Pages:
Author

Topic: MC2: A cryptocurrency based on a hybrid PoW/PoS system - page 52. (Read 195190 times)

sr. member
Activity: 391
Merit: 250
Random idea for the POW system, based off of a comment someone else made, and something I've been thinking of:

Difficulty only does one thing: regulate the number of coins given out, as solving the blockchain at difficulty 1 (even in Scrypt) would be rather easy.

Would it be feasible, then, to merge the POW/POS system with something that has real-world tangible value? What I'm talking about is merging with an entity that does something of great value in the real world, such as Folding@Home.

In such an example, the user would have to submit POW to both the blockchain, but also submit work units to F@H. The difficulty for the POW/POS would be extremely low, increasing at a much slower rate, as F@H folding points are much harder to come by. Additionally, it may further discourage FGPA/ASIC units, as protein folding would require dual-use systems such as CPUs and GPUs (which would also make CPUs generally more valuable, as the gap between CPUs and GPUs for F@H are closer, although GPUs are still notably better).

It would also open up one previously-unused portion of the market: Nvidia GPUs. NVidia GPUs are much faster than ATI GPUs for F@h, and would essentially equalize their abilities, as an NVidia GPU can fold about 3-4 times faster than a comparable ATI GPU (with the ATI GPU being able to hash at a similarly better rate).

I know this would be an out-there concept, but I think tying work into a dual-usage system may be incredibly lucrative, as it would not only spur on coinage, but scientific research as well. One could theoretically surmise that eventually, the MC2 coin could accept other projects similar to F@h as part of its dual POW system, allowing other heavy-duty scientific applications to use the crowd-sourced computing power. Think of it as killing two birds with one stone - all the while, likely rendering FGPA/ASICs useless.
newbie
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
This looks very promising.

Bitcoin was a great idea with great execution, but after 4 years it has turned out that there's huge room for improvements to be implemented, or incorporated in a new coin.

Curently none of the altcoins have achieved any -really- significant improvement over the original idea. Netcoin can be the Bitcoin 2.0, if properly designed.
hero member
Activity: 617
Merit: 559
Opening up funding via shareholder option purchasable in USD or Alt coins would be a clever way of getting more of the community involved prior to the launch. I would be interested in seeing this coin come to fruition however I fear I cannot contribute on the developmental side. This is an avenue that should be explored, there appears to be interest in it Taco.



newbie
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
About that BOINC thing, very great idea!
I was discussing this the other day.

I also have this idea of launching this coin with some sort of GUI that can configure the wallet in a way that can create cold wallets in a jiffy.
With the current crypto-currency's it is a pain to create 100% safe wallets, and far to difficult for the average Joe PC user.
If we can come up with a solution to create 100% safe wallets for end-users with a much easier process then the current one for litecoin and bitcoin, it can possibly reach a larger audience. The idea that anyone can create a 100% safe wallet (hassle free) that people can trust I think is a very important.
Marketing wise this is also a very good unique and strong selling point.

I picture this to be like a simple GUI which follows you through the steps of creating an offline cold storage on a CD drive, USB, chip whatever.
Maybe even create some sort of bootable ISO file with pre-installed software so people can safely create an offline wallet in a safe environment.
All they have to do is download the software, install the software on a USB drive/CD, boot that USB drive, follow the steps of the GUI and voilla, they created a safe wallet.

This is just the start of an idea, please give feedback and comment on this.
sr. member
Activity: 383
Merit: 250
EDIT: also a GUI that enables anyone to mine easily, making mining more accessible for the masses = more people using the coin Smiley


I totally agree with this...
GUI should be something like Bitminter, it's UserFriendly²
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1000
Reality is stranger than fiction
Our ideas and dreams and actions make us who we are  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000
This has probably already been mentioned but I really think it would be awesome to enable merge mining that also supports projects like SETI@home and other BOINC projects like helping find a cure for cancer.

Integrate this with the GUI of your coin so that miner can drag and select a percentage of their hashing power to contribute to the BOINC network (from 0% to 100%).

If the coin gets really popular this implementation could do so much good for the world it's unbelievable.

EDIT: also a GUI that enables anyone to mine easily, making mining more accessible for the masses = more people using the coin Smiley

Yes! Merge this with something like folding@home or SETI@home so that while we're doing this we're doing something meaningful for others as well.

So many members of the crypto community are techno idealists who want to change the world, I really think this is really worth doing Smiley The Bitcoin network is so powerful - imagine if this coin reached those levels and had this integration Smiley I'm so excited with this idea!
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
This has probably already been mentioned but I really think it would be awesome to enable merge mining that also supports projects like SETI@home and other BOINC projects like helping find a cure for cancer.

Integrate this with the GUI of your coin so that miner can drag and select a percentage of their hashing power to contribute to the BOINC network (from 0% to 100%).

If the coin gets really popular this implementation could do so much good for the world it's unbelievable.

EDIT: also a GUI that enables anyone to mine easily, making mining more accessible for the masses = more people using the coin Smiley


Yes! Merge this with something like folding@home or SETI@home so that while we're doing this we're doing something meaningful for others as well.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000
This has probably already been mentioned but I really think it would be awesome to enable merge mining that also supports projects like SETI@home and other BOINC projects like helping find a cure for cancer.

Integrate this with the GUI of your coin so that miner can drag and select a percentage of their hashing power to contribute to the BOINC network (from 0% to 100%).

If the coin gets really popular this implementation could do so much good for the world it's unbelievable.

EDIT: also a GUI that enables anyone to mine easily, making mining more accessible for the masses = more people using the coin Smiley

newbie
Activity: 53
Merit: 0
NetCoin:

Creative innovation.
Potential crowdsource funding.
Excitement among the miners.
Top-notch developer.

What is there not to like?!  This coin will be a winner.

 
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005
What are the benefits of Proof of Activity vs Proof of Stake? Why not do a hybrid of all 3 to get the best of all 3?

In short,
no chain bloat from tons of PoS blocks and more secure.  Blocks come regularly as opposed to sporadically as per PPC.

Forums and chat coming soon.
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 510
Just to let everyone know, it's not dead and I'm still working on the theory.  It's taking me a while to develop the new proof of stake/proof of stake hybrid system, but I want to be confident that it can provide 4 minute secure confirmations to try to make it the fastest cryptocurrency available, without having to compromise security.  And that's honestly a hard task, but I think I might be onto something using a new system of secure block signing with stakeholders.  So, stay tuned.  It will not be anything like the PoW/PoS system that PPC uses and will not borrow code from that, but more similar to cunicula's proposed "Proof of Activity" system but faster and more efficient.

What are the benefits of Proof of Activity vs Proof of Stake? Why not do a hybrid of all 3 to get the best of all 3?
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
You've got me super uber excited man! Faster currency? and a unique PoW/PoS code different from PPC? This is going to be the next big thing.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005
Just to let everyone know, it's not dead and I'm still working on the theory.  It's taking me a while to develop the new proof of stake/proof of stake hybrid system, but I want to be confident that it can provide 4 minute secure confirmations to try to make it the fastest cryptocurrency available, without having to compromise security.  And that's honestly a hard task, but I think I might be onto something using a new system of secure block signing with stakeholders.  So, stay tuned.  It will not be anything like the PoW/PoS system that PPC uses and will not borrow code from that, but more similar to cunicula's proposed "Proof of Activity" system but faster and more efficient.
sr. member
Activity: 391
Merit: 250
I think some sort of share system would be fantastic, and would gladly donate some cash to the project.

I think a percentage of TX fees for a specific amount of time would be a smart idea - not just for investors/shareholders, but for the coin itself. I think that the developers of the coin should get some sort of benefit from it.

Say, 50% of TX fees go to miners, 20% go to a development fund (which can be allocated democratically through a vote-based model), and 30% go to shareholders and/or some sort of PoS system.

Depending on when you need investment, I may be down for $1,000 USD or an equivalent in LTC if you'd take LTC.
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 510
Hi guys,

Updates should be coming later this week.  There's a lot to rewrite in the draft paper, and I need to run it by some people first.

Notably, iddo mentioned an alternative PoS system and, reading it now, I came up independently with a similar solution over the past month.  If it works it may allow four minute confirmation and solve the 51% vulnerability, which I'm sure would be desirable for a lot of people.  But it needs to be figured out further and a lot of people will need to go over it to ensure it's secure.

I want to rewrite the hashing algorithm so that the hash itself uses all the different algorithms.  I've also been going through research papers to try to find the algorithms that use AES code fragments (modern CPU friendly), runs slowly on FPGA implementations (almost all SHA3 candidates like this were eliminated for this reason), and then to implement the hash algorithm and ensure that the following parameters are met:
1) That approximately half of the cycles in the scrypt loop are spent computing hashes of various types, while the other half are spent in memory access steps.
2) That using scrypt with parameters of N that are not 2^n is okay -- hashes compute fine if you remove the error checking in the implementations in C that I have, but I can't be sure that this does not lead to any problems until I step through the code.
3) Goal throughput of 5 KH/s or more average on a CPU to make sure verifying that verifying the blockchain is not impossible for the end user client.  N range will be adjusted accordingly.

As far as GitHub is concerned, there won't be a fork started until the theory behind the chain is solid.

Eventually a kickstarter may be formed and I'll aim for $50,000 or so to pay potential developers.  There's no way I can do this on my own, I'm paid right now for unrelated contracted research so I won't have a ton of free time over the next 12 months to dedicate to this.

I'll go through this thread later this week and try to respond to everyone's comments and suggestions.  Thanks for the interest!

My advice on the funding, definitely aim higher. See if you can be funded in Bitcoin as well as Kickstarter because if the price of Bitcoin goes up you'll have plenty of cash to fund development. It also ties development into the success of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general which is a good thing imo.

Something like this http://www.raisebitcoins.com/ https://bitcoinstarter.com/
in combination with Kickstarter. I think one way to get funding off the ground and I mentioned it before is to find a way to offer somehow a return on the investment people make so that they feel it's in their self interest to invest in the development of your coin.

The same way mining is incentivized as a way to protect the network, development should also be incentivized. This is something which could be built into the project itself.

Here are some ideas I can propose and others here tell me what you all think about it.

Proposition 1: Suppose we all pledge X amount of Bitcoin to the project as a way to reserve shares in the project. A certain percentage of transaction fees early on can go to paying for the development of the project itself and toward paying the share holders. If done right then this project could get hundreds or perhaps even thousands in Bitcoin from initial investors on top of Kickstarter. The price of the shares should be cheap early on for early supporters but slowly rise in price later on for people who decide to come in with big money late. The point of this proposition is to somehow find a way to tie in an economic incentive for people to pledge X amount of Bitcoin or cash to the project, if it can accomplish this it will generate more than $50,000 easily.

Proposition 2: Suppose we don't use a transaction fee model but instead use a sort of privileged mining model where those who want to mine early must pay to reserve a spot on the mailing list? The problem with this would be accusations of premining so it's not the best solution.

Proposition 3: Allow investors to be among the first to BUY these coins prior to them reaching the exchanges. This would likely generate some interest but I don't know how this would be set up.

Anyway there are many more potential propositions but from what I see in the Bitcoin community the best way to fund stuff like this isn't to ask for donations but to provide incentives to make people invest. I see it a lot with mining companies offering ASICs to people who buy some lesser product or to people who preorder etc. Why can't these mechanisms be used to support this project as well?
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 510
I vote for the name NetCoin, I think it sounds badass and it's a suitable name that I really feel will get traction with everyone in the mining community as well as the mainstream media wheeler and dealers who will pull a BTC with this type of coin lol.

Also do we have any ballpark idea as to when this coin will be released, I am an eager beaver!

Netcoin does sound good.  I agree.
legendary
Activity: 1118
Merit: 1004
If it is NetCoin, do we call it NTC? Very nice IMO.

NTC is a nice acronym, agreed.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
The cryptocoin watcher
Replying to follow, and because I love this proposal.

Other altcoins built out of nowhere standing on the shoulders of giants are like Jurassic Park, the first people to enter think it's going to be the awesomest thing ever, then they get devoured by the raptors.

newbie
Activity: 54
Merit: 0
If it is NetCoin, do we call it NTC? Very nice IMO.
Pages:
Jump to: