Bitcoin Core - Bitcoin Wiki

Syscoin Platform’s Great Reddit Scaling Bake-off Proposal

Syscoin Platform’s Great Reddit Scaling Bake-off Proposal

https://preview.redd.it/rqt2dldyg8e51.jpg?width=1044&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=777ae9d4fbbb54c3540682b72700fc4ba3de0a44
We are excited to participate and present Syscoin Platform's ideal characteristics and capabilities towards a well-rounded Reddit Community Points solution!
Our scaling solution for Reddit Community Points involves 2-way peg interoperability with Ethereum. This will provide a scalable token layer built specifically for speed and high volumes of simple value transfers at a very low cost, while providing sovereign ownership and onchain finality.
Token transfers scale by taking advantage of a globally sorting mempool that provides for probabilistically secure assumptions of “as good as settled”. The opportunity here for token receivers is to have an app-layer interactivity on the speed/security tradeoff (99.9999% assurance within 10 seconds). We call this Z-DAG, and it achieves high-throughput across a mesh network topology presently composed of about 2,000 geographically dispersed full-nodes. Similar to Bitcoin, however, these nodes are incentivized to run full-nodes for the benefit of network security, through a bonded validator scheme. These nodes do not participate in the consensus of transactions or block validation any differently than other nodes and therefore do not degrade the security model of Bitcoin’s validate first then trust, across every node. Each token transfer settles on-chain. The protocol follows Bitcoin core policies so it has adequate code coverage and protocol hardening to be qualified as production quality software. It shares a significant portion of Bitcoin’s own hashpower through merged-mining.
This platform as a whole can serve token microtransactions, larger settlements, and store-of-value in an ideal fashion, providing probabilistic scalability whilst remaining decentralized according to Bitcoin design. It is accessible to ERC-20 via a permissionless and trust-minimized bridge that works in both directions. The bridge and token platform are currently available on the Syscoin mainnet. This has been gaining recent attention for use by loyalty point programs and stablecoins such as Binance USD.

Solutions

Syscoin Foundation identified a few paths for Reddit to leverage this infrastructure, each with trade-offs. The first provides the most cost-savings and scaling benefits at some sacrifice of token autonomy. The second offers more preservation of autonomy with a more narrow scope of cost savings than the first option, but savings even so. The third introduces more complexity than the previous two yet provides the most overall benefits. We consider the third as most viable as it enables Reddit to benefit even while retaining existing smart contract functionality. We will focus on the third option, and include the first two for good measure.
  1. Distribution, burns and user-to-user transfers of Reddit Points are entirely carried out on the Syscoin network. This full-on approach to utilizing the Syscoin network provides the most scalability and transaction cost benefits of these scenarios. The tradeoff here is distribution and subscription handling likely migrating away from smart contracts into the application layer.
  2. The Reddit Community Points ecosystem can continue to use existing smart contracts as they are used today on the Ethereum mainchain. Users migrate a portion of their tokens to Syscoin, the scaling network, to gain much lower fees, scalability, and a proven base layer, without sacrificing sovereign ownership. They would use Syscoin for user-to-user transfers. Tips redeemable in ten seconds or less, a high-throughput relay network, and onchain settlement at a block target of 60 seconds.
  3. Integration between Matic Network and Syscoin Platform - similar to Syscoin’s current integration with Ethereum - will provide Reddit Community Points with EVM scalability (including the Memberships ERC777 operator) on the Matic side, and performant simple value transfers, robust decentralized security, and sovereign store-of-value on the Syscoin side. It’s “the best of both worlds”. The trade-off is more complex interoperability.

Syscoin + Matic Integration

Matic and Blockchain Foundry Inc, the public company formed by the founders of Syscoin, recently entered a partnership for joint research and business development initiatives. This is ideal for all parties as Matic Network and Syscoin Platform provide complementary utility. Syscoin offers characteristics for sovereign ownership and security based on Bitcoin’s time-tested model, and shares a significant portion of Bitcoin’s own hashpower. Syscoin’s focus is on secure and scalable simple value transfers, trust-minimized interoperability, and opt-in regulatory compliance for tokenized assets rather than scalability for smart contract execution. On the other hand, Matic Network can provide scalable EVM for smart contract execution. Reddit Community Points can benefit from both.
Syscoin + Matic integration is actively being explored by both teams, as it is helpful to Reddit, Ethereum, and the industry as a whole.

Proving Performance & Cost Savings

Our POC focuses on 100,000 on-chain settlements of token transfers on the Syscoin Core blockchain. Transfers and burns perform equally with Syscoin. For POCs related to smart contracts (subscriptions, etc), refer to the Matic Network proposal.
On-chain settlement of 100k transactions was accomplished within roughly twelve minutes, well-exceeding Reddit’s expectation of five days. This was performed using six full-nodes operating on compute-optimized AWS c4.2xlarge instances which were geographically distributed (Virginia, London, Sao Paulo Brazil, Oregon, Singapore, Germany). A higher quantity of settlements could be reached within the same time-frame with more broadcasting nodes involved, or using hosts with more resources for faster execution of the process.
Addresses used: 100,014
The demonstration was executed using this tool. The results can be seen in the following blocks:
612722: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/6d47796d043bb4c508d29123e6ae81b051f5e0aaef849f253c8f3a6942a022ce
612723: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/8e2077f743461b90f80b4bef502f564933a8e04de97972901f3d65cfadcf1faf
612724: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/205436d25b1b499fce44c29567c5c807beaca915b83cc9f3c35b0d76dbb11f6e
612725: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/776d1b1a0f90f655a6bbdf559ff5072459cbdc5682d7615ff4b78c00babdc237
612726: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/de4df0994253742a1ac8ac9eec8d2a8c8b0a6d72c53d6f3caa29bb6c171b0a6b
612727: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/e5e167c52a9decb313fbaadf49a5e34cb490f8084f642a850385476d4ef10d70
612728: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/ab64d989edc71890e7b5b8491c20e9a27520dc45a5f7c776d3dae79057f59fe7
612729: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/5e8b7ecd0e36f99d07e4ea6e135fc952bf7ec30164ab6f4d1e98b0f2d405df6d
612730: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/d395df3d31dde60bbb0bece6bd5b358297da878f0beb96be389e5f0e043580a3
It is important to note that this POC is not focused on Z-DAG. The performance of Z-DAG has been benchmarked within realistic network conditions: Whiteblock’s audit is publicly available. Network latency tests showed an average TPS around 15k with burst capacity up to 61k. Zero-latency control group exhibited ~150k TPS. Mainnet testing of the Z-DAG network is achievable and will require further coordination and additional resources.
Even further optimizations are expected in the upcoming Syscoin Core release which will implement a UTXO model for our token layer bringing further efficiency as well as open the door to additional scaling technology currently under research by our team and academic partners. At present our token layer is account-based, similar to Ethereum. Opt-in compliance structures will also be introduced soon which will offer some positive performance characteristics as well. It makes the most sense to implement these optimizations before performing another benchmark for Z-DAG, especially on the mainnet considering the resources required to stress-test this network.

Cost Savings

Total cost for these 100k transactions: $0.63 USD
See the live fee comparison for savings estimation between transactions on Ethereum and Syscoin. Below is a snapshot at time of writing:
ETH price: $318.55 ETH gas price: 55.00 Gwei ($0.37)
Syscoin price: $0.11
Snapshot of live fee comparison chart
Z-DAG provides a more efficient fee-market. A typical Z-DAG transaction costs 0.0000582 SYS. Tokens can be safely redeemed/re-spent within seconds or allowed to settle on-chain beforehand. The costs should remain about this low for microtransactions.
Syscoin will achieve further reduction of fees and even greater scalability with offchain payment channels for assets, with Z-DAG as a resilience fallback. New payment channel technology is one of the topics under research by the Syscoin development team with our academic partners at TU Delft. In line with the calculation in the Lightning Networks white paper, payment channels using assets with Syscoin Core will bring theoretical capacity for each person on Earth (7.8 billion) to have five on-chain transactions per year, per person, without requiring anyone to enter a fee market (aka “wait for a block”). This exceeds the minimum LN expectation of two transactions per person, per year; one to exist on-chain and one to settle aggregated value.

Tools, Infrastructure & Documentation

Syscoin Bridge

Mainnet Demonstration of Syscoin Bridge with the Basic Attention Token ERC-20
A two-way blockchain interoperability system that uses Simple Payment Verification to enable:
  • Any Standard ERC-20 token to be moved from Ethereum to the Syscoin blockchain as a Syscoin Platform Token (SPT), and back to Ethereum
  • Any SPT to be moved from Syscoin to the Ethereum blockchain as an ERC-20 token, and back to Syscoin

Benefits

  • Permissionless
  • No counterparties involved
  • No trading mechanisms involved
  • No third-party liquidity providers required
  • Cross-chain Fractional Supply - 2-way peg - Token supply maintained globally
  • ERC-20s gain vastly improved transactionality with the Syscoin Token Platform, along with the security of bitcoin-core-compliant PoW.
  • SPTs gain access to all the tooling, applications and capabilities of Ethereum for ERC-20, including smart contracts.
https://preview.redd.it/l8t2m8ldh8e51.png?width=1180&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0a955a0181746dc79aff718bd0bf607d3c3aa23
https://preview.redd.it/26htnxzfh8e51.png?width=1180&format=png&auto=webp&s=d0383d3c2ee836c9f60b57eca35542e9545f741d

Source code

https://github.com/syscoin/?q=sysethereum
Main Subprojects

API

Tools to simplify using Syscoin Bridge as a service with dapps and wallets will be released some time after implementation of Syscoin Core 4.2. These will be based upon the same processes which are automated in the current live Sysethereum Dapp that is functioning with the Syscoin mainnet.

Documentation

Syscoin Bridge & How it Works (description and process flow)
Superblock Validation Battles
HOWTO: Provision the Bridge for your ERC-20
HOWTO: Setup an Agent
Developer & User Diligence

Trade-off

The Syscoin Ethereum Bridge is secured by Agent nodes participating in a decentralized and incentivized model that involves roles of Superblock challengers and submitters. This model is open to participation. The benefits here are trust-minimization, permissionless-ness, and potentially less legal/regulatory red-tape than interop mechanisms that involve liquidity providers and/or trading mechanisms.
The trade-off is that due to the decentralized nature there are cross-chain settlement times of one hour to cross from Ethereum to Syscoin, and three hours to cross from Syscoin to Ethereum. We are exploring ways to reduce this time while maintaining decentralization via zkp. Even so, an “instant bridge” experience could be provided by means of a third-party liquidity mechanism. That option exists but is not required for bridge functionality today. Typically bridges are used with batch value, not with high frequencies of smaller values, and generally it is advantageous to keep some value on both chains for maximum availability of utility. Even so, the cross-chain settlement time is good to mention here.

Cost

Ethereum -> Syscoin: Matic or Ethereum transaction fee for bridge contract interaction, negligible Syscoin transaction fee for minting tokens
Syscoin -> Ethereum: Negligible Syscoin transaction fee for burning tokens, 0.01% transaction fee paid to Bridge Agent in the form of the ERC-20, Matic or Ethereum transaction fee for contract interaction.

Z-DAG

Zero-Confirmation Directed Acyclic Graph is an instant settlement protocol that is used as a complementary system to proof-of-work (PoW) in the confirmation of Syscoin service transactions. In essence, a Z-DAG is simply a directed acyclic graph (DAG) where validating nodes verify the sequential ordering of transactions that are received in their memory pools. Z-DAG is used by the validating nodes across the network to ensure that there is absolute consensus on the ordering of transactions and no balances are overflowed (no double-spends).

Benefits

  • Unique fee-market that is more efficient for microtransaction redemption and settlement
  • Uses decentralized means to enable tokens with value transfer scalability that is comparable or exceeds that of credit card networks
  • Provides high throughput and secure fulfillment even if blocks are full
  • Probabilistic and interactive
  • 99.9999% security assurance within 10 seconds
  • Can serve payment channels as a resilience fallback that is faster and lower-cost than falling-back directly to a blockchain
  • Each Z-DAG transaction also settles onchain through Syscoin Core at 60-second block target using SHA-256 Proof of Work consensus
https://preview.redd.it/pgbx84jih8e51.png?width=1614&format=png&auto=webp&s=5f631d42a33dc698365eb8dd184b6d442def6640

Source code

https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin

API

Syscoin-js provides tooling for all Syscoin Core RPCs including interactivity with Z-DAG.

Documentation

Z-DAG White Paper
Useful read: An in-depth Z-DAG discussion between Syscoin Core developer Jag Sidhu and Brave Software Research Engineer Gonçalo Pestana

Trade-off

Z-DAG enables the ideal speed/security tradeoff to be determined per use-case in the application layer. It minimizes the sacrifice required to accept and redeem fast transfers/payments while providing more-than-ample security for microtransactions. This is supported on the premise that a Reddit user receiving points does need security yet generally doesn’t want nor need to wait for the same level of security as a nation-state settling an international trade debt. In any case, each Z-DAG transaction settles onchain at a block target of 60 seconds.

Syscoin Specs

Syscoin 3.0 White Paper
(4.0 white paper is pending. For improved scalability and less blockchain bloat, some features of v3 no longer exist in current v4: Specifically Marketplace Offers, Aliases, Escrow, Certificates, Pruning, Encrypted Messaging)
  • 16MB block bandwidth per minute assuming segwit witness carrying transactions, and transactions ~200 bytes on average
  • SHA256 merge mined with Bitcoin
  • UTXO asset layer, with base Syscoin layer sharing identical security policies as Bitcoin Core
  • Z-DAG on asset layer, bridge to Ethereum on asset layer
  • On-chain scaling with prospect of enabling enterprise grade reliable trustless payment processing with on/offchain hybrid solution
  • Focus only on Simple Value Transfers. MVP of blockchain consensus footprint is balances and ownership of them. Everything else can reduce data availability in exchange for scale (Ethereum 2.0 model). We leave that to other designs, we focus on transfers.
  • Future integrations of MAST/Taproot to get more complex value transfers without trading off trustlessness or decentralization.
  • Zero-knowledge Proofs are a cryptographic new frontier. We are dabbling here to generalize the concept of bridging and also verify the state of a chain efficiently. We also apply it in our Digital Identity projects at Blockchain Foundry (a publicly traded company which develops Syscoin softwares for clients). We are also looking to integrate privacy preserving payment channels for off-chain payments through zkSNARK hub & spoke design which does not suffer from the HTLC attack vectors evident on LN. Much of the issues plaguing Lightning Network can be resolved using a zkSNARK design whilst also providing the ability to do a multi-asset payment channel system. Currently we found a showstopper attack (American Call Option) on LN if we were to use multiple-assets. This would not exist in a system such as this.

Wallets

Web3 and mobile wallets are under active development by Blockchain Foundry Inc as WebAssembly applications and expected for release not long after mainnet deployment of Syscoin Core 4.2. Both of these will be multi-coin wallets that support Syscoin, SPTs, Ethereum, and ERC-20 tokens. The Web3 wallet will provide functionality similar to Metamask.
Syscoin Platform and tokens are already integrated with Blockbook. Custom hardware wallet support currently exists via ElectrumSys. First-class HW wallet integration through apps such as Ledger Live will exist after 4.2.
Current supported wallets
Syscoin Spark Desktop
Syscoin-Qt

Explorers

Mainnet: https://sys1.bcfn.ca (Blockbook)
Testnet: https://explorer-testnet.blockchainfoundry.co

Thank you for close consideration of our proposal. We look forward to feedback, and to working with the Reddit community to implement an ideal solution using Syscoin Platform!

submitted by sidhujag to ethereum [link] [comments]

“Neutrino payments” in Universa. Part 1: Theory

TLDR; – Neutrino payments (ν-payments) is a “Lightning-style” protocol of zero-fee Universa-guaranteed microtransactions, requiring the (regular Universa) fee only to establish and to close the series of micropayments.
Part 1 of 2; read the Part 2 (“Practice”) to learn more about Universa-specific details of implementation.

Abstract

Reading this article you’ll refresh your knowledge about the Lightning Network for Bitcoin (its benefits for Bitcoin as well as its basic architecture),.. and find out how easy it is to implement the concepts of Lightning Network on top of Universa smart contracts, without writing even a single line of code.

Lightning Network benefits

A well-known recent improvement to Bitcoin network is the Lightning Network, the off-chain micropayments extension that utilizes the legacy data and features of core Bitcoin network, but builds its own, not (immediately) blockchain-registered methods of value transfer, trying to compensate for many existing Bitcoin flaws:
Of course, many of these flaws just don’t exist in Universa network:
So, let’s construct a micropayment framework over Universa. To distinguish the Universa implementation from Bitcoin one, let’s call it… say, “neutrino payments” – cause neutrinos are incredibly fast and incredibly lightweight, and they can traverse the whole Universe(a), so why not? Here come the neutrino payments.

Neutrino payments: architecture

Imagine Alice and Bob.
Alice is a prominent video blogger and streamer on Twitch; during the stream, she accepts donations – they are usually tiny in amount, but there may be a number of them from the same viewer, to encourage her to stream more and longer.
Bob is a dedicated fan and viewer of Alice’s streams, and donates her regularly, being sure that his donations are important for her providing the quality contents. He doesn’t like to donate more than €10 per stream, though; but each donation may be from €0.01 up to even €0.5.
When Alice starts another stream, Bob establishes a Lightning Network channel with Alice. This is basically just a multi-signature “wallet” controlled by the keys of both Alice and Bob. At this moment, Bob registers it in the Bitcoin blockchain (that’s one of just two transactions with the Bitcoin network; all the other operations won’t require updating the Bitcoin blockchain), so the network knows some funds are “locked down” in this channel. In Bob’s case, he locks down just €10 amount of his cryptocurrency, for future Lightning Network payments to Alice.
Whenever Bob makes a donation to Alice, this happens actually over the Lightning Network only. He submits a new transaction with a new distribution of funds in the multisig wallet of the Lightning Network channel, signed with just his own key. First it is a “€0.01 to Alice, €9.99 to Bob”, then that is “€0.02 to Alice, €9.98 to Bob” and so on.
As the €10 balance is locked in the channel already (and that is recorded in the Bitcoin blockchain), Alice knows the funds are “confirmed”. And seeing a transaction signed by Bob, she may be sure the funds in this transaction are already “hers” (the funds are locked; the transaction is signed by 1 key of the two, now it is only her who needs to sign it to receive them fully; nothing can go wrong here). If the donations on her stream involve any paid “fan service” for those who donate, she could consider the payment happened, even though it is not – yet – registered in Bitcoin blockchain.
When the channel being closed, Alice just signs the last received transaction with her own key, completing the multi-sig requirements. And then the payment is registered in the Bitcoin network, being the second of just the two real network transactions and completing the “micropayments sequence”. None of the intermediate transactions involved any cost to either Alice or Bob.

Preliminary architecture

Can the scenario above be executed in Universa? Sure, and so trivially that the introduction before may be larger than the actual Universa’s implementation as a smart contract!
Each smart contract in Universa is a structured document, containing some mandatory fields with one of them being “state.owner”. state.owner field is usually assigned a SimpleRole containing just the key address of the current owner. So “sending” any token usually means just “reassigning” the owner field of the underlying smart contract (potentially, with splitting some smart contract in multiple, having the same total amount; or joining multiple compatible contracts, similarly keeping the total amount invariant).
How to make a “multi-signature wallet” in Universa then? Easy. The owner (state.owner) is reassigned not to a SimpleRole, but to a ListRole containing multiple key addresses. Each ListRole is created in one of multiple modes, like Mode.ALL or Mode.ANY.

“Establishing a channel”

To emulate the Lightning Network channel, Bob should make a new revision of his €10-worth token contract, where the new state.owner is assigned with a ListRole in Mode.ALL, and put there two key addresses: of Bob’s key and of Alice’s key. After this he registers this ownership change in the Universa network,.. yes, this is the 1st of the 2 transactions touching the blockchain; and this is equivalent to “establishing a channel” in real Bitcoin Lightning network:
... state: owner: mode: ALL name: owner roles: - alice: name: Alice type: simple addresses: - __type: KeyAddress uaddress: __type: binary base58: "" - bob: name: Bob type: simple addresses: - __type: KeyAddress uaddress: __type: binary base58: "" type: list ... 
Note he doesn’t create any new smart contract. He doesn’t need the original smart contract of his token be prepared somehow. Any regular “token”-style smart contract (and not even just a token; but more on this later) in Universa will support it, as the only what happens with it, in terms of Universa, is ownership change!

Micropayments

Similarly to the Lightning network transfers, after the initial revision of the contract all the subsequent mitransactions happen off-chain.
When Bob wants to “make a donation micropayment” to Alice, he takes the registered contract revision, and creates a new transaction pack. The transaction pack contains new and revoked sections; in the revoked section, he puts the registered contract revision. In the section, he puts two new revision of this smart contract. The sum of “amounts” in both revisions should be equal to the amount field in the original token; one revision will contain the amount being “donated” to Alice (like, “0.01”), and the other revision will contain the amount remaining in Bob’s ownership (like, “9.99”).
Then he signs this transaction pack with his own key, and sends it to Alice via any off-chain method.
But what Bob doesn’t do, contrary to regular Universa usage, is he doesn’t attempt to register this contract in Universa network. He could not do it anyway (do you remember that the current owner is ListRole(mode=ALL, parties=(Alice, Bob))? – this syntax is high-level and not reflects the real smart contract syntax), as the signature from Alice is needed for contract to be registered. But he doesn’t wait for Alice signing her document either,.. he just sits and watches the Alice’s stream further.
Alice, in her turn, doesn’t sign the document immediately. She does accept the donation though; for her, it is basically happened. If she checks the existing token contract (the one with the amount=10 and owner being a ListRole), she’ll see it is in APPROVED state (so, “the money are locked in the Lightning channel”). She sees the ownership in one of the contracts being changed to herself, indefinitely; and Bob signed this transaction pack. The only remaining is her signature, nothing can go wrong – it is a real donation just waiting for her signature to be finalized.
...
As the Twitch stream goes, Bob decides to make one more donation. He just rebuilds the same transaction pack, but now with the new amount donated to Alice (now it will be “0.02” probably), and the new remainder in his ownership (9.98). He signs the transaction pack again, and sends it to Alice (again, via any direct p2p connection, without touching the Universa network).
Alice, seeing a new transaction pack from Bob, compares it with the previous one received from him. She sees a new ownership token contract owned by her key address, and the amount increased since the previous Bob’s operation. She notices it has increased by 0.01, and, happily, publicly announces on her Twitch stream that a new donation, 0.01, has been received from her regular fan, Bob. Bob, you are the best!
Again, she doesn’t need to sign a new transaction pack yet, she just keeps it for longer, waiting if Bob wants to make another microdonation.
...
One may wonder, what happens if Bob, in one of his next “microtransactions”, decreases the amount donated to Alice? Like, the previous amount donated to Alice was 1.25, and in the next transaction pack signed by him, he gives her just 1.1? Yes he can make such a transaction pack; but Alice already has a better transaction pack, and it is signed by Bob already (and just waiting for her own signature). So she just ignores any new transaction pack which is worse (for her) than what she has got already. No “negative microdonation” is possible, she just waits until Bob is in the better mood, and his donation is higher than 1.25.

“Closing the channel”

As soon as the Twitch stream is over – or when Alice and Bob mutually decide the channel could be closed; like, when Bob announces he is not going to donate to Alice in this stream for a while while – Alice gets the latest (and the best) transaction pack, containing the new splitting of token ownership between herself and Bob. Then she signs it with her own key, and registers in in Universa Mainnet (as, with the previous Bob's signature, the transaction pack has now everything to register it properly). This is the 2nd of the two Universa blockchain transactions, the final one.
Since this moment, the actual token transfer has occurred and registered. Only two Universa network registrations (think about it as “€0.02 spent”) were required, no matter how many – dozens, hundreds, thousands – of intermediate microtransactions occured.

Read next: real-world architecture

When you choose to implement such a “Neutrino payments” protocol in your own application, you will need to consider some Universa specifics, to make sure to implement it in a safe way, without any risk for the users to lose their possessions. But more on this in “Neutrino payments” in Universa. Part 2: Practice.
submitted by amyodov to u/amyodov [link] [comments]

Can we build a decentralized Lightning Network powered Video or File sharing service?

I have the feeling that it's possible to build a censorship-resistant DAO - a service that, once released into the internet, owns itself - for hosting and sharing files, videos, images. It could work like youtube, rapidshare or imgur. Bitcoin would be the essential financing instrument.
Youtube and sharehosters only make tiny amounts with each click from their advertising. Users could contribute with microtransactions over the Lightning Network. The service could use the money to rent more server space, etc.
Why do we need this? The European Parliament about to pass the article 13-bill. It will make platforms like youtube liable for their users copyright violations. That law will likely lead to upload filtering and a ton of censorship.
This bitcoin-fueled share hoster If nobody owns the service, there is no way of going after the people who run the service.
Is anybody already working on anything like this?
submitted by raumi75 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Every computer is the Bitcoin computer

Bitcoin doesn't require any special hardware, as it can be used on any device which can do computations. To make a Bitcoin transaction you need to create a ECDSA signature, which is just math, something which all computers do well. You can do it both on resource-constrained like smart cards (think SIM cards) and on large servers alike.
The idea that you need a special Bitcoin computer to use Bitcoin is outright harmful, as it limits your choices and dupes you into buying overpriced proprietary hardware which gives the vendor more control of what you can and cannot do. This is very much against the spirit of Bitcoin which can thrive only as an open system.
So yeah, that thing 21 inc is trying to sell makes no sense, whatsoever.
But a lot of people think that "there might be something in it", let me go through the theories of why this device makes sense:
  1. "It is a dev kit!". Let me guess, you aren't a programmer. Or if you're a programmer, you're a shitty programmer and should be ashamed of yourself. You do not need any dev kit for Bitcoin, all you need is open source software (and, maybe, some internet services, optionally). When I wanted to try to do something Bitcoin related back in 2011, all I needed was to download bitcoind and install it on my $10/month VPS. Then I looked through RPC API call list and made a Bitcoin-settled futures exchange. The whole thing took me only a week. I didn't need to pay $400 for a devkit. Learning how to work with bitcoind took less than a day. There are hundreds of Bitcoin companies and thousands of hobbyist working on Bitcoin projects, none of them needed any sort of a dev kit.
  2. "It is useful because it has APIs and pre-installed software!" No, see above. If needed, pre-installed software can be delivered in a form of a virtual machine (e.g. VirtualBox, VMware, etc), no need for a physical device.
  3. "It is useful because it comes with a micropayment service/API". Nope. These things can be done in software, no need for custom hardware. Obviously, a micropayment system can be more widely adopted when it is open. If it is tied to custom hardware (which I doubt) then you have a vendor lock-in which is exactly the thing we're trying to avoid with Bitcoin.
  4. "it comes with pre-installed marketplace". So what, we have marketplaces such as OpenBazaar. If there are useful features in the 21 inc's marketplace we can replicated them in open source software.
  5. "It's convenient for users!" Are you saying that a $400 device which you need to be connected to a laptop is more convenient than a service which can run in a browser?
  6. "It might offer better security". We already have devices such as Trezor which can protect bitcoins from unsecure operating system. Trezor costs much less than $400 and is actually useful. Even though it was done by a small company without much capital.
  7. "It can be used for applications like a reputation system, etc." When telecom companies wanted an ability to differentiate between users, they created smartcard-based SIM cards. This technology is many decades old. Using Bitcoin for a reputation system is a bad idea, as it is not designed for that. If device holds 1000 satoshi to give it an identity weight, a guy who has 1 bitcoin can impersonate 10000 such devices. It just not going to work.
  8. "A constant stream of bitcoins it mines is convenient for users." User has to pay for this device, he might as well just buy bitcoins. If it is necessary for bitcoins to be attached to hardware, this can be done using a tiny dongle which costs less than $1 to manufacture, or a smart card.
  9. "But this device got backed by VCs and large companies, there must be something to it, we are just too stupid to comprehend its greatness". Well...
There is, indeed, a very simple explanation of this device's existnce: Balaji's reality distortion field. He is a prominent VC, so it was relatively easy to convince others that it's a worthy idea. The big vision behind it -- the financial network of devices -- is actually great. And then there is a question of execution. A guy like Balaji is supposed to be an expert in assessing feasibility of execution. So, as we can guess, investors trusted him. As many VCs tell, they invest in people. They cannot examine nitty-gritty technical details, but just look at skills, track record, etc.
So the fact that it got large investments and generates a lot of hype doesn't mean much, there was a plenty of such companies during dotcom boom.
It's quite like :CueCat. As we now know, an ability to scan a printed code and open a web page which it points to is very useful, a lot of people use QR codes, they are ubiquitous. This was exactly the vision behind CueCat. But it was implemented as a dedicated hardware device, not as a smartphone app, as there were no smartphones at that time. So after a lot of hype and aggressive marketing the company failed, but just few years later their vision became realized in QR reader apps.
Hardware becomes increasingly irrelevant. As Mark Andreessen, Balaji's partner, [once said], software is eating the world. Solving problems which can be solved software using custom hardware is just silly.
Balaji talks about internet-of-things applications where devices mine bitcoins and use them to buy services they need to function. Well, in the end, user pays for that, as he pays for physical chips and electricity. It would be more efficient for him to pay directly than to use this mining-based scheme. And it's possible to do so using software. E.g. imagine you have a lot of smart devices which use external services in your home. It would be nice if you can just aggregate the bill and pay it off automatically, say $2/month. Why only $2? Well, if there is a device consuming $20/month, it needs some serious mining abilities, so it will cost much more than $20 in electricity bills...
Maybe 21 inc will eventually pivot into purely software solutions, they have a lot of money to play with. But the current generation of devices they make just makes no sense, whatsoever, and people who try to find something useful in them just waste their time.
EDIT: One plausible case for using custom hardware is a possibility of off-chain microtransactions using trusted hardware. Not unlike MintChip conceptually. But size of the device as well as its price is puzzling in this case, as this can be implemented (and was already implemented) in smart card form factor.
submitted by killerstorm to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Lightning Network and Proof of Work

I'll explain some advanced things here.
Bitcoin's security and decentralization is because of his Proof of Work, the greater the bitcoin hashrate, the safer it is.
When you lose Proof of Work to earn zero and instant fees, you lose POW security and decentralization of currency.
So the Lightning Network comes to microtransactions, the good of the Lightning Network in relation to others is that its ballast is the very block of Bitcoin that is the strongest in the world and with a code well reviewed and tested by Bitcoin Core.
Only by SegWit itself along with Batch Transactions and in the future the Schnorr is already able to leave the rates in 1 sat / byte for a long time, since the three decrease the use of the blockchain.
Lightning Network will serve to keep zero and instant rate forever, without letting go of Bitcoin's Proof of Work safety.
Study:
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/
https://lightning.network/
https://info.shapeshift.io/blog/2018/02/22/shapeshift-now-batching-bitcoin-transactions
https://medium.com/@SDWouters/why-schnorr-signatures-will-help-solve-2-of-bitcoins-biggest-problems-today-9b7718e7861c
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-work_system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake
submitted by ayanamirs to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin, Deflation and the End of Top-Down Consumerism

I had a "shower thought" the other day about bitcoin while doing some gardening and thought I'd run it by you folks and maybe get some discussion going. I'm going to try and flesh out my original train of thought in a few paragraphs so this could get long, but feel free to skip to the TL;DR below if you're short on time.
There seems to still be a lot of hand-wringing among both critics and supporters of bitcoin regarding the currency's deflationary nature. I don't want to re-hash all the related arguments here in detail as they have already been well articulated elsewhere, but suffice it to say many observers of the bitcoin space, especially classically-trained economists, are eager to pronounce doom for the future of bitcoin as a currency because it does not have the "desirable" property of being inflationary.
Why is an inflationary currency "desirable," you ask? Well, one of the arguments frequently trotted out by the the aforementioned skeptics is that an inflationary currency is good because it impels holders of the currency to spend it before its devalued over time by inflation, thereby stimulating spending and stimulating the economy as a whole. This was also the same argument that both the Federal Reserve and especially the Abe administration in Japan made when they started their respective quantitative easing programs. In particular, the Abe administration and the Bank of Japan have stated that they will pump as much money into the system as needed to ensure that the "economic evil" of deflation is defeated.
And yet, as someone who is very much skeptical of disgusted with consumerism for consumerism's sake, I find this line of thinking really disturbing. Sure, on paper it's "good" for the economy if Mr. Tanaka goes out and buys a new Toshiba OLED TV with his quickly-depreciating yen, but if Mr. Tanaka already has a perfectly-working TV he bought two years ago and would not have bought the new TV without being "induced" to do so by the threat of his cash becoming increasingly worthless, is the transaction really occurring on a purely voluntary basis (i.e. based on the fact that Mr. Tanaka just wants a new TV) or is there some measure of unnatural coercion taking place, distorting the market? As you can probably guess, I think the latter is more true than the former. The fact of the matter is, a lot of people buy a lot of garbage they don't need due to the coercive nature of an inflationary currency and inflationary currency plays a non-trivial role in supporting our modern consumerist society.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, may produce the opposite effect as a deflationary store of value: if Mr. Tanaka holds bitcoin instead of yen, he won't be so easily manipulated by a central authority into coerced consumption. In fact, the opposite is true: if bitcoin generally appreciates it may produce an anti-consumerism effect whereby Mr. Tanaka will only buy a new TV if he actually really, really needs one. Obviously Toshiba doesn't like this since they actually have to try much harder to innovate and convince people that they need new TVs, but I would argue that this is a good thing for the environment and innovation since less external waste is generated and Mr. Tanaka is empowered to build his own wealth rather that remain stuck in the work-consume hamster wheel.
If you believe like I do that rampant consumerism is a bad thing, the above bitcoin-induced effect is already really awesome and a great reason to support bitcoin, but I think bitcoin may be an even more potent force for destroying the cancer of thoughtless consumerism by virtue of the fact that the ability to send money instantly and cheaply to anyone, anytime and anywhere could potentially reduce the role that advertising plays in modern society as a way of monetizing information and entertainment.
Just think of all the content services that most people use on a daily basis that are supported by advertising: TV, radio, magazines and a good chunk of the internet. Imagine instead a world where all of these content services are built on mandatory (pay-per-view) microtransactions instead of advertising. Instead of having Mr. Tanaka buy Asahi beer, which pays Fuji News to run ads so Mr. Tanaka buys more beer in an endless cycle of pointless consumerism, Mr. Tanaka can just pay Fuji News in bitcoin for the right to view their content and buy Asahi beer on a purely rational basis (i.e. when he naturally wants to) rather than when he’s been brainwashed by endless advertising to do so. Thus, I think bitcoin could become a powerful force for dismantling the inefficient and soul-crushing consumerist society that we all live under, and it’s deflationary nature has an important part to play in inducing the changes needed for this to happen.
I know that the above argument is very rough around the edges and could probably be refined and improved by smarter people than me, so I ask you, /bitcoin, do you think bitcoin could potentially become a powerful force for re-aligning our ideology as a society away from consumerism to something more meaningful and fulfilling, or am I being to optimistic and naïve here?
TL;DR: I think that bitcoin, by virtue of being a deflationary currency and enabling seamless, instant transactions has the potential to subvert the consumerist dogma of our current society, but on the other hand maybe I’m wrong and just inhaled too much pollen while gardening earlier.
submitted by KoKansei to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Coin-a-Year: Nyancoin

Hello cryptocurrency lovers! Welcome to Coin-a-Year, the laziest series yet in the Coin-a-Day publishing empire. This year's coin is Nyancoin (NYAN). I originally covered Nyancoin in an article here in /cryptocurrency published January 4th, 2015.
Without (much) further ado, I'm going to include the original report next, unmodified. This is unlike my Coin-a-Week series, where I use strikeout and update in-text. Because this is going to be a longer update, I'll just make all further comments and updates below, just realize that all information below is as of January 4th, 2015 and thus is more than a year out of date as of posting now, at the end of February 2016.
Since I use horizontal rules as internal dividers in the original post, I'll use a double horizontal rule to divide the original text from this prelude and the following update.
Coin-a-Day Jan 4th
Welcome to the fourth installment of Coin-a-Day! To see convenient links to the introduction and the previous entries, please see /coinaday. Today's coin is Nyancoin (NYAN).
Summary
• ~173.6 million available currently [1]; 337 million limit [2]
• All-time high: ~0.000024 BTC on February 16, 2014 [1]
• Current price: ~3 satoshi [1]
• Current market cap: ~$1,275 [1]
• Block rate (average): 1 minute [1] [3]
• Transaction rate: ~25? / last 24 hours; estimated $3-4 [4]
• Transaction limit: 70 / second [5]
• Transaction cost: 0 for most transactions [6]
• Rich list: ??? [7]
• Exchanges: Cryptsy [8]
• Processing method: Mining [10]
• Distribution method: proof-of-work block rewards and 1% premine for "bounties, giveaways & dev support" [2] [10]
• Community: Comatose [9]
• Code/development: https://github.com/nyancoin-release/nyancoin ; there hasn't been a released code change in 10 months. The new developer has talked about some changes, but has not made a new release. He has given advice about how to keep the network running and operate the client. [10]
• Innovation or special feature: First officially licensed cryptocurrency (from Nyancat) [2]; "zombie"-coin [11]
Description / Community:
So you're probably wondering why in the world we're talking about a coin which has been declared dead and already written off. I actually first selected this coin to illustrate a "deadcoin", but the more I dug into it, the more I was amazed at the shambles I discovered. I am combining the description and community sections for this coin, because the community (or lack thereof) is the central issue for Nyancoin.
Substantially all, if not literally all, of the original infrastructure is gone. From the announcement post, the original website has expired. The nyan.cat site itself survives, but has no reference to the coin. The github repo remains, but then there was never much changed from the bitcoin/litecoin original. In fact, the COPYING file doesn't even list "Nyancoin Developers". None of the original nodes seem to be running anymore. @Nyan_Coin hasn't tweeted since July 6th. And that was just to announce posting an admittedly cute picture to facebook which makes a claim for a future which seems never to have developed. Of the original 15 pools, I think all are dead except p2pool, for which at least one node still supports NYAN. The original blockchain explorer, nyancha.in, is still running. The faucet is dead or broken. The original exchanges no longer list it (two of the three having died; SwissCEX having ended its trading as of the first of this year). And so forth.
And yet:

I'm not dead! I'm getting better!

No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
[Of course, that scene finishes with knocking out the "recovering" patient so he can be taken away...not to mention the absurdity of including Monty Python in a financial article, but moving right along.]
There is still just enough left to Nyancoin to keep it twitching, even if it is on life-support. Whether it's an individual node or whether it's a pool, there are blocks being produced at a steady rate as intended. Transactions are being processed. There is still a market. There is still a block explorer. And there is a dev. It is like a case study in the absolute minimum necessary to keep a coin alive. The most likely outcome is almost certainly a final collapse when one critical piece or another of the infrastructure goes away. And yet in the meantime, a person can own a million NYAN for $8 [12], and then move this coin quickly and easy, albeit with no particular external demand. It's like the world's most hyped testnet.
I think this case presents an interesting example of what happens to an altcoin when its initial support dries up. NYAN coin is more fortunate than some, actually, as there are some where there are no longer any nodes running it nor the original announcement thread (in fact, there was actually a second Nyancoin launched around the same time. But it died hard and its original announcement thread was deleted and at this point I would have no idea how to access it; so "Nyancoin" thus illustrates how hard a coin can die (Nyancoin 2) as well as how it can hang around despite being proclaimed dead, with far more justification behind that pronouncement than there has been for bitcoin (NYAN) ).
Footnotes
[1] http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nyancoin/
[2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=402085.0 Regarding the premine, it's unclear to me where this money is now, since the original poster hasn't been active on BCT since May and the original site is down. However, given that it's only 1%, and about $25 in value right now, there seem to be more significant concerns for NYAN.
[3] http://nyancha.in/chain/Nyancoin - Nyan blockchain explorer; blocks are somewhat inconsistent but somewhere around the 1 minute average
[4] There doesn't seem to be anything automatically doing these stats, so I did visual inspection on about 1500 blocks (about one day) excluding the block generation reward (~250k/day). Most blocks are otherwise empty. I counted about 24 transactions or so scrolling through, with an outlier around 300k NYAN and another around 100k NYAN. In total, about 500k NYAN, excluding the block rewards. This is very approximately $3-4.
[5] Nyancoin is a basically unmodified, slightly out-of-date bitcoin as far as code goes, and ignoring the change in block rate and total coin supply, as well as the difficulty retarget after every block. So for purposes of estimating maximum possible transaction throughput, I start with bitcoin's estimated 7 transactions per second, and multiply by 10 for having a block on average every minute rather than every 10 minutes. In any event, this limit is not likely to be reached in the foreseeable future.
[6] Like bitcoin, transaction fees appear to be optional in Nyancoin. Unlike bitcoin, there is almost no transaction volume, and coins tend to sit for a relatively long time before being moved. So zero-fee transactions appear to be the norm from looking at a couple transactions on the block explorer.
[7] I couldn't find one. See the disclosure section of this article: your humble correspondent is likely represented in some way on a top 100 if one were to be made or if one exists, despite not holding it directly, depending on how the exchange holds it.
[8] I could not find any other exchanges still listing Nyancoin. SwissCex appears to have disabled it as of a couple days ago. Cryptsy has a notice that the NYAN/BTC market will be closing, but its NYAN/LTC market appears strong.
[9] Essentially all of the original sites, pools, faucets, etc. are dead and there has been very little to replace it. There is basically a single node, or perhaps a very few, which are running the blockchain. However, there is a developer still trying to hold things together, maxvall_dev, maxvall on BCT. He is the last hope for the NYAN.
[10] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=597877.0 This is the thread where maxvall took over as dev, and it also discusses switching to PoS, which hasn't happened as far as I know.
[11] "zombie"-coin: Not to be confused with ZMB (my god, does it ever end?). This is my term to describe a coin which is "undead": by rights it should be dead. And yet it's still walking around and acting like it's alive. What is it? What's going on? It's quite debatable whether this gives it any special value, but I find it an interesting state, and it's why this was chosen for early coverage. There are plenty of actually popular and successful coins, and we will go onto covering more normal selections; we're looking for variety rather than repetition. But I think this is an interesting example for what can go wrong, and yet in the midst of that, how little it takes for a coin to survive. In fact, it's almost like an alternate history bitcoin to me; this shows the concept that "it was run on one computer before; it can be run on one computer again" to some extent. And there are even some strange pragmatic benefits as well, like having no competition for getting a transaction into a block and thus zero transaction fees.
[12] And, in fact, the author chose to do so today, spending about 0.03 BTC for about 1 million NYAN.
Additional Reading
/nyancoins - Like NYAN: mostly dead, but not quite
http://nyan-coin.org/ - new official website
BCT thread listing nodes, xpool (p2pool), for mining information.
americanpegasus predicting in February that NYAN will hit $1; always an entertaining read
Giveaway
Instead of a challenge today, since NYAN has enough challenges, I decided I would give away 10,000 NYAN to at least the first ten people who ask for it. This still remains at my discretion, but honestly, if you really want, say, 50,000 NYAN and create four new accounts to do so, I'll probably be too amused to say no. I don't expect to get ten requests. If I get more, I'll probably still fulfill them, but as with everything else, this is left to my whim.
Donations and Disclosure
Okay, this is an important one today because of the tiny market here. I actually hold less USD value in NYAN than in BTC, DOGE, and PPC (although my value in PPC might be about equivalent actually), but I hold more of the total market in NYAN than any of those three. And I'll probably be buying more. So I have a conflict of interest in writing this article.
I am not providing financial advice and I do not make any recommendations of any sort on any matters. Make your own decisions; do your own research. Please, I do not want to hear about anyone doing anything "on my advice." I am not offering advice.
I personally hold just over 1 million NYAN on Cryptsy right now.
Perhaps it would be better if I didn't write any articles about anything I were invested inspeculating on, but I started this series for my own education to further my speculation, so unfortunately, dear reader, your needs come second to my own. tanstaafl; you get what you pay for, and I'm giving you my thoughts.
If by some strange quirk of fate you actually own NYAN and enjoyed this article and wished to donate some to me, K7Ho9HghBF6xWwS6JsepE6RAEPyAXbsQCV is mine (first non-empty account I've posted; transferred 1000 NYAN into here earlier from Cryptsy to test that the network and my wallet were actually working).
Thank you all for reading and commenting! I've already learned a lot from this process and I look forward to more!
Upcoming coins:
• January 5th: Nxt
• January 6th: Darkcoin
• January 7th: Namecoin
I'll use alphabetic labeling for footnotes in the updates to avoid any confusion with the footnotes in the original. For simplicity, unchanged items, like the 337 million limit and the 1 minute will not be mentioned, and we'll start with the summary changes.
Updates:
Summary
  • ~263.7 million NYAN currently exist [a]
  • Current price: ~7 satoshi [b]
  • Current market cap: ~$8,000 [c]
  • Transaction rate: ~185 / last 24 hours; ~3,300,000 NYAN (~$100) [d]
  • Exchanges: Cryptopia [e]
  • Community: We're not quite dead yet; in fact, I think we're getting better! [f]
  • Code/Development: I have an early draft of NYAN2, but I'm about six months past my initial goal for having it available to use. Life/work/lack of build machine/procrastination. NYAN2 will be a rebase onto a modern LTC codebase which will soft fork to fix a current vulnerability to a fork bug. For now, the network still runs on the same code that it did when I wrote the first article.
Discussion
I'm going to consider the community first, since I pointed it out as the weakness and central topic in the last one, then talk about the technical situation briefly, and then review the financial results.
The community has been excellent, if I do say so myself. We've got working infrastructure going thanks to the contributions of many Nekonauts (see [f]). Some original Nekonauts have returned or at least popped in from time to time, and new ones like myself have found Nyancoin (I would say given what I wrote in the original, I was still a skeptic of it at that point. Not that skeptics can't be Nekonauts, but I think I'd put my conversion to the cult of nyan shortly after writing that, even though I was already a nillionaire then for the heck of it.)
While I do look forward to seeing the community continue to grow in future years and consider that important, I don't think the community is our weakest point any longer; I think it's now our strongest point. I've tried to encourage the community's revival as best I could, including giving away tens of nillions in total, and lots of long rambling articles on my views on ethics and philosophy and frankly it's worked better than I would've really expected (or at least it has coincided with an effective recovery of the community). The community also helped me through at least a couple hard times personally in there as well.
The technical situation in Nyancoin is mostly unchanged but slightly improved, although with two additional known vulnerabilities. It's unchanged in that it's the same client. It's improved in that we have an active nyanchain explorer host (nyan.space), and we have a public draft of a plan for a soft forking security fix update in the near future (hopefully by the end of March (although I've slipped these deadlines before and may well miss March for release by a bit, I do think I'm inching closer now and then)).
The most serious vulnerability is to forking. This is the bug which hit Peercoin if I recall correctly. NYAN2 is intended to solve this through its soft fork from the LTC fix upstream (from the BTC fix upstream). In the meantime, we've been lucky we haven't been attacked. The tiny marketcap probably helps with not being a particularly attractive attack target. We're not exactly about to pay ransom to move faucet outputs. But that's no excuse; we want this fixed and should have it finally done "soon" (tm).
The less serious vulnerability is to a time warp attack in the difficulty function (Kimoto Gravity Well), which relates to general weaknesses it has and issues we've had with large gaps in the block chain because of spikes in the difficulty function causing it to be unprofitable and driving away most of the hash, and then low difficulty and price rise making it attractive to more hash, creating a spike and causing it again. While this is irritating, the chain still works, even if there are fits and starts at times. An important part of the reason I can get away with this is because there is at least one Nekonaut-supporting miner, CartmanSPC, who rescues us from time to time, and did so during the course of this article being written. We have a bunch of pools, but sometimes the hash just isn't there to get us unstuck when the difficulty goes high enough. Another part of the reason I consider it not an especially serious issue is because there's a workaround which works for me (classic bad developer logic): I use a large transaction fee (generally 337 NYAN, although I might have halved it after the most recent halving, I'll probably use 337 again) on my personal wallet by default. If necessary, I use a couple of them. It can make NYAN profitable to mine again despite the higher difficulty and "unstick" the chain. The difficulty function can go back down again in the next block if the gap has been long enough, so that can be enough to keep it going again for a while (although it can also get stuck again irritatingly fast at times). A fix for this will be putting in a better difficulty function for NYAN3, which will require a hard fork. This is tentatively scheduled for feature freeze around the middle of this year, coding to follow, activation sometime early 2017.
Financial has been our most disappointing performance. A graph of the 1 year performance right now on coinmarketcap looks pretty sad, showing our fall from a little over 60 satoshi down to around 7 satoshi now.
We rose too high, too fast, and I didn't stick with the safe high paying job like a sane person. Instead I hit the road, went to jail, and worked minimum wage. That doesn't sound like a sentence from a cryptocurrency financial review, does it? But the performance of NYAN since the article has been the story of my personal finances, which is the story of my life since then.
So, autobiographical coinaday interlude, trying to keep it generally to the most salient points. Well, in 2014 I had been on my way home to Minnesota from California when I was pulled over leaving Eureka, Nevada for speeding (got sloppy and went 45 approaching the 45 sign and thus technically still in the 35; bored cop seeing out-of-state plates). My vehicle reeked of weed, what with having been in Mendocino County previously with no intention of traveling out of the county much less state anytime soon but family emergency brought me back, and the end result was a citation for possession of cannabis and paraphernalia along with the speeding.
Fast forward to the beginning of 2015, I'm settled into a good software position and start looking more at cryptocurrency in my spare time. I write the coin-a-day series for a bit and then got annoyed and quit after a while when trying to do one a day on top of an actual job was too much for me (along with some annoyance over criticism; I can be rather thin-skinned at times). But I had gotten interested in Nyancoin, and started buying it up more and more with extra money I was making.
