Free groupfabric bitcoin miner Download - groupfabric ...

How to Transfer Bitcoins from Group Fabric Miner to a Bitcoin Wallet Once you Reach Minimum Payout

How to Transfer Bitcoins from Group Fabric Miner to a Bitcoin Wallet Once you Reach Minimum Payout submitted by Rufflenator to 3bitcoins [link] [comments]

How to Transfer Bitcoins from Group Fabric Miner to a Bitcoin Wallet Once you Reach Minimum Payout

How to Transfer Bitcoins from Group Fabric Miner to a Bitcoin Wallet Once you Reach Minimum Payout submitted by ososru to Bitcoin4free [link] [comments]

Transcript of how Philip the tyrant admin of the Bitcoin Cash Telegram group called Spoice stupid, an idiot, a parrot among other insults then banned her instead of discussing Bitcoin Cash. That Telegram group is hostile, ABC/IFP shills run and follows the rBitcoin toxic censorship modus operandi.

David B., [18.10.20 01:46]
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/jdagi3/whats_up_with_the_bchn_hypocrisy/

David B., [18.10.20 01:47]
Wut x2

J Stodd, [18.10.20 01:49]
[In reply to David B.]
Their words are meaningless. They have no principles. Wish i could comment but bitcoinxio banned me from rbtc and never told me why

David B., [18.10.20 01:59]
These comments are so toxic

Spoice, [18.10.20 01:59]
In reality, the real continuation of Bitcoin as we all know it is what is carried on by BCHN, BU, BCHD and others

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
ABC is changing the rules to something that is not Bitcoin

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
anyone denying those facts is selling you snake oil

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
If Blockstream tried to take some % to their own benefit, we would have never needed BCH in the first place

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:00]
everyone would have rejected them in a second

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:01]
[In reply to Spoice]
Bitcoin Cash is not Bitcoin to start with, so who cares?

David B., [18.10.20 02:01]
[ Album ]

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
yet we have ABC trying to pull this theft and all those puppets think it's ok

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
JSTodd that's bullshit

David B., [18.10.20 02:01]
Like trying to talk to a core maxi about altcoins

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
Bitcoin Cash is the most Bitcoin out of all Bitcoins

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:01]
it is the continuation of what Satoshi started

David B., [18.10.20 02:02]
Tbh they aren't even toxic

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:02]
[In reply to Spoice]
If the hash follows then it is Bitcoin Cash. Only if it doesn't is your claim true

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:03]
[In reply to Spoice]
Bitcoin is Bitcoin. Bitcoin failed to be Peer to Peer Cash, so Bitcoin Cash attempted to fix this by forking Bitcoin and attacking the root of the problem. This does not mean Bitcoin Cash is literally Bitcoin. Adopt a different argument. Sorry if you bought into that bc of Rogers rantings

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:05]
Bitcoin Cash can replace Bitcoin, and if Bitcoin dies and BCH wins then sure maybe it can take its name from its grave, but they are different products, trying to say Bitcoin stopped being "Bitcoin" and became BCH is a self contradiction.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:08]
Jstodd's got some good points.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:08]
He's learnt so much in the last year ☺️

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:08]
"Bitcoin is Bitcoin" is a false statement. BTC is just an instance of Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the set of rules defined in the whitepaper first and foremost, it is peer to peer electronic cash. BTC no longer fits that criteria. Bitcoin Cash meets them. The fork proposed by ABC also fails to meet that criteria. Therefore the continuation of Bitcoin is in whatever BU, BCHN, Flowee and others will continue.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:09]
What rules were defined in the WP?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:10]
Let's see which rules aren't: 1) No coinbase tax going to any centralized entity such as ABC 2) No throttling of TX throughput such as BTC

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:10]
therefore they both fail the simple "Is this Bitcoin?" test

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:11]
Finally, Michael, if you think Hash rate defines what Bitcoin is, you should stick to BTC

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:11]
21 million coins isn't in the WP

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:11]
I asked what rules did the WP define.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
Because BCH failed that criteria since it forked, therefore your point is wrong

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January/014994.html

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
The announcement of the white paper included the 21 million limit, close enough

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:12]
HIs announcement isn't the WP

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
show me where Satoshi said that Amaury shoudl tax the chain?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:12]
Doesn't matter- close enough

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:12]
Bitcoin is the set of rules defined in the whitepaper first and foremost - You

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:13]
My ears pricked up on that comment, so I'm asking you what you meant.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:13]
Correct. Changing the 21 million hard limit is still more Bitcoin than taxing the Coinbase, yet both will never ever happen. Not to Bitcoin anyway

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:13]
If you meant Satoj's writings pre and post WP then you should be clear about it

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:13]
some bastardized chain might, just not Bitcoin

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:14]
The closest we have to anything to indicate what is "Bitcoiness" is general things like "the longest chain"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:14]
No, it is never a single thing

David B., [18.10.20 02:15]
REEEE

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:15]
trustless, no single trusted third parties, and rules can change due to incentives via consensus

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:15]
it is a set of common sense and experiment driven and historical relevance and initial parameters and "peer to peer electronic cash" definition indicators

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:15]
never a single thing

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]
[In reply to Spoice]
This is like the exact opposite of what you said earlier

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]
Bitcoin is defined by the rules in the WP, I mean common sense.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]
🤷‍♂️

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:16]
Nope, the rule set is defined in the white paper should never change, but I never said all rules are defined in the white paper

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:16]
What rules?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:16]
It is a union

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:17]
What rules are there?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:17]
Rules in the white paper + what continued to define Bitcoin thereafter

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:17]
[In reply to Spoice]
> "Bitcoin is Bitcoin is a false statement."
Alas, if we cannot agree on the law of identity, aka A=A, then i dont understand how to hold a conversation with you using logic.
> BTC is an instance of Bitcoin
No, BTC is a ticker used optionally by exchanges. Other common tickers for bitcoin include XBC, XBT, BC (correct me if im wrong on any of these)
> "Bitcoin is a set of rules in the whitepaper"
Super hard to defend this. Theres no mention of a 21M supply cap, no blocksize limit *at all*, and it also says additional rules and incentives can be enforced (implying maybe they should).

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:17]
I go through this with BSVers all the time. We have no spec sheet of rules defining what Bitcoin is from Satoshi.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
Rules such as what defines a correct block, miners receiving the full incentive of mining it, etc

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:18]
The WP is a highlevel document

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
The WP is a description of a scientific experiment

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
if you want to start your own experiment, be my guest

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:18]
[In reply to Spoice]
Valid tx rules aren't defined in the WP

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:18]
just don't try to call it Bitcoin

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:19]
The word majority is in the WP an awful lot wouldn't you say?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:19]
Not valid TX rules, but what a proof of work block is and how it diverts the reward to the miner, etc

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:20]
[In reply to Spoice]
and? what about BTC doesn't apply?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:20]
I'm not arguing for any fork of BCH here.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:20]
It no longer meets the very title of the white paper experiment, "Peer to peer electronic cash"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:20]
The BTC instance of the experiment is destined to move away from the very title of the white paper

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:20]
It's electronic, and I use it like cash.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:20]
that the maintainers even wanted to edit the white paper (Cobra and co) because of this fact

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:20]
u/Spoice When did BTC stop being Bitcoin in your view? The day Amaury decided to launch the fork, before Segwit happened?
If someone else launched a fork first, they would have been "the real bitcoin"?
This is a game of whoever forks first becomes the real Bitcoin?
What if two people launched a fork at the exact same time, maybe even with identical specs?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:21]
Where did I go wrong?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:21]
[In reply to Spoice]
Did they?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:21]
Doesn't matter if you use it today, its very technical fabric will have to move your transactions to 2nd layers and it will no longer be peer to peer electronic cash on chain

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:21]
peer to peer electronic cash on chain - Not in the wp

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:22]
We have satoj talking about HFT with sidechannels.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:22]
So what?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:23]
I think this is a good discussion Phil, nothing disrespectful is being said. I hope this is ok?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:23]
Doesn't matter, the rule of common sense, which is closer to that title? Increasing a simple variable (Blocksize) to stay on track of the title and experiment, or introduce IOUs and Watchtowers and channels and locked BTC and that whole LN Bastardization? Which is close to the title?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:23]
No one said that can't happen

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:24]
[In reply to Spoice]
Congratulations you've made an argument which isn't an argument.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:25]
The whole thing that was said was the system is based on majority rules, and incentives can be changed. Majority breaks any deadlock.

David B., [18.10.20 02:25]
How to kill a coin 101

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:25]
Logic fails anyone who tries to claim BTC, ABC, BSV or any similar standalone experiments as Bitcoin, because of simple sanity checks and logic checks, often stemming out of common sense - If what you have moves you a single step away from what is otherwise the same old experiment which Satoshi wrote about and unleashed, you're not Bitcoin. If what you have moves you a step closer, it is Bitcoin. and so on and so forth.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:25]
Wow, really fanatical almost religious statements. I guess its Sunday morning.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:27]
[In reply to Spoice]
There's nothing common about common sense. You point to the WP to make a point, and your point isn't in there.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:27]
Throttled and you need off-chain IOUs and always-on services to function (BTC) ? Not Bitcoin. Requires permission to be used and could be centrally confiscated on the whim of the organization behind it (BSV)? Not Bitcoin. Premined (Bitcoin Gold, Diamond)? Not Bitcoin. Taxing the miners through Coinbase and changing the incentives which were at play since day 0 (ABC)? Not Bitcoin

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:27]
simple checks really, yet those who are set to benefit will of course be oblivious to these

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:28]
This whole “Bitcoin Cash is the true Bitcoin - see whitepaper” is really stupid. It also ignores the history of how Bitcoin Cash came into existence

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:28]
Phillip, remove anyone here that has said Bitcoin Gold was the original Bitcoin immediately

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:28]
^^^^

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:29]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
It falls to pieces the moment it's questioned.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:29]
It is not about "True" Bitcoin

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:30]
It is about the Bitcoin closest to the experiment which always was

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:30]
I don't care about "True" or not, they all are true

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:30]
[In reply to Jingles]
Sorry, I hve stopped reading all the sillyness above. Will reread later

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:30]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
I'm joking around 😂

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:30]
but the rule of entropy says I shouldn't place my money nor effort in experiments which are set to fade eventually, because they have skewed incentives

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:31]
[In reply to Spoice]
You get to chose that for yourself but you do not get to dictate it for others

David B., [18.10.20 02:31]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
Don't read it. You will have no braincells left

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:31]
Bitcoin as we know it has a long track record of incentives which work

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:31]
I won't ever dictate it for others

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:31]
I only would dictate it for myself, just like how I never use BTC or BSV today, I won't use ABC tomorrow

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
only because they're new experiments

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
interesting, and I wish them luck

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:32]
"Bitcoin is Bitcoin" is a false statement - Spoice 2020

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
but I would rather stick to the Bitcoin I know

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
that's all

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:32]
I won't ever dictate it for others - Also Spoice
Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:32]
Bitcoin Cash came with a plan snd goals. They were clearly presented in two presentations that happened before viabtc announced they would mine with ABC software and create a coin and chain named Bitcoin Cash

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
Yes, because he means BTC is Bitcoin, and that's a false statement

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:32]
How is it false?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:32]
It is an instance of Bitcoin

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:33]
[In reply to Michael Nunzio]
you're looking intimidatingly handsome in your new profile picture

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:33]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
Lol

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:33]
[In reply to J Stodd]
actually a good question

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
Anyway, those are my two cents

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
Everyone is free to choose which experiments to pour their effort on and their money in

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:34]
[In reply to Spoice]
You are entitled to your opinion.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
Andreas is publishing Lightning Network books, I mean

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:34]
So to each his own

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:35]
[In reply to Spoice]
Lets leave it at that

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:35]
but Bitcoin as I know it continues with no Tax, and that in my opinion is BCH with no tax

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:35]
Ah you had to continue

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:36]
Good thing no tax is proposed by anyone
Spoice, [18.10.20 02:35]
Isn't this the Bitcoin Cash telegram?

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:35]
😅

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:36]
If I don't discuss Bitcoin Cash here, where should I?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:36]
Tax, IFP, call it what you will

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:36]
from my perspective as a user, it's one the same

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:36]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
I bet nobody will answer it, either

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Spoice]
Apparently btc /s

David B., [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Spoice]
As a user what do you care?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:37]
Ooh, can I shill the Bitcoin room in here?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:37]
Nah, I prefer quick responses and chats

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:37]
Reddit is broken

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Jingles]
Lol

J Stodd, [18.10.20 02:37]
[In reply to Spoice]
Nobody even pays it, it just comes out of the block reward. The block reward is not sentient, it cannot be stolen from or wronged

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:37]
Dont push your luck 😉

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:37]
[ 😀 Sticker ]

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:38]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
You too brother. 🙏

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:38]
[In reply to Michael Nunzio]
but mine is the same....i need new ones everyone always calls me fat because of this one

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:38]
literally if i say 1 thing to any troll anywhere first thing they say is "ok fatass"

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:38]
i blame this dumb photographer

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:38]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
Don't listen.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:39]
u/spoice maybe write a read.cash article if you really feel you need to educate people

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:39]
David, as a user I believe that each new experiment carries risk with it, why should I take part in a new fork of Bitcoin which has a new set of game-theory rules which doesn't even benefit me, rather it benefits some other entity which will take 5% of any effort or economic activity I produce on this chain? They're also off-loading the risk to me as a usebuildebusiness who choose to join their experiment.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:40]
Why should I take that risk while the Bitcoin I know and have known for over 10 years worked perfectly for me thus far? (BCH, that is)

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:40]
small fees and empty blocks?

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:41]
It will insure that a centralized group has control over development and they are by decree in the code, it's a literal take over.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:41]
[In reply to Spoice]
“BSV-freeze the protocol - true Bitcoin” sounds like more your thing

David B., [18.10.20 02:41]
[In reply to Spoice]
Better run bitcoin core 0.1

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:41]
Imagine if satoshi keyd his address in the code to be paid out of every block, but instead of paying himself started a company "Bitcoin Dev Co"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:42]
Not really, BSV kills the incentives I am discussing too

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:42]
[In reply to Jingles]
Please stay nice now

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:42]
No one would ever be able to say Bitcoin was Decentralized, Bitcoin Dev Co would get paid directly from the reward.

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:42]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
"BSV: We have all the Bad Idea. On chain"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:42]
The Nash equilibrium we have tested for the past 10 years will be changed with ABC, it changed with BTC and BSV too

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:42]
"Bad Solutions Verified"

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:42]
that game-theory set of incentives

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:43]
why would I want to take a risk with any of those experiments when I gain 0?

David B., [18.10.20 02:43]
Better run bitcoin core 0.1

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:43]
Nope, you're talking technical freezing of development, that's not what I am addressing

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:43]
[In reply to David B.]
Thats the BTC chain though

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:43]
[In reply to Spoice]
O please share with us your background in the subject. Or are you now just parroting others

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:44]
BSV wants to freeze the technical development and they want a stable protocol from an API/development perspective

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:44]
but from an incentive ruleset perspective, they already butchered the equilibrium Bitcoin had

Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ], [18.10.20 02:44]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
That's one of those phrases, when you hear it you know they are just a parrot of someones propaganda. "MUH NASH EQUILIBRIUM!"

David B., [18.10.20 02:44]
Stable = bad?

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:45]
[In reply to Jc Crown [ I DON'T DM PEOPLE - DON'T GIVE ME MONEY! ]]
I love you

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:45]
Philip, for an admin you are ought to be nicer, if you think I am parroting others you're free to think that, but to state it so bluntly in your position is just... wrong

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:46]
If you think the point I made is wrong, discuss it

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:46]
[In reply to Jingles]
Maybe talk to him in DM about that?😉

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:46]
not me

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:46]
[In reply to Phlip - Not giving away coins]
working on it.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:46]
[In reply to Spoice]
I ought to be nicer...😂😂😂

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:47]
Also, anyone who studied Bitcoin at length and its set of incentives and game-theory ruleset should know what a Nash Equilibrium is and who the players are in the Bitcoin game

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:47]
[In reply to Spoice]
You state as fact. You get to dhow why your statements or opinions are even relevant.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
If it's not a fact, highlight how

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
don't attack me

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
prove me wrong

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
if you fail that simple debate test

David B., [18.10.20 02:48]
How's that breakfast helping?

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:48]
you should rename from Janitor to Tyrant

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:48]
I'm still waiting to see the defined rules as per the wp

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:49]
[In reply to Spoice]
Didn't know this was stand up comedy night in here.

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:49]
I missed the memo

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:49]
If I have to prove all idiots on the internet wrong I would have a hard time. You are starting to really waste everybody’s time. You state, you prove. Or you are just generating noise

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:50]
[In reply to Spoice]
Be careful now.

Michael Nunzio, [18.10.20 02:50]
Noisy bugger.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:52]
Getting close to just do some cleaning up.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:52]
If you can't debate technical points I am making about Bitcoin Cash on a Bitcoin Cash Telegram, and within the span of 10 minutes you called me stupid, idiot, noisy and a parrot, you absolutely are a tyrant and I stand by my point: You should not be an admin here, nor anywhere actually. If you think I should be careful for the fear of you banning me, go ahead. You still fail to debate the simplest technical point and yet claim you can "but can't be bothered to". You remind me of that Thermos guy.

Spoice, [18.10.20 02:53]
How do people with 0 technical know how end up in these admin positions is beyond me

Jingles, [18.10.20 02:53]
I challenged your comments and you just changed the goal posts.

Phlip - Not giving away coins, [18.10.20 02:53]
[In reply to Spoice]
Ok. You are not paying me and you are free to create noise elsewhere
submitted by wisequote to btc [link] [comments]

List of moderately difficult skribbl words for your new friend group (1200+ words)

That is to say that this list contains words that this list contains words that:
  1. Usually aren't instantly guess-able (like star, apple, or Nike).
  2. Can be played with a group of acquaintances (I play with a group of interns at work to blow off time)
Created this list by modifying an existing difficult word list we found online and adding a bunch of new words. If you see a stupid difficult word, it was probably a word from the existing difficult word list that I forgot to remove. (amicable and reimbursement were the type of bs I removed lol).
abraham lincoln, accordion, accounting, acre, actor, adidas, advertisement, air conditioner, aircraft carrier, airport security, alarm clock, alcohol, alert, alice in wonderland, alphabet, altitude, amusement park, angel, angle, angry, ankle, apathetic, apathy, apparatus, applause, application, apron, archaeologist, archer, armada, arrows, art gallery, ashamed, asteroid, athlete, atlantis, atlas, atmosphere, attack, attic, audi, aunt, austin powers, australia, author, avalanche, avocado, award, baby, baby-sitter, back flip, back seat, baggage, baguette, baker, balance beam, bald, balloon, bamboo, banister, barbershop, barney, baseboards, bat, beans, beanstalk, beard, bed and breakfast, bedbug, beer pong, belt, beluga whale, berlin wall, bible, biceps, bikini, binder, biohazard, biology, birthday, biscuit, bisexual, bitcoin, black hole, blacksmith, bleach, blizzard, blueprint, bluetooth, blunt, blush, boa constrictor, bobsled, bonnet, book, bookend, bookstore, border, boromir, bottle cap, boulevard, boundary, bow tie, bowling, boxing, braces, brain, brainstorm, brand, bride, bride wig, bruise, brunette, bubble, bubble bath, bucket, buckle, buffalo, bugs bunny, bulldog, bumble bee, bunny, burrito, bus, bushel, butterfly, buzz lightyear, cabin, cable car, cadaver, cake, calculator, calendar, calf, calm, camera, cannon, cape, captain, captain america, car, car accident, carat, cardboard, carnival, carpenter, carpet, cartography, cartoon, cartoonist, castaway, castle, cat, catalog, cattle, cd, ceiling, cell, cellar, centimetre, centipede, century, chain mail, chain saw, chair, champion, chandelier, channel, chaos, charger, chariot, chariot racing, check, cheerleader, cheerleader dust, chef, chemical, cherub, chess, chevrolet, chick-fil-a, chicken coop, chicken legs, chicken nugget, chime, chimney, china, chisel, chord, church, circus tent, clamp, classroom, cleaning spray, cliff, cliff diving, climate, clique, cloak, clog, clown, clue, coach, coast, cockpit, coconut, coffee, coil, comedian, comfy, commercial, community, companion, company, compare, comparison, compromise, computer, computer monitor, con, confidant, confide, consent, constrictor, convenience store, conversation, convertible, conveyor belt, copyright, cord, corduroy, coronavirus, correct, cot, country, county fair, courthouse, cousin, cowboy, coworker, cramp, crane, cranium, crate, crayon, cream, creator, credit, crew, crib, crime, crisp, criticize, crop duster, crow's nest, cruise, cruise ship, crumbs, crust, cubicle, cubit, cupcake, curtain, cushion, customer, cutlass, czar, dab, daffy duck, dance, danger, darth vader, darts, dashboard, daughter, dead end, deadpool, deceive, decipher, deep, default, defect, degree, deliver, demanding, demon, dent, dentist, deodorant, depth, descendant, destruction, detail, detective, diagonal, dice, dictate, disco, disc jockey, discovery, disgust, dismantle, distraction, ditch, diver, diversify, diversity, diving, divorce, dizzy, dodge ball, dog, dolphin, donald trump, doorbell, doppelganger, dorsal, double, doubloon, doubt, doubtful, download, downpour, dragon, drain, dream, dream works, dress shirt, drift, drip, dripping, drive-through, drought, drowning, drugstore, dryer, dryer sheet, dryer sheets, dugout, dumbbell, dumbo, dust, dust bunny, duvet, earache, earmuffs, earthquake, economics, edge, edit, education, eel, effect, egg, eiffel tower, eighteen-wheeler, electrical outlet, elf, elope, emigrate, emotions, emperor, employee, enemy, engaged, equation, error, eureka, everglades, evolution, exam, exercise, exhibition, expired, explore, exponential, extension, extension cord, eyeball, fabric, factory, fad, fade, fake flowers, family tree, fan, fast food, faucet, feather, feeder road, feeling, ferris wheel, fiddle, figment, finding nemo, firefighter, firefox, fireman, fireman pole, fireplace, fireside, fireworks, first class, first mate, fish bone, fishing, fizz, flag, flat, flavor, flight, flip flops, flock, florist, flotsam, flowchart, flower, flu, flute, flutter, flying saucer, fog, foil, food court, football player, forklift, form, forrest gump, fossil, fowl, fragment, frame, fresh water, freshwater, friction, fries, front, frost, fuel, full, full moon, fun, fun house, funnel, fur, galaxy, gallon, gallop, game, gamer, garden, garden hose, gas station, gasoline, gavel, gentleman, geologist, germ, germany, geyser, giant, ginger, giraffe, gladiator, glasses, glitter, glue, glue stick, goalkeeper, goatee, goblin, gold, gold medal, golden retriever, gondola, good-bye, government, gown, graduation, grain, grandpa, gratitude, graveyard, gravity, great-grandfather, grenade, grill, grim reaper, groom, groot, group, guess, guillotine, gumball, guru, gymnast, hail, hair dryer, haircut, half, hand soap, handful, handle, hang, hang glider, hang ten, harry potter, hawaii, hay wagon, hearse, heater, heaven, helmet, hermit crab, high heel, high tops, highchair, hitler, hockey, homework, honk, hoodies, hoop, hopscotch, hot, hot dog, hot fuzz, hot tub, hotel, houseboat, human, humidity, hunter, hurdle, husband, hut, hydrant, hydrogen, hypothermia, ice, ice cream cone, ice fishing, icicle, idea, igloo, illuminati, implode, important, improve, in-law, incisor, income, income tax, index, inertia, infect, inglorious bastards, inside out, insurance, interception, interference, interject, internet, invent, invisible, invitation, iron man, ironic, irrational, irrigation, isaac newton, island, ivy, ivy full, jackhammer, japan, jaw, jazz, jedi, jellyfish, jet lag, jig, jigsaw, joke, joker, journal, juggle, jump rope, jungle, junk, junk drawer, junk mail, justice, kangaroo, ketchup, kill bill, killer, kilogram, kim possible, kiss, kitten, kiwi, kit-kat, kneel, knight, koala, lace, lady bug, ladybug, lamp, lance, landfill, landlord, lap, laptop, last, laundry detergent, layover, leak, leap year, learn, leather, lebron james, lecture, legolas, leprechaun, letter, letter opener, lettuce, level, lice, lichen, lie, lifeguard, lifejacket, lifestyle, light, lightning, lightning mcqueen, lightsaber, limit, lion, lipstick, living room, lobster, logo, loiterer, lollipop, loonie, lord of the rings, lottery, love, loveseat, loyalty, lullaby, lumberjack, lumberyard, lunar eclipse, lunar rover, lung, lyrics, macaroni, machete, machine, macho, magnet, mailbox, makeup, mammoth, manatee, mark zuckerberg, martian, mascot, mascot fireman, mask, mast, mastercard, mat, mayhem, mechanic, megaphone, member, memory, mercedes benz, mermaid, meteor, michael scott, michelangelo, microscope, microsoft, microsoft word, microwave, midnight, migrate, millionaire, mime, mine, mine car, miner, minivan, mirror, missile, mitten, mohawk, moisturizer, molar, mold, mom, monsoon, monster, monsters inc, mooch, moonwalk, moth, mount rushmore, mozart, mr potato head, mulan, mummy, music, mysterious, myth, name, nanny, naruto, navigate, negotiate, neighborhood, nemo, nepal, nest, netflix, neutron, newsletter, night, nightmare, nike, north pole, nose, nostril, nurse, nutmeg, oar, obey, observatory, office, offstage, olive oil, olympics, one-way street, opaque, optometrist, orange juice, orbit, organ, organize, ornament, ornithologist, ounce, oven, owl, oyster, pacific ocean, pacifier, page, pail, pain, palace, pancakes, panda, panic, pantyhose, paper plate, paperclip, parade, paranoid, parent, parking garage, parley, parody, partner, password, pastry, patrick starr, pawnshop, peace, peacock, peanut, peasant, pelt, pen pal, pendulum, pepsi, periwinkle, personal, pest, pet store, petroleum, pharaoh, pharmacist, philosopher, phineas and ferb, phone, photo, piano, pickup truck, picnic, pigpen, pigtails, pile, pilgrim, pilot, pinboard, pineapple express, ping pong, pink panther, pipe, pirate, pizza, pizza sauce, plan, plank, plantation, plastic, playground, pleasure, plow, plumber, pocket, pocket watch, point, pokeball, pokemon, pole, police, pomp, pompous, pong, popeye, population, portfolio, positive, positive champion, post, post office, practice, president, preteen, prey, prime meridian, printer ink, prize, produce, professor, profit, promise, propose, protestant, psychologist, publisher, pumpkin, pumpkin pie, punching bag, punishment, punk, puppet, putty, quadrant, quarantine, quartz, queue, quicksand, quit, quiver, raccoon, race, raft, rage, rainbow, raindrop, rainwater, random, raphael, ratatouille, ratchet, ray, reaction, realm, ream, receipt, recess, record, recorder, recycle, referee, refund, regret, religion, remain, resourceful, rest stop, retail, retire, reveal, revenge, reward, rhyme, rhythm, rib, rick and morty, riddle, right, rim, rind, ringleader, risk, rival, robe, robot, rock band, rocket, rodeo, roller coaster, roommate, roundabout, rowboat, rubber, ruby, rudder, runt, rv, s'mores, safe, salmon, salt, sand castle, sandbox, sandbox bruise, sandpaper, santa claus, sap, sapphire, sash, sasquatch, satellite, saturn, sausage, saxophone, scarf, scatter, schedule, school, school bus, science, scissors, scooby doo, scrambled eggs, scream, screwdriver, script, scuba diving, scythe, seahorse, season, seat, seat belt, seed, serial killer, servant, sewer, shaft, shakespeare, shame, shampoo, sheep, sheets, shelter, sherlock holmes, shipwreck, shoelace, shopping cart, shotgun wedding, shower, shower curtain, shrew, shrink, shrink ray, sickle, sidekick, siesta, signal, silhouette, silt, simba, simpsons, skateboard, skating rink, ski goggles, ski lift, skip, skipping rope, skydiving, slack, sleep, sleet, slim shady, slipper, slump, snag, snapchat, sneeze, snooze, snore, snow globe, snowball, snowflake, soak, social distancing, socks, softball, solar eclipse, somersault, song, sophomore, soul, soulmate, soviet russia, space, space-time, spaceship, spaghetti, spare, speakers, spiderman, spirited away, sponge, spoon, spotify, spring, sprinkler, squat, stage, stage fright, stagecoach, stairs, staple, starbucks, starfish, startup, star trek, statement, stationery, statue of liberty, stay, steamboat, steel drum, stethoscope, stew, stewie griffin, sticky note, stingray, stockings, stork, storm trooper, story, stout, stowaway, stranger, strawberry, streamline, student, stuff, stun, submarine, sugar, suit, sun, sunburn, sunlight, sunscreen, superbad, superman, surfing, sushi, swamp, swarm, sweater, swim shorts, swing dancing, switzerland, swimming, syringe, system, tachometer, taco bell, tadpole, tag, tank, tattle, taxes, taxi, teabag, team, tearful, teenage mutant ninja turtle, teenager, teepee, telepathy, telephone booth, telescope, temper, ten, tesla, testify, tetris, thanos, the beatles, the dark knight, the prestige, theory, think, thread, thrift store, throne, ticket, tide, time, timeline, time machine, time zone, tin, tinting, tiptoe, tire, tissue box, toast, today, toddler, toilet paper, toll road, tomato sauce, tombstone, toothbrush, toothpaste, top hat, torch, tornado, toronto maple leafs, tourist, tournament, tow, tow truck, toy store, toy story, trademark, traffic jam, trail, trailer, train, train tracks, transformers, translate, transpose, trapped, trash bag, trash can, trawler, treatment, trench coat, tricycle, trip, trombone, truck, truck stop, tsunami, tub, tuba, tug, tugboat, turret, tutor, tutu, twang, twitter, umbrella, unemployed, united states, university, upgrade, vacation, vampire, van, vanilla, vanquish, vegan, vegetarian, vehicle, vein, venn diagram, vest, villain, violent, vision, vitamin, voice, voicemail, volleyball, wag, wall-e, wallet, wallow, wasabi, washing machine, water, water buffalo, water cycle, water vapor, wax, wealth, weather, wedding, wedding cake, weed, welder, werewolf, wet, wetlands, whale, whatsapp, whey, whip, whiplash, whisk, wifi, wig, wikipedia, win, wind, winnie the pooh, wish, witch, wizard, wolverine, woody, workout, world, wormhole, writhe, yacht, yak, yard, yardstick, yawn, yeti, yin yang, yoda, yodel, yolk, youtube, zamboni, zen, zero, zeus, zip code, zipper, zombie, zombieland, zoo
submitted by skribblwords to skribbl [link] [comments]

Proof Of Stake

Proof Of Stake
https://preview.redd.it/7nfccptuway41.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=0103130266549ba8ae21e63d837b67528e39f59c
In my previous article, I have covered one of the most famous consensus mechanism i.e Proof of Work. But like any technology, that protocol also has a certain drawback, and to overcome these issues another protocol has been developed i.e Proof Of Stake.
Proof Of Stake, as the name implies depends upon the stake of a validator. Like Miners in PoW, PoS consists of a group of validators. These validators use a pseudo-random algorithm to select a node that will act as a validator for the next block. The validator was decided based on a combination of different factors which includes the staking age and the node’s wealth. This means that the more coin one has, the more mining power he or she will have. Thus unlike PoW which is quite a power extensive because it depends upon solving a complex computational puzzle to decide the next block, the validation and generation of next block in PoS solely depend on the owner's stake. In Proof of Stake systems, the blocks that were mined are termed as ‘forged’.
This algorithm was introduced in 2011 with the idea to solve the problems with Proof of Work. Though both these algorithm is used to achieve consensus in the blockchain network, the underlying process to reach the final goal is different.
Some of the crypto coins like Nxt (NXT), Blackcoin, ShadowCoin, and Peercoin (PPC) uses the PoS method. Ethereum (ETH) is also planning to switch to a PoS system.
How do PoS works?
The blockchain network consists of a series of a node which acts as a miner (Forge in this case). Any network user who wants to participate in the forging activity needs to stake a certain amount of coin into the network. One can do this by sending a special transaction that will lock up their base cryptocurrency(in Ethereum's case, ether). The stake size determines the chances of a node to be selected as the next validator who will forge the next block. The bigger the stake, the higher the chances.
The newly created node which got selected to forge the next block checks the validity of the transactions in the block. If the transactions are valid, it then signs the block and adds it to the blockchain network. The node receives the transaction fees that are associated with the transactions in the block as a reward.
In the case when the node doesn’t want to serve as a forger, it can withdraw its stake along with the rewards earned. The network verifies and releases the node once it successfully checks that the node has not been involved in any malicious activity.
Advantages of using PoS:-
o Enhanced security.
o Energy-efficient.
o Reduced risk of centralization.
Forge selection method:-
Two unique methods are being used in case there is a requirement of not selecting the node with the maximum stake. These are:-
o Randomized Block Selection
In this method, a node gets selected as the validators which are having a combination of the lowest hash value and the highest stake. The account which will receive the right to forge a block can be easily predicted by each node because the stakes are public
o Coin Age Selection method
In this method, a node gets selected as the validators who have kept their stake for a longer period. The Coin age is calculated by multiplying the number of days the coins have been reserved as stake by the number of coins that are available as stake.
Coin age=no.of days coined staked *total no of coins staked
The coin age of a node has been reset to zero once it forged a block. To forge another block, the node has to wait for a certain period. Hence this method prevents the large stake nodes from dominating the blockchain network.
Different types of PoS
Proof Of Stake can be categorized into two parts:-
o Chain-based proof of stake
This algorithm randomly selects a validator during the time slot (e.g. every period of 10 seconds might be a time slot) available to create a block, and then assign it an authority to create a block with the constraint that the block must point to some previous block. Generally, it points to the last block of the longest chain. Hence over time, the blocks converge into one growing chain.
Blockchain projects that implemented this model are Nxt, Peercoin, Ardor.
o BFT-style proof of stake
This model offers ‘consistency’. Here the randomly chosen validators decide whether a particular block can be included in the chain or not at the end of each round. This type could be favored for a more “permission” approach. In this case, the consensus on a block does not depend on the length or size of the chain.
Blockchain projects that implemented this model are Neo, Tendermint, Polkadot, Hyperledge Fabric.
How it reduces the risk of a Network attack?
Since this model works on the concept of the stake owned by the validator, thus to effectively control the network and approve fraudulent transactions, a node has to own a majority stake in the network (also known as the 51% attack) which is quite impractical because if a hacker tries to purchase 51% of the total number of coins, the market reacts by the fast price appreciation.
Also, wherever the network detects any fraudulent transaction, not only the forger node loses a part of its stake but is also restricted from participating in future activities. Till the time the cost of staking is higher than the reward, the validator is at a loss in case of attempting fraud.
With the “Casper” upgrade underway for Ethereum, Proof-of-Stake (POS) model is gaining more popularity among other Blockchain consensus designs. With this upgrade, the protocols will set certain criteria that will identify a bad validator. The bad validator would lose their deposit if proven, thus making this model more secure.
Read more: Understanding different Consensus Mechanisms, Proof Of Work Explained
#bitcoin #ethereum #consensus #pos #blockchain
submitted by RumaDas to u/RumaDas [link] [comments]

ABC Bug Explained

Disclaimers: I am a Bitcoin Verde developer, not an ABC developer. I know C++, but I am not completely familiar with ABC's codebase, its flow, and its nuances. Therefore, my explanation may not be completely correct. This explanation is an attempt to inform those that are at least semi- tech-savvy, so the upgrade hiccup does not become a scary boogyman that people don't understand.
1- When a new transaction is received by a node, it is added to the mempool (which is a collection of valid transactions that should/could be included in the next block).
2- During acceptance into the mempool, the number of "sigOps" is counted, which is the number of times a signature validation check is performed (technically, it's not a 1-to-1 count, but its purpose is the same).
2a- The reason behind limiting sigops is because signature verification is usually the most expensive operation to perform while ensuring a transaction is valid. Without limiting the number of sigops a single block can contain, an easy DOS (denial of service) attack can be constructed by creating a block that takes a very long to validate due to it containing transactions that require a disproportionately large number of sigops. Blocks that take too long to validate (i.e. ones with far too many sigops) can cause a lot of problems, including causing blocks to be slowly propagated--which disrupts user experience and can give the incumbent miner a non-negligible competitive advantage to mine the next block. Overall, slow-validating blocks are bad.
3- When accepted to the mempool, the transaction is recorded along with its number of sigops.
3a- This is where the ABC bug lived. During the acceptance of the mempool, the transaction's scripts are parsed and each occurrence of a sigop is counted. When OP_CHECKDATASIG was introduced during the November upgrade, the procedure that counted the number of sigops needed to know if it should count OP_CHECKDATASIG as a sigop or as nothing (since before November, it was not a signature checking operation). The way the procedure knows what to count is controlled by a "flag" that is passed along with the script. If the flag is included, OP_CHECKDATASIG is counted as a sigop; without it, it is counted as nothing. Last November, every place that counted sigops included the flag EXCEPT the place where they were recorded in the mempool--instead, the flag was omitted and transactions using OP_CHECKDATASIG were logged to the mempool as having no sigops.
4- When mining a block, the node creates a candidate block--this prototype is completely valid except for the nonce (and the extended nonce/coinbase). The act of mining is finding the correct nonce. When creating the prototype block, the node queries the mempool and finds transactions that can fit in the next block. One of the criteria used when determining applicability is the sigops count, since a block is only allowed to have a certain number of sigops.
4a- Recall the ABC bug described in step 3a. The number of sigops for transactions using OP_CHECKDATASIG is recorded as zero--but only during the mempool step, not during any of the other operations. So these OP_CHECKDATASIG transactions can all get grouped up into the same block. The prototype block builder thinks the block should have very few sigops, but the actual block has many, many, sigops.
5- When the miner module is ready to begin mining, it requests the prototype block the in step 4. It re-validates the block to ensure it has the correct rules. However, since the new block has too many sigops included in it, the mining software starts working on an empty block (which is not ideal, but more profitable than leaving thousands of ASICs idle doing nothing).
6- The empty block is mined and transmitted to the network. It is a valid block, but does not contain any other transactions other than the coinbase. Again, this is because the prototype block failed to validate due to having too many sigops.
This scenario could have happened at any time after OP_CHECKDATASIG was introduced. By creating many transactions that only use OP_CHECKDATASIG, and then spending them all at the same time would create blocks containing what the mempool thought was very few sigops, but everywhere else contained far too many sigops. Instead of mining an invalid block, the mining software decides to mine an empty block. This is also why the testnet did not discover this bug: the scenario encountered was fabricated by creating a large number of a specifically tailored transactions using OP_CHECKDATASIG, and then spending them all in a 10 minute timespan. This kind of behavior is not something developers (including myself) premeditated.
I hope my understanding is correct. Please, any of ABC devs correct me if I've explained the scenario wrong.
EDIT: markblundeberg added a more accurate explanation of step 5 here.
submitted by FerriestaPatronum to btc [link] [comments]

Which type of curren(t) do you want to see(cy)? An analysis of the intention behind bitcoin(s). Part 3

Part 1
Part 2
So I have been subbed to /bitcoin since it had less than two thousand subs but haven't posted there in years. I think I took a break from researching bitcoin to take a foray into the world of conspiracy around 2014 and only got back in to it around the beginning of 2017 but with a bit of sense of skepticism and cynicism about everything. I think I returned to /bitcoin around that time but there had been a rift that had emerged in the community between those that said that bitcoin was censoring any discussion around big blocks but then also just censorship in general. This lead to the formation of /btc which became the main spot for big blockers to gather to talk about protocol development. Following the fork of Bitcoin Cash and SegWit (BTC) in August 2017 the camps were further divided when the fence sitters were denied their SegWit2x compromise. Many from the fence sitters then deferred back to the incumbent bitcoin as citing muh network effect, liquidity, and hashpower while some who felt betrayed by the failure of getting S2X through went to support BCH for some attempt at on chain scaling rather than through pegged side chains or Lightning Network.
Bitcoin cash initially went with a modest doubling of the blocksize to 2MB but implemented some other features like a new more rapidly adjusting difficulty algorithm to protect themselves against hashpower fluctuations from the majority chain. In about July of that year I had seen what I potentially thought was someone LARPing on /biz/ but screencapped, that segwit2x which was scheduled for november 2017 would be called off and then hashpower would switch to BCH causing congestion and chain death spiral on BTC and BCH would pump massively. I was partial to the idea as the game theory and incentives on a big block bitcoin should attract miners. About a month after SegWit2x was indeed called off while the BTC blockchain was hugely congested, BCH went through a violent pump reaching 0.5 BTC/BCH on a European exchange called Kraken while it also pumped ridiculously on American exchange coinbase. Shortly afterwards the market took a giant dump all over those people who bought the top and it has since retraced to roughly 30:1 or so now.
After that pump though BCH kind of gained some bagholders I guess who started to learn the talking points presented by personalities like Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, Peter Rizun and Amaury Sechet. Craig S Wright by this time had been outed as Satoshi but had in 2016 publicly failed to convince the public with the cryptographic proof he provided. To which he later published the article I don't have the courage to prove I am the bitcoin creator. In essence this allowed many to disregard anything he offered to the crypto community though his company nChain was very much interested in providing the technical support to scale what he saw as the true implementation of bitcoin. Following debate around a set of planned protocol upgrades between a bitcoin node implementation by his company nChain and the developers of another client Bitcoin ABC (adjustable block cap), the two parties both dug their heels in and wouldn't compromise.
As it became clear that a fork was imminent there was a lot of vitriol tossed out towards Wright, another big billionaire backer Calvin Ayre and other personalities like Roger Ver and Jihan Wu. Craig's credibility was disregarded because of his failure to provide convincing cryptographic proof but still people who wanted to pursue the protocol upgrades that nChain were planning (as it best followed their interpretation of the bitcoin white paper) pursued his variant, while others who followed the socia consensus deferred to the positions of their personalities like Wu, Ver, and Sechet but even developers from Ethereum and other protocols chimed in to convince everyone that CSW is a fraud. This was referred to as the hash war and was the first time that the bitcoin protocol had been contentiously hard forked.

Hashpower is the CPU cycles you can commit to the Proof of Work function in bitcoin and the majority will generate the longest chain as they have the most proof of work. To win the contentious hard fork legitimately and make sure your chain will always be safe going forward you need to maintain your version of the blockchain with 51% of the hashpower on the network and force the other parties to continue to spend money on building a blockchain that is never going to be inserted in to the majority chain. As well as this you need to convince exchanges that you have the majority chain and have them feel safe to accept deposits and withdrawals so that they don't lose money in the chaos. This is how it would play out if both parties acted according to the rules of bitcoin and the Nakamoto Consensus.

There was a lot of shit talking between the two parties on social media with Craig Wright making a number of claims such as "you split, we bankrupt you" "I don't care if there is no ability to move coins to an exchange for a year" and other such warnings not to engage in foul play.. To explain this aftermath is quite tedious so It might be better to defer to this video for the in depth analysis but basically Roger Ver had to rent hashpower that was supposed to be mining BTC from his mining farm bitcoin.com, Jihan Wu did the same from his Bitmain Mining Farm which was a violation of his fiduciary duty as the CEO of a company preparing for an IPO. In this video of a livestream during the hashwar where Andreas Brekken admits to basically colluding with exchange owners like Coinbase, Kraken (exchange Roger Ver invested in), Bitfinex and others to release a patched ABC client to the exchanges and introducing "checkpoints" in to the BCH blockchain (which he even says is arguably "centralisation") in order to prevent deep reorgs of the BCH blockchain.
>"We knew we were going to win in 30 mins we had the victory because of these checkpoints that we released to a cartel of friendly businesses in a patch so then we just sat around drinking beers all day".
By releasing a patched client that has code in it to prevent deep reorgs by having the client refer to a checkpoint from a block mined by someone who supported BCHABC if another group of hash power was to try to insert a new chain history, this cartel of exchanges and mining farm operators conspired in private to change the nature of the bitcoin protocol and Nakamoto Consensus. Since the fork there have been a number of other BCH clients that have come up that require funding and have their own ideas about what things to implement on the BCH chain. What began to emerge was actually not necessarily an intention of scaling bitcoin but rather to implement Schnorr signatures to obfuscate transactions and to date the ABC client still has a default blocksize of 2MB but advertised as 16MB.
What this demonstrates for BCH is that through the collusion, the cartel can immediately get a favourable outcome from the developers to keep their businesses secure and from the personalities/developers to work on obfuscating records of transactions on the chain rather than scaling their protocol. After the SegWit fork, many from the BCH camp alleged that through the funding to Blockstream from AXA and groups that tied to the Bilderbergs, Blockstream would be beholden to the legacy banking and would be a spoke and hub centralised model, so naturally many of the "down with central banks anarcho capitalist types" had gathered in the BCH community. Through these sympathies it seems that people have been susceptible to being sold things like coin mixing and obfuscation with developers offering their opinions about how money needs to be anonymous to stop the evil government and central banks despite ideas like Mises’ Regression Theorem, which claims that in order for something to be money in the most proper sense, it must be traceable to an originally non-monetary barter commodity such as gold.
What this suggests is that there is an underlying intent from the people that have mechanisms to exert their will upon the protocol of bitcoin and that if obfuscation is their first priority rather than working on creating a scalable platform, this demonstrates that they don't wish to actually be global money but more so something that makes it easier to move money that you don't want seen. Roger Ver has often expressed sentiments of injustice about the treatment of Silk Road found Ross Ulbricht and donated a large amount of money to a fund for his defence. I initially got in to bitcoin seeking out the Silk Road and though I only wanted to test it to buy small quantities of mdma, lsd, and mescaline back in 2011 there was all sorts of criminal activity on there like scam manuals, counterfeits, ID, Credit Card info, and other darknet markets like armoury were selling pretty crazy weapons. It has been alleged by Craig Wright that in his capacity as a digital forensics expert he was involved with tracing bitcoin that was used to fund the trafficking of 12-16 year olds on the silk road. There have been attempts at debunking such claims by saying that silk road was moderated for such stuff by Ulbricht and others, but one only has to take a look in to the premise of pizza gate to understand that there it may be possible to hide in plain site with certain code words for utilising the market services and escrow of websites like the silk road. The recent pedo bust from South Korea demonstrates the importance of being able to track bitcoin transactions and if the first thing BCH wanted to do after separating itself from Satoshi's Vision and running on developer and cartel agendas was to implement obfuscation methods, this type of criminal activity will only proliferate.
Questions one must ask oneself then are things like why do they want this first? Are some of these developers, personalities and cartel businesses sitting on coins that they know are tarnished from the silk road and want to implement obfuscation practices so they can actually cash in some of the value they are unable to access? Merchants from the silk road 1 are still being caught even as recently as this year when they attempted to move coins that were known to have moved through the silk road. Chain analytics are only becoming more and more powerful and the records can never be changed under the original bitcoin protocol but with developer induced protocol changes like Schnorr signatures, and coinjoin it may be possible to start laundering these coins out in to circulation. I must admit with the cynicism I had towards government and law enforcement and my enjoying controlled substances occasionally I was sympathetic to Ross and donated to his legal fund back in the day and for many years claimed that I wouldn't pay my taxes when I wanted to cash out of bitcoin. I think many people in the space possess this same kind of mentality and subsequently can be preyed upon by people who wish to do much more in the obfuscation than dodge tax and party.
Another interesting observation is that despite the fact that btc spun off as a result of censorship around big block scaling on bitcoin, that subreddit itself has engaged in plenty of censorship for basically anyone who wants to discuss the ideas presented by Dr Craig Wright on that sub. When I posted my part 2 of this series in there a week ago I was immediately met with intense negativity and ad hominems so as to discourage others from reading the submission and my post history was immediately throttled to 1 comment every 10 mins. This is not quite as bad as cryptocurrency where my post made it through the new queue to gather some upvotes and a discussion started but I was immediately banned from that sub for 7 days for reason "Content standards - you're making accusations based on no evidence just a dump of links that do nothing to justify your claims except maybe trustnodes link (which has posted fabricated information about this subreddit mods) and a Reddit post. Keep the conspiracy theories in /conspiracy" My post was also kept at zero in bitcoin and conspiracy so technically btc was the least censored besides C_S_T.
In addition to the throttling I was also flagged by the u/BsvAlertBot which says whether or not a user has a questionable amount of activity in BSV subreddits and then a break down of your percentages. This was done in response to combat the "toxic trolls" of BSV but within bitcoincashSV there are many users that have migrated from what was originally supposed to be a uncensored subreddit to discuss bitcoin and many such as u/cryptacritic17 has have switched sides after having been made to essentially DOXX themselves in btc to prove that they aren't a toxic troll for raising criticisms of the way certain things are handled within that coin and development groups. Other prominent users such as u/jim-btc have been banned for impersonating another user which was in actual fact himself and he has uploaded evidence of him being in control of said account to the blockchain. Mod Log, Mod Damage Control, Mod Narrative BTFO. Interestingly in the comments on the picture uploaded to the blockchain you can see the spin to call him an SV shill when in actual fact he is just an OG bitcoiner that wanted bitcoin to scale as per the whitepaper.
What is essentially going on in the Bitcoin space is that there is a battle of the protocols and a battle for social consensus. The incumbent BTC has majority of the attention and awareness as it is being backed by legacy banking and finance with In-Q-Tel and AXA funding blockstream as well as Epstein associates and MIT, but in the power vaccum that presented itself as to who would steward the big block variant, a posse of cryptoanarchists have gained control of the social media forums and attempted to exert their will upon what should essentially be a Set In Stone Protocol to create something that facilitates their economic activity (such as selling explosives online)) while attempting to leverage their position as moderators who control the social forum to spin their actions as something different (note memorydealers is Roger Ver). For all his tears for the children killed in wars, it seems that what cryptoanarchists such as u/memorydealers want is to delist/shut down governments and they will go to any efforts such as censorship to make sure that it is their implementation of bitcoin that will do that. Are we really going to have a better world with people easier able to hide transactions/launder money?
Because of this power vacuum there also exists a number of different development groups but what is emerging now is that they are struggling for money to fund their development. The main engineering is done by self professed benevolent dictator Amaury Sechet (deadalnix) who in leaked telegram screen caps appears to be losing it as funding for development has dried up and money raised in an anarchist fashion wasn't compliant with laws around fundraising sources and FVNI (development society that manages BCH development and these donations) is run by known scammer David R Allen. David was founder of 2014 Israeli ICO Getgems (GEMZ) that scammed investors out of more than 2500 Bitcoins. The SV supported sky-lark who released this information has since deleted all their accounts but other users have claimed that sky-lark was sent personal details about themselves and pictures of their loved ones and subsequently deleted all their social media accounts afterwards.
There are other shifty behaviours like hiring Japanese influencers to shill their coin, recruiting a Hayden Otto that up until 2018 was shilling Pascal Coin to become a major ambassador for BCH in the Australian city of Townsville. Townsville was claimed to be BCH city hosting a BCH conference there and claiming loads of adoption, but at the conference itself their idea of demonstrating adoption was handing a Point of Sale device to the bar to accept bitcoin payments but Otto actually just putting his credit card behind the bar to settle and he would keep the BCH that everyone paid. In the lead up to the conference the second top moderator of btc was added to the moderators of townsville to shill their coin but has ended up with the townsville subreddit wanting to ban all bitcoin talk from the subreddit.
Many of the BCH developers are now infighting as funding dries up and they find themselves floundering with no vision of how to achieve scale or get actual real world adoption. Amaury has recently accused Peter Rizun of propagandising, told multiple users in the telegram to fuck off and from all accounts appears to be a malignant narcissist incapable of maintaining any kind of healthy relationship with people he is supposed to be working with. Peter Rizun has begun lurking in bitcoincashSV and recognising some of the ideas coming from BSV as having merit while Roger has started to distance himself from the creation of BCH. Interestingly at a point early in the BCH history Roger believed Dr Craig Wright was Satoshi, but once CSW wouldn't go along with their planned road map and revealed the fact he had patents on blockchain technology and wanted to go down a path that worked with Law, Roger retracted that statement and said he was tricked by Craig. He joined in on the faketoshi campaign and has been attempted to be sued by Dr Wright for libel in the UK to which Roger refused to engage citing grounds of jurisdiction. Ironically this avoidance of Roger to meet Dr Wright in court to defend his claims can be seen as the very argument against justice being served by private courts under an anarchocapitalist paradigm with essentially someone with resources simply being able to either flee a private court's jurisdiction or engage a team of lawyers that can bury any chances of an everyday person being able to get justice.
There is much more going on with the BCH drama that can be explained in a single post but it is clear that some of the major personalities in the project are very much interested in having their ideals projected on to the technical implementation of the bitcoin protocol and have no qualms spouting rhetoric around the anti-censorship qualities of bitcoin/BCH while at the same time employing significant censorship on their social media forums to control what people are exposed to and getting rid of anyone who challenges their vision. I posit that were this coin to become a success, these "benevolent dictators" as they put it would love their new found positions of wealth/dominance yet if their behaviour to get there is anything to go by, would demonstrate the same power tripping practices of censorship, weasel acts, misleading people about adoption statistics and curating of the narrative. When the hashrate from Rogers bitcoin.com minging operation on BCH dropped dramatically and a lot of empty blocks were being mined, his employer and 2IC moderator u/BitcoinXio (who stepped in to replace roger as CEO) was in the sub informing everyone it was simply variance that was the reason when only a few days later it was revealed that they had reduced their hash power significantly. This is not appropriate behaviour for one of the primary enterprises engaged in stewarding BCH and encouraging adoption nor is the inability to be accountable for such dishonest practices as well. It seems bitcoin.com treats btc as their own personal spam page where Roger can ask for donations despite it being against the sub rules and spin/ban any challenge to the narrative they seek to create.
Let's see how the censorship goes as I post this around a few of the same places as the last piece. Stay tuned for the next write up where I take a deep dive in to the coin that everyone doesn't want you to know about.
submitted by whipnil to C_S_T [link] [comments]

My growing collection of info about NEO

It can be very time consuming to keep up to date on a single blockchain project let alone multiple ones. If you just heard about NEO a few weeks ago it would be impossible catch up on past occurrences due to high volume of Reddit posts and articles made on the project. I’m going to try and simplify the past, present and future as much as I can into one well thought-out post. I hope I can be helpful to anyone who has been investigating like myself. I will include sources with all of my research.
https://imgur.com/a/NBI7S (img for mobile backround)
Key notes from the White Paper http://docs.neo.org/en-us/
Digital Assets
Digital assets are programmable assets that exist in the form of electronic data. With blockchain technology, the digitization of assets can be decentralized, trustful, traceable, highly transparent, and free of intermediaries. On the NEO blockchain, users are able to register, trade, and circulate multiple types of assets. Proving the connection between digital and physical assets is possible through digital identity. Assets registered through a validated digital identity are protected by law.
Digital Identity
Digital identity refers to the identity information of individuals, organizations, and other entities that exist in electronic form. The more mature digital identity system is based on the PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) X.509 standard. In NEO, we will implement a set of X.509 compatible digital identity standards. This set of digital identity standards, in addition to compatible X.509 level certificate issuance model, will also support Web Of Trust point-to-point certificate issuance model. Our verification of identity when issuing or using digital identities includes the use of facial features, fingerprint, voice, SMS and other multi-factor authentication methods.
Smart Contracts
The NeoContract smart contract system is the biggest feature of the seamless integration of the existing developer ecosystem. Developers do not need to learn a new programming language but use C#, Java and other mainstream programming languages in their familiar IDE environments (Visual Studio, Eclipse, etc.) for smart contract development, debugging and compilation. NEO's Universal Lightweight Virtual Machine, NeoVM, has the advantages of high certainty, high concurrency, and high scalability. The NeoContract smart contract system will allow millions of developers around the world to quickly carry out the development of smart contracts.
Economic Model
NEO has two native tokens, NEOand NeoGas NEO represents the right to manage the network. Management rights include voting for bookkeeping, NEO network parameter changes, and so on. The minimum unit of NEO is 1 and tokens cannot be subdivided. GAS is the fuel token for the realization of NEO network resource control. The NEO network charges for the operation and storage of tokens and smart contracts, thereby creating economic incentives for bookkeepers and preventing the abuse of resources. The minimum unit of GAS is 0.00000001.
Distribution Mechanism
NEO's 100 million tokens are divided into two portions. The first portion is 50 million tokens distributed proportionally to supporters of NEO during the crowdfunding. This portion has been distributed.
The second portion is 50 million NEO managed by the NEO Council to support NEO's long-term development, operation and maintenance and ecosystem. The NEO in this portion has a lockout period of 1 year and is unlocked only after October 16, 2017. This portion WILL NOT enter the exchanges and is only for long-term support of NEO projects. The plans for it are as below:
▪ 10 million tokens (10% total) will be used to motivate NEO developers and members of the NEO Council
▪ 10 million tokens (10% total) will be used to motivate developers in the NEO ecosystem
▪ 15 million tokens (15% total) will be used to cross-invest in other block-chain projects, which are owned by the NEO Council and are used only for NEO projects
▪ 15 million (15% total) will be retained as contingency
▪ The annual use of NEO in principle shall NOT exceed 15 million tokens
GAS distribution
GAS is generated with each new block. The initial total amount of GAS is zero. With the increasing rate of new block generation, the total limit of 100 million GAS will be achieved in about 22 years. The interval between each block is about 15-20 seconds, and 2 million blocks are generated in about one year. According to this release curve, 16% of the GAS will be created in the first year, 52% of the GAS will be created in the first four years, and 80% of the GAS will be created in the first 12 years. GAS will be distributed proportionally in accordance with the NEO holding ratio, recorded in the corresponding addresses. NEO holders can initiate a claim transaction at any time and claim these GAS tokens at their holding addresses.
Consensus mechanism: dBFT
The dBFT is called the Delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerant, a Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus mechanism that enables large-scale participation in consensus through proxy voting. The holder of the NEO token can, by voting, pick the bookkeeper it supports. The selected group of bookkeepers, through BFT algorithm, reach a consensus and generate new blocks. Voting in the NEO network continues in real time, rather than in accordance with a fixed term.
Cross-chain assets exchange agreement
NeoX has been extended on existing double-stranded atomic assets exchange protocols to allow multiple participants to exchange assets across different chains and to ensure that all steps in the entire transaction process succeed or fail together. In order to achieve this function, we need to use NeoContract function to create a contract account for each participant. If other blockchains are not compatible with NeoContract, they can be compatible with NeoX as long as they can provide simple smart contract functionality.
Cross-chain distributed transaction protocol
Cross-chain distributed transactions mean that multiple steps of a transaction are scattered across different blockchains and that the consistency of the entire transaction is ensured. This is an extension of cross-chain assets exchange, extending the behavior of assets exchange into arbitrary behavior. In layman's terms, NeoX makes it possible for cross-chain smart contracts where a smart contract can perform different parts on multiple chains, either succeeding or reverting as a whole. This gives excellent possibilities for cross-chain collaborations and we are exploring cross-chain smart contract application scenarios.
Distributed Storage Protocol: NeoFS
NeoFS is a distributed storage protocol that utilizes Distributed Hash Table technology. NeoFS indexes the data through file content (Hash) rather than file path (URI). Large files will be divided into fixed-size data blocks that are distributed and stored in many different nodes
Anti-quantum cryptography mechanism: NeoQS
The emergence of quantum computers poses a major challenge to RSA and ECC-based cryptographic mechanisms. Quantum computers can solve the large number of decomposition problems (which RSA relies on) and the elliptic curve discrete logarithm (which ECC relies on) in a very short time. NeoQS (Quantum Safe) is a lattice-based cryptographic mechanism. At present, quantum computers do not have the ability to quickly solve the Shortest Vector Problem (SVP) and the Closest Vector Problem (CVP), which is considered to be the most reliable algorithm for resisting quantum computers.
Reasons for choosing dBFT over PoW and PoS:
With the phenomenal success of Bitcoin and its increasing mainstream adoption, the project’s unbounded appetite for energy grew accordingly. Today, the average Bitcoin transaction costs as much energy as powering 3.67 average American homes, which amounts to about 3000 times more than a comparable Credit Card settlement.
This mind boggling amount of energy is not, as it is commonly believed, being wasted. It is put to good use: securing the Bitcoin network and rendering attacks on it infeasible. However, the cost of this security mechanism and its implications for an increasingly warming and resource hungry planet led almost the entire crypto industry to the understanding that an alternative has to be found, at least if we’re interested in seeing blockchain technology gaining overwhelming mainstream adoption.
The most popular alternative to PoW, used by most alternative cryptocurrency systems, is called Proof-of-Stake, or PoS. PoS is highly promising in the sense that it doesn’t require blockchain nodes to perform arduous, and otherwise useless, cryptographic tasks in order to render potential attacks costly and infeasible. Hence, this algorithm cuts the power requirements of PoS blockchains down to sane and manageable amounts, allowing them to be more scalable without guzzling up the planet's energy reserves.
As the name suggests, instead of requiring proof of cryptographic work, PoS requires blockchain nodes to proof stake in the currency itself. This means that in order for a blockchain node to be eligible for a verification reward, the node has to hold a certain amount of currency in the wallet associated with it. This way, in order to execute an attack, a malevolent node would have to acquire the majority of the existing coin supply, rendering attacks not only costly but also meaningless, since the attackers would primarily harm themselves.
PoS, as well as PoW, simply cause the blockchain to fork into two alternative versions if for some reason consensus breaks. In fact, most blockchains fork most of the time, only to converge back to a single source of truth a short while afterwards.
By many crypto enthusiasts, this obvious bug is very often regarded as a feature, allowing several versions of the truth to survive and compete for public adoption until a resolution is generated. This sounds nice in theory, but if we want to see blockchain technology seriously disrupt and/or augment the financial sector, this ever lurking possibility of the blockchain splitting into two alternative versions cannot be tolerated.
Furthermore, even the fastest PoS blockchains out there can accomodate a few hundred transactions per second, compare that to Visa’s 56,000 tx/s and the need for an alternative becomes clear as day.
A blockchain securing global stock markets does not have the privilege to fork into two alternative versions and just sit and wait it out until the market (or what’s left of it) declares a winner. What belongs to whom should be engraved in an immutable record, functioning as a single source of truth with no glitches permitted.
After investigating and studying the crypto industry and blockchain technologies for several years, we came to the conclusion that the delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerance alternative (or dBFT) is best suited for such a system. It provides swift transaction verification times, de-incentivises most attack vectors and upholds a single blockchain version with no risk of forks or alternative blockchain records emerging - regardless of how much computing power, or coins an attacker possesses.
The term Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT) derives its name from the Byzantine Generals problem in Game Theory and Computer Science, describing the problematic nature of achieving consensus in a distributed system with suboptimal communication between agents which do not necessarily trust each other.
The BFT algorithm arranges the relationship between blockchain nodes in such a way that the network becomes as good as resilient to the Byzantine Generals problem, and allows the system to remain consensus even if some nodes bare malicious intentions or simply malfunction.
To achieve this, Antshare’s version of the delegated BFT (or dBFT) algorithm acknowledges two kinds of players in the blockchain space: professional node operators, called bookkeeping nodes, who run nodes as a source of income, and users who are interested in accessing blockchain advantages. Theoretically, this differentiation does not exist in PoW and most PoS environments, practically, however, most Bitcoin users do not operate miners, which are mostly located in specialized venues run by professionals. At Antshares we understand the importance of this naturally occurring division of labor and use it to provide better security for our blockchain platform.
Accordingly, block verification is achieved through a consensus game held between specialized bookkeeping nodes, which are appointed by ordinary nodes through a form of delegated voting process. In every verification round one of the bookkeeping nodes is pseudo-randomly appointed to broadcast its version of the blockchain to the rest of the network. If ⅔ of the remaining nodes agree with this version, consensus is secured and the blockchain marches on. If less than ⅔ of the network agrees, a different node is appointed to broadcast its version of the truth to the rest of the system, and so forth until consensus is established.
In this way, successful system attacks are almost impossible to execute unless the overwhelming majority of the network is interested in committing financial suicide. Additionally, the system is fork proof, and at every given moment only one version of the truth exists. Without complicated cryptographic puzzles to solve, nodes operate much faster and are able to compete with centralized transaction methods.
https://www.econotimes.com/Blockchain-project-Antshares-explains-reasons-for-choosing-dBFT-over-PoW-and-PoS-659275
OnChain
It is important to note the technical difference between Onchain and NEO. Onchain is a private VC-backed company with over 40 employees. NEO is a public platform with different community-led groups contributing to this public project. There exists NEO council comprised of the original NEO creators, employees from Onchain, full time NEO council members and there is also the first Western based group called City of Zion. This confusion is likely the source of the rumour about Antshares and Alibaba having a connection. Onchain and NEO are separate entities who are intimately related via cross-chain communications and similar designs.
Onchain, a Shanghai-based blockchain R&D company, first started developing Antshares in February of 2014 which will eventually become the foundation of DNA. Onchain was founded by CEO Da HongFei and CTO Erik Zhang in response to the attention from private companies garnered by the development of Antshares, China’s first public blockchain. In contrast to the weeks-old start-ups launching ICOs that is happening currently in the blockchain world, it took them 22 long months of R&D to even begin providing services to their first customers. Finally, in April 2016, the first whitepaper on consensus protocol from China was born — the dBFT (delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerance) protocol.
2016 was a busy year for Onchain and they really picked up the pace that year. Other than continuing the development of Antshares, brushing shoulders with Fortune 500 companies, Onchain became the first Chinese blockchain company to join Hyperledger — an open source blockchain project started by the Linux Foundation specifically focusing on the development of private and consortium chains for businesses. It is here where the Da HongFei and Erik Zhang, entered the hyperbolic time chamber that is now known as Fabric, a platform by Hyperledger for distributed ledger solutions, and has consequently helped them to develop many aspects underpinning the design of DNA.
In June of 2016, during the first of many future partnerships with Microsoft China, Onchain founded Legal Chain specifically targeting the inadequacies of the digital applications within the legal system. In 2005, (Digital Signature Act) was passed into national law which permitted an effective digital signatures to gain the same legal rights as a real signature.
In company with Microsoft China, they are also aiming to integrate the technology with Microsoft’s face and voice recognition API function to kick start this digital revolution within the legal system. At the same time, a partnership was formed with FaDaDa, a third-party platform for electronic contracts that has processed over 27 million contracts to date, to provide secure evidence storage with DNA. If that’s not enough, they were also voted as KPMG’s top 50 Fintech Company in China and established a relationship with the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry which led to the recent tour to Japan. Finally, at the end of 2016 they announced a partnership with Alibaba to provide attested email service for Ali Cloud with Legal Chain where it provides a proof-of-existence for a blockchain-powered email evidence repository for enterprise-level use.
Fosun Group, China’s largest private conglomerate, have recently invested into Onchain in order to apply DNA across all of its businesses. Currently, Fosun International has a market cap of 102.98 billion dollars on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and that is only its international branch.
The role of Onchain so far is reminiscent of Ethereum’s EEA in addition to a stronger emphasis of governmental cooperation. Onchain has identified the shortcomings of present laser focus of hype on public platforms such as NEO and Ethereum and addressing that with DNA. DNA envisions a future where a network of assorted, specifically designed blockchains serving private enterprises, consortiums, government and the public communicating with each other forming an interconnected blockchain network.
This is the goal of DNA — infiltrating every little inefficient niche that had no better alternatives before the invention of blockchain. What is especially critical to remember during this explosive time of hype driven partly by the obscene degree of greed is that not every little niche that blockchain can fill will be holding its own little ICO for you to “go to the moon on your rocket powered lambos”. Some of those efficiencies gained will simply be consumed by companies privately or by public systems such as the legal system.
https://hackernoon.com/neo-onchain-and-its-ultimate-plan-dna-4c33e9b6bfaa
http://www.onchain.com/
https://github.com/DNAProject/DNA
https://siliconangle.com/blog/2016/10/20/onchain-partners-with-alibaba-for-blockchain-powered-email-evidence-repository/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-fosun-blockchain/chinas-fosun-invests-in-local-version-of-bitcoin-tech-blockchain-idUSKCN1B30KM
City of Zion (CoZ)
City of Zion (CoZ) is a global community of open source enthusiasts, with the shared goal of helping NEO achieve its full potential. CoZ primarily operates through the community Slack and CoZ Github, central places where the community shares knowledge and contributes to projects.
CoZ is neither a corporation, nor a consulting firm or a devshop / for-hire group.
Members
https://imgur.com/a/Gc9jT
CoZ aims to be low barrier of entry, the process is straightforward:
  1. Join the channel #develop.
  2. Fork or create a project.
  3. Publish as open source.
  4. After a couple of contributions a CoZ council member will invite you to the proper channel for your contributions.
  5. Receive rewards and back to 3.
Unit testing - Ongoing effort to implement code coverage for the core
Integration testing - Tools for automated testing, performance metrics and functionality validation on private test nets
Continuous integration - Automated multi-platform testing of all pull requests at GitHub.
Deployment pipeline - Automated tools and processes to ensure fast and reliable updates upon code changes
New C# implementation (NEO2) - Improve code quality, speed & testability
Roadmap
https://imgur.com/a/4CDhw
dApps competition
https://cityofzion.io/dapps/1
10 prizes of 1350 GAS, with 500 GAS to be used for smart contract deployment. Currently 19 dApps registered. Deadline is 16 of November 11:59 EST.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B4wu5lNlukwybEstaEJMZ19kbjQ
Traveling
August 8th to August 12th:
From August 8th to August 12th, 2017, the NEO core team, led by founder & CEO Da Hongfei will travel to Japan to explore the forefront of Japan's Blockchain innovation. This trip represents the first in a series of trips around the world with the goal to foster international cooperation's and to keep up with the fast pace in Blockchain innovation. Starting in Japan, the NEO core team will visit famous local Blockchain research institutions and active communities to engage in bilateral communication. NEO will meet with Japanese tech-celebrities to gain insights about the latest developments in the Japanese Blockchain and digital currency community. Additionally, Japanese local tech media will conduct an interview allowing NEO to present its development status and its latest technological innovations.
https://www.reddit.com/NEO/comments/6ry4s9/japan_the_neo_core_team_starts_out_on_an/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgTQ32CkxlU
https://www.reddit.com/NEO/comments/6ssfx1/neo_meetup_in_tokyo_august_10th_2017_2100h/
19th August, 2017
Blockchain X Series - NEO example applications
20th August, 2017
NEO and Microsoft Azure host a blockchain programming training in Shanghai
23rd August, 2017
INNOxNEO Blockchain Open Nights: 2nd Meeting
24th August, 2017
NEO Meetup in Taipei
https://www.reddit.com/NEO/comments/6wbebneo_taipei_meetup_long_post/
13th September, 2017
INNOxNEO Blockchain Open Nights: 3rd Meeting
14th September, 2017
NEO Shanghai Meetup with NEO team
24th September, 2017
NEO Blockchain Programming Day - Hangzhou Station
27th September, 2017
INNOxNEO Blockchain Open Nights: 4th Meeting
27th September, 2017
First London NEO Developer Meetup!
4th October, 2017
First San Francisco NEO Developer Social!
14th-16th October, 2017
GNOME.Asia Summit 2017, Chongqing, China
21st October, 2017
NEO JOY, Exploring Blockchain application, Nanjing, China
26th October, 2017
Inaugural Global Fintech & Blockchain China Summit 2017
Networks proves itself with the first ICO
ICOs, on other platforms such as Ethereum, often resulted in a sluggish network and transaction delays. While NEO’s dBFT consensus algorithm is designed to achieve consensus with higher efficency and greater network throughputt, no amount of theoretical calculations can simulate the reality of real-life conditions.
--Key Observations--
Smart Contract Invocations:
A total of 13,966 smart contracts invocations were executed on the NEO network over this time period, of which, nearly all called the RPX smart contract method mintTokens. A total of 543,348,500 RPX tokens were successfully minted and transferred to user accounts, totalling 10,097 smart contract executions.
Refunded Invocations:
A total of 4182 refund events were triggered by the smart contract method mintTokens. (Note: RPX has stated that these refunds will be processed within the next two weeks.)
Crowdsale statistics:
A successful mintTokens execution used around 1043 VM operations, while an execution that resulted in a refund used 809 VM operations. Within the hour and six minutes that the token sale was active, a total of 12,296,409 VM operations were executed. A total of 9,575 unique addresses participated in the RPX ICO. Half of these, approximately 4,800 unique addresses, participated through CoZ’s Neon wallet. The top 3 blocks with the most transactions were block 1445025 (3,242 transactions), block 1444902 (2,951 transactions), and block 1444903 (1609 transactions).
Final Thoughts
At the moment, the consensus nodes for the NEO network are operated by the NEO Council in China. By Q1 2018, NEO Council aims to control less than two-thirds of the consensus nodes.
We are pleased to note that the NEO network continuted to operate efficiently with minimal network impact, even under extreme network events. Block generation time initially slowed down to 3 minutes to process the largest block, but quickly recovered to approximately 25 seconds. Throughout the entire RPX ICO, consensus nodes were able to achieve consensus and propagate new block transactions to the rest of the network. In closing, while we consider this performance to be excellent, NEO Council and City of Zion areworking closely together on upgrades, that will increase the throughputs of the NEO network.
Hyperledger
Members and governance of Hyperledger:
Early members of the initiative included blockchain ISVs, (Blockchain, ConsenSys, Digital Asset, R3, Onchain), well-known technology platform companies (Cisco, Fujitsu, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, NEC, NTT DATA, Red Hat, VMware), financial services firms (ABN AMRO, ANZ Bank, BNY Mellon, CLS Group, CME Group, the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), Deutsche Börse Group, J.P. Morgan, State Street, SWIFT, Wells Fargo), Business Software companies like SAP, Systems integrators and others such as: (Accenture, Calastone, Credits, Guardtime, IntellectEU, Nxt Foundation, Symbiont).
The governing board of the Hyperledger Project consists of twenty members chaired by Blythe Masters, (CEO of Digital Asset), and a twelve-member Technical Steering Committee chaired by Christopher Ferris, CTO of Open Technology at IBM.
http://www.8btc.com/onchain-hyperledger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperledger
“As a leading open-source contributor in China’s blockchain community, Onchain shares the same values as the Linux Foundation and the Hyperledger project intrinsically. We believe international collaboration plus local experience are key to the adoption of distributed ledger technology in China; we are also very excited to see other Chinese blockchain startups join Hyperledger and look forward to adding our combined expertise to the project.” Da Hongfei, Founder and CEO of Onchain
https://hyperledger.org/testimonials/onchain
Important Articles
Distribution technology DNA framework went through the national block chain standard test On May 16th, the first China block chain development competition in Hangzhou announced that Onchain, became the first through the national standard test block system.
http://www.51cto.com/art/201705/539824.htm?mobile
Da Hongfei and OnChain working relationship with Chinese Government
https://finance.sina.cn/2017-04-13/detail-ifyeifqx5554606.d.html?from=wap
http://www.gz.chinanews.com/content/2017/05-28/73545.shtml
The Chinese government is reportedly preparing to allow the resumption of cryptocurrency trading in the country in the coming months, with the required anti-money laundering (AML) systems and licensing programs in place.
https://coingeek.com/cryptocurrency-trading-poised-to-make-a-return-in-china-report/
Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry - Working with OnChain and NEO
http://www.8btc.com/onchain-ribenjingjichanyesheng
Notice NEO will be invited to attend the INNO x Austrade China-Australia chain high-end exchange
AUSTRADE - The Australian Trade and Investment Commission is the official government, education and investment promotion agency of the Australian Government
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/LmXnW7MtzOX_fqIo7diU9A
Source for NEO/OnChain Microsoft Cooperation:
http://www.8btc.com/onchain-microsoft
Da Hongfei quotes
"There is no direct cooperation between Alibaba and NEO/Onchain, other than their mailbox service is using Law Chain to provide attested email service. In terms of Microsoft, yes we have cooperation with Microsoft China because NEO is built with C# and .NET Core, and NeoContract is the first in the world to support writing smart contract with C#"
https://www.reddit.com/NEO/comments/6puffo/we_are_da_hongfei_and_erik_zhang_founders_of_neo/dksm5ga/
"We have pretty good communication with government, with regulators. They don't have any negative impression with NEO and they like our technology and the way we deal with things. Regulation is not an issue for us"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpUdTIQdjVE&feature=youtu.be&t=1m16s
“Before they started cleaning up the market, I was asked for information and suggestions” “I do not expect the government to call me in the short-term and say, ‘Let’s use NEO as the blockchain technology infrastructure of China.’ But in the medium term? Why not? I think it’s possible.”
https://medium.com/@TheCoinEconomy/neo-founder-da-hongfei-advised-china-on-ico-exchange-ban-says-govt-4631b9f7971
-Upcoming Roadmap-
Decentralization of consensus nodes
▪ P2P Network optimization (2017Q4) – Network optimizations to ensure fast block generation after decentralization.
▪ Voting Algorithm Optimization (2017Q4) – Adjustments in voting algorithm to prevent identified attack vectors.
▪ Candidate List Website (2018Q1) – Published list of candidates so that voters know who they are voting for.
▪ NEO Council Consensus Node < 2/3 (2018Q1) – NEO Council shall operate less than two thirds of consensus nodes by the end of quarter 1, 2018.
Universal Data Format for Wallet/Node Prog.
▪ NEP2 – Private Key Encryption/Decryption (2017Q4) - Method for encrypting and encoding a passphrase-protected private key.
▪ NEP3 – Universal Data Format (2017Q4) – Standard data format to allow easier wallet and node programming.
https://neo.org/en-us/blog/details/65
Promotion/Ecosystem
▪ Globally Legal Token-raising Framework (2017Q4) – Following government interest to regulate ICO’s, NEO will complete a framework to raise tokens legally in all major markets by the end of 2017.
▪ NEO DevCon 1 (2017Q4) – First NEO Development Conference! More details at later date.
▪ CoZ Funding (2017Q4) – Continuous funding plan for CoZ covering next 5 years.
▪ Seed Projects (2017Q4) – First seed projects to be cross-invested with the dedicated NEO pool.
https://neo.org/en-us/blog/details/65
https://github.com/neo-project
Repositories - 14
People - 5
Contributors- 12
https://github.com/CityOfZion
Repositories - 35
People - 14
Contributors- 22
https://github.com/DNAProject/DNA
Repositories - 4
Contributors - 17
Donations welcome: ASdNxSa3E8bsxCE9KFKBMm3NA43sYJU9qZ
submitted by NEOcryptotrader to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

FUD Copy Pastas

**Last updated: May 30, 2018: Updated wallet info with release of Trinity.
This 4 part series from the IOTA foundation covers most of the technical FUD centered at IOTA.
https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
Also the official IOTA faq on iota.org answers nearly all of these questions if you want to hear the answers directly.
Purpose of Writing
Since posting FUD is so ridiculously low-effort in comparison to setting the record straight, I felt it necessary to put a log of copy-pastas together to balance the scales so its just as easy to answer the FUD as it was to generate it. So next time you hear someone say "IOTA is centralized", you no longer have to take an hour out of your day and spin your wheels with someone who likely had an agenda to begin with. You just copy-paste away and move on.
It's also worth mentioning IOTA devs are too damn busy working on the protocol and doing their job to answer FUD. So I felt a semblance of responsibility.
Here they are. These answers are too my understanding so if you see something that doesn't look right let me know! They are divided into the following categories so if you are interested in a specific aspect of IOTA you can scroll to that section.
1) WALLET
2) COMMUNITY
3) INVESTING
4) TECHNICAL

WALLET

IOTA was hacked and users funds were stolen!

First, IOTA was not hacked. The term “hacked” is thrown around way too brazingly nowadays and often used to describe events that weren’t hacks to begin with. Its a symptom of this space growing way too fast creating situations of the blind leading the blind and causing hysteria.
What happened:
Many IOTA users trusted a certain 3rd party website to create their seed for their wallets. This website silently sent copies of all the seeds generated to an email address and waited till it felt it had enough funds, then it took everyones money simultaneously. That was the ”hack”.
https://blog.iota.org/the-secret-to-security-is-secrecy-d32b5b7f25ef
The lesson:
The absolute #1 marketed feature of crypto is that you are your own bank. Of everything that is common knowledge about crypto, this is at the top. But being your own bank means you are responsible for the security of your own funds. There is no safety net or centralized system in place that is going to bail you out.
For those that don’t know (and you really should if you’ve invested in anything crypto), your seed is your username-pw-security question-backup email all rolled into one. Would you trust a no-name 3rd party website to produce your username+pw for your bank account? Because thats essentially what users did.
The fix:
Make your seed offline with the generators in the sidebar or use dice. This is outlined in the “how to generate wallet and seed” directly following.
The trinity and carriota wallets will have seed generators within them upon their release.

How to generate wallet and seed

1) Download official trinity wallet here
2) follow the instructions on the app.
3) Do not run any apps in conjunction with the trinity app. Make sure all other apps are completely closed out on your device.

Are you sure a computer can’t just guess my seed?

An IOTA seed is 81 characters long. There are more IOTA seed combinations than atoms in the universe. All the computers in the world combined would take millions billions of years just to find your randomly generated one that’s located somewhere between the 0th and the 2781st combination. The chance for someone to randomly generate the exact same seed as yours is 1 / (2781).
If you can’t fathom the number 27 ^ 81, this video should help:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8YIdmwcubc

Why is Trinity wallet taking so long!!??

Trinity is out. https://trinity.iota.org/

COMMUNITY

IOTA introduction video to share with family

https://youtu.be/LyC04NrJ3yA

Tangle visualizers

http://tangle.glumb.de/

How to setup a full node

Download Bolero and run! Bolero is an all-in-one full node install package with the latest IOTA IRI and Nelson all under a one-click install!
https://github.com/SemkoDev/bolero.fun/releases
"If you want to help the network then spam the network. If you really want to help the network then create a full node and let others spam you!"

No questions or concerns get upvoted, only downvoted!

That’s just the nature of this business. Everyone in these communities has money at stake and are extremely incentivized to keep only positive news at the top of the front page. There is nothing you're going to do about that on this subreddit or any crypto subreddit. It's just a reddit fact of life we have to deal with. Everyone has a downvote and everyone has an upvote. But what can be done is just simply answer the questions even if they are downvoted to hell. Yea most people wont' see the answers or discussion but that one person will. every little bit counts.
I will say that there are most certainly answers to nearly every FUD topic out there. Every single one. A lot of the posts I'm seeing as of late especially since the price spike are rehashed from months ago. They are often not answered not because there isn't an answeexplanation, but because regulars who have the answers simply don't see them (for the reason listed above). I can see how it's easy for this to be interpreted (especially by new users) as there not being an answer or "the FUDsters are on to something" but thats just not the case.

Developer's candidness (aka dev's are assholes!)

http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7obyyx/serious_talk_about_pr_system_iota_and_david/ds8ouvc
http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7obyyx/serious_talk_about_pr_system_iota_and_david/ds8rega
http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7oi9g8/why_is_everyone_so_critical_of_david_this_has_to/ds9rtbb
https://i.redd.it/qb0ik4tgny401.jpg
Lastly and to no surprise, David conducts himself very professionally in this interview even when asked several tough questions about the coordinator and MIT criticism.

IOTA Devs do not respond appropriately to criticism

When critiquers provide feedback that is ACTUALLY useful to the devs, then sure they'll be glad to hear it. So far not once has an outside dev brought up something that the IOTA devs found useful. Every single time it ends up being something that was already taken into consideration with the design and if the critiquer did an ounce of research they would know that. Thus you often find the IOTA devs dismissing their opinion as FUD and responding with hostility because all their critique is really doing is sending the message to their supporters that they are not supposed to like IOTA anymore.
Nick Johnson was a perfect example of this. The Ethereum community was co-existing [peacefully]with IOTA’s community (as they do with nearly all alt coins) until Nick wrote his infamous article. Then almost overnight Ethereum decided it didn’t like IOTA anymore and we’ve been dealing with that shit since. As of today, add LTC to that list with Charlie’s (even admitting) ignorant judgement of IOTA.
12/17/2017: Add John McAfee (bitcoin cash) and Peter Todd (bitcoin) to the list of public figures who have posted ignorantly on IOTA.

A lot of crypto communities certainly like to hate on IOTA...

IOTA is disrupting the disrupters. It invented a completely new distributed ledger infrastructure (the tangle) that replaces the blockchain and solves all of its fundamental problems (namely fees and scaling). To give you an idea of this significance, 99% of the cryptocurrencies that exist are built on a block chain. These projects have billions of dollars invested into them meaning everyone in their communities are incentivized to see IOTA fail and spread as much FUD about it as possible. This includes well known organizations, public figures, and brands. Everyone commenting in these subreddits and crypto communities have their own personal money at stake and skin in the game. Misinformation campaigns, paid reddit posters, upvote/downvote bots, and corrupt moderators are all very real in this space.

INVESTING

How do I buy IOTA

https://medium.com/@fuo213/how-to-buy-iota-the-complete-guide-for-crypto-dummies-e63560caf921

What is the IOTA foundation?

IOTA foundation is a non-profit established in Germany and recognized by the European Union. Blog post here: https://blog.iota.org/iota-foundation-fb61937c9a7e

How many companies and organizations are interested, partnered or actively using IOTA?

A lot, and often too many to keep up with.
https://reddit.com/Iota/comments/7f3dmx/list_of_known_iota_partnerships_corporate/

How was IOTA distributed?

All IOTAs that will ever exist were sold at the ICO in 2015. There was no % reserved for development. Devs had to buy in with their personal money. Community donated back 5% of all IOTA so the IOTA foundation could be setup.

No inflation schedule? No additional coins? How is this sustainable?

Interestingly enough, IOTA is actually the only crypto that does not run into any problems with a currency cap and deflationaryism. Because there are zero fees, you will always be able to pay for something for exactly what it's worth using IOTA, no matter how small the value. If by chance in the future a single iota grows so large in value that it no longer allows someone to pay for something in fractions of a penny, the foundation would just add decimal points allowing for a tenth or a hundreth or a thousandth of an iota to be transacted with.
To give you some perspective, if a single IOTA equals 1 penny, IOTA would have a 27 trillion dollar market cap (100x that of Bitcoin's today)

IOTA is not for P2P, only for M2M

With the release of the trinity wallet, it's now dead simple for anyone to use IOTA funds for P2P. Try it out.

Companies technically don’t have to use the IOTA token

Yes they do
Worth clarifying that 0 iota data transactions are perfectly fine and are welcomed since they still provide pow for 2 other transactions and help secure the network. In the early stages, these types of transactions will probably be what give us the tps/pow needed to remove the coordinator and allow the network defend 34% attacks organically.
But... if someone does not want to sell or exchange their data for free (0 IOTA transaction), then Dominic is saying that the IOTA token must be used for that or any exchange in value on the network.
This is inherently healthy for the ecosystem since it provides a neutral and non-profit middle ground that all parties/companies can trust. If one company made their own token it wouldn’t be trusted since companies are incentivized by profits and nothing is stopping them from manipulating their token to make them more money. Thus, the IOTA foundation will not partner with anyone who refuses to take this option off the table.

All these companies are going to influence IOTA development!!

These companies have no influence on the development of IOTA. They either choose to use it or they don’t.

Internet of things is cheap and will stay cheap

Internet of things is one application of IOTA and considered by many to be the 4th industrial revolution. Go do some googling. IOTA having zero fees enables M2M for the first time in history. Also, if a crypto can do M2M it sure as shit can do M2P and P2P. M2M is hard mode.

IOTA surpassing speculation

IOTA, through the data marketplace and [qubic](qubic.iota.org), will be the first crypto to surpass speculation and actually be used in the real world for something. From there, it will branch out into other use cases, such as P2P. Or maybe P2P use of IOTA will grow in parallel with M2M, because why not?
https://blog.iota.org/iota-data-marketplace-cb6be463ac7f
12/19/17 update: Bosch reinforces IOTA's break-out from speculation by buying IOTA tokens for its future use in the data marketplace. https://i.redd.it/8e5b8bi9ov401.png
http://www.bosch-presse.de/pressportal/de/en/robert-bosch-venture-capital-makes-first-investment-in-distributed-ledger-technology-137411.html

Investing in a new project barely off the ground

Investing in a project in its early stages was something typically reserved for wealthy individuals/organizations before ICO’s became a thing. With early investing comes much less hand holding and more responsibility on the user to know what they are doing. If you have a hard time accepting this responsibility, don’t invest and wait for the technology to get easier for you. How many people actually knew how to use and mine bitcoin in 2009 before it had all its gui infrastructure?
IOTA is a tangle, the first of its kind. NOT a copy paste blockchain. As a result wallets and applications for IOTA are the first of their kind and translating the tangle into a nice clean user-friendly blockchain experience for the masses is even more taxing.

Why is the price of my coin falling?!

This may be the most asked question on any crypto subreddit but it's also the easiest to explain. The price typically falls when bad things happen to a coin or media fabricates bad news about a coin and a portion of investors take it seriously. The price increases when good things happen to a coin, such as a new exchange listing or a partnership announced etc.. The one piece that is often forgotten but trumps all these effects is something called "market forces".
Market forces is what happens to your coin when another coin gets a big news hit or a group of other coins get big news hits together. For example, when IOTA data marketplace released, IOTA hit a x5 bull run in a single week. But did you notice all the other alt coins in the red? There are a LOT of traders that are looking at the space as a whole and looking to get in on ANY bull action and will sell their other coins to do so. This effect can also be compounded over a long period of time such as what we witnessed when the bitcoin fork FOMO was going on and alt coins were squeezed continuously to feed it for weeks/months.
These examples really just scratch the surface of market forces but the big takeaway is that your coin or any coin will most certainly fall (or rise) in price at the result of what other coins are doing, with the most well known example being bitcoin’s correlation to every coin on the market. If you don't want to play the market-force game or don't have time for it, then you can never go wrong buying and holding.
It's also important to note that there are layers of investors. There's a top layer of light-stepping investors that are a mixture of day traders and gamblers trying to jump in and jump out to make quick money then look for the next buying (or shorting) opportunity at another coin. There's a middle layer of buyers and holders who did their research, believe in the tech and placing their bets it will win out in the long run. And the bottom layer are the founders and devs that are in it till the bitter end and there to see the vision realized. When a coin goes on a bull run, always expect that any day the top layer is going to pack up and leave to the next coin. But the long game is all about that middle layer. That is the layer that will be giving the bear markets their price-drop resistance. That is why the meme "HODL" is so effective because it very elegantly simplifies this whole concept for the common joe and makes them a part of that middle layer regardless if they understand whats going on or not.

TECHNICAL

How is IOTA free and how does it scale

IOTA is an altruistic system. Proof of work is done in IOTA just like bitcoin. Only a user’s device/phone must do pow for 2 other transactions before issuing one of its own. Therefore no miners and no fees. And the network becomes faster the more transactions are posted. Because of this, spamming the network is encouraged since they provide pow for 2 other transactions and speed up the network.

IOTA is centralized

IOTA is more decentralized than any blockchain crypto that relies on 5 pools of miners, all largely based in China. Furthermore, the coordinator is not a server in the dev’s basement that secretly processes all the transactions. It’s several nodes all around the globe that add milestone transactions to show the direction of the IF’s tangle within the DAG so people don’t accidentally follow a fork from a malicious actor. Anyone with the know-how can fork the tangle right now with a double-spend. But no one would follow their fork because the coordinator reveals which tangle is the legit IF one. If the coordinator wasn’t there (assuming low honest-transaction volume), there would be no way to discern which path to follow especially after the tangle diverges into forks of forks. Once throughout of honest transactions is significant enough, the “honest tangle” will replace the coordinated one and people will know which one to follow simply because it’s the biggest one in the room.
Referencing the coordinator is also optional.
Also, if you research and understand how IOTA intends to work without the coordinator, it’s easier to accept it for now as training wheels. I suggest reading pg 15 and on of the white paper analyzing in great depth how the network will defend different attack scenarios without a coordinator. For the past several months, IOTA foundation has been using St Petersburg college’s super computer to stress test IOTA and learn when they can turn the coordinator off. There will likely be a blog about the results soon.
This is another great read covering double spends on IOTA without a coordinator: www.tangleblog.com/2017/07/10/is-double-spending-possible-with-iota/
This too: http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7eix4a/any_iota_guru_that_can_explain_what_this_guy_is/dq5ijrm
Also this correspondence with Vitalik and Come_from_Beyond https://twitter.com/DavidSonstebo/status/932510087301779456
At the end of the day, outstanding claims require outstanding evidence and folks approaching IOTA with a “I’ll believe it when I see it” attitude is completely understandable. It’s all about your risk tolerance.

Can IOTA defend double spend attacks?

99% of these “but did they think about double spend attacks?” type questions could just be answered if people went and did their own research. Yes of course they thought about that. That’s like crypto101…
www.tangleblog.com/2017/07/10/is-double-spending-possible-with-iota/

Will IOTA have smart contracts?

Yes - qubic.iota.org

Trinary vs binary?

"By using a ternary number system, the amount of devices and cycles can be reduced significantly. In contrast to two-state devices, multistate devices provide better radix economy with the option for further scaling"
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep36652
https://www.reddit.com/CryptoCurrency/comments/6jgbvb/iota_isnt_it_the_perfect_cryptocurrency/dje8os2/

Bitcoin with lightning network will make IOTA obsolete.

If you want lightning network, IOTA already released it. Called flash channels.
https://blog.iota.org/instant-feeless-flash-channels-88572d9a4385

IOTA rolled its own crypto!

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
This is why: https://blog.iota.org/the-transparency-compendium-26aa5bb8e260
Cybercrypt has been hired to review and audit it. IOTA is currently running SHA-3/KECCAK now until Curl is ready.

MIT said bad things about IOTA

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
And for official formal closure that MIT was completely wrong:
https://www.reddit.com/CryptoCurrency/comments/7svr8mit_media_lab_dci_allegations_proven_wrong_iotas/
https://blog.iota.org/curl-disclosure-beyond-the-headline-1814048d08ef
https://medium.com/@comefrombeyond/cfbs-comments-on-https-www-media-mit-edu-posts-iota-response-5834c7f8172d

Nick Johnson says IOTA is bad!

Nick Johnson is an ethereum dev who is incentivized to see IOTA fail, see CFBs twitter responses here.
https://mobile.twitter.com/nicksdjohnson/status/912676954184323073?lang=en
And this
https://t.co/1HgfPhg2lP
And this
https://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/72lly0/comment/dnjk9f5?st=JB2VKUBB&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;sh=a2892548
And this
https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2

IOTA is not private!

Masked authenticated messages exist right now so data can be transferred privately. Very important for businesses.

Coin privacy

Centralized coin mixer is out that foundation runs. Logs are kept so they can collect data and improve it Folks can copy the coin mixer code and run it themselves. Goal is for mixer to be decentralized and ran by any node.

How do nodes scale? How on earth can all that data be stored?

Full nodes store, update and verify from the last snapshot, which happens roughly every month. Its on the roadmap to make snapshotting automatic and up to each full node’s discretion.With automatic snapshots, each full node will act as a partial perma-node and choose when to snapshot its tangle data. If someone wants to keep their tangle data for several months or even years, they could just choose not to snapshot. Or if they are limited on hard drive space, they could snapshot every week.
Perma-nodes would store the entire history of the tangle from the genesis. These are optional and would likely only be created by companies who wish to sell historical access of the tangle as a service or companies who heavily use the tangle for their own data and want to have quick, convenient access to their data’s history.
Swarm nodes are also in development which will ease the burden on full nodes. https://blog.iota.org/iota-development-roadmap-74741f37ed01

Node discovery is manual? Wtf?

Nelson is fixing has fixed this:
https://medium.com/deviota/carriota-nelson-automatic-peer-discovery-for-iota-bdca9b8b8750
https://medium.com/deviota/carriota-nelson-in-a-nutshell-1ee5317d8f19
https://github.com/SemkoDev/nelson.cli

IOTA open source?

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
IOTA protocol is open source. The coordinator is closed source open source.
https://imgur.com/a/xWQUp

Foundation moved user's funds?

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
https://blog.iota.org/claims-and-reclaims-finalization-e692844c505a
https://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7mmimu/claims_and_reclaims_is_processing/drv63d5/

My IOTA donation address:

9PZFQNPLVDUNGAOYYMMXFWMGNPMNAJWZKTYOOMCYQTZQA9RPVVN9SE9KGOL9HWZFJBXKQGEOY9JJYDXB9TY9FLQPXB
submitted by mufinz2 to Iota [link] [comments]

Private vs. Public Blockchain or Permissioned vs Permissionless

Private vs. Public Blockchain or Permissioned vs Permissionless
Regardless of Bitcoin’s highly volatile cycles it has gone through since its birth in 2009, we can thank this digital asset as it shed the light on the most disruptive technology of the 21st century — Blockchain — which not only stayed within the field but also gained wider adoption across various industries.
It all started with the vision of putting the control back in the people’s hands in terms of digital currency. However, nowadays Blockchain is facilitating major centralized systems but has also automated numerous FinTech aspects such as transactions and the implementation of improved procedures.
Decentralization, which is the core concept of a blockchain, means that power is in the hands of the participating parties. Everyone in the network can exercise equal authority and can read and write transactions on it.
Nevertheless, this property didn’t get through to some organizations and enterprises that handle sensitive information. This has prevented them from using blockchain for a long time. But in the light of the huge benefits that blockchain may offer to these enterprises, industry stakeholders built a blockchain that functions with controlled decentralization, and they named it as private/permissioned blockchain.
Even though private blockchains marginally deviate from the true notion of blockchain, they have led to many conglomerates joining the blockchain bandwagon, thus sparking a wider adoption of the technology.
To better understand how private blockchains differ from the classical public blockchains, let’s dive into more details.

Spotting the Difference

Accessibility

Public blockchains, as the name suggests, are simply that. Public. All participants on a public blockchain system have access to the data stored on the blockchain. They also have an equal opportunity to become a node or a miner on the network in order to validate transactions.
In contrast, a private blockchain is a so-called “distributed ledger” with a central entity governing the power to control as to who can view or validate transactions on them. There are strictly defined criteria which an individual or an entity needs to obey in order to become a node on a private blockchain network. The process often comes with a KYC process that seeks complete validation of a node’s identity.

Transaction Speed

Another chief alteration between a private and a public blockchain is their scalability, often referred to as the transaction speed. Public blockchains usually have a relatively slow transaction speed in comparison to the private blockchains.
A blockchain has three major building blocks: security, decentralization, and scalability. Blockchain enduring the power in all three of these is yet to emerge. This creates a small paradox, as security is traditionally an integral part of a Blockchain due to its cryptographic design, so it’s either of the two remaining aspects that are fractionally compromised to leverage the other one.
To put this in perspective, consider the Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchain. These two are the most known public blockchains with utmost decentralization. But this decentralization results in transaction speed between seven to 14 transactions each second, which is extremely slow.
Now consider the Hyperledger Fabric, which is a private blockchain. It is said to deliver a transaction speed of over 3,500 per second.

What About Public Blockchains with a High Scalability?

It can be reasoned that there are also those public blockchains with a transaction speed of over 2,000 to 3,000 transactions per second. But these are only public in the sense that anyone can view the transactions recorded on the blocks while the power to validate those transactions are still concentrated in a smaller, selective group of nodes.
This is perfectly illustrated in the case of the EOS blockchain which uses a DPoS (Delegated Proof of Stake) consensus mechanism, where only 21 block producers/nodes represent a greater number of stakeholders and are responsible for validating transactions on the network.

What empowers the Public Blockchain to gain an edge?

Simply put, they’re the truest of blockchains. In any case, to sum it up precisely, here are the merits that public blockchains encompass:
· Readily available: As prior mentioned, anyone can participate in a public blockchain network to view and validate transactions
· Decentralized and Distributed: No central body controls the processes of a public blockchain, which makes it perfectly aligned with the ethos of a blockchain.
· Immutable and Secure: To validate a transaction on a blockchain, more than 51% of the nodes must approve and validate the transaction. These nodes are random individuals and entities spread across the globe. So, once a transaction is recorded, it becomes impossible for another 51% or more nodes to agree to alter the data of a particular block at the same time.

https://preview.redd.it/jwvpliuvu8v31.png?width=1600&format=png&auto=webp&s=e5777ae826f3ead3a3f8d777fee1d8e1b4f493a4

Enterprise-centric technology — Private Blockchain Advantages

As already mentioned, private blockchains have become the go-to blockchains for enterprises, especially those in the FinTech industry. Let’s see why:
· Private (of course): Especially in the past couple of years, enterprises took a big initiative in preventing public display of users’ personal data. This makes private, that is, permissioned blockchain a perfect fit for them.
· Highly Scalable: Private blockchain, owing to the use of only a few nodes, can handle a high number of transactions each second.
· Affordable: Unlike public blockchains, private blockchains mostly govern their own nodes and they do not have to pay out incentives to miners validating the transactions.

https://preview.redd.it/jzwustzxu8v31.png?width=1600&format=png&auto=webp&s=444944ff6e9be3f680d7a1d969a250b2c3645c11

Final Note

Both private and public blockchains must be appraised as two different systems altogether, and yet their potential to disrupt a plethora of industries has started to take shape. Regardless of their strengths and weaknesses, private and public blockchain development is being continually fine-tuned to meet the demand of the industry leaders in order to put them in the right use.
submitted by theblockbox to u/theblockbox [link] [comments]

Why NYA is an attack on Bitcoin and why it will fail (long)

I wrote a rather lengthy response to a reddit post that I think is worth sharing, especially for newcomers to dispell some false narratives about S2X and Barry Silberts' New-York Agreement aka hostile takeover attempt of Bitcoin that is doomed to fail.
big block hard-liners wanted block size only, no SegWit.
Which doesn't make any logical sense. A lot of fud was actively being spread about how segwit was unsafe (such as the ANYONECANSPEND fud) but segwit is ofcourse working as intended thanks to the world class engineering of the Bitcoin Core developers. This led to the suspicion that BitMain was behind the opposition of segwit. BitMain miners use "covert AsicBoost" which is a technique that allows their rigs to use less electricity than competing mining equipment. However, segwit introduced changes to Bitcoin that made using covert AsicBoost impossible, which would explain their fierce opposition to segwit. We're talking big money here - the AsicBoost advantage is worth US$ 100 million according to estimates of experts.
After segwit was finalized, the Bitcoin software was programmed to activate segwit but not before 95% of the hashpower signalled to be ready. After all, miners are tasked with creating valid blocks and should be given the opportunity to update their software for protocol changes such as segwit. As a courtesy to the miners, the Bitcoin software basically said: "ok, segwit is here, but I'll politely hold off its activation until 95% of you say that you're ready to deal with this protocol change".
Sadly, mining is heavily centralized, and segwit was never getting activated due to the opposition of a few or perhaps even a single person: Jihan Wu of BitMain. As an aside, the centralization of hash power is also a direct result of AsicBoost. How this works: since AsicBoosted rigs are able to mine more efficiently than their competitors, these rigs drive up the difficulty and with that the average amount of hashes required to find a block. This in turn causes less efficient rigs to mine at a loss because they need to expend more energy to find a block. As a result, BitMain competitors got pushed out and BitMain became the dominant self-mining ASIC manufacturer.
After segwit was finalized, it required 95% of the hashpower to activate but it never gained more than around 30%. So 70% of hash power abused the courtesy of the Bitcoin software to wait until they were ready for activation and refused to give the go ahead. This went on for months and worst case it would have taken until August 2018 before segwit would activate.
let's do a compromise- we do SegWit AND we hard fork
In March 2017 a pseudonymous user called Shaolin Fry created BIP148 which is a softfork that invalidates any block that wouldn't signal segwit readiness starting August 1st 2017. This also became known as the UASF (User-Activated Soft Fork, as opposed to the original miner-activated soft fork that didn't work as intended). This patch saw significant adoption and miners would soon be forced to signal segwit or else see their blocks being invalidated by the network, which would cause them significant financial losses.
In May 2017 so after BIP148, the backroom New-York Agreement (NYA) was created by the Digital Currency Group of Barry Silbert together with businesses in the Bitcoin space such as BitPay and almost all miners. The NYA was the beginning of an outright misinformation campaign.
The NYA was trumpeted to be a "compromise". Miners would finally agree to activate segwit. In return, Bitcoin would hardfork and double its capacity on top of the doubling already achieved by segwit. In reality, BIP148 was already going to force miners to signal the activation of segwit. Also, developers and most users were notably absent in this NYA. So, given that segwit was already unstoppable because of BIP148, the parties around the table had to "compromise" to do something that they all wanted: hardfork Bitcoin to increase its capacity.
Or, is it all in fact really about increasing capacity? After all, segwit already achieved this. Bcash was created which doubled block size as well but without segwit. And then there is good old Litecoin having four times the transaction capacity of Bitcoin and segwit. Plenty of working alternatives that obsolete the need for yet another altcoin. So, perhaps transaction capacity is used as an excuse to reach a different goal. Let's explore.
Apparently after not-so-careful study of the Bitcoin whitepaper, the NYA participants came up with an absurd redefinition of what is "Bitcoin". According to this bizarre definition, they started to claim that Bitcoin is being defined as:
  1. Any blockchain that has the most cumulative hashpower behind it (measured from the Genesis block at the inception of Bitcoin):
  2. Using the SHA256 hashing algorithm;
  3. Having the current difficulty adjustment algorithm (resetting difficulty every 2016 blocks).
Ad 1. Note that it starts with "any blockchain". This also includes blockchains that contain invalid blocks, in other words, blocks that Bitcoin nodes would reject.
This is ofcourse bizarre but it is exactly what the NYA participants claim. It effectively puts all power in the hand of miners. Instead of nodes validating blocks, according to this novel and absurd interpretation of Bitcoin it will be miners that call the shots. Whatever block a miner produces will be valid as long as they mine on top of their own block, because that chain will then have the most cumulative hash power. Nodes become mere distributors of blocks and lose all their authority as they can no longer decide over the validity of a block. MinerCoin is born.
The Bitcoin whitepaper actually mentions this scenario where a majority of the hashpower takes over the network and starts producing invalid blocks and refers to it as being an attack. It is worth quoting this section 8, second paragraph in its entirety:
"As such, the verification is reliable as long as honest nodes control the network, but is more vulnerable if the network is overpowered by an attacker. While network nodes can verify transactions for themselves, the simplified method can be fooled by an attacker's fabricated transactions for as long as the attacker can continue to overpower the network. One strategy to protect against this would be to accept alerts from network nodes when they detect an invalid block, prompting the user's software to download the full block and alerted transactions to confirm the inconsistency. Businesses that receive frequent payments will probably still want to run their own nodes for more independent security and quicker verification." (emphasises mine).
Any doubt left whether "most hashpower wins" is an attack should be removed by a telling remark in the release notes of 0.3.19:
"Safe mode can still be triggered by seeing a longer (greater total PoW) invalid block chain."
As mentioned, miners representing 95% of all hash power participate in the NYA. They are currently expressing their support for the NYA by putting "NYA" inside blocks. The NYA participants intend to remove their hash power from Bitcoin completely and point it towards their altcoin. To double down on their claim that Bitcoin is defined by hashpower, they show some serious audacity by referring to their altcoin as... "Bitcoin". Anyone not part of the NYA refers to their coin as segwit2x, S2X or sometimes 2x.
The NYA participants proceed to proclaim victory. They reason that with all hash power on their blockchain and hardly any left for Bitcoin, "legacy Bitcoin" will be stuck as blocks will be created so slowly that Bitcoin becomes unusable, forcing everyone to switch to the "real" Bitcoin (sic). In other words, it was part of the plan was to remove hash power from Bitcoin to disrupt and force users into their altcoin.
Ofcourse, Bitcoin Core would not just sit idle and let such an attack happen. There are several ways to defend against this attack. As a last resort, an emergency difficulty reset combined with a change in the PoW algorithm can be deployed to get Bitcoin going again.
This is not likely to be necessary however as miners simply can't afford to mine a coin that has a small fraction of the value of Bitcoin. They have large bills to pay which is impossible by mining a coin that has half or even less the value of Bitcoin. In other words, miners would bankrupt themselves unless their altcoin attains the same value as Bitcoin. Given the lack of user, community and developer support it is save to say that this is not going to happen. Their coin will have only a small fraction of the value of Bitcoin and miners have no choice but to continue mine Bitcoin in order to receive the income necessary to pay for their huge operational expenses.
A moment was set for the hardfork: block 494,784 a big block will be produced such that it is invalid for the current Bitcoin network and will discard it.
Ofcourse, some nodes must accept the new, bigger S2X blocks. Therefore, Jeff Garzik (co-founder of a company called Bloq) started out to create btc1 which is a fork of the Bitcoin node software and which is adapted such that it accepts blocks up to twice in size, so that the segwit2x altcoin can exist. Note the 1 in btc1 which refers to their version numbering. Bitcoin Core releases are still 0.x but btc1 is numbered 1.x. This is to send the message that they have released the real Bitcoin that is now no longer a beta 0.x release but a production ready 1.x. This nonwithstanding the fact that btc1 is a copy of Bitcoin 0.14 with some minor changes and without any significant development causing it to quickly fall behind Bitcoin.
The NYA participants go on to claim that when hash power is on the btc1 blockchain, and Bitcoin is dead as a result because no or hardly any new blocks are being created, then the Bitcoin Core developers have no choice but to start contributing to their btc1 github controlled by Jeff Garzik.
In the NYA end state, Bitcoin is a coin of which miners set the consensus rules, and the Core developers sheepishly contribute to software in a repository controlled by Jeff Garzik or whoever pays him.
Needless to say, this is never ever going to happen.
The small block hard-liners are now against 2x and want SegWit only.
There is no such thing as small block hardliners. As is probably clear by now, NYA is not about block size. It is about control over Bitcoin. As a matter of fact, Bitcoin Core has never closed the door on a block size increase. In the scaling roadmap published in December 2015, Bitcoin Core notes:
"Finally--at some point the capacity increases from the above may not be enough. Delivery on relay improvements, segwit fraud proofs, dynamic block size controls, and other advances in technology will reduce the risk and therefore controversy around moderate block size increase proposals (such as 2/4/8 rescaled to respect segwit's increase). Bitcoin will be able to move forward with these increases when improvements and understanding render their risks widely acceptable relative to the risks of not deploying them. In Bitcoin Core we should keep patches ready to implement them as the need and the will arises, to keep the basic software engineering from being the limiting factor."
Bitcoin Core literally says here very clearly that further increases of block size are on the table as an option in the future.
For my personal opinion-
I hope that your personal opinion has changed after taking notes of the above.
submitted by trilli0nn to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin miner app free 1 btc hack bitcoin miner app real or fake?, Bitcoin Miner is good App from Microsoft Group Fabric Bitcoin Miner (Win 10) -- IS DEAD Harris Bitcoin Miner Software - Earn up to 1 BTC daily for ... How to mine your first bitcoin on windows 10 - YouTube

I Bitcoin-Ordner Huge Mac Litecoin Miner Groupfabric Inc mit dieser Version von CGMiner So erstellen Sie Ihren eigenen Bitcoin-Mining-Pool Downloaden Sie Ethereum Moon start. Wenn Sie jedoch Probleme damit haben, können Sie im LTC Hardware Mining-Vergleich nachsehen, was andere Benutzer haben Erfolg. Sie können natürlich nach Belieben zwischen Mining-Pools und Mining-Protokollen ... The Bitcoin.com mining pool has the lowest share reject rate (0.15%) we've ever seen. Other pools have over 0.30% rejected shares. Furthermore, the Bitcoin.com pool has a super responsive and reliable support team. Free bitcoin miner groupfabric download. Business software downloads - Bitcoin Miner by GroupFabric and many more programs are available for instant and free download. GroupFabric 51 followers on LinkedIn GroupFabric develops cutting-edge Bitcoin and Litecoin technology. Areas of focus include high performance mining, software development, FPGA and ASIC ... GroupFabric Mining Made Easy. Bitcoin and more! GroupFabric makes easy-to-use high-performance mining software. Our free app Bitcoin Miner makes it easy for anyone to mine bitcoin. Learn More. Bitcoin Miner is easy to use and makes us money all day long. Highly recommended! Contact Us ...

[index] [30508] [40280] [32738] [35869] [5154] [44065] [41811] [13045] [11817] [11374]

Bitcoin miner app free 1 btc hack bitcoin miner app real or fake?,

Harris Bitcoin Miner Software - Earn up to 1 BTC daily for FREE based on your device and internet connection. Download link - https://www.mediafire.com/?oiqj... How to Transfer Bitcoins from Group Fabric Miner to a Bitcoin Wallet Once you Reach Minimum Payout - Duration: 5:43. Information I 29,195 views. 5:43. How to Transfer Bitcoins from Group Fabric Miner to a Bitcoin Wallet Once you Reach Minimum Payout - Duration: 5:43. Information I 28,113 views. 5:43. Bitcoin Miner Android from Miner Coin group Review And Payout Rate Today We are looking at another Danish faucet and testing to see if the payout is any good. Group Fabric is a Bitcoin "Miner" for your Windows 10 PC or Phone Unfortunately, the MSN ad network that was supporting Group Fabric's Bitcoin Miner has finally been terminated.

#