Topic: [BTE] The Bytecoin Information Thread - page 35. (Read 78911 times)

Update to reflect problems with The Bytecoin Pool   http://pool.bytecoin.in/    *Note: As of April 9, 2013 neither the balance or unconfirmed balances appear to be updating at this pool.


I do not know, this thread is mainly compiled from what I can find on the forum regarding Bytecoin and from member input. If you find one let me know and I can add it.

are there any pps pools yet ? 

Made a few minor edits.

Yes, if nothing else Bytecoin has a nice looking logo.

Nice Bytechips!!

Added graphic, thanks!

Nice business-to-business (b2b) picture:



Created by Ls777 (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1759951)

Added, thanks!

You forgot to mention to Premine by large block regarding in the beginning

I made a live orderbook here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitsnbytes-a-live-bitcoinbytecoin-orderbook-170157

Added BTE Hashers Pool.

It is so new that nothing is guaranteed. I am by no means an expert in any of this, but from what I have read I would think the best defense, which I believe we have going at least so far, is plenty of miners and plenty of pools. The more pools, and miners that are hopefully distributed evenly among these pools, we have the harder it would be for a individual or small group to come in and dominate the field, thus attempting a 51% attack.

I also think it is in the best interest of the pools to look out for this as well. My bitcoin miners participate in the BTC Guild pool, and I have seen they have a plan in place to try and discourage gaining too large of a membership. Basically, they plan to raise the pool fees if the pool hash rates start to go over 40% of the network hash rate.  They recognize that people will be scared off and lose confidence in bitcoin should one pool even approach 51% of processing power. It is in the best interests of everyone to try and avoid this scenario.

This same approach will also need to apply to bytecoin, since it is basically a 1:1 derivative of the bitcoin code. If enough people stick with it and pools and miners continue to be brought on board, in approximately proportional ratios, I think it may have a good chance of surviving. But only time will tell...

Added.

hi bte family

I was wondering are there any ideas to help against asic 51% attacks?  I don't quite have the know-how to code yet, but I feel if someone could figure out how to take the 51% attack vulnerability the coin would have a guaranteed bright future.

I have been dabbling in terracoin, and the 51% attacks have been making my stomach drop to my toes, and I think alot of stomachs dropped to alot of toes actually.

just throwing it out there for development stimulus.  the first innovator to figure out 51% protection will be a bte hero

See this re source - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=169236.msg1760297;topicseen#msg1760297

If you look through my diff, you can see that they swapped bitcoin for bytecoin everywhere in the code

And I think this is where its a different blockchain ( genesis block ) :


diff -r src.bit/main.cpp src.byte/main.cpp
34c34
< uint256 hashGenesisBlock("0x000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f");
---
> uint256 hashGenesisBlock("0x00000000c3040b997c96926200ed00b0a5b2e97e3d0015deb41249489e666f84");
62c62
< const string strMessageMagic = "Bitcoin Signed Message:\n";
---
> const string strMessageMagic = "Bytecoin Signed Message:\n";
1597,1603c1597,1598
<     // This rule was originally applied all blocks whose timestamp was after March 15, 2012, 0:00 UTC.
<     // Now that the whole chain is irreversibly beyond that time it is applied to all blocks except the
<     // two in the chain that violate it. This prevents exploiting the issue against nodes in their
<     // initial block download.
<     bool fEnforceBIP30 = (!pindex->phashBlock) || // Enforce on CreateNewBlock invocations which don't have a hash.
<                           !((pindex->nHeight==91842 && pindex->GetBlockHash() == uint256("0x00000000000a4d0a398161ffc163c503763b1f4360639393e0e4c8e300e0caec")) ||
<                            (pindex->nHeight==91880 && pindex->GetBlockHash() == uint256("0x00000000000743f190a18c5577a3c2d2a1f610ae9601ac046a38084ccb7cd721")));
---
>
>     bool fEnforceBIP30 = true;

One thing I'd like to see... If ByteCoin is ... 100% identical to BitCoin ... Why isnt it mining and processing BTC/BitCoins .. Where is the source difference that specifies ... to be a new blockchain ?

        const char* pszTimestamp = "04/01/2013 ABC News: North Korea pledges to expand nuclear program.";
        CTransaction txNew;
        txNew.vin.resize(1);
        txNew.vout.resize(1);
        txNew.vin[0].scriptSig = CScript() << 486604799 << CBigNum(4) << vector((const unsigned char*)pszTimestamp, (const unsigned char*)pszTimestamp + strlen(pszTimestamp));
        txNew.vout[0].nValue = 50 * COIN;
        txNew.vout[0].scriptPubKey = CScript() << ParseHex("04678afdb0fe5548271967f1a67130b7105cd6a828e03909a67962e0ea1f61deb649f6bc3f4cef3 8c4f35504e51ec112de5c384df7ba0b8d578a4c702b6bf11d5f") << OP_CHECKSIG;
        CBlock block;
        block.vtx.push_back(txNew);
        block.hashPrevBlock = 0;
        block.hashMerkleRoot = block.BuildMerkleTree();
        block.nVersion = 2;
        block.nTime    = 1364786987;
        block.nBits    = 0x1d00ffff;
        block.nNonce   = 29849213;

^^ for ByteCoin

versus

        const char* pszTimestamp = "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks";
        CTransaction txNew;
        txNew.vin.resize(1);
        txNew.vout.resize(1);
        txNew.vin[0].scriptSig = CScript() << 486604799 << CBigNum(4) << vector((const unsigned char*)pszTimestamp, (const unsigned char*)pszTimestamp + strlen(pszTimestamp));
        txNew.vout[0].nValue = 50 * COIN;
        txNew.vout[0].scriptPubKey = CScript() << ParseHex("04678afdb0fe5548271967f1a67130b7105cd6a828e03909a67962e0ea1f61deb649f6bc3f4cef3 8c4f35504e51ec112de5c384df7ba0b8d578a4c702b6bf11d5f") << OP_CHECKSIG;
        CBlock block;
        block.vtx.push_back(txNew);
        block.hashPrevBlock = 0;
        block.hashMerkleRoot = block.BuildMerkleTree();
        block.nVersion = 1;
        block.nTime    = 1231006505;
        block.nBits    = 0x1d00ffff;
        block.nNonce   = 2083236893;

For BitCoin

been checking out the diff in those two files. Most relate to the genesis block and the BIP30 03/22 check

You're Welcome! Thanks for the update to the list.

thanks so much! its just to hold us over until get a real exchange.