Has no one even mentioned that there already is a Communitycoin?
https://github.com/CaptChadd/Communitycoin
OK so the Dev is not active anymore but where did they get the idea of Communitycoin from? Did they even check if it had already been released? They must have known as the .org domain is taken.
Did the Dev's not think to do a revival or at least inform previous miners that this is a rebooted coin?
Topic: [ANN] CommunityCoin (COMM) | Pure PoS | Original COMM MultiPools Coming Soon - page 108. (Read 523929 times)
May 03, 2014, 04:48:08 AM
May 03, 2014, 04:41:33 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
other % supply attack are surely possible , but he must own a large number of stake, he can't do an attack with 1% of the cap
Of course. If only 1% of the cap is minting, then he can do the attack.
Inactive or cold stored coins don't count in this calculation.
If the attacker owns all the nodes in the network it is of no concern how many coins of the total cap he owns. He is the network. He decides which blocks are accepted and which are rejected. He generates all blocks.
Moving on from this simply conclusion you can surely see why only the coins actively participating in the minting process are of concern to the question how many coins are needed to effectively attack the network.
how can he own all the node? you mean no one beside him is minting
approx 640k comm coins(0.08%) are minted every day, he can do an attack if he own 320k+ at least, but to do this he need 400M+ comm coin
the hashpower in a pos coin is your stake not your mint, so compared to the traditional pow you need a certain % to do an attack, but i don't know if other %attack like finney
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake
I'm not talking about the minted, but the minting coins.
If he owns most of the minting coins, he owns the network.
I go back to the beginning. Your logic dictates, that the network would be forever safe, if the dev would have lost 500 Million instead of 200 Million. Obviously this is ridiculous.
And yet again. The wiki is no good source for in detail questions.
It's good enough for people who take a quick look and leave again. As soon as you ask "and how/why exactly is it like it is written here?" the wiki becomes pretty lacking.
but those lost coin are not in the network anymore, it's like they don't exist anymore nodes can't relies on them, so an attack it's still possibile even in that scenario
are you sure about the fact that someone can own the network if he own a large % of the minting coin? because that's seems to easy to me, % of minting coin for a certain time is a very very low number
anyway to control a great % of the minting coin, the diff must be really low(also competitors should have a low stake), and he should have a right % of the total supply
There is a reason why peercoin switched to an almost completly centralized model as the amount of POW compared to POS dimnishes. They have the same problem over there. It is also the reason why pure POS hasn't been done all that often in the past. You can do it now, as there are enough people who jump a train like this without knowing what exactly it is.
Mind, it is not trivial to own the network. It is just a lot cheaper calculation and investment wise. By now nobody has done it I think. Pure POS is niche enough to be safe for the time being.
And you also need to code a new wallet which can use the flaws of the POS system. That is another point. The attack vector I'm talking about is academical for the time being.
Oh, and the coins are in the network. The clients just reject any transaction from the adress they are stored in.
The network is a consensus machine. If enough nodes have consensus about something, it will be done.
i don't think an attack of that type, that aim at the minting phase is as a strong a contorlling a large % of the supply coin, which is the case of POS coin, this value is the hashpower
he can double spend only those minting coins....i'm not sure about this
but i think that the attack strength is directly proportional to the % of the coin owned
May 03, 2014, 03:42:07 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
other % supply attack are surely possible , but he must own a large number of stake, he can't do an attack with 1% of the cap
Of course. If only 1% of the cap is minting, then he can do the attack.
Inactive or cold stored coins don't count in this calculation.
If the attacker owns all the nodes in the network it is of no concern how many coins of the total cap he owns. He is the network. He decides which blocks are accepted and which are rejected. He generates all blocks.
Moving on from this simply conclusion you can surely see why only the coins actively participating in the minting process are of concern to the question how many coins are needed to effectively attack the network.
how can he own all the node? you mean no one beside him is minting
approx 640k comm coins(0.08%) are minted every day, he can do an attack if he own 320k+ at least, but to do this he need 400M+ comm coin
the hashpower in a pos coin is your stake not your mint, so compared to the traditional pow you need a certain % to do an attack, but i don't know if other %attack like finney
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake
I'm not talking about the minted, but the minting coins.
If he owns most of the minting coins, he owns the network.
I go back to the beginning. Your logic dictates, that the network would be forever safe, if the dev would have lost 500 Million instead of 200 Million. Obviously this is ridiculous.
And yet again. The wiki is no good source for in detail questions.
It's good enough for people who take a quick look and leave again. As soon as you ask "and how/why exactly is it like it is written here?" the wiki becomes pretty lacking.
but those lost coin are not in the network anymore, it's like they don't exist anymore nodes can't relies on them, so an attack it's still possibile even in that scenario
are you sure about the fact that someone can own the network if he own a large % of the minting coin? because that's seems to easy to me, % of minting coin for a certain time is a very very low number
anyway to control a great % of the minting coin, the diff must be really low(also competitors should have a low stake), and he should have a right % of the total supply
There is a reason why peercoin switched to an almost completly centralized model as the amount of POW compared to POS dimnishes. They have the same problem over there. It is also the reason why pure POS hasn't been done all that often in the past. You can do it now, as there are enough people who jump a train like this without knowing what exactly it is.
Mind, it is not trivial to own the network. It is just a lot cheaper calculation and investment wise. By now nobody has done it I think. Pure POS is niche enough to be safe for the time being.
And you also need to code a new wallet which can use the flaws of the POS system. That is another point. The attack vector I'm talking about is academical for the time being.
Oh, and the coins are in the network. The clients just reject any transaction from the adress they are stored in.
The network is a consensus machine. If enough nodes have consensus about something, it will be done.
May 03, 2014, 03:18:46 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
other % supply attack are surely possible , but he must own a large number of stake, he can't do an attack with 1% of the cap
Of course. If only 1% of the cap is minting, then he can do the attack.
Inactive or cold stored coins don't count in this calculation.
If the attacker owns all the nodes in the network it is of no concern how many coins of the total cap he owns. He is the network. He decides which blocks are accepted and which are rejected. He generates all blocks.
Moving on from this simply conclusion you can surely see why only the coins actively participating in the minting process are of concern to the question how many coins are needed to effectively attack the network.
how can he own all the node? you mean no one beside him is minting
approx 640k comm coins(0.08%) are minted every day, he can do an attack if he own 320k+ at least, but to do this he need 400M+ comm coin
the hashpower in a pos coin is your stake not your mint, so compared to the traditional pow you need a certain % to do an attack, but i don't know if other %attack like finney
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake
I'm not talking about the minted, but the minting coins.
If he owns most of the minting coins, he owns the network.
I go back to the beginning. Your logic dictates, that the network would be forever safe, if the dev would have lost 500 Million instead of 200 Million. Obviously this is ridiculous.
And yet again. The wiki is no good source for in detail questions.
It's good enough for people who take a quick look and leave again. As soon as you ask "and how/why exactly is it like it is written here?" the wiki becomes pretty lacking.
but those lost coin are not in the network anymore, it's like they don't exist anymore nodes can't relies on them, so an attack it's still possibile even in that scenario
are you sure about the fact that someone can own the network if he own a large % of the minting coin? because that's seems to easy to me, % of minting coin for a certain time is a very very low number
anyway to control a great % of the minting coin, the diff must be really low(also competitors should have a low stake), and he should have a right % of the total supply
May 03, 2014, 03:13:58 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
other % supply attack are surely possible , but he must own a large number of stake, he can't do an attack with 1% of the cap
Of course. If only 1% of the cap is minting, then he can do the attack.
Inactive or cold stored coins don't count in this calculation.
If the attacker owns all the nodes in the network it is of no concern how many coins of the total cap he owns. He is the network. He decides which blocks are accepted and which are rejected. He generates all blocks.
Moving on from this simply conclusion you can surely see why only the coins actively participating in the minting process are of concern to the question how many coins are needed to effectively attack the network.
how can he own all the node? you mean no one beside him is minting
approx 640k comm coins(0.08%) are minted every day, he can do an attack if he own 320k+ at least, but to do this he need 400M+ comm coin
the hashpower in a pos coin is your stake not your mint, so compared to the traditional pow you need a certain % to do an attack, but i don't know if other %attack like finney
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake
I'm not talking about the minted, but the minting coins.
If he owns most of the minting coins, he owns the network.
I go back to the beginning. Your logic dictates, that the network would be forever safe, if the dev would have lost 500 Million instead of 200 Million. Obviously this is ridiculous.
And yet again. The wiki is no good source for in detail questions.
It's good enough for people who take a quick look and leave again. As soon as you ask "and how/why exactly is it like it is written here?" the wiki becomes pretty lacking.
May 03, 2014, 03:07:47 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
other % supply attack are surely possible , but he must own a large number of stake, he can't do an attack with 1% of the cap
Of course. If only 1% of the cap is minting, then he can do the attack.
Inactive or cold stored coins don't count in this calculation.
If the attacker owns all the nodes in the network it is of no concern how many coins of the total cap he owns. He is the network. He decides which blocks are accepted and which are rejected. He generates all blocks.
Moving on from this simply conclusion you can surely see why only the coins actively participating in the minting process are of concern to the question how many coins are needed to effectively attack the network.
how can he own all the node? you mean no one beside him is minting
approx 640k comm coins(0.08%) are minted every day, he can do an attack if he own 320k+ at least, but to do this he need 400M+ comm coin
the hashpower in a pos coin is your stake(total coin in your wallet, not only the one staked to do the mint) not your mint, so compared to the traditional pow you need a certain % to do an attack, but i don't know if other %attack like finney are possible
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake
May 03, 2014, 02:57:51 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
other % supply attack are surely possible , but he must own a large number of stake, he can't do an attack with 1% of the cap
Of course. If only 1% of the cap is minting, then he can do the attack.
Inactive or cold stored coins don't count in this calculation.
If the attacker owns all the nodes in the network it is of no concern how many coins of the total cap he owns. He is the network. He decides which blocks are accepted and which are rejected. He generates all blocks.
Moving on from this simply conclusion you can surely see why only the coins actively participating in the minting process are of concern to the question how many coins are needed to effectively attack the network.
May 03, 2014, 02:51:51 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
other % supply attack are surely possible , but he must own a large number of stake, he can't do an attack with 1% of the cap
also the % minted is very low compared to the total supply, and it is easy to control 51% of that supply(not the toal supply but the toal mint one), this mean that everyone can do an attack, i don't think so, you need to control much more then that
May 03, 2014, 02:47:40 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
Not really. What you interpret as supply count are only the coins staking/minting.
And it is really that. The staking coins.
Imagine an extreme example.
There is only one node with one coin. Then this one node with the one coin creates all blocks and thus determines what is going on.
May 03, 2014, 02:37:48 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
if 1/2 are sinked(sinked you mean that they are out of the supply count right), then the new 51% is 1/4 of the to old total or 1/2 of the new one
May 03, 2014, 12:49:59 AM
This coin is dead, no activity going on on the exchanges nobody is buying anymore price dropped to 69.
I think i whas wrong with this coin, will take that buy wall at 67 if nothing happens soon...
I think i whas wrong with this coin, will take that buy wall at 67 if nothing happens soon...
the problem is still one
those damn 200M, no one will buy until those 200M will die once and for all
Stop throwing this shit, 200M coins were blocked forever.
you could bring them back with a client upgrade, only hard fork can ensure that they will never be used
Just to clarify, it is not enough someone change the code and start running the new wallet... Most of the network has to use this new wallet. Besides of this, the wallet is supposed to be lost and if this is true no wallet change would bring those coins back. The fix was only a measure to guarantee if this is not true those coins wouldn't be dumped on any exchange.
Adriano
I need a COMMunicator who will close contact with me about community needs and future projects. So you can fix or add, remove anything on OP.
To the dev: Can you give us some more technical clarification about the wallet fix? It is indeed not clear whether the fix is permanent or temporary. You may consider it closed but the INVESTORS might not because they do not know for sure whether the wallet is lost or not.
On what REAL comm projects do you want to focus on if there are none?
Also how many communicators do you need? You have already 3 right now
Thanks for the cash by the way, but I don't think this coin has a perspective.
1) Technical data is given here: https://github.com/communitycoin/communitycoin/commit/7f07bdfe582683474b1c7ea34da9068780d890d9
I advised Adriano to block future transactions from that wallet above 28647 (which is last transaction activity on that wallet). It was also best solution i could think And we updated exchanges and majority of wallets are now 1.5. But if we play with mind we can (trigger) bring more chaotic scenarios which is useless. Dev team did a good job and delivered comms best of possible to right parties. A true observer can easy see from the timeline under which conditions delivery completed.
2) A real project is a new exchange for COMM, new shopping site, new media or social media share, anything can be agreed to benefit COMMunity. Not a real project is the one brings new question marks or confusion or insecurity in people mind. For example worrying about this and that and promoting it and so others can not offer & share with COMMunity real products.
3) Everyone is a COMMunicator for me the main difference who is able to handle and get this community produce and willing to communicate. So 3-4 is not the case. If you want to create some good things for the community, i am open for it.
Ok ..that is good .Dear Dev please update the OP with these three points specially the first point . And for sure many of us feel that (Everyone is a COMMunicator for COMM when we reply here or elsewhere )
Solution : When there is new updates to the wallet EXGs & Who not believe must check the code before start to use it .
Thanks
May 03, 2014, 12:48:27 AM
we can fork and makes it X11 (I am pretty sure it would be possible...)
Of course. Just tell me. Why?
X11 is a POW algo. Why should it be implemented in a POS system?
Pure POS has a set of serious flaws that need adressing. Migrating to X11 is utterly meaningless.
I also dont understand why we would need POW algo like X11
Which are the flaws you are referring?
Generally the cost to do an attack on a fully POS system is minimal.
A wallet can vote for several different generated blocks without any cost of doing so. It is a similar attack vector like 51% attacks in POW, just without the calculation cost.
Mind, you still need a sizeable amount of coins or at least nodes to do such an attack.
Nevertheless, it is without calculation price.
This is new to me! I thought that you could only attack if you would have more than 51% of the coins!
I am not completly sure about every detail. I am sure though, that you don't need 51% of all coins.
Maybe 51% of all minting coins, but never more.
And the minting ones aren't that many after all.
I think the metric more relevant is the amount of nodes you control. A Botnet would have a compareably easy approach on attacking a POS system.
So, POS is far from invincible
wiki say that you need 51% of all coin to do it, but doing so will damage yourself, which is stupid
Wiki is wrong, or rather unclear if it is stated like that in there.
You will at the very most need 51% of all minting coins. And that only if you want to ensure that your attack will succeed 100%. If you don't believe that, think for a moment. Create a coin with 100 Million units and sink 50 Million of these. Now the coin is safe as nobody can own 51 Million of the coin? I don't think so.
In any way. The problem here is, that with a large amount of coins you can basically flood the network with blocks and vote for all your own blocks, hoping that other nodes will vote for your blocks as well.
An attack of this kind is very cheap, as you don't need serious calculation power to generate a block. And you don't need a large amount of coins.
This is a problem that needs adressing if pure POS should work at any time.
May 03, 2014, 12:43:43 AM
hey @communitycoin
i PMed you a banner for op i think 2 days ago
at least check your inbox and if you dont like it, tell me through pm
i PMed you a banner for op i think 2 days ago
at least check your inbox and if you dont like it, tell me through pm
May 03, 2014, 12:39:12 AM
This one seems actually quite interesting.
May 03, 2014, 12:25:35 AM
This coin is dead, no activity going on on the exchanges nobody is buying anymore price dropped to 69.
I think i whas wrong with this coin, will take that buy wall at 67 if nothing happens soon...
I think i whas wrong with this coin, will take that buy wall at 67 if nothing happens soon...
the problem is still one
those damn 200M, no one will buy until those 200M will die once and for all
Stop throwing this shit, 200M coins were blocked forever.
you could bring them back with a client upgrade, only hard fork can ensure that they will never be used
Just to clarify, it is not enough someone change the code and start running the new wallet... Most of the network has to use this new wallet. Besides of this, the wallet is supposed to be lost and if this is true no wallet change would bring those coins back. The fix was only a measure to guarantee if this is not true those coins wouldn't be dumped on any exchange.
Adriano
I need a COMMunicator who will close contact with me about community needs and future projects. So you can fix or add, remove anything on OP.
To the dev: Can you give us some more technical clarification about the wallet fix? It is indeed not clear whether the fix is permanent or temporary. You may consider it closed but the INVESTORS might not because they do not know for sure whether the wallet is lost or not.
On what REAL comm projects do you want to focus on if there are none?
Also how many communicators do you need? You have already 3 right now
Thanks for the cash by the way, but I don't think this coin has a perspective.
1) Technical data is given here: https://github.com/communitycoin/communitycoin/commit/7f07bdfe582683474b1c7ea34da9068780d890d9
I advised Adriano to block future transactions from that wallet above 28647 (which is last transaction activity on that wallet). It was also best solution i could think And we updated exchanges and majority of wallets are now 1.5. But if we play with mind we can (trigger) bring more chaotic scenarios which is useless. Dev team did a good job and delivered comms best of possible to right parties. A true observer can easy see from the timeline under which conditions delivery completed.
2) A real project is a new exchange for COMM, new shopping site, new media or social media share, anything can be agreed to benefit COMMunity. Not a real project is the one brings new question marks or confusion or insecurity in people mind. For example worrying about this and that and promoting it and so others can not offer & share with COMMunity real products.
3) Everyone is a COMMunicator for me the main difference who is able to handle and get this community produce and willing to communicate. So 3-4 is not the case. If you want to create some good things for the community, i am open for it.
May 03, 2014, 12:06:27 AM
I'm starting to wonder if I am on the Ignored list by the COMMunity after feeding trolls a while ago 
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
NEVER..you are one of the few intelligent people on this thread. So let me ask a question... I want to point my spiffy new asiac miner at Comm coin, can you please tell me how?
If it's a Scrypt ASIC then Hashcows mate, Payouts in COMM
That was supposed to be a POS joke, you know, mine it directly
Sorry I don't get it.
Hmmm now this thread turned into a joke
You can't mine a 100% pre-mined coin...HELLO
? Actually you can, Look at Premine Coin even though it's only for TX Fees.
Basically Multipools allow you to mine a whole lot of Coins then whatever value you earn in BTC you can request an equivalent Payout in COMM or whatever Coin would like.
ok...i give up
May 03, 2014, 12:03:52 AM
I'm starting to wonder if I am on the Ignored list by the COMMunity after feeding trolls a while ago
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
NEVER..you are one of the few intelligent people on this thread. So let me ask a question... I want to point my spiffy new asiac miner at Comm coin, can you please tell me how?
If it's a Scrypt ASIC then Hashcows mate, Payouts in COMM
That was supposed to be a POS joke, you know, mine it directly
Sorry I don't get it.
Hmmm now this thread turned into a joke
You can't mine a 100% pre-mined coin...HELLO
? Actually you can, Look at Premine Coin even though it's only for TX Fees.
Basically Multipools allow you to mine a whole lot of Coins then whatever value you earn in BTC you can request an equivalent Payout in COMM or whatever Coin you would like
May 02, 2014, 11:59:15 PM
I'm starting to wonder if I am on the Ignored list by the COMMunity after feeding trolls a while ago
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
NEVER..you are one of the few intelligent people on this thread. So let me ask a question... I want to point my spiffy new asiac miner at Comm coin, can you please tell me how?
If it's a Scrypt ASIC then Hashcows mate, Payouts in COMM
That was supposed to be a POS joke, you know, mine it directly
Sorry I don't get it.
Hmmm now this thread turned into a joke
You can't mine a 100% pre-mined coin...HELLO
? Please read my initial reply to Nthused when he first posted about 20 mins. ago May 02, 2014, 11:57:01 PM
A community without tech skills is useless. The core and backbone of a coin is the dev team and their development.
Don't you all agree?
Don't you all agree?
Agree entirely.
Arguments about early distribution are meaningless. The main Distribution is going on right now, on the exchanges..
COMM is alive, better than most alts... also very young. Don't be impatient.
+1
May 02, 2014, 11:44:35 PM
I'm starting to wonder if I am on the Ignored list by the COMMunity after feeding trolls a while ago
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
COMM has potential, especially with these Gold Bars !
NEVER..you are one of the few intelligent people on this thread. So let me ask a question... I want to point my spiffy new asiac miner at Comm coin, can you please tell me how?
If it's a Scrypt ASIC then Hashcows mate, Payouts in COMM
That was supposed to be a POS joke, you know, mine it directly
Sorry I don't get it.
Hmmm now this thread turned into a joke
Jump to: