Topic: [ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything (decentralized blockexplorer coming) - page 288. (Read 790414 times)

KnC to build a hydro power plant next to its 16nm miners.

That company has got itself sorted.

Build the fastest most efficient BTC miners, then build a free source of electricity.

http://www.kncminer.com/blog/newsarchive

Once the infrastructure its paid for, its a perpetual free money printing press

16k is such and odd number. I'll round it to 20k.

This update is such a huge benefit to the project. The more I think about it, the more central it will be to the future.

https://github.com/FireWalkerX/Spreadcoin-core

above is the tree i am working on...

Bitcoin Core Development Bounty:  16K SPR

Coins101: 5k SPR
Minerpage:  5k SPR
Stonehedge: 5k SPR
ivcelmik: 1k SPR

Have I missed any contributions off? 

First proper lol in ages.

Hey, bump bitch

Got yourself a new troll account. You need to figure out a better way to hide your IP.

lol

Exactly, SPR is all talk with false promises don't you know.

As soon as you buy they make profit off a slow dying coin.

Time for new wallet, time for testnet, time for roadmap.

Give me something

I personally have no idea why the Bitcoin Foundation aren't willing to solve this problem themselves.

However, if they won't, we will!

Time for a whitepaper?

Plugging those numbers into a spreadsheet, plus a little extra for sweep in some 1 BTC transactions, gives:

* 100 SPR nodes, would relay $1.7bn worth of transactions per year at current rate of $USD exchange

* 1,000 SPR nodes would relay $17bn per year

* 2,000 SPR nodes would relay $34bn per year

* 5,000 SPR nodes would relay ~$85bn per year (and costs only $3m in hosting)

Add some open source code to show no sybil attacks are being performed, and you have the makings of a great network supporting the mother ship.

Add some heavy handed regulations, and you have an SPR network that is supporting the mother ship in neutral jurisdictions. Something that businesses running full nodes would not be able to say.

Lets assume that there are 2,000 nodes set-up by businesses wanting to keep the bitcoin network stable to protect their business interests.  Sounds very fair and reasonable.

But

If those businesses are based in regulated countries, then a few court orders and you have the makings for a silent surveillance program.

To prevent Bitcoin nodes from going the way of centralized mining operations, Bitcoin actually does need a 'nodes with incentives' initiative, for many, many reasons:

* Risks of reducing node count due to block size increases
* Centralization due to reducing node count
* Regulations creating environment for secret surveillance programs
* For profit sybil attacks
* Increased use of mobile wallets reducing full nodes

I thought I'd share with you a week's average utilisation to run a BTC and SPR node on a T2.small on AWS.  The CPU use is low but I want to factor in the possibility of running services on the same machine in the future.  I expect load to increase.

For info, last month's bill for this instance was about £30GBP

In terms of value provided to the BTC network in the last 7 days, this node has been the first relay point for 1,411BTC worth of transactions (excluding all transactions below 1BTC!).  Thats about $320,000 at today's spot price.  I expect the transactions below 1BTC to amount to a similar value if I could be bothered to sum them all. This one BTC node is handling roughly half a million USD of transactions a week at the moment.

CPU:



Network In:



Network Out:

he is too young for school, more like kindergarden :-)

Lol.  Shouldn't you be at school?

Or just gambling.  Coins have been very cheap for a long time until recently. 

That's the SPR Instamine dump being split up and transferred.

Over exposure much?

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/spr/address.dws?175312.htm

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/spr/address.dws?190677.htm

Initial thoughts on BitLicences are based around this reported comment from the regulator:

Lawsky said in his press conference, it is a sign that the regulation is not quite right. Regulators will not please everyone. Any Bitcoin business lost will surely find a new home elsewhere in another state in the union, at least until that state models their future regulatory framework upon New York’s BitLicense.

They are basically saying that all regulators will copy their licensing regulations.

What that means is that anyone wanting to run a crypto service will find it difficult without getting regulated.

Unless

You run a decentralized series of nodes that can run services anywhere in the world, where the regulations don't apply. Of course, consumers IPs will need to be banned if they are coming from regulated locations.

And VPS providers will have to be chosen with care.

Services running on decentralized nodes looks like the way forward.

You are where the future is going to be: Decentralize Everything. Enjoy 

BitLicences have been updated:

http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/speeches/sp1506031.htm

"We are excited about the potential digital currency holds for helping drive long-overdue changes in our ossified payments system. We simply want to make sure that we put in place guardrails that protect consumers and root out illicit activity – without stifling beneficial innovation."

Crypto is going to change the existing financial system, slowly - but surely.

For the automated escrow services everyone asked to see first:

"Second, we have no intention of being a regulator of software developers – only financial intermediaries. For example, students or other innovators who are simply developing software and are not holding onto customer funds are not required to apply for a BitLicense. There is an important reason for making this distinction when a company becomes a financial intermediary: There is a basic bargain that when a financial company is entrusted with safeguarding customer funds and receives a license from the state to do so – it accepts the need for heightened regulatory scrutiny to help ensure that a consumer’s money does not just disappear into a black hole."

If ServiceNodes don't ever hold funds, and they always stay with consumers, there is a clearer indication that regulations won't be necessary for ServiceNodes.

The licence regulations are here:

http://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/regulations/adoptions/dfsp200t.pdf

There seems to be an exclusion to regulations if keeping away from fiat, but its not clear in some places - ie, what's the point of BitLicences?

edit

Well, it looks like these regulations will cover businesses like shapeshift which keep away from Fiat, but convert between currencies. I'll be interested to see the reaction of shapeshift, Bittrex and Cryptsy to these New York State (only) regulations.

Anyone know whats going with the rich list?

Looks like people have been stocking up!

https://chainz.cryptoid.info/spr/#!rich

Someone, somewhere, knows something.