here's the original post http://www.reddit.com/r/myriadcoin/comments/26re6w/new_project_for_a_bored_coder_noobminer_for_mac/
a variance of that project is being done.
Topic: [ANN][XMY] Myriad | Multi-Algo, Fair, Secure - page 140. (Read 849993 times)
a variance of that project is being done.
here's the original post http://www.reddit.com/r/myriadcoin/comments/26re6w/new_project_for_a_bored_coder_noobminer_for_mac/
Do you check out the reddit much? There's a project underway you'd probably be interested in. It's basically a wallet with a built in p2p miner that mines directly to the wallet. Supposed to auto-config, etc, so you just open the wallet and click mine.
Read it more and more everyday. I'll check that out. Sounds very interesting, and very 'parallel'.
Thanks. Have you got a link?
Do you check out the reddit much? There's a project underway you'd probably be interested in. It's basically a wallet with a built in p2p miner that mines directly to the wallet. Supposed to auto-config, etc, so you just open the wallet and click mine.
You're probably right. Wallet hacking would be a huge vulnerability, but I don't know enough about the technical aspects to be able to intelligently comment on this. Hopefully we'll hear from others with more specific knowledge on the subject.
But the general idea would be to do as much as possible with the wallet, and only the absolutely necessary with the coin.
What would stop a botnet operator from making his own wallet implementation that bypassed said throttles? I feel like this would have to be apart of the coin itself.
You're probably right. Wallet hacking would be a huge vulnerability, but I don't know enough about the technical aspects to be able to intelligently comment on this. Hopefully we'll hear from others with more specific knowledge on the subject.
But the general idea would be to do as much as possible with the wallet, and only the absolutely necessary with the coin.
What would stop a botnet operator from making his own wallet implementation that bypassed said throttles? I feel like this would have to be apart of the coin itself.
You're probably right. Wallet hacking would be a huge vulnerability, but I don't know enough about the technical aspects to be able to intelligently comment on this. Hopefully we'll hear from others with more specific knowledge on the subject.
But the general idea would be to do as much as possible with the wallet, and only the absolutely necessary with the coin.
unfortunately botnet ops wouldn't even need to hack the wallet with this idea. They'd just have to create a payload that deployed a headless version of the wallet, created an address, started mining, and then use the api to send the funds back home. It would take a tiny bit of scripting.
also, if it had some kind of ram requirement (like 16gb) it would only work with 64bit systems, with enough memory. Not a solution for everyone...
I like your spirit though:)
What would stop a botnet operator from making his own wallet implementation that bypassed said throttles? I feel like this would have to be apart of the coin itself.
You're probably right. Wallet hacking would be a huge vulnerability, but I don't know enough about the technical aspects to be able to intelligently comment on this. Hopefully we'll hear from others with more specific knowledge on the subject.
But the general idea would be to do as much as possible with the wallet, and only the absolutely necessary with the coin.
What would stop a botnet operator from making his own wallet implementation that bypassed said throttles? I feel like this would have to be apart of the coin itself.
I'm not a coder but I'm having a hard time imagining how you'd make it so the throttling would only be applied to one of the algorithms.
I'm not a "coder" either, but I do have basic IT knowledge having worked with hardware, system and network administration, and web design/creation/administration for over 20 years (and I'm slowly learning C++ since that is the bedrock that everything is built on and will continue to be built on . . . so, someday, I might be able to at least tell you what's under the hood.
).In-so-far as this idea goes, the basic idea would be to do everything you possibly can with the wallet - the wallet would control the throttling of the hashrate input. Theoretically, you could throw TH/s at it, but it would simply ignore everything over the threshold and only report/submit everything up to that limit. Everything else would simply be ignored, or thrown away as it were. The other algos would mine unrestrictedly. You would essentially leave current functions in place, and add a new, restricted mining function for Qubit (along with its sub-functions).
The only change I would envision for the coin itself would be the reward amounts. Everything else would be done with the wallet.
Add: you might have to put some sort of dynamic checksum into the coin code to protect against wallet hacking . . .
I'm not a coder but I'm having a hard time imagining how you'd make it so the throttling would only be applied to one of the algorithms.
That's my understanding as well, and while it would still be possible, it wouldn't make sense since that one wallet would have the same throttling threshold as every wallet, meaning that the botnet operator's total hashrate could never exceed that threshold either - as for the coins potentially mined, they would number the same as what would be mined with his/her own computer.
One wallet, one address, and your CPU (or the throttling threshold in the case of someone who wants to try and pipe more through, like with a GPU for example - keep in mind that older graphic cards may actually be slightly more efficient than an older CPU, and not hit the throttling threshold, or barely exceed it).
I'm not an expert but I imagine the botnet operator would have one wallet and use the botnet basically as a mining pool.
That's my understanding as well, and while it would still be possible, it wouldn't make sense since that one wallet would have the same throttling threshold as every wallet, meaning that the botnet operator's total hashrate could never exceed that threshold either - as for the coins potentially mined, they would number the same as what would be mined with his/her own computer.
One wallet, one address, and your CPU (or the throttling threshold in the case of someone who wants to try and pipe more through, like with a GPU for example - keep in mind that older graphic cards may actually be slightly more efficient than an older CPU, and not hit the throttling threshold, or barely exceed it).
Interesting concept! Hopefully we hear from some others about how this would work in theory. This actually reminds me a lil of Vitalik Buterin suggestion for Bitcoin, making it so cpus can mine directly from the wallet to thwart centralization. I don't know if he meant adding a new algo or changing sha to something else. Either way we know that's never going to happen with bitcoin.
I'm not an expert but I imagine the botnet operator would have one wallet and use the botnet basically as a mining pool.
That's my understanding as well, and while it would still be possible, it wouldn't make sense since that one wallet would have the same throttling threshold as every wallet, meaning that the botnet operator's total hashrate could never exceed that threshold either - as for the coins potentially mined, they would number the same as what would be mined with his/her own computer.
One wallet, one address, and your CPU (or the throttling threshold in the case of someone who wants to try and pipe more through, like with a GPU for example - keep in mind that older graphic cards may actually be slightly more efficient than an older CPU, and not hit the throttling threshold, or barely exceed it).
I'm not an expert but I imagine the botnet operator would have one wallet and use the botnet basically as a mining pool.
But, is it to be implied that a bot would download and install the wallet and then configure it to automatically start without the end user being aware??? Would this really be botnet vulnerable to begin with?
I wouldn't say it's not impossible to address. Nothing is impossible. But so far, other than perhaps the coin primer linked to, coins that are easily cpu mined get raped by botnets literally dumping coins until there's no value left.
But, is it to be implied that a bot would download and install the wallet and then configure it to automatically start without the end user being aware??? Would this really be botnet vulnerable to begin with?
I wouldn't say it's not impossible to address. Nothing is impossible. But so far, other than perhaps the coin primer linked to, coins that are easily cpu mined get raped by botnets literally dumping coins until there's no value left.
But, is it to be implied that a bot would download and install the wallet and then configure it to automatically start without the end user being aware??? Would this really be botnet vulnerable to begin with?
I wouldn't say it's not impossible to address. Nothing is impossible. But so far, other than perhaps the coin primer linked to, coins that are easily cpu mined get raped by botnets literally dumping coins until there's no value left.
Yes I have (and usually in the same off handed manner).
Could you give everyone a quick run down on the theoretical vulnerabilities given my loosely defined specs (one miner per address, wallet restricted, throttled mining), and perhaps also on why such vulnerabilities would be impossible to address?
You ever hear of botnets? a zombie network of compromised computers would mine the majority of the coins leaving your average person getting almost nil.
Yes I have (and usually in the same off handed manner).
Could you give everyone a quick run down on the theoretical vulnerabilities given my loosely defined specs (one miner per address, wallet restricted, throttled mining), and perhaps also on why such vulnerabilities would be impossible to address?
For those who do not believe in MYR - I witnessed Blackcoin dropping to less than MYR's current market-cap amount and then shoot up to its current value. BC has no true innovative feature, while MYR has BTC's holy grail - a fully-working anti-51%-attack mechanism with fresh algorithms and a more dedicated Dev team behind it. If you're into MYR for a quick profit, look elsewhere. The feature I'm looking forward to the most is MYR's new merged-mining system - however, when advertising MYR with friends and acquaintances, focus on the 51% aspect. Forget SMS wallets and all that crap - those are things which any coin can have. Multi-algo isn't, unless it's a post-MYR copy which people will identify as such immediately.
You ever hear of botnets? a zombie network of compromised computers would mine the majority of the coins leaving your average person getting almost nil.
Yes I have (and usually in the same out of hand manner).
Could you give everyone a quick run down on the theoretical vulnerabilities given my loosely defined specs (one miner per address, wallet restricted, throttled mining), and perhaps also on why such vulnerabilities would be impossible to address?
Shinycoin ( https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annshc-shinycoin-first-ever-ramhog-algo-powpos-no-asicgpu-whitepaper-655789 )uses an algo that requires 16GB ram. 95% of all botnet zombies run on less that 4GB RAM...
You ever hear of botnets? a zombie network of compromised computers would mine the majority of the coins leaving your average person getting almost nil.
Yes I have (and usually in the same off handed manner).
Could you give everyone a quick run down on the theoretical vulnerabilities given my loosely defined specs (one miner per address, wallet restricted, throttled mining), and perhaps also on why such vulnerabilities would be impossible to address?
You ever hear of botnets? a zombie network of compromised computers would mine the majority of the coins leaving your average person getting almost nil.
Here’s a Radical [Not So Novel] Idea (please don’t laugh)
Would you be interested hearing an idea that could take MYR ballistic and worldwide (in the truest sense of the word)? Well, sit back and read on if you answered yes.
This is an idea that could really cause MYR to go 'viral'. Can you imagine people from all over the world automatically mining MYR on startup of their PC? What could possibly get millions of people all over the world (including the underdeveloped world) doing that?
Let’s step back for some background and start out by remembering and taking into account some of my logical anti-ASIC arguments (I haven’t been too bad with my predictions in recent months either) and then move forward going one step further by looking at the opposite end of the spectrum.
Just like at one end of the spectrum we have an ever more concentrated and centralized network in combination with price under serious pressure, at the other end we also have an authentic widely distributed network with a stable and generally rising price, and if hardware specialization leads to the first, then, the opposite, namely, hardware generalization, should logically lead to the second.
Economies of scale are generally a good thing when referring to competitive markets; the only problem exists when those markets become concentrated (centralized) in a few hands, and then economies of scale can work against the common good. We need look no further than the fiat banking system to see what eventually happens.
One of the most important ideas at the heart of the crypto ethic was the idea that decentralization was key for creating a viable 'alternative' storage of wealth that could compete with the traditional fiat system.
Have we by some chance become sidetracked with our obsessions for short term profit? What with, hey, we’ve even got a website dedicated to this extreme distraction. What’s the name? Oh, yeah, here it is, Crypto Pump of course (how could it be named anything else?). http://cryptopump.com Was this what we all had in mind when starting out with cryptocurrencies?
Decentralization is all about making something as available as possible to as many people as possible. Are we really going in the right direction to accomplish that by favoring specialized and centralized economies of scale? Okay, a large market cap would be great for PR, but how long lived would it be if it’s not built on a real foundation. Selling out to short term specialization and centralization is nothing more than assured short term gain in exchange for long term pain.
So, if centralized specialization leads to ruin, then generalization, or decentralization as it were, should lead to system health and vitality – exactly what is desired for a solid and authentic vehicle for storage of wealth. And just what do I mean by “generalization”? I’m referring to making something as “generally” available as possible, and not just in words, but in real deeds as well. It’s one thing to say that even CPUs can mine, and it’s quite another altogether to say (and make real) that they can do so competitively (and we all know that the little guy can only be competitive in a “little guy world” where the rules are fair and designed to protect the little guy, and not one where major competitors are swallowing up what little guys are still left).
Have you guessed where I’m going with this?
CPU mining that is just as profitable as GPU mining, and also with ASIC?
Had you guessed?
Yes, CPU on par with ASIC!
If you do that, if you make MYR the cryptocurrency that everyone who owns a computer could competitively mine (seriously now, everyone), you’d have millions of users all over the world configuring their MYR wallets to launch on system startup!
Okay, there are some details to work out, like having a launch on boot setting in the wallet, and, of course, the automatic mine on launch 'plug and play' coding as well.
The wallet would need pre-configured mining parameters so that the new user could mine with a simple click, either solo, or better yet, with an official MYR worldwide P2P (worldwide really meaning worldwide with scores of active nodes all over the world).
The pre-configured, in wallet, miner would only mine using the CPU, or CPU equivalent that would be limited by a throttling mechanism that either matched the most powerful end-user CPU, or an average of the most common CPUs in active use (meaning that it would be possible to mine with a GPU miner, but never at a hashrate that exceeded the CPU throttling level per address, and never independent or outside of the wallet).
Rewards would look something like this:
Throttled Qubit CPU pre-configured wallet restricted mining = 4000 coins per block
Groestl = 450 coins per block
Skein = 450 coins per block
SHA-256 = 50 coins per block
Scrypt = 50 coins per block
And, with that, you'd put MYR on the world map as the first truly fair cryptocurrency in the world where everyone who owns a computer is looked at funny if their MYR wallet isn’t running 'in the background'.
How’s that for an idea for taking MYR mainstream?
You’re right. This would be even beyond mainstream!
Isn’t that what we really had in mind when getting involved in cryptos?
Now, let all those specialized, short term profitability obsessed, miners tell us why this is a bad idea (and GPU miners as well, for that matter) . . . something which should also tell us a lot.
Here’s a Radical [Not So Novel] Idea (please don’t laugh)
Would you be interested hearing an idea that could take MYR ballistic and worldwide (in the truest sense of the word)? Well, sit back and read on if you answered yes.
This is an idea that could really cause MYR to go 'viral'. Can you imagine people from all over the world automatically mining MYR on startup of their PC? What could possibly get millions of people all over the world (including the underdeveloped world) doing that?
Let’s step back for some background and start out by remembering and taking into account some of my logical anti-ASIC arguments (I haven’t been too bad with my predictions in recent months either) and then move forward going one step further by looking at the opposite end of the spectrum.
Just like at one end of the spectrum we have an ever more concentrated and centralized network in combination with price under serious pressure, at the other end we also have an authentic widely distributed network with a stable and generally rising price, and if hardware specialization leads to the first, then, the opposite, namely, hardware generalization, should logically lead to the second.
Economies of scale are generally a good thing when referring to competitive markets; the only problem exists when those markets become concentrated (centralized) in a few hands, and then economies of scale can work against the common good. We need look no further than the fiat banking system to see what eventually happens.
One of the most important ideas at the heart of the crypto ethic was the idea that decentralization was key for creating a viable 'alternative' storage of wealth that could compete with the traditional fiat system.
Have we by some chance become sidetracked with our obsessions for short term profit? What with, hey, we’ve even got a website dedicated to this extreme distraction. What’s the name? Oh, yeah, here it is, Crypto Pump of course (how could it be named anything else?). http://cryptopump.com Was this what we all had in mind when starting out with cryptocurrencies?
Decentralization is all about making something as available as possible to as many people as possible. Are we really going in the right direction to accomplish that by favoring specialized and centralized economies of scale? Okay, a large market cap would be great for PR, but how long lived would it be if it’s not built on a real foundation. Selling out to short term specialization and centralization is nothing more than assured short term gain in exchange for long term pain.
So, if centralized specialization leads to ruin, then generalization, or decentralization as it were, should lead to system health and vitality – exactly what is desired for a solid and authentic vehicle for storage of wealth. And just what do I mean by “generalization”? I’m referring to making something as “generally” available as possible, and not just in words, but in real deeds as well. It’s one thing to say that even CPUs can mine, and it’s quite another altogether to say (and make real) that they can do so competitively (and we all know that the little guy can only be competitive in a “little guy world” where the rules are fair and designed to protect the little guy, and not one where major competitors are swallowing up what little guys are still left).
Have you guessed where I’m going with this?
CPU mining that is just as profitable as GPU mining, and also with ASIC?
Had you guessed?
Yes, CPU on par with ASIC!
If you do that, if you make MYR the cryptocurrency that everyone who owns a computer could competitively mine (seriously now, everyone), you’d have millions of users all over the world configuring their MYR wallets to launch on system startup!
Okay, there are some details to work out, like having a launch on boot setting in the wallet, and, of course, the automatic mine on launch 'plug and play' coding as well.
The wallet would need pre-configured mining parameters so that the new user could mine with a simple click, either solo, or better yet, with an official MYR worldwide P2P (worldwide really meaning worldwide with scores of active nodes all over the world).
The pre-configured, in wallet, miner would only mine using the CPU, or CPU equivalent that would be limited by a throttling mechanism that either matched the most powerful end-user CPU, or an average of the most common CPUs in active use (meaning that it would be possible to mine with a GPU miner, but never at a hashrate that exceeded the CPU throttling level per address, and never independent or outside of the wallet).
Rewards would look something like this:
Throttled Qubit CPU pre-configured wallet restricted mining = 4000 coins per block
Groestl = 450 coins per block
Skein = 450 coins per block
SHA-256 = 50 coins per block
Scrypt = 50 coins per block
And, with that, you'd put MYR on the world map as the first truly fair cryptocurrency in the world where everyone who owns a computer is looked at funny if their MYR wallet isn’t running 'in the background'.
How’s that for an idea for taking MYR mainstream?
You’re right. This would be even beyond mainstream!
Isn’t that what we really had in mind when getting involved in cryptos?
Now, let all those specialized, short term profitability obsessed, miners tell us why this is a bad idea (and GPU miners as well, for that matter) . . . something which should also tell us a lot.
keep on good work guys i'm mining MYR half a year now and i didn't sell 1 myr i'm holding all and supporting the community 
Myr is the leetest and will be the biggest coin ever with all plans that will be integrated into MYR
Regards
Community & DEV
Myr is the leetest and will be the biggest coin ever with all plans that will be integrated into MYR
Regards
Community & DEV
Here’s a Radical [Not So Novel] Idea (please don’t laugh)
Would you be interested hearing an idea that could take MYR ballistic and worldwide (in the truest sense of the word)? Well, sit back and read on if you answered yes.
This is an idea that could really cause MYR to go 'viral'. Can you imagine people from all over the world automatically mining MYR on startup of their PC? What could possibly get millions of people all over the world (including the underdeveloped world) doing that?
Let’s step back for some background and start out by remembering and taking into account some of my logical anti-ASIC arguments (I haven’t been too bad with my predictions in recent months either) and then move forward going one step further by looking at the opposite end of the spectrum.
Just like at one end of the spectrum we have an ever more concentrated and centralized network in combination with price under serious pressure, at the other end we also have an authentic widely distributed network with a stable and generally rising price, and if hardware specialization leads to the first, then, the opposite, namely, hardware generalization, should logically lead to the second.
Economies of scale are generally a good thing when referring to competitive markets; the only problem exists when those markets become concentrated (centralized) in a few hands, and then economies of scale can work against the common good. We need look no further than the fiat banking system to see what eventually happens.
One of the most important ideas at the heart of the crypto ethic was the idea that decentralization was key for creating a viable 'alternative' storage of wealth that could compete with the traditional fiat system.
Have we by some chance become sidetracked with our obsessions for short term profit? What with, hey, we’ve even got a website dedicated to this extreme distraction. What’s the name? Oh, yeah, here it is, Crypto Pump of course (how could it be named anything else?). http://cryptopump.com Was this what we all had in mind when starting out with cryptocurrencies?
Decentralization is all about making something as available as possible to as many people as possible. Are we really going in the right direction to accomplish that by favoring specialized and centralized economies of scale? Okay, a large market cap would be great for PR, but how long lived would it be if it’s not built on a real foundation. Selling out to short term specialization and centralization is nothing more than assured short term gain in exchange for long term pain.
So, if centralized specialization leads to ruin, then generalization, or decentralization as it were, should lead to system health and vitality – exactly what is desired for a solid and authentic vehicle for storage of wealth. And just what do I mean by “generalization”? I’m referring to making something as “generally” available as possible, and not just in words, but in real deeds as well. It’s one thing to say that even CPUs can mine, and it’s quite another altogether to say (and make real) that they can do so competitively (and we all know that the little guy can only be competitive in a “little guy world” where the rules are fair and designed to protect the little guy, and not one where major competitors are swallowing up what little guys are still left).
Have you guessed where I’m going with this?
CPU mining that is just as profitable as GPU mining, and also with ASIC?
Had you guessed?
Yes, CPU on par with ASIC!
If you do that, if you make MYR the cryptocurrency that everyone who owns a computer could competitively mine (seriously now, everyone), you’d have millions of users all over the world configuring their MYR wallets to launch on system startup!
Okay, there are some details to work out, like having a launch on boot setting in the wallet, and, of course, the automatic mine on launch 'plug and play' coding as well.
The wallet would need pre-configured mining parameters so that the new user could mine with a simple click, either solo, or better yet, with an official MYR worldwide P2P (worldwide really meaning worldwide with scores of active nodes all over the world).
The pre-configured, in wallet, miner would only mine using the CPU, or CPU equivalent that would be limited by a throttling mechanism that either matched the most powerful end-user CPU, or an average of the most common CPUs in active use (meaning that it would be possible to mine with a GPU miner, but never at a hashrate that exceeded the CPU throttling level per address, and never independent or outside of the wallet).
Rewards would look something like this:
Throttled Qubit CPU pre-configured wallet restricted mining = 4000 coins per block
Groestl = 450 coins per block
Skein = 450 coins per block
SHA-256 = 50 coins per block
Scrypt = 50 coins per block
And, with that, you'd put MYR on the world map as the first truly fair cryptocurrency in the world where everyone who owns a computer is looked at funny if their MYR wallet isn’t running 'in the background'.
How’s that for an idea for taking MYR mainstream?
You’re right. This would be even beyond mainstream!
Isn’t that what we really had in mind when getting involved in cryptos?
Now, let all those specialized, short term profitability obsessed, miners tell us why this is a bad idea (and GPU miners as well, for that matter) . . . something which should also tell us a lot.
Jump to: