seen in a project. I’m actually a doctor of medicine but in terms of my experience in crypto, I have been involved in the industry since 2012 beginning with mining Litecoin. Since then I have been doing deep dive analysis on different projects, investing, and building a network in crypto that I will utilize to help connect and scale Epic in every way I can. To give some credit to those people in my network that have been a part of helping give Epic exposure, I would like to give a special thanks to u/Tetsugan and u/Saurabhblr. Tetsugan has been doing a lot of work for the Japanese community to penetrate the Japanese market, and Japan has already developed a growing interest in Epic. Daku Sarabh the owner and creator of Crypto Daku Robinhooders, I would like to thank him and his community for giving us one of our first large AMA’s, which he has supported our project early and given us a free AMA. Many more to thank but can’t be disclosed. Also thank you to all the Epic Community leaders, developers, and Content producers!
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
I’m Max Freeman, which stands for “Maximum Freedom for Mankind”. I started working on the ideas that would become Epic in 2018. I fell in love with Bitcoin in 2017 but realized that it needs privacy at the base layer, fungibility, better scalability in order to go to the next level.
CryptoDiffer team
Really interesting backgrounds I must admit, pleasure to see the team that clearly has one vision of the project by being completely decentralized:)
Q2: Can you briefly describe what is Epic Cash in 3–5 sentences? What technology stands behind Epic Cash and why it’s better than the existing one?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
I’d like to highlight the differences between Epic and the two highest-valued privacy coin projects, Monero and Zcash. XMR has always-on privacy like Epic does, but at a cost: Its blockchain is over 20x more data intensive than Epic, which limits its possibilities for scalability. Epic’s blockchain is small and light enough to run a full node on cell phones, something that is in our product road map. ZEC by comparison can’t run on low end devices because of its zero knowledge based approach, and only 1% of transactions are fully private. Epic is simply newer, more advanced technology than prior networks thanks to Mimblewimble
We will also add more algorithms to widen the range of hardware that can participate in mining. For example, cell phones and tablets based around ARM chips. Millions of people can mine Epic that can’t mine Bitcoin, and that will help grow the network rapidly.
There are some great short videos on our YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQBFfksJlM97rgrplLRwNUg/videos
that explain why we believe we have created something truly special here.
Our core architecture derives from Grin, so we are fortunate to benefit on an ongoing basis from their considerable development efforts. We are focused on making our currency truly usable and widely available, beyond a store of value and becoming a true medium of exchange.
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Well we all have our views, but in a nutshell, we offer things that were missing in the previous cryptos. We have sound fiscal emission schedule matching Bitcoin, but we are vastly more private and faster. Our blockchain is lighter than Bitcoin or Monero and our tech is more scalable. Also, we are unique in that we are mineable with CPUs and GPUs as well as ASICs, giving the broadest population the ability to mine Epic Cash. Plus, you can’t forget FUNGIBILITY 🙂 we are big on that — since you can’t have true privacy without fungibility.
Also, please understand, we have HUGE respect to all the cryptos that came before us, we learned a lot from them, and thanks to their mistakes we evolved.
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
To add on, what also makes Epic Cash unique is the ability to decentralize the mining using a tri-algo model of Random X (CPU), Progpow (GPU), and Cuckoo (ASIC) for an ability to do hybrid mining. I believe this is an issue we can see today in Bitcoin having centralized mining and the average user has a costly barrier of entry.
To follow up on this one in my opinion one of the things we adopted that we have seen success for , in example Bitcoin and Monero, is a strong community driven coin. I believe having a community driven coin will provide a more organic atmosphere especially when starting with No ICO, or Premine with a fair distribution model for everyone.
CryptoDiffer team
Q3: What are the major milestones Epic Cash has achieved so far? Maybe you can share with us some exciting plans for future weeks/months?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Since we went live in September of 2019, we attracted a very large community of users, miners, investors and contributors from across the world. Epic Cash is a very international project with white papers translated into over 30 languages. We are very much a community driven project; this is very evident from our content and the amount of translations in our white papers and in our social media content.
We are constantly working on improving our usability, security and privacy, as well as getting our message and philosophy out into the world to achieve mass adoption. We have a lot of exciting plans for our project, the plan is to make Epic Cash into something that is More than Money.
You can tell I am the Marketing guy since my message is less about the actual tech and more about the usability and use cases for Epic Cash, I think our Team and Community have a great mix of technical, practical, social and fiscal experiences. Since we opened our YouTube channels content for community submissions, we have seen our content translated into Spanish, French, German, Polish, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Russian, and other languages
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Our future development roadmap will be published soon and includes 4 tracks:
Usability
Mining
Core Protocol
Ecosystem Development
Core Protocol
Epic Server 2.9.0 — this release improves the difficulty adjustment and is aimed at making block emission closer to the target 60 seconds, particularly reducing the incidence of extremely short and long blocks — Status: In Development (Testing) Anticipated Release: June 2020
Epic Server 3.0.0 — this completes the rebase to Grin 3.0.0 and serves as the prerequisite to some important functional building blocks for the future of the ecosystem. Specifically, sending via Tor (which eliminates the need to open ports), proof of payment (useful for certain dex applications e.g. Bisq), and our native mobile app. Status: In Development (Testing) Anticipated Release: Fall 2020
Non-Interactive Transactions — this will enhance usability by enabling “fire and forget” send-to-address functionality that users are accustomed to from most cryptocurrencies. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Scaling Options — when blocks start becoming full, how will we increase capacity? Two obvious options are increasing the block size, as well as a Lightning Network-style Layer 2 structure. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Confidential Assets — Similar to Raven, Tari, and Beam, the ability to create independently tradable assets that ride on the Epic Blockchain. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Usability
GUI Wallet 2.0 — Restore from seed words and various usability enhancements — Status: Needs Assessment Anticipated Release: Fall 2020
Mobile App — Native mobile experience for iOS and Android. Status: In Development (Testing) Anticipated Release: Winter 2020
Telegram Integration — Anonymous payments over the Telegram network, bot functionality for groups. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Mining
RandomX on ARM — Our 4th PoW algorithm, this will enable tablets, cell phones, and low power devices such as Raspberry Pi to participate in mining. Status: Needs Assessment Anticipated Release: n/a
The economics of mining Epic are extremely compelling for countries that have free or extremely cheap electricity, since anyone with an ordinary PC can mine. Individual people around the world can simply run the miner and earn meaningful money (imagine Venezuela for example), something that has not been possible since the very early days of Bitcoin.
Ecosystem Development
Atomic Swaps — Connecting Epic to other blockchains in a trustless way, starting with ETH so that Epic can trade on DeFi infrastructure such as Uniswap, Kyber, etc. Status: Drawing Board Anticipated Release: n/a
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
From the Community aspect, we have been further developing our community international reach. We have been seeing an increase in interest from South America, China, Russia, Japan, Italy, and the Philippines. We are working on targeting more countries. We truly aim to be a decentralized project that is open to everyone worldwide.
CryptoDiffer team
Great, thank you for your answers, we now can move to community questions part!
Cryptodiffer Community
You have 3 mining algorithms, the question is: how do they not compete with each other? Is there any benefit of mining on the GPU and CPU if someone is mining on the ASIC?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
The block selection is deterministic, so that every 100 blocks, 60% are for RandomX (CPU), 38% for ProgPow (GPU), and 2% for Cuckoo (ASIC) — the policy is flexible so that we can have as many algorithms with any percentages we want. The goal is to make the most decentralized and resilient network possible, and with that in mind we are excited to work on enabling tablets and cell phones to mine, since that opens it up to millions of people that otherwise can’t take part.
Cryptodiffer Community
To Run a project smoothly, Funding is very important, From where does the Funding/revenue come from?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Yes, early on this was realized and in order to scale a project funds are indeed needed. Epic Cash did not start with any funding and no ICO and was organically genesis mined with no pre-mine. Epic cash is also a nonprofit community driven project similar to Monero. There is no profit-driven entity in the picture. To overcome the revenue issue Epic Cash setup a development fund tax that decreases 1% every year until 2028 when Epic Cash reaches singularity with Bitcoin emissions. Currently it is at 7.77%. This will help support the scaling of the project.
Cryptodiffer Community
Hi! In your experience working also with MONERO can you please clarify which are those identified problems that EPIC CASH aims to develop and resolve? What’s the main advantage that EPIC CASH has over MONERO? Thank you!
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
First, I must admit that I am still a huge fan and HODLer of Monero. That said:
✅ our blockchain is MUCH lighter than Monero’s
✅ our transaction processing speed is much faster
✅ our address-less blockchain is more private
✅ Epic Cash can be mined with CPU (RandomX) GPU (ProgPow) and Cuckoo, whereas Monero migrated to RandomX and currently only mineable with CPU
Cryptodiffer Community
  1. the feature ‘Cut Through’ deletes old data, how is it decided which data will be deletes, and what are the consequences of it for the platform and therefore the users?
  2. On your website I see links to download Epic wallet and mining software for Linux,Windows and MacOs, I am a user of android, is there a version for me, or does it have a release date?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
  1. This is one of the most exciting features of Mimblewimble, which is its extraordinary ability to compress blockchain data. In Bitcoin, the entire history of a coin must be replayed every time it is spent, and comprehensive details are permanently stored in the blockchain. Epic discards spent transaction inputs and consolidates outputs, storing neither addresses or amounts, only a tiny kernel to allow sender and receiver to prove their transaction.
  2. The Vitex mobile app is great for today, and we have a native mobile app for iOS and Android in the works as well.
Cryptodiffer Community
$EPIC Have total Supply of 21,000,000 EPIC , is there any burning plan? Or Buyback program to maintain $EPIC price in the future?
Who is Epic Biggest competitors?
And what’s makes epic better than competitors?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
We respect the older generation coins like Bitcoin. But we have learned that the supply economics of Bitcoin is very sound. Until today we can witness how the Bitcoin is being adopted institutionally and by retail. We match the 21 million BTC supply economics because it is an inelastic fixed model which makes the long-term economics very sound. To have an elastic model of burning tokens or printing tokens will not have a solid economic future. Take for example the USD which is an inflating supply. In terms of competitors we look at everyone in crypto with respect and also learn from everyone. If we had to compare to other Mimblewimble tech coins, Grin is an inelastic forever inflating supply which in the long term is not sound economics. Beam however is an inelastic model but is formed as a corporation. The fair distribution is not there because of the permanent revenue model setup for them. Epic Cash a non-profit development tax fund model for scaling purposes that will disappear by 2028’s singularity.
Cryptodiffer Community
What your plans in place for global expansion, are you focusing on only market at this time? Or focus on building and developing or getting customers and users, or partnerships?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Since we are a community project, we have many developers, in addition to the core team.
Our plans for Global expansion are simple — we have advocates in different regions addressing their audiences in their native languages. We are growing organically, by explaining our ideology and usability. The idea is to grow beyond needing a fiat bridge for crypto use, but to rather replace fiat with our borderless, private and fungible crypto so people can use it to get goods and services without using banks.
We are not limiting ourselves to one particular demographic — Epic Cash is a valid solution for the gamers, investors, techie and non techie people, and the unbanked.
Cryptodiffer Community
EPIC confidential coin! Did you have any problems with the regulators? And there will be no problems with listing on centralized exchanges?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
In terms of structure, we are carefully set up to minimize these concerns. Without a company or investors in the picture, and having raised no funds, there is little scope to attack in terms of securities laws. Bitcoin and Ethereum are widely acknowledged as acceptable, and we follow in their well-established footprints in that respect. Centralized exchanges already trade other privacy coins, so we don’t see this as much of an issue either. In general, decentralized p2p exchange options are more interesting than today’s centralized platforms. They are more censorship resistant, secure, and privacy-protecting. As the technology gets better, they should continue to gain market share and that’s why we’re proud to be partnered with Vitex, whose exchange and mobile app work very well.
Cryptodiffer Community
What are the main utility and real-life usage of the #EPIC As an investor, why should we invest in the #EPIC project as a long-term investment?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Because our blockchain is so light (only 1.16gb currently, and grows very slowly) it is naturally well suited to become a decentralized mobile money standard because people can run a full node on their phone, guaranteeing the security of their funds. Scalability in Bitcoin requires complicated and compromised workarounds such as Lightning Network and light clients, and these problems are solved in Epic.
With our forthcoming Mobile Mining app, hundreds of millions of cell phones and tablets will be able to easily join the network. People can quickly and cheaply send money to one another, fulfilling the long-envisioned promise of P2P electronic cash.
As an investor, it’s important to ask a few key questions. Bitcoin Standard tokenomics of disinflation and a fixed supply are well proven over a decade now. We follow this model exactly, with a permanently synchronized supply from 2028, and 4 emission halvings from now until then, with our first one in about two weeks. Beyond that, we can apply some simple logical tests. What is more valuable, money that can only be used in some cases (censorable Bitcoin based on a lack of fungibility) or money that can be used universally? (fungible Epic based on always-on privacy by default). Epic is also poised to be a more decentralized and therefore resilient network because of wider participation in mining. Epic is designed to be Bitcoin++ Privacy, Fungibility, Scalability
Cryptodiffer Community
Q1. What are advantages for choosing three mining algorithms RandomX+, ProgPow and CuckAToo31+ ?
Q2. Beam and Grin use MimbleWimble protocol, so what are difference for Epic? All of you will be friends for partners or competitors?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
RandomX and ProgPow are designed to use the entirety of a CPU / GPU’s unique processing capabilities in a way that other types of hardware don’t work as well. You can run RandomX on a GPU but it doesn’t work nearly as well as a much cheaper CPU, for example. Cuckoo is a “memory hard” algorithm that widens the range of companies that can produce the hardware.
Grin and Beam are great projects and we’ve learned a lot from them. We inherited our first codebase from Grin’s excellent Rust design, which is a better language for community participation than C++ that Beam currently uses.
Functionally, Mimblewimble is similar across the 3 coins, with standard Confidential Transactions, CoinJoin, Dandelion++, Schnorr Signatures and other advanced features. Grin is primarily ASIC-targeted, Beam is GPU-targeted, and Epic is multi-hardware.
The biggest differences though are in tokenomics and project structure. Grin has permanent inflation of 60 coins per block with no halvings, which means steady erosion of value over time due to new supply pressure. It also lacks a steady funding model, making future development in jeopardy, particularly as the per coin price falls. Beam has a for-profit model with heavy early inflation and a high developer tax. Epic builds on the strengths of these earlier mimblewimble projects and addresses the parts that could be improved.
Cryptodiffer Community Some privacy coin has scalability issues! How Epic cash will solve scalability issues? Why you choose randomX consensus algorithem?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Fungibility means that you can’t distinguish one unit of currency from another, in example Gold. Fungibility has recently become a hot issue as people have been noticing Bitcoins being locked up by exchanges which may of had a nefarious history which are called Tainted Coins. In example coins that have been involved in a hack, darknet market transactions, or even processing coin through a mixer. Today we can already see freshly mined Bitcoins being sold at a premium price to avoid the fungibility problem Bitcoin carries today. Bitcoin can be tracked by chainalysis and is not a fungible cryptocurrency. One of the features that Epic has is privacy with added fungibility, because of Mimblewimble technology, Epic has no addresses recorded and therefore nothing can be tracked by chainalysis. Below I provide a link of an example of what the lack of fungibility is resulting in today with Bitcoin. One of the reasons why we chose the Random X algo. is because of the easy barrier of entry and also to further decentralize the mining. Random X algo can be mined on old computers or laptops. We also have 2 other algos Progpow (GPU), and Cuckoo (ASIC) to create a wider decentralization of mining methods for Epic.
Cryptodiffer Community
I’m a newbie in crypto and blockchain so how will Epic Cash team target and educate people who don’t know about blockchain and crypto?
What is the uniqueness of Epic Cash that cannot be found in other project that´s been released so far ?
Yoga Dude Pr&Marketing at Epic Cash
Actually, while we have our white paper translated into over 30 languages, we are more focused on explaining our uses and advantages rather than cold specs. Our tech is solid, but we not get hung up on pure tech talk which most casual users do not need to or care to understand. As long as our fundamentals and tech are secure and user friendly our primary goal is to educate about use cases and market potential.
The uniqueness of Epic Cash is its amalgamation of “whats good” in other cryptos. We use Mimblewimble for privacy and anonymity. Our blockchain is much lighter than our competitors. We are the only Mimblewimble crypto to use a unique cocktail of mining algorithms allowing to be mined by casual miners with gaming rigs and laptops, while remaining friendly to GPU and CPU farmers.
The “uniqueness” is learning from the mistakes of those who came before us, we evolved and learned, which is why our privacy is better, we are faster, we are fungible, we offer diverse mining and so on. We are the best blend — thats powerful and unique
Cryptodiffer Community
Can you share EPIC’s vision for decentralized finance (DEFI)? What features do EPIC have to support DEFI?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
We view Epic as ideally suited to be the decentralized digital reserve asset of the new Private Internet of Money that’s emerging. At a technology level, atomic swaps can be created to build liquidity bridges so that wrapped Epic tokens (like WBTC, WETH) can trade on other networks as ERC20, BEP2, NEP5, VIP180, Algorand and so on. There is more Bitcoin value locked on Ethereum than in Lightning Network, so we will similarly integrate Epic so that it can trade on networks such as Uniswap, Kyber, and so on.
Longer term, if there is market demand for it, thanks to Scriptless Script functionality our blockchain has, we can build “Confidential Assets” (which Raven, Tari, and Beam are all also working on) that enable people to create tokenized assets in a private way.
Cryptodiffer Community
If you could choose one celebrity to promote Epic-cash, who that would be?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
I am a firm believer that the strength of the project lies in allowing community members to become their own celebrities, if their content is good enough the community will propel them to celebrity status. Organic celebrities with small but loyal following are vastly more beneficial than big name professional shills with inflated but non caring audiences.
I remember the early days of Apple when an enthusiastic dude named Guy Kawasaki became Apple Evangelist, he was literally going around stores that sold Apple and visited user groups and Evangelized his belief in Apple. This guy became a Legend and helped Apple become what it is today.
Epic Cash will have its OWN Celebrities
Cryptodiffer Community
How does $EPIC solve scalability of transactions? Current blockchains face issues with scalability a lot, how does $EPIC creates a solution to it?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Epic Cash is utilizing Mimblewimble technology. Besides the privacy & fungibility aspect of the tech. There is the scalability features of it. It is implemented into Epic by transaction cut-through. Which means it allows nodes to remove all intermediate transactions, thus significantly reducing the blockchain size without affecting its validation. Mimblewimble also does not use addresses like a BTC address, and amount of transactions are also not recorded. One problem Monero and Bitcoin are facing now is scalability. It is evident today that data is getting more expensive and that will be a problem in the long run for those coins. Epic is 90% lighter and more scalable compared to Monero and Bitcoin.
Cryptodiffer Community
what are the ways that Epic Cash generates profits/revenue to maintain your project and what is its revenue model ? How can it make benefit win-win to both invester and your project ?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
There is a block subsidy of 7.77% that declines 1.11% per year until 0, where it stays after that. As a nonprofit community effort, this extremely modest amount goes much further than in other projects, which often take 20, 30, even 50+ % of the coin supply. We believe that this ongoing funding model best aligns the long term incentives for all participants and balances the compromises between the ends of the centralized/decentralized spectrum of choices that any project must make.
Cryptodiffer Community
Q1 : What are your major goals to archive in the next 3–4 years?
Q2 : What are your plans to expand and gain more adoption?
Yoga Dude Pr&Marketing at Epic Cash
Max already talked about our technical plans and goals in his roadmap. Allow me to talk more about the non technical 😁
We are aiming for broader reach in the non technical more mainstream community — this is a big challenge but we believe it is doable. By offering simpler ways to mine Epic Cash (with smart phones for example), and by doing more education we will achieve the holy grail of crypto — moving past the fiat bridges and getting Epic Cash to be accepted as means of payment for goods and services. We will accomplish this by working with regional advocacy groups, community interaction, off-line promotional activities and diverse social media targeting.
Cryptodiffer Community
It seems to me that EpicCash will have its first Halving, right? Why a halving so soon?
Is a mobile version feasible?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Our supply emission catches up to that of Bitcoin’s first 19 years after 8 years in Epic, so that requires more frequent halvings. Today’s block emission is 16, next up are 8, 4, 2, and then finally 0.15625. After that, the supply of Epic and that of BTC stay synchronized until maxing out at 21m coins in 2140.
Today we have a mobile wallet through the Vitex app, a native mobile wallet coming, and are working on mobile mining.
Cryptodiffer Community
What markets will you add after that?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
Well, we are aiming to have ALL markets
Epic Cash in its final iteration will be usable by everyone everywhere regardless of their technical expertise. We are not limiting ourselves to the technocrats, one of our main goals is to help the billions of unbanked. We want everyone to be able to mine, buy, and most of all USE Epic Cash — gamers, farmers, soccer moms, students, retirees, everyone really — even bankers (well once we defeat the banking industry)
We will continue building on the multilingual diversity of our global community adding support and advocacy groups in more countries in more languages.
Epic Cash is More than Money and its for Everyone.
Cryptodiffer Community
Almost, all cryptocurrencies are decentralized & no-one knows who owns that cryptocurrencies ! then also, why Privacy is needed? hats the advantages of Private coins?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
With a public transparent blockchain such as Bitcoin, you are permanently posting a detailed history of your money movements open for anyone to see (not just legitimate authorities, either!) — It would be considered crazy to post your credit card or bank statements to Twitter, but that’s what is happening every time you send a transaction that is not private. This excellent video from community contributor Spencer Lambert https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0blbfmvCq\_4 explains better than I can.
Privacy is not just for criminals, it’s for everyone. Do you want your landlord to increase the rent when he sees that you get a raise? Your insurance company to raise your healthcare costs because they see you buying too much ice cream? If you’re a business, do you want your employees to see how much money their coworkers make? Do you want your competitors to trace your supplier and customer relationships? Of course not. By privacy being default for everyone, cryptocurrency can be used in a much wider range of situations without unacceptable compromises.
Cryptodiffer Community
What are the main utility and real-life usage of the #EPIC As an investor, why should we invest in the #EPIC project as a long-term investment?
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Epic Cash can be used as a Private and Fungible store of value, medium of exchange, and unit of account. As Epic Cash grows and becomes adopted it can be compared to how Bitcoin and Monero is used and adopted as well. As Epic is adopted by the masses, it can be accepted as a medium of exchange for store owners and as fungible payments without the worry of having money that is tainted. Epic Cash as a store of value may be a good long term aspect of investment to consider. Epic Cash carries an inelastic fixed supply economic model of 21 million coins. There will be 5 halvings which this month of June will be our first halving of epic. From a block reward of 16 Epic reduced to 8. If we look at BTC’s price action and history of their halvings it has been proven and show that there has been an increase in value due to the scarcity and from halvings a reduction of # of BTC’s mined per block. An inelastic supply model like Bitcoin provides proof of the circulating supply compared to the total supply by the history of it’s Price action which is evident in long term charts since the birth of Bitcoin. EPIC Plans to have 5 halvings before the year 2028 to match the emissions of Bitcoin which we call the singularity event. Below is a chart displaying our halvings model approaching singularity. Once bitcoin and cryptocurrency becomes adopted mainstream, the fungibility problem will be more noticed by the general public. Privacy coins and the features of fungibility/scalability will most likely be sought over. Right now a majority of people believe that all cryptocurrency is fungible. However, that is not true. We can already see Chainalysis confirming that they can trace and track and even for other well-known privacy coins today such as Z-Cash.
Cryptodiffer Community
  1. You aim to reach support from a global community, what are your plans to get spanish speakers involved into Epic Cash? And emerging markets like the african
  2. How am I secure I won’t be affected by receiving tainted money?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Native speakers from our community are working to raise awareness in key markets such as mining in Argentina and Venezuela for Spanish (Roberto Navarro called Epic “the holy grail of cryptocurrency” and Ethiopia and certain North African countries that have the lowest electricity costs in the world. Remittances between USA and Latin American countries are expensive and slow, so Epic is also perfect for people to send money back home as well.
Cryptodiffer Community
Do EPICs in 2020 focus more on research and coding, or on sales and implementation?
Yoga Dude PR&Marketing at Epic Cash
We will definitely continue to work on research and coding, with emphasis on improved accessibility (especially via smartphones) usability, security and privacy.
In terms of financial infrastructure will continuing to add exchanges both KYC and non KYC.
Big part of our plans is in ongoing Marketing and PR outreach. The idea is to make Epic Cash a viral sensation of sorts. If we can get Epic Cash adopters to spread the word and tell their family, coworkers and friends about Epic Cash — there will be no stopping us and to help that happen we have a growing army of content creators, and supporters.
Everyone with skin in the game gets the benefit of advancing the cause.
Folks also, this isn’t an answer to the question but an example of a real-world Epic Cash content —
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtAVEqKGgqY
a challenge from one of our content creators to beat his 21 pull ups and get 100 epics! This has not been claimed yet — people need to step up 🙂 and to help that I will match another 100 Epic Cash to the first person to beat this
Cryptodiffer Community
I was watching some videos explaining how to send and receive transactions in EpicCash, which consists of ports and sending links, my question is why this is so, which, for now, looks complex?
Let’s talk about the economic model, can EpicCash comply with the concept of value reserve?
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
In V3, which is coming later this summer, Epic can be sent over Tor, which eliminates this issue of port opening, even though using tools like ngrok.io, it’s not necessarily as painful as directly configuring the router ports. Early Lightning Network had this issue as well and it’s something we have a plan to address via research into non-interactive transactions. “Fire and Forget” payments to an address, as people are used to in Bitcoin, is coming to Epic and we’re excited to develop functionality that other advanced mimblewimble coins don’t yet have. We are committed to constant improvement in usability and utility, to make our money system the ease of use leader.
We are involved in the project (anyone can join the Freeman Family) because we believe that simply by choosing to use a form of money that better aligns with our ideals, that we can make a positive change in the world. Some of my thoughts about how I got involved are here: https://medium.com/epic-cash/the-freeman-family-e3b9c3b3f166
Max Freeman Project Lead at Epic Cash
Huge thanks to our friends Maks and Vladyslav, we welcome everyone to come say hi at one of our friendly communities. It is extremely early in this journey, our market cap is only 0.5m right now, whereas the 3 other mimblewimble coins are at $20m, $30m and $100m respectively. Epic is a historic opportunity to follow in the footsteps of legends such as Bitcoin and Monero, and we hope to become the first Top 5 privacy coin project.
Xenolink Advisor at Epic Cash
Would like to Thank the Cryptodiffer Team and the Cryptodiffer community for hosting us and also engaging with us to learn more about Epic. If anyone else has more questions and wants to know more about EPIC , can find us at our telegram channel at https://t.me/EpicCash .
Yoga Dude Pr&Marketing at Epic Cash
Thank you, CryptoDiffer Team, and this wonderful Community!!!
Cryptodiffer TEAM
Thank you everyone for taking your time and asking great questions
Thank you for your time, it was an insightful session
Spread the love
submitted by EpicCashFrodo to epiccash [link] [comments]

[MINING] Can anyone help with this? "stratum_subscribe timed out ...retry after 10 seconds"

Hi everyone,
Just as a disclaimer for the beginning, I'm not investing in Bitcoin, I'm not doing this for any profit or reason, it's more for my own interest.
I'm trying to do some mining on my Raspberry Pi 3, and I have set up a wallet, got a pool account with Slush Pool, and installed or the libraries and software needed to run. As far as I am aware I have ran the right code. However, when I run it, I get this:
 ./cpuminer --algo sha256d --url stratum+tcp://eu.stratum.slushpool.com:3333 --user CENSORED --pass CENSORED ** cpuminer-multi 1.3.7 by [email protected] ** [2020-05-18 21:25:38] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://eu.stratum.slushpool.com:3333 [2020-05-18 21:25:38] 4 miner threads started, using 'sha256d' algorithm. [2020-05-18 21:26:08] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:26:08] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:26:48] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:26:48] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:27:28] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:27:28] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:28:08] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:28:08] ...retry after 10 seconds [2020-05-18 21:28:48] stratum_subscribe timed out [2020-05-18 21:28:48] ...retry after 10 seconds 
Anyone have any idea on how to sort this out? Thanks
submitted by SwagBee to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

When Craig starts mining on BTC using his original non-Segwit protocol and grabbing everyone's Segwit coins it will not be a 51% attack. It will legally be a 51% defence.

Segwit right now on BTC is a 51% attack. It is a 51% attack that the majority have accepted, thus it is termed "a soft fork" but on the pure technical level they are exactly the same thing, except they'd term it an attack if it was a soft-fork without social consensus. Anything over 51% has technical consensus, the real consensus that matters in Bitcoin. All node software would follow this chain as it would not be breaking the hard rules.
A miner with 51% of hashpower trying to for instance pay himself 100,000BTC as a block reward would not be within consensus, he'd just be hard-forking, and would be a 100% miner - but on his own chain which would be worthless and of no concern. A hard-fork being accepted implies a loosening of the rules (all nodes would need to change their software to allow 100,000BTC block rewards for this attack to work).
Now a soft fork is a tightening of the consensus rules, what once were "Anyone Can Spend" transactions which quite literally meant was money to be picked up by any miner and spent, are now soft-forked into being "hey you can't spend these - they're Segwit" and providing 51% of the miners are still going along with the soft-fork any attempt to spend them will not be allowed to be propagated and built on as a valid block. No node software needs to be changed to follow these rules, which is why old Bitcoin software before Segwit can still sync up to the latest block however due to the kludgey way Segwit works it sees them as "Anyone Can Spend" transactions and doesn't really understand them or the segmented signatures. So it's pretty useless to use and for a miner could only mine a empty block or a block with non-Segwit transactions, and if it tried to spend a segwit address other miners understanding segwit would reject its block.
But if a 51% majority starts to reject this soft-fork, then all Segwit addresses can be emptied out with the money going to the miner and there is nothing that the 49% of miners or the 100% of soyboys running non-mining Raspberry Pi nodes can do about it other than shitstorm on Twitter, FUD themselves to death and (try to) dump their BTC.
Make no mistakes - it will totally collapse the coin and its value will rapidly become 0 as nobody will be able to move it. Exchanges will be the first to freeze, and a crypto without any exchanges and with most wallets being emptied by miners will trash the HODLings in non-Segwit addresses too. Miners will start mining on BSV and/or BAB and with the hashpower (security) dropping dramatically and approaching "mom's basement" levels of hashpower BTC will never ever be able to recover. Then fun things such as massive re-orgs and continuous empty blocks with political messages inside them will take place just for LOLz.
All the cryptoworlds anger will be pointed at Craig (I think like Honeybadger he won't give a shit as he's used to this) but legally not only is he only following protocol, he'll also be following the protocol that he copyrighted and everybody else will be the rogue actors, the ones culpable for this massive loss, as Craig takes down the 51% attack (Segwit) that they've been running a few years now.
Craig has been nice and put out numerous warnings - now it's time to just wait as he reclaims his protocol.
submitted by jim-btc to bitcoincashSV [link] [comments]

Best $100-$300 FPGA development board in 2018?

Hello, I’ve been trying to decide on a FPGA development board, and have only been able to find posts and Reddit threads from 4-5 years ago. So I wanted to start a new thread and ask about the best “mid-range” FGPA development board in 2018. (Price range $100-$300.)
I started with this Quora answer about FPGA boards, from 2013. The Altera DE1 sounded good. Then I looked through the Terasic DE boards.
Then I found this Reddit thread from 2014, asking about the DE1-SoC vs the Cyclone V GX Starter Kit: https://www.reddit.com/FPGA/comments/1xsk6w/cyclone_v_gx_starter_kit_vs_de1soc_board/‬ (I was also leaning towards the DE1-SoC.)
Anyway, I thought I better ask here, because there are probably some new things to be aware of in 2018.
I’m completely new to FPGAs and VHDL, but I have experience with electronics/microcontrollers/programming. My goal is to start with some basic soft-core processors. I want to get some C / Rust programs compiling and running on my own CPU designs. I also want to play around with different instruction sets, and maybe start experimenting with asynchronous circuits (e.g. clock-less CPUs)
Also I don’t know if this is possible, but I’d like to experiment with ternary computing, or work with analog signals instead of purely digital logic. EDIT: I just realized that you would call those FPAAs, i.e. “analog” instead of “gate”. Would be cool if there was a dev board that also had an FPAA, but no problem if not.
EDIT 2: I also realized why "analog signals on an FPGA" doesn't make any sense, because of how LUTs work. They emulate boolean logic with a lookup table, and the table can only store 0s and 1s. So there's no way to emulate a transistor in an intermediate state. I'll just have play around with some transistors on a breadboard.
UPDATE: I've put together a table with some of the best options:
Board Maker Chip LUTs Price SoC? Features
icoBoard Lattice iCE40-HX8K 7,680 $100 Sort of A very simple FPGA development board that plugs into a Raspberry Pi, so you have a "backup" hard-core CPU that can control networking, etc. Supports a huge range of pmod accessories. You can write a program/circuit so that the Raspberry Pi CPU and the FPGA work together, similar to a SoC. Proprietary bitstream is fully reverse engineered and supported by Project IceStorm, and there is an open-source toolchain that can compile your hardware design to bitstream. Has everything you need to start experimenting with FPGAs.
iCE40-HX8K Breakout Board Lattice iCE40-HX8K-CT256 7,680 $49 No 8 LEDs, 8 switches. Very similar to icoBoard, but no Raspberry Pi or pmod accessories.
iCE40 UltraPlus Lattice iCE40 UltraPlus FPGA 5280 $99 No Chip specs. 4 switchable FPGAs, and a rechargeable battery. Bluetooth module, LCD Display (240 x 240 RGB), RGB LED, microphones, audio output, compass, pressure, gyro, accelerometer.
Go Board Lattice ICE40 HX1K FPGA 1280 $65 No 4 LEDs, 4 buttons, Dual 7-Segment LED Display, VGA, 25 MHz on-board clock, 1 Mb Flash.
snickerdoodle Xilinx Zynq 7010 28K $95 Yes Xilinx Zynq 7-Series SoC - ARM Cortex-A9 processor, and Artix-7 FPGA. 125 IO pins. 1GB DDR2 RAM. Texas Instruments WiLink 8 wireless module for 802.11n Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 4.1. No LEDs or buttons, but easy to wire up your own on a breadboard. If you want to use a baseboard, you'll need a snickerdoodle black ($195) with the pins in the "down" orientation. (E.g. The "breakyBreaky breakout board" ($49) or piSmasher SBC ($195)). The snickerdoodle one only comes with pins in the "up" orientation and doesn't support any baseboards. But you can still plug the jumpers into the pins and wire up things on a breadboard.
numato Mimas A7 Xilinx Artix 7 52K $149 No 2Gb DDR3 RAM. Gigabit Ethernet. HDMI IN/OUT. 100MHz LVDS oscillator. 80 IOs. 7-segment display, LEDs, buttons. (Found in this Reddit thread.)
Ultra96 Xilinx Zynq UltraScale+ ZU3EG 154K $249 Yes Has one of the latest Xilinx SoCs. 2 GB (512M x32) LPDDR4 Memory. Wi-Fi / Bluetooth. Mini DisplayPort. 1x USB 3.0 type Micro-B, 2x USB 3.0 Type A. Audio I/O. Four user-controllable LEDs. No buttons and limited LEDs, but easy to wire up your own on a breadboard
Nexys A7-100T Xilinx Artix 7 15,850 $265 No . 128MiB DDR2 RAM. Ethernet port, PWM audio output, accelerometer, PDM microphone, microphone, etc. 16 switches, 16 LEDs. 7 segment displays. USB HID Host for mice, keyboards and memory sticks.
Zybo Z7-10 Xilinx Zynq 7010 17,600 $199 Yes Xilinx Zynq 7000 SoC (ARM Cortex-A9, 7-series FPGA.) 1 GB DDR3 RAM. A few switches, push buttons, and LEDs. USB and Ethernet. Audio in/out ports. HDMI source + sink with CEC. 8 Total Processor I/O, 40 Total FPGA I/O. Also a faster version for $299 (Zybo Z7-20).
Arty A7 Xilinx Artix 7 15K $119 No 256MB DDR3L. 10/100 Mbps Ethernet. A few switches, buttons, LEDs.
DE10-Standard (specs) Altera Cyclone V 110K $350 Yes Dual-core Cortex-A9 processor. Lots of buttons, LEDs, and other peripherals.
DE10-Nano Altera Cyclone V 110K $130 Yes Same as DE10-Standard, but not as many peripherals, buttons, LEDs, etc.

Winner:

icoBoard ($100). (Buy it here.)
The icoBoard plugs into a Raspberry Pi, so it's similar to having a SoC. The iCE40-HX8K chip comes with 7,680 LUTs (logic elements.) This means that after you learn the basics and create some simple circuits, you'll also have enough logic elements to run the VexRiscv soft-core CPU (the lightweight Murax SoC.)
The icoBoard also supports a huge range of pluggable pmod accessories:
You can pick whatever peripherals you're interested in, and buy some more in the future.
Every FPGA vendor keeps their bitstream format secret. (Here's a Hacker News discussion about it.) The iCE40-HX8K bitstream has been fully reverse engineered by Project IceStorm, and there is an open-source set of tools that can compile Verilog to iCE40 bitstream.
This means that you have the freedom to do some crazy experiments, like:
You don't really have the same freedom to explore these things with Xilinx or Altera FPGAs. (Especially asynchronous circuits.)

Links:

Second Place:

iCE40-HX8K Breakout Board ($49)

Third Place:

numato Mimas A7 ($149).
An excellent development board with a Xilinx Artix 7 FPGA, so you can play with a bigger / faster FPGA and run a full RISC-V soft-core with all the options enabled, and a much higher clock speed. (The iCE40 FPGAs are a bit slow and small.)
Note: I've changed my mind several times as I learned new things. Here's some of my previous thoughts.

What did I buy?

I ordered a iCE40-HX8K Breakout Board to try out the IceStorm open source tooling. (I would have ordered an icoBoard if I had found it earlier.) I also bought a numato Mimas A7 so that I could experiment with the Artix 7 FPGA and Xilinx software (Vivado Design Suite.)

Questions

What can I do with an FPGA? / How many LUTs do I need?

submitted by ndbroadbent to FPGA [link] [comments]

r/Bitcoin recap - November 2018

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the 23rd monthly Bitcoin news recap.
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
You can see recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in November 2018
Adoption
Development
Security
Mining
Business
Research
Education
Regulation & Politics
Archeology (Financial Incumbents)
Price & Trading
Fun & Other
Congratulations Bitcoin on about to be 1 Million subscribers! See you next month!
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Dark Net/Decentralized Net, Hypothetical layer 2 solutions for DEX's, phone nodes/MeshNets

There was an incredibly important episode of Max Keiser today, the second half he interviews a Venezuelan entrepreneur who is building encrypted meshnet nodes that can send bitcoin transactions and encrypted messages with 3g and 4g without sms, in places that are heavily censored, offgrid, or out of power, they also said you can repurpose old bitcoin miners into these things as well.
With the direction that governments are going, I think it is increasingly important to seperate the blockchain from the internet backbone itself by using meshnets (and to ultimately make Tor and exchanges a part of it as well)

In any case to the point- G20 summit recently said that they more or less plan to wage a global KYC AML war on cryptocurrency. Many of their proposals undermine the entire privacy and safety of crypto and are antithetical. They are proposing building parallel identity associated traceable refutable, mutable systems and barring countless people out of the economy globally. They could try to break constitutional rights to put backdoors in open source software developers, to persecute miners, node operators, software and wallet releases like Wasabi. And now with FATF, the exchanges will lean towards, they will have a motive to simply ban non compliant or non identity attributed 'smart contract' wallets, a defacto ban on peer 2 peer anonymouty. Countries would attempt to force these wallets onto people and they would essentially have their bitcoin trapped in a statist parrallel bitcoin ecosystem with no way to send money to anonymous wallets, they would attempt to ban and regulate normal wallets and hardware wallets and to ban VPN and Tor, to seize DNS and domain.

IT's very easy to cencor crypto and thus money and economic freedom, because the stupid Decentralized exchanges have seizable servers, addresses, business, name, etc, and the order book and matching engine require a server adn resolver, and have temporary custodianship over crypto assets, happenoff chain, etc.
What is needed is a real time atomic swap over a decentralized DNS/servecomputation like with IFPS/ZeroNet/Namecoin/Blockstack, but there definitely needs to be hostable nodes, proliferated meshnet node phones. I think ethereum 2.0 scaling will be the breakthrough moment for speed/size, etc.
This tendency towards controlled DEX like Binance is just utterly unsustainable and needs to be readily undermined, but it will require the merging of many blockchain systems with meshnet strategies.

I am trying to gain some insight into what people are working on and envisioning for a lot of the coming layer 2 solutions in regard to a broader decentralized ecosystem, notably for DEX and smart contracts.
-How can layer 2 aid and help the concept of something like Ren VM where you have decentralized computing and smart contracts privately interacting with liquidity pools?
-How is layer 2 going to strengthen the feasibility of proliferating full nodes on raspberry pi and phones, and will it help DEX?
I feel like a really big issue like a front and center issue is the reliance of exchanges on a central server for orderbook matching and offchain settlement, margin, colateralization, the data involved. Non custodial wallets aren't enough. The central servers are a vector point for centralization, counter party risk, over reliance upon high capital institutions.
Arguably bitcoin needs something much more decentralized, that could be achieved with layer two solutions that either integrate with or emulate things like namecoin, ethereum smart contracts, and the new Ren VM tools. The biggest issue is of course speed and scalability.
The server function and data of these exchanges should be held inside smart contracts because its more secure, it seems like a virtual machine approach is in fact a better way to go about the challenges of linking liquidity pools and orderbooks.
There's also a project from back in the day called Gridcoin. It was or is used to link up computer processing power for science applications and scientific engine rendering solutions for modeling things. Richard heart is making a project similar for science applications.
I believe this is a much more secure way to approach DAPP's and layer 2 protocols, to get virtual machines that are not located on central servers to help process a lot of the advanced needs of the network, to slowly make the entire exchange and reliance of these failurepoints of bitcoin to be a part of the bitcoin protocol itself, to remove the ecosystem itself away from the clear net and central servers, and to begin to upload it into satellites and proliferated phone nodes.
submitted by samdane7777 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[TUTORIAL] Turn your $35 Raspberry Pi into a 21 Bitcoin Computer! (original post deleted)

I noticed that ButtcoinEE deleted his own tutorial from here, and I liked the information provided, so I'm reposting it for others who may not have it saved.
I haven't tested his tutorial on my own RPI yet, but if anyone wants to give it a go, I can update this as needed.
Below is the post directly quoted from OP:
You get your brand new RPI and
curl https://install.21.co/bitcoin-computeinstall.sh | sudo bash 
Congratulations, you just saved $365. That's all there is to it.
Just want the python library and not the other stuff?
wget https://apt.21.co/pool/t/tw/two1_1.0.0-1_all.deb dkpg -i two1_1.0.0-1_all.deb 
This will work on any computer, or if you want you can extract it and just use the python library without installing.
Not an honest option, not everything works and I would be essentially forking. This is not an honest comparison, but it's closer!
Forking?
You're posting directory dumps and talking about how easy it is to create your own 21 computer, yet don't know what a fork is? You just lost all credibility.
What is forking?
The software would need to be forked to work on whatever miner you attach to RPi. It's not plug and play bro and the nice folks at 21 Inc won't support your kludge.
From their code:
SupportedMiners = collections.OrderedDict([ ("rpi2miner", minerhal.RPi2Miner), ("cpuminer", minerhal.CpuMiner), ]) 
It's supported operation in the code supplied by the company.
That is not honest given that you cannot reproduce everything that the 21 Bitcoin Computer can do right now. You don't have the integrated framework. You would be doing something very different and that is not an honest comparison.
The script linked is literally what sets up the 21 Bitcoin Computer, it's identical in software in every way.
submitted by ecafyelims to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Preventing double-spends is an "embarrassingly parallel" massive search problem - like Google, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid. BUIP024 "address sharding" is similar to Google's MapReduce & Berkeley's BOINC grid computing - "divide-and-conquer" providing unlimited on-chain scaling for Bitcoin.

TL;DR: Like all other successful projects involving "embarrassingly parallel" search problems in massive search spaces, Bitcoin can and should - and inevitably will - move to a distributed computing paradigm based on successful "sharding" architectures such as Google Search (based on Google's MapReduce algorithm), or [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid (based on Berkeley's BOINC grid computing architecture) - which use simple mathematical "decompose" and "recompose" operations to break big problems into tiny pieces, providing virtually unlimited scaling (plus fault tolerance) at the logical / software level, on top of possibly severely limited (and faulty) resources at the physical / hardware level.
The discredited "heavy" (and over-complicated) design philosophy of centralized "legacy" dev teams such as Core / Blockstream (requiring every single node to download, store and verify the massively growing blockchain, and pinning their hopes on non-existent off-chain vaporware such as the so-called "Lightning Network" which has no mathematical definition and is missing crucial components such as decentralized routing) is doomed to failure, and will be out-competed by simpler on-chain "lightweight" distributed approaches such as distributed trustless Merkle trees or BUIP024's "Address Sharding" emerging from independent devs such as u/thezerg1 (involved with Bitcoin Unlimited).
No one in their right mind would expect Google's vast search engine to fit entirely on a Raspberry Pi behind a crappy Internet connection - and no one in their right mind should expect Bitcoin's vast financial network to fit entirely on a Raspberry Pi behind a crappy Internet connection either.
Any "normal" (ie, competent) company with $76 million to spend could provide virtually unlimited on-chain scaling for Bitcoin in a matter of months - simply by working with devs who would just go ahead and apply the existing obvious mature successful tried-and-true "recipes" for solving "embarrassingly parallel" search problems in massive search spaces, based on standard DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING approaches like Google Search (based on Google's MapReduce algorithm), or [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid (based on Berkeley's BOINC grid computing architecture). The fact that Blockstream / Core devs refuse to consider any standard DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING approaches just proves that they're "embarrassingly stupid" - and the only way Bitcoin will succeed is by routing around their damage.
Proven, mature sharding architectures like the ones powering Google Search, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid will allow Bitcoin to achieve virtually unlimited on-chain scaling, with minimal disruption to the existing Bitcoin network topology and mining and wallet software.
Longer Summary:
People who argue that "Bitcoin can't scale" - because it involves major physical / hardware requirements (lots of processing power, upload bandwidth, storage space) - are at best simply misinformed or incompetent - or at worst outright lying to you.
Bitcoin mainly involves searching the blockchain to prevent double-spends - and so it is similar to many other projects involving "embarrassingly parallel" searching in massive search spaces - like Google Search, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid.
But there's a big difference between those long-running wildly successful massively distributed infinitely scalable parallel computing projects, and Bitcoin.
Those other projects do their data storage and processing across a distributed network. But Bitcoin (under the misguided "leadership" of Core / Blockstream devs) instists on a fatally flawed design philosophy where every individual node must be able to download, store and verify the system's entire data structure. And it's even wore than that - they want to let the least powerful nodes in the system dictate the resource requirements for everyone else.
Meanwhile, those other projects are all based on some kind of "distributed computing" involving "sharding". They achieve massive scaling by adding a virtually unlimited (and fault-tolerant) logical / software layer on top of the underlying resource-constrained / limited physical / hardware layer - using approaches like Google's MapReduce algorithm or Berkeley's Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) grid computing architecture.
This shows that it is a fundamental error to continue insisting on viewing an individual Bitcoin "node" as the fundamental "unit" of the Bitcoin network. Coordinated distributed pools already exist for mining the blockchain - and eventually coordinated distributed trustless architectures will also exist for verifying and querying it. Any architecture or design philosophy where a single "node" is expected to be forever responsible for storing or verifying the entire blockchain is the wrong approach, and is doomed to failure.
The most well-known example of this doomed approach is Blockstream / Core's "roadmap" - which is based on two disastrously erroneous design requirements:
  • Core / Blockstream erroneously insist that the entire blockchain must always be downloadable, storable and verifiable on a single node, as dictated by the least powerful nodes in the system (eg, u/bitusher in Costa Rica), or u/Luke-Jr in the underserved backwoods of Florida); and
  • Core / Blockstream support convoluted, incomplete off-chain scaling approaches such as the so-called "Lightning Network" - which lacks a mathematical foundation, and also has some serious gaps (eg, no solution for decentralized routing).
Instead, the future of Bitcoin will inevitably be based on unlimited on-chain scaling, where all of Bitcoin's existing algorithms and data structures and networking are essentially preserved unchanged / as-is - but they are distributed at the logical / software level using sharding approaches such as u/thezerg1's BUIP024 or distributed trustless Merkle trees.
These kinds of sharding architectures will allow individual nodes to use a minimum of physical resources to access a maximum of logical storage and processing resources across a distributed network with virtually unlimited on-chain scaling - where every node will be able to use and verify the entire blockchain without having to download and store the whole thing - just like Google Search, [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid and other successful distributed sharding-based projects have already been successfully doing for years.
Details:
Sharding, which has been so successful in many other areas, is a topic that keeps resurfacing in various shapes and forms among independent Bitcoin developers.
The highly successful track record of sharding architectures on other projects involving "embarrassingly parallel" massive search problems (harnessing resource-constrained machines at the physical level into a distributed network at the logical level, in order to provide fault tolerance and virtually unlimited scaling searching for web pages, interstellar radio signals, protein sequences, or prime numbers in massive search spaces up to hundreds of terabytes in size) provides convincing evidence that sharding architectures will also work for Bitcoin (which also requires virtually unlimited on-chain scaling, searching the ever-expanding blockchain for previous "spends" from an existing address, before appending a new transaction from this address to the blockchain).
Below are some links involving proposals for sharding Bitcoin, plus more discussion and related examples.
BUIP024: Extension Blocks with Address Sharding
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/54afm7/buip024_extension_blocks_with_address_sharding/
Why aren't we as a community talking about Sharding as a scaling solution?
https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/3u1m36/why_arent_we_as_a_community_talking_about/
(There are some detailed, partially encouraging comments from u/petertodd in that thread.)
[Brainstorming] Could Bitcoin ever scale like BitTorrent, using something like "mempool sharding"?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3v070a/brainstorming_could_bitcoin_ever_scale_like/
[Brainstorming] "Let's Fork Smarter, Not Harder"? Can we find some natural way(s) of making the scaling problem "embarrassingly parallel", perhaps introducing some hierarchical (tree) structures or some natural "sharding" at the level of the network and/or the mempool and/or the blockchain?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3wtwa7/brainstorming_lets_fork_smarter_not_harder_can_we/
"Braiding the Blockchain" (32 min + Q&A): We can't remove all sources of latency. We can redesign the "chain" to tolerate multiple simultaneous writers. Let miners mine and validate at the same time. Ideal block time / size / difficulty can become emergent per-node properties of the network topology
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4su1gf/braiding_the_blockchain_32_min_qa_we_cant_remove/
Some kind of sharding - perhaps based on address sharding as in BUIP024, or based on distributed trustless Merkle trees as proposed earlier by u/thezerg1 - is very likely to turn out to be the simplest, and safest approach towards massive on-chain scaling.
A thought experiment showing that we already have most of the ingredients for a kind of simplistic "instant sharding"
A simplistic thought experiment can be used to illustrate how easy it could be to do sharding - with almost no changes to the existing Bitcoin system.
Recall that Bitcoin addresses and keys are composed from an alphabet of 58 characters. So, in this simplified thought experiment, we will outline a way to add a kind of "instant sharding" within the existing system - by using the last character of each address in order to assign that address to one of 58 shards.
(Maybe you can already see where this is going...)
Similar to vanity address generation, a user who wants to receive Bitcoins would be required to generate 58 different receiving addresses (each ending with a different character) - and, similarly, miners could be required to pick one of the 58 shards to mine on.
Then, when a user wanted to send money, they would have to look at the last character of their "send from" address - and also select a "send to" address ending in the same character - and presto! we already have a kind of simplistic "instant sharding". (And note that this part of the thought experiment would require only the "softest" kind of soft fork: indeed, we haven't changed any of the code at all, but instead we simply adopted a new convention by agreement, while using the existing code.)
Of course, this simplistic "instant sharding" example would still need a few more features in order to be complete - but they'd all be fairly straightforward to provide:
  • A transaction can actually send from multiple addresses, to multiple addresses - so the approach of simply looking at the final character of a single (receive) address would not be enough to instantly assign a transaction to a particular shard. But a slightly more sophisticated decision criterion could easily be developed - and computed using code - to assign every transaction to a particular shard, based on the "from" and "to" addresses in the transaction. The basic concept from the "simplistic" example would remain the same, sharding the network based on some characteristic of transactions.
  • If we had 58 shards, then the mining reward would have to be decreased to 1/58 of what it currently is - and also the mining hash power on each of the shards would end up being roughly 1/58 of what it is now. In general, many people might agree that decreased mining rewards would actually be a good thing (spreading out mining rewards among more people, instead of the current problems where mining is done by about 8 entities). Also, network hashing power has been growing insanely for years, so we probably have way more than enough needed to secure the network - after all, Bitcoin was secure back when network hash power was 1/58 of what it is now.
  • This simplistic example does not handle cases where you need to do "cross-shard" transactions. But it should be feasible to implement such a thing. The various proposals from u/thezerg1 such as BUIP024 do deal with "cross-shard" transactions.
(Also, the fact that a simplified address-based sharding mechanics can be outlined in just a few paragraphs as shown here suggests that this might be "simple and understandable enough to actually work" - unlike something such as the so-called "Lightning Network", which is actually just a catchy-sounding name with no clearly defined mechanics or mathematics behind it.)
Addresses are plentiful, and can be generated locally, and you can generate addresses satisfying a certain pattern (eg ending in a certain character) the same way people can already generate vanity addresses. So imposing a "convention" where the "send" and "receive" address would have to end in the same character (and where the miner has to only mine transactions in that shard) - would be easy to understand and do.
Similarly, the earlier solution proposed by u/thezerg1, involving distributed trustless Merkle trees, is easy to understand: you'd just be distributing the Merkle tree across multiple nodes, while still preserving its immutablity guarantees.
Such approaches don't really change much about the actual system itself. They preserve the existing system, and just split its data structures into multiple pieces, distributed across the network. As long as we have the appropriate operators for decomposing and recomposing the pieces, then everything should work the same - but more efficiently, with unlimited on-chain scaling, and much lower resource requirements.
The examples below show how these kinds of "sharding" approaches have already been implemented successfully in many other systems.
Massive search is already efficiently performed with virtually unlimited scaling using divide-and-conquer / decompose-and-recompose approaches such as MapReduce and BOINC.
Every time you do a Google search, you're using Google's MapReduce algorithm to solve an embarrassingly parallel problem.
And distributed computing grids using the Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) are constantly setting new records searching for protein combinations, prime numbers, or radio signals from possible intelligent life in the universe.
We all use Google to search hundreds of terabytes of data on the web and get results in a fraction of a second - using cheap "commodity boxes" on the server side, and possibly using limited bandwidth on the client side - with fault tolerance to handle crashing servers and dropped connections.
Other examples are [email protected], [email protected] and PrimeGrid - involving searching massive search spaces for protein sequences, interstellar radio signals, or prime numbers hundreds of thousands of digits long. Each of these examples uses sharding to decompose a giant search space into smaller sub-spaces which are searched separately in parallel and then the resulting (sub-)solutions are recomposed to provide the overall search results.
It seems obvious to apply this tactic to Bitcoin - searching the blockchain for existing transactions involving a "send" from an address, before appending a new "send" transaction from that address to the blockchain.
Some people might object that those systems are different from Bitcoin.
But we should remember that preventing double-spends (the main thing that the Bitcoin does) is, after all, an embarrassingly parallel massive search problem - and all of these other systems also involve embarrassingly parallel massive search problems.
The mathematics of Google's MapReduce and Berkeley's BOINC is simple, elegant, powerful - and provably correct.
Google's MapReduce and Berkeley's BOINC have demonstrated that in order to provide massive scaling for efficient searching of massive search spaces, all you need is...
  • an appropriate "decompose" operation,
  • an appropriate "recompose" operation,
  • the necessary coordination mechanisms
...in order to distribute a single problem across multiple, cheap, fault-tolerant processors.
This allows you to decompose the problem into tiny sub-problems, solving each sub-problem to provide a sub-solution, and then recompose the sub-solutions into the overall solution - gaining virtually unlimited scaling and massive efficiency.
The only "hard" part involves analyzing the search space in order to select the appropriate DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations which guarantee that recomposing the "sub-solutions" obtained by decomposing the original problem is equivalent to the solving the original problem. This essential property could be expressed in "pseudo-code" as follows:
  • (DECOMPOSE ; SUB-SOLVE ; RECOMPOSE) = (SOLVE)
Selecting the appropriate DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and implementing the inter-machine communication coordination) can be somewhat challenging, but it's certainly doable.
In fact, as mentioned already, these things have already been done in many distributed computing systems. So there's hardly any "original work to be done in this case. All we need to focus on now is translating the existing single-processor architecture of Bitcoin to a distributed architecture, adopting the mature, proven, efficient "recipes" provided by the many examples of successful distributed systems already up and running like such as Google Search (based on Google's MapReduce algorithm), or [email protected], [email protected], or PrimeGrid (based on Berkeley's BOINC grid computing architecture).
That's what any "competent" company with $76 million to spend would have done already - simply work with some devs who know how to implement open-source distributed systems, and focus on adapting Bitcoin's particular data structures (merkle trees, hashed chains) to a distributed environment. That's a realistic roadmap that any team of decent programmers with distributed computing experience could easily implement in a few months, and any decent managers could easily manage and roll out on a pre-determined schedule - instead of all these broken promises and missed deadlines and non-existent vaporware and pathetic excuses we've been getting from the incompetent losers and frauds involved with Core / Blockstream.
ASIDE: MapReduce and BOINC are based on math - but the so-called "Lightning Network" is based on wishful thinking involving kludges on top of workarounds on top of hacks - which is how you can tell that LN will never work.
Once you have succeeded in selecting the appropriate mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations, you get simple massive scaling - and it's also simple for anyone to verify that these operations are correct - often in about a half-page of math and code.
An example of this kind of elegance and brevity (and provable correctness) involving compositionality can be seen in this YouTube clip by the accomplished mathematician Lucius Greg Meredith presenting some operators for scaling Ethereum - in just a half page of code:
https://youtu.be/uzahKc_ukfM?t=1101
Conversely, if you fail to select the appropriate mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations, then you end up with a convoluted mess of wishful thinking - like the "whitepaper" for the so-called "Lightning Network", which is just a cool-sounding name with no actual mathematics behind it.
The LN "whitepaper" is an amateurish, non-mathematical meandering mishmash of 60 pages of "Alice sends Bob" examples involving hacks on top of workarounds on top of kludges - also containing a fatal flaw (a lack of any proposed solution for doing decentralized routing).
The disaster of the so-called "Lightning Network" - involving adding never-ending kludges on top of hacks on top of workarounds (plus all kinds of "timing" dependencies) - is reminiscent of the "epicycles" which were desperately added in a last-ditch attempt to make Ptolemy's "geocentric" system work - based on the incorrect assumption that the Sun revolved around the Earth.
This is how you can tell that the approach of the so-called "Lightning Network" is simply wrong, and it would never work - because it fails to provide appropriate (and simple, and provably correct) mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations in less than a single page of math and code.
Meanwhile, sharding approaches based on a DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operation are simple and elegant - and "functional" (ie, they don't involve "procedural" timing dependencies like keeping your node running all the time, or closing out your channel before a certain deadline).
Bitcoin only has 6,000 nodes - but the leading sharding-based projects have over 100,000 nodes, with no financial incentives.
Many of these sharding-based projects have many more nodes than the Bitcoin network.
The Bitcoin network currently has about 6,000 nodes - even though there are financial incentives for running a node (ie, verifying your own Bitcoin balance.
[email protected] and [email protected] each have over 100,000 active users - even though these projects don't provide any financial incentives. This higher number of users might be due in part the the low resource demands required in these BOINC-based projects, which all are based on sharding the data set.
[email protected]
As part of the client-server network architecture, the volunteered machines each receive pieces of a simulation (work units), complete them, and return them to the project's database servers, where the units are compiled into an overall simulation.
In 2007, Guinness World Records recognized [email protected] as the most powerful distributed computing network. As of September 30, 2014, the project has 107,708 active CPU cores and 63,977 active GPUs for a total of 40.190 x86 petaFLOPS (19.282 native petaFLOPS). At the same time, the combined efforts of all distributed computing projects under BOINC totals 7.924 petaFLOPS.
[email protected]
Using distributed computing, [email protected] sends the millions of chunks of data to be analyzed off-site by home computers, and then have those computers report the results. Thus what appears an onerous problem in data analysis is reduced to a reasonable one by aid from a large, Internet-based community of borrowed computer resources.
Observational data are recorded on 2-terabyte SATA hard disk drives at the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico, each holding about 2.5 days of observations, which are then sent to Berkeley. Arecibo does not have a broadband Internet connection, so data must go by postal mail to Berkeley. Once there, it is divided in both time and frequency domains work units of 107 seconds of data, or approximately 0.35 megabytes (350 kilobytes or 350,000 bytes), which overlap in time but not in frequency. These work units are then sent from the [email protected] server over the Internet to personal computers around the world to analyze.
Data is merged into a database using [email protected] computers in Berkeley.
The [email protected] distributed computing software runs either as a screensaver or continuously while a user works, making use of processor time that would otherwise be unused.
Active users: 121,780 (January 2015)
PrimeGrid
PrimeGrid is a distributed computing project for searching for prime numbers of world-record size. It makes use of the Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing (BOINC) platform.
Active users 8,382 (March 2016)
MapReduce
A MapReduce program is composed of a Map() procedure (method) that performs filtering and sorting (such as sorting students by first name into queues, one queue for each name) and a Reduce() method that performs a summary operation (such as counting the number of students in each queue, yielding name frequencies).
How can we go about developing sharding approaches for Bitcoin?
We have to identify a part of the problem which is in some sense "invariant" or "unchanged" under the operations of DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE - and we also have to develop a coordination mechanism which orchestrates the DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations among the machines.
The simplistic thought experiment above outlined an "instant sharding" approach where we would agree upon a convention where the "send" and "receive" address would have to end in the same character - instantly providing a starting point illustrating some of the mechanics of an actual sharding solution.
BUIP024 involves address sharding and deals with the additional features needed for a complete solution - such as cross-shard transactions.
And distributed trustless Merkle trees would involve storing Merkle trees across a distributed network - which would provide the same guarantees of immutability, while drastically reducing storage requirements.
So how can we apply ideas like MapReduce and BOINC to providing massive on-chain scaling for Bitcoin?
First we have to examine the structure of the problem that we're trying to solve - and we have to try to identify how the problem involves a massive search space which can be decomposed and recomposed.
In the case of Bitcoin, the problem involves:
  • sequentializing (serializing) APPEND operations to a blockchain data structure
  • in such a way as to avoid double-spends
Can we view "preventing Bitcoin double-spends" as a "massive search space problem"?
Yes we can!
Just like Google efficiently searches hundreds of terabytes of web pages for a particular phrase (and [email protected], [email protected], PrimeGrid etc. efficiently search massive search spaces for other patterns), in the case of "preventing Bitcoin double-spends", all we're actually doing is searching a massive seach space (the blockchain) in order to detect a previous "spend" of the same coin(s).
So, let's imagine how a possible future sharding-based architecture of Bitcoin might look.
We can observe that, in all cases of successful sharding solutions involving searching massive search spaces, the entire data structure is never stored / searched on a single machine.
Instead, the DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and the coordination mechanism) a "virtual" layer or grid across multiple machines - allowing the data structure to be distributed across all of them, and allowing users to search across all of them.
This suggests that requiring everyone to store 80 Gigabytes (and growing) of blockchain on their own individual machine should no longer be a long-term design goal for Bitcoin.
Instead, in a sharding environment, the DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and the coordination mechanism) should allow everyone to only store a portion of the blockchain on their machine - while also allowing anyone to search the entire blockchain across everyone's machines.
This might involve something like BUIP024's "address sharding" - or it could involve something like distributed trustless Merkle trees.
In either case, it's easy to see that the basic data structures of the system would remain conceptually unaltered - but in the sharding approaches, these structures would be logically distributed across multiple physical devices, in order to provide virtually unlimited scaling while dramatically reducing resource requirements.
This would be the most "conservative" approach to scaling Bitcoin: leaving the data structures of the system conceptually the same - and just spreading them out more, by adding the appropriately defined mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operators (used in successful sharding approaches), which can be easily proven to preserve the same properties as the original system.
Conclusion
Bitcoin isn't the only project in the world which is permissionless and distributed.
Other projects (BOINC-based permisionless decentralized [email protected], [email protected], and PrimeGrid - as well as Google's (permissioned centralized) MapReduce-based search engine) have already achieved unlimited scaling by providing simple mathematical DECOMPOSE and RECOMPOSE operations (and coordination mechanisms) to break big problems into smaller pieces - without changing the properties of the problems or solutions. This provides massive scaling while dramatically reducing resource requirements - with several projects attracting over 100,000 nodes, much more than Bitcoin's mere 6,000 nodes - without even offering any of Bitcoin's financial incentives.
Although certain "legacy" Bitcoin development teams such as Blockstream / Core have been neglecting sharding-based scaling approaches to massive on-chain scaling (perhaps because their business models are based on misguided off-chain scaling approaches involving radical changes to Bitcoin's current successful network architecture, or even perhaps because their owners such as AXA and PwC don't want a counterparty-free new asset class to succeed and destroy their debt-based fiat wealth), emerging proposals from independent developers suggest that on-chain scaling for Bitcoin will be based on proven sharding architectures such as MapReduce and BOINC - and so we should pay more attention to these innovative, independent developers who are pursuing this important and promising line of research into providing sharding solutions for virtually unlimited on-chain Bitcoin scaling.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

The 8 most informative comments about 21inc's bitcoin computer dev kit

"Anyone who thinks this is about making money by mining has very little insight into what Bitcoin actually offers the world. This is not about bringing the old economy (banks, businesses, governments) into the Bitcoin family. This is about building entirely new economies, ones that have never and could never have existed before. 21inc can see the vision and they just bootstrapped the IoT on the Bitcoin blockchain. Thank your lucky stars on your way to the moon." - PhiMinD
"I'm fairly sure this is NOT an end user device. This device appears to be solely for the purpose of prototyping integration with other devices, and allow people to work out the ends and outs of the process. My assumption is that in like 6 months to a year, a much more compact and integrated device will be released that would be far cheaper, and suitable for installation in actual consumer devices. This is for developers." - DakotaChiliBeans
"The more I think about it, the more incredible and groundbreaking this seems. When every piece of hardware and software has the ability to transfer money, our entire concept of how we do everything changes. We're only beginning to imagine the possibilities. Even the few simple ones I've been thinking of make my head spin. Bitcoin as a human currency is exciting. Creates a more open system, breaks monopoly, gives you the option of true, non-revocable ownership. All great stuff. But it's these revolutionary ideas that make me believe that Bitcoin, or a successor very much like it, will take over the world. As someone invested in bitcoin, I'd like to see it succeed and my investment pay off, but goddamn will this be an exciting ride regardless. At this point, I'm seriously thinking of buying and developing on it. The potential here is lightyears beyond what most people are thinking." - consideranon
"Seeing the 21 Bitcoin computer reminds me of the developer kits for oculus rift. It took a lot of time to perfect before going fully public. It was also tested with a pre-release through Samsung's VR headset. Other more resourceful people bought the cardboard much like the same people would buy the Raspberry Pi instead of this. Anyway, the 21 computer is very likely the first iteration of many." - Hiro_Y3
"I think it removes a step in the process. Instead of learning about wallets, private keys, maintaining a login and password, etc, the computer takes care of all of that without the user having to think about any of it. The mining function provides initial liquidity to get the ball rolling. This is the first step of payments being built into the IoT." -TDBit
"Most of everybody here is missing the point. This is a bitcoin computer. This is not made to simply mine to generate a profit but rather a miner is just an added part. The miner is used to continuously supply the Bitcoin computer with bitcoin. It uses the bitcoin to "write" to the blockchain. It's like a digital quill with an endless bitcoin inkwell." -Fuzzypickles69
"Ok, this takes a leap of faith, but what they're trying to do is build a full-stack device which can send/receive bitcoin and which also solves the "how do devices get bitcoin in the first place" problem. Imagine the whole thing being a lot smaller and cheaper, and embedded in lots of devices globally. Now you have a world in which millions of devices (machines) can send and receive tiny payments, and which natively have a currency unit to use for that purpose." - melbustus
"ServiceXYZ: Links your 21 box to your Twitter account, and any paywall website lets you read anything you want without popups, ads, or subscriptions. There, I just made up a business in 10 seconds, someone go make it :)" - evoorhees
These comments were pointed to by balaji himself, here.. https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/3lv6zj/ama_request_ceo_of_21inc_balaji_srinivasan/cv9zq9q
submitted by phieziu to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why Bitcoin Unlimited approach is correct from a Software Architecture point of view

First, I would like to express that the division in the community and the toxicity created by censorship has effected the discussion in both subs ( even though this sub is not censored ). As a community, we have been focused so much on fighting each other we struggle we are beginning to loose our creativity and the spark that made bitcoin great. I see more discussion of politics and name calling and its is beginning to get distracting.
When a heated discussion in software engineering occurs, the best thing both sides can to is to abstract and conceptualize the system we are trying to work on. I consider bitcoin a decentralized system, where the blockchain represents the state of the system. Miners via POW allow the system to converge to a single valid state.
What goes in the blockchain and the definition of a valid state is defined by the client, which implements a protocol that is 'bitcoin'. Ideally, this protocol definition should only specify 'business logic' for example there can be 21 million coins, you cannot materialise money out of thin air, the controlled issuing of coins, you cannot spend coins you don't have, no IOU ect.
However, Satoshi realized that there is an attack vector that effects the consensus system, whereby a miner could artificially create over-sized blocks and give that miner a controllable benefit. The solution to this problem was to introduce a blocksize limit. This is the root problem the blocksize limit is trying to address. The blocksize was not made small so people can run full nodes via TOR or in raspberry pi's
The problem with this fix, is that it introduced technical debt from a software architectural point of view. Because a blocksize limit is not 'business logic' and it had to be included in the consensus layer to resolve this vulnerability. Ideally the consensus layer should be minimal and should contain business logic and not scalability constants...
The system can scale and evolve more easily overtime if the consensus layers has the minimal set of rules ( which we can all agree on).My challenge to both the small and large blockers, is to try and find creative solutions to address the root cause of the blocksize limit.
Why dont we make it costly to artificially create large blocks. The easiest way a miner can increase a blocks size, is by creating thousands of transactions that have no fee and including them...So what if: Each block can only contain X "free transactions", and other transactions in the block must have a fee. Perhaps eve define a function that scales the minimum fee for the other transactions as a function of the block reward. This would make it really expensive for miners to artificially bloat the block. [ Edit ] The only way to defeat this mechanism would be to then pad the block with artificial high fee transactions and withhold these transactions from the network so the miner gets back the fee. The only way to counter this attack is to have some mechanism so a block with high fee 'padding transactions' gets orphaned and the transactions re-entered into the mempool.
tldr Goal: Remove any scaling logic from the consensus layer of bitcoin, which should only contain specification of business logic and block syntax. Hard scaling constants such as max blocksize should not be apart of the consensus logic because their value is subjective and is bad for decentralized systems.
edited to make OP more clear
submitted by Spartan3123 to btc [link] [comments]

If Blockstream were truly "conservative" and wanted to "protect Bitcoin" then they would deploy SegWit AS A HARD FORK. Insisting on deploying SegWit as a soft fork (overly complicated so more dangerous for Bitcoin) exposes that they are LYING about being "conservative" and "protecting Bitcoin".

Oh... the irony.
The whole purpose of SegWit was to clean up Bitcoin's code.
But, by attempting to deploy SegWit as a soft fork, Blockstream had to make the code needlessly overcomplicated and less safe - because they had to make the code messy in order to shoehorn it into a soft fork. (This is also sometimes referred to as "technical debt.")
For years they've been telling us that we can't have bigger blocks because "someone's Raspberry Pi on a slow internet connection might get kicked off the network". But when Blockstream decides that it's ok to:
Now suddenly Blockstream is fine with deploying messier, less-safe, more-complicated, less-compatible code.
But I thought Blockstream was "conservative" and wanted to "protect Bitcoin"?
Yeah, that's what they say.
But let's look at what they do.
Like any corporation, Blockstream's first duty is to its owners - such as AXA, PwC - all of whom would benefit if Bitcoin (a) fails or (b) becomes centralized in Lightning banking hubs.
Blockstream's first duty is not to you - Bitcoin users and miners.
Whenever the interests of Blockstream's corporate owners diverge from the interests of Bitcoin users and miners - Blockstream's owners prevail.
That is actually how the law works.
As CEO of Blockstream, Adam Back's primary duty is no longer to "do the math".
His primary duty is to "maximize shareholder value".
It would in fact be illegal for Blockstream to prioritize the needs of Bitcoin's users and miners over the needs of Blockstream's owners.
You (Bitcoin users and miners) do not own Blockstream. AXA and PwC do.
Blockstream doesn't care about you. They. Don't. Care. About. You.
This is why Blockstream keeps screwing you over (Bitcoin users and miners).
And Blockstream will continue to screw you over until you reject Blockstream's inferior, dangerous, messy code.
The first step is to reject SegWit-as-a-soft-fork.
Blockstream's implementation of SegWit-as-a-soft-fork is overly complicated and dangerous - and selfish.
ViaBTC is one of the first big smart powerful miners to reject SegWit.
Some people might say, "But we need SegWit!"
I agree - SegWit is great - as a hard fork.
SegWit ain't rocket science folks - it's just a code refactoring: re-arranging or "segregating" transaction validation data separate from transaction sender, receiver and amount data in the Merkle tree.
I also think Pieter Wuille is a great programmer and I was one of the first people to support SegWit after it was announced at a congress a few months ago.
But then Blockstream went and distorted SegWit to fit it into their corporate interests (maintaining their position as the dominant centralized dev team - which requires avoiding hard-forks). And Blockstream's corporate interests don't always align with Bitcoin's interests.
Luke-Jr figured out a way to sneak SegWit onto the network as a soft-fork - a needlessly over-complicated and less-safe way of doing things.
Why is Blockstream against hard forks?
Blockstream is following their own selfish road map and business plan for Bitcoin - which involves avoiding hard forks at all costs.
This is because Blockstream wants to avoid any "vote" where the network might prefer some other team's code.
If a dev team such as Blockstream offers you an inferior product...
... and if they're lying to your face about why they're offering you an inferior product...
... because they have a conflict of interest where they're actually trying to help their owners and not help you...
...and they probably are under some kind of "non-disclosure" agreement where they can't even tell you any of this...
Then you can and should reject these inferior code offerings from Blocksteam.
If you truly want to be "conservative" and "protect Bitcoin", then:
It doesn't matter who provides Segwit-as-a-hard-fork - it could be some independent devs, or it could even be some devs who break away from Blockstream.
This kinda sorta almost happened with the Hong Kong agreement - and the fact that it ended up getting broken is... "interesting".
Smart users and miners who really care about Bitcoin will insist on using the cleanest and safest approach to refactoring Bitcoin to solve transaction malleability
And that means:
ViaBTC is the first big mining pool to stand up to Blockstream:
ViaBTC: "Drop the matter of SegWit, let's hard fork together."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57bbqj/viabtc_drop_the_matter_of_segwit_lets_hard_fork/
ViaBTC Might Block Segwit, Calls 1MB blocks “Network Suicide”; Moves to Bitcoin Unlimited
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57a1uc/viabtc_might_block_segwit_calls_1mb_blocks/
ViABTC: "Why I support BU: We should give the question of block size to the free market to decide. It will naturally adjust to ever-improving network & technological constraints. Bitcoin Unlimited guarantees that block size will follow what the Bitcoin network is capable of handling safely."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/574g5l/viabtc_why_i_support_bu_we_should_give_the/
Fun facts about ViaBTC: Founded by expert in distributed, highly concurrent networking from "China's Google". Inspired by Viaweb (first online store, from LISP guru / YCombinator founder Paul Graham). Uses a customized Bitcoin client on high-speed network of clusters in US, Japan, Europe, Hong Kong.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57e0t8/fun_facts_about_viabtc_founded_by_expert_in/
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Scanning multiple subnets, and gathering IP addresses and MAC addresses of active hosts.

Hey guys,
I have some issues with trying to get mac addresses and building a lookup table within python to store these.
We are creating a python framework for monitoring large scale bitcoin mines with miners on multiple subnets. I am aware that current offerings of software such as awesome miner are able to scrape mac addressees across subnets, and display them.
We are having the issue of if our client adds more hosts to the network, the IP addresses no longer match the UUID scheme we have set, and we get IP to UUID mismatches. Of course you could setup static ip addressing, however on a large network with over 4000 machines, this takes way to long for us to do and we want to automate the process.
I have tried using nmap ping scan for this however I am only returning back active ip addresses, not macs.
Now I do know that mac addresses will not traverse switches or routers, but is there ANY way that this can be done?
Another option we have is putting a raspberry pi on each subnet, then through the python program use ssh tunneling to issue ping and arp -n commands to the raspberry pis, gathering everything and sending it back to the Command and Control server, would this work?
submitted by QuantumTradingGroup to learnpython [link] [comments]

Making pooled mining immune to 51% attacks, selfish mining, etc. by bundling an SPV client into mining software.

This idea has been floating in my mind for a while, but I haven't seen anyone else mention it. Figured it was worth discussing.

The problem

The threat posed by pools is that they indirectly control large amounts of hashing power. Miners are mining blindly on whatever header the pool gives them, and hence can be made to attack the network at their leisure.

GetBlockTemplate

GetBlockTemplate was supposed to fix this problem by allowing miners to do their own transactions (and making what they're mining completely transparent). This works, but adoption is low for a few reasons:
TLDR: GBT is a great way to neuter the ability of pools to do bad things™, but it isn't widely deployed due to the resource requirements and setup effort of using it properly.
Most/All the big threats posed by a large pool boil down to:
In both cases, the fact that this is occuring is actually detectable regardless of mining protocol (getwork,stratum,GBT), because the parent block hash is part of the header the miner is hashing. So the information you need to know whether you're being used to attack the network has been available all along.

The suggestion

By bundling an SPV client into mining software, all miners can verify that they're building on top of a block that is:
  1. Known to the network (blocking selfish mining).
  2. The tip of the longest chain (blocking orphaning of other blocks/51% attacks).
If this isn't the case, they can switch to their backup pool.

Advantages of the approach:

Disadvantages:

Does this work, or am I missing something obvious?
submitted by ninja_parade to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: After Butterfly Labs collapses, engineers find new jobs at 21 Inc.

BEGIN BLOG POST

After Butterfly Labs collapses, engineers find new jobs at 21 Inc.

A bitcoin miner has shipped on time. Yes, that is news. A new venture-capital backed company, 21 Inc., has released a miniature bitcoin miner that they call a "Bitcoin computer". For $399.99, you get a Raspberry Pi, an SHA-256 ASIC board, and a giant fan.
Again, this is news: normally, a manufacturer of bitcoin miners would overdesign and underengineer their equipment, or, if they managed to ship something functional, it would be so poorly engineered -- and over budget -- that it be an explosion waiting to happen and/or priced comparably to a four-door sedan.
21 Inc. has done something remarkable in the Bitcoin world: they started a company that operates like a legitimate business. They're even listed on Amazon.com, a company that's so strict with vendors that Nintendo was kicked off their system for not kissing enough customer ass.
Okay, enough with the praise.

This thing sucks.

The 21.co "computer" certainly deserves a place in the VC world, along with the other products consisting of wild promises and inane use cases. For the price of 4 Raspberry Pi computer kits, you get the following:
(If you have a remote desire to develop applications that use bitcoin, stop here. Go through that list and buy just those items above. You don't need anything else. If you're looking for comedy, or if you're a sucker with too much money, read on...)

Is that all I get for my money?

Those products alone don't allow you to make Bitcoin applications, apparently. You need these things, too:

How about the software demos?

It's difficult to justify developing a $400 computer that can't do much. So, to entice some customers, 21 Inc. included demos that try really hard to make customers feel inspired. Here are just a few things that 21 Inc. claims were totally impossible before their product existed:

What are the real customers saying?

The packaging is slick:
"This @21dotco computer came already opened..."
The hardware is reliable:
"...it must have lost power, which caused my SSH keys to become corrupted."
The software is revolutionary:
"...it will be more expensive to pay for your spotify subscription via your electricity bill, but a lot of people don't care."

I want to buy it anyway!

Go ahead. I won't stop you. Oh, and 21 Inc. doesn't accept bitcoins.
END BLOG POST
submitted by theirmoss to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

LYNX: AN ECO-FRIENDLY CRYPTOCURRENCY

Lynx is a new Crypto project that is solving and tackling one of the biggest problems in crypto-currencies and that is the cost to maintain and run the network normally called, “mining.”
AN ECO-FRIENDLY CRYPTOCURRENCY
Bitcoin’s business rules and energy requirements create an over-reliance on fossil fuels; Lynx does the opposite and strives to solve this problem. For cryptocurrency to be considered a secure platform for exchange in today’s global marketplace, it must be created with global sustainability in mind.
GLOBALLY SUSTAINABLE NETWORK
Unlike Bitcoin, the Lynx code discourages high-volume mining rigs because the code purposefully lacks incentives to mine it for profit. As a result, the entire Lynx network is designed to operate on a collaboration of low power devices that anyone can run, resulting in a collective global mining cost of only dollars a day.
From Lynx’s white paper:
LYNX CREATED THE HYBRID PROOF OF WORK SOLUTION. LYNX BUSINESS RULES ENCOURAGE THE USE OF LOW-COST COMPUTING (LIKE A RASPBERRY PI WHICH ONLY CONSUMES AROUND 3 WATTS OF ELECTRICITY) TO MINE THE COIN. AS A RESULT, THE ELECTRICAL COST TO MAINTAIN THE LYNX NETWORK IS A FRACTION OF BITCOIN’S, YIELDING A LOW ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. THE EMPHASIS ON LOW-COST COMPUTING ALSO CREATES A MORE DECENTRALIZED, BROAD MINER BASE WHICH STRENGTHENS THE STABILITY AND SECURITY OF THE CURRENCY. AND, THE EASY-TO-USE TOOLS AND BROAD MINER BASE CREATES A MORE EQUITABLE CRYPTOCURRENCY THAT ANYONE CAN USE FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. LYNX WAS DESIGNED TO HAVE MINIMAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BECAUSE IT’S COMMITTED TO CREATING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS AND MAINTAINING A SMALL CARBON FOOTPRINT.
FOR A CRYPTOCURRENCY TO BE CONSIDERED ECO-FRIENDLY29, THE ELECTRICITY REQUIREMENTS TO RUN THE GLOBAL NETWORK (INCLUDING THE HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE) MUST HAVE A MINIMAL IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.30 TO ENSURE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, LYNX DEVELOPED HYBRID PROOF OF WORK (HPOW). LYNX HPOW STILL USES POW ​BUT MODIFIES IT SO IT ISN’T PROFITABLE AND, AS A RESULT, CREATES AN ENTIRE CRYPTOCURRENCY NETWORK THAT CAN RUN ON ENERGY EFFICIENT, EASY TO SET-UP, LOW-COST COMPUTERS OR CLOUD SERVICES. THIS REMOVES ANY BARRIERS TO ENTRY FOR NON-TECHNICAL INDIVIDUALS OR ORGANIZATIONS WHO WANT TO GET INVOLVED WITH, SUPPORT, AND BUILD APPLICATIONS ON A STABLE AND SECURE CRYPTOCURRENCY PROJECT. FROM THE LYNX WHITEPAPER:
HTTP://CDN.GETLYNX.IO/2018-06-18_LYNX_WHITEPAPER.PDF
Lynx is listed on CoinMarket Cap here: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/lynx/
Watch Ben Wilson the founder of LYNX speak on The Future of Cryptocurrency: Overcoming the Limitations at a recent blockchain conference:
submitted by dastan1 to u/dastan1 [link] [comments]

The reasons for doing a HF now as opposed to SW are more than just: "HF is a neater cleaner solution" . Here is a list

First of all I am not opposed to SW. I'd prefer BU. Over that I would prefer Segwit. I do not think UASF is good. In fact it makes me doubt some of my previous conclusions: That the market can resolve this issue. I think UASF might be a way for a minority to take control of bitcoin by introducing chaos or the threat of chaos. Anyways...
1 A hard fork now is better than segwit because if done through BU it gives us an opportunity to avoid this same debate over and over again over the next few years. With SW you just get a theoretical 1.7MB increase which is something. With a HF upgrade it shows everyone there is no big deal. As we have already seen from ethereum HF Is NOT a big deal. The market cap of Ethereum is higher than before their hard fork. Period.
2 Tier 2 solutions don't exist yet. It is not worth destroying bitcoins network effect by causing high transaction fees from a delayed scaling resolution during our growth phase. While segwit would go a way towards mitigating this problem and giving us time to rollout solutions it is probably not enough. Especially considering that it needs a 95% miner signal and that will probably never happen.
3 The tier 2 solutions most talked about such as the lightning network do not actually allow more users* . It allows one user to make several payments to someone else by opening up channels and perhaps it allows those payments to be routed to other people who are also part of the LN. As thezerg1 recently said, if payment channels were the solution then the ones that exist would already be seeing great usage (like 21.co's payment channels). But they aren't. Say for instance I opened up a channel with amazon. I paid them in bitcoin through this payment channel. I actually order a ton of things from amazon. Maybe 1 per week. This means I could use the channel over time to order more and more things right? Except that amazon wouldn't be able to convert the bitcoins into dollars until the payment channel is closed. This makes it useless for merchants UNTIL a time when bitcoin starts making a full loop in the economy. That isn't happening yet. That is another reason why on chain scaling is preferable now. It gives more time for that to happen. (Also worth mentioning that with high transaction fees it is going to take a great fee to even start a payment channel).
3 We are going to need a hard fork eventually anyway because even with tier 2 solutions and even if you cram twice as many transactions into current blocks we will still need greater sized blocks. The only argument against this perhaps is some convoluted "extension blocks" idea. But that still doesn't solve the problem of miner funding. Ultimately miners are going to need more on chain capacity to achieve a greater revenue than what 1MB will allow so that the security of the network is kept relatively high. Since we are going to need one anyway, now is better.
4 The decentralization of bitcoin will rapidly become greater with more users. Not only will there be more holders of bitcoin, more merchants, there will be more nodes since nodes exist as a proportion of the user base. With the rapid advancement of things like bandwidth, more CPU power, even cheaper devices like maybe a raspberry pi 4 that will be able to run full nodes, greater storage space... and more sophisticated bitcoin client software that will work on things like faster synching, smarter bandwidth controls ETC... I think the network will be MORE decentralized if we allow more use cases which allows more users which allows more decentralization. It is worth mentioning that one of the greatest use cases for running a node is a merchant who accepts bitcoin and doesn't use a payment processor. If the transaction fees are too high then that disincentivizes merchants from using bitcoin at all which is something core actually wants since they consider the market for payments already saturated with Credit cards. (Two more reasons why Andreas talks are now pointless. He claims that payments are safer with Bitcoin because they are push instead of pull. Kind of moot when the core developers of bitcoin don't even believe in "payments").
5 Now there is a new reason. UASF. As vitalik said it carries nearly 100% of the risks of hard forks but with nearly 0% of the benefits. A hard fork is definitely superior to UASF. * (i) only soft-fork-able changes can be implemented in this way * (ii) not as much user freedom, as if the majority of miners download then users who refuse are stuck on the miners' chain * Costs: (i) the stability risks of a chaotic split into two chains if the majority of miners do not install the fork * (ii) since the majority of miners may switch over later, the no-fork chain is under constant risk of getting annihilated * (iii) if there is a ~50/50 split between miners, chaotic forks and rejoins can happen many times * Wrong: best case hard fork is that no one cares about one of the two sides, ie. all ethereum forks except for one. Jihaan Wu even had to create a 10 btc bounty for directionn on the chaos that would ensue for exchanges if the UASF is tried out.
Reason # 6 Finally development will get some decentralization. One creepy assertion that many make for why not to switch from core is that it has a greater amount of contributors. The fact is... whatever the main bitcoin client is will have the most contributors by default. People are simply less willing to develop for things when their chances of contributions have a significantly less chance of ever being used. It is a non-argument.
Vitalik Buterin Hard forks: they're controversial because some people oppose them because they're concerned they would be too controversial. Erm....
submitted by specialenmity to btc [link] [comments]

Passives Einkommen durch Raspberry Pi 3 - YouTube 4 GH/s Raspberry PI Bitcoin Miner - PiMiner - YouTube Raspberry Pi 4 Bitcoin Mining For 24 Hours! - YouTube DIY Bitcoin Mining: Hardware (part1) - YouTube DIY Bitcoin Mining: Software (part 2) - YouTube

Der Miner bootet und fängt an zu Minen mit ca. 2,83 khash/s (am Monitor vom Raspberry Pi zu sehen). Wenn ich mich nun per Putty aufschalte logge ich mich ein und das Autostart Skript startet erneut, jetzt wurde der Miner somit 2 mal gestartet, dadurch sinkt die Hashrate auf 1,4 khash/s… Kann es sein, dass Du den Miner zwei mal gestartet hast? Den „Putty Miner“ kannst du mit Strg + C ... Trotzdem ist die Raspberry Pi Lösung zweifelsohne eine kostengünstige Möglichkeit, um in das Mining einsteigen zu können und die Prozesse zu erlernen. Energieeffizient ist das System allemal. Außerdem lässt sich der Rechner relativ leicht aufstellen, und man muss kein wirklicher Computerfreak sei, um zu seinem ersten Bitcoin Miner zu ... Achtung: Stand 2013! Nachdem ich mich etwas in das Thema Bitcoin mining eingelesen habe, wollte ich direkt einmal probieren, mit dem RPi Bitcoins „abzubauen“. Hier blieb es allerdings bei einem Versuch. Software ist vorhanden, um ohne weitere externe Geräte mit dem Pi das Schürfen zu beginnen. Diese nennt sich „cpuminer“ und lässt sich wie folgt installieren: $ […] Gibt es nicht eh nur Bitcoin? weiterlesen. Magi Coin Mining. Schritt für Schritt Anleitung um einen Raspberry Pi 4 als Miner zu verwenden und was man alles beachten sollte. weiterlesen. Remote Control. Eine Anleitung um den Raspberri Pi aus der Ferne zu bedienen. Egal ob nur Konsole, oder inkl. grafischer Oberfläche. weiterlesen. Informationen von der „Farm“ Ø CPU Temperatur. 53 °C. le This tutorial will show you how to install bitcoin mining software on your Raspberry Pi and use a 16x2 Character LCD Plate to monitor your crypto-currency creation.

[index] [36829] [6785] [42679] [31700] [33267] [19216] [4481] [47805] [36018] [39802]

Passives Einkommen durch Raspberry Pi 3 - YouTube

Code to copy URL: https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=103046 How to setup Raspbian & Putty: https://youtu.be/vHJ4ZeXT_Zc How to setup a B... Raspberry PI Bitcoin Miner with Adafuit LCD Block Erupter: https://amzn.to/2nwwHak Raspberry Pi 3: https://amzn.to/2OvZBTQ 10-Port USB Hub: https://amzn.to/2... Get an additional $10 in Bitcoins from Coinbase when purchasing through my referral link http://fredyen.com/get/Bitcoins BitMinter: http://bit.ly/BitMinter S... Buy Raspberry Pi 4 Model B 4GB: https://amzn.to/2tlBfGW How to Setup a Raspberry Pi 4 Bitcoin Mining Rig w/ Bitmain AntMiner U3: https://youtu.be/dPWTSytzN7g... In this video we look at how to install a CPU miner on the Raspberry Pi 3 and how to mine with it. Commands: sudo apt-get install automake autoconf pkg-confi...

#