difference crypto monnaie: bitcoin fr faq

Crypto Faucet I use to store my mined bitcoin on, with 4.08% APR paid daily with accounts over 30k satoshi. Referral link included, I share 50% commissions with my referrals paid every Sunday if you're interested.

My referral link for the aforementioned FREEBITCO.IN: https://freebitco.in/?r=30437643&tag=redditF
I have cross referenced this post on my site: passivecryptoguides.com
Why should you sign on with me? I'm not a one off, you can reach me personally through DM or post comments. I've done most of the leg work, alleviating the trial and error process. Just follow the steps in this guide specifically in sections 7️⃣, 8️⃣, and 9️⃣.
I share 50% commissions, get a kick back on everything you earn weekly.
I trust this site, and personally have 270$ worth of bitcoin in one account with almost 500$ total including two other accounts.
Coming from Cointiply? Well, as a heads up, you're not actually holding any BTC. I suggest what you earn you HODL in FREEBITCO.IN.
Just some abbreviation and terminology explanation before we start for those unfamiliar.
BTC=Bitcoin
USD=US Dollar
Satoshi
Click here Bitcoin price history, past and present
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
POST LAYOUT
1️⃣GENERAL INFO
2️⃣POST INTENTIONS
3️⃣MY EARNINGS
4️⃣HOW DO COMMISSION REWARDS WORK?
5️⃣SOME CLAIM STATS
6️⃣MULTIPLY BITCOIN STRATS AND INFO
7️⃣AUTOMATION
8️⃣OPTIMIZATION AND USE
9️⃣STRATS TO INCREASE EARNINGS
1️⃣0️⃣ADVERTISING YOUR LINK
1️⃣1️⃣LINKS
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
1️⃣GENERAL INFO1️⃣
FREEBITCO.IN can be accessed from any device with internet.
Using a VPN or a TOR is now allowed given that your account achieves certain criteria similar to a captcha free account requirements.
🛑WARNING: FREEBITCO.IN wipes inactive accounts after a certain period! If you lose interest, withdraw your BTC!
📝NOTE: iOS devices (iPad, iPhone) are restrictive. The only way to access is via website, as BitBot isn't available.📝
FREEBITCO.IN is what's called a "faucet", a site that gives a small steady stream of crypto which FREEBITCO.IN does through hourly rolls and interest accrual.
FREEBITCO.IN also hosts other means to win or earn crypto, you can gamble with Multiplier, or bet on world evens and crypto prices.
After your account reaches 30k Satoshi, you begin to collect interest. The site also offers lifetime referral commissions, explained later in this guide.
All you need to start is an email. You can add more verification options for security later on. I would highly suggest it. Use a junk email though.
2FA and MFA are strongly suggested. A password should be 15 characters long. I suggest Google Authenticator for your 2FA needs.
I know you can definitely access this site from Brave Browser with add blockers enabled. I'm sure it will work with others. Even without an ad blockers, they only advertise their site gambling and games, no 3rd party adds that I've seen. It's not too invasive or spammy either.
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
2️⃣POST INTENTIONS2️⃣
This post is both an advertising platform I use, and a guide I've made to help those interested to automate and optimize earnings.
For those of a cautious mindset, I've uploaded all of FREEBITCO.IN's information on interest accrual, security, and proof of mining on Imgur, in case you're worried about visiting the site.
Transparent link here: Interest accrual structure and FREEBITCO.IN security. https://imgur.com/a/wWjQtKT
My referral link: https://freebitco.in/?r=30437643&tag=redditC2
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
3️⃣MY EARNINGS3️⃣
So at this point, with hourly claims and daily interest, I'm bringing in roughly 8978 Satoshi (or .70$ USD with BTC at 7804$ USD) daily at full optimization on one account, and two other self referred accounts without lifting a finger. This is before the fact that a hourly roll (claim) can reward up to a max of 200$ USD worth of BTC (percentages in section 5️⃣).
They also have a weekly lotto (tickets awarded with every roll and referral roll) with the last 1st place winner receiving .32769156 BTC (2587$ USD at current bitcoin price).
This is also not including my current commissions on accounts not owned by me. In this post I will describe some of my strategies I've incorporated, and some insight into how this website works.
To offload or withdraw bitcoin, you're going to need what is called a "wallet". I personally use Coinbase (available on mobile or desktop) as you can sell it through here as well and easily move money to Paypal or a bank.
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
4️⃣HOW DO COMMISSION REWARDS WORK?4️⃣
If you are already on FREEBITCO.IN, do you have someone who referred you? Do they share commissions? If not, why not make a new account and join me, where you'll get a return on everything you earn.
As you can see, large affiliate groups don't share anything, hoarding hundreds of thousands worth of BTC earned off their referrals
I share 50% of my commissions. I get 50% of your roll rewards, 25% of your interest, and 0.4% of your wagers. All of this is paid out by FREEBITCO.IN as a commission, so it's not pulled from your rewards or held BTC.
So the more you're active, the more you'll receive from me weekly (being active is doing anything that I get commissions from). IMPORTANT: Your (and all referrals) shares are based on activity, so if you are inactive for the week, you get a lower % for that week. If you're the most active of my referrals you get a higher percentage of what I share. This is to incentivize being active and to stop people from getting a cut without doing anything.
If you have FREEBITCO.IN automated, you don't have to worry about this. However, having a larger bankroll to earn interest, or playing Multiply BTC (I do not suggest playing unless doing so to meet auto roll requirements) will increase can your activity further.
Commission Structure
Here is some proof, I've actually shared about 2/3 of all commissions
Commissions update 12 January 2020
Here is a proof of Payment section per individual
📝NOTE: I've noticed when I was creating the images of commission sharing that the "RECENT" blocks are showing zero. If you look at totals from the first image, you can tell I'm actively sharing with all of my referrals.📝
Join my team FREEBITCO.IN
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
5️⃣SOME CLAIM STATS5️⃣
You can earn AT LEAST .00000552 BTC (.048$) daily when automated (or claiming every hour on the hour) before bonuses (like using reward points to increase rewards 1000%). After some testing, it seems that this amount will always be about .048$ worth of BTC, base claim rewards no bonus active.
After .00030000 BTC, you accrue compounding interest at a rate of 4.08% APR, paid daily. As soon as your daily interest is accredited, it too starts earning interest. The daily interest rate comes out to ~0.011% of your total held BTC.
FREEBITCO.IN gives you a roll once every hour, free
📝NOTE: Roll rewards fluctuate inversely with BTC price. BTC goes down, roll rewards go up, vice versa. The BTC rewards USD value will be extremely close to the values represented below.📝
Current rewards and probability with every hourly roll.
(.002$) -> 98.85%
(.02$) -> 1.00%
(.20$) -> .08%
(2.00$) -> .04%
(20$) -> .02%
(200$) -> .01%
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
6️⃣MULTIPLY BTC STRATS AND INFO6️⃣
🛑!WARNING!, NO STRATEGY IS 100%, THE MULTIPLIER GAME IS GAMBLING, YOU CAN STILL LOSE YOUR WHOLE BALANCE IF YOU PUSH YOUR LUCK.🛑
UPDATE: I decided to do some research after some odd outcomes when extensively testing some of my Multiplier strats. Turns out FREEBITCO.IN does indeed have a house advantage that isn't too transparent. Longer sessions are almost always going to come out negative. If you still plan on playing, do short sessions, once daily max, with lower amounts.
There are a couple methods to play the Multiplier with a reduced risk (but still a risk) here as well. I would suggest small play sessions.
STRAT #1
My preferred settings for AUTOROLL on MULTIPLY that I've had the best success rate with to date. (preferably with .00005000 in ACCT for best results)
BET: Minimum
ODDS: 3
ROLLS: (doesn't matter, 100)
BET ON: alternate
STOP BETTING PROFIT: .00000050, important as the bets will get exponentially higher with every loss. Win in small increments.
STOP BETTING LOSS: Set a loss limit if you want, I have mine set to .00001 and haven't reached it
ON WIN: select increase bet 0%
ON LOSS: select increase bet 65%
RANDOMIZE CLIENT SEED: yes
DO NOT REFRESH: yes
Here is a pic of the settings
Anything else doesn't matter. Make sure the boxes are checked for the above options.
With this strat, I've won positive on one account, about .000077 BTC, and I've only played 5 or 6 times, at less than 2-3 minutes of play time a session.
STRAT #2
Good for accounts with a low balance. I've had a surprising amount of luck with this method, enough so that I thought I'd post it here with an update. This could work well for accounts with less than 1k Satoshi, as a losing streak wouldn't be a huge loss. For this strat, you should have at least 189 Satoshi in your account.
BET: Minimum amount
ODDS/WIN CHANCE: 189 or %0.5
ROLLS: 189 (remains the same no matter if you bet more)
BET ON: High or Low, but not Alternate.
STOP BETTING ON PROFIT: Minimum amount, once again, you want continuous small wins
UPDATE: Conducting more tests for viability
I played these settings 10 times, I came out positive 8/10 times. In the end I was positive 433 Satoshi total with selecting "hi".
On selecting "low" I went positive 5/10 losing 525 Satoshi.
On selecting "hi" and betting 10 Satoshi, I went positive 3/10 times losing 9708 Satoshi.
On selecting "high" and betting 100 Satoshi, I never went positive, 0/10. Losing 189000 Satoshi (~15$ USD).
There does seem to be a pattern of losing more when betting more. Like anything gambling, there's probably a house advantage that's not too transparent.
Win small lose small.
Pic of these settings
STRAT #3
Another strategy I've tried is betting most of my balance once occasionally with a 94.06% chance of winning. This is, eh, alright to risk OCCASIONALLY, but a loss would set you back more than you ever made using this strategy, which happened to me, I lost about 40 USD worth of BTC after making maybe 5 USD.
THIS METHOD IS GREAT FOR MEETING NON-CAPTCHA ACCOUNT REQUIREMENTS!
Playing this in auto roll, out of 20 rolls I'd always lose at least once, putting me into the negative. Even with 10 rolls, I'd more often then not lose at least once.
Pic of these settings
There are other strats out there, such as the "Martingale", which is essentially doubling the bet amount every loss, then resetting your bet to minimum after a win to in theory "win back what you lost". At 47.5% odds of winning, I've had loss streaks that would drain my account.
My summary for Multiply, use sparingly. Don't use it as your primary means of earning. Use once or twice daily, limit play sessions to 5 minutes max.
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
7️⃣AUTOMATION7️⃣
📝NOTE: FREEBITCO.IN captcha requirements seem to be tiered, with requirements for Captcha free upscaling when you BTC holding passes a certain threshold.
I'm currently testing, as is another team member (Shout out to u/SrExtreme69) , what exactly these thresholds, if holding at these thresholds increases the length of Captcha free rolls, and at what amount does FREEBITCO.IN no longer require these to be met.📝
📝NOTE: To start automating, remember to verify email and setup 2FA or the Captcha will still appear even if your account meets Captcha free requirements. Check the site occasionally as Captcha free roll requirements can change. After certain held BTC amount you don't need to renew your requirements. I haven't had to achieve new requirements in over a month.📝
📝NOTE: You may need to manually roll for a bit until the the ability to achieve a Captcha free account becomes available. It doesn't show at first.📝
📝NOTE: It's very difficult, if not impossible to automate on iOS devices.
First of all, getting to this point can be a grind, but once achieved you'll have a steady flow of BTC with options to increase earnings through rewards claims using RP. I would suggest going to your PROFILE tab on FREEBITCO.IN and disabling lottery to increase RP production when starting out. Using other apps or resources to supplement income is a good idea as well.
On the FREE BTC page, there is a blue text hyperlink with requirements that need to be met to make your account captcha free, thus allowing you to enable autoroll on extensions or apps. It has multiple ways to achieve this and they can change, so if your autoroll has stopped, check to see if these requirements have changed.
Here are the requirements. (Amounts vary)
It seems only two of these requirements need to be met.
The less risky and easiest method is to buy lottery tickets and bet with jackpots on. Even better is depositing bitcoin if you have that amount.
The POSSIBLY least expensive method is to bet both regularly and with Jackpots enabled on MULTIPLY (for higher amounts required, IMO Multiplier strat #3 works best)
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
8️⃣OPTIMIZATION AND USE OF FREEBITCO.IN8️⃣
For computers
I would suggest using Firefox, as you can add functions and tools to your bar up top. One of the being a "auto roll" for FREEBITCO.IN, still requires a "captcha free" account. Turn it on and let go, check it occasionally to make sure its still going.
Autoroll firefox add-on link
My link again for ease of access
Not my preferred method, but good for a second account, as using a computer means devoting more attention to FREEBITCO.IN in an inconvenient manner if you are just starting out. After Captcha has been removed, this becomes more hands free, but not as profitable as using bitbot, as you can't autoclaim RP rewards.
I haven't tried many methods besides using Firefox addons, as I'm wary of sources or intent when it comes to 3rd party scripts or programs. If I find any trustworthy scripts or programs, I will update here.
For Mobile
🛑BITBOT WARNING, IF YOU USE BITBOT TO ACCESS FREEBITCO.IN BEFORE USING MY REFERRAL, YOU WILL BE REFERRED THROUGH BITBOT, AND THEY DON'T SHARE COMMISSIONS AS FAR AS I CAN TELL🛑 My Link again
📝NOTE: iOS devices (iPhone, iPad) do not have access to BitBot, nor do they allow extensions/add-ons on their browsers. I have not personally found a way around this. You may still access the site and manually roll.📝
I use BitBot. This is the best place to start from IMO. You can set it to notify you of rolls and gives direct access to the site from the app (you can also access the site from any device with internet). Once your account is "captcha free" you can set it to auto roll AND automatically claim rewards every 24 hours (RP increase, BTC increase, Lottery ticket Increase).
📝NOTE: Bitbot allows auto roll from the app for accounts over 500 RP. This isn't permanent, as it uses your RP. You'll need to log onto the website through a browser to achieve captch free account requirements, which Bitbot does recognize, which allow completely free rolls.📝
📝NOTE: Accessing FREEBITCO.IN through BitBot doesn't allow access to the Hi-Lo or betting games.📝
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
9️⃣STRATS TO INCREASE EARNINGS9️⃣
Bitbot optimization
I started manual claims by setting roll notifications to "ON" for a while until I supplemented my BTC in FREEBITCO.IN with what I was collecting from my miner and CryptoTab. Once I was able to AUTOMATE and I had enough RP to claim the RP BONUS, I set it to do that automatically every 24 hours as this nets more RP than you spend (EG, 100 RP roll bonus costs 1200 RP, but can net 2400 RP if claimed every hour). Eventually you accrue enough RP to claim the %1000 BTC bonus, probably at a rate of once or twice a week.
My current BitBot settings now that its auto claiming, I have the 24 hour auto bonus claiming 100 RP roll bonus and 100% claim bonus, spending a total of 1520 RP, but I'm making 2400 RP with the RP bonus, leaving me 780 RP in the positive each day. Every now and then I'll stop the auto bonus claim so I can buy the 1000% claim bonus (3200 RP). So on a normal day I'll make about 1344 Satoshi. Bitbot auto bonus settings
Once your accrue more referrals, or save enough RP, it's possible to claim the 1000% BTC roll bonus multiple days in a row. This is just about as optimal as you can get for auto rolling.
Self Referrals
If you have two devices (phone and computer preferably) you can make two accounts as long as one uses a different wifi or internet connection, as the roll rewards tracks IP addresses for roll counts. So if you have 2 devices on the same network, it sudo links accounts, so if you roll on one, it restarts the timer on the other. This allows you to collect referral rewards from yourself. Effectively adding 25% of interest and 50% roll rewards.
I currently have a phone autorolling on BitBot with a computer autorolling on Firefox with a tool to roll automatically as long as the page remains open. My computer account is referred from my mobile account, and is currently bringing in an extra .000015+ BTC weekly (currently, total will be this Sunday and I will update).
I've also made another account on my partners phone, linked it with bitbot and got it auto-rolling. Once bitbot is going, its non-invasive and you can silence notifications, it also uses minimal data.
Supplementing with CryptoTab
I'll use CryptoTab on my computer 24/7 to earn BTC from that while I have FREEBITCO.IN running. I also have it running on my phone at night when I sleep and on an iPad I have that I don't use much, its server mining, so no worries about battery on mobile devices. On computers it does actually use your processing power. You can directly deposit into you FREEBITCO.IN accounts.
CryptoTab Link
I've used it for two weeks and have earned a total of .000454 BTC (3.60$ USD). Not huge, but enough to start collecting interest on FREEBITCO.IN and to get the capthca free account requirements.
Supplementing with Cointiply
🛑WARNING: Cointiply's main currency is the constant, weighted against the dollar (10,000 coin/1USD). This means your actually BTC holdings will fluctuate with BTC's price.
For this reason, it's my strong opinion that DON'T HODL in Cointiply as you're not holding actual BTC.🛑
Cointiply is a great site to earn decent amounts of COIN which translate to SAT's. Earn coin, withdraw to FREEBITCO.IN (as you actually hold BTC in cointiply).
I also use an ASIC miner (Antminer s9i, DIY liquid cooled and overclocked with BixBit firmware), and whatever I earn I'll put that into FREEBITCO.IN to collect interest. If you want, I may be willing to do a rental.
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
1️⃣0️⃣ADVERTISING YOUR LINK1️⃣0️⃣
📝NOTE: Since this faucet has been around a while, many people privy to sites such as this are already signed up. So getting referrals can be a slog. My tips for your ads is be genuine and don't hard sell or post "too good to be true" sensational ads.📝
COINTIPLY
This is another faucet. Its structure is a bit different from FREEBITCO.IN, as you complete offers to earn coin. Within this site (also an app) users can earn coins by doing PTC ads (and other offers), this is a good method to get exposure as you can advertise as well. Using this method my traffic for last week as about 800 people.
13000 coins buys about 1000 "clicks" on your ads. They also have options to advertise to people based on location (these options will increase or decrease cost). After your first ad, you usually get a 10% off coupon good for 7 days as well.
You can earn this amount within a day doing surveys on Theorem. I've done surveys before, and this has to be one of the best surveys sights I've ever done. Very rarely do I get kicked out mid survey, and if I do, I still get partial pay.
I will also use "Hideout" on my computer and leave it running. It has to be the open tab on your browser, with the browser open, not minimized. Let it go and check it occasionally as it has a timeout at roughly 2-3 hrs idle. As of now this is the best passive method of earning on Cointiply.
PI NETWORK
Pi Network, an ICO (Initial coin offering) based on trust and social media is another good medium for advertising. I will usually see 15-20 people click on my link with 2-4 ads posted per day.
Just go to "chat", select "random" and post an ad in the chat channel. No charge.
My tip, keep your ads short to medium in length, don't spam.
XYO NETWORK/COIN APP
This is another crypto earned through "geo-mining". On the "coin" app you can do a "geodrop" where you can leave a note. Just click on the box with a parachute icon, select "any" on the "Tile" selection. Leave your ad in the "note" section.
It costs 10 "COIN" at the very least to do a "geodrop". This method may not be worth it if you aren't already involved in the program. To earn a substantial amount of coin, you'll need a subscription or a "sentinel". Sentinels can actually be purchased for under 20$ nowadays (depending on site) and is the best option to earn. Without these you'll only make approx .05-.18 coin every 30 seconds if you're actively moving.
My tips if you plan on advertising on this platform, once again keep it short, and only advertise around 7-9am and 4-6pm, as this will be peak mining hours with people driving to and from work.
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
1️⃣1️⃣LINKS1️⃣1️⃣
My FREEBITCO.IN Referral Link
What is a Satoshi?
Bitcoins price through Coingecko
CryptoTab Link
Autoroll on Firefox
Coinbase Link
PI NETWORK
COINTIPLY
XYO NETWORK/COIN APP
⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹⏹
submitted by thatoneguyYMK to SpareCash [link] [comments]

Start Here for Much Wallet WOW!

EDIT 2017-02-10: A word about Nodes

There is a discussion about nodes that came up today, where it seems I'm discouraging people from running the full QT/Core client. Yes and No. What I'm trying to make sure people understand is how things work, and that it is NOT mandatory to run a client in order to use Dogecoins (and yes, I realise that browser-based tools like coinb.in and wallet sweepers are 'clients' by strict definition).
That said, more nodes is absolutely a good thing for the network. Preferrably full nodes. How do you run a full node? Just run Core/QT and open up Port 22556 on your router so it can connect to more than 8 peers. What will it cost you? You need your machine to be on 24/7/365, you need enough storage for the full blockchain (currently about 20Gb. Bitcoin is over 120Gb) and enough bandwidth to keep it in sync and share blocks with peers. A couple of Gb a month, most likely. This is best done with a desktop on a wired broadband link. Or maybe a hosted VM in the cloud. :)

EDIT 2017-01-09: Wallets WITHOUT Clients

Since I started helping people on /BitcoinBeginners, I'm getting a lot of questions about how to use wallets without running clients or trusting third parties. So here are a couple of resources that will make that possible, and not just for Dogecoin:
Multi-Coin Wallet Generator Now supporting 129 currencies! Coinb.in Start by setting the currency, found in the gear wheel in the Broadcast tab. Dogecoin Wallet Sweeper Redeem 'paper' wallets containing up to about 100 UTXOs. Bitinfo Charts My favourite block explorer, handles a bunch of cryptos.
Using these resources, it is possible to hold, receive and spend coins in various currencies, without having to run QT or a 'lite' client. You can also download and run the pages on your own device.

EDIT 2016-11-23: SEMANTICS about MINING! :P

Even though there is already a section on mining below, it has been suggested given the huge number of posts on the subject that this needs to be made clearer. Since people get their panties in a twist over the word 'dead', lets change that...

MINING IS DEAD!

MINING DOGECOIN IS UNPROFITABLE!

Put simply, there is no way to mine Dogecoin and make a profit because of the massive hashpower provided by industrial-scale Litecoin miners. Mining Doge directly stopped being viable when our hashrate exploded with the introduction of AuxPoW. Mining with CPU's and GPU's died when ASICs were introduced. And mining with a laptop WILL kill your laptop and cost you a fortune to repair or replace. Mining Litecoin with an exchange that also mines Doge and others will earn less than the electricity consumed, and you won't recover your costs. Probably ever, but certainly not in any reasonable time.
Mining other currencies may be a thing, but that's beyond our scope here. This is /Dogecoin, not /GetRichMiningCryptos after all. If you want to mine the newest scamcoin for fun and profit, look elsewhere for advice. :/
Oh, and most important:

READ BEFORE YOU POST!

At any given time, there are half a dozen posts on the frontpage just like the one you're about to write, where the answers have already been given. Read them. Don't make people waste their time repeating themselves because you were too lazy to bother reading stuff. :P
So there I was, having a quiet Sundy arvo bludge, as you do, when 42points turned up on Facebook and asked me to write a new sticky post for /dogecoin. Why would he do this, when he should be having a bludge himself, I hear you ask? Well, seems he was doing exactly that, and wanted to fob off the work he’s too slack to do himself. ;) Ah well, being a sucker for punishment, I’ll grudgingly oblige I guess.
OK, first things first.

The Clients:

Dogecoin Core 1.10.0 2015-Nov-01
Bootstrap file for Core to save some download time.
Dogecoin Core Guide Wiki
MultiDoge v0.1.7 2016-Jan-31
Android Dogecoin Wallet 2.0.8 2016-Jan-18
Android Coinomi Wallet
Java Cate 0.14 alpha 2 Multicoin wallet 2016-Feb-14
Exodus multicoin wallet
iOS Doughwallet

Do you REALLY need a client?

Wallet ELI5
UTXO ELI5
Paper Wallet Generator
Sample HTML Wallet List
Dogetipbot subreddit and website
Dogechain Wallet
Block.io Wallet
Exchanges
BTC38
Poloniex
CoinSpot
ShapeShift - Not really an exchange, rather a currency trader.

Mining

Litecoinpool
Prohashing
Zpool

Explorers

BitInfoCharts - My favourite, has charts!
chain.so
dogechain.info
/dogecoindev where the devs hang out

More Info

Dogeducation
Technical Wiki
Preev currency value calculator

EDITS:

From peoplma
I was wondering if you could add just a couple things. A link to the coinomi android wallet, it's probably the best one out there. And a sentence somewhere along the lines of "if you need help with any dogecoin software you are welcome to make a post, but PLEASE include your OS, version number of the client, and any relevant transaction IDs that you are willing to share" if you can fit that in somewhere.
Also, if you want to link to Prohashing, I'm pretty sure it's the only Scrypt mining pool that will actually pay out in doge. The others I know of pay out in litecoin or bitcoin. And it's a profit switching multipool, so gives a better return than just mining ltc/doge.
And there's these two wiki articles I thought would be helpful to link /dogecoin/wiki/technical for those technically minded newbies or intermediate users who want to dig a little deeper. And maybe a link to /dogecoin/wiki/dogecoincoreguide next to the link for dogecoin core.
From pts2002
Finally a proper sticky post! Here's some other stuff you could add:
zpool.ca mining pool - You can get paid in pretty much any coin, and you can mine in multiple algos (currently mining lyra2v2 with my GPU). Doing about 500Ð/day
shapeshift.io exchange - My favourite exchange, quick and easy. No registration required!
Also, you should add some blockchain explorers!
chain.so - Support for bitcoin, litecoin and doge.
dogechain.info - Official blockchain explorer. Includes a wallet (already mentioned). Live update currently not working (?)
EDIT: Here's another thing I found!
preev.com currency value calculator - Easy way to check the value of your dogecoins (or bitcoins, or litecoins, or peercoins)!
submitted by Fulvio55 to dogecoin [link] [comments]

Homelab collective ressources post!

Hey guys!
I'm fairly new to this sub and to having a home lab in general and I found this community to be so kind and helping, I wanted to give back what I've learned. I'm seeing a lot of questions asked around on improvements and on what to do with x extra hardware so I thought it would be nice to have a thread to regroup that.
 
I'll put here some stuff I gathered and the most common questions I've seen, feel free to contribute and i'll update the post along.
 
Latest Additions
 
Homelab Dashboard
Posts about dashboards have been growing lately and here are some of the best that were kind enough to provide us with their sources.
User Screenshot Source
yours truly http://imgur.com/a/GhCNH https://github.com/Gabisonfire/dashboard-q
lastditchefrt http://i.imgur.com/5zQdao4.png https://github.com/d4rk22/Network-Status-Page
_SleepingBag_ http://i.imgur.com/Ql9ZM4W.png https://github.com/jsank/homelabdash
NiknakSi https://niknak.org/extras/sysinfo TBA
DainBramaged http://imgur.com/jYNlUEQ https://github.com/gordonturneBigBoard
michaelh4u https://i.imgur.com/XkZwMKj.png https://github.com/michaelh4u/homelabfrontpage
spigotx http://imgur.com/a/1zMht https://github.com/spigotx/HomeLab2
SirMaster https://nicko88.com/ https://github.com/dashbad/plex-server-status
yourofl10 http://imgur.com/a/AyROa TBA
TheBobWiley http://imgur.com/a/oU6d3 https://github.com/TheBobWiley/ManageThis-LandingPages
0110010001100010 http://i.imgur.com/iwtQcsL.jpg https://github.com/danodemano/monitoring-scripts
mescon & SyNiK4L https://i.imgur.com/gqdVM6p.jpg https://github.com/mescon/Muximux
ak_rex http://i.imgur.com/a/RJkrT https://github.com/ak-rex/homelab-dashboard
 
Or build yours from scratch: PRTG API, ELK, Grafana, freeboard, JumpSquares
 
Some other resources: Custom Monitoring Scripts by 0110010001100010
 
Credits to apt64 for his original post
= Pi specific =
 
= Download Automation =
 
= Virtualization =
 
= Monitoring =
 
= Media Center =
 
= Remote access =
 
= VOIP =
 
= Networking =
 
= File Servers/Storage/RAID =
 
= Cameras =
 
= Documentation =
 
= Dynamic DNS =
 
= Backup =
 
= Creating network diagrams =
 
= Guides =
 
= Misc =
 
That's all I could come up with on top of my head + some research, passing over to you guys so we can get a nice complete list!
 
Let's try and stick with free(or mostly) softwares, let me know if you guys feel otherwise.
submitted by Gabisonfire to homelab [link] [comments]

RaiBlocks AMA Summary!

I posted this under /cryptocurrency and /cryptomarkets as well! Might be less useful under this subreddit... but I'm using it for purposes of helping people become aware of this coin.
Summation of RaiBlocks lead developer AMA. I'm very excited about this coin, and if you're asking why I did this...I'm trying out my AMA consolidating script that I wrote for fun :) I'm interested in seeing what people think about this coin! You can read the responses directly from this link: https://www.reddit.com/RaiBlocks/comments/7ko5l7/colin_lemahieu_founder_and_lead_developer_of/
 
What are your top priorities atm? Both in developing areas itself and in terms of integration?
 
The top priorities right now are:
These basically need to happen in a sequence because each item isn't useful unless the previous one is complete.
 
 
Do you have any plans to have your source code peer reviewed? By peer review I mean sending your source code down to MIT for testing and review.
Where do you see Raiblocks 5-10 years from now? (For instance do you envision people using a Raiblocks mobile phone app to transfer value between each other, or buy stuff at the store?
 
We definitely need peer and code reviews and we're open to anyone doing this. We have ideas for people in universities that want to analyze the whitepaper or code so we'll see what comes of that. In my opinion code security guarantees can only be given with (eyes * time) and we need both.
I'd like to see RaiBlocks adopted as an internet RFC and basically become an ubiquitous background technology like http. I think you're probably right and a mobile app would be the most user-friendly way to do this so people don't need to carry around extra cards in their wallet etc.
 
 
Is there a list of the team readily available? Are there firm plans to expand, and if so, in which directions?
The roadmap indicated a website redesign scheduled for November 2017. Is there an update?
 
We have about 12 people in the core team; about half are code and half are business developers. On the redesigned website we're going to include bios for sure, no one in our team is anonymous. I think we have pretty good coverage of what we need right now, we could always use more people capable of contributing to the core code.
The website design is well underway, we wanted to streamline and add some more things to it so it took longer than originally estimated. It'll looking like after the new year we'll have it ready.
 
 
Would you ever consider renaming the coin to simply "Rai" or any other simplified form other than RaiBlocks?
2. What marketing strategy do you think will push XRB forward from now on as a fully working product. Instant and free, the green coin, "it just works" coin, etc?
3. Regarding security, is "quantum-proofing" a big concern at the moment and how do you guys plan to approach this when the time comes. And how possible would it be for bad actors to successfully implement a 51% attack.
 
  1. Yea there are a few difficulties people have pointed out with our name. People don't know if it's "ray" or "rye". "Blocks" doesn't have a meaning to a lot of people and the name reference might be too esoteric to be meaningful. I'm not prideful so I'm not stuck on a particular name, we'll take a look at what our marketing and business developers say peoples' impressions are and if they have any naming recommendations.
  2. Our marketing strategy is to focus on complete simplicity. Instant and free resonates with enthusiasts and mass adoption will only come when using xrb is absolutely the same experience as using a banking or other payment app. People aren't going to tolerate jargon or confusing workflows when sending or receiving payments.
  3. Quantum computing is going to be an amazing leap for humanity but it's also going to cause a lot of flux in cryptography. The plan I see is the similar to what I did in selecting the cryptographic algorithms we're using right now: look for leaders in academia and industry that have proven implementations and use those as they recommend migration based on computing capability. Quantum vulnerabilities can be an issue in the future but a vulnerable implementation would be an issue right now.
 
 
Hi Colin, lately XRB has been getting frequently compared to and contrasted with Iota. I was hoping that you could give us your thoughts on the differences between the two and what your general vision for the future of Raiblocks is.
 
It's flattering to be compared to IOTA, they have a very talented team building ambitious technology. When looking at design goals I think one thing we're not attempting to approach is transferring a data payload, we're only looking to be a transfer of value.
There are lots of ideas and technology to be developed in the cryptocurrency space and I want RaiBlocks to solve one section of that industry: the transfer of value. I think the best success would be if RaiBlocks was adopted as the global standard for this and crypto efforts could move to non-value-transfer use-cases.
 
 
Do you see XRB becoming the new payment method for commerce. As in, buying coffee, groceries, etc? Do you have plans for combating the HODL mentality so this currency can actually be used in the future of buying and selling?
 
Being a direct transactional payment method is our goal and we're trying to build software that's accessible to everyone to make that happen. I see holding as a speculative tactic anticipating future increases and you're right, it's not in line with day-to-day transactions. I think as market cap levels off to a more consistent value the reason for holding and speculating goes away and people can instead focus on using it as a value exchange.
 
 
Are you planning to expand the RaiBlocks team over the next 12 months? If so, what types of positions are you hoping to fill?
 
Right now we have about 12 people, half core and half business developers. I think this count is good for working on what we're doing right now which is getting wallets and exchanges worked on. Ideally people outside our team will start developing technology around xrb taking advantage of the network effect to build more technology faster than we could internally. That being said we're going to look in a few months to see if there's anything out there people aren't developing that should be and we'll see what people we need to make it happen.
 
 
At what point did you make the decision to make RaiBlocks your full time job? What was the decision making process like?
 
It was after the week where the core team met here in Austin to brainstorm our next steps. I saw how much enthusiasm there was from crypto-veterans with having a working system capable of being scaled up to what's needed for massive adoption and it seemed the risk needed to be taken.
It was hard decision to make, working in the crypto and finance is rough and I like using my leisure time to work on inventions. Of all the projects ideas I have this one seemed to have a high chance of success and the benefits of having a working, decentralized currency would be huge.
 
 
Hi Colin, what prevents great cryptos like XRB from being listed on bigger exchanges?
 
It's good to understand where the biggest headaches for exchanges lie: support tickets, operations, and development. If a technology is different from what they already have, that takes development time. If the software is new and not widely run, that's potential operations time to fix it which results in support tickets and community backlash. Adding BitCoin clones or Ethereum ICO coins is easy because they don't have these associated risks or costs.
 
 
What can the average RaiBlocks-Fan do to help XRB getting adopted / growing / expanding?
 
I think the best thing an average fan could do is word of mouth and telling people about RaiBlocks. More people being aware of it means there's the possibility someone who's never heard of it before would be interested in contributing as a vendor, developer, exchange etc.
Good advertising or marketing will never be able to reach everyone as well as someone reaching out within their own network.
 
 
Ray or Rye?
 
Ray hehe. It comes from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones Lots of people don't know the answer though >_<
 
 
Are you looking at incorperating a datamarket like iota in the future? Given the speed of the network a data exchange for highly accurate sensors could be a game changer.
Further more, are there any plans to increase the Dev team in the future? I read on the FAQ you'd like RaiBlocks to be somewhat of a protocol which is a huge ambition. A Dev from say the Mozilla foundation or other could further cement this ambitious project.
 
Transmitting data payloads is something we probably won't pursue. The concern is adding more features like this could cause us to make decisions that compromise the primary focus points of low-cost and speed for transferring value.
We can add people to the dev team though I think we'll get the most traction by teaching teams in these other organization how to use RaiBlocks so they can be the experts on the subject in their companies.
 
 
Does the actual RaiBlocks version require "Each node in the network must be aware of all transactions as they occur" part? This was in the old white paper and is asked here:
https://www.reddit.com/RaiBlocks/comments/7ksl81/some_questions_regarding_raiblocks_consensus/?st=jbdmgagc&sh=d1c93cca
 
If a node wants to independently know the balances of all accounts in the system, it must at a minimum have storage to hold accounts and all their balances. In order to know all balances it must either listen to transactions as they're happening or bootstrap from someone else to catch up as what happens on startup.
 
 
There is no incentive to run nodes. Some people will do it because it is cheap as fuck (as I read an raspberry pie can run it). But I think not many people will do it.
1. How important are the nodes in terms of further scaling?
2. On which network conditions where the 7000 transactions met?
3. What happens if the transactions per day tenfolds but the nodes don't?
4. How much better will Rai scale if someone sets up, lets say, 100 nodes with awesome hardware and network?
5. How many nodes could be enough for visa level scaling?
6. Which further improvements can be made for Rai IF there needs to be other improvements than setting up new nodes? Are there other concepts like 2nd layer solutions planned?
7. How will Rai defend network attacks?
I know there is an PoW part. But since there a also large attacks on high cap coins on which people invest millions of $ to congest a network..Is it possible that the Rai network will be unusable for several days because of this?
 
I think the out-of-protocol incentives to running a node are under-referenced yet I see them as the primary driving factor for participating as a whole. Node rewards come at the expense of other network participants and in this closed loop the incentives aren't enough to keep a cryptocurrency alive. Long-term there needs to be a system-level comparative advantage to what people are already using for a transfer of value. If someone is using xrb and it saves them hundreds or thousands of dollars per month in fees and customer irritation in delayed payments, they have a direct monetary incentive to using xrb and a monetary incentive in the health of the system.
1) More nodes provides transaction and bootstrapping redundancy. More representatives provides decentralization.
2) The 7k TPS was a profile how fast commodity hardware could eat transactions. All of the real-world limits are going to be something hardware related, either bandwidth, IO, or CPU.
3) The scaling is more related to the hardware the nodes are using rather than the node count. If there was 10x increase in transactions it would use 10x the bandwidth and IO as nodes observe transactions happening.
4) If someone made 100 representative nodes the network would be far more decentralized though the tx throughput would be unchanged since that's a per-node requirement.
5) Scaling to Visa will have high bandwidth and IO requirements on representatives associated with doing 10k IOPS. Datacenter and business class hardware will have to be enough to handle the load.
6) Second layer solutions are always an option and I think a lot of people will use them for fraud protection and insurance. Our primary focus is to make the 1st layer as efficient and high speed as possible so a 2nd layer isn't needed for daily transactions.
7) Defending against network attacks will be an ongoing thing, people like breaking the network for lulz or monetary gain i.e. competing cryptos. If there are attacks we haven't defended against or considered it'll be a matter of getting capable people to fix issues.
 
