Topic: [BCN] Bytecoin. Secure, private, untraceable since 2012 - page 352. (Read 1070171 times)

Also if you want to work out the age of the chain, this might not be exact for actual age in years, but its timed in years as that is how much has been mined, to give you an idea.

Please let me know if I screw up the calculation.

Bytecoin height: 483532

Target: 120 seconds.

Chain age = (120 seconds * 483,532 blocks) = 58,023,840 seconds.

58,023,840 seconds = 967,064 minutes.

967,064 minutes = 16,117.733 hours.

16,117.733 hours = 671.5 days.

671.5 = 1.83 years.

Even if this was mined last month, it's still the majority of the coin.

Either pre-mined or insta-mined.

I have no idea why people are supporting this one over a fairer release (Monero)

See

https://cryptonote.org/coins.php


Basically this coin has been mining for two years, it was mining before they started to release the paper and research. It's a premine pure and simple.

At least Satoshi released his whitepaper in the same month as Bitcoin, not over a year later.

https://minergate.com/blockchain/bcn/block/1

To be honest, the only people that are going to shout and be loud in support of Bytecoin over Monero are the people who have billions of Bytecoin.

Does not work on win 8.1 x64. Looks like it is a common problem. Is there a difference between cpuminer and simpleminer in hash rate?

One time addresses are an almost certantly, people have implementations (search "stealth address"), the ideas just need to mature and get standardized.  After trying them out in Bytecoin I can say that they work more nicely than I expected.

The ring signature is a little trickier:  The cryptography itself is simple (I'll probably add a version using SECP256k1 to Sipa's libsecp256k1 once he figures out how he wants to handle hash functions for determinstic signing and schnorr signatures), but the overall implementation requires an additional spent coin set which is another utxo like data structure— this also isn't so bad, but its completely incompatible with pruning. Effectively Bitcoin full nodes just need to track the currently spendable coins in order to validate blocks, spending coins reduces the set, creating outputs increases it. Right now that data is only about 300MBytes and it grows much more slowly than the blockchain (even with people gunking it up with forever unspendable data storage outputs). In the bytecoin approach transactions create spendable coins and transactions also create spent keys, there is no 'reduces'— it grows forever. Breaking pruning is pretty big scalability hit in the long run.  (Incidentally, all other cryptographic anonymity systems have similar long term scaling challenges)

But having this stuff available FOR Bitcoin isn't the same as having it IN Bitcoin. So I wouldn't count out having it for the Bitcoin currency even if I don't expect to see it in the Bitcoin blockchain anytime soon. It certantly seems easier to deploy than zerocash which requires a similar spent coins list plus a committed UTXO and a lot more heavyweight crypto code.

That maybe it's just handing a mining hardware manufacturing monopoly to a near-duopoly of multiple billion dollar CPU making companies that have patent warchests that probably preclude competition? And then there is the advantage they that botnet herders have… It's hard to say. I don't really believe "CPU mining" is actually possible— even if you somehow found a function that was suitable as a good POW but made perfect use of cpu hardware, you can usually get a factor of 2-10 in better (power, mfg) efficiency by cutting out fat (e.g. IO) and optimizing for mining use.  Since mining is ideally perfect competition even 'small' advantages can push all the competition out of the market. This also applies to the R&D, a lot of CPU costs to customers are NRE— cost to Intel and AMD are much lower marginally.

Andytoshi wrote a lot more about POW functions and I basically agree with his views: https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/asic-faq.pdf  Mostly I think that POW stuff is the least interesting stuff to mess with, yet it's easy to get it wrong (e.g. and permit surprising optimizations) or create collateral damage (e.g. making verifying too expensive, or precluding SPV nodes (e.g. POS coins break SPV pretty badly)). Way too much though is put into POW because its a kind of easily accessible surface technology that attracts a lot of shed painting.  About the only thing in that space that I've found at all interesting is the idea that it might be possible to make a POW out of ticking for public timelock encryption... though the fact that having "useful side-effect" actually is a point against a POW approach, we currently have basically other idea of how decentralized time-lock encryption could be created (Perhaps through indistinguishably obfuscation of some code that read bitcoin headers to get the time— but even that would require trusted initialization) ... so getting it as a POW outcome might be interesting.

Maybe is hidden somewhere in deep web for last two years just like Bytecoin 

Yeah, CryptoNote "v2". I wonder if there was "v1" at some point.

Thank you for your attention to the coin. Bytecoin really exists and works, so the anonymous cryptocurrency is already here. The ideas behind Bytecoin and CryptoNote are somewhat difficult to implement in Bitcoin as far as I understand. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's hardly any chance we could see ring signatures or one-time addresses in Bitcoin as nobody wants to fix the running locomotive.


Unfortunately, I think the majority of the cryptocurrency enthusiasts are just obsessed with the mining profit at no extra effort. That would explain why so few people are into the hardcore technology (apart from it being complicated for sure). This disproportion should be very high for Bitcoin for what I see; a lot of ecosystem projects with a very small core team.

However, there is a point behind it. After all, consumer adoption beats the technology. Top tech is not what guarantees the success, and I'm pretty sure this correlates with my point above.

What do you personally think about CPU-mining as an idea?

PM me your BCN address we will reward you with 6M BCN for the pool development

Yes, but the date don't match.


CryptoNote White paper is puplished on October 17, 2013.
https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

And after Monero was supposedly instamined they switched to Quazarcoin
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-qcn-quazarcoin-full-privacydata-protection-egalitarian-pow-600658

And the story goes on and on and on, just like with hundreds of forks.

This is not an official announcement, the coin existed prior to March when DStrange started this topic. The coins were mined in almost already 2 years.

Yes, that is why CryptoNote supporter switched to Monero I suppose.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/xmr-monero-a-secure-private-untraceable-cryptocurrency-583449

How many coins are in existence so far?

This seemed to announced just a couple of months ago but already something like 144,000,000,000 coins have been mined?

./minerd  -a cryptonight -o http://bcn.extremepool.org:5555 -u

-p x -t <# of threads>

Usage: minerd [OPTIONS]
Options:
  -a, --algo=ALGO       specify the algorithm to use
                          scrypt       scrypt(1024, 1, 1) (default)
                          sha256d      SHA-256d
                          keccak       Keccak
                          quark        Quark
                          heavy        Heavy
                          skein        Skein
                          shavite3     Shavite3
                          blake        Blake
                          x11          X11
                          cryptonight  CryptoNight
  -o, --url=URL         URL of mining server
  -O, --userpass=U:P    username:password pair for mining server
  -u, --user=USERNAME   username for mining server
  -p, --pass=PASSWORD   password for mining server
      --cert=FILE       certificate for mining server using SSL
  -x, --proxy=[PROTOCOL://]HOST[:PORT]  connect through a proxy
  -t, --threads=N       number of miner threads (default: number of processors)
  -r, --retries=N       number of times to retry if a network call fails
                          (default: retry indefinitely)
  -R, --retry-pause=N   time to pause between retries, in seconds (default: 30)
  -T, --timeout=N       timeout for long polling, in seconds (default: none)
  -s, --scantime=N      upper bound on time spent scanning current work when
                          long polling is unavailable, in seconds (default: 5)
      --no-longpoll     disable X-Long-Polling support
      --no-stratum      disable X-Stratum support
      --no-redirect     ignore requests to change the URL of the mining server
  -q, --quiet           disable per-thread hashmeter output
  -D, --debug           enable debug output
  -P, --protocol-dump   verbose dump of protocol-level activities
  -S, --syslog          use system log for output messages
  -B, --background      run the miner in the background
      --benchmark       run in offline benchmark mode
  -c, --config=FILE     load a JSON-format configuration file
  -V, --version         display version information and exit
  -h, --help            display this help text and exit

Awesome! What should be the command line for minerd? By default cpuminer runs on scrypt. How do I run it on cryptonote algo?

How do I define the # of threads in simpleminer.exe? "--threads 8" doesn't work

I will as soon as I verify block reward

https://github.com/LucasJones/cpuminer-multi

Where can I get the CPU Miner?

You should start a new thread to announce this.