And then comes the crash. I had to stop putting as much in as I realized that where I was living and what I was working on wasn't going to work out for me and I needed to figure something else out. So, as I seem wont to do, I went on a roadtrip. I quit my job. And I went back for the court date for my citations and refused to pay, instead spending 10 days in jail rather than pay ~$1400 (I actually had the money in cash available to me if I chose to pay as a backup if I chickened out, but the judge annoyed me enough that I really preferred to be jailed instead of paying, as stupid as that sounds since I'm quite sure the judge didn't care in the least one way or another).
After that, I went back to roadtrip lifestyle for a while. It was a nice period. A lot of beautiful scenery; a lot of reading. Eventually, I busted up my car pretty badly...a couple times actually, the second time for good. Fast forwarding through the rest of the year, I worked a couple minimum wage jobs to pay bills and avoid cubicle life and kill some time until I figured out what I was going to do next. Just recently I quit as delivery boy after getting a speeding ticket (I swear, I'm not as horrible of a driver as this makes me sounds, although I have had a bad tendency to speed in the past, which I really have curbed to almost nothing; but I'm clearly not good enough) and am currently writing a Coin-a-Year article with a friend's incentive and applying to do documentation and development with the Nu project.
Okay, so what did any of that have to do with NYAN? Well, it's the mess of a life that has led to the fall of the price from 60 satoshi to 7 satoshi. If instead my life history for the time since the article had been simply "I was happily employed writing software", then I don't believe we would have dropped below 20 satoshi. It's easy to see in hindsight. If anyone can lend me a time machine, I'm sure I can get some condensed instructions which should improve performance significantly. Otherwise, just going to have more chalked up for the "character building" tally.
So, lessons learned if you are the major buy support for your coin: you need long-term reserves. Whatever you put in bids can be taken out in a moment by a dump for no apparent reason. This is particularly true if you may be quitting your cushy, high-paying job and wandering around without income for an extended period of time. Rather obvious, but hey, maybe someone else can learn from my mistakes. If I'd been bidding as cautiously as I am now from the beginning, I think the price would probably be somewhere from 10-20 satoshi now instead of around 7 satoshi.
It's especially unfortunate given that I wanted to be able to demonstrate the more consistent growth possible building a stable store of value, as opposed to the pump and dumps common in altcoins. And instead we had a pump-and-dump looking graph ourselves after I bid up higher than I was able to sustain, and a large (10+ nillion) instadump crashed the market all the way back down to 1 satoshi momentarily. We've had a few large (2+ nillion) dumps since, but nothing that large. We haven't generally had that large of bids though either.
It's hard to know when I've exhausted the supply at a price level, when it sometimes waits for a couple weeks or even more and then fills all the bids at once. But I want to maximize the minimum price paid because I think that's important for building confidence in a store of value long-term, which is one of my core goals for NYAN.
At the same time, we're still up from the lowest parts of the floor and where I found it. Since I own about 30% [g], the very cheapest supply has been taken off the market. I plan to keep on buying up "cheap NYAN" as much as I can. I've bought up to 60 satoshi before, I'll probably buy up that high this time around. I've got a token 100,000 NYAN ask at 300 satoshi; I hope never to sell lower.
Conclusions
Now I try to wrap it all together as if I saw this all coming and am the wise expert, despite having had about 90% drop in price in the last year after bidding too high. My original concept was taking the "minimum viable coin" and reviving it to a powerhouse as a textbook example in how to do it.
Part of my core concept in this is the arbitrariness of value: throughout history, humans have chosen any number of things as a store of value for the time: salt, large rocks, certain metals, disks, marked sticks, and so forth. While there has generally been a certain logic in the choice, in that there is a locally restricted supply in one way or another, and so forth, from the perspective of other centuries or cultures the choices can seem quite strange. Growing up, I was always struck by how strange the notion of salt being limited and valuable seemed in a world where people were trying to reduce intake and large amounts could be bought for trivial sums. And yet, a key nutrient necessary for life fundamentally makes more sense as being valuable than notched sticks or printed paper or a piece of plastic with some encoded information.
Humans have perpetually come up with stranger and stranger ways of storing and transferring value. Each new step, as always, comes with its own disadvantages and, frankly, has generally appeared nonsensical at best and fraudulent at worst to the status quo. Which doesn't mean that each new attempt is valuable. The gold bugs always like to point out that every fiat currency ultimately returns to its true value of zero. And the skeptics of cryptocurrency argue that all cryptocurrencies will eventually return to their true value of zero.
It's certainly possible. And it's possible the USD will hyperinflate someday. I tend to try the moderate view for a plausible guess of the future. By that type of logic, I would guess that over the course of decades, USD will in general lose value, and cryptocurrency will tend to slowly gain value. That might not seem the moderate view, but USD not losing value over decades would be truly shocking. And hyperinflation has been predicted since the USD went off the gold standard, or before. So some amount of inflation less than hyperinflation seems like the safe guess (but then, the Titanic arriving would also have seemed like the safe guess to me). And with cryptocurrency, I think it's clear by now the technology will continue to survive. So my first question is with what overall value as a market? It could go down, of course, but that seems unlikely in an already small, young market. Even if all the current crop die off and are replaced, whatever cryptocurrencies are around should be able to do better than a handful of billion in market cap in my view.
I believe that cryptocurrency has a bright future ahead of it. The best coins should ultimately survive and thrive. But I've been wrong on most of my major calls so far, like for instance when I thought BTC was over-priced around $5-$10.
I think Nyancoin can have an important role to play in the future of cryptocurrency in the years and decades to come, but it's a massively speculative long-shot. See also Nyancoin risks document. But like Linus Torvalds' autobiography, I try to keep "Just for Fun" as a core motto and principle. It's makes for a good hobby project because there will always be more to work on, with a core community motto of
TO INFINITY AND BEYOND!
Disclaimers / Sponsorship:
As I said before:
I am not providing financial advice and I do not make any recommendations of any sort on any matters. Make your own decisions; do your own research. Please, I do not want to hear about anyone doing anything "on my advice." I am not offering advice.
And I'll reiterate that I own about 30% [g] of the current supply of NYAN, which makes me by definition maximally biased.
Also, I'm not sure what's up with the address from the first post. It doesn't show up in my current wallet as a recognized address. So, anyhow, don't send there. :-) If you'd like to donate, please consider sponsoring a coin-a-day or coin-a-week article.
This is the first sponsored article. This Coin-a-Year article has been brought to you by spydud22 's generous patronage. I'd been meaning to do a Coin-a-Week article on Nyancoin for a while, but between wanting to "wait until the price recovered a bit" and general procrastination, then it seemed like it would make a good Coin-a-Year article, and then I wanted to wait until the price recovered a bit more...anyhow, so thank you spydud22, for causing me to finally do this. :-)
Footnotes
  • [a] nyan.space/chain/Nyancoin ; as of block 1091430, 263738786.71890615 NYAN outstanding. This is slightly over 50% more than the last report, which is what we would expect, since it had existed for about a year then, and has approximately annual halvings. The first year generated about 50% of total supply; the second year generated about 25% of total supply. We should expect in a year to have about 17% (one-sixth) more than we have now.
  • [b] https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/Exchange?market=NYAN_BTC ; this is the only market reflected in coinmarketcap and it is the primary one on which I trade. Cryptopia also has other base pairs which operate at significantly higher spreads (lower bids; higher asks) and have minimal volume. In the time since the last report, NYAN has traded as high as 60 satoshi (and briefly a little higher at times), but over the last almost twelve months since a peak about a year ago, the price has been generally declining overall, as a gross oversimplification of a lot of movements. This has been an effect of me not being able to keep buying as much and there being large dumps I wasn't expecting from time-to-time. Now I'm taking the approach of building large (one or more nillion (million NYAN)) bids on each price as I slowly work my way back up again in order to be able to handle possible dumps with less price shock.
  • [c] coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nyancoin/ ; as noted in [b], this only reflects the /BTC basepair on Cryptopia but that's where most of the volume is anyhow. Of course, the market is also not particularly liquid since I'm the primary buyer and have rather limited means currently.
  • [d] I haven't setup a script to count this yet, among many things on my to-do list for someday, so I went through by hand from what was the then-latest block of 1091430 on nyan.space back to 1089766 which was the first block generated less than 24 hours before. There was actually a three and a half hour block gap at that point, such that the next prior block was about 24 hours and 15 minutes before 1091430 while 1089766 was only about 20 hours and 45 minutes prior, and has a disproportionate number of transactions and value compared to a typical block (8 and ~313,000 NYAN respectively) from the build-up during the gap. But since that gap conveniently started right about at the start of the 24 hour period, doesn't really skew our results here.
Note that there are often times where the UTXO created during one transaction during the day is spent during a later transaction in the day. This can be considered the "same" Nyancoin being "spent" twice in the same day in our total. But in practice, I believe what's happening here is the faucet is breaking off small (10-50 NYAN) pieces from a larger (~40,000 NYAN) chunk, and so that pops up a bunch of times. So the total NYAN blockchain volume as counted for this topline number should not be interpreted as "NYAN spent in the day" but "NYAN moved on the chain", where the "same coin" can move many times. So it's a very easily gamed metric and not a strong / resistant metric like the market price tends to be (at least relatively speaking), but it's a fun number to calculate and provides a little bit of information.
The transaction count can also be easily inflated and certainly, for instance, having the faucet does generate transactions which are a very common transaction.
And this is also just an arbitrary 24 hour period compared to a previous arbitrary 24 hour period. Nonetheless, I do think there's clearly a bit more activity on the Nyanchain, even though the typical block is still empty and the number of transactions and volume is still tiny compared to the major cryptocurrencies.
Here's an arbitrary example of the faucet transactions Note the zero transaction fee, which I love that the miners support (the defaults are all quite low as well).
Here's an example of what may be the smallest transaction by NYAN volume of the day; but no, I followed its small, spent output, and it led to this gem which also links to this. I have no idea what's going on here, but it's hilarious and I love it. How's that for microtransaction support? :-)
  • [e] Obviously Cryptsy went down. We had had more than enough red flags with Cryptsy (including one time where I was able to withdraw 6 nillion more than I had in my balance) and got onto Cryptopia. spydud22 basically accomplished that for us, although I helped out in the tail end of the campaigning.
  • [f] Our community is still small (I wish there were literally dozens of us!) but we've had valuable activity from multiple people, including, just as highlights, vmp32k who hosts nyan.space, a clone of the original nyancha.in, jwflame who created the excellent nyancoin.info intro site, with the awesome status page (which currently notes that "the last 500 blocks actually took 111 minutes, which is approaching the speed of light, causing the universe to become unstable"), KojoSlayer who runs the faucet and dice, spydud22 who got us on Cryptopia, and many other Nekonauts have made worthy contributions, and the Nekonauts mentioned have done more than just that listed. So while we are small, we are active at least from time to time and technically capable.
Even though our posting rate is still around 1 post a day or so on average, and so still a relatively quiet subreddit (and it is our main (only?) hub), it's still a very noticeable and significant difference from how /nyancoins looked when I was reviewing it for the original piece here. Here's an attempt to approximate what was there using Reddit search ; archive.org has a snapshot on January 19th, 2015, which is well into the early revival mania and one from August 14th, 2014, before four and a half months of little to no activity. Apparently archive.org unsubscribed to /nyancoins in that interval itself...
  • [g] Maybe up to around 35% by now; maybe still around 30%. I haven't updated hodling report lately; it was 30% last time I recall, but I've bought more and more has been made since.
submitted by coinaday to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

The World Wide Web runs on webservers in datacenters. The World Wide Blockchain should also run on "blockservers" in datacenters. The "sweet spot" of Bitcoin scaling, reliability, security & convenience is *nodes in the cloud* + *private keys offline*. The is the future of Bitcoin. Let's embrace it.

Four-Line Summary
(1) Bitcoin nodes (and everyone's public addresses) should be online - in datacenters.
(2) Bitcoin wallets (and your private keys) should be offline - in your pocket.
(3) This architecture provides the optimal combination or "sweet spot" for short-term and long-term Bitcoin scaling, reliability, security & convenience.
(4) The best communications strategy is for us to embrace the approach of "nodes-in-datacenters" a/k/a "blockservers-in-the-cloud" - instead of apologizing for it.
Longer Summary
(1) Bitcoin nodes should be online - on "online public blockservers", ideally running on big, powerful webservers with high connectivity & high-end specs, in datacenters.
(2) Bitcoin private keys should be offline - in "offline private wallets", ideally running on tiny, cheap computers with no connectivity & low-end specs, in your pocket.
https://blockchainbdgpzk.onion/pushtx
(3) We should embrace "nodes-in-datacenters" (ie, "blockservers-in-the-cloud") and "keys-in-your-pocket" as the future of Bitcoin, providing the optimal combination (or "sweet spot") of scaling, reliability, security & convenience.
Details
Bitcoin has been a success for 7 years and is continuing to grow and needs a simple and safe way to scale.
So, now it is time for people to embrace nodes-in-datacenters a/k/a blockservers-in-the-cloud (plus private keys offline - to enable 100% security with "offline signing of transactions") as Bitcoin's future.
Why?
(1) ...because everything on the web actually works this way already - providing the optimal combination of scaling, reliability, security & convenience.
  • You already keep your passwords for websites and webmail on you - usually physically offline (in your head, written on a slip of paper, or maybe in an offline file, etc.)
  • When was the last time you ran a server out of your home to continually spider and index terabytes of data for the entire web?
  • Why should you need to hold 60 GB of data (and growing) when you just want to check the balance of a single Bitcoin address (eg, one of your addresses)?
  • Bitcoin is still very young, and if in order to fulfill its earlier promise about banking the unbanked, microtransactions, DACs (decentralized autonomous corporations), IoT (Internet of Things), smart contracts, etc., then we should hope and expect that the blockchain will someday take up terabytes, not "mere" gigabytes - just like Google's giant search engine index, which they update every few minutes.
  • Do you really think you should be performing this kind of heavy-duty indexing, querying and "serving" on a low-end machine behind a low-end connection in your home, when companies like Google can do it so much better?
  • As long as you physically control your own private keys, who cares if you rely on blockchain.info or blockexplorer.com (or someday: bitcoin.google.com or bitcoin.msn.com or bitcoin.yahoo.com) to lookup up public information about balances and transactions on Bitcoin addresses?
  • They're not going to be able to lie to you. The meaning of "permissionless" and "decentralized" is that anybody can set up a full-node / "blockserver" (plus "blockchain search engines"), and anybody can (and will) immediately report it to the whole world if a website like blockchain.info or blockexplorer.com (or someday: bitcoin.google.com or bitcoin.msn.com or bitcoin.yahoo.com) provides false information - which would seriously damage their business, so they'll never do it.
(2) ...because webservers and webmail don't lie to you, and "nodes-in-datacenters" (ie, "blockservers-in-the-cloud") aren't going to be able to lie to you either - since it would not be in their interest, and they would get caught if they did.
  • When was the last time google.com or or yahoo.com or msn.com (bing.com) lied to you when you performed a search or looked up some news?
  • When was the last time blockchain.info or blockexplorer.com lied to you when you checked the balance at a Bitcoin address?
  • Currently, with billions of websites and news sources ("webservers") running around the world in datacenters, there are "web search engines" (eg, google.com or news.google.com or msn.com or yahoo.com) where you can look up information and news on the World Wide Web. In order to survive, the business model of these "web search engines" is about getting lots of visitors, and providing you with reliable information. It's not in their best interests to lie - so they never do. These sites simply "spider" / "crawl" / "index" the entire massive web out there (every few minutes actually), and then conveniently filter / aggregate / present the results as a free service to you.
  • In the future, when there are 10,000 or 100,000 Bitcoin full-nodes ("blockservers") running around the world in datacenters, there will be "blockchain search engines" (eg, bitcoin.google.com or bitcoin.msn.com or bitcoin.yahoo.com - just like we already have blockchain.info and blockexplorer.com, etc.) where you will be able to lookup transactions and balances on the World Wide Blockchain. In order to survive, their business model will be about getting lots of visitors, and providing you with reliable information. It's not going to be in their best interests to lie - so they never will. These sites will simply "spider" / "crawl" / "index" the entire massive blockchain out there (every few minutes actually), and then conveniently filter / aggregate / present the results as a free service to you.
  • The business model for "blockchain search engines" might eventually showing ads or sponsored content along with the Bitcoin blockchain search functions which we are primarily interested in. This would be quite usable and simple and safe, and similar to how most people already use sites like google.com, yahoo.com, msn.com, etc.
(3) ...because "nodes-in-datacenters" (ie, "blockservers-in-the-cloud") provide simple scaling now.
  • Nodes-in-the-cloud are the only solution which can provide scaling now - using existing, tested software - by simply adjusting - or totally eliminating - the MAXBLOCKSIZE parameter.
  • They can use existing, tested, reliable software: thousands of 2MB+ nodes are already running.
  • About 1,000 Classic nodes have been spun up in AWS ECS datacenters (Amazon Web Services - Elastic Computer Cloud) in the past month. (Uninformed yes-men at r\bitcoin try to spin this as a "bad thing" - but we should embrace it as a "good thing", explicitly espousing the philosophy outlined in this post.)
  • "Nodes-in-datacenters" (ie, "blockservers-in-the-cloud") can be flexibly and easily configured to provide all the scaling needed in terms of:
    • Bandwidth (throughput)
    • Hard drive space (storage)
    • RAM (memory)
    • CPU (processing power)
  • The yes-men and sycophants and authoritarians and know-nothings on the censored subreddit r\bitcoin are forever fantasizing about some Rube Goldberg vaporware with a catchy name "Lightning Network" which doesn't even exist, and which (at best, if it ever does come into existence) would be doomed to be slow, centralized and expensive. LN is a non-thing.
  • Those same people on the censored r\bitcoin forum are desperately trying to interpret the thousands of Classic nodes as a negative thing - and their beloved non-existent Lightning Network as a positive thing. This is the kind of typical down-is-up, black-is-white thinking that always happens in a censorship bubble - because the so-called Lightning Network isn't even a thing - while Classic is a reality.
(4) ...because "nodes-in-datacenters" (ie, "blockservers-in-the-cloud") provide more reliability / availability.
  • 24/7/365 tech support,
  • automatic server reboots,
  • server uptime guarantees,
  • electrical power uptime guarantees.
(5) ...because "nodes-in-datacenters" (ie, "blockservers-in-the-cloud") provide better security.
(6) ...because "nodes-in-datacenters" (ie, "blockservers-in-the-cloud") provide more convenience.
(7) ...because separating "full-node" functionality from "wallet" functionality by implementing "hierarchical deterministic (HD)" wallets is cleaner, safer and more user-friendly.
Armory, BIP 0032 provide "hierarchical deterministic (HD)" wallets.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0032
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Deterministic_Wallet
http://www.bitcoinarmory.com/tutorials/armory-advanced-features/offline-wallets/
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/16646/offline-wallets-electrum-vs-armory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQumISxkJsQ
  • "Hierarchical deterministic" wallets are required in order to be able to keep private keys offline, and "offline-sign" transactions. This is because a wallet needs to be "deterministic" in order to be able to generate the same sequence of random private keys in the offline wallet and the online wallet.
  • "Hierarchical deterministic (HD)" wallets are also required in order to allow a user to perform a single, one-time, permanent backup of their wallet - which lasts forever (since a HD wallet already deterministically "knows" the exact sequence of all the private keys which it will generate, now and in the future - unlike the antiquated wallet in Core / Blockstream's insecure, non-user-friendly Bitcoin implementation, which pre-generates keys non-deterministically in batches of 100 - so old backups of Core / Blockstream wallets could actually be missing later-generated private keys, rendering those backups useless).
  • Bitcoin is now over 7 years old, but Core / Blockstream has mysteriously failed to provide this simple, essential feature of HD wallets - while several other Bitcoin implementations have already provided this.
  • This feature is extremely simple, because it is all done entirely offline - not networking, no game theory, no non-deterministic behavior, no concurrency. The "HD wallet" functionality just needs some very basic, standard crypto and random-number libraries to generate a "seed" which determines the entire sequence of all the private keys which the wallet can generate.
  • Newer Bitcoin implementations (unlike Core / Blockstream) have now "modularized" their code, also separating "full-node" functionality from "wallet" functionality at the source code level:
  • in Golang - "btcsuite" from Conformal, providing "btcd" (node) and "btcwallet" (wallet):
  • in Haskell + MySQL/SQLite - "Haskoin":
  • There is also a Bitcoin implementation which provides only a full-node:
  • in Ruby + Postgres - "Toshi" from CoinBase:
  • [Tinfoil] The fact that Core / Blockstream has failed to provide HD and failed to clean up and modularize its messy spaghetti code - and the fact that Armory is now out of business (and both companies received millions of dollars in venture capital, and the lead dev of Armory left because the investors were creating needless obstacles regarding intellectual property rights, licensing, etc.) - these facts are suspicious because suggest that these corporations may be trying to discourage dev-friendliness, user-friendliness, security, convenience, and on-chain scaling.
(8) ...because the only thing most users really want and need is total physical control over their private keys.
  • Most people do not want or need to run a Bitcoin full-node, because:
    • A Bitcon full-node consumes lots of disk space and bandwidth, and can be expensive and complicated to set up, run, maintain, and secure.
    • A Bitcoin full-node requires an extremely high level of hardware and software security - which most computer users have never even attempted.
  • As Armory or Electrum users know, the simplest and safest way to provide 100% guaranteed security is by using "offline storage" or "cold storage" or "air gap".
  • In other words, ideally, you should never even let your private keys touch a device which has (or had) the hardware and/or software to go online - ie: no Wi-Fi, no 3G, and no Ethernet cable.
  • This offline machine is used only to generate private keys (where a Bitcoin private key is literally actually just any truly random number up to around 1078 ) - and also used to "offline-sign" transactions.
  • So it is simplest and safest if your private keys are on an offline machine which never can / did go online - and such as machine can be very cheap, because it really only needs to run some very basic random-number-generator and crypto libraries.
  • It would be simplest and safest for people to own a tiny cheap 100% secure offline computer to use only for:
    • generating / storing Bitcoin private keys
    • signing Bitcoin transactions
    • possibly also for generating / storing other kinds of private keys (other cryptocurrencies, GPG keys, etc.)
Four-Line Summary / Conclusion:
(1) Bitcoin nodes (and everyone's public addresses) should be online - in datacenters.
(2) Bitcoin wallets (and your private keys) should be offline - in your pocket.
(3) This architecture provides the optimal combination or "sweet spot" for short-term and long-term Bitcoin scaling, reliability, security & convenience.
(4) The best communications strategy is for us to embrace the approach of "nodes-in-datacenters" a/k/a "blockservers-in-the-cloud" - instead of apologizing for it.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Why has Bitcoin not being optimized for micropayments yet?

One of the most obvious advantages programmable digital money has over fiat money is the potential for efficient and fast micropayments. Pre-cryptocurrency financial systems have delays and overhead that could never support penny transactions of any quantity efficiently and in most cases cannot handle divisible pennies at all.
If Bitcoin encouraged small transactions today, completely new business models could appear overnight. The Internet already provides the basis for delivering digital services and resources efficiently in small quantities.
Why is the difficulty level of Bitcoin not adjusted to be relative to transaction size? This would allow thousands of tiny transactions to be quickly validated while keeping the proof-of-work high for larger transactions.
It seems a pity that an entire area of business where Bitcoin wouldn't just have an advantage, it would be the ONLY way to move forward, is being delayed in favor of other priorities that seem designed around competing more directly with fiat instead of leap frogging past it.
Reference: Bitcoin wiki
I must be missing something? A technological problem? Or an economic reason why crypto currency is not yet good enough for micro transactions? Enlighten me, please!
EDIT CONCLUSION:
After reading comments and following up on links I am convinced the solution for micropayments is very simple economics. If the hash difficulty of any block is proportional to the transaction value of that block then small transactions become cheap, which appears to be the main reason why microtransactions are not economically feasible now.
The ratio of proof-of-work difficulty to transaction value for small transactions would remain the same ratio as for large transactions, so the disincentivization for gaming the block chain would remain intact.
With identical economic return for validating many small transaction vs fewer large transactions, both small and large transactions will treated with equal priority by miners. For both small and large transactions dedicating a higher percentage of the transaction as a mining fee will incentivize prioritization equally. In other words, miners become agnostic to transaction size, but not to prioritization fees, which is both an egalitarian and economically efficient result.
One problem mentioned is of denial of service attacks. That will be a problem whenever transaction numbers increase, but reducing the mining difficulty for small transactions means that a flood of small transactions can be cleared more quickly, making small transactions less effective for DoS attacks than they would otherwise be. So this solution actually reduces both the cost and impact of DoS.
EDIT 2 ANOTHER BIG BENEFIT:
Another benefit of setting difficulty to transaction size is that smaller miners could stay independent but focus on clearing smaller transactions with a reduced block validation time, so would get much more statistically steady income. Smaller rewards but more frequently. This would eliminate a lot of the perverse incentives to centralize mining in a system where decentralization is a desired property.
submitted by nevermark to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

"Practical systems to allow transactions of less than 1 USD have seen little success." --Wikipedia article on micropayments makes no mention of Bitcoin.

I just noticed that the Wikipedia article on micropayments makes no mention of Bitcoin. I've never edited Wikipedia before and am short on time at the moment, so perhaps a Wikipedian out there could update the article, so that Bitcoin is mentioned as the most recent technology with the potential to solve the micropayment problem?
(Sorry to not do it myself, but I try to contribute when I can!)
An excerpt from the article is below.
During the late 1990s, there was a movement to create microtransaction standards,[5] and the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) worked on incorporating micropayments into HTML even going as far as to suggest the embedding of payment-request information in HTTP error codes.[4] The W3C has since stopped its efforts in this area,[4] and micropayments have not become a widely used method of selling content over the Internet.
Edit: added excerpt, clarified that intent is to request help with Wikipedia editing.
Update: article now mentions Bitcoin! Those who are interested in micropayments will now be aware of new efforts toward solving this problem. Thanks to surfer431 for pointing out that...
You can view the history here or by clicking "View history" in the top right: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Micropayment&action=history
submitted by 11251442132 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Lightning Network, Bitcoin and Proof of Work

I'll explain some advanced things here.
Bitcoin's security and decentralization is because of his Proof of Work, the greater the bitcoin hashrate, the safer it is.
When you lose Proof of Work to earn zero and instant fees, you lose POW security and decentralization of currency.
So the Lightning Network comes to microtransactions, the good of the Lightning Network in relation to others is that its ballast is the very block of Bitcoin that is the strongest in the world and with a code well reviewed and tested by Bitcoin Core.
Only by SegWit itself along with Batch Transactions and in the future the Schnorr is already able to leave the rates in 1 sat / byte for a long time, since the three decrease the use of the blockchain.
Lightning Network will serve to keep zero and instant rate forever, without letting go of Bitcoin's Proof of Work safety.
Study:
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/
https://lightning.network/
https://info.shapeshift.io/blog/2018/02/22/shapeshift-now-batching-bitcoin-transactions
https://medium.com/@SDWouters/why-schnorr-signatures-will-help-solve-2-of-bitcoins-biggest-problems-today-9b7718e7861c
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-work_system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake
submitted by ayanamirs to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

A Non-technical Bitcoin Primer (Part 1)

TL;DR: This non-technical intro covers what Bitcoin is, its benefits over current payment technologies, and the threats to its success. The goal is to get a beginner quickly up to speed and making sense of the headlines. The primer is divided into two parts, and the second part is linked to at the bottom. Suggestions for additional resources are provided at the end of Part 2.
There was a recent post asking "I've been hearing a lot of talk about Bitcoin the past few months, and I want to get started, but I want to know what it is, and the benefits of using Bitcoin over other forms of currencies."
While it's relatively easy to find resources on the technical underpinnings of Bitcoin, or on how to purchase your first bitcoins, it's difficult to find summaries of the many issues it faces as a technology. Media stories can be confusing to navigate, with some heralding Bitcoin as the next great revolution, and others deriding it as a tool for criminals.
I thought this would be a good opportunity to post an early draft of my primer covering the important non-technical aspects of Bitcoin. It should be enough to get a beginner off to a good start.
Part 1 is below, and Part 2 is linked to at the bottom.
Comments are appreciated!
WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL? We can now communicate in a truly global way, thanks to the World Wide Web. Instead of sending letters, we send e-mail. Instead of expensive long-distance phone calls, we have Skype and Google Hangouts. Instead of looking up information with a card catalog, we search Google or go to Wikipedia.
Unlike our communications systems, our traditional payment systems are not global, despite the fact that we live in an increasingly global economy. Bitcoin is the first web-native payment protocol and consensus network that supports global, decentralized peer-to-peer payments (I'll explain more about what that means in a bit). At first, you can think of it as a global form of cash for the internet, but it's actually more than that. It has the potential to do for the world economy what the World Wide Web did for communications.
At present, we largely rely on payment systems that were designed before the web even existed. Our methods of payment depend on a patchwork of local currencies and banking systems. Traditional payment systems, such as credit cards as we currently know them, were introduced in the U.S. in the late 1950s!
People have recognized the need for a new payment network for a long time and have been trying to invent a form of e-cash for decades. The main problem is that digital money, like anything that's digital, is easy to copy. We can't have people copying their money and fabricating billions of e-dollars for themselves, because those e-dollars would become worthless.
Bitcoin is a major breakthrough in computer science that has solved the problem of copying money (called "double spending").
HOW COULD MONEY WITH NO CENTRAL ISSUING AUTHORITY EXIST? When we say Bitcoin is decentralized, we mean that it's run by the users. How? Here's a brief, non-technical overview.
The users include people who use bitcoins for transactions (consumers and merchants), developers who create new ways to use Bitcoin, and miners.
Miners run specialized computers all over the world that verify transactions (checking that no double spending has occurred); they are rewarded with newly "mined" bitcoins (this is how new bitcoins are created, instead of them being issued by a government).
All the transactions are recorded on a public ledger called the blockchain (since the blockchain puts everyone in agreement with the transaction history, it's the consensus mechanism alluded to earlier).
Bitcoin with a capital "B" refers to both the protocol (the technical specification of how this system works and the code that implements it) and the whole payment network of users. When written with a lowercase b, bitcoin usually refers to the currency that is transacted across this system.
(It turns out that Bitcoin, as a protocol, supports many other applications in addition to the bitcoin currency. In a way, it's similar to how the internet is used for more than sending e-mail, but I won't get into additional applications here.)
So, what are some advantages of Bitcoin?
WHAT MAKES BITCOIN DIFFERENT
SECURITY You buy something online at Target by typing in your credit card number. Target gets hacked (as we saw early this year), and hackers now have your account number, which is basically the key or password to your credit line.
Now consider e-mail. When you send someone e-mail, do you need to give them your password in order for them to read the e-mail? No. You have a public e-mail address that you can share with them, if they need to reply to you.
Bitcoin is like that. You have a public key (like your e-mail address) and a private key (like your password). You can send and receive payments without giving away the keys to your funds.
So, things like the Target debacle could not happen.
Yes, people's coins do get stolen, and there are still security issues, but often these have to do with people who are not knowledgeable about Bitcoin and who try to store the coins themselves (as opposed to storing them with a reputable third party), and they end up not securing their private keys properly.
Or, they'll print what's called a paper wallet with unencrypted private keys and send it through the USPS (you wouldn't send a lot of cash in an envelope through USPS, would you? I'm hoping you answered no!). Please do not do this!
So, people need to learn that Bitcoin is like cash in some ways; if you lose it, you're not getting it back (although some efforts at insuring bitcoins are starting to crop up).
As the industry grows, storing coins securely will become easier for the non-techie. Remember, it used to require lots of technical knowledge just to get on the World Wide Web.
LOW FEES It's difficult to overstate the importance of this. Low fees will help workers sending money abroad to family, they'll help small business owners and larger merchants, and they'll enable new business models.
Currently, people can pay around 10% to send international remittances (e.g. if they're sending $200 to family abroad, they might pay $20 in fees), and the international remittance market is huge. For example, in 2010, India received 55 billion U.S. dollars in remittances; perhaps half of this was for family maintenance. Remittance fees are therefore a big burden on lots of families worldwide.
Merchants pay around 2-2.5% on all the money they bring in through credit cards. Small businesses accepting payments through PayPal pay 2.9% +.30. An individual bringing in about $3000 monthly could pay around $90 per month to be able to accept payments.
Typical Bitcoin transactions range from free to .0001 BTC, or about $.06 per transaction, regardless of the number of Bitcoins sent. (Fellow redditors, please chime in on this if you have helpful sources).
Low fees also enable microtransactions, which are very small payments, and these can support entirely new business models. For example, consider an online newspaper that charges a large monthly fee. Many users just want to read one article. With microtransactions, it's conceivable that users could instead just pay a few cents per article. This was previously impossible, because the fees paid by the newspaper to collect the payment would be larger than the payment itself.
Why are the payments so cheap? What's the catch? Bitcoin payments are peer-to-peer, so there aren't third parties charging fees. Most of the fees charged by credit card companies, as I understand it, go toward fraud prevention, but Bitcoin does not suffer from the same security flaws.
GLOBAL SOLUTION Bitcoin is built for a web-connected world. It's not issued by any particular government and can be sent between two parties anywhere in the world without going through intermediate banks and exchanges, which reduces cost.
ACCESS FOR THE UNBANKED Roughly half of the world's adult population is unbanked, i.e. does not have access to a bank account. Not having access to a bank account makes it difficult and expensive to send payments, to store funds securely, and so on. In short, it's a major hardship.
It's not that the unbanked have no money. Often, there is just no access to a reliable banking infrastructure where they live.
In the developed world, it’s possible to be denied access to a banking account because of having overdrawn an account many years ago. "Mistakes like a bounced check or a small overdraft have effectively blacklisted more than a million low-income Americans from the mainstream financial system for as long as seven years" according to the New York Times. A million people is a small number compared to half the world's adult population, but this shows that access to banking can be difficult for a lot of people in developed nations as well.
As the Bitcoin industry grows, it will become easier for individuals to securely store their money (people in developing nations often do have access to cell phones, and payment applications for such cell phones are already being developed). In this way, developing countries can leapfrog traditional banking infrastructure as they did with telecommunications networks by going straight from having no land lines to having cell phones.
PREVENTION OF RAMPANT INFLATION In many countries, such as Venezuela, Argentina, and Iran, the local currency can be highly inflationary. People's hard-earned assets become less and less valuable. This can happen when a country prints too much money.
With Bitcoin, the rate at which new bitcoins enter the economy is strictly controlled by the protocol. Eventually, there will be a maximum of 21 million bitcoins in circulation. After that, no more bitcoins will be produced.
Right now, the price of Bitcoin is very volatile, but much of this volatility is the result of Bitcoin being new. If it succeeds in becoming more widely adopted by merchants and consumers, and if more institutional investors start getting into Bitcoin, and if regulatory clarity increases from governments, this volatility will diminish. (All of these things are starting to happen.)
A related aspect of Bitcoin that is novel is that if it becomes widely adopted, then in the medium term, its value will increase fairly dramatically, instead of decreasing as with inflationary currencies. Basically, the bitcoin supply won't increase too much, but the goods and services paid for with that supply will increase. So, the value of the bitcoins will need to go up to accommodate that change. (In the short-term, the price is determined more by speculation, but it's this speculation that makes bitcoins valuable enough to actually be useful).
Bitcoins constitute a new kind of asset class. People can use them as a currency, but they can also use them as an investment (especially now, while it's still early). These two aspects of the currency will pull in opposite directions for now (if it'll grow in value, should I really spend it?). People here on bitcoin might tend to hope that this tension will be resolved, as Bitcoin will be made popular by its many advantages. No one knows how it will play out.
PERMISSIONLESS APPLICATIONS LAYER Early on in Bitcoin's history, a famous economist (who I won't name, so as not to make personal attacks) who vastly underestimated the potential of the World Wide Web as a transformative economic force, made a similar estimate of Bitcoin's potential.
In this terrific article, a research fellow at George Mason University explains that this economist was making the same mistake in both cases.
In the early days of the internet, it wasn't clear to everyone why it was better than the existing telecommunications networks. It turns out that the primary feature that set it apart is its permissionless applications layer. In other words, the internet is built on a protocol for data transfer, but developers can do whatever they want with the data at the ends of the network, without having to modify the network itself or get permission from internet service providers.
For example, AT&T experimented with video calls as far back as the 1960s. It wasn't until the World Wide Web that cheap video calls were made possible by the likes of Skype and Google.
In a similar way, Bitcoin is a protocol for transferring data and recording it on a public ledger, and developers can create new features on top of the protocol. This is why Bitcoin has been called "the internet of money."
A helpful analogy to keep in mind is that internet:communication::Bitcoin:finance. This is fleshed out in the "terrific article" I linked to.
NO CHARGEBACKS Let's say someone steals your credit card information and fraudulently uses it to purchase goods. You dispute the charge, and you get your money back (hence the term chargeback).
Since the money goes back to you, it's taken away from the merchant, despite the fact that the merchant has already given away the goods. Chargebacks can also happen if the consumer is unsatisfied with the goods, and for other reasons as well. This can be very costly for merchants.
Bitcoin payments are irreversible, so chargebacks do not happen. This is very helpful to merchants, but it means that when you purchase faulty goods as a consumer, you might not have a formal process in place to get your money back.
A trustworthy merchant could voluntarily send your money back, but there is no third party bank that can reverse the payment.
ACCEPTING BITCOIN IS EASY All you have to do is post your public key (like an e-mail address), and people can send you payments.
TO BE CONTINUED I've run out of room. In Part 2 of this primer, pseudonymity is discussed, along with threats to Bitcoin's success.
Edits: Wording under "SECURITY," per BitCamel; typos; linked to remittance data.
submitted by 11251442132 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Hcash Main Chain Beta Testing Announcement

Hcash is proud to announce that as of the 11th of December 2017, its main chain testing phase has begun. With the launch of this chain, the Hcash ecosystem has reached a new phase in its lifecycle. Hcash is now able to support more projects on its network, allowing for more versatility and accessibility, while providing a solid technological foundation for the future expansion of this ecosystem. Hcash prides itself in prioritizing the development of its technology and thus, is now able to provide a new network that is more secure and efficient than ever before.
Hcash is currently building the capability to interact between chains and has successfully completed its quantum-resistance design. Its team will continue to work on its plan for a decentralized system that is capable of seamlessly interacting with other tokens. This will help better service the needs of those in the finance, e-commerce and big data industries.
In a few short months, Hcash has successfully become one of the top 30 cryptocurrency leaders globally by market capitalization. This is made possible in part because of Hcash’s partnership with leading universities such as Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Hong Kong Polytechnic University and Monash University Australia who have all worked hard at improving Hcash’s technological capabilities.
During the preliminary testing of the main chain, we welcome those who are interested in helping us improve functionality to download the beta version at: https://github.com/HcashOrg/Hcash/releases/tag/2.0.0 and it’s user guide at: https://github.com/HcashOrg/Hcash/wiki
We hope that through rigorous testing, we can further improve the product to provide a better user experience. Developers and independent users can contribute to the improvement of the chain through two different ways. Developers are welcomed to report any known issues to our Github page and improve the code as they deem necessary. The Hcash team will then contact the developer in private and reward them accordingly. While independent testers or users are welcomed to send their experiences and suggestions to [email protected]. The Hcash team will also reward these users accordingly.
Important hints: This test main chain is used only for beta testing; any transactions will not be accepted by the future main chain or the current chain. It is used purely for testing purposes.
The Hcash main chain will have the following capabilities:
Smart contracts: -As Smart contracts are universally understood to be one of the most useful tools in the cryptocurrency ecosystem, the Hcash team has worked hard to introduce this in Hcash by creating a smart contract protocol that is highly flexible and capable of executing complex codes seamlessly. When designing the smart contract protocol, Hcash developers were mindful of the possibility of severe lags in the chain due to large volumes of transactions, and wanted to create a smart contract protocol that would reduce the likelihood of such problems. Additionally, by using C++11 and glua’s programmable smart contracts, it has also become a possibility for small to medium-sized businesses to adopt blockchain technology to utilize in their day-to-day business transactions and operations.
Diffie-Hellman method: -Hcash has used the Diffie-Hellman method to ensure that the key is able to navigate through unsafe networks and avoid the compromise of data during transactions. Network congestion has been a long-standing problem in the cryptocurrency industry. This is because both bitcoin and Ethereum chains have small block sizes, making network congestions common. Hcash’s upgrade means that its block capacity has increased to 500tps as compared to bitcoin which only has a 6.99tps capacity; leading to a 70-fold improvement, making Hcash a much better candidate for executing high-volume microtransactions.
PoW+PoS Mechanisms: -With the launch of the chain, Hcash will officially adopt a PoW+PoS system. A combination of the two will ensure that the system can be more easily audited and thus, is more secure. PoS can help users without mining setups participate, while PoW can attract cryptocurrency enthusiasts who want to help support the Hcash ecosystem.
Hcash will continue to work with its partnered research and development teams across the world to solidify its position at the forefront of the industry. Once beta testing has been completed, Hcash will focus on launching its non-test main chain.
The Hcash team would like to take the opportunity to thank its community who have continually supported its product. We would also like to extend our thanks to our team members all throughout the world, as well as our research labs who have worked tirelessly to develop Hcash’s technology.
Please continue to monitor Hcash’s social media accounts to follow our progress. Thank you.
submitted by H_cash to hcash [link] [comments]

What are the main problems faced by cryptocurrencies and how do different coins address them?

I'm somewhat new to cryptocurrencies, but I think the main issues at the moment in terms of usage can be summed up as follows:
Which coins address some of these issues? I know the Cicada Platform claim to solve a lot of these issues but they don't actually have it implemented yet AFAIK, and the white paper is very long.
Can all of these issues even be addressed within a P2P, decentralised system? And if not, will the decentralised nature justify the higher fees and slow transactions for the world at large if it were to become commonplace?
I'd really love to have a near-instant transaction, very cheap/free decentralised payment systems for making international payments, or even microtransactions without large fees (from Stripe, etc.). Unfortunately with the recent rises in the costs of moving Bitcoin (and even Ethereum to a lesser extent), cryptocurrencies are facing stiff competition from mobile, international banks like Revolut for the same purpose.
So I want to invest in the technologies which do solve these problems. Even if they don't necessarily rise in value (it's a bit of a Keynesian beauty contest afterall - i.e. to profit you should buy what you think others will buy in the future, not necessarily what you think is best technologically). But I'd feel much better investing in something I understand and trust in.
submitted by nivenkos to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Ceci N’est Pas Une Pipe

In 1928–9, the Belgian surrealist Rene Magritte created a masterpiece painting called “The Treachery of Images,” a painting of a simple carved wood pipe with a subtitle that translates as “This is not a pipe.”
 
His message has been interpreted that language and images are both representations of reality, but neither of them are reality itself. The famous pipe. How people reproached me for it! And yet, could you stuff my pipe? No, it’s just a representation, is it not? So if I had written on my picture ‘This is a pipe’, I’d have been lying!
— René Magritte Source: Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images
 
In our highly connected society, we often make the leap from the word that describes an object to the image of that object to the object itself all of the time. And that shorthand means that we ascribe attributes to things based on the words and images we have created, even when those representations are truly not the reality of the object.
 
For example, the blockchain industry has been in the news a lot lately. Five years ago, Bitcoin was most famous as a secretive alternative to traditional currency, with very low awareness outside of the crypto tech and underground “sin commerce” communities. Over the past two-three years, as the number of Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) has exploded, one of the most common analogies has become that of hacker theft of the proceeds showing the immaturity and “Wild West”-like character of the industry, as the total market capitalization for these alternative currencies and tokens has approached and surpassed $100 billion. By 2016, bitcoin has become accepted in mainstream businesses, including Uber, Swiss Railway, Steam, and dozens of retailers in Japan.
 
Today, there are hundreds of entities promoting blockchain businesses that cover almost every aspect of life, from environmental cleanup projects to international funds transfer to gambling to digital medical records. Last year, it seemed that nearly every venture proposal started as “We are going to Uber for XXX industry;” this year, hundreds of companies are saying “We are Blockchain for XXX industry.” And so, over the past 12 months, hundreds of companies that have emerged have largely been successful at raising $100,000 to $10 million for tokens associated with whatever proposition they are pitching. It can sometimes seem that there is no limit to the range of things that might be done with an immutable ledger for microtransactions. Welcome to the top of the hype cycle.
 
But what about real world problems? What about solving some challenges associated with the accepted structure of today’s industries? Blockchain technologies have unique benefits for decentralized marketplaces — businesses like exchanges where buyers and sellers meet. Where many centralized exchanges offer rapid trade confirmations, there are also many that feature long delays and uncertainty. While most blockchain exchanges have very limited capacity as compared to traditional exchanges, the decentralized blockchain versions tend to be far cheaper and can be faster.
 
Digital streaming technology has transformed both the music and the film industries, but they have mostly served to increase the level of control of the major content distribution organizations. The music industry was decimated by the shift from CDs to digital downloads, and the creative destruction was driven by the return to sales of singles instead of full-length albums with 6–10 songs that people didn’t really want. Why spend $14.99 when you can spend $0.99 for the song you really want? The growth of a new streaming segment — personalized radio stations like Spotify, Apple Music, and Pandora — has been a bright growth point in an otherwise declining industry. In the film industry, DVD sales peaked in 2004 and have been declining in value ever since; the industry attempts to maintain high price points with Blu-Ray versions and extra interactive content attached to DVD sales have been a disappointment. But again, there is growth in one segment — digital streaming from libraries of films.
 
Most of the disrupting digital streaming market is controlled by four companies: Alphabet (YouTube), Amazon, Hulu, and Netflix. Amazon and Netflix are deploying a model that blends film production and distribution, so it is natural that they will highlight their own content ahead of content from other sources. Google and Hulu are content distribution facilitators; Hulu is owned jointly by the major film and television studios and plans to enable live TV streaming later this year for customers that have “cut the cable,” while Google leverages advertising potential based on its strong knowledge of each person’s interests honed from years of search expertise. And these four companies are increasing their share as smaller or less focused competitors have been stumbling and retrenching. Verizon’s Go90 and AT&T’d DirecTV have both stepped back from their aggressive streaming service expansion plans in the face of sustained losses. But these are all centralized systems that continue to reward publishers of blockbuster content, not the thousands of films created each year by passionate artists who are trying to tell a different kind of story. Each of these major streaming film companies maintains deep catalogs of content, with thousands of movies of all genres, but the recommendation engines are designed to promote the most popular films, along with the films or series that the studios most wish to make successful. The marketing budgets drive viewership, and only the blockbusters have strong marketing budgets.
 
What is an independent filmmaker to do? StreamSpace proposes to launch a marketplace for independent films that puts the power of distribution into the hands of the filmmakers themselves, offering viewers new ways to explore new films and find great entertainment options that would otherwise go undiscovered. To do this, we cannot rely on the traditional centralized model for storage and account control. Instead, we use the blockchain as a method of enabling thousands of people to share small amounts of storage on their computers and to enable rapid download of fragments of film content that are reassembled in a unique player.
 
Come spend time with us and see what a decentralized streaming platform can do to give you control over your own distribution and engagement with your viewers.
submitted by streamspace to StreamSpace [link] [comments]

Ceci N’est Pas Une Pipe

In 1928–9, the Belgian surrealist Rene Magritte created a masterpiece painting called “The Treachery of Images,” a painting of a simple carved wood pipe with a subtitle that translates as “This is not a pipe.”
 
His message has been interpreted that language and images are both representations of reality, but neither of them are reality itself. The famous pipe. How people reproached me for it! And yet, could you stuff my pipe? No, it’s just a representation, is it not? So if I had written on my picture ‘This is a pipe’, I’d have been lying!
— René Magritte Source: Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images
 
In our highly connected society, we often make the leap from the word that describes an object to the image of that object to the object itself all of the time. And that shorthand means that we ascribe attributes to things based on the words and images we have created, even when those representations are truly not the reality of the object.
 
For example, the blockchain industry has been in the news a lot lately. Five years ago, Bitcoin was most famous as a secretive alternative to traditional currency, with very low awareness outside of the crypto tech and underground “sin commerce” communities. Over the past two-three years, as the number of Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) has exploded, one of the most common analogies has become that of hacker theft of the proceeds showing the immaturity and “Wild West”-like character of the industry, as the total market capitalization for these alternative currencies and tokens has approached and surpassed $100 billion. By 2016, bitcoin has become accepted in mainstream businesses, including Uber, Swiss Railway, Steam, and dozens of retailers in Japan.
 
Today, there are hundreds of entities promoting blockchain businesses that cover almost every aspect of life, from environmental cleanup projects to international funds transfer to gambling to digital medical records. Last year, it seemed that nearly every venture proposal started as “We are going to Uber for XXX industry;” this year, hundreds of companies are saying “We are Blockchain for XXX industry.” And so, over the past 12 months, hundreds of companies that have emerged have largely been successful at raising $100,000 to $10 million for tokens associated with whatever proposition they are pitching. It can sometimes seem that there is no limit to the range of things that might be done with an immutable ledger for microtransactions. Welcome to the top of the hype cycle.
 
But what about real world problems? What about solving some challenges associated with the accepted structure of today’s industries? Blockchain technologies have unique benefits for decentralized marketplaces — businesses like exchanges where buyers and sellers meet. Where many centralized exchanges offer rapid trade confirmations, there are also many that feature long delays and uncertainty. While most blockchain exchanges have very limited capacity as compared to traditional exchanges, the decentralized blockchain versions tend to be far cheaper and can be faster.
 
Digital streaming technology has transformed both the music and the film industries, but they have mostly served to increase the level of control of the major content distribution organizations. The music industry was decimated by the shift from CDs to digital downloads, and the creative destruction was driven by the return to sales of singles instead of full-length albums with 6–10 songs that people didn’t really want. Why spend $14.99 when you can spend $0.99 for the song you really want? The growth of a new streaming segment — personalized radio stations like Spotify, Apple Music, and Pandora — has been a bright growth point in an otherwise declining industry. In the film industry, DVD sales peaked in 2004 and have been declining in value ever since; the industry attempts to maintain high price points with Blu-Ray versions and extra interactive content attached to DVD sales have been a disappointment. But again, there is growth in one segment — digital streaming from libraries of films.
 
Most of the disrupting digital streaming market is controlled by four companies: Alphabet (YouTube), Amazon, Hulu, and Netflix. Amazon and Netflix are deploying a model that blends film production and distribution, so it is natural that they will highlight their own content ahead of content from other sources. Google and Hulu are content distribution facilitators; Hulu is owned jointly by the major film and television studios and plans to enable live TV streaming later this year for customers that have “cut the cable,” while Google leverages advertising potential based on its strong knowledge of each person’s interests honed from years of search expertise. And these four companies are increasing their share as smaller or less focused competitors have been stumbling and retrenching. Verizon’s Go90 and AT&T’d DirecTV have both stepped back from their aggressive streaming service expansion plans in the face of sustained losses. But these are all centralized systems that continue to reward publishers of blockbuster content, not the thousands of films created each year by passionate artists who are trying to tell a different kind of story. Each of these major streaming film companies maintains deep catalogs of content, with thousands of movies of all genres, but the recommendation engines are designed to promote the most popular films, along with the films or series that the studios most wish to make successful. The marketing budgets drive viewership, and only the blockbusters have strong marketing budgets.
 
What is an independent filmmaker to do? StreamSpace proposes to launch a marketplace for independent films that puts the power of distribution into the hands of the filmmakers themselves, offering viewers new ways to explore new films and find great entertainment options that would otherwise go undiscovered. To do this, we cannot rely on the traditional centralized model for storage and account control. Instead, we use the blockchain as a method of enabling thousands of people to share small amounts of storage on their computers and to enable rapid download of fragments of film content that are reassembled in a unique player.
 
Come spend time with us and see what a decentralized streaming platform can do to give you control over your own distribution and engagement with your viewers.
submitted by streamspace to Filmmakers [link] [comments]

Why Is Call of Duty: WWII SO BAD?! - YouTube Noob's Guide To Bitcoin Mining - Super Easy & Simple - YouTube IGN - YouTube Is Conqueror's Blade as BAD as its Negative Steam Rating ... How to ember staking and sell embercoin on cryptopia

Bitcoin Core (formerly Bitcoin-Qt) is the third Bitcoin client, developed by Wladimir van der Laan based on the original reference code by Satoshi Nakamoto. It has been bundled with bitcoind since version 0.5. Bitcoin-Qt has been rebranded to Bitcoin Core since version 0.9.0 .. Bitcoin Core can be used as a desktop client for regular payments or as a server utility for merchants and other ... From Bitcoin Wiki. Jump to: navigation, search. The maximum transaction rate is the block size limit divided by the average transaction size. The block size limit is well known, 1MB, however the average transaction size isn't. Here we'll look at what influences that size. The minimum sized transaction type is the OP_CHECKSIG transaction: scriptPubKey: <33 byte compressed pubKey> OP_CHECKSIG ... By linking every file transfer to a small bitcoin microtransaction, the Bitcache system provides a feedback mechanism to users with a value associated with each download. The solution breaks bitcoins down into "Bits" worth a millionth of one bitcoin, with payments using Bits taking place on the Bitcache platform, not in the main blockchain. Bitcache lets creators including musicians ... The bitcoin blockchain is a public ledger that records bitcoin transactions. [90] It is implemented as a chain of blocks, each block containing a hash of the previous block up to the genesis block [lower-alpha 4] of the chain. A network of communicating nodes running bitcoin software maintains the blockchain. [36]: 215–219 Transactions of the form payer X sends Y bitcoins to payee Z are ... Lightning Network Explained []. Lightning Network is a proposed implementation of Hashed Timelock Contracts (HTLCs) with bi-directional payment channels which allows payments to be securely routed across multiple peer-to-peer payment channels. This allows the formation of a network where any peer on the network can pay any other peer even if they don't directly have a channel open between each ...

[index] [7754] [17978] [50371] [38403] [8509] [16373] [37537] [1882] [31766] [9637]

Why Is Call of Duty: WWII SO BAD?! - YouTube

COD: WWII was meant to be a return to the basics, to the core of what the series is about. But how did it astronomically fail to do that? What's holding it b... BLOC.MONEY: https://bloc.money/ In this video we are going to see how to mine cryptocurrency BLOC with a Rasperry pi also known as Single Board computer BLOC money runs on cryptonight haven ... We are lacking a really special open world game so far this year but it looks like we FINALLY got one. Lets dig into the super powers, weapons, and mutants o... Some Helpful Links: • Buy Parts for a Mining Rig: http://amzn.to/2jSSsCz • Download NiceHash Miner: https://www.nicehash.com/?p=nhmintro • Choose a Wallet: h... Bienvenue sur la chaîne YouTube de Boursorama ! Le portail boursorama.com compte plus de 30 millions de visites mensuelles et plus de 290 millions de pages v...

#