Author

Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 108. (Read 387493 times)

legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1077
^ Will code for Bitcoins
August 04, 2014, 05:00:19 PM
Economic fact:

Mining cannot provide real returns.

And so cannot lottery. There's a few hundred times greater chance to be hit by lightning than to win the lottery, nevertheless world lottery revenues are around US$ 500 billion. Please read that figure again and say that to people who run every day to buy lottery tickets around the world.

People just love to get much from investing small, nothing attracts them more. Instead to bringing that to our advantage in cryptocurrencies, we did absolutely the opposite, making it harder and harder for average Joe to mine and we called that an improvement. Instead of making every computer (or a mobile phone) a miner, we have a relatively few giant mining farms which point close to 50% hashrate to CEX.io. 100% of altcoins are racing to get in the same situation fast.

I'm just saying that CPU-only mining is the *fastest* way to get general adoption. The only problem is it's really, really hard to get GPU/ASIC resistant algorithm, but that will be solved eventually.
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
August 04, 2014, 04:37:09 PM
As a result, they asymmetrically benefit from CPU-only coins as a mechanism to monetize stolen computer access.

This only applies if mining is clearly more profitable than any other activity.
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
August 04, 2014, 04:34:08 PM
Thinking that the average person is ever going to be able to profitably mine a CPU only coin seems like wishful thinking.

Economic fact:

Mining cannot provide real returns.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1077
^ Will code for Bitcoins
August 04, 2014, 04:18:17 PM
You are reading it wrong, modern dual/quad core ARM chips would mine with comparable mining power to ordinary botnet node, considering that they will mine while phone is absolutely idle (night) they may even be on par with desktop computers which have to do something else while they mine.

Botnet mining also needs to remain stealthy and fly under the radar.

Memory intensive PoWs are particularly troublesome because you cannot easily throttle RAM usage like you can CPU usage. Users are very likely to notice when you accidentally send their machine into swap-hell...

The idea is not to make users unaware of the mining software running, it's to make them easily configurable to run when the users do not mind it at all. There are API calls in Android (and I suppose on other mobile platforms also) to start an app only when the phone is on charger and not moved for some time. Once you wake up and grab your phone, the app can stop until the next night charging cycle. I doubt anyone would mind that, and if you can do something useful and get some value from using such an app many people would give it a go. Compare that with cost of entry to mine today. No wonder that cryptocoin penetration with general population is as low as it is now.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
August 04, 2014, 04:09:25 PM
The most important thing to learn from Cuckoo Cycle is that he's doing it *right* -- he's treating his proposed proof-of-work in the same way professionals treat proposals for encryption or hash algorithms by publishing a clear spec and implementation, soliciting comments, and even funding (from his own pocket, no less) further evaluation and analysis.  BEFORE it's used in a coin.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a coin as a testbed for a new algorithm. It is a case where the mining incentivizes something useful (testing and optimizing the algorithm), not unlike other coins where the mining process is intended to produce some useful scientific or mathematical result.

Where this ends up being bad is when the developer makes either dishonest or unsupported claims about the algorithm (e.g. "this won't be feasible to mine on a GPU") as opposed to being up front about the algorithm being experimental and unknown and seeing where it ends up.
legendary
Activity: 990
Merit: 1108
August 04, 2014, 04:08:39 PM
Thinking that the average person is ever going to be able to profitably mine a CPU only coin seems like wishful thinking.

People like to play in lotteries...
legendary
Activity: 990
Merit: 1108
August 04, 2014, 04:07:59 PM
You are reading it wrong, modern dual/quad core ARM chips would mine with comparable mining power to ordinary botnet node, considering that they will mine while phone is absolutely idle (night) they may even be on par with desktop computers which have to do something else while they mine.

Botnet mining also needs to remain stealthy and fly under the radar.

Memory intensive PoWs are particularly troublesome because you cannot easily throttle RAM usage like you can CPU usage. Users are very likely to notice when you accidentally send their machine into swap-hell...
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1002
amarha
August 04, 2014, 04:05:39 PM
Thinking that the average person is ever going to be able to profitably mine a CPU only coin seems like wishful thinking.
legendary
Activity: 990
Merit: 1108
August 04, 2014, 04:02:30 PM
Or have an emission curve with a slow, flat initial period before ramping up to real.

Imagine if XMR's curve had looked like:

days 0-30:  1 xmr/block
days 31-90:  1 + 16 * (day-30)/60) xmr/block
days 91 onwards:  using the existing XMR mechanism

I agree wholeheartedly. Except the reward should converge to something nonzero.
With some small percentage of coins inevitably getting lost every year,
perpetual debasement serves long-term security while avoiding deflation.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1077
^ Will code for Bitcoins
August 04, 2014, 03:55:37 PM
Having GPU miner as part of the release bundle at very launch has to be mandatory for coin to be considered as "fairly" launched. CPU2GPU ratio is irrelevant. Even if it is 1:1 it simply has to be released immediately.

I disagree. We are eagerly awaiting for a coin that would *never* have a GPU miner, only CPU. There are people working on this, and Cuckoo Cycle looks the most promising. First coin which achieves this may be a revolution, with millions of individual miners finally being able to get involved in cryptocurrency.

The botnets indeed eagerly await this.  I'm pretty sure this is a philosophically wrong goal, but we can debate that another time. Smiley

Botnets are unimportant and not an issue. How many +10k botnets are there? Even less +100k botnets, you can probably count them all manually. And only Android has +1Billion 30-day active users:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/25/google-now-has-1b-active-android-users/
All botnets combined are just drop in the sea if only a part of those mobile users got involved in mining while devices charge overnight. That's the best chance to bring cryptocurrency to the masses and scale the number of users by few orders of magnitude.

Mobile devices can only mine while plugged in.  Their relative mining power is still very small - 1 billion 32 bit 1.6ghz dual core ARM chips are not insignificant, but when operating at less than, say, 25% duty cycle, that's roughly the equivalent of a few tens of millions of powerful servers.  Most users won't mine, period -- the ROI is extremely small compared to the time & knowledge needed to set it up, unless the device "just did it" preconfigured.  (But that's close to a mobile phone botnet).

How many nodes are involved in botnets worldwide?  This list is very out of date, but listed the largest as having 30 *million* nodes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botnet#Historical_list_of_botnets

More importantly, remember that botnet operators are, in the most fundamental sense of the word, total assholes.  They waste someone else's resources to accomplish their own gain.  They don't pay power, they don't pay capex, etc.  As a result, they asymmetrically benefit from CPU-only coins as a mechanism to monetize stolen computer access.

You are reading it wrong, modern dual/quad core ARM chips would mine with comparable mining power to ordinary botnet node, considering that they will mine while phone is absolutely idle (night) they may even be on par with desktop computers which have to do something else while they mine. The larger the botnet, the shorter it last because they are easier to detect, so even if there are some of them which have multi-million nodes, what's that compared to thousands of millions of active mobile users?

I don't understand why do you think people would not mine if the mobile miner has an easy, mobile app style installation? Once they realize the potential, they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. People are not (that) stupid. We just need the right algorithm to be absolutely GPU resistant, and  Cuckoo Cycle is on the brink of being that. Once it happens, there will be no going back. The altcoin which achieves that will be a real silver to Bitcoin's gold.
legendary
Activity: 990
Merit: 1108
August 04, 2014, 03:53:37 PM
What are the opinions on cloak here?

They have a pretty nice logo...

legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1141
August 04, 2014, 03:45:45 PM
What are the opinions on cloak here?
dga
hero member
Activity: 737
Merit: 511
August 04, 2014, 03:32:17 PM
Having GPU miner as part of the release bundle at very launch has to be mandatory for coin to be considered as "fairly" launched. CPU2GPU ratio is irrelevant. Even if it is 1:1 it simply has to be released immediately.

I disagree. We are eagerly awaiting for a coin that would *never* have a GPU miner, only CPU. There are people working on this, and Cuckoo Cycle looks the most promising. First coin which achieves this may be a revolution, with millions of individual miners finally being able to get involved in cryptocurrency.

