Topic: [ANN][XCN] Cryptonite | 1st mini-blockchain coin | M7 PoW | No Premine - page 50. (Read 578565 times)

"Supply in Numbers:
After 1 month: ~11 Million
After 3 months: ~ 32 Million
After 1 year: ~ 123 Million
After 2 years: ~ 240 Million
After 10 years: ~ 920 Million"

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8196634

Is there any way I can help with the coin, and perhaps earn myself some cryptonite?

We will probably use a variant of the coin shuffle protocol but that may change.

@bitfreak: does that " 7- block mixing, sidechains.."  part mean that you already have chosen/invented a scheme for mixing/anonymization to implement at the core level?
Did I miss that part??

I spoke to our core developer yesterday and he has been preoccupied with other stuff lately but he said that he'll have time to do some work in a few weeks. Slice sharing optimization is still at the top of the list. I will also try to release a web wallet with full client side encryption some time within the next few weeks.

It all really depends whether or not we keep supporting qt. Most of the sync problems are isolated to qt and it's very difficult to add new features and make changes to qt because it's not a simple rpc wallet. The web wallet supports withdrawal limits and many other things that qt does not support if you really want a GUI for all those advanced features.

Yes I will probably do that after I finish the web wallet with full client side encryption because I'll have to write a lot of the same javascript for both projects.

There is already a field like that which tells you when the address was last used. But it's much more complicated than you assume, we probably spent hours discussing this topic. For a start if you allow received coins to update that field then people could prevent old accounts from being pruned just by sending a small amount of coins to that address. 5 years is also much too short, someone with a long term savings account might not know how old addresses are pruned and lose all their money. 20 years is probably the minimum but I know from experience that people will demand to make it 50 or 100 years just to ease their fears. And if you have dust sitting around in the account tree for 50 years before it gets pruned it's kind of a dumb solution because we could be dead before it even starts working. That is one reason we started to think about a system where fees were periodically charged to all addresses in the account tree, that way small balance accounts wouldn't hang around a long time but large balance accounts would. However there are even more issues involved with that approach when you start thinking deeply about it.

XCN's MBC structure may be ideal for sidechains, but are they not necessary for its success.

XCN is well-positioned to complement BTC as another type of digital cash by specializing in smaller, instant casual transactions.

A BTC approximates the function of a 430oz LGD gold bar, while an XCN is more like a copper penny.  The monetary maths serve different segments of the market, as do the metals.

      What was your longterm vision for XCN?

Any news on updated versions of the wallets as the coin could do with some positive news? There have been a lot of posts in this thread about syncing issues so a bug fixing release would be good. I'm sure it was on the roadmap a few weeks ago. Also I'm using the QT client on win7 and I've noticed that the GUI does not give options for withdrawal limits and purging the database, which is a shame as having these features in the GUI would show them off to new users. No point in hiding innovative features in the command line especially for us windows users :-)
Could we add a paper wallet generator to the roadmap? Some sort of bitaddress clone. It's not a big deal but a useful part of any coins ecosystem.
I was reading about account pruning and my understanding is that it isn't implemented yet and it's more of a long term project. I have an idea for how to make account pruning possible in the future for accounts which haven't been touched for along time to deal with coins in lost wallets.
'lasttransactionblock' would be a new variable for each account to record the last time the account sent or received a transaction. Miners would need to update the field for both sender and receiver for every transaction to the current block.
This can then be used later to prune addresses with no transactions for say 5 years to top up the coinbase account to pay miners rewards. So the inevitable lost coins can be used to pay for security without adding inflation or high transaction fees.
Obviously this new variable would need a hard fork as all the nodes would need to agree on it but this can be added to any future hard forks with important changes to address other issues such as mining pools.

So forget HF trading. Provide the ability for natural buyers and sellers to transact reasonably conveniently and without counterparty risk and let the gamers go play something else.

Good stuff.  I understand block/propagation times are a constraint for on-chain HF trading.  Now that I think about it, tx fees would also add friction as the equivalent of a Tobin Tax!  Perhaps we will see the emergence of hyper-localized coins with extremely short block times.  NASDAQcoin, NYSEcoin, and COMEXcoin would be limited to NYC and Chicago based nodes and feature <1 second blocks, low (or zero) tx fees, etc.  The very low latency HFT networks already exist; we just need to provide the tools so they can create beneficial blockchain overlays which replace their current (problematic) centralized clearinghouse model.

Of course these specialized coins should be non-malleable sidechains of XCN...if we build it they will come!  

Another approach would be to metacast tx across several interoperable/compatible chains, so it's a safe bet at least one of them will pop a block very soon afterwards.  Maybe Supernet type schemes will provide such functionality.

Yes exchanges are clearly the weakest link in the whole cryptocurrency ecosystem, so I can understand the desire for a decentralized trading platform. Over the last few years I've read about at least a dozen such platforms but I'm not sure how many of those actually manifested into a real solution. I'm fairly sure there is at least one P2P trading solution in existence right now but this is another topic I haven't been keeping an eye on lately. The main problem with any decentralized trading platform is the inherent latency which P2P networking brings with it. Although Cryptonite can handle a larger number of transactions I don't think it would have a low enough latency to handle high frequency trading and I still don't think it would be a great idea to cram all the HF trades into the blockchain. The best solution would probably be to create a specialized side chain to hold all the trading transactions because then you can easily solve the problem of how to create trading pairs between different altcoins, you just need the sidechain to be connected to multiple altcoins and the ability to track which type of assets exist in the side chain. Now that I start thinking about this topic more I'm getting all sorts of ideas about how to design such a side chain.

EDIT: actually I think the mini-blockchain scheme would probably be the ideal type of system to use in such a side chain because when you think about it, trading just boils down to balances. When you're trading on an exchange all you really care about is your coin balances. When you make a trade one of your balances will decrease and another will increase because you're selling one type of asset in return for another type. So when it comes to trading I don't think there is a need for advanced scripting capabilities. The mini-blockchain scheme uses a simple balance system instead of scripting so it seems like the ideal solution to this problem. We don't really need the withdrawal limit feature in this type of side chain, so we could just use the withdrawal limit field in the account tree to represent the type of asset. So for example a value of 0 might be BTC, a value of 1 might be LTC, a value of 3 XCN, etc. That way it would be super easy to know how much of each coin you are holding and it allows us to track which coins are being sent into and out of the side chain. To trade between different coins you'd just need to create a transaction with the appropriate outputs signed by all parties involved in the trade.

The danger of off-chain trades on exchanges is that you are exposed to the exchanges' regulatory/institutional/counterpary risk.

By using multisig and keeping as much as possible on-chain, users are protected for localized catastrophic failures.

As I said Cryptonite may have certain advantages that make it useful in a supernet type of system. I haven't really been following the progress of the supernet stuff and I'm uncertain exactly how it all works so I can't give you a good answer. And no I haven't been contacted about HF trading. Typically exchanges handle the trading, especially high frequency trading. Even if Cryptonite can better handle more transactions there is no reason to make all those HF trades as real transactions when you can let exchanges handle that stuff off the chain.

I was referring to something like supernetwork and blocknet. Has anyone from the financial sector contacted you about high frequency trading?

The longterm vision is a truly scalable cryptocurrency which will remain decentralized long into the future. With improved scalability you get more transaction bandwidth and better support for micro-transactions, which are important properties for any cryptocurrency which wants to support a large user base.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "an internet of coins scheme", but I designed Cryptonite to fill a certain niche in the altcoin scene, so it can do things that other alts cannot do and it will probably have applications that I have not foreseen when it comes to interaction between different altcoins.

Hey bitfreak, this coin is extremely interesting, so I wanted to ask to some questions about you and the coin. First off with the rise of the internet of coins schemes you cant help but think about coins in those terms, I think cryptonite could be very valuable especially for an internet of coins network. I really think XCN has a perfect spot as a fast transfer, possible HFT role and it seems like it was purposeful. XCN goes against the current landscape of coins in that while everyone is working on a swiss army knife approach where their coin does 10-15 things all half completed you went a different route and built a coin that had one brilliant feature and it works really well.

What was your longterm vision for XCN?

Did you build XCN to fit into an internet of coins scheme?

Thanks, it did the job

Did you try deleting the corrupted blockchain from your datadir and resyncing?

Is there any thought to centralization of mining? The vast majority of miners seem to be on http://xcn.1gh.com/ with a few on http://xcn.nonce-pool.com/. It looks like we're way beyond the levels that ghash reached with bitcoin which caused such a media storm. Luckily this produced several good proposals to fix bitcoin, just because bitcoin couldn't manage a hard fork to fix their problems it doesn't mean we couldn't do that to make sure xcn is ready with all the solutions.
See http://hackingdistributed.com/2014/06/18/how-to-disincentivize-large-bitcoin-mining-pools/ for one idea. 

Hi,

I need to roll back some my XCN i used to keep on c-cex due to delisting.

I have built up the walled. Standard things:


went all right, but after launching I got the error of blockchain loading.
I selected "rebuild" option and got segfault.

What's wrong? It is compiled against libdb5.1 but it used to work (maybe the previous version?).
Bitcoin built up the same way works fine. Just need to specify -datadir (that issue still exists after first Cryptonite launch in it's early days).