 
Are you open to changes to the name? (Rai)
What are your plans with regards to marketing?
 
I'm open to it, people get confused on ray/rye pronunciation, not the greatest first impression.
As far as timing I think marketing works best after a more user friendly wallet and integration in to more exchanges otherwise we're sending traffic to something people can't use. We're going to start by focusing on the initial adopters which will likely be enthusiasts and going forward work on the next set of users that aren't enthusiasts but want to drive savings for their business through lower payment processing costs.
 
 
A recent tweet(https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/942961006614945792) from Vitalik Buterin. Could this be a case with testing the scalability of RaiBlocks as well and in reality we wouldn't come close to 7000tx/s?
 
I think he's definitely right, a lot of the TPS numbers are synthetic benchmarks usually on one system. The biggest thing hindering TPS are protocol-specific limits like hard caps or high contention design. The next biggest thing will be bandwidth and then disk IO. Some of these limits can be improved by profiling and fixing code instead of actual limits in the hardware.
We want to get better, real world numbers but our general opinion is that the RaiBlocks protocol is going to be limited by hardware, rather than design.
 
 
Are you planning to add a fiat gateway to the main website and mobile wallet?
 
If we can make it happen for sure, that seems like a very user-focused feature people would want.
The difficulty at least in the US is the money-transmitter licenses which are hard to obtain. More than likely if this functionality was added it'd be a partnership with an established financial company that has procedures in place to operate within countries' regulations.
 
 
I saw a post on /iota that claims that their quantum resistance is a main benefit over raiblocks. Can you go into detail about this? explain any plans you have to let XRB persevere through upcoming quatum revolution?
 
I think everyone with cryptography in their programs is keeping an eye on quantum cryptography because we're all in the same boat. I don't have cryptanalysis credentials so I didn't feel comfortable building an implementation and instead chose to use one off-the-shelf from someone with assuring credentials.
There are some big companies that have made small mistakes that blow up the usefulness of the entire algorithm, it's incredibly easy to do. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2010/12/ps3-hacked-through-poor-implementation-of-cryptography/
 
 
Hello Colin, is any security audit to the source code planned?
 
We don't have one contracted though both internally and externally this is an important thing people want completed.
 
 
Do you have plans to radically change the interface of the desktop wallet, and to develop a universal, cross-platform, clean and simple UX design for the wallet? This will be huge for mass adoption in my humble opinion
 
I completely agree, we do plan on completely redoing the desktop wallet, both from a UX standpoint and maintainability so UI code doesn't need to be in C++. This could also remove out dependency on QT which is the least permissive license in the code right now.
I write code better than I design GUIs ;)
 
 
It seems like Raiblocks is aiming to be a true currency with it's lacking of transaction fees and fast confirmation times, which is great! If Raiblocks can add some kind of support for privacy then I think it got the whole picture figured out in terms of being "digital cash". Do you currently have any plans to implement privacy features into RaiBlocks?
If Raiblocks is unable to do this, it will still be a straight improvement over things like LTC which are currently being used as currency, but I don't think it will be able to become THE cryptocurrency without privacy features.
 
I love the concept of privacy in the network and it's a hard thing to do right. Any solution used would need to be compatible with our balance-weighted-voting method which means at least we'd have to know how much weight a representative has even if we're hiding actual account balances.
To be fully anonymous it would have to be hide accounts, amounts, endpoints, and also timing information; with advanced network analysis the timing is the hardest thing to hide. Hopefully some day we can figure out an efficient privacy solution though the immediate problem we can solve is making a transactional cryptocurrency so we're focusing on that.
 
 
Could you provide an analysis on the flaws of RaiBlocks? Is it in any way, shape, or form at a disadvantage compared to a blockchain based ledger like bitcoin? There has to be drawbacks, but I haven’t found any.
Do you plan on expanding the dev team and establishing a foundation? Also, how much money is in the development pool?
 
One drawback is to handle is our chain-per-account model and asynchronous updates it takes more code and design. This means instead of one top-block hash for everything there's one for each account. This gives us the power of wait-free asynchronous transactions at the cost of simplicity.
After we finish up things like the wallet, website, and exchange integration we'll be looking at seeing what dev resources we need to build tech if no one else is already working on a particular thing. We have about 6 million XRB right now so we've made the existing dev funds go a long way. If something expensive to build came along and dev funds wouldn't cut it we could look at some sort of external funding.
 
 
How big of a problem is PoW for exchanges and what are potential solutions?
 
Considering how much exchanges stand to make through commission I don't see the cost as a barrier, it's just an abnormal technology request compared to other cryptocurrencies.
We're working on providing a service exchanges can use in the interim until they set up their own infrastructure to generate the work. Other options are containers people can use on cloud services to get the infrastructure they need until they want to invest in their own.
 
 
It's my understanding that since everything works asynchronously, in the case of double spending there is a chance a merchant would receive the block that would be later invalidated and have it shown in it's wallet, even if a little later (1 minute?) the amount would correct when the delegates vote that block invalid. Is there any mechanism to avoid this? Maybe tag the transactions in the wallet as "confirming" and then "confirmed" after that minute? Is there actually any certain way for a wallet to know, in a deterministic/programable way, at what moment a transaction is 100% legit? (for example if the delegates are DoS'ed I guess that minute could be much longer). I know this is an improbable case, but still...
 
Yea you're hitting a good point, the consensus algorithm in the node is designed to wait for the incoming transaction to settle before accepting it in to the local chain for the exact reason you listed, if their transaction were to be rolled back the local account would be rolled back as well.
We can trend the current weight of all representatives that are online and voting and make sure we have >50% of the vote weight accounted for before considering it settled.
 
 
Hey Colin, will you eventually have support for a Trezor or other hard wallet?
 
Yea we'll definitely work with companies like Trezor that are interested in being a hardware wallet for xrb. It's just a matter of making sure they support the signing algorithms and integrating with their API.
 
EDIT: I'm getting a lot of messages asking me how to buy XRB. I used this guide which was very helpful: https://www.reddit.com/RaiBlocks/comments/7i0co0/the_definitive_guide_to_buying_and_storing/
In short -- buy BTC on coinbase, open up an account on bitgrail, transfer that BTC from coinbase to bitgrail, then trade your BTC for XRB. It's a pain right now because it's such a new coin, but soon it will be listed on more exchanges, and hopefully on things like shapeshift/changelly. After that it will be much easier... but until then, the inconvenience is what we have to pay in order to get into XRB while its still early.
EDIT: BAD SCRIPT, BAD!
submitted by atriaxx to RaiBlocks [link] [comments]

IRC Log from Ravencoin Open Developer Meeting - Aug 24, 2018

[14:05] <@wolfsokta> Hello Everybody, sorry we're a bit late getting started
[14:05] == block_338778 [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.72.214.222.226] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:06] <@wolfsokta> Here are the topics we would like to cover today • 2.0.4 Need to upgrade - What we have done to communicate to the community • Unique Assets • iOS Wallet • General Q&A
[14:06] == Chatturga changed the topic of #ravencoin-dev to: 2.0.4 Need to upgrade - What we have done to communicate to the community • Unique Assets • iOS Wallet • General Q&A
[14:06] <@wolfsokta> Daben, could you mention what we have done to communicate the need for the 2.0.4 upgrade?
[14:07] == hwhwhsushwban [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.172.58.37.35] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:07] <@wolfsokta> Others here are free to chime in where they saw the message first.
[14:07] == hwhwhsushwban [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.172.58.37.35] has quit [Client Quit]
[14:08] Whats up bois
[14:08] hi everyone
[14:08] hi hi
[14:08] <@wolfsokta> Discussing the 2.0.4 update and the need to upgrade.
[14:08] <@Chatturga> Sure. As most of you are aware, the community has been expressing concerns with the difficulty oscillations, and were asking that something be done to the difficulty retargeting. Many people submitted suggestions, and the devs decided to implement DGW.
[14:09] <@Tron> I wrote up a short description of why we're moving to a new difficulty adjustment. https://medium.com/@tronblack/ravencoin-dark-gravity-wave-1da0a71657f7
[14:09] <@Chatturga> I have made posts on discord, telegram, bitcointalk, reddit, and ravencointalk.org from testnet stages through current.
[14:10] <@Chatturga> If there are any other channels that can reach a large number of community members, I would love to have more.
[14:10] <@wolfsokta> Thanks Tron, that hasn't been shared to the community at large yet, but folks feel free to share it.
[14:10] When was this decision made and by whom and how?
[14:10] <@Chatturga> I have also communicated with the pool operators and exchanges about the update. Of all of the current pools, only 2 have not yet updated versions.
[14:11] <@wolfsokta> The decision was made by the developers through ongoing requests for weeks made by the community.
[14:12] <@wolfsokta> Evidence was provided by the community of the damages that could be caused to projects when the wild swings continue.
[14:12] So was there a meeting or vote? How can people get invited
[14:12] <@Tron> It was also informed by my conversations with some miners that recommended that we make the change before the coin died. They witnessed similar oscillations from which other coins never recovered.
[14:13] only two pools left to upgrade is good, what about the exchanges? Any word on how many of those have/have not upgraded?
[14:13] <@wolfsokta> We talked about here in our last meeting Bruce_. All attendees were asked if they had any questions or concerns.
[14:13] == blondfrogs [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.185.245.87.219] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:13] == roshii [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.41.251.25.100] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:13] sup roshii long time no see
[14:14] <@Chatturga> Bittrex, Cryptopia, and IDCM have all either updated or have announced their intent to update.
[14:14] == wjcgiwgu283ik3cj [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.172.58.37.35] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:15] sup russki
[14:15] what's the status here?
[14:15] I don’t think that was at all clear from the last dev meeting
[14:15] I can’t be the only person who didn’t understand it
[14:15] <@wolfsokta> Are there any suggestions on how to communicate the need to upgrade even further? I am concerned that others might also not understand.
[14:17] I’m not sold on the benefit and don’t understand the need for a hard fork — I think it’s a bad precedent to simply go rally exchanges to support a hard fork with little to no discussion
[14:17] so just to note, the exchanges not listed as being upgraded or have announced their intention to upgrade include: qbtc, upbit, and cryptobridge (all with over $40k usd volume past 24 hours according to coinmarketcap)
[14:18] <@wolfsokta> I don't agree that there was little or no discussion at all.
[14:19] <@wolfsokta> Looking back at our meeting notes from two weeks ago "fork" was specifically asked about by BrianMCT.
[14:19] If individual devs have the power to simple decide to do something as drastic as a hard fork and can get exchanges and miners to do it that’s got a lot of issues with centralization
[14:19] <@wolfsokta> It had been implemented on testnet by then and discussed in the community for several weeks before that.
[14:19] == under [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.72.200.168.56] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:19] howdy
[14:19] Everything I’ve seen has been related to the asset layer
[14:19] I have to agree with Bruce_, though I wasn't able to join the last meeting here. That said I support the fork
[14:20] Which devs made this decision to do a fork and how was it communicated?
[14:20] well mostly the community made the decision
[14:20] Consensus on a change is the heart of bitcoin development and I believe the devs have done a great job building that consensus
[14:20] a lot of miners were in uproar about the situation
[14:20] <@wolfsokta> All of the devs were supporting the changes. It wasn't done in isolation at all.
[14:21] This topic has been a huge discussion point within the RVN mining community for quite some time
[14:21] the community and miners have been having issues with the way diff is adjusted for quite some time now
[14:21] Sure I’m well aware of that -
[14:21] Not sold on the benefits of having difficulty crippled by rented hashpower?
[14:21] The community saw a problem. The devs got together and talked about a solution and implemented a solution
[14:21] I’m active in the community
[14:22] So well aware of the discussions on DGW etc
[14:22] Hard fork as a solution to a problem community had with rented hashpower (nicehash!!) sounds like the perfect decentralized scenario!
[14:23] hard forks are very dangerous
[14:23] mining parties in difficulty drops are too
[14:23] <@wolfsokta> Agreed, we want to keep them to an absolute minimum.
[14:23] But miners motivation it’s the main vote
[14:24] What would it take to convince you that constantly going from 4 Th/s to 500 Gh/s every week is worse for the long term health of the coin than the risk of a hard fork to fix it?
[14:24] == Tron [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.173.241.144.77] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
[14:24] This hardfork does include the asset layer right? if so why is it being delayed in implementation?
[14:24] <@wolfsokta> Come back Tron!
[14:24] coudl it have been implement through bip9 voting?
[14:24] also hard fork is activated by the community! that's a vote thing!
[14:24] @mrsushi to give people time to upgrade their wallet
[14:25] @under, it would be much hard to keep consensus with a bip9 change
[14:25] <@wolfsokta> We investigated that closely Under.
[14:25] == Tron [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.173.241.144.77] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:25] <@wolfsokta> See Tron's post for more details about that.
[14:25] <@spyder_> Hi Tron
[14:25] <@wolfsokta> https://medium.com/@tronblack/ravencoin-dark-gravity-wave-1da0a71657f7
[14:25] Sorry about that. Computer went to sleep.
[14:26] I'm wrong
[14:26] 2 cents. the release deadline of october 31st puts a bit of strain on getting code shipped. (duh). but fixing daa was important to the current health of the coin, and was widely suppported by current mining majority commuity. could it have been implemented in a different manner? yes . if we didnt have deadlines
[14:27] == wjcgiwgu283ik3cj [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.172.58.37.35] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[14:27] sushi this fork does not include assets. it's not being delayed though, we're making great progress for an Oct 31 target
[14:28] I don’t see the urgency but my vote doesn’t matter since my hash power is still CPUs
[14:28] <@wolfsokta> We're seeing the community get behind the change as well based on the amount of people jumping back in to mine through this last high difficulty phase.
[14:28] So that will be another hardfork?
[14:28] the fork does include the asset code though set to activate on oct 30th
[14:28] yes
[14:29] <@wolfsokta> Yes, it will based on the upgrade voting through the BIP9 process.
[14:29] I wanted to ask about burn rates from this group: and make a proposal.
[14:29] we're also trying hard to make it the last for awhile
[14:29] Can you clear up the above — there will be this one and another hard fork?
[14:29] <@wolfsokta> Okay, we could discuss that under towards the end of the meeting.
[14:30] If this one has the asset layer is there something different set for October
[14:30] <@wolfsokta> Yes, there will be another hard fork on October 31st once the voting process is successful.
[14:31] <@wolfsokta> The code is in 2.0.4 now and assets are active on testnet
[14:31] Bruce, the assets layer is still being worked on. Assets is active on mainnet. So in Oct 31 voting will start. and if it passes, the chain will fork.
[14:31] this one does NOT include assets for mainnet Bruce -- assets are targeted for Oct 31
[14:31] not***
[14:31] not active****
[14:31] correct me if I'm wrong here, but if everyone upgrades to 2.0.4 for this fork this week, the vote will automatically pass on oct 31st correct? nothing else needs to be done
[14:31] Will if need another download or does this software download cover both forks?
[14:31] <@wolfsokta> Correct Urgo
[14:32] thats how the testnet got activated and this one shows "asset activation status: waiting until 10/30/2018 20:00 (ET)"
[14:32] Will require another upgrade before Oct 31
[14:32] thank you for the clarification wolfsokta
[14:32] <@wolfsokta> It covers both forks, but we might have additional bug fixes in later releases.
[14:32] So users DL one version now and another one around October 30 which activates after that basically?
[14:33] I understand that, but I just wanted to make it clear that if people upgrade to this version for this fork and then don't do anything, they are also voting for the fork on oct 31st
[14:33] Oh okay — one DL?
[14:33] Bruce, Yes.
[14:33] Ty
[14:33] well there is the issue that there maybe some further consensus bugs dealing with the pruneability of asset transactions that needs to be corrected between 2.0.4 and mainnet. so i would imagine that there will be further revisions required to upgrade before now and october 31
[14:33] @under that is correct.
[14:34] I would highly recommend bumping the semver up to 3.0.0 for the final pre 31st release so that the public know to definitely upgrade
[14:34] @under +1
[14:35] out of curiosity, have there been many bugs found with the assets from the version released in july for testnet (2.0.3) until this version? or is it solely a change to DGW?
[14:35] <@wolfsokta> That's not a bad idea under.
[14:35] <@spyder_> @under good idea
[14:35] @urgo. Bugs are being found and fixed daily.
[14:35] Any time the protocol needs to change, there would need to be a hard fork (aka upgrade). It is our hope that we can activate feature forks through the BIP process (as we are doing for assets). Mining pools and exchanges will need to be on the newest software at the point of asset activation - should the mining hash power vote for assets.
[14:35] blondfrogs: gotcha
[14:35] There have been bugs found (and fixed). Testing continues. We appreciate all the bug reports you can give us.
[14:36] <@wolfsokta> Yes! Thank you all for your help in the community.
[14:37] (pull requests with fixes and test coverage would be even better!)
[14:37] asset creation collision is another major issue. current unfair advantage or nodes that fore connect to mining pools will have network topologies that guarantee acceptance. I had discussed the possibility of fee based asset creation selection and i feel that would be a more equal playing ground for all users
[14:38] *of nodes that force
[14:38] <@wolfsokta> What cfox said, we will always welcome development help.
[14:38] So just to make sure everyone know. When assets is ready to go live on oct 31st. Everyone that wants to be on the assets chain without any problems will have to download the new binary.
[14:39] <@wolfsokta> The latest binary.
[14:39] under: already in the works
[14:39] excellent to hear
[14:39] == UserJonPizza [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.24.218.60.237] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:39] <@wolfsokta> Okay, we've spent a bunch of time on that topic and I think it was needed. Does anybody have any other suggestions on how to get the word out even more?
[14:40] maybe preface all 2.0.X releases as pre-releases... minimize the number of releases between now and 3.0 etc
[14:41] <@wolfsokta> Bruce_ let's discuss further offline.
[14:41] wolfsokta: which are the remaining two pools that need to be upgraded? I've identified qbtc, upbit, and cryptobridge as high volume exchanges that haven't said they were going to do it yet
[14:41] so people can help reach out to them
[14:41] f2pool is notoriously hard to contact
[14:41] are they on board?
[14:42] <@wolfsokta> We could use help reaching out to QBTC and Graviex
[14:42] I can try to contact CB if you want?
[14:42] <@Chatturga> The remaining pools are Ravenminer and PickAxePro.
[14:42] <@Chatturga> I have spoken with their operators, the update just hasnt been applied yet.
[14:42] ravenminer is one of the largest ones too. If they don't upgrade that will be a problem
[14:42] okay good news
[14:42] (PickAxePro sounds like a Ruby book)
[14:43] I strongly feel like getting the word out on ravencoin.org would be beneficial
[14:44] that site is sorely in need of active contribution
[14:44] Anyone can volunteer to contribute
[14:44] <@wolfsokta> Okay, cfox can you talk about the status of unique assets?
[14:44] sure
[14:45] <@wolfsokta> I'll add website to the end of our topics.
[14:45] code is in review and will be on the development branch shortly
[14:45] would it make sense to have a page on the wiki (or somewhere else) that lists the wallet versions run by pools & exchanges?
[14:45] will be in next release
[14:45] furthermore, many sites have friendly link to the standard installers for each platform, if the site linked to the primary installers for each platform to reduce github newb confusion that would be good as well
[14:46] likely to a testnetv5 although that isn't settled
[14:46] <@wolfsokta> Thanks cfox.
[14:46] <@wolfsokta> Are there any questions about unique assets, and how they work?
[14:47] after the # are there any charachters you cant use?
[14:47] will unique assets be constrained by the asset alphanumeric set?
[14:47] ^
[14:47] <@Chatturga> @Urgo there is a page that tracks and shows if they have updated, but it currently doesnt show the actual version that they are on.
[14:47] a-z A-Z 0-9
[14:47] <@Chatturga> https://raven.wiki/wiki/Exchange_notifications#Pools
[14:47] There are a few. Mostly ones that mess with command-line
[14:47] you'll be able to use rpc to do "issueunique MATRIX ['Neo','Tank','Tank Brother']" and it will create three assets for you (MATRIX#Neo, etc.)
[14:47] @cfox - No space
[14:48] @under the unique tags have an expanded set of characters allowed
[14:48] Chatturga: thank you
[14:48] @UJP yes there are some you can't use -- I'll try to post gimmie a sec..
[14:49] Ok. Thank you much!
[14:49] 36^36 assets possible and 62^62 uniques available per asset?
[14:49] <@spyder_> std::regex UNIQUE_TAG_CHARACTERS("^[[email protected]$%&*()[\\]{}<>_.;?\\\\:]+$");
[14:50] regex UNIQUE_TAG_CHARACTERS("^[[email protected]$%&*()[\\]{}<>_.;?\\\\:]+$")
[14:50] oh thanks Mark
[14:51] <@wolfsokta> Okay, next up. I want to thank everybody for helping test the iOS wallet release.
[14:51] <@wolfsokta> We are working with Apple to get the final approval to post it to the App Store
[14:51] @under max asset length is 30, including unique tag
[14:51] Does the RVN wallet have any other cryptos or just RVN?
[14:52] == BruceFenton [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.67.189.233.170] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[14:52] will the android and ios source be migrated to the ravenproject github?
[14:52] I've been adding beta test users. I've added about 80 new users in the last few days.
[14:52] <@wolfsokta> Just RVN, and we want to focus on adding the asset support to the wallet.
[14:53] == Bruce_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.67.189.233.170] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
[14:53] <@wolfsokta> Yes, the code will also be freely available on GitHub for both iOS and Android. Thank you Roshii!
[14:53] Would you consider the iOS wallet to be a more secure place for one's holdings than say, a Mac connected to the internet?
[14:53] will there be a chance of a more user freindly wallet with better graphics like the iOS on PC?
[14:53] the android wallet is getting updated for DGW, correct?
[14:53] <@wolfsokta> That has come up in our discussion Pizza.
[14:54] QT framework is pretty well baked in and is cross platform. if we get some qt gurus possibly
[14:54] Phones are pretty good because the wallet we forked uses the TPM from modern phones.
[14:54] Most important is to write down and safely store your 12 word seed.
[14:54] TPM?
[14:54] <@wolfsokta> A user friendly wallet is one of our main goals.
[14:55] TPM == Trusted Platform Module
[14:55] Ahhh thanks
[14:55] just please no electron apps. they are full of security holes
[14:55] <@spyder_> It is whats makes your stuffs secure
[14:55] not fit for crypto
[14:55] under: depends on who makes it
[14:55] The interface screenshots I've seen look like Bread/Loaf wallet ... I assume that's what was forked from
[14:55] ;)
[14:56] <@wolfsokta> @roshii did you see the question about the Android wallet and DGW?
[14:56] Yes, it was a fork of breadwallet. We like their security.
[14:56] chromium 58 is the last bundled electron engine and has every vuln documented online by google. so unless you patch every vuln.... methinks not
[14:56] Agreed, great choice
[14:57] <@wolfsokta> @Under, what was your proposal?
[14:58] All asset creation Transactions have a mandatory OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY of 1 year(or some agreed upon time interval), and the 500 RVN goes to a multisig devfund, run by a custodial group. We get: 1) an artificial temporary burn, 2) sustainable community and core development funding for the long term, after OSTK/Medici 3) and the reintroduction of RVN supply at a fixed schedule, enabling the removal of the 42k max cap of total As
[14:58] *im wrong on the 42k figure
[14:58] <@wolfsokta> Interesting...
[14:59] <@wolfsokta> Love to hear others thoughts.
[14:59] Update: I posted a message on the CryptoBridge discord and one of their support members @stepollo#6276 said he believes the coin team is already aware of the fork but he would forward the message about the fork over to them right now anyway
[14:59] Ifs 42 million assets
[14:59] yep.
[15:00] I have a different Idea. If the 500 RVN goes to a dev fund its more centralized. The 500 RVN should go back into the unmined coins so miners can stay for longer.
[15:01] *without a hardfork
[15:01] <@wolfsokta> lol
[15:01] that breaks halving schedule, since utxos cant return to an unmined state.
[15:01] @UJP back into coinbase is interesting. would have to think about how that effects distribution schedule, etc.
[15:01] only way to do that would be to dynamicaly grow max supply
[15:02] and i am concerned already about the max safe integer on various platforms at 21 billion
[15:02] js chokes on ravencoin already
[15:02] <@wolfsokta> Other thoughts on Under's proposal? JS isn't a real language. ;)
[15:02] Well Bitcoin has more than 21 bn Sats
[15:02] Is there somebody who wants to volunteer to fix js.
[15:02] hahaha
[15:03] I honestly would hate for the coins to go to a dev fund. It doesn't seem like Ravencoin to me.
[15:03] Yep, but we're 21 billion x 100,000,000 -- Fits fine in a 64-bit integer, but problematic for some languages.
[15:03] <@wolfsokta> Thanks UJP
[15:04] <@wolfsokta> We're past time but I would like to continue if you folks are up for it.
[15:04] Yeah no coins can go anywhere centrality contorted like a dev fund cause that would mean someone has to run it and the code can’t decide that so it’s destined to break
[15:05] currently and long term with out the financial backing of development then improvements and features will be difficult. we are certainly thankful for our current development model. but if a skunkworks project hits a particular baseline of profitability any reasonable company would terminate it
[15:05] Yes let’s contibue for sure
[15:05] the alternative to a dev fund in my mind would be timelocking those funds back to the issuers change address
[15:06] But we can’t have dev built in to the code — it has to be open source like Bitcoin and monero and Litecoin - it’s got drawbacks but way more advantages- it’s the best model
[15:06] Dev funding
[15:06] i highly reccommend not reducing the utility of raven by removing permanently the supply
[15:07] == BW_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.138.68.243.202] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:07] timelocking those funds accompllishes the same sacrifice
[15:07] @under timelocking is interesting too
[15:07] How exactly does timelocking work?
[15:07] <@wolfsokta> ^
[15:07] I mean you could change the price of assets with the Block reward halfing.
[15:07] == Roshiix [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.105.67.2.212] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:08] funds cant be spent from an address until a certain time passes
[15:08] but in a what magical fairy land do people continue to work for free forever. funding development is a real issue... as much as some might philosphically disagree. its a reality
[15:08] You’d still need a centralized party to decide how to distribute the funds
[15:08] even unofficially blockstream supports bitcoin devs
[15:08] on chain is more transparent imho
[15:09] == Tron_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.173.241.144.77] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:09] @UJP yes there are unlimited strategies. one factor that I think is v important is giving application developers a way to easily budget for projects which leads to flat fees
[15:09] If the project is a success like many of believe it will be, I believe plenty of people will gladly done to a dev fund. I don't think the 500 should be burned.
[15:09] *donate
[15:09] centralized conservatorship, directed by community voting process
[15:10] == Tron [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.173.241.144.77] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
[15:10] <@wolfsokta> Thanks Under, that's an interesting idea that we should continue to discuss in the community. You also mentioned the existing website.
[15:10] It would need to be something where everyone with a QT has a vote
[15:10] think his computer went to sleep again :-/
[15:10] I agree UJP
[15:10] with the website
[15:10] No that’s ico jargon — any development fund tied to code would have to be centralized and would therefor fail
[15:11] ^
[15:11] ^
[15:11] ^
[15:11] dashes model for funding seems to be pretty decentralized
[15:11] community voting etc
[15:11] Once you have a dev fund tied to code then who gets to run it? Who mediates disputes?
[15:11] oh well another discussion
[15:11] Dash has a CEO
[15:12] <@wolfsokta> Yeah, let's keep discussing in the community spaces.
[15:12] Dash does have a good model. It's in my top ten.
[15:12] having the burn go to a dev fund is absolute garbage
[15:12] These dev chats should be more target than broad general discussions — changing the entire nature of the coin and it’s economics is best discussed in the RIPs or other means
[15:13] <@wolfsokta> Yup, let's move on.
[15:13] just becuase existing implementation are garbage doesnt mean that all possible future governance options are garbage
[15:13] <@wolfsokta> To discussing the website scenario mentioned by under.
[15:13] the website needs work. would be best if it could be migrated to github as well.
[15:13] What about this: Anyone can issue a vote once the voting feature has been added, for a cost. The vote would be what the coins could be used for.
[15:14] features for the site that need work are more user friendly links to binaries
[15:14] <@wolfsokta> We investigated how bitcoin has their website in Github to make it easy for contributors to jump in.
[15:14] that means active maintenance of the site instead of its current static nature
[15:15] <@wolfsokta> I really like how it's static html, which makes it super simple to host/make changes.
[15:15] the static nature isn’t due to interface it’s due to no contributors
[15:15] no contribution mechanism has been offered
[15:15] github hosted would allow that
[15:16] We used to run the Bitcoin website from the foundation & the GitHub integration seemed to cause some issues
[15:16] its doesnt necessarily have to be hosted by github but the page source should be on github and contributions could easily be managed and tracked
[15:17] for example when a new release is dropped, the ability for the downlaods section to have platform specific easy links to the general installers is far better for general adoption than pointing users to github releases
[15:18] <@wolfsokta> How do people currently contribute to the existing website?
[15:18] they dont?
[15:18] We did that and it was a complete pain to host and keep working — if someone wants to volunteer to do that work hey can surely make the website better and continually updated — but they could do that in Wordpress also
[15:19] I’d say keep an eye out for volunteers and maybe we can get a group together who can improve the site
[15:19] == digitalvap0r-xmr [[email protected]/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.67.255.25.134] has joined #ravencoin-dev
[15:19] And they can decide best method
[15:20] I host the source for the explorer on github and anyone can spin it up instantly on a basic aws node. changes can be made to interface etc, and allow for multilingual translations which have been offered by some community members
[15:20] there are models that work. just saying it should be looked at
[15:20] i gotta run thank you all for your contributions
[15:20] <@wolfsokta> I feel we should explore the source for the website being hosted in GitHub and discuss in our next dev meeting.
[15:21] <@Chatturga> Thanks Under!
[15:21] == under [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.72.200.168.56] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[15:21] <@wolfsokta> Thanks, we also need to drop soon.
[15:21] There is no official site so why care. Someone will do better than the next if RVN is worth it anyway. That's already the case.
[15:21] <@wolfsokta> Let's do 10 mins of open Q&A
[15:22] <@wolfsokta> Go...
[15:23] <@Chatturga> Beuller?
[15:24] No questions ... just a comment that the devs and community are great and I'm happy to be a part of it
[15:24] I think everyone moved to discord. I'll throw this out there. How confident is the dev team that things will be ready for oct 31st?
[15:24] <@wolfsokta> Alright! Thanks everybody for joining us today. Let's plan to get back together as a dev group in a couple of weeks.
[15:25] thanks block!
[15:25] <@wolfsokta> Urgo, very confident
[15:25] Please exclude trolls from discord who havent read the whitepaper
[15:25] great :)
[15:25] "things" will be ready..
[15:25] Next time on discord right?
[15:25] woah why discord?
[15:25] some of the suggestions here are horrid
[15:25] this is better less point
[15:25] == blondfrogs [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.185.245.87.219] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[15:25] Assets are working well on testnet. Plan is to get as much as we can safely test by Sept 30 -- this includes dev contributions. Oct will be heavy testing and making sure it is safe.
[15:26] people
[15:26] <@wolfsokta> Planning on same time, same IRC channel.
[15:26] == BW_ [[email protected]/web/freenode/ip.138.68.243.202] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
[15:26] @xmr any in particular?
[15:27] (or is "here" discord?)
[15:27] Cheers - Tron
[15:27] "Cheers - Tron" - Tron
submitted by Chatturga to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

Is anyone else freaked out by this whole blocksize debate? Does anyone else find themself often agreeing with *both* sides - depending on whichever argument you happen to be reading at the moment? And do we need some better algorithms and data structures?

Why do both sides of the debate seem “right” to me?
I know, I know, a healthy debate is healthy and all - and maybe I'm just not used to the tumult and jostling which would be inevitable in a real live open major debate about something as vital as Bitcoin.
And I really do agree with the starry-eyed idealists who say Bitcoin is vital. Imperfect as it may be, it certainly does seem to represent the first real chance we've had in the past few hundred years to try to steer our civilization and our planet away from the dead-ends and disasters which our government-issued debt-based currencies keep dragging us into.
But this particular debate, about the blocksize, doesn't seem to be getting resolved at all.
Pretty much every time I read one of the long-form major arguments contributed by Bitcoin "thinkers" who I've come to respect over the past few years, this weird thing happens: I usually end up finding myself nodding my head and agreeing with whatever particular piece I'm reading!
But that should be impossible - because a lot of these people vehemently disagree!
So how can both sides sound so convincing to me, simply depending on whichever piece I currently happen to be reading?
Does anyone else feel this way? Or am I just a gullible idiot?
Just Do It?
When you first look at it or hear about it, increasing the size seems almost like a no-brainer: The "big-block" supporters say just increase the blocksize to 20 MB or 8 MB, or do some kind of scheduled or calculated regular increment which tries to take into account the capabilities of the infrastructure and the needs of the users. We do have the bandwidth and the memory to at least increase the blocksize now, they say - and we're probably gonna continue to have more bandwidth and memory in order to be able to keep increasing the blocksize for another couple decades - pretty much like everything else computer-based we've seen over the years (some of this stuff is called by names such as "Moore's Law").
On the other hand, whenever the "small-block" supporters warn about the utter catastrophe that a failed hard-fork would mean, I get totally freaked by their possible doomsday scenarios, which seem totally plausible and terrifying - so I end up feeling that the only way I'd want to go with a hard-fork would be if there was some pre-agreed "triggering" mechanism where the fork itself would only actually "switch on" and take effect provided that some "supermajority" of the network (of who? the miners? the full nodes?) had signaled (presumably via some kind of totally reliable p2p trustless software-based voting system?) that they do indeed "pre-agree" to actually adopt the pre-scheduled fork (and thereby avoid any possibility whatsoever of the precious blockchain somehow tragically splitting into two and pretty much killing this cryptocurrency off in its infancy).
So in this "conservative" scenario, I'm talking about wanting at least 95% pre-adoption agreement - not the mere 75% which I recall some proposals call for, which seems like it could easily lead to a 75/25 blockchain split.
But this time, with this long drawn-out blocksize debate, the core devs, and several other important voices who have become prominent opinion shapers over the past few years, can't seem to come to any real agreement on this.
Weird split among the devs
As far as I can see, there's this weird split: Gavin and Mike seem to be the only people among the devs who really want a major blocksize increase - and all the other devs seem to be vehemently against them.
But then on the other hand, the users seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of a major increase.
And there are meta-questions about governance, about about why this didn't come out as a BIP, and what the availability of Bitcoin XT means.
And today or yesterday there was this really cool big-blockian exponential graph based on doubling the blocksize every two years for twenty years, reminding us of the pure mathematical fact that 210 is indeed about 1000 - but not really addressing any of the game-theoretic points raised by the small-blockians. So a lot of the users seem to like it, but when so few devs say anything positive about it, I worry: is this just yet more exponential chart porn?
On the one hand, Gavin's and Mike's blocksize increase proposal initially seemed like a no-brainer to me.
And on the other hand, all the other devs seem to be against them. Which is weird - not what I'd initially expected at all (but maybe I'm just a fool who's seduced by exponential chart porn?).
Look, I don't mean to be rude to any of the core devs, and I don't want to come off like someone wearing a tinfoil hat - but it has to cross people's minds that the powers that be (the Fed and the other central banks and the governments that use their debt-issued money to run this world into a ditch) could very well be much more scared shitless than they're letting on. If we assume that the powers that be are using their usual playbook and tactics, then it could be worth looking at the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins, to get an idea of how they might try to attack Bitcoin. So, what I'm saying is, they do have a track record of sending in "experts" to try to derail projects and keep everyone enslaved to the Creature from Jekyll Island. I'm just saying. So, without getting ad hominem - let's just make sure that our ideas can really stand scrutiny on their own - as Nick Szabo says, we need to make sure there is "more computer science, less noise" in this debate.
When Gavin Andresen first came out with the 20 MB thing - I sat back and tried to imagine if I could download 20 MB in 10 minutes (which seems to be one of the basic mathematical and technological constraints here - right?)
I figured, "Yeah, I could download that" - even with my crappy internet connection.
And I guess the telecoms might be nice enough to continue to double our bandwidth every two years for the next couple decades – if we ask them politely?
On the other hand - I think we should be careful about entrusting the financial freedom of the world into the greedy hands of the telecoms companies - given all their shady shenanigans over the past few years in many countries. After decades of the MPAA and the FBI trying to chip away at BitTorrent, lately PirateBay has been hard to access. I would say it's quite likely that certain persons at institutions like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs and the Fed might be very, very motivated to see Bitcoin fail - so we shouldn't be too sure about scaling plans which depend on the willingness of companies Verizon and AT&T to double our bandwith every two years.
Maybe the real important hardware buildout challenge for a company like 21 (and its allies such as Qualcomm) to take on now would not be "a miner in every toaster" but rather "Google Fiber Download and Upload Speeds in every Country, including China".
I think I've read all the major stuff on the blocksize debate from Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Greg Maxwell, Peter Todd, Adam Back, and Jeff Garzick and several other major contributors - and, oddly enough, all their arguments seem reasonable - heck even Luke-Jr seems reasonable to me on the blocksize debate, and I always thought he was a whackjob overly influenced by superstition and numerology - and now today I'm reading the article by Bram Cohen - the inventor of BitTorrent - and I find myself agreeing with him too!
I say to myself: What's going on with me? How can I possibly agree with all of these guys, if they all have such vehemently opposing viewpoints?
I mean, think back to the glory days of a couple of years ago, when all we were hearing was how this amazing unprecedented grassroots innovation called Bitcoin was going to benefit everyone from all walks of life, all around the world:
...basically the entire human race transacting everything into the blockchain.
(Although let me say that I think that people's focus on ideas like driverless cabs creating realtime fare markets based on supply and demand seems to be setting our sights a bit low as far as Bitcoin's abilities to correct the financial world's capital-misallocation problems which seem to have been made possible by infinite debt-based fiat. I would have hoped that a Bitcoin-based economy would solve much more noble, much more urgent capital-allocation problems than driverless taxicabs creating fare markets or refrigerators ordering milk on the internet of things. I was thinking more along the lines that Bitcoin would finally strangle dead-end debt-based deadly-toxic energy industries like fossil fuels and let profitable clean energy industries like Thorium LFTRs take over - but that's another topic. :=)
Paradoxes in the blocksize debate
Let me summarize the major paradoxes I see here:
(1) Regarding the people (the majority of the core devs) who are against a blocksize increase: Well, the small-blocks arguments do seem kinda weird, and certainly not very "populist", in the sense that: When on earth have end-users ever heard of a computer technology whose capacity didn't grow pretty much exponentially year-on-year? All the cool new technology we've had - from hard drives to RAM to bandwidth - started out pathetically tiny and grew to unimaginably huge over the past few decades - and all our software has in turn gotten massively powerful and big and complex (sometimes bloated) to take advantage of the enormous new capacity available.
But now suddenly, for the first time in the history of technology, we seem to have a majority of the devs, on a major p2p project - saying: "Let's not scale the system up. It could be dangerous. It might break the whole system (if the hard-fork fails)."
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here, maybe someone else could enlighten me, but I don't think I've ever seen this sort of thing happen in the last few decades of the history of technology - devs arguing against scaling up p2p technology to take advantage of expected growth in infrastructure capacity.
(2) But... on the other hand... the dire warnings of the small-blockians about what could happen if a hard-fork were to fail - wow, they do seem really dire! And these guys are pretty much all heavyweight, experienced programmers and/or game theorists and/or p2p open-source project managers.
I must say, that nearly all of the long-form arguments I've read - as well as many, many of the shorter comments I've read from many users in the threads, whose names I at least have come to more-or-less recognize over the past few months and years on reddit and bitcointalk - have been amazingly impressive in their ability to analyze all aspects of the lifecycle and management of open-source software projects, bringing up lots of serious points which I could never have come up with, and which seem to come from long experience with programming and project management - as well as dealing with economics and human nature (eg, greed - the game-theory stuff).
So a lot of really smart and experienced people with major expertise in various areas ranging from programming to management to game theory to politics to economics have been making some serious, mature, compelling arguments.
But, as I've been saying, the only problem to me is: in many of these cases, these arguments are vehemently in opposition to each other! So I find myself agreeing with pretty much all of them, one by one - which means the end result is just a giant contradiction.
I mean, today we have Bram Cohen, the inventor of BitTorrent, arguing (quite cogently and convincingly to me), that it would be dangerous to increase the blocksize. And this seems to be a guy who would know a few things about scaling out a massive global p2p network - since the protocol which he invented, BitTorrent, is now apparently responsible for like a third of the traffic on the internet (and this despite the long-term concerted efforts of major evil players such as the MPAA and the FBI to shut the whole thing down).
Was the BitTorrent analogy too "glib"?
By the way - I would like to go on a slight tangent here and say that one of the main reasons why I felt so "comfortable" jumping on the Bitcoin train back a few years ago, when I first heard about it and got into it, was the whole rough analogy I saw with BitTorrent.
I remembered the perhaps paradoxical fact that when a torrent is more popular (eg, a major movie release that just came out last week), then it actually becomes faster to download. More people want it, so more people have a few pieces of it, so more people are able to get it from each other. A kind of self-correcting economic feedback loop, where more demand directly leads to more supply.
(BitTorrent manages to pull this off by essentially adding a certain structure to the file being shared, so that it's not simply like an append-only list of 1 MB blocks, but rather more like an random-access or indexed array of 1 MB chunks. Say you're downloading a film which is 700 MB. As soon as your "client" program has downloaded a single 1-MB chunk - say chunk #99 - your "client" program instantly turns into a "server" program as well - offering that chunk #99 to other clients. From my simplistic understanding, I believe the Bitcoin protocol does something similar, to provide a p2p architecture. Hence my - perhaps naïve - assumption that Bitcoin already had the right algorithms / architecture / data structure to scale.)
The efficiency of the BitTorrent network seemed to jive with that "network law" (Metcalfe's Law?) about fax machines. This law states that the more fax machines there are, the more valuable the network of fax machines becomes. Or the value of the network grows on the order of the square of the number of nodes.
This is in contrast with other technology like cars, where the more you have, the worse things get. The more cars there are, the more traffic jams you have, so things start going downhill. I guess this is because highway space is limited - after all, we can't pave over the entire countryside, and we never did get those flying cars we were promised, as David Graeber laments in a recent essay in The Baffler magazine :-)
And regarding the "stress test" supposedly happening right now in the middle of this ongoing blocksize debate, I don't know what worries me more: the fact that it apparently is taking only $5,000 to do a simple kind of DoS on the blockchain - or the fact that there are a few rumors swirling around saying that the unknown company doing the stress test shares the same physical mailing address with a "scam" company?
Or maybe we should just be worried that so much of this debate is happening on a handful of forums which are controlled by some guy named theymos who's already engaged in some pretty "contentious" or "controversial" behavior like blowing a million dollars on writing forum software (I guess he never heard that reddit.com software is open-source)?
So I worry that the great promise of "decentralization" might be more fragile than we originally thought.
Scaling
Anyways, back to Metcalfe's Law: with virtual stuff, like torrents and fax machines, the more the merrier. The more people downloading a given movie, the faster it arrives - and the more people own fax machines, the more valuable the overall fax network.
So I kindof (naïvely?) assumed that Bitcoin, being "virtual" and p2p, would somehow scale up the same magical way BitTorrrent did. I just figured that more people using it would somehow automatically make it stronger and faster.
But now a lot of devs have started talking in terms of the old "scarcity" paradigm, talking about blockspace being a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" - which seems kinda scary, and antithetical to much of the earlier rhetoric we heard about Bitcoin (the stuff about supporting our favorite creators with micropayments, and the stuff about Africans using SMS to send around payments).
Look, when some asshole is in line in front of you at the cash register and he's holding up the line so they can run his credit card to buy a bag of Cheeto's, we tend to get pissed off at the guy - clogging up our expensive global electronic payment infrastructure to make a two-dollar purchase. And that's on a fairly efficient centralized system - and presumably after a year or so, VISA and the guy's bank can delete or compress the transaction in their SQL databases.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if some guy buys a coffee on the blockchain, or if somebody pays an online artist $1.99 for their work - then that transaction, a few bytes or so, has to live on the blockchain forever?
Or is there some "pruning" thing that gets rid of it after a while?
And this could lead to another question: Viewed from the perspective of double-entry bookkeeping, is the blockchain "world-wide ledger" more like the "balance sheet" part of accounting, i.e. a snapshot showing current assets and liabilities? Or is it more like the "cash flow" part of accounting, i.e. a journal showing historical revenues and expenses?
When I think of thousands of machines around the globe having to lug around multiple identical copies of a multi-gigabyte file containing some asshole's coffee purchase forever and ever... I feel like I'm ideologically drifting in one direction (where I'd end up also being against really cool stuff like online micropayments and Africans banking via SMS)... so I don't want to go there.
But on the other hand, when really experienced and battle-tested veterans with major experience in the world of open-souce programming and project management (the "small-blockians") warn of the catastrophic consequences of a possible failed hard-fork, I get freaked out and I wonder if Bitcoin really was destined to be a settlement layer for big transactions.
Could the original programmer(s) possibly weigh in?
And I don't mean to appeal to authority - but heck, where the hell is Satoshi Nakamoto in all this? I do understand that he/she/they would want to maintain absolute anonymity - but on the other hand, I assume SN wants Bitcoin to succeed (both for the future of humanity - or at least for all the bitcoins SN allegedly holds :-) - and I understand there is a way that SN can cryptographically sign a message - and I understand that as the original developer of Bitcoin, SN had some very specific opinions about the blocksize... So I'm kinda wondering of Satoshi could weigh in from time to time. Just to help out a bit. I'm not saying "Show us a sign" like a deity or something - but damn it sure would be fascinating and possibly very helpful if Satoshi gave us his/hetheir 2 satoshis worth at this really confusing juncture.
Are we using our capacity wisely?
I'm not a programming or game-theory whiz, I'm just a casual user who has tried to keep up with technology over the years.
It just seems weird to me that here we have this massive supercomputer (500 times more powerful than the all the supercomputers in the world combined) doing fairly straightforward "embarassingly parallel" number-crunching operations to secure a p2p world-wide ledger called the blockchain to keep track of a measly 2.1 quadrillion tokens spread out among a few billion addresses - and a couple of years ago you had people like Rick Falkvinge saying the blockchain would someday be supporting multi-million-dollar letters of credit for international trade and you had people like Andreas Antonopoulos saying the blockchain would someday allow billions of "unbanked" people to send remittances around the village or around the world dirt-cheap - and now suddenly in June 2015 we're talking about blockspace as a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" and partially centralized, corporate-sponsored "Level 2" vaporware like Lightning Network and some mysterious company is "stess testing" or "DoS-ing" the system by throwing away a measly $5,000 and suddenly it sounds like the whole system could eventually head right back into PayPal and Western Union territory again, in terms of expensive fees.
When I got into Bitcoin, I really was heavily influenced by vague analogies with BitTorrent: I figured everyone would just have tiny little like utorrent-type program running on their machine (ie, Bitcoin-QT or Armory or Mycelium etc.).
I figured that just like anyone can host a their own blog or webserver, anyone would be able to host their own bank.
Yeah, Google and and Mozilla and Twitter and Facebook and WhatsApp did come along and build stuff on top of TCP/IP, so I did expect a bunch of companies to build layers on top of the Bitcoin protocol as well. But I still figured the basic unit of bitcoin client software powering the overall system would be small and personal and affordable and p2p - like a bittorrent client - or at the most, like a cheap server hosting a blog or email server.
And I figured there would be a way at the software level, at the architecture level, at the algorithmic level, at the data structure level - to let the thing scale - if not infinitely, at least fairly massively and gracefully - the same way the BitTorrent network has.
Of course, I do also understand that with BitTorrent, you're sharing a read-only object (eg, a movie) - whereas with Bitcoin, you're achieving distributed trustless consensus and appending it to a write-only (or append-only) database.
So I do understand that the problem which BitTorrent solves is much simpler than the problem which Bitcoin sets out to solve.
But still, it seems that there's got to be a way to make this thing scale. It's p2p and it's got 500 times more computing power than all the supercomputers in the world combined - and so many brilliant and motivated and inspired people want this thing to succeed! And Bitcoin could be our civilization's last chance to steer away from the oncoming debt-based ditch of disaster we seem to be driving into!
It just seems that Bitcoin has got to be able to scale somehow - and all these smart people working together should be able to come up with a solution which pretty much everyone can agree - in advance - will work.
Right? Right?
A (probably irrelevant) tangent on algorithms and architecture and data structures
I'll finally weigh with my personal perspective - although I might be biased due to my background (which is more on the theoretical side of computer science).
My own modest - or perhaps radical - suggestion would be to ask whether we're really looking at all the best possible algorithms and architectures and data structures out there.
From this perspective, I sometimes worry that the overwhelming majority of the great minds working on the programming and game-theory stuff might come from a rather specific, shall we say "von Neumann" or "procedural" or "imperative" school of programming (ie, C and Python and Java programmers).
It seems strange to me that such a cutting-edge and important computer project would have so little participation from the great minds at the other end of the spectrum of programming paradigms - namely, the "functional" and "declarative" and "algebraic" (and co-algebraic!) worlds.
For example, I was struck in particular by statements I've seen here and there (which seemed rather hubristic or lackadaisical to me - for something as important as Bitcoin), that the specification of Bitcoin and the blockchain doesn't really exist in any form other than the reference implementation(s) (in procedural languages such as C or Python?).
Curry-Howard anyone?
I mean, many computer scientists are aware of the Curry-Howard isomorophism, which basically says that the relationship between a theorem and its proof is equivalent to the relationship between a specification and its implementation. In other words, there is a long tradition in mathematics (and in computer programming) of:
And it's not exactly "turtles all the way down" either: a specification is generally simple and compact enough that a good programmer can usually simply visually inspect it to determine if it is indeed "correct" - something which is very difficult, if not impossible, to do with a program written in a procedural, implementation-oriented language such as C or Python or Java.
So I worry that we've got this tradition, from the open-source github C/Java programming tradition, of never actually writing our "specification", and only writing the "implementation". In mission-critical military-grade programming projects (which often use languages like Ada or Maude) this is simply not allowed. It would seem that a project as mission-critical as Bitcoin - which could literally be crucial for humanity's continued survival - should also use this kind of military-grade software development approach.
And I'm not saying rewrite the implementations in these kind of theoretical languages. But it might be helpful if the C/Python/Java programmers in the Bitcoin imperative programming world could build some bridges to the Maude/Haskell/ML programmers of the functional and algebraic programming worlds to see if any kind of useful cross-pollination might take place - between specifications and implementations.
For example, the JavaFAN formal analyzer for multi-threaded Java programs (developed using tools based on the Maude language) was applied to the Remote Agent AI program aboard NASA's Deep Space 1 shuttle, written in Java - and it took only a few minutes using formal mathematical reasoning to detect a potential deadlock which would have occurred years later during the space mission when the damn spacecraft was already way out around Pluto.
And "the Maude-NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) Protocol Analyzer (Maude-NPA) is a tool used to provide security proofs of cryptographic protocols and to search for protocol flaws and cryptosystem attacks."
These are open-source formal reasoning tools developed by DARPA and used by NASA and the US Navy to ensure that program implementations satisfy their specifications. It would be great if some of the people involved in these kinds of projects could contribute to help ensure the security and scalability of Bitcoin.
But there is a wide abyss between the kinds of programmers who use languages like Maude and the kinds of programmers who use languages like C/Python/Java - and it can be really hard to get the two worlds to meet. There is a bit of rapprochement between these language communities in languages which might be considered as being somewhere in the middle, such as Haskell and ML. I just worry that Bitcoin might be turning into being an exclusively C/Python/Java project (with the algorithms and practitioners traditionally of that community), when it could be more advantageous if it also had some people from the functional and algebraic-specification and program-verification community involved as well. The thing is, though: the theoretical practitioners are big on "semantics" - I've heard them say stuff like "Yes but a C / C++ program has no easily identifiable semantics". So to get them involved, you really have to first be able to talk about what your program does (specification) - before proceeding to describe how it does it (implementation). And writing high-level specifications is typically very hard using the syntax and semantics of languages like C and Java and Python - whereas specs are fairly easy to write in Maude - and not only that, they're executable, and you state and verify properties about them - which provides for the kind of debate Nick Szabo was advocating ("more computer science, less noise").
Imagine if we had an executable algebraic specification of Bitcoin in Maude, where we could formally reason about and verify certain crucial game-theoretical properties - rather than merely hand-waving and arguing and deploying and praying.
And so in the theoretical programming community you've got major research on various logics such as Girard's Linear Logic (which is resource-conscious) and Bruni and Montanari's Tile Logic (which enables "pasting" bigger systems together from smaller ones in space and time), and executable algebraic specification languages such as Meseguer's Maude (which would be perfect for game theory modeling, with its functional modules for specifying the deterministic parts of systems and its system modules for specifiying non-deterministic parts of systems, and its parameterized skeletons for sketching out the typical architectures of mobile systems, and its formal reasoning and verification tools and libraries which have been specifically applied to testing and breaking - and fixing - cryptographic protocols).
And somewhat closer to the practical hands-on world, you've got stuff like Google's MapReduce and lots of Big Data database languages developed by Google as well. And yet here we are with a mempool growing dangerously big for RAM on a single machine, and a 20-GB append-only list as our database - and not much debate on practical results from Google's Big Data databases.
(And by the way: maybe I'm totally ignorant for asking this, but I'll ask anyways: why the hell does the mempool have to stay in RAM? Couldn't it work just as well if it were stored temporarily on the hard drive?)
And you've got CalvinDB out of Yale which apparently provides an ACID layer on top of a massively distributed database.
Look, I'm just an armchair follower cheering on these projects. I can barely manage to write a query in SQL, or read through a C or Python or Java program. But I would argue two points here: (1) these languages may be too low-level and "non-formal" for writing and modeling and formally reasoning about and proving properties of mission-critical specifications - and (2) there seem to be some Big Data tools already deployed by institutions such as Google and Yale which support global petabyte-size databases on commodity boxes with nice properties such as near-real-time and ACID - and I sometimes worry that the "core devs" might be failing to review the literature (and reach out to fellow programmers) out there to see if there might be some formal program-verification and practical Big Data tools out there which could be applied to coming up with rock-solid, 100% consensus proposals to handle an issue such as blocksize scaling, which seems to have become much more intractable than many people might have expected.
I mean, the protocol solved the hard stuff: the elliptical-curve stuff and the Byzantine General stuff. How the heck can we be falling down on the comparatively "easier" stuff - like scaling the blocksize?
It just seems like defeatism to say "Well, the blockchain is already 20-30 GB and it's gonna be 20-30 TB ten years from now - and we need 10 Mbs bandwidth now and 10,000 Mbs bandwidth 20 years from - assuming the evil Verizon and AT&T actually give us that - so let's just become a settlement platform and give up on buying coffee or banking the unbanked or doing micropayments, and let's push all that stuff into some corporate-controlled vaporware without even a whitepaper yet."
So you've got Peter Todd doing some possibly brilliant theorizing and extrapolating on the idea of "treechains" - there is a Let's Talk Bitcoin podcast from about a year ago where he sketches the rough outlines of this idea out in a very inspiring, high-level way - although the specifics have yet to be hammered out. And we've got Blockstream also doing some hopeful hand-waving about the Lightning Network.
Things like Peter Todd's treechains - which may be similar to the spark in some devs' eyes called Lightning Network - are examples of the kind of algorithm or architecture which might manage to harness the massive computing power of miners and nodes in such a way that certain kinds of massive and graceful scaling become possible.
It just seems like a kindof tiny dev community working on this stuff.
Being a C or Python or Java programmer should not be a pre-req to being able to help contribute to the specification (and formal reasoning and program verification) for Bitcoin and the blockchain.
XML and UML are crap modeling and specification languages, and C and Java and Python are even worse (as specification languages - although as implementation languages, they are of course fine).
But there are serious modeling and specification languages out there, and they could be very helpful at times like this - where what we're dealing with is questions of modeling and specification (ie, "needs and requirements").
One just doesn't often see the practical, hands-on world of open-source github implementation-level programmers and the academic, theoretical world of specification-level programmers meeting very often. I wish there were some way to get these two worlds to collaborate on Bitcoin.
Maybe a good first step to reach out to the theoretical people would be to provide a modular executable algebraic specification of the Bitcoin protocol in a recognized, military/NASA-grade specification language such as Maude - because that's something the theoretical community can actually wrap their heads around, whereas it's very hard to get them to pay attention to something written only as a C / Python / Java implementation (without an accompanying specification in a formal language).
They can't check whether the program does what it's supposed to do - if you don't provide a formal mathematical definition of what the program is supposed to do.
Specification : Implementation :: Theorem : Proof
You have to remember: the theoretical community is very aware of the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Just like it would be hard to get a mathematician's attention by merely showing them a proof without telling also telling them what theorem the proof is proving - by the same token, it's hard to get the attention of a theoretical computer scientist by merely showing them an implementation without showing them the specification that it implements.
Bitcoin is currently confronted with a mathematical or "computer science" problem: how to secure the network while getting high enough transactional throughput, while staying within the limited RAM, bandwidth and hard drive space limitations of current and future infrastructure.
The problem only becomes a political and economic problem if we give up on trying to solve it as a mathematical and "theoretical computer science" problem.
There should be a plethora of whitepapers out now proposing algorithmic solutions to these scaling issues. Remember, all we have to do is apply the Byzantine General consensus-reaching procedure to a worldwide database which shuffles 2.1 quadrillion tokens among a few billion addresses. The 21 company has emphatically pointed out that racing to compute a hash to add a block is an "embarrassingly parallel" problem - very easy to decompose among cheap, fault-prone, commodity boxes, and recompose into an overall solution - along the lines of Google's highly successful MapReduce.
I guess what I'm really saying is (and I don't mean to be rude here), is that C and Python and Java programmers might not be the best qualified people to develop and formally prove the correctness of (note I do not say: "test", I say "formally prove the correctness of") these kinds of algorithms.
I really believe in the importance of getting the algorithms and architectures right - look at Google Search itself, it uses some pretty brilliant algorithms and architectures (eg, MapReduce, Paxos) which enable it to achieve amazing performance - on pretty crappy commodity hardware. And look at BitTorrent, which is truly p2p, where more demand leads to more supply.
So, in this vein, I will close this lengthy rant with an oddly specific link - which may or may not be able to make some interesting contributions to finding suitable algorithms, architectures and data structures which might help Bitcoin scale massively. I have no idea if this link could be helpful - but given the near-total lack of people from the Haskell and ML and functional worlds in these Bitcoin specification debates, I thought I'd be remiss if I didn't throw this out - just in case there might be something here which could help us channel the massive computing power of the Bitcoin network in such a way as to enable us simply sidestep this kind of desperate debate where both sides seem right because the other side seems wrong.
https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/neil.ghani/papers/ghani-calco07
The above paper is about "higher dimensional trees". It uses a bit of category theory (not a whole lot) and a bit of Haskell (again not a lot - just a simple data structure called a Rose tree, which has a wikipedia page) to develop a very expressive and efficient data structure which generalizes from lists to trees to higher dimensions.
I have no idea if this kind of data structure could be applicable to the current scaling mess we apparently are getting bogged down in - I don't have the game-theory skills to figure it out.
I just thought that since the blockchain is like a list, and since there are some tree-like structures which have been grafted on for efficiency (eg Merkle trees) and since many of the futuristic scaling proposals seem to also involve generalizing from list-like structures (eg, the blockchain) to tree-like structures (eg, side-chains and tree-chains)... well, who knows, there might be some nugget of algorithmic or architectural or data-structure inspiration there.
So... TL;DR:
(1) I'm freaked out that this blocksize debate has splintered the community so badly and dragged on so long, with no resolution in sight, and both sides seeming so right (because the other side seems so wrong).
(2) I think Bitcoin could gain immensely by using high-level formal, algebraic and co-algebraic program specification and verification languages (such as Maude including Maude-NPA, Mobile Maude parameterized skeletons, etc.) to specify (and possibly also, to some degree, verify) what Bitcoin does - before translating to low-level implementation languages such as C and Python and Java saying how Bitcoin does it. This would help to communicate and reason about programs with much more mathematical certitude - and possibly obviate the need for many political and economic tradeoffs which currently seem dismally inevitable - and possibly widen the collaboration on this project.
(3) I wonder if there are some Big Data approaches out there (eg, along the lines of Google's MapReduce and BigTable, or Yale's CalvinDB), which could be implemented to allow Bitcoin to scale massively and painlessly - and to satisfy all stakeholders, ranging from millionaires to micropayments, coffee drinkers to the great "unbanked".
submitted by BeYourOwnBank to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

How To Quickly Sync A Wallet with Bootstrap (Litecoin/Bitcoin) Solutions To Common CIV Wallet Problems Windows ZOIN : soon release wallet Win fast dogecoin !!! Come and look - YouTube Using A Bootstrap To Sync Wallet

bitcoin.org - Today the site is an independent open source project with contributors from around the world. Final publication authority is held by the co-owners, but all regular activity is organized through the public pull request process and managed by the site co-maintainers. Bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency that enables instant payments to anyone, anywhere in the world. Bitcoin uses peer-to-peer technology to operate with no central authority: transaction management and money issuance are carried out collectively by the network. The original Bitcoin software by Satoshi Nakamoto was released under the MIT license. . Most client software, derived or "from To enable block pruning set prune=N on the command line or in bitcoin.conf, where N is the number of MiB to allot for raw block and undo data. A value of 0 disables pruning. The minimal value above 0 is 550 . The number of Bitcoins generated per block starts at 50 and is halved every 210,000 blocks (about four years). Bitcoin transactions are broadcast to the network by the sender, and all peers trying to solve blocks collect the transaction records and add them to the block they are working to solve. Miners get incentive to include transactions in The transactions are then said to have been confirmed by the Bitcoin network. For example, if Sean sends one bitcoin to John, this transaction will remain “unconfirmed” until the next block is created. Once that block is created and the new transaction is verified and included in that block, the transaction will have one confirmation.

[index] [14990] [18357] [15444] [5314] [14032] [29132] [2800] [15362] [7978] [25654]

How To Quickly Sync A Wallet with Bootstrap (Litecoin/Bitcoin)

Commands to resync and reindex Civitas wallet: "C:\Program Files\Civitas\civitas-qt.exe" -reindex "C:\Program Files\Civitas\civitas-qt.exe" -resync Use code "hL0QlW" and get 3% off every purchase ... If you enjoyed the video, please do subscribe and if it was helpful, please leave a like! It's a short video, but a very informative one! If you enjoyed and liked it, please do send me some ZCoin ... How to start mining Zcoin (XZC) on pool with NVIDIA GPU's Explained in details how to mine Zcoin (XZC) coin on pool with NVIDIA GPU's. Useful Links: Official Website: https://zcoin.io/ Zcoin (XZC ... In this video I will cover how to sync a Zoin wallet using a bootstrap file. This same procedure can be used for almost any coin with an available bootstrap. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue

Flag Counter