The botnets indeed eagerly await this.  I'm pretty sure this is a philosophically wrong goal, but we can debate that another time. Smiley

Botnets are unimportant and not an issue. How many +10k botnets are there? Even less +100k botnets, you can probably count them all manually. And only Android has +1Billion 30-day active users:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/25/google-now-has-1b-active-android-users/
All botnets combined are just drop in the sea if only a part of those mobile users got involved in mining while devices charge overnight. That's the best chance to bring cryptocurrency to the masses and scale the number of users by few orders of magnitude.

Mobile devices can only mine while plugged in.  Their relative mining power is still very small - 1 billion 32 bit 1.6ghz dual core ARM chips are not insignificant, but when operating at less than, say, 25% duty cycle, that's roughly the equivalent of a few tens of millions of powerful servers.  Most users won't mine, period -- the ROI is extremely small compared to the time & knowledge needed to set it up, unless the device "just did it" preconfigured.  (But that's close to a mobile phone botnet).

How many nodes are involved in botnets worldwide?  This list is very out of date, but listed the largest as having 30 *million* nodes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botnet#Historical_list_of_botnets

More importantly, remember that botnet operators are, in the most fundamental sense of the word, total assholes.  They waste someone else's resources to accomplish their own gain.  They don't pay power, they don't pay capex, etc.  As a result, they asymmetrically benefit from CPU-only coins as a mechanism to monetize stolen computer access.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1077
^ Will code for Bitcoins
August 04, 2014, 03:26:00 PM
Having GPU miner as part of the release bundle at very launch has to be mandatory for coin to be considered as "fairly" launched. CPU2GPU ratio is irrelevant. Even if it is 1:1 it simply has to be released immediately.

I disagree. We are eagerly awaiting for a coin that would *never* have a GPU miner, only CPU. There are people working on this, and Cuckoo Cycle looks the most promising. First coin which achieves this may be a revolution, with millions of individual miners finally being able to get involved in cryptocurrency.

The botnets indeed eagerly await this.  I'm pretty sure this is a philosophically wrong goal, but we can debate that another time. Smiley

Botnets are unimportant and not an issue. How many +10k botnets are there? There are even less +100k botnets, you can probably count them all manually. And only Android has +1Billion 30-day active users:
http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/25/google-now-has-1b-active-android-users/
All botnets combined are just drop in the sea if only a part of those mobile users got involved in mining while their devices charge overnight. That's the best chance to bring cryptocurrency to the masses and scale the number of users by few orders of magnitude.
dga
hero member
Activity: 737
Merit: 511
August 04, 2014, 03:19:26 PM
Having GPU miner as part of the release bundle at very launch has to be mandatory for coin to be considered as "fairly" launched. CPU2GPU ratio is irrelevant. Even if it is 1:1 it simply has to be released immediately.

I disagree. We are eagerly awaiting for a coin that would *never* have a GPU miner, only CPU. There are people working on this, and Cuckoo Cycle looks the most promising. First coin which achieves this may be a revolution, with millions of individual miners finally being able to get involved in cryptocurrency.

The botnets indeed eagerly await this.  I'm pretty sure this is a philosophically wrong goal, but we can debate that another time. Smiley

(n.b. -- I think there are GREAT uses for functions that have rough speed parity across hardware, but it's more from the perspective of things like key derivation, which is what scrypt was originally intended as, and not mining.)

And let's wait to decide about Cuckoo Cycle.  I haven't even started on the design of how I'd do it on the GPU -- I'm still trying to solidify some of the algorithmic issues behind the mining process before I try to take more of tromp's money.  We're still doing some back and forth about the time/memory tradeoffs, and I don't think the improvements are done yet:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=707879.40

The most important thing to learn from Cuckoo Cycle is that he's doing it *right* -- he's treating his proposed proof-of-work in the same way professionals treat proposals for encryption or hash algorithms by publishing a clear spec and implementation, soliciting comments, and even funding (from his own pocket, no less) further evaluation and analysis.  BEFORE it's used in a coin.
dga
hero member
Activity: 737
Merit: 511
August 04, 2014, 03:13:37 PM
How to turn a nice idea into a pile of shit in 4 hours:

http://minichain.info/address/CNCzEBdvxzKSsGGdeqdGv17zuyWLeyAFvw

Yea, that's quite a nice highly optimized GPU miner you have there.  This is like when Maxcoin launched with a couple guys having Nvidia miners on day 1 mining 5000x faster than everyone else.

XCN price is a train wreck waiting to happen until there's a long and reasonable explanation about that address.

All you really have to do is look at precedent we already have for coins where any hidden GPU miners are involved.  Every single one of those coins had apocalyptic price crashes from the initial price.  The coin is a complete gamble at the moment.  This concludes the XCN r0ach report.

Having GPU miner as part of the release bundle at very launch has to be mandatory for coin to be considered as "fairly" launched. CPU2GPU ratio is irrelevant. Even if it is 1:1 it simply has to be released immediately.


Or have an emission curve with a slow, flat initial period before ramping up to real.

Imagine if XMR's curve had looked like:

days 0-30:  1 xmr/block
days 31-90:  1 + 16 * (day-30)/60) xmr/block
days 91 onwards:  using the existing XMR mechanism

You'd have a flat 1 xmr/block initial period, followed by a linear ramp-up to full rate over the next two months, and then the long-term slowly decreasing function.

(The first time I saw something like this was Gatra's launch of Riecoin, which was incredibly fair in that regard, but he did it over a day or two instead of doing it over three months, as a mechanism not to guard against fast miners, but to ensure that word got to spread about the coin before the mining *really* started.)

It's like having a testnet available, but with a little money involved so that it still pays for people to develop the fast miners early, and to create opportunities for them to leak out and someone to open source them.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1077
^ Will code for Bitcoins
August 04, 2014, 03:12:22 PM
Having GPU miner as part of the release bundle at very launch has to be mandatory for coin to be considered as "fairly" launched. CPU2GPU ratio is irrelevant. Even if it is 1:1 it simply has to be released immediately.

I disagree. We are eagerly awaiting for a coin that would *never* have a GPU miner, only CPU. There are people working on this, and Cuckoo Cycle looks the most promising. First coin which achieves this may be a revolution, with millions of individual miners finally being able to get involved in cryptocurrency.
sr. member
Activity: 299
Merit: 250
August 04, 2014, 02:21:29 PM
How to turn a nice idea into a pile of shit in 4 hours:

http://minichain.info/address/CNCzEBdvxzKSsGGdeqdGv17zuyWLeyAFvw

Yea, that's quite a nice highly optimized GPU miner you have there.  This is like when Maxcoin launched with a couple guys having Nvidia miners on day 1 mining 5000x faster than everyone else.

XCN price is a train wreck waiting to happen until there's a long and reasonable explanation about that address.

All you really have to do is look at precedent we already have for coins where any hidden GPU miners are involved.  Every single one of those coins had apocalyptic price crashes from the initial price.  The coin is a complete gamble at the moment.  This concludes the XCN r0ach report.

Having GPU miner as part of the release bundle at very launch has to be mandatory for coin to be considered as "fairly" launched. CPU2GPU ratio is irrelevant. Even if it is 1:1 it simply has to be released immediately.
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
August 04, 2014, 01:41:57 PM
Do you see Monero as a buy right now?

The average cost basis of Monero holders is BTC0.00421 currently. That means that people are on average 17% underwater. No significant group with significantly cheaper coins exist - only 30% have bought in cheaper than the current price.

When assessing if something is a "buy right now", I would say that no much further dumping is likely.
hero member
Activity: 966
Merit: 1003
August 04, 2014, 12:56:11 PM
All you really have to do is look at precedent we already have for coins where any hidden GPU miners are involved.  Every single one of those coins had apocalyptic price crashes from the initial price.  The coin is a complete gamble at the moment.  This concludes the XCN r0ach report.

This time it will be different.


Private GPU miner is extremely harmful for the economy, XCN community should get a public GPU miner ASAP.

Noo.. it's a way to pay that small group of display driver fiddling nerds the BTC they deserve for their skillz. Over and over again.

10 release/find a coin with a new exotic PoW algo
20 create optimized miner
30 mine shitloads
40 sell miner
50 dump coins
60 goto 10
Jump to: