Topic: 123 (Read 4890 times)

It is centralised to the point where bitcoin is more than 51% of all blockchain currency both in value and in hashing power, which is a massive compromise of the basic concept of decentralisation.

Original poster, are you contributing to that by failing to mine the alt coins that are so low in difficulty that even with a single not very recent generation CPU you can pick up blocks several times per day still?

-MarkM-

I've tried almost every rc edition,and i didn't find it compromised.

*ask

and no.. I was just making sure you knew markm was in fact calling you the idiot here.


And what exactly is on-topic in this thread again? I will admit I am having a hard time wading through all the nonsense.

This is your thread is it not? Seems pretty clear to me whom he was talking to.

You seem to have completely derailed your own thread now.

I am now having difficulty finding out what the problem is.

People can CPU mine still no problem, that is part of the beauty of merged mining.

Anyone who feels their chance of finding a BTC, NMC, DVC, IXC, I0C or even CLC block is too small can add GRP to their merged mining mix so that even if they are only using some ancient CPU and thus have what seems to them a too low chance of finding a block of the higher difficulty chains can nonetheless find GRP blocks quite regularly.

If "too many people" do that, I am sure more chains can be added so that the impatient folk who insist on finding blocks relatively often can still do so.

Furthermore the crap about folk who made thousands not being an incentive is silly too, because just as those thousands were mined easily due to the stupidity, ignorance, lack of foresight, lack of vision, lack of confidence, lack of entrepeneurial spirit and so on and so forth of the masses upon masses of people who failed to discover cryptocoin technology had been invented or, even having discovered that fact, failed to mine any, the exact same things are currently causing the exact same results currently.

That is: the same reasons people gave themselves or had thrust upon them by circumstance for not picking up virtually free thousands upon thousands of bitcoins a few years ago continue to apply right now to e.g. GRouPcoins.

So as long as you deliberately fail to pick up thousands of almost free groupcoins right now, you sound pretty idiotic complaining about not having picked up thousands of almost free bitcoins a few years ago.

If you start thinking of more stupid lame excuses like "but bitcoins are worth more than groupcoins" you will just sound like all the losers who made the same lame excuses ("but dollars are worth more than bitcoins!", "but ounces of gold are worth more than bitcoins!" etc) a years ago.

You are a deliberate, by deliberate aforethought and intent, loser, You have no-one but yourself to blame if you continue to deliberately lose.

-MarkM-

I understood the part where you told him he's of average intelligence because everyone's of average intelligence, and then the part where we're all stupid for creating something (even though that's impossible if everyone is of average intelligence).  But I lost you at the "most of you here is right way for as long as you don't detach from mostly bullshits" part.

Slush is both intelligent and thoughtful and cares about what happens with Bitcoin. I've never seen him do anything for a quick buck.  Your unkind words here are unjustified and just make you look foolish.

The beauty is that the greed of the few will benefit the many because their goals are streamlined. It is what some of us refer to as the free market

I probably understand what you intend to achieve, but it will not work. You cannot restrict users on doing whatever they want, the system must work even if anyone can hack the device etc. In current Bitcoin, once you can find hash difficult enough, it is valid, regardless if you find it on Pentium II, an array of ASICS, broke the SHA256 or have a monkey which can type in good nonce.

In addition, once the only-ASICs got popular and you will have tens of thousands of users, they will stop mining, because they will not want to wait year for their found block. Its human behavior to be greedy and unpatient .. if you cannot "feed them "regularly", they will abandon the idea.

Meh.  I've read most of your thousand or so posts; I don't think I can take any more "education" without puking.  Very much looking forward to the launch of cuniculacoin though.

Because there is no cost.  You make the investment once, and then benefit forever.  Your hybrid system has this same flaw, an investment in stake multiplies your apparent work for all eternity.  In POS, the returns-to-scale in stake is infinite.

I note that the length of your wiki page on POS has grown rather large and convoluted as you keep trying to throw different crutches into the system to prop up first the fundamental flaws, and then the secondary flaws created by the earlier crutches, and then tertiary, etc...

The source code for bitcoin is freely available, all of the functions for creating and verifying signatures exist already, there is room in the header to add a signature field, and none of your rules look particularly hard to implement.  Go ahead and create your altcoin, exactly the way you want it, so that you can prove to all of us that we are wrong about your ideas.  I'll bet you 1 BTC that someone like artforz will totally pwn your chain and have a near absolute, but still unstoppable, monopoly on generation within a week.

Yes, this is true and unfortunate. PPC coin is a pure proof-of-stake system. Attacks are costless. Miners should extend any and every fork they see.

I argued for a mixed proof-of-stake/proof-of-work system based on coin age in the proof of stake wiki.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake

Attack attempts would cause output losses under a mixed system.
 
I hope that PPC coin will eventually move to a mixed system, but who knows.

 

Proof-of-stake (at least all existing attempts I know of) also allows miners to use it for attacks in parallel to the legitimate blockchain. That is, there is no cost to attempt to fork the blockchain. Incentively speaking, this means rational miners should mine every chain that does not hurt them personally.

So proof-of-work mining has capital costs and electricity costs. Proof-of-stake mining only has capital costs. Can you make a logical argument why this would matter?

Hint: Consult an economics textbook. It doesn't matter. All that matters is whether returns-to-scale are decreasing, constant, or increasing.
 

How about the logical argument that I said, instead of the one the nonsense that you imagined me saying?  I'll repeat it for you, and highlight a key point.  "Proof-of-stake tends towards oligopoly/monopoly because stake has no ongoing cost and tends to accumulate."

Where is the fallacy here? Solo mining is to pool mining as being paid in lottery tickets is to being paid in cash.
A perfectly valid analogy.

The system tends to oligopoly if the risk-adjusted rate of return on investment increases as more is invested. This is true in solo mining, but not in pooled mining or PPC coin's version of proof-of-stake.

You are saying that if people reinvest minting earnings in minting assets, then their share in total minting assets will grow over time. Okay, but of course that is equally true in proof-of-work as well.

Is there a logical argument supporting your views that I should be aware of?

subby- let's get the basics out of the way first, shall we? Kiss my ass. Your arrogant, ill-informed, pseudo-intellectual horseshit is nothing more than the drooling of an amateur Atlas. 88 posts and you are already willing to prostitute yourself with sig ads? You are a classic little bootlick aren't you?

1. Essentially nobody agrees with you. You have seized on one tangential argument, made it poorly and turned into a mouth breathing simpleton about it. Who cares about your thoughts on the matter?

2. Your open hostility and irrational potty mouth does nothing to enhance your worth as a agent provocateur for whatever cause you seem to want to spout. Nobody can hear your voice through the silliness.

3. You are utterly clueless about the nature of the best here. With the possible exception of 3 very noble souls who banked at unfathomable levels in the early adopter phase, nobody here gives fuck-all concern about the network. Nobody cares about the security of the beast, nobody wants to see anything. The only real purpose for bitcoin is to create pretend businesses that speculate in making more bitcoins out of nothing at all, and buying drugs on Silk Road. Beyond that everyone is too broke, stoned, or on the run with their ill-gotten gains to worry about the fucking network. It's a lot like a whorehouse in that respect... if you aren't the guy playing the piano you are either fucking or getting fucked, ain't no middle ground. And since very few whorehouses care at all about the network... you will end up being ignored by everyone. Especially because you think you should be a dick about it.

4. And if it is really all that important to you to come here and try the same tired foolishness, why not do it under your RealSolid/CoinHunter/DoucheBag handle? Why all the effort to create a new identity and whip up 88 worthless posts in two weeks?

LOL, yeah, checkpointcoin for the win.

P.S.  Proof-of-stake tends towards oligopoly/monopoly because stake has no ongoing cost and tends to accumulate.

This is a severe flaw, not a feature. It can be avoided with better design. For one attempt, see PPC coin.