Bitcoin vs. Litecoin: What's the Difference?

Bitcoin (BTC)A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.

Bitcoin (BTC)A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.
  • Bitcoin (BTC) is a peer-to-peer cryptocurrency that aims to function as a means of exchange that is independent of any central authority. BTC can be transferred electronically in a secure, verifiable, and immutable way.
  • Launched in 2009, BTC is the first virtual currency to solve the double-spending issue by timestamping transactions before broadcasting them to all of the nodes in the Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin Protocol offered a solution to the Byzantine Generals’ Problem with a blockchain network structure, a notion first created by Stuart Haber and W. Scott Stornetta in 1991.
  • Bitcoin’s whitepaper was published pseudonymously in 2008 by an individual, or a group, with the pseudonym “Satoshi Nakamoto”, whose underlying identity has still not been verified.
  • The Bitcoin protocol uses an SHA-256d-based Proof-of-Work (PoW) algorithm to reach network consensus. Its network has a target block time of 10 minutes and a maximum supply of 21 million tokens, with a decaying token emission rate. To prevent fluctuation of the block time, the network’s block difficulty is re-adjusted through an algorithm based on the past 2016 block times.
  • With a block size limit capped at 1 megabyte, the Bitcoin Protocol has supported both the Lightning Network, a second-layer infrastructure for payment channels, and Segregated Witness, a soft-fork to increase the number of transactions on a block, as solutions to network scalability.

https://preview.redd.it/s2gmpmeze3151.png?width=256&format=png&auto=webp&s=9759910dd3c4a15b83f55b827d1899fb2fdd3de1

1. What is Bitcoin (BTC)?

  • Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer cryptocurrency that aims to function as a means of exchange and is independent of any central authority. Bitcoins are transferred electronically in a secure, verifiable, and immutable way.
  • Network validators, whom are often referred to as miners, participate in the SHA-256d-based Proof-of-Work consensus mechanism to determine the next global state of the blockchain.
  • The Bitcoin protocol has a target block time of 10 minutes, and a maximum supply of 21 million tokens. The only way new bitcoins can be produced is when a block producer generates a new valid block.
  • The protocol has a token emission rate that halves every 210,000 blocks, or approximately every 4 years.
  • Unlike public blockchain infrastructures supporting the development of decentralized applications (Ethereum), the Bitcoin protocol is primarily used only for payments, and has only very limited support for smart contract-like functionalities (Bitcoin “Script” is mostly used to create certain conditions before bitcoins are used to be spent).

2. Bitcoin’s core features

For a more beginner’s introduction to Bitcoin, please visit Binance Academy’s guide to Bitcoin.

Unspent Transaction Output (UTXO) model

A UTXO transaction works like cash payment between two parties: Alice gives money to Bob and receives change (i.e., unspent amount). In comparison, blockchains like Ethereum rely on the account model.
https://preview.redd.it/t1j6anf8f3151.png?width=1601&format=png&auto=webp&s=33bd141d8f2136a6f32739c8cdc7aae2e04cbc47

Nakamoto consensus

In the Bitcoin network, anyone can join the network and become a bookkeeping service provider i.e., a validator. All validators are allowed in the race to become the block producer for the next block, yet only the first to complete a computationally heavy task will win. This feature is called Proof of Work (PoW).
The probability of any single validator to finish the task first is equal to the percentage of the total network computation power, or hash power, the validator has. For instance, a validator with 5% of the total network computation power will have a 5% chance of completing the task first, and therefore becoming the next block producer.
Since anyone can join the race, competition is prone to increase. In the early days, Bitcoin mining was mostly done by personal computer CPUs.
As of today, Bitcoin validators, or miners, have opted for dedicated and more powerful devices such as machines based on Application-Specific Integrated Circuit (“ASIC”).
Proof of Work secures the network as block producers must have spent resources external to the network (i.e., money to pay electricity), and can provide proof to other participants that they did so.
With various miners competing for block rewards, it becomes difficult for one single malicious party to gain network majority (defined as more than 51% of the network’s hash power in the Nakamoto consensus mechanism). The ability to rearrange transactions via 51% attacks indicates another feature of the Nakamoto consensus: the finality of transactions is only probabilistic.
Once a block is produced, it is then propagated by the block producer to all other validators to check on the validity of all transactions in that block. The block producer will receive rewards in the network’s native currency (i.e., bitcoin) as all validators approve the block and update their ledgers.

The blockchain

Block production

The Bitcoin protocol utilizes the Merkle tree data structure in order to organize hashes of numerous individual transactions into each block. This concept is named after Ralph Merkle, who patented it in 1979.
With the use of a Merkle tree, though each block might contain thousands of transactions, it will have the ability to combine all of their hashes and condense them into one, allowing efficient and secure verification of this group of transactions. This single hash called is a Merkle root, which is stored in the Block Header of a block. The Block Header also stores other meta information of a block, such as a hash of the previous Block Header, which enables blocks to be associated in a chain-like structure (hence the name “blockchain”).
An illustration of block production in the Bitcoin Protocol is demonstrated below.

https://preview.redd.it/m6texxicf3151.png?width=1591&format=png&auto=webp&s=f4253304912ed8370948b9c524e08fef28f1c78d

Block time and mining difficulty

Block time is the period required to create the next block in a network. As mentioned above, the node who solves the computationally intensive task will be allowed to produce the next block. Therefore, block time is directly correlated to the amount of time it takes for a node to find a solution to the task. The Bitcoin protocol sets a target block time of 10 minutes, and attempts to achieve this by introducing a variable named mining difficulty.
Mining difficulty refers to how difficult it is for the node to solve the computationally intensive task. If the network sets a high difficulty for the task, while miners have low computational power, which is often referred to as “hashrate”, it would statistically take longer for the nodes to get an answer for the task. If the difficulty is low, but miners have rather strong computational power, statistically, some nodes will be able to solve the task quickly.
Therefore, the 10 minute target block time is achieved by constantly and automatically adjusting the mining difficulty according to how much computational power there is amongst the nodes. The average block time of the network is evaluated after a certain number of blocks, and if it is greater than the expected block time, the difficulty level will decrease; if it is less than the expected block time, the difficulty level will increase.

What are orphan blocks?

In a PoW blockchain network, if the block time is too low, it would increase the likelihood of nodes producingorphan blocks, for which they would receive no reward. Orphan blocks are produced by nodes who solved the task but did not broadcast their results to the whole network the quickest due to network latency.
It takes time for a message to travel through a network, and it is entirely possible for 2 nodes to complete the task and start to broadcast their results to the network at roughly the same time, while one’s messages are received by all other nodes earlier as the node has low latency.
Imagine there is a network latency of 1 minute and a target block time of 2 minutes. A node could solve the task in around 1 minute but his message would take 1 minute to reach the rest of the nodes that are still working on the solution. While his message travels through the network, all the work done by all other nodes during that 1 minute, even if these nodes also complete the task, would go to waste. In this case, 50% of the computational power contributed to the network is wasted.
The percentage of wasted computational power would proportionally decrease if the mining difficulty were higher, as it would statistically take longer for miners to complete the task. In other words, if the mining difficulty, and therefore targeted block time is low, miners with powerful and often centralized mining facilities would get a higher chance of becoming the block producer, while the participation of weaker miners would become in vain. This introduces possible centralization and weakens the overall security of the network.
However, given a limited amount of transactions that can be stored in a block, making the block time too longwould decrease the number of transactions the network can process per second, negatively affecting network scalability.

3. Bitcoin’s additional features

Segregated Witness (SegWit)

Segregated Witness, often abbreviated as SegWit, is a protocol upgrade proposal that went live in August 2017.
SegWit separates witness signatures from transaction-related data. Witness signatures in legacy Bitcoin blocks often take more than 50% of the block size. By removing witness signatures from the transaction block, this protocol upgrade effectively increases the number of transactions that can be stored in a single block, enabling the network to handle more transactions per second. As a result, SegWit increases the scalability of Nakamoto consensus-based blockchain networks like Bitcoin and Litecoin.
SegWit also makes transactions cheaper. Since transaction fees are derived from how much data is being processed by the block producer, the more transactions that can be stored in a 1MB block, the cheaper individual transactions become.
https://preview.redd.it/depya70mf3151.png?width=1601&format=png&auto=webp&s=a6499aa2131fbf347f8ffd812930b2f7d66be48e
The legacy Bitcoin block has a block size limit of 1 megabyte, and any change on the block size would require a network hard-fork. On August 1st 2017, the first hard-fork occurred, leading to the creation of Bitcoin Cash (“BCH”), which introduced an 8 megabyte block size limit.
Conversely, Segregated Witness was a soft-fork: it never changed the transaction block size limit of the network. Instead, it added an extended block with an upper limit of 3 megabytes, which contains solely witness signatures, to the 1 megabyte block that contains only transaction data. This new block type can be processed even by nodes that have not completed the SegWit protocol upgrade.
Furthermore, the separation of witness signatures from transaction data solves the malleability issue with the original Bitcoin protocol. Without Segregated Witness, these signatures could be altered before the block is validated by miners. Indeed, alterations can be done in such a way that if the system does a mathematical check, the signature would still be valid. However, since the values in the signature are changed, the two signatures would create vastly different hash values.
For instance, if a witness signature states “6,” it has a mathematical value of 6, and would create a hash value of 12345. However, if the witness signature were changed to “06”, it would maintain a mathematical value of 6 while creating a (faulty) hash value of 67890.
Since the mathematical values are the same, the altered signature remains a valid signature. This would create a bookkeeping issue, as transactions in Nakamoto consensus-based blockchain networks are documented with these hash values, or transaction IDs. Effectively, one can alter a transaction ID to a new one, and the new ID can still be valid.
This can create many issues, as illustrated in the below example:
  1. Alice sends Bob 1 BTC, and Bob sends Merchant Carol this 1 BTC for some goods.
  2. Bob sends Carols this 1 BTC, while the transaction from Alice to Bob is not yet validated. Carol sees this incoming transaction of 1 BTC to him, and immediately ships goods to B.
  3. At the moment, the transaction from Alice to Bob is still not confirmed by the network, and Bob can change the witness signature, therefore changing this transaction ID from 12345 to 67890.
  4. Now Carol will not receive his 1 BTC, as the network looks for transaction 12345 to ensure that Bob’s wallet balance is valid.
  5. As this particular transaction ID changed from 12345 to 67890, the transaction from Bob to Carol will fail, and Bob will get his goods while still holding his BTC.
With the Segregated Witness upgrade, such instances can not happen again. This is because the witness signatures are moved outside of the transaction block into an extended block, and altering the witness signature won’t affect the transaction ID.
Since the transaction malleability issue is fixed, Segregated Witness also enables the proper functioning of second-layer scalability solutions on the Bitcoin protocol, such as the Lightning Network.

Lightning Network

Lightning Network is a second-layer micropayment solution for scalability.
Specifically, Lightning Network aims to enable near-instant and low-cost payments between merchants and customers that wish to use bitcoins.
Lightning Network was conceptualized in a whitepaper by Joseph Poon and Thaddeus Dryja in 2015. Since then, it has been implemented by multiple companies. The most prominent of them include Blockstream, Lightning Labs, and ACINQ.
A list of curated resources relevant to Lightning Network can be found here.
In the Lightning Network, if a customer wishes to transact with a merchant, both of them need to open a payment channel, which operates off the Bitcoin blockchain (i.e., off-chain vs. on-chain). None of the transaction details from this payment channel are recorded on the blockchain, and only when the channel is closed will the end result of both party’s wallet balances be updated to the blockchain. The blockchain only serves as a settlement layer for Lightning transactions.
Since all transactions done via the payment channel are conducted independently of the Nakamoto consensus, both parties involved in transactions do not need to wait for network confirmation on transactions. Instead, transacting parties would pay transaction fees to Bitcoin miners only when they decide to close the channel.
https://preview.redd.it/cy56icarf3151.png?width=1601&format=png&auto=webp&s=b239a63c6a87ec6cc1b18ce2cbd0355f8831c3a8
One limitation to the Lightning Network is that it requires a person to be online to receive transactions attributing towards him. Another limitation in user experience could be that one needs to lock up some funds every time he wishes to open a payment channel, and is only able to use that fund within the channel.
However, this does not mean he needs to create new channels every time he wishes to transact with a different person on the Lightning Network. If Alice wants to send money to Carol, but they do not have a payment channel open, they can ask Bob, who has payment channels open to both Alice and Carol, to help make that transaction. Alice will be able to send funds to Bob, and Bob to Carol. Hence, the number of “payment hubs” (i.e., Bob in the previous example) correlates with both the convenience and the usability of the Lightning Network for real-world applications.

Schnorr Signature upgrade proposal

Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (“ECDSA”) signatures are used to sign transactions on the Bitcoin blockchain.
https://preview.redd.it/hjeqe4l7g3151.png?width=1601&format=png&auto=webp&s=8014fb08fe62ac4d91645499bc0c7e1c04c5d7c4
However, many developers now advocate for replacing ECDSA with Schnorr Signature. Once Schnorr Signatures are implemented, multiple parties can collaborate in producing a signature that is valid for the sum of their public keys.
This would primarily be beneficial for network scalability. When multiple addresses were to conduct transactions to a single address, each transaction would require their own signature. With Schnorr Signature, all these signatures would be combined into one. As a result, the network would be able to store more transactions in a single block.
https://preview.redd.it/axg3wayag3151.png?width=1601&format=png&auto=webp&s=93d958fa6b0e623caa82ca71fe457b4daa88c71e
The reduced size in signatures implies a reduced cost on transaction fees. The group of senders can split the transaction fees for that one group signature, instead of paying for one personal signature individually.
Schnorr Signature also improves network privacy and token fungibility. A third-party observer will not be able to detect if a user is sending a multi-signature transaction, since the signature will be in the same format as a single-signature transaction.

4. Economics and supply distribution

The Bitcoin protocol utilizes the Nakamoto consensus, and nodes validate blocks via Proof-of-Work mining. The bitcoin token was not pre-mined, and has a maximum supply of 21 million. The initial reward for a block was 50 BTC per block. Block mining rewards halve every 210,000 blocks. Since the average time for block production on the blockchain is 10 minutes, it implies that the block reward halving events will approximately take place every 4 years.
As of May 12th 2020, the block mining rewards are 6.25 BTC per block. Transaction fees also represent a minor revenue stream for miners.
submitted by D-platform to u/D-platform [link] [comments]

Something is rotten in the state of DOGE mining

Shibes, something stinks in doge land. A problem in the design of dogecoin means that dishonest (or perhaps we should call them "creative") miners can take a disproportionate share of rewards, leaving everyone else to earn less than they deserve. Many of you have probably noticed that calculators estimate payouts larger than what you earn in practice (for example, dustcoin estimates ~1500DOGE/day @ 200KH/s while Non Stop Mine pays about a quarter of that rate), and most have written it off as bad luck: the blocks your pool found happened to be small, or your pool happened to be unlucky, and such is life. At least another friendly Shibe is having a better day, and it'll come around in tips anyway! Unfortunately, the truth is much darker.
The "random" DOGE rewards per block are not random. In fact, the value of each block is predetermined by a simple equation applied to the hash of the previous block. A creative miner can take advantage of this fact to mine dogecoin when the potential reward is high, and switch to litecoin when the potential reward is low. During some rounds, the reward is so small it isn't worth the electricity spent finding it; during more rounds, the reward is less than can be earned mining LTC; in a few rounds, the reward is spectacular. Honest miners mine with the expectation of earning an average of 500,000 DOGE per block, but when people are selectively mining the high-profit DOGE rounds, the average reward falls for honest miners.
So the question is: is this problem theoretical, or are honest miners really losing value to cheaters? I spent some time digging, and it appears that cheating is rampant! There are a few ways cheating can be detected.
If there is outside competition for high-value blocks, then pools should on average be finding blocks worth less than 500,000 DOGE (because some of the valuable blocks, but none of the low-value blocks, will be found by cheaters). The largest pool, Dogehouse, reports some useful averages: over all time, the pool has found 11,241 valid blocks worth 5365077071.0746 DOGE, for an average of 477,277 DOGE (including fees, which should actually raise the average above 500,000!). That's 4.5% below the expected average block value. Is it simply bad luck? No. With so many blocks found, there's about a 7% chance that the average will be above 505,000 or below 495,000; there's a <<1% chance their average will be above 510,000 or below 490,000, and effectively NO chance of seeing an average below 485,000. 477,000 is simply preposterous. Dogepool is either mind-bogglingly unlucky, or something is fishy.
Maybe Dogehouse is doing something fishy...but we can look at other pools. Dogechain's pool's all-time average block value is similar: 478847 DOGE. They're a smaller pool so the odds of this being bad luck aren't astronomical, but it's not very likely. Fast-pool's average is 477892. They're big enough that the odds are again astronomical.
And this only accounts for people cheating outside of the pools. Cheaters can operate inside our pools (more on this later)!
Maybe there's something wrong with the pools. They mostly run similar software. All their owners could be lying to us. We can check for signs of cheating independent of the pools: if more people are mining high-value blocks than low-value blocks, the hash-rate will be higher when the next block is high-value, so high-value blocks will be found faster than low-value blocks. Here's what you find if you look at 5000 recent blocks (blocks 80,001 to 85,000) and measure the average time to find a block, broken out by the block value:
I had to drop about 50 blocks which were missing good timestamps, but they're evenly distributed and shouldn't skew the averages.
The pattern is clear: the network is finding high-value blocks significantly faster than low-value blocks. Low-value rounds take as much as 10% longer than intended, and high-value rounds take around 5% less time than intended. Significant hashrate belongs to miners that cheat.
I mentioned cheaters can operate inside our pools. The payment algorithms used by most pools were carefully designed for bitcoin's (effectively) fixed block reward. They reliably protect against cheaters trying to hop in and out of pools based on short-term profitability, by making payouts solely dependent on the unknowable future (the straightforward pool payment schemes allow cheaters to look at a pool's recent history and use that to take an unfair share of its earnings; read this awesome paper for details). Since the future reward for a bitcoin pool is completely unknowable, PPLNS does not protect against a hopper who knows the future. In the case of Dogecoin, the future reward IS knowable, and PPLNS offers no protection.
Dogehouse is so big we can reasonably assume they'll find any particular block. Dogehouse is using a PPLNS target similar to an ordinary round's length. Someone who mines only during high-value rounds will, with high confidence, earn significantly more DOGE per share submitted than someone who mines Dogecoin 24/7. They also experience much lower variance in earnings.
The random block reward size needs to be removed. It's fun, but it rewards cheaters. Developing a more secure random block value selection technique is possible, but based on observations of GitHub, I do not trust the Dogecoin creator to get it right. Even subtle errors re-open the opportunity for cheating.
While I believe cheating is already unacceptably common, many will disagree until it worsens. To force the issue, I've included everything you need to join the cheaters.
Patch dogecoin/src/main.cpp:
diff --git a/src/main.cpp b/src/main.cpp index 2af23af..8c32dad 100644 --- a/src/main.cpp +++ b/src/main.cpp @@ -1794,6 +1794,8 @@ bool CBlock::ConnectBlock(CValidationState &state, CBlockIndex* pindex, CCoinsVi prevHash = pindex->pprev->GetBlockHash(); } +fprintf(stdout, "Next block value: %lld\n", GetBlockValue(pindex->nHeight, 0, GetHash())); +fflush(stdout); if (vtx[0].GetValueOut() > GetBlockValue(pindex->nHeight, nFees, prevHash)) return state.DoS(100, error("ConnectBlock() : coinbase pays too much (actual=%"PRI64d" vs limit=%"PRI64d")", vtx[0].GetValueOut(), GetBlockValue(pindex->nHeight, nFees, prevHash))); 
Perl script to control cgminer:
#!/usbin/perl use strict; use warnings; my $ltcMiner = "192.168.1.1 4029"; my $dogeMiner = "192.168.1.1 4028"; open (INSTREAM, "dogecoind|") or die; my $lastPool = 0; # LTC while (my $line = ) { if ($line =~ /Next block value: ([\d].*)/) { my $val = $1; if ($val >= 70000000000000) { # High-value DOGE round if ($lastPool == 0) { # Switch from LTC to DOGE $lastPool = 1; &onoff($dogeMiner, "en"); &onoff($ltcMiner, "dis"); } else { # Already mining DOGE } } elsif ($lastPool == 1) { # Low-value DOGE round and currently mining DOGE $lastPool = 0; print " Switching to LTC\n"; &onoff($ltcMiner, "en"); &onoff($dogeMiner, "dis"); } else { # Low-value DOGE round; already mining LTC anyway } } } close (INSTREAM); exit; sub onoff { my $miner = shift; my $enDis = shift; open (OUT1, "|nc $miner") or die $!; print OUT1 "gpu${enDis}able|0"; close (OUT1); } 
Then, simply run two instances of cgminer with separate API ports, one configured for LTC and the other configured for DOGE.
submitted by DisappointedShibe to dogemining [link] [comments]

A look into the future regarding Decentralization,ASIC resistance and Vertcoin and other crypto currency (Long Post)

Warning: this post is lengthy because it includes details to understand the current development of Crypto and ASIC resistant Cryptos.
I. Decentralization is the fundamental assumption in the block chain security model:
I am glad that the recent Vertcoin price hike have brought more people to the awareness of crypto-currency decentralization. As decentralization is an assumption in satoshi's white paper, and hence the fundamental aspect in block-chain's security model. It appears that the block-chain security model is not complete. As you can see, there is an obvious concentration of computing power appears in bitcoin where one or two ASICs manufactures are controlling more than 51% of the network hash power. In satoshi's white paper, the assumption of 1 CPU,1 vote, does not hold indefinitely. Just 5-6 years after the inception of blockchain, we appear to have such machine based on ASIC, and the phenomenon of 1 ASIC, 1*103 or more votes, and the magnitude is only seem to be increasing.
Centralization defeats the entire security model of any crypto-currency based on block-chain and its variant. As of the time of the writing the bitcoin network and its public ledger's survival is not based on its invulnerability to rewrite, but based on the fact that the ASIC computing powers that secure the network currently lacks incentive to destroy it. When such incentive arrives the result can be catastrophic. As whoever controls the 51% hash power control the power to modify the block chain. In the Segwit 1 fork, there is worry that the bitcoin chain can not survive. (reference this article for a variety of possibility during a fork where miner controls the majority of hash power: https://medium.com/@jimmysong/uasf-bip148-scenarios-and-game-theory-9530336d953e ). In segwit 2X fork, some miners wants to make their own copy of of the chain, and in the process destroy the original chain. This upcoming fork is much more threatening than every single bitcoin fork comes before it.
II. CPU/GPU vs FPGA vs ASIC - you must understand the differences to understand the ASIC resistance movement
The decentralization problem is not fully solved yet. the crypto community and its developers are left to fill in the question.
As you can see the current approach is to make hashing algorithm to be hard to realize in ASICs. To fully discuss this approach, we must look at the currently available computing hardware architectures. the list go like this:
(CPU and GPU)->FPGA->ASICs.
The list go from the most general purpose,flexible computing hardware to the least flexible, and specific task computing hardware.
The list also go from the worst raw performance(you can say hash power for crypto) to the best raw performance, given a specific task.
CPU, and to a extend GPU are general purposed hardware that can be programmed to perform all tasks, while ASIC(Application Specific Integrated Circuits) can only perform a specific task. FPGA(Field Programmable Gate Arrays) - sits somewhere in the middle, it can be reprogram to perform a specific task better than CPUs and GPUs but the performance and durability is worse than ASIC.
In therms of computing speed,optimization and hence raw performance on a specific task, the list goes in reverse, this is because hashing algorithms and its calculation can be optimize thru parallelism(I have 10 workers to do 1 task 10 times quicker) and pipe-lining (think factory production pipeline with sequential work stations). CPU and General-Purpose GPUs in our computers exploit parallalism and pipe-lining to a degree, But because they are general hardware, the exploitation is limited because they must accommodate all types of possible computation. ASICs, are develop to only accommodate the required computation in a task, and exploit parallelism and pipe-lining to the extreme, this gives rise to ASICs such as AntMiners, where the performance is more than 3 magnitudes better than CPU and GPU.
III. ASIC resistance, and the movement to keep the crypto decentralize
The ultimate goal of alt-coin development is to fill in the void of satoshi's block-chain security model. The void is , How to keep the network decentralized in terms of hashrate/s?
The obvious answer, the first approach, would be to let the most abundant hardware to perform as well as the least abundant hardware. Thus, make an hashing algorithm so that either a CPU can perform as well as ASICs, or make an algorithm so that it is very very hard(cost prohibited) to develop ASICs for.
It appears that this approach is the most successful at the moment, some memory hard algorithms such as Vertcoin's very own Lyra2REv2 has no ASICs currently available.
But on the longer time frame, the profit driven development of ASICs is a definite trend, ASIC resistance is a constant Spear vs Shield game. Being ASIC resistance is not necessarily equivalent to being decentralized.
There are several ramification of being ASIC resistant. First the algorithm is necessarily more complex and cost more electricity on CPU/GPU to perform. Secondly, Developing ASIC for algorithm such as Lyra2REv2 is hard. Because of this hardness, there are fewer people who can develop this than the amount of people who can develop SHA256*bitcoin ASICs. Maybe in the not too distance future bitmain's monopoly over SHA256 ASICs would end and more of us can purchase a bitcoin ASIC, thus the bitcoin network becomes decentralized again. But because it is harder to develop Lyra2REv2 ASICs, once developed the ASIC monopoly can remain for a very long time enough to destroy the network. Because fewer people can do it, it will be more centralized once developed.
This does not mean that Vertcoin's security model is not good. In fact it is very promising. First the hardness to develop Lyra2REv2 ASIC can be to the point of such extrem that no one is able to figure out over an very long period of time. Second, once developed, the devs promise to hard fork the network again with a new algorithm in their tool bag. because the tool bag is unknown, the ASIC development cycle repeats, possibility over a long time.
So the Vertcoin's hashing algo Lyra2REv2 is among the best of all crypto. combining with the fact that a promised evolution of hashing algo once ASIC appear, I dare to say that the security/decentralization model is the best in crypto.
IV. Further discussion regarding ASICs and Network decentralization and security. paradigm switch regarding ASICs
It is in the profit driven nature that an ASIC would apear,Bitcoin already fell, for a memory hard algo, Scrypt and Scrypt-N is thought to be resistant enough, but ASIC appear, thus LiteCoin and The old Vertcoin falls. Vertcoin later forked and adapt to Lyra2 , and sub sequently Lyra2REv2 and remain the most secure coin.
For the ones used by GroestleCoin(Groestl), Decred(Blake256), SteinCoin(Stein256) , although there is no ASICs, but over an infinite horizon, the ASIC will appear this coins can all flop over night, if they do not adapt to the changes , Like what Vertcoin can do.
I think in the infinitely long term, there are 2 solution.
1st the same as Vertcoin, Keep ASICs out, and keep evolving the unknown puzzle bag for replacement if ASICs appear.
2nd, Amend the algorithm so that the theoretical upper bound in the speed up from ASIC is low. This requires making most calculations sequential and none-associative, with a slow bottle neck. thus parallal and pipe-lining machine can not take too much advantage. After that make ASIC development an open source, community movement, so that the entire community is guarantee to enjoy the advancement in ASICs. This would guarantee that the advantage from a new novel asic is small compare to what the community have, and limit the degree of concentration of hash power. ASIC can also benefit the network by reducing power consumption and increase transaction speed.
V. Conclusion
The current security model of Bitcoin is flawed and Vertcoin's solution is the current best at tackling the security concern. The promise of evolution of Vertcoin's Lyra2REv2 can be a viable long term solution to the Spear vs Shield game of ASICs. Nonetheless, I think we are making good progress of filling the void. I hope the future decentralization solution of Vertcoin can evolve past the paradigm of strictly ASIC resistance, and considering community driven and fair distribution of ASICs. I hope everyone in crypto can participate in this discussion.
Disclosure: I hold Vertcoin, 100% of my porfolio :).
submitted by bntyjx to vertcoin [link] [comments]

Flux: Revisiting Near Blocks for Proof-of-Work Blockchains

Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2018/415
Date: 2018-05-29
Author(s): Alexei Zamyatin∗, Nicholas Stifter, Philipp Schindler, Edgar Weippl, William J. Knottenbelt∗

Link to Paper


Abstract
The term near or weak blocks describes Bitcoin blocks whose PoW does not meet the required target difficulty to be considered valid under the regular consensus rules of the protocol. Near blocks are generally associated with protocol improvement proposals striving towards shorter transaction confirmation times. Existing proposals assume miners will act rationally based solely on intrinsic incentives arising from the adoption of these changes, such as earlier detection of blockchain forks.
In this paper we present Flux, a protocol extension for proof-of-work blockchains that leverages on near blocks, a new block reward distribution mechanism, and an improved branch selection policy to incentivize honest participation of miners. Our protocol reduces mining variance, improves the responsiveness of the underlying blockchain in terms of transaction processing, and can be deployed without conflicting modifications to the underlying base protocol as a velvet fork. We perform an initial analysis of selfish mining which suggests Flux not only provides security guarantees similar to pure Nakamoto consensus, but potentially renders selfish mining strategies less profitable.

References
[1] Bitcoin Cash. https://www.bitcoincash.org/. Accessed: 2017-01-24.
[2] P2pool. http://p2pool.org/. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[3] G. Andersen. Comment in ”faster blocks vs bigger blocks”. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=673415.msg7658481#msg7658481, 2014. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[4] G. Andersen. [bitcoin-dev] weak block thoughts... https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-Septembe011157.html, 2015. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[5] E. Androulaki, S. Capkun, and G. O. Karame. Two bitcoins at the price of one? double-spending attacks on fast payments in bitcoin. In CCS, 2012.
[6] J. Becker, D. Breuker, T. Heide, J. Holler, H. P. Rauer, and R. Bohme. ¨ Can we afford integrity by proof-of-work? scenarios inspired by the bitcoin currency. In WEIS. Springer, 2012.
[7] I. Bentov, R. Pass, and E. Shi. Snow white: Provably secure proofs of stake. https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/919.pdf, 2016. Accessed: 2016-11-08.
[8] Bitcoin community. OP RETURN. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP\RETURN. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[9] Bitcoin Wiki. Merged mining specification. [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Merged\](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Merged)) mining\ specification. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[10] Blockchain.info. Hashrate Distribution in Bitcoin. https://blockchain.info/de/pools. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[11] Blockchain.info. Unconfirmed bitcoin transactions. https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[12] J. Bonneau, A. Miller, J. Clark, A. Narayanan, J. A. Kroll, and E. W. Felten. Sok: Research perspectives and challenges for bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2015.
[13] V. Buterin. Ethereum: A next-generation smart contract and decentralized application platform. https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper, 2014. Accessed: 2016-08-22.
[14] C. Decker and R. Wattenhofer. Information propagation in the bitcoin network. In Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P), 2013 IEEE Thirteenth International Conference on, pages 1–10. IEEE, 2013.
[15] J. R. Douceur. The sybil attack. In International Workshop on Peer-toPeer Systems, pages 251–260. Springer, 2002.
[16] I. Eyal, A. E. Gencer, E. G. Sirer, and R. Renesse. Bitcoin-ng: A scalable blockchain protocol. In 13th USENIX Security Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’16). USENIX Association, Mar 2016.
[17] I. Eyal and E. G. Sirer. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 436–454. Springer, 2014.
[18] J. Garay, A. Kiayias, and N. Leonardos. The bitcoin backbone protocol: Analysis and applications. In Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2015, pages 281–310. Springer, 2015.
[19] A. E. Gencer, S. Basu, I. Eyal, R. Renesse, and E. G. Sirer. Decentralization in bitcoin and ethereum networks. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (FC). Springer, 2018.
[20] A. Gervais, G. Karame, S. Capkun, and V. Capkun. Is bitcoin a decentralized currency? volume 12, pages 54–60, 2014.
[21] A. Gervais, G. O. Karame, K. Wust, V. Glykantzis, H. Ritzdorf, ¨ and S. Capkun. On the security and performance of proof of work blockchains. https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/555.pdf, 2016. Accessed: 2016-08-10.
[22] M. Jakobsson and A. Juels. Proofs of work and bread pudding protocols. In Secure Information Networks, pages 258–272. Springer, 1999.
[23] A. Judmayer, A. Zamyatin, N. Stifter, A. G. Voyiatzis, and E. Weippl. Merged mining: Curse or cure? In CBT’17: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain Technology, Sep 2017.
[24] G. O. Karame, E. Androulaki, M. Roeschlin, A. Gervais, and S. Capkun. ˇ Misbehavior in bitcoin: A study of double-spending and accountability. volume 18, page 2. ACM, 2015.
[25] A. Kiayias, A. Miller, and D. Zindros. Non-interactive proofs of proof-of-work. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2017/963, 2017. Accessed:2017-10-03.
[26] A. Kiayias, A. Russell, B. David, and R. Oliynykov. Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In Annual International Cryptology Conference, pages 357–388. Springer, 2017.
[27] Y. Lewenberg, Y. Sompolinsky, and A. Zohar. Inclusive block chain protocols. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 528–547. Springer, 2015.
[28] Litecoin community. Litecoin reference implementation. https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin. Accessed: 2018-05-03.
[29] G. Maxwell. Comment in ”[bitcoin-dev] weak block thoughts...”. https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-Septembe011198.html, 2016. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[30] S. Micali. Algorand: The efficient and democratic ledger. http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01341, 2016. Accessed: 2017-02-09.
[31] S. Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf, Dec 2008. Accessed: 2015-07-01.
[32] Namecoin community. Namecoin reference implementation. https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[33] Narayanan, Arvind and Bonneau, Joseph and Felten, Edward and Miller, Andrew and Goldfeder, Steven. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency technologies. https://d28rh4a8wq0iu5.cloudfront.net/bitcointech/readings/princeton bitcoin book.pdf?a=1, 2016. Accessed: 2016-03-29.
[34] K. Nayak, S. Kumar, A. Miller, and E. Shi. Stubborn mining: Generalizing selfish mining and combining with an eclipse attack. In 1st IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2016. IEEE, 2016.
[35] K. J. O’Dwyer and D. Malone. Bitcoin mining and its energy footprint. 2014.
[36] R. Pass and E. Shi. Fruitchains: A fair blockchain. http://eprint.iacr.org/2016/916.pdf, 2016. Accessed: 2016-11-08.
[37] C. Perez-Sol ´ a, S. Delgado-Segura, G. Navarro-Arribas, and J. Herrera- ` Joancomart´ı. Double-spending prevention for bitcoin zero-confirmation transactions. http://eprint.iacr.org/2017/394, 2017. Accessed: 2017-06-
[38] Pseudonymous(”TierNolan”). Decoupling transactions and pow. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=179598.0, 2013. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[39] P. R. Rizun. Subchains: A technique to scale bitcoin and improve the user experience. Ledger, 1:38–52, 2016.
[40] K. Rosenbaum. Weak blocks - the good and the bad. http://popeller.io/ index.php/2016/01/19/weak-blocks-the-good-and-the-bad/, 2016. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[41] K. Rosenbaum and R. Russell. Iblt and weak block propagation performance. Scaling Bitcoin Hong Kong (6 December 2015), 2015.
[42] M. Rosenfeld. Analysis of hashrate-based double spending. http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.2009, 2014. Accessed: 2016-03-09.
[43] R. Russel. Weak block simulator for bitcoin. https://github.com/rustyrussell/weak-blocks, 2014. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[44] A. Sapirshtein, Y. Sompolinsky, and A. Zohar. Optimal selfish mining strategies in bitcoin. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1507.06183.pdf, 2015. Accessed: 2016-08-22.
[45] E. B. Sasson, A. Chiesa, C. Garman, M. Green, I. Miers, E. Tromer, and M. Virza. Zerocash: Decentralized anonymous payments from bitcoin. In Security and Privacy (SP), 2014 IEEE Symposium on, pages 459–474. IEEE, 2014.
[46] Satoshi Nakamoto. Comment in ”bitdns and generalizing bitcoin” bitcointalk thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28696#msg28696. Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[47] Y. Sompolinsky, Y. Lewenberg, and A. Zohar. Spectre: A fast and scalable cryptocurrency protocol. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2016/1159, 2016. Accessed: 2017-02-20.
[48] Y. Sompolinsky and A. Zohar. Secure high-rate transaction processing in bitcoin. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 507–527. Springer, 2015.
[49] Suhas Daftuar. Bitcoin merge commit: ”mining: Select transactions using feerate-with-ancestors”. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7600. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[50] M. B. Taylor. Bitcoin and the age of bespoke silicon. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Compilers, Architectures and Synthesis for Embedded Systems, page 16. IEEE Press, 2013.
[51] F. Tschorsch and B. Scheuermann. Bitcoin and beyond: A technical survey on decentralized digital currencies. In IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials, volume PP, pages 1–1, 2016.
[52] P. J. Van Laarhoven and E. H. Aarts. Simulated annealing. In Simulated annealing: Theory and applications, pages 7–15. Springer, 1987.
[53] A. Zamyatin, N. Stifter, A. Judmayer, P. Schindler, E. Weippl, and W. J. Knottebelt. (Short Paper) A Wild Velvet Fork Appears! Inclusive Blockchain Protocol Changes in Practice. In 5th Workshop on Bitcoin and Blockchain Research, Financial Cryptography and Data Security 18 (FC). Springer, 2018.
[54] F. Zhang, I. Eyal, R. Escriva, A. Juels, and R. Renesse. Rem: Resourceefficient mining for blockchains. http://eprint.iacr.org/2017/179, 2017. Accessed: 2017-03-24.
submitted by dj-gutz to myrXiv [link] [comments]

Merged Mining: Analysis of Effects and Implications

Date: 2017-08-24
Author(s): Alexei Zamyatin, Edgar Weippl

Link to Paper


Abstract
Merged mining refers to the concept of mining more than one cryptocurrency without necessitating additional proof-of-work effort. Merged mining was introduced in 2011 as a boostrapping mechanism for new cryptocurrencies and countermeasures against the fragmentation of mining power across competing systems. Although merged mining has already been adopted by a number of cryptocurrencies, to this date little is known about the effects and implications.
In this thesis, we shed light on this topic area by performing a comprehensive analysis of merged mining in practice. As part of this analysis, we present a block attribution scheme for mining pools to assist in the evaluation of mining centralization. Our findings disclose that mining pools in merge-mined cryptocurrencies have operated at the edge of, and even beyond, the security guarantees offered by the underlying Nakamoto consensus for extended periods. We discuss the implications and security considerations for these cryptocurrencies and the mining ecosystem as a whole, and link our findings to the intended effects of merged mining.

Bibliography
[1] Coinmarketcap. http://coinmarketcap.com/. Accessed 2017-09-28.
[2] P2pool. http://p2pool.org/. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[3] M. Ali, J. Nelson, R. Shea, and M. J. Freedman. Blockstack: Design and implementation of a global naming system with blockchains. http://www.the-blockchain.com/docs/BlockstackDesignandImplementationofaGlobalNamingSystem.pdf, 2016. Accessed: 2016-03-29.
[4] G. Andersen. Comment in "faster blocks vs bigger blocks". https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=673415.msg7658481#msg7658481, 2014. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[5] G. Andersen. [bitcoin-dev] weak block thoughts... https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-Septembe011157.html, 2015. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[6] L. Anderson, R. Holz, A. Ponomarev, P. Rimba, and I. Weber. New kids on the block: an analysis of modern blockchains. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.06530.pdf, 2016. Accessed: 2016-07-04.
[7] E. Androulaki, S. Capkun, and G. O. Karame. Two bitcoins at the price of one? double-spending attacks on fast payments in bitcoin. In CCS, 2012.
[8] A. Back, M. Corallo, L. Dashjr, M. Friedenbach, G. Maxwell, A. Miller, A. Poelstra, J. Timón, and P. Wuille. Enabling blockchain innovations with pegged sidechains. http://newspaper23.com/ripped/2014/11/http-_____-___-_www___-blockstream___-com__-_sidechains.pdf, 2014. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[9] A. Back et al. Hashcash - a denial of service counter-measure. http://www.hashcash.org/papers/hashcash.pdf, 2002. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[10] S. Barber, X. Boyen, E. Shi, and E. Uzun. Bitter to better - how to make bitcoin a better currency. In Financial cryptography and data security, pages 399–414. Springer, 2012.
[11] J. Becker, D. Breuker, T. Heide, J. Holler, H. P. Rauer, and R. Böhme. Can we afford integrity by proof-of-work? scenarios inspired by the bitcoin currency. In WEIS. Springer, 2012.
[12] I. Bentov, R. Pass, and E. Shi. Snow white: Provably secure proofs of stake. https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/919.pdf, 2016. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[13] Bitcoin Community. Bitcoin developer guide- transaction data. https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#term-merkle-tree. Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[14] Bitcoin Community. Bitcoin protocol documentation - merkle trees. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_documentation#Merkle_Trees. Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[15] Bitcoin community. Bitcoin protocol rules. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_rules. Accessed: 2017-08-22.
[16] V. Buterin. Chain interoperability. Technical report, Tech. rep. 1. R3CEV, 2016.
[17] W. Dai. bmoney. http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt, 1998. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[18] C. Decker and R. Wattenhofer. Information propagation in the bitcoin network. In Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P), 2013 IEEE Thirteenth International Conference on, pages 1–10. IEEE, 2013.
[19] C. Decker and R. Wattenhofer. Bitcoin transaction malleability and mtgox. In Computer Security-ESORICS 2014, pages 313–326. Springer, 2014.
[20] Dogecoin community. Dogecoin reference implementation. https://github.com/dogecoin/
[27] A. Gervais, G. Karame, S. Capkun, and V. Capkun. Is bitcoin a decentralized currency? volume 12, pages 54–60, 2014.
[28] A. Gervais, G. O. Karame, K. Wüst, V. Glykantzis, H. Ritzdorf, and S. Capkun. On the security and performance of proof of work blockchains. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 3–16. ACM, 2016.
[29] I. Giechaskiel, C. Cremers, and K. B. Rasmussen. On bitcoin security in the presence of broken cryptographic primitives. In European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS), September 2016.
[30] J. Göbel, H. P. Keeler, A. E. Krzesinski, and P. G. Taylor. Bitcoin blockchain dynamics: The selfish-mine strategy in the presence of propagation delay. Performance Evaluation, 104:23–41, 2016.
[31] E. Heilman, A. Kendler, A. Zohar, and S. Goldberg. Eclipse attacks on bitcoin’s peer-to-peer network. In 24th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 15), pages 129–144, 2015.
[32] Huntercoin developers. Huntercoin reference implementation. https://github.com/chronokings/huntercoin. Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[33] B. Jakobsson and A. Juels. Proofs of work and bread pudding protocols, Apr. 8 2008. US Patent 7,356,696; Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[34] M. Jakobsson and A. Juels. Proofs of work and bread pudding protocols. In Secure Information Networks, pages 258–272. Springer, 1999.
[35] A. Judmayer, N. Stifter, K. Krombholz, and E. Weippl. Blocks and chains: Introduction to bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, and their consensus mechanisms. Synthesis Lectures on Information Security, Privacy, & Trust, 9(1):1–123, 2017.
[36] A. Juels and J. G. Brainard. Client puzzles: A cryptographic countermeasure against connection depletion attacks. In NDSS, volume 99, pages 151–165, 1999.
[37] A. Juels and B. S. Kaliski Jr. Pors: Proofs of retrievability for large files. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 584–597. Acm, 2007.
[38] H. Kalodner, M. Carlsten, P. Ellenbogen, J. Bonneau, and A. Narayanan. An empirical study of namecoin and lessons for decentralized namespace design. In WEIS, 2015.
[39] G. O. Karame, E. Androulaki, and S. Capkun. Double-spending fast payments in bitcoin. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 906–917. ACM, 2012.
[40] G. O. Karame, E. Androulaki, M. Roeschlin, A. Gervais, and S. Čapkun. Misbehavior in bitcoin: A study of double-spending and accountability. volume 18, page 2. ACM, 2015.
[41] A. Kiayias, A. Russell, B. David, and R. Oliynykov. Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In Annual International Cryptology Conference, pages 357–388. Springer, 2017.
[42] S. King. Primecoin: Cryptocurrency with prime number proof-of-work. July 7th, 2013.
[43] T. Kluyver, B. Ragan-Kelley, F. Pérez, B. E. Granger, M. Bussonnier, J. Frederic, K. Kelley, J. B. Hamrick, J. Grout, S. Corlay, et al. Jupyter notebooks-a publishing format for reproducible computational workflows. In ELPUB, pages 87–90, 2016.
[44] Lerner, Sergio D. Rootstock plattform. http://www.the-blockchain.com/docs/Rootstock-WhitePaper-Overview.pdf. Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[45] Y. Lewenberg, Y. Bachrach, Y. Sompolinsky, A. Zohar, and J. S. Rosenschein. Bitcoin mining pools: A cooperative game theoretic analysis. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pages 919–927. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2015.
[46] Litecoin community. Litecoin reference implementation. https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[47] I. Maven. Apache maven project, 2011.
[48] G. Maxwell. Comment in "[bitcoin-dev] weak block thoughts...". https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-Septembe011198.html, 2016. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[49] S. Meiklejohn, M. Pomarole, G. Jordan, K. Levchenko, D. McCoy, G. M. Voelker, and S. Savage. A fistful of bitcoins: characterizing payments among men with no names. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Internet measurement conference, pages 127–140. ACM, 2013.
[50] S. Micali. Algorand: The efficient and democratic ledger. http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01341, 2016. Accessed: 2017-02-09.
[51] A. Miller, A. Juels, E. Shi, B. Parno, and J. Katz. Permacoin: Repurposing bitcoin work for data preservation. In Security and Privacy (SP), 2014 IEEE Symposium on, pages 475–490. IEEE, 2014.
[52] A. Miller, A. Kosba, J. Katz, and E. Shi. Nonoutsourceable scratch-off puzzles to discourage bitcoin mining coalitions. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 680–691. ACM, 2015.
[53] B. Momjian. PostgreSQL: introduction and concepts, volume 192. Addison-Wesley New York, 2001.
[54] Myriad core developers. Myriadcoin reference implementation. https://github.com/myriadcoin/myriadcoin. Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[55] S. Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf, Dec 2008. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[56] S. Nakamoto. Merged mining specification. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Merged_mining_specification, Apr 2011. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[57] Namecoin Community. Merged mining. https://github.com/namecoin/wiki/blob/masteMerged-Mining.mediawiki#Goal_of_this_namecoin_change. Accessed: 2017-08-20.
[58] Namecoin community. Namecoin reference implementation. https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[59] A. Narayanan, J. Bonneau, E. Felten, A. Miller, and S. Goldfeder. Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies: A Comprehensive Introduction. Princeton University Press, 2016.
[60] K. Nayak, S. Kumar, A. Miller, and E. Shi. Stubborn mining: Generalizing selfish mining and combining with an eclipse attack. In 1st IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2016. IEEE, 2016.
[61] K. J. O’Dwyer and D. Malone. Bitcoin mining and its energy footprint. 2014.
[62] R. Pass, L. Seeman, and A. Shelat. Analysis of the blockchain protocol in asynchronous networks. In Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, pages 643–673. Springer, 2017.
[63] D. Pointcheval and J. Stern. Security arguments for digital signatures and blind signatures. Journal of cryptology, 13(3):361–396, 2000.
[64] Pseudonymous("TierNolan"). Decoupling transactions and pow. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=179598.0, 2013. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[65] P. R. Rizun. Subchains: A technique to scale bitcoin and improve the user experience. Ledger, 1:38–52, 2016.
[66] K. Rosenbaum. Weak blocks - the good and the bad. http://popeller.io/index.php/2016/01/19/weak-blocks-the-good-and-the-bad/, 2016. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[67] K. Rosenbaum and R. Russell. Iblt and weak block propagation performance. Scaling Bitcoin Hong Kong (6 December 2015), 2015.
[68] M. Rosenfeld. Analysis of bitcoin pooled mining reward systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1112.4980, 2011.
[69] M. Rosenfeld. Analysis of hashrate-based double spending. http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.2009, 2014. Accessed: 2016-03-09.
[70] R. Russel. Weak block simulator for bitcoin. https://github.com/rustyrussell/weak-blocks, 2014. Accessed: 2017-05-10.
[71] A. Sapirshtein, Y. Sompolinsky, and A. Zohar. Optimal selfish mining strategies in bitcoin. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 515–532. Springer, 2016.
[72] Sathoshi Nakamoto. Comment in "bitdns and generalizing bitcoin" bitcointalk thread. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28696#msg28696. Accessed: 2017-06-05.
[73] O. Schrijvers, J. Bonneau, D. Boneh, and T. Roughgarden. Incentive compatibility of bitcoin mining pool reward functions. In FC ’16: Proceedings of the the 20th International Conference on Financial Cryptography, February 2016.
[74] B. Sengupta, S. Bag, S. Ruj, and K. Sakurai. Retricoin: Bitcoin based on compact proofs of retrievability. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking, page 14. ACM, 2016.
[75] N. Szabo. Bit gold. http://unenumerated.blogspot.co.at/2005/12/bit-gold.html, 2005. Accessed: 2017-09-28.
[76] M. B. Taylor. Bitcoin and the age of bespoke silicon. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Compilers, Architectures and Synthesis for Embedded Systems, page 16. IEEE Press, 2013.
[77] Unitus developers. Unitus reference implementation. https://github.com/unitusdev/unitus. Accessed: 2017-08-22.
[78] M. Vukolić. The quest for scalable blockchain fabric: Proof-of-work vs. bft replication. In International Workshop on Open Problems in Network Security, pages 112–125. Springer, 2015.
[79] P. Webb, D. Syer, J. Long, S. Nicoll, R. Winch, A. Wilkinson, M. Overdijk, C. Dupuis, and S. Deleuze. Spring boot reference guide. Technical report, 2013-2016.
[80] A. Zamyatin. Name-squatting in namecoin. (unpublished BSc thesis, Vienna University of Technology), 2015.
submitted by dj-gutz to myrXiv [link] [comments]

Estimation of Miner Hash Rates and Consensus on Blockchains

arXiv:1707.00082
Date: 2017-07-01
Author(s): A. Pinar Ozisik, George Bissias, Brian Levine

Link to Paper


Abstract
We make several contributions that quantify the real-time hash rate and therefore the consensus of a blockchain. We show that by using only the hash value of blocks, we can estimate and measure the hash rate of all miners or individual miners, with quanti able accuracy. We apply our techniques to the Ethereum and Bitcoin blockchains; our solution applies to any proof-of-work-based blockchain that relies on a numeric target for the validation of blocks. We also show that if miners regularly broadcast status reports of their partial proof-of- work, the hash rate estimates are signi cantly more accurate at a cost of slightly higher bandwidth. Whether using only the blockchain, or the additional information in status reports, merchants can use our techniques to quantify in real-time the threat of double-spend attacks.

References
[1] 2015. The Bitcoin Lightning Network: Scalable Off-Chain Instant Payments. https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf. (July 2015).
[2] 2016. Gnosis. https://www.gnosis.pm. (November 2016).
[3] Asaph Azaria, Ariel Ekblaw, Thiago Vieira, and Andrew Lippman. 2016. "MedRec: Using Blockchain for Medical Data Access and Permission Management. In Proc. Intl. Conf. on Open and Big Data. 25–30.
[4] Adam Back, Matt Corallo, Luke Dashjr, Mark Friedenbach, Gregory Maxwell, Andrew Miller, Andrew Poelstra, Jorge Timón, and Pieter Wuille. 2014. Enabling Blockchain Innovations with Pegged Sidechains. Technical report. (Oct 22 2014).
[5] Simon Barber, Xavier Boyen, Elaine Shi, and Ersin Uzun. 2012. Bitter to better—how to make bitcoin a better currency. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 399–414.
[6] Bryan Bishop. 2015. bitcoin-dev mailling list: Weak block thoughts... https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-Septembe011158.html. (Sep 2015).
[7] bitcoin 2015. Confirmation. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Confirmation. (February 2015).
[8] Joseph Bonneau. 2015. How long does it take for a Bitcoin transaction to be confirmed? https://coincenter.org/2015/11/what-does-it-meanfor-a-bitcoin-transaction-to-be-confirmed/. (November 2015).
[9] J. Bonneau, A. Miller, J. Clark, A. Narayanan, J.A. Kroll, and E.W. Felten. 2015. SoK: Research Perspectives and Challenges for Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies. In IEEE S&P. 104–121. http://doi.org/10.1109/ SP.2015.14
[10] George Casella and Roger L. Berger. 2002. Statistical inference. Brooks Cole, Pacific Grove, CA. http://opac.inria.frecord=b1134456
[11] Kyle Croman et al. 2016. On Scaling Decentralized Blockchains . In Workshop on Bitcoin and Blockchain Research.
[12] Digix. 2017. https://www.dgx.io/. (Last retrieved June 2017).
[13] DigixDAO. 2017. https://www.dgx.io/dgd/. (Last retrieved June 2017).
[14] J. Douceur. 2002. The Sybil Attack. In Proc. Intl Wkshp on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS).
[15] Bradley Efron. 1982. The jackknife, the bootstrap and other resampling plans. Society for industrial and applied mathematics (SIAM).
[16] Ethash. 2017. https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Ethash. (Last retrieved June 2017).
[17] ethereum. Ethereum Homestead Documentation. http://ethdocs.org/en/latest/. (????).
[18] Etheria. 2017. http://etheria.world. (Last retrieved June 2017).
[19] Ittay Eyal and Emin Gün Sirer. 2014. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. Financial Cryptography (2014), 436–454. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45472-5_28
[20] William Feller. 1968. An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications: Volume I. Vol. 3. John Wiley & Sons London-New YorkSydney-Toronto.
[21] Juan Garay, Aggelos Kiayias, and Nikos Leonardos. 2015. The bitcoin backbone protocol: Analysis and applications. In Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques. Springer, 281–310.
[22] Arthur Gervais, Ghassan O. Karame, Karl Wust, Vasileios Glykantzis, Hubert Ritzdorf, and Srdjan Capkun. 2016. On the Security and Performance of Proof of Work Blockchains. https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/555. (2016).
[23] Hashcash. 2017. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hashcash. (Last retrieved June 2017).
[24] Ethan Heilman, Leen Alshenibr, Foteini Baldimtsi, Alessandra Scafuro, and Sharon Goldberg. 2017. TumbleBit: An untrusted Bitcoincompatible anonymous payment hub. In Proc. ISOC Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS).
[25] Svante Janson. 2014. Tail Bounds for Sums of Geometric and Exponential Variable. Technical Report. Uppsala University.
[26] Litecoin. 2017. https://litecoin.org. (Last retrieved June 2017).
[27] Satoshi Nakamoto. 2009. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf. (May 2009).
[28] A. Pinar Ozisik, Gavin Andresen, George Bissias, Amir Houmansadr, and Brian Neil Levine. 2016. A Secure, Efficient, and Transparent Network Architecture for Bitcoin. Technical Report UM-CS-2016-006. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. https://web.cs.umass.edu/publication/details.php?id=2417
[29] Meni Rosenfeld. 2012. Analysis of hashrate-based double-spending. https://bitcoil.co.il/Doublespend.pdf. (December 2012).
[30] Ayelet Sapirshtein, Yonatan Sompolinsky, and Aviv Zohar. 2015. Optimal Selfish Mining Strategies in Bitcoin. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1507.06183.pdf. (July 2015).
[31] Eli Ben Sasson, Alessandro Chiesa, Christina Garman, Matthew Green, Ian Miers, Eran Tromer, and Madars Virza. 2014. Zerocash: Decentralized Anonymous Payments from Bitcoin. In IEEE S&P. 459–474. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SP.2014.36
[32] Yonatan Sompolinsky and Aviv Zohar. 2015. Secure high-rate transaction processing in Bitcoin. Financial Cryptography and Data Security (2015). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47854-7_32
[33] Yonatan Sompolinsky and Aviv Zohar. 2016. Bitcoin’s Security Model Revisited. https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.09193. (May 2016).
[34] F. Tschorsch and B. Scheuermann. 2016. Bitcoin and Beyond: A Technical Survey on Decentralized Digital Currencies. IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials PP, 99 (2016), 1–1. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST. 2016.2535718
[35] Marko Vukolić. 2015. The quest for scalable blockchain fabric: Proof-ofwork vs. BFT replication. In International Workshop on Open Problems in Network Security. Springer, 112–125.
submitted by dj-gutz to myrXiv [link] [comments]

A long term outlook at the Dogecoin economy and currency (intro & pt 1 - mining power and a 51% attack) [meta]

Dogecoin is awesome. Dogecoin is too the moon!
But like any moon mission, it's worth asking the question what can go wrong on the way there. What stakeholders exist in the Dogecoin economy, what outcomes are possible in Dogecoin's journey, and how those outcomes could affect the behavior of the stakeholders.
This post is designed to encourage you to ask questions about every aspect of how Dogecoin functions. I do not intend this as investment advice in any sense of the word and have worked hard to avoid any discussion about what will happen to the price of dogecoin in the future.
In this post I will outline the stakeholders, outline the factors that affect the currency, and address the question of how Hashrate is related to miners decisions, and how it protects Dogecoin from a 51% attack
A few of the key facts I'll discuss:
Disclosure: I own a small amount of Dogecoin and Bitcoin (less than $100 in total at current market value) It's purely for entertainment and research purposes.
At the moment, I see the following people in the Dogecoin community:
  1. Long term investors (individuals holding Dogecoin either as a store of value or an investment opportunity)
  2. Short term investors (individuals holding Dogecoin as an investment opportunity)
  3. Professional Dogecoin miners (individuals choosing to mine Dogecoin rather than other Scrypt based coins, motivated by income)
  4. Community Dogecoin miners (individuals choosing to mine Dogecoin because they like Dogecoin, not motivated by income)
  5. Dogecoin buyers and sellers (individuals using dogecoin as a short term medium of exchange)
  6. Dogecoin community members (individuals holding Dogecoin for fun and/or using it for non-monetary compensation {irrelevant of market value}
  7. Dogecoin developers (Individuals who will decide what changes are made to the Dogecoin protocol {some of which may affect market behavior})
It's important to note that individuals in the community can be in more than one category (someone who holds dogecoin for short term investment can also buy and sell dogecoin on the market)
Variables which can affect the above stakeholders:
A. The average (and future) mining reward from a block of Dogecoin per kilohash hour. (How much can I make mining Dogecoin, what will Dogecoin inflation look like)
B. The total mining power (in GH) focused on Dogecoin vs other Scrypt coins (the more distributed miners, the safer the blockchain)
C. The price of Dogecoin/Market Cap (to determine if Dogecoin is worth mining)
D. The market perception about the future price of Dogecoin (to determine if Dogecoin is worth holding/spending and worth mining) {this is harder to quantify}
E. The Transaction volume of Dogecoin (to determine the community interest in the currency)
F. The reliability of Fiat to Dogecoin exchanges and Crypto to Dogecoin Exchanges (to facilitate an efficient/accurate market price for Dogecoin)
G. The speed of Dogecoin conversion into fiat (for instant transactions by merchants)
H. The development pipeline for new Dogecoin compatible mining hardware (how far off are ASICs for Scrypt)
As I see it, there's one major outcome that affects the entire community equally.
A 51% attack on Dogecoin would be of massive adverse value to everyone (except the individuals perpetrating the attack). If Dogecoin's blockchain was corrupted, It would cease to function as a useful medium of exchange and as a store of value. Miners would leave because the value would plummet from it not being trusted. Short term investors would dump their holdings as they started to lose value. Long term investors would do the same.
The currency would die.
How does one prevent a 51% attack? Have a large total mining hashrate in the hands of a diverse number of miners. If the cost of running a 51% attack is so high it's not worth the money, it won't happen.
This leads to a fundamental question: what keeps people mining Dogecoin?
Dogecoin miners are separated into two groups (as mentioned above), Professional miners who will go where they can make the most money, and amateur miners who will mine Dogecoin because they like the currency.
From a community health perspective, the professional miners are the main concern (with a few caveats). If professional miners leave, that affects trust in Dogecoin.
So what keeps them mining for us? There are two major Scrypt based cryptos out right now, Litecoin and Dogecoin, and the community, as of this writing, is essentially split 50/50 is split 55/45 in favor of Dogecoin.
What this reflects is that miners expect to make more money mining Dogecoin than litecoin. Since an efficient market exists for trading Litecoin into Bitcoin and Dogecoin into Bitcoin, it seems to this author that value should be assessed in terms of current actual value (that miners choose what coin to mine based on how much they can sell it for today)
Since two large scale profitable currencies exist (LTE and DOGE) miners are going to choose the more profitable up until the point where the two converge. This depends on three variables:
Difficulty, total hash rate, and average reward.
As of Jan 23, DOGE is a little over twice as profitable as LTC.
This is what has prompted the major switch of the past few days.
I need help modeling is how much total value comes from LTC and how much from DOGE (essentially, if I owned the entire mining pool and split my work equally, how much could I make from each currency?)
At some point, enough miners will leave LTC that it's difficulty will drop. Assuming LTC retains its value (in fiat), falling difficulty will make it more profitable. Eventually, its profitability will once again match that of Dogecoin, and miners will stop leaving LTC for DOGE.
The problem is that as miners leave, it is possible that the currency value will drop as well.
On Jan 20, LTC had a 115GH rate, Doge had 57GH. Doge was trading at .00003 LTC. On Jan 23, Doge had 95, LTC had 75, and Doge more than doubled in price to .0000675. (Litecoin has also dropped about $1 (~5%) in value in USD over the same period.)
This is likely why even though Dogecoin has more miners than LTC, Litecoin is still less profitable for Miners (at this precise moment). Dogecoin has increased in currency value more than it has decreased in mining value.
Thus, the fundamental question is what kind of change is required in the price of DOGE/LTC and what hashing ratio will LTC and DOGE settle on based on their current price. It's important to remember that LTC has not dropped in value significantly, Doge has simply rose dramatically.
Fundamentally, as long as LTC has some value, it will have some percentage of Scrypt hashing power devoted to it. The same is true for Doge. So as long as people still want both currencies to some degree, mining power will be split. *Depending on that split, Dogecoin will be safe if it has enough mining power to prevent a malicious third party, and if that mining power remains in the hands of a diverse group of DOGE mining pools. *
My next post will address the different needs of the Long term investor, the short term investor, and the casual owner. (Some want a long term stable currency, some want a dramatic increase in price (even if it hurts the currency long term)
Please feel free to leave comments about anything you disagree with, any changes I should make, any thoughts about other factors that could affect the health of the currency, any other subjects you'd like to see explored. Thanks!
submitted by harddata to dogecoin [link] [comments]

Nyancoins Megapost - Central Link Collection

Edit: Going to finally start an overhaul on this (April 23rd, 2016); it's been six months since the last edit. I'm going to go from current back, so there's going to be a gap between this top, new stuff and what's below until I finish the update.
I'm just going to have the last six months all shoved together into one large update here. There's weak categorization, but basically just think of it as a huge list. In general, the newer items will be higher within a given category than the older items. I apologize if I left anything out which people would like to see included. Some things I considered more of a temporary update than something relevant months later, but just PM me and I'll add anything requested!
We're currently in a quiet low point. Nothing catastrophic is happening, but we are relatively weak. I call it "the best nadir" because if this is as bad as it gets, we're doing alright. The price is down to 4 satoshi now, which is the lowest sustained price since the beginning of the revival. I'm going on a year behind my original goal for releasing NYAN2, still stuck on a new build computer (alternately time and energy to cripple together a build system out of what I have available).
One major new element: I've set a goal for us to have a mission to visit the site of Apollo 17 in twenty years. This is basically a new dimension. For the first ten years, I envision this as a purely "paper program", doing research on past space programs, in particular Mercury through Apollo, but any and all launch platforms and spacecraft which have been done. We may additionally seek to gain additional education (for instance, I would like aerospace engineering and material science undergraduate degrees at a minimum; we also are going to need experienced test pilots).
Space Program Initial Vision: [NYAN 2035] We must send a mission to visit the site of the Apollo 17 plaque on the Moon
Also, I've replaced the previous "Nekonauts of the Month" competition with a "Who Wants to be a Nillionaire?". The major difference is that rather than relying upon me to track everything, the expectation is that Nekonauts will sign up and self-report accomplishments.
Nyan Projects
[Hype] Browser based MMORPG accepting Nyancoins for member items: KojoSlayer's latest foray into nyan video game development! I've seen an early preview and it reminds me of a primitive Runescape (meant as a compliment)
Fun Posts
Insert NyanDisk 1 into Drive A:: NyanDOS!
Nyan like it's 1999 ....: telnet into nyan!
[breaking news] Nyancoins will be bought out by Garza in a last-ditch attempt to save Paycoin - April fool's post
Trumpchain on Twitter: "It can happen. Our blockchain has tremendous potential. We have tremendous people. #MakeTheBlockchainGreatAgain" - Terrific shitpost; really fantastic!
Join the Nekonauts today! - Cool nyan poster
"I really hope Satoshi is finally dumping and declaring that, like, Nyancoin is the true bearer of his vision." - CountOneInterrupt - My favorite idea ever
Nyancoin Zen - So cute. This may be my favorite nyan image ever for its understatement and beauty.
High Definition Nyan up close - Amusing
Making PC more Nyan-Friendly! - cute; amusing. Such nyan!
Typical Nyancoiner breakfast. - DobbsCoin is great with this stuff!
[meta] [misadventures of coinaday] [Pizza Boy Adventures] Late Night Pizza - Just a little choose-your-own-delivery I wrote during my stint as a pizza delivery boy.
I don't know how I wasn't aware of this site before - I still can't believe there's an entire site for this!
Get NYAN
Want more NYAN? Faucet Mrai and trade to me for NYAN (and then hodl!): What is says on the tin. The faucet is down temporarily at time of this writing, but it'll be back up before I update this section likely. The price offered there is low (mailing list mentioning 200-300 satoshi currently; my offer is worth about 2 satoshi currently); I would consider higher, but probably wouldn't pay those apparent market rates (no actual exchange yet).
Force Multipliers
Content about the difference a determined person can make. Intended as inspiration.
[Force Multiplier] [Original Content] [pdf; 23 pages] Archimedes and the Siege of Syracuse - Previously unpublished paper I wrote for a history course in college.
[Force Multipliers] [Military History] Julius Caesar's Greatest Military Victory (Video; 10 minutes) - An explanation of achieving victory in an apparently unwinnable situation.
[Force Multipliers] [Naval History] Korea: Admiral Yi - I: Keep Beating the Drum - Extra History - Incredible loyalty and dedication from this greatest Admiral saved his country
Philosophy
Content which fits the themes of fun, self-improvement, and service to others.
Wikipedia essay: WikiLove - I think Wikipedia's policies are in a lot of ways something to look up to. It's true that they're stuck in bureaucracy now, and have driven away many experts, but they function and their policies have helped to give some structure to the anarchy.
[US history and macroeconomics] [59 minute video] Thom Hartmann, "The Crash of 2016" - Interesting video. I think the predicted outcome is something of a longshot, but it's interesting to me that he called Sanders as a major factor in the election years ago.
Taylor Mali, "Words and Their Consequences" (68 min video) - Poetry and philosophy
We Are One - Didn't get any attention at the time, but this is a general statement about the power of people working together.
A Message of Hope for the World - What's the point of Nyancoins? To inspire people.
A brief word on censorship - tl;dr: Censorship is bad, m'kay?
Who Owns Nyancoins? - Hodlers.
To The Moon is Not Enough: 100 Year Planning - About the importance of an unlimited time horizon. We build to last.
General
Catch-all category. Okay, this category got out of hand. I should do a second round later and break this out into a few different ones.
The best argument I've heard so far for keeping the 1MB cap in Bitcoin - I still think it would have been better for Bitcoin to grow, but this is the strongest argument for its stagnation in capacity that I've seen.
[conceptual design] How we should expect 100,000 transactions in a minute (or second?) to be handled - This is about the idea that we should expect to be able to handle large loads without crashing. Pretty basic. Related to an /cryptocurrency post I'd made: 100,000 Transactions Per Second: How Do We Get There?, which gives a very high-level overview of one way to reach high throughput capacity using blockchains.
Interesting cryptocurrency to try: raiblocks, protocol without transaction fees or block rewards - I think Raiblocks will be a valuable "companion coin" to Nyancoins ultimately. I don't know how exactly that'll work, but I believe that good cryptocurrency communities should make alliances. If nothing else, we can be valuable to each other as the "loyal opposition", critics who want to see success.
Coin-a-Year: Nyancoin : link to /CryptoCurrency post - Summary of the first year or so of NYAN revival
[far future concept] Nyanshares, Nythereumbits, and all-in on 37 rainbow - A double post: first part describes a possible spin-off, hybrid, 'companion coin' we could make in future years. The second part talks about what a gamble NYAN is.
NyanCoin compilation guide and downsizing nyan.space / NyanChain [semi-meta] - Has a link to a guide for compiling nyancoind on servers.
[meta] [misadventures of coinaday] Stuck in the Dihydrogen Monoxide - Another in a series of coinaday posts proving "play stupid games; win stupid prizes"
[Data] Faucet Stats - KojoSlayer's faucet stats
Thing to do a thing that can't do that thing.... - Bit of code for pulling BTC/NYAN feed from Cryptopia.
Fresh builds, coming up! - initial report from vmp32k on attempting to modernize the codebase
DigiShield - suggestion for different difficulty algorithm
BIP101 implementation to be made available for altcoins - prohashing announcing that they will have a Scrypt BIP101 implementation; this is planned to be our base for NYAN3
Year 1: Acquisition and Triage ; Year 2: Acquisition and Build - Optimistic; in reality, year two of the revival has largely been me just trying to survive. Hopefully more acquisition and build as the year goes on.
[technical] [financial] Price Stability and Consistent Hashing - Basic theory. If we have consistent prices, we'll have more consistent hashing.
[technical] [forking] [NYAN3] Should running old defaults be considered a vote against a hard fork or should the veto need to be explicit? / General voting discussion - What it says on the tin. I haven't gotten feedback on this yet. It's far in the future, but I think it's a critical question. I'm not sure which way is correct.
2015 in review: overview - Initial summary of the previous year; written before the Coin-a-Year post which did similar
[meta] [finance] [misadventures of coinaday] Paying Debts - Since writing this, I've gone further into debt. I need to get my personal finances together this year, for my own sake, for the sake of those I owe, and for the sake of Nyancoins.
Countdown to the Second Halving - The current block is 1168851 as I write this; we've got less than 350,000 more blocks until the third halving!
I updated the major risks page for Nyancoins to include mention of the fork bug and 'time warp'. Please review and comment. - bolded for visibility; I consider the risks document and making sure that we inform potential buyers as much as possible to be a critical requirement for us
[technical] [security] Time warp, fork bug, disclosure policies, and practical results: a working system despite flaws - Discussion of the success of Nyancoins as a working system despite its technical vulnerabilities.
Zero Fees (*) - Discussion of the role of zero fee transactions and why I consider them important
[finance] [meta] [Misadventures of coinaday] overdrafts and consequences / Cryptopia 1sat Dump - Discussion of my stupidity and its consequences on Nyancoins' financial health
[technical] NIP 1: Base NYAN3 on XT - I consider this critical. We will make a statement about not following the path Bitcoin is currently going down. This is not urgent for us because our activity is so low, but it will be part of building a strong foundation for the future.
Hodling Update: 30% - I haven't done the math recently. I'm probably within 5% of this, but I don't know if I've gone up or down. I haven't given away a whole lot, but I have put no new money into Nyancoins for months from being so broke. I've still gained some millions more from when my 5 satoshi bids got hit though.
[finance] Up? Down? Horizontal? - Considering 30 - It's pretty sad how far we are from 30 satoshi now (4 satoshi at the moment). I believe we'll get it back ultimately, but the revival certainly hasn't had the financial success I'd hoped.
Dice soft launch - Not sure of the current state here. Check with KojoSlayer.
State of the NYAN October 2015: An interlude for gratitude and yearning for more - I should get back to doing these monthly eventually. Right now it's quiet enough that there doesn't seem to be a real need.
[financial] NYAN vs DOGE as a long-term store of value - What it says. I believe that the lower supply inflation and smaller supply of NYAN will ultimately lead to NYAN trading above DOGE (currently trading at less than 10:1).
[finance] [stats] [gaming] Breaking the Bank: Risk-of-Ruin, Dice Games, and Basic Logic - I'm pretty proud of this one. By having more money than god, and a screwed up default max bet rule, I was able to beat the house. 8-)
100M - Talking about the remaining supply and the implications.
I think I'm done with this update (at least getting the new content in; I have not changed the old text and content, which is everything below).
Since I can only have one thing stickied at a time, but there are a lot of different things going on, I've switched over to having one main link collection post. And this is it.
I'll update this periodically (I'll try to do a major update once a month) and might replace it at some point. It'll have general discussion of the context behind why these various threads are significant.
I'm doing August and September together for Nekonaut awards and updates here since I got a bit busy at work. NYAN2 is released as a first-draft, but I haven't built it yet (nor done final changes and fixes). I need a computer with more RAM than what I have available to me now. However, I'm quite satisfied with the performance of NYAN1.2, ancient though it may be, so I'm not treating it as an emergency.
The biggest news is that we are now listed on cryptopia.co.nz ! They are a great community and provide better ecosystem support than most exchanges: they include a pool and explorer along with the exchange. And their exchange has a lot of basepairs, with NYAN/BTC, NYAN/UNO, NYAN/DOGE, and NYAN/DOT being relatively active, NYAN/LTC being quiet, and the other two (popularcoin and feathercoin) being unfamiliar to me and generally unused.
Oh, also, when I've taken a look at it, the Nyanchain seems to be running smoothly. I haven't been watching too closely, but the status page is usually showing all green. I especially like seeing the high number of connections (generally close to 30). [Comment from July version; still accurate. I should get automated metrics on the Nyanchain someday, but in the meantime, it seems to be moving pretty smoothly anecdotally.]
Top stories from August and Septemberish
Nekonauts of the Months, August and September 2015 - Combined awards, three awards for 1M as a result, and such. Just check it out. :-)
New IRC channel and tipbot - This came about during the listing process; we are now at #nyan2
WE ARE LIVE! Cryptopia added us just now!! - Culmination of the process of getting listed on Cryptopia. After leading in user votes and DOT votes after the first couple days, the admins decided to add us. So as I count it, we won three votes. :-)
Looking good on Cryptopia so far - My early reaction to the exchange.
The past few days. - Repost of a classic, which is always a good idea in NYAN, given our rich archives.
Miners We Need YOU! - Brief discussion by KojoSlayer about the importance of miners to the Nyancoin ecosystem.
Nyancoind Dockerfile (for the tech-nyans) - Cool demo by vmp32k
Nyancat all up on your Vim command line. - Cool xpost from /vim.
[financial] I hit a positive balance on Cryptsy-NYAN again - I started buying on Cryptsy. I've since withdrawn from Cryptsy and am working on eliminating my balances there, but I've got a lot of altcoins to consolidate yet.
100M - A discussion of the remaining supply to be generated (now under 100 million more coins)
Top stories from July
Gitian Build Instructions - !!! This is exactly what I was trying to figure out. With this roadmap, we should be able to help others build *coins with gitian as well as provide a solid introduction to our own community members. This should be linked and submitted for feedback elsewhere; I should report back to the Litecoin thread with a link to this for discussion. I cannot overstate how important I find this contribution.
Nekonauts of the Month, July 2015 - Still going with this. I may not always get this perfect, but I hope that it will help add some motivation and recognition to the community who is building the next generation of Nyancoins.
Ɲyancoins for Nekonauts! [designs] - Some logos and concept art; a start by W7phone; we hope to see more of this type of thing!
[hypothetical] What would it take for us to be able to start our own Nyan exchanges? - tl;dr: Let's get setup on some decentralized exchanges!
Linux Nekonauts: Building nyancoind - I should get this in the sidebar somewhere. An excellent first post by gentlenyan !
Top stories from June
Nekonauts of the Month, June 2015 - Latest round of awards; I plan to keep doing this each month for as long as I can
[community] You are a leader of Nyancoins / Herding Cats: Leading Leaders; Leadership in a Decentralized Community - A discussion of the importance of you to the success of Nyancoins
vmp32k launches a beta of a faucet - When is this going live?
kojoslayer launches a faucet
Various post on mining being stuck - we are still a bit spotty, but it seems like it might be a bit better. We could use something more than just an instantaneous status page; if someone wants to make something which does statistical analysis of the performance of the nyanchain, that would be awesome.
Broke through the 40 satoshi ceiling, and Plagiarizing great speeches in history and claiming to have a community mandate: Coin-a-Day writes inspirational pap as we stand on the verge of breaking through the 50 satoshi ceiling and envisions the glorious future ahead - and rather more. The price dipped back down on Cryptsy since, but we had a nice rise for a while. I'm hoping that when we get an exchange we have confidence in, we'll see more buying again.
Warning: Cryptsy does not process large NYAN withdrawals - This is why I recommend not using Cryptsy; plus this
Top stories from May
First off: Ɲyancoins needs YOU! - This is a discussion of how all of us have something we can do for Nyancoins, and how improving your own life is absolutely one of those things.
Nekonauts of the Month, May 2015 - This is my first month running this competition. I'm looking to recognize people who are active and contributing to the community and to give them NYAN to help further whatever they'd like to do next.
The network is stable! - Thanks to a new miner, spydud22, we are showing all green on status!
Wow, very large chunk of NYAN at 40 satoshi (6 million) - The title is outdated; there's about double this volume now. [Edit: And now the title is accurate again.]
Initial notes and thoughts on the Nyancoins client update - I've identified the approximate version of Litecoin that Nyancoins is based on and looked at a diff. It looks reasonable and do-able. I haven't yet looked at the latest branch on which I'll apply these changes.
Nyancoins 2.0
https://github.com/mathwizard1232/nyancoins/tree/nyancoins2 - first draft of NYAN2
(intentional duplication from top stories for July; I consider it that important): Gitian Build Instructions - !!! This is exactly what I was trying to figure out. With this roadmap, we should be able to help others build *coins with gitian as well as provide a solid introduction to our own community members. This should be linked and submitted for feedback elsewhere; I should report back to the Litecoin thread with a link to this for discussion. I cannot overstate how important I find this contribution.- earlier working notes
Cross-platform Gitian builds - Discussion about getting Gitian builds to work for Mac without access to a Mac.
Initial notes and thoughts on the Nyancoins client update - Right now I haven't had time to do much more on this, but I need to work on doing the Litecoin gitian build yet.
Gitian Build - jwflame's initial notes on trying the gitian build
DLC
Distributed Library Coin; stealing^Wrepurposing the ideas of others - Introducing the concept; basically a virtual lending library for the community; Learned Optimism is offered.
[DLC] Siege of Earth - Second post, offering Siege of Earth, a classic sci fi tale
Minecraft
[Idea] Minecraft NyanCoins - KojoSlayer is making a cool Minecraft Nyancoins faucet sort of thing (get Nyancoins for playing Minecraft).
[Sneak Peak] Nyancoin Minecraft Server - This project is moving forward quite quickly! See also /NyanCoinsMC for more information.
[Beta] Launch Nyancoins Minecraft Server : NyanCoinsMC - BOOM! I'm amazed at how quickly this has gotten setup. Go check it out!
Background / theory
Overview of major risks of buying Nyancoins - I've tried to collect every risk I could think of in this one place. This is important reading before investing.
Nyan's core principles and why they matter
draft one of Cold Storage 101: How to secure your coins for long-term hodling - I need to incorporate the suggestions still, but between the article and the comments, this is decent.
I will work harder: in which Coinaday reports for duty - My statement that this is going to a new level for me: I'm considering this my dream job now, rather than just my hobby. I'm dedicating myself to serving this community as best I can.
[community] You are a leader of Nyancoins / Herding Cats: Leading Leaders; Leadership in a Decentralized Community - This is a discussion of the importance of each individual, in particular you, to this revival.
A really good read about fiduciary duties in running an exchange - discussion of the responsibility one takes on in managing money for others
[rant] In response to "there is only BTC [and maybe LTC [and maybe DOGE]] AND DEFINITELY NOTHING ELSE MATTERS" - Possibly amusing rant.
My most worthless and most valuable coins: Comparing DIME and 42 - A discussion about interpreting spot price in context
[theory] Bitcoin discussion of hard forks - Talking about the risks involved with a hard fork
Rooting for LTC's Rally to Hold: Nyancoins and the Cryptocurrency Market - Nyancoins do not stand alone. Although it's easy to see the rise of another cryptocurrency as weakening us, because we might trade lower against them temporarily, I believe that a stronger CryptoCurrency market as a whole will be important for our long-term health.
[financial] Cryptocurrency valuation models: Considering Nyancoins as a zero-coupon bond against the community
Classic Posts
Why Nyancoin will hit $1/NYAN (and much more). We're going to space, and you're invited! - This is an infamous post by americanpegasus. I believe it was actually someone mocking him in /bitcoin by linking to this which first made me aware that Nyancoins existed, and got the idea in my head that it was a deadcoin (from seeing a post/comments on the sub at the time which claimed that). So the dream of this post was actually so bold that it brought it back from the grave, because it was bold enough to be mocked, and that mockery eventually led me to investigate it, and that investigation led me to fall in love.
1Ɲ >= 1Đ - This is a vision I have, that we shall rise above DOGE. This is not a dig against DOGE but merely a statement about the growth I expect to see us have. There are about 500x as many Dogecoins as there are Nyancoins, so even if we remain significantly smaller we can easily pass their unit price. We've done so briefly previously but are currently below this mark.
We choose to go to the Moon - This is my manifesto about why I am doing this. Cribbed from JFK's moon speech, it is meant to express that it is because of, not in spite of, the challenges that we face that I am here. This started out as a personal challenge. While I certainly would like to get rich off of this, the reason I chose to pursue this is because if we do then, then we're awesome badasses that people can be impressed by.
The original Nyancoins intro video - wasn't really sure where to categorize this
Older stories
I'll move stories down here as they get older. For now it's the block stoppage stuff as that seems to have stabilized.
Holy shit, 22 hours since the last block. At this rate, I'm going to have to start solving hashes by hand... - This was my post about the block stoppage.
Difficulty has spiked again; if we hit another stall I'll try the transaction fee trick again - Another block stoppage, and a record of my attempt to use the same trick to break it loose again (transaction fee incentive).
I'm ready to give up on life; in which coinaday finally has his full-blown mental breakdown. So long, and thanks for all the rainbows! - My personal mental breakdown. Just listed here because it made an impact. Also, it was an amazing response from the community which meant a lot to me.
Fuck it; encore une fois - My reaction afterward, saying that I'll give things another shot.
GFS
Disregard the below: GFS has been down for a few months and probably won't be back. At one point, this project had been offered to me, and perhaps I should have taken it, but I felt like I was already heavily committed here and couldn't take that on as well. It's a shame that no one managed to keep it running though. I really liked the idea.
Disregard the below: it's back down again, last I checked. Not sure what to link on that. The new bot got mildly political again / referenced being a shadowbanned user, and bam. I'm not sure where this is going to go now, if anywhere. Although I suppose the on-blockchain stuff isn't affected, and I'd wager go1dfish will do something again.
/GetFairShare will be attempting another distribution today; go try it out! - GetFairShare is back! Go get free money!
I don't really understand what's going on, but apparently the bot used for /GetFairShare got banned - Some background on GFS having gone down
I think that this will continue to be useful as we gain a larger and larger volume of posts and help me not have to worry about burying something significant posted a couple weeks back or something.
Also, right now I'm just gleaning from the frontpage, but I'll add in some great classic posts too.
Let me know in the comments if there are other posts you'd like to see added here.
submitted by coinaday to nyancoins [link] [comments]

Should you listen to coin investment advice ?

This is from a recruiter yes a company that does hr and placement for companies - instead of spamming me with job emails they now know about crypto and trading
This is on par with when the can driver tells you to buy gold bars as an investment
Crypto-Bubble?

As our January newsletter goes out to you, the global crypto currency market is tanking, with all the major coins experiencing a major drop. However there has been a huge amount of talk in 2017 about the influence of blockchain technology, and this will almost certainly continue in 2018. Bitcoin will remain the ‘gold standard’ in the cryptocurrency market, although we expect 2018 will see the rise of the Alt-Currency market with alternate cryptocurrencies increasing in prominence.
Our view is that the current boom in the global crypto market feels similar to thedot.com bubble of 1999, although undoubtedly there were some huge tech companiesthat emerged after the hype died down. Quite recently, an initiative from several global banks, led by UBS, is looking at how blockchain technology can help speed the inter-bank rec process, called the Massive Autonomous Distributed Reconciliation program(Madrec).
Or is the current crypto-bubble similar to tulip mania of the seventeeth century, where there was actually very little intrinsic value behind the rapid increase in tulip valuation? Only time shall tell.
Let’s have a look at a few of the Alt-Currencies we think should make news in 2018, and potentially have some real intrinsic value and real-world application:
Why is Ethereum important?
Ethereum is kind of like the Linux of crypto. It’s sort of an open development platform that allows developers to use the platform for app development. And it’s also the platform that is the base for many other cryptocurrencies. Ethereum has faster transaction speed than Bitcoin, as essentially the ‘blocks’ can be created much faster. The ability of 3rd party applications to run on the Ethereum network is a big factor in this crypto-currency having utility.
Why is Ripple important?
Ripple has gained interest from big business, and specifically financial services firms have been exploring how to use Ripple for fast transactions with their blockchain technology. Ripple in the simplest context is a real-time payment system. It was developed by a few smart guys involved with Bitcoin from the early days, and these guys created something cool called The Interledger Protocol that allows a secure pathway for the exchange of money. Importantly, a lot of the big global banks like Ripple, so if you have big banks and corporates using Ripple for value-exchange, then Ripple and the affiliated XRP digital asset will get used by banks to allow customers to do fast, efficient money transfers.
Why is Dash important?
Dash is a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, that was a fork from Bitcoin in 2014. It’s built on the same core code as Bitcoin but has virtually negligible transaction costs, and can be used as a very low cost method to pass cash from one person to another. Dash is short for Digital Cash, and claims to be the fastest and most efficient method to transfer digital cash through two unique features called PrivateSend and InstantSend, both of which basically send digital cash in a fast, private, low cost manner.
Why is LiteCoin important?
Think of LiteCoin as the silver to Bitcoin’s gold status. LiteCoin is similar to Dash in that it’s a peer-to-peer currency with virtually zero transaction costs. There will be many more LiteCoin vs Bitcoin in exitence so this makes for much faster transaction time, and processing time, and a faster hashrate. In short, LiteCoin is quite similar to Bitcoin as it’s built on the same code, but there will be lots more of them with a faster transaction time, so they will be a bit more useful than Bitcoin but probably less valuable.
Opportunities
submitted by Fx_frontrunner to u/Fx_frontrunner [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Hashrate auf Allzeithoch Bitcoin Profits Falling Hashrate Rising Bitcoin Explodes!!! Lightning Network FASTER than Visa! Litecoin Privacy  Yellow Vests  Crypto Mom Turn Key Bitcoin Mining Solution The Last Time This Bitcoin Pattern Happened, it Skyrocketed Higher

Litecoin vs. Bitcoin Hashrate. The next point of comparison for Litecoin vs. Bitcoin is network hashrate, or the total mining power allocated to the network by miners. The significance of network hashrate is that the higher it is, the more secure the network is. This is because if a network has a high hashrate, it’s more resistant to a 51% ... Live hashrate distribution, pool fees & minimum payment comparison. Mining Pools & Block Explorer. ASIC - Scrypt. MiningPoolStats. Toggle navigation . MiningPoolStats # × LTC/USD : 7 Day. Market Cap : $ 24h Vol : $ Difficulty : 6 Months. Block Height : Avg. Block Time : Hard Fork : Reward Halving in : Tweets by litecoin × Small donations to keep website running are greatly appreciated ... r/litecoin For discussion about Litecoin, the leading cryptocurrency derived from Bitcoin. Litecoin is developed with a focus on speed, efficiency, and wider initial coin distribution through the use of scrypt-based mining. Litecoin VS Ethereum -AMAZONPOLLY-ONLYWORDS-START- Litecoin and Ethereum are two of the most exciting projects in the crypto space. Both of these coins are consistently in the top five coins when it comes to market cap. Even though both of these projects are extremely popular, their main purposes are entirely different. In the guide, Litecoin VS Ethereum, we are going to take a look at the ... Bitcoin Average hashrate (hash/s) per day Chart. Transactions Block Size Sent from addresses Difficulty Hashrate Price in USD Mining Profitability Sent in USD Avg. Transaction Fee Median Transaction Fee Block Time Market Capitalization Avg. Transaction Value Median Transaction Value Tweets GTrends Active Addresses Top100ToTotal Fee in Reward

[index] [46074] [13215] [11071] [15859] [1063] [12349] [37368] [2392] [25645] [26288]

Bitcoin Hashrate auf Allzeithoch

Rx 560 4gb on NiceHash daily mining update 12-31-17 bitcoin coinbase my gpus gtx 1060 6gb gtx 1050 ti 4gb gtx 1050 2gb gtx 750 1gb rx 560 4gb. #Bitcoin explodes! Lightning Network not only faster that Visa but “days faster” when it comes to on-boarding merchants! $BTC hashrate 3 month high, $LTC pri... Während der BITCOIN (BTCUSD) bereits sein letztes Reaktionshoch überwunden hat, ziert sich der LITEOCIN (LTCUSD) gegenwärtig noch. Dies verspricht entspreche... Bitcoin Hashrate auf Allzeithoch ... Erst Litecoin Anstieg, jetzt Bitcoin? - Duration: 10:48. Blue Alpine Krypto Analysen 417 views. 10:48. 963Hz + 852Hz + 639Hz Miracle Tones Activate Pineal ... just hodl on! bitcoin mining, metronome ico nonsense, coinbase stuff and more! Sign up with coinbase. buy or sell 100 dollars in crypto currency and get 10 dollars of bitcoin for free with this ...

#