[EMUNIE] One small step for transactions, one giant leap for crypto - page 2.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: monsterer on September 04, 2015, 03:08:01 AM

Quote from: Fuserleer on September 03, 2015, 05:12:36 PM

If the network suddenly splits into 3 sets of 33, then no future transaction can gain a majority, as 33 votes is always less than the 50 required, thus the ledger in all 3 groups is never appended to. Those transactions time out and no forks results.

I cant explain it in any simpler terms than this, and if you still believe that there will be forks, well, I dont know what else to write.

What about long range attacks? Is the evidence of past voting history difficult to forge?

Endorsement information is included in transaction data, which is signed by the transaction creator. They are not malleable in any way.

monsterer

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Fuserleer on September 03, 2015, 05:12:36 PM

If the network suddenly splits into 3 sets of 33, then no future transaction can gain a majority, as 33 votes is always less than the 50 required, thus the ledger in all 3 groups is never appended to. Those transactions time out and no forks results.

I cant explain it in any simpler terms than this, and if you still believe that there will be forks, well, I dont know what else to write.

What about long range attacks? Is the evidence of past voting history difficult to forge?

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: r3wt2 on September 03, 2015, 05:21:41 PM

I'm glad to see that you have stuck with this project. Haven't kept up with recent events around crypto. Can anyone give me a recap on the progress of eMunie? Last i was around it was a java program available in an early beta.

Pretty much the same, java, in beta lol

Lots of technological improvements though, speed, scalability, efficiency etc.. which enable a long term roadmap and a fulfillment of many goals that are still outstanding with crypto in general.

r3wt2

newbie

Activity: 13

Merit: 0

I'm glad to see that you have stuck with this project. Haven't kept up with recent events around crypto. Can anyone give me a recap on the progress of eMunie? Last i was around it was a java program available in an early beta.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: r0ach on September 03, 2015, 06:38:29 AM

Quote from: lovely89 on September 03, 2015, 06:09:56 AM

Quote from: r0ach on September 03, 2015, 04:56:47 AM

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 10:22:55 PM

There has been extensive testing and we already have robust error detection and correction, you would know this if you read our recent blog post which covers some of these concerns you mentioned
http://www.blog.emunie.com/

Let's say a state actor or rogue ISP decides to shape traffic to fragment the network for an extended period of time. I remember Dan talking about some arbitrary time limit built into the system that was rather short to cover network latency that was not covered by this. If the network becomes fragmented into several different pieces this way, let's say three similar sized groups, what was the reference point governing the "longest chain" so to speak? Is it the group with the highest reputation? And is that reputation derived from averaging the entire group, or can you have just one guy with extremely high reputation making it a consensus of only...one person.

Fork consensus was not discussed enough at all when it's probably the most important part of any platform. Dan kind of brushed it off like forks aren't going to be a problem when they definitely can be, especially with ISP traffic shaping and port blocking out the wazoo nowadays.

Comcast Doesn't Give A F*ck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMcny_pixDw

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12242079

Pretty sure you already read this. Wait for technical paper if you want more detail. Let's not go in circles.

I remember that post now but wasn't thinking about state actor attacks at the time: (n/3)-1.

Emunie seems trivial for a state actor to destroy completely compared to PoW, PoS, and DPoS. If the state actor comes for PoW, you're just screwed temporarily. If they come for PoS, you're screwed permanently, but they will probably make you rich in the process before it goes down. If they go for DPoS, you won't see it coming, then it just implodes (unless all nodes are non-anonymous NGO or something like Tim Swanson says). If they come for Emunie, the state actor attack doesn't even cost them anything since they already own or indirectly have control over all the infrastructure, then you just get a BSOD screen and it never works again.

The point of reference is (as stated previously) the past endorsements that transaction producers have made, a sub-set of these are the nodes that are allowed to vote on future transactions.

In your scenario, imagine there are 99 nodes in the network, and they are all receiving endorsements constantly so they are all eligible to vote all of the time.

If the network suddenly splits into 3 sets of 33, then no future transaction can gain a majority, as 33 votes is always less than the 50 required, thus the ledger in all 3 groups is never appended to. Those transactions time out and no forks results.

I cant explain it in any simpler terms than this, and if you still believe that there will be forks, well, I dont know what else to write.

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: JBC on September 03, 2015, 03:32:31 PM

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 05:54:41 PM

The interest and processing payments are (last I heard) in equal portions meaning they each qualify for 45% of all new emu generated. Furthermore this means that 45% of all new emu created will be given as interest to all account holders based on their portion of the total currency available. This means that while some will probably attempt to short their interest or payments, those who hold will actually be building capital proportional to their holdings.

More precisely the reason why, if this coin does launch, it won't go anywhere. Go all the way back to March 2013 and people then were saying it was a crackpot mechanism.

We can look at the some-300 inflationary coins since 2013, since most copied inflationary PoW or induced a high PoS with an unlimited supply, and they all got drop like a hot potato. Inflation is theft.

No one cares what fancy words you use. At the end of the day eMunie is net inflationary and buyers will stay away once they realize Dan is putting his hand in their pockets.

All this fixation about "supply" and "price" just shows you to be an idiot savant and we already have coins like that out there. NuBits is one but there's been others. I should point out they're approaching the garbage bin capitalization and/or been de-listed from exchanges.

Thats a complete misunderstanding of, well, pretty much everything right there. You have inflationary supply and inflationary value totally mixed up.

Bitcoin itself is inflationary, with regard to the supply, at least until 2140, its the price that is supposed to be deflationary (look how well that has worked for the past 18 months!)

An inflationary supply isn't theft so long as its not taking value from the existing currency in circulation.

If the price of an EMU is $1, and there are 1M in existence, but there is demand for 1M more, if the system does nothing, then the value of an EMU will double. If the system creates 1M more EMU, then the price remains at $1...the currency is then neither inflationary or deflationary with regard to prices, so please explain how that is theft when everyones EMU still has the exact same purchasing power?

JBC

member

Activity: 66

Merit: 10

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 05:54:41 PM

The interest and processing payments are (last I heard) in equal portions meaning they each qualify for 45% of all new emu generated. Furthermore this means that 45% of all new emu created will be given as interest to all account holders based on their portion of the total currency available. This means that while some will probably attempt to short their interest or payments, those who hold will actually be building capital proportional to their holdings.

More precisely the reason why, if this coin does launch, it won't go anywhere. Go all the way back to March 2013 and people then were saying it was a crackpot mechanism.

We can look at the some-300 inflationary coins since 2013, since most copied inflationary PoW or induced a high PoS with an unlimited supply, and they all got drop like a hot potato. Inflation is theft.

No one cares what fancy words you use. At the end of the day eMunie is net inflationary and buyers will stay away once they realize Dan is putting his hand in their pockets.

All this fixation about "supply" and "price" just shows you to be an idiot savant and we already have coins like that out there. NuBits is one but there's been others. I should point out they're approaching the garbage bin capitalization and/or been de-listed from exchanges.

theprofileth

full member

Activity: 239

Merit: 100

Socialist Cryptocurrency Devote

And if your outlandish claims even were true wouldn't you just be damning all of crypto? And furthermore what if you are wrong? What if you are actually just blowing smoke up our ass like every other crackpot conspirator we have had to deal with? I think that may be you should wait until we have more details revealed before you slather on all the doom and gloom you can or maybe it was a mistake to even try to reason with you in the first place. But who knows maybe you will be right after all (though probably not) either way we are not going to simply lie down and give up when so much of the future of economic independence is at stake.
Also my bad before I messed up the link to the blog http://blog.emunie.com

r0ach

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1000

Quote from: lovely89 on September 03, 2015, 06:09:56 AM

Quote from: r0ach on September 03, 2015, 04:56:47 AM

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 10:22:55 PM

There has been extensive testing and we already have robust error detection and correction, you would know this if you read our recent blog post which covers some of these concerns you mentioned
http://www.blog.emunie.com/

Let's say a state actor or rogue ISP decides to shape traffic to fragment the network for an extended period of time. I remember Dan talking about some arbitrary time limit built into the system that was rather short to cover network latency that was not covered by this. If the network becomes fragmented into several different pieces this way, let's say three similar sized groups, what was the reference point governing the "longest chain" so to speak? Is it the group with the highest reputation? And is that reputation derived from averaging the entire group, or can you have just one guy with extremely high reputation making it a consensus of only...one person.

Fork consensus was not discussed enough at all when it's probably the most important part of any platform. Dan kind of brushed it off like forks aren't going to be a problem when they definitely can be, especially with ISP traffic shaping and port blocking out the wazoo nowadays.

Comcast Doesn't Give A F*ck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMcny_pixDw

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12242079

Pretty sure you already read this. Wait for technical paper if you want more detail. Let's not go in circles.

I remember that post now but wasn't thinking about state actor attacks at the time: (n/3)-1.

Emunie seems trivial for a state actor to destroy completely compared to PoW, PoS, and DPoS. If the state actor comes for PoW, you're just screwed temporarily. If they come for PoS, you're screwed permanently, but they will probably make you rich in the process before it goes down. If they go for DPoS, you won't see it coming, then it just implodes (unless all nodes are non-anonymous NGO or something like Tim Swanson says). If they come for Emunie, the state actor attack doesn't even cost them anything since they already own or indirectly have control over all the infrastructure, then you just get a BSOD screen and it never works again.

lovely89

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: r0ach on September 03, 2015, 04:56:47 AM

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 10:22:55 PM

There has been extensive testing and we already have robust error detection and correction, you would know this if you read our recent blog post which covers some of these concerns you mentioned
http://www.blog.emunie.com/

Let's say a state actor or rogue ISP decides to shape traffic to fragment the network for an extended period of time. I remember Dan talking about some arbitrary time limit built into the system that was rather short to cover network latency that was not covered by this. If the network becomes fragmented into several different pieces this way, let's say three similar sized groups, what was the reference point governing the "longest chain" so to speak? Is it the group with the highest reputation? And is that reputation derived from averaging the entire group, or can you have just one guy with extremely high reputation making it a consensus of only...one person.

Fork consensus was not discussed enough at all when it's probably the most important part of any platform. Dan kind of brushed it off like forks aren't going to be a problem when they definitely can be, especially with ISP traffic shaping and port blocking out the wazoo nowadays.

Comcast Doesn't Give A F*ck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMcny_pixDw

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.12242079

Pretty sure you already read this. Wait for technical paper if you want more detail. Let's not go in circles.

r0ach

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1000

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 10:22:55 PM

There has been extensive testing and we already have robust error detection and correction, you would know this if you read our recent blog post which covers some of these concerns you mentioned
http://www.blog.emunie.com/

Let's say a state actor or rogue ISP decides to shape traffic to fragment the network for an extended period of time. I remember Dan talking about some arbitrary time limit built into the system that was rather short to cover network latency that was not covered by this. If the network becomes fragmented into several different pieces this way, let's say three similar sized groups, what was the reference point governing the "longest chain" so to speak? Is it the group with the highest reputation? And is that reputation derived from averaging the entire group, or can you have just one guy with extremely high reputation making it a consensus of only...one person.

Fork consensus was not discussed enough at all when it's probably the most important part of any platform. Dan kind of brushed it off like forks aren't going to be a problem when they definitely can be, especially with ISP traffic shaping and port blocking out the wazoo nowadays.

Comcast Doesn't Give A F*ck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMcny_pixDw

lovely89

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: monsterer on September 03, 2015, 02:10:40 AM

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 05:54:41 PM

Again the purpose isn't to stop the correct or incorrect revaluation of the currency, it is simply in place to increase the quality of life for the majority of users by attempting to provide some form of logical or at least mathematical attempts at price stabilization without arbitrarily deciding the value of the currency. Furthermore any increase in the total amount of emu will be split up as 10% for the buffer and 90% as interest and payment for processing transactions.

Quality of life will not be improved if the price stabilisation is broken. Furthermore, you cannot 'arbitrarily' decide the value of the currency in a free market.

The market maker model of price stabilisation works by creating huge buy/sell walls around your currency valuation price; the idea being that, since the system is the majority holder on both sides of the market, it would be impossible for anyone to eat through those walls. However, you can see where this starts to break down if the system is not the majority holder, or starts losing it's majority over time.

Let's wait for the complete details in this before we pointlessly debate.

monsterer

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1007

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 05:54:41 PM

Again the purpose isn't to stop the correct or incorrect revaluation of the currency, it is simply in place to increase the quality of life for the majority of users by attempting to provide some form of logical or at least mathematical attempts at price stabilization without arbitrarily deciding the value of the currency. Furthermore any increase in the total amount of emu will be split up as 10% for the buffer and 90% as interest and payment for processing transactions.

Quality of life will not be improved if the price stabilisation is broken. Furthermore, you cannot 'arbitrarily' decide the value of the currency in a free market.

The market maker model of price stabilisation works by creating huge buy/sell walls around your currency valuation price; the idea being that, since the system is the majority holder on both sides of the market, it would be impossible for anyone to eat through those walls. However, you can see where this starts to break down if the system is not the majority holder, or starts losing it's majority over time.

theprofileth

full member

Activity: 239

Merit: 100

Socialist Cryptocurrency Devote

There has been extensive testing and we already have robust error detection and correction, you would know this if you read our recent blog post which covers some of these concerns you mentioned
http://blog.emunie.com

r0ach

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1000

Quote from: theprofileth on September 02, 2015, 05:54:41 PM

this means that 45% of all new emu created will be given as interest to all account holders based on their portion of the total currency available

Getting a non-deterministic number and set of nodes that can expand or contract the money supply at will without forking or having enormous security risks doesn't sound possible. Bitshares, which is overly complex compared to most cryptos, is simpler than this and forks around 5-10 per day. I guess this is the benefit of the ledger system not using blocks? Everything is kept at millisecond interval delay from each other? It doesn't sound very "anti-fragile" though. Isn't this kind of setup way more vulnerable to attacks by state actors? What do you do if the state decides to disconnect the network from other parts of the network for extended periods of time?

Relying on a steady state network and not having fork resolution being the backbone of the system itself seems like it creates major problems in this area.

theprofileth

full member

Activity: 239

Merit: 100

Socialist Cryptocurrency Devote

Quote from: monsterer on September 02, 2015, 07:32:47 AM

Quote from: Fuserleer on September 02, 2015, 06:46:04 AM

Currency trades will be performed within the integrated DEX (3rd party exchanges are supported also, but have no impact on the economics), with tokens representing other world currencies. These tokens are pegged to the respective currency and can be converted to actual fiat currency via a network of on/off ramps through another system component called TRAID.

Initially the buffer will hold only EMU, users will "buy in" with USD tokens, that they can then trade on the DEX for EMU. This is the basic mechanism with which the buffers obtain other asset types.

These tokens can also be used to buy goods/services if the merchant wishes to accept them. World currency tokens can not be traded freely in the DEX, 1 USD token is worth 1 real USD.

The system must maintain a chain wide majority holdings of EMU for this to be effective, and also be fortunate enough that the initial sell off of EMU for USD tokens does not then lead to a situation where the system is not a chain wide majority holder of USD tokens.

Obviously there is counterparty risk associated with the (multiple?) gateways... Will each gateway have its own USD token? If not, how do you get them to agree on the value?

Again the purpose isn't to stop the correct or incorrect revaluation of the currency, it is simply in place to increase the quality of life for the majority of users by attempting to provide some form of logical or at least mathematical attempts at price stabilization without arbitrarily deciding the value of the currency. Furthermore any increase in the total amount of emu will be split up as 10% for the buffer and 90% as interest and payment for processing transactions. The interest and processing payments are (last I heard) in equal portions meaning they each qualify for 45% of all new emu generated. Furthermore this means that 45% of all new emu created will be given as interest to all account holders based on their portion of the total currency available. This means that while some will probably attempt to short their interest or payments, those who hold will actually be building capital proportional to their holdings.

monsterer

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Fuserleer on September 02, 2015, 06:46:04 AM

Currency trades will be performed within the integrated DEX (3rd party exchanges are supported also, but have no impact on the economics), with tokens representing other world currencies. These tokens are pegged to the respective currency and can be converted to actual fiat currency via a network of on/off ramps through another system component called TRAID.

Initially the buffer will hold only EMU, users will "buy in" with USD tokens, that they can then trade on the DEX for EMU. This is the basic mechanism with which the buffers obtain other asset types.

These tokens can also be used to buy goods/services if the merchant wishes to accept them. World currency tokens can not be traded freely in the DEX, 1 USD token is worth 1 real USD.

The system must maintain a chain wide majority holdings of EMU for this to be effective, and also be fortunate enough that the initial sell off of EMU for USD tokens does not then lead to a situation where the system is not a chain wide majority holder of USD tokens.

Obviously there is counterparty risk associated with the (multiple?) gateways... Will each gateway have its own USD token? If not, how do you get them to agree on the value?

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

Quote from: monsterer on September 02, 2015, 03:14:14 AM

Quote from: Fuserleer on September 01, 2015, 04:35:21 PM

For example if a party was to come and sell a lot of EMU in one shot at a sub market price, where the result of selling that volume would sink the price below a system wide agreed lower threshold, then the system itself would buy that EMU with assets it holds (if it has enough) at the threshold level.

This dominant market maker model of price stabilisation is similar to how nuBits works - the trick is to have more money available than anyone else in the market at all times in order to manipulate the price. However, although eMunie's MM will have more of its native token available than anyone else, where will it get the liquidity for the other side of the market from?

For that matter, where are these trades taking place?

Currency trades will be performed within the integrated DEX (3rd party exchanges are supported also, but have no impact on the economics), with tokens representing other world currencies. These tokens are pegged to the respective currency and can be converted to actual fiat currency via a network of on/off ramps through another system component called TRAID.

Initially the buffer will hold only EMU, users will "buy in" with USD tokens, that they can then trade on the DEX for EMU. This is the basic mechanism with which the buffers obtain other asset types.

These tokens can also be used to buy goods/services if the merchant wishes to accept them. World currency tokens can not be traded freely in the DEX, 1 USD token is worth 1 real USD.

ExtremeFacials.com

member

Activity: 190

Merit: 10

Quote from: Fuserleer on September 02, 2015, 06:35:26 AM

"Listen, and understand! That troll is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever!" - Kyle Reese

fuckin' A Mr Fuserleer!! There's a lot of scared mofo's round these parts trying to muddy the waters. eMunie is the GAS, just do ya research and it's obvious EMU is a solid currency for everyday people

Fuserleer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1016

I wouldn't give the trolls the satisfaction of an argument.

There is an endless queue of them waiting to get on the same carousel over and over, as they've all read some post(s) from some crack pot on "the interweb" so it must be true and taken over simple fact. Anyone who matters will perform their own fact finding and come to the correct conclusion.

"Listen, and understand! That troll is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever!" - Kyle Reese

Topic: [EMUNIE] One small step for transactions, one giant leap for crypto - page 2. (Read 5626 times)