Topic: rpietila Altcoin Observer - page 80. (Read 387491 times)

But there are experts on both sides. Vitalik just recently being a convert. And SlipperySlope here as well.

I know gmaxwell has posted about 'Nothing at Stake' attacks, but that appears now to be a solveable issue. Infact, Vitalik wrote a whole article about them and it appears as a result of his article sparking debate, a solution was found.

I certainly don't claim to have the anwser, but it would appear that this is something that's headed towards being solved. Unless of course AnonyMint is correct and it's totally unworkable.

If it comes down to one entity controlling 51% of the money supply and that's the main issue, then I think it's already better than PoW since theoretically it should cost more to mount that sort of attack than attempt a similar 51% attack on a PoW network(edit: unless someone can borrow 51% of the money supply on leverage). If there are other issues then of course all of those will need to be solved.

One way to attack a POS coin is to hedge a 51% attack using derivatives. In this scenario the attacker purchases the coin and hedges the position by selling short in the derivatives market. The net effect is that attacker's stake does not equal the attacker's exposure. The main reason this kind of attack has not happened is that none of the POS coins have developed to the point where a strong and liquid derivatives markets has developed.

You mean we just skip straight to you possessing 51% of the coins?

rpietila mentioned it's cheaper to attack PoS, that's economical soundness, I was answering to him.

Perhaps you should keep asking on nxtforum.org to get answers, be persistent, if you're interested, don't expect being spoon-fed answers.

I only need a small fraction of the active stake to forge the occasional block.

My question remains, what happens when many nodes disagree on whether some block is valid?

You need coins to forge, a lot of them, that's why it's called Proof-of-Stake Why would you destroy your own investment if you spent billions of USD to buy up 51% of coins (or 90% of coins when TF is implemented)?

As I pointed out in the other bitcointalk thread, my basic NXT PoS soundness questions raised in

https://nxtforum.org/general/forging-questions/

remain unanswered.

So one attack vector is forging with timestamps artifiically advanced by almost 15 secs,
and having many nodes disagree on whether the new block is valid or not...

Definition of a scam: something you haven't profited from and don't hope to

Can you elaborate? I have observed exchange price action and noticed that when 1% of NXT is purchased at market price, this drives the price up 25%. If that is extrapolated to 51%, the funding would have to be in billions of USD, not to mention there is no single place where that amount of coins can be purchased. At the same time there are calculations that buying up hardware to control 51% of Bitcoin hashrate only requires $500 mln.

If 99% of all PoS coins shut down and went home the only thing that would happen is people would stop losing money buying the pump-and-dump shitcoin-of-the-day from the Altcoin Announcments forum.

The greatly increased scam potential alone that has resulted in almost all new shitcoins being PoS coins should be enough to scare away most careful investors. But if you want to bet on trying to find that 1% of PoS coins that are not outright scams and on PoS being sound enough to actually work despite warnings from nearly all competent analysts, go right ahead. And I really do mean this. Being willing to go up against the prevailing wisdom of experts is a great thing and important to progress. Just know that the odds are very much against you.

My understanding is that PoS has attack vectors that are not present in PoW, giving the attacker a cheaper way to totally control/destroy the network. On the other hand, even credit cards "work", in a way. Nothing is perfect, even PoW.

If he says so, it has to be true. PoS should shut down all operations within 24 hours and go home.

AnonyMint seems absolutely convinced that PoS cannot work. You both seem confident in your respective opinions. Does your CPoS system address any of his concerns?

Yes, these will be four premined altcoins, in which users will find their coins present if acquired before the date of the fork. The fork simply copies the original blockchain at a certain announced moment in time, then creates new blocks without effort according to the coin's specifications, e.g. Bitcoin - every 10 minutes. In CPoS, geographically dispersed, redundant full nodes take turns creating new blocks as a certain nomadic software agent periodically migrates from node to node. Non-generating nodes replicate and verify the canonical blockchain. The core code for each altcoin, e.g. bitcoind for Bitcoin, is run as a slave by CPoS which provides the encrypted and authenticated network (TLS/SSL) between nodes.

My goal is to ultimately persuade users to migrate from the original coin networks to the respective CPoS networks by virtue of customer service, improved performance, e.g. effectively immediate confirmations, and 100x lower fees. Wallet and service owners should be able to reconfigure their seed node addresses to join the CPoS network.

By design, CPoS does not have the well known vulnerabilities of Satoshi's Bitcoin, e.g. 51% attack, Sybil attack, Finney attack, lost transactions, miner-ignored transactions, selfish mining, partitioned network, etc. Rather CPoS has a set of new to-be-found vulnerabilities because the Texai code base has never been used in production. DDoS attacks will be mitigated by paid-for DDoS traffic filtering at each full node. Best-effort volunteers operate the existing PoW networks, whereas CPoS operators will be paid professionals.

I expect CPoS altcoin prices to be very low at first, growing in proportion to the square of their respective transaction quantities. As the the CPoS altcoins grow in value, the system be able to keep pace with transaction growth by adding more paid-for full nodes. I would vet the first operators, prioritizing system administrator and data security skills. I suppose monthly payments of $5000 in coin should suffice to attract the talent CPoS needs to provision the specified hardware and bandwidth. As block rewards grow with price increase, the CPoS system would pay C++ developers to join the Bitcoin Core team. I believe, for example, that blockchain spent transaction pruning as proposed by Satoshi would be a valuable contribution by CPoS to the cryptocurrency community.

The Texai cognitive architecture should become a compelling platform for third-party application development, as the various Java software agents will pay each other with bitcoin microtransactions for micro-services rendered, and will pay each local operator for the agent's fair share of the infrastructure.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ai-coin-development-diary-584719

It was there for the whole day. If you are patient (and have 100 BTC), you can drive XMR price to 0.005 without spending a dime in this market.

Lighten up already, it was a joke: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stVIWf03XrQ

So if I'm understanding right you plan to do a hard-fork of the Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Namecoin blockchains? How does that work exactly? People will have their balances from their orginial blockchains on your CPoS forks as well?

Has this ever happened before? Is the intention to lure people over to these new networks where their balances are duplicated?

It's an interesting idea, that's for sure.

Any talked about crypti?

You angry and blind. You trying to insult me, just because you have nothing to say in substance.

I have my own reasons of being anonymous, and people who i work with know exactly why, and this have no relations with your fantasy about botnets.

Sorry for off-topic.

I would love to see him help too, especially when a fellow Greek ask for his help!

If you're tired of holding XMR, there's 35k of liquidity at the top of the book on polo right now

EDIT: well, i guess there just aren't any more XMR for sale at this price.  poor bidder.  hope he's patient.