Topic: Slimcoin | First Proof of Burn currency | Decentralized Web - page 62. (Read 137085 times)

@eddycurrent - yeah, thanks for your help, would be good to see wallet, faster loading times.

Btw. @ksdme tested BDB 5.X version, and it speeds up only a little bit ~10%.

Edit: If SPV wallet aka Electrum-like is possible?
Or is it a problem like here described? https://www.reddit.com/r/blackcoin/comments/2e0d7m/lightweight_spv_clients_for_blackcoin_or_other_pos/

Btw. Bitcoin Core 0.15 still uses BDB4.8, as default lib.

Hello all,

New binarys for armhf(V7) are available. The rest will be available in the next week or so. I am still working on the automated cross compile system.

Regarding the future of Slimcoin, I would be in favour of developing it as a cryptocurrency separate from other codebases such as Bitcoin's and Peercoin's to allow more flexibility in what features are available, however I am aware that this may not be viable as this would require much more development work. I am starting to have a look at the codebase, to see if I can update the wallet's interface and make the wallet more responsive.

Regards

Yep, pre-mined coins, many ICOS, Tron - the "vedette" of the week -  is also a very, very suspicious case (they copied part of another whitepaper for their "decentralized web", and their model would not provide much more than what would be possible with our web2web ) ... But I think Bitconnect is one of the worst of all with their HYIP (to not use the "P" word) scheme ...

Yes. Until I fixed the seeding issue you (and all other people that want to test web2web) should do the following:

- code a HTML site (a text file with "Hello World" or something similar is enough, however). It must be, for now, one single page, but it can contain inline CSS, SVG and encoded images, and maybe even use external stylesheets from an openly accessible web server.
- add it to WebTorrent (download here) and seed it
- copy the magnet link in WebTorrent and remove all trackers (so only the magnet://btih:infohash part stays there)
- open the Slimcoin client & wait until it syncs
- "inscribe" the magnet link to the blockchain.
- copy the SLM address from where you sent the transaction that inscribed the shortened magnet link
- open https://d5000.github.io/web2web/gateway.html
- and paste the SLM address there.

Obviously, that is still pretty complicated; I have some ideas how this could be done in 1 or 2 steps with a very simple tool, but first the Fuseki server must be stabilized and the seeding problem solved.

Once the most significant problems are solved, I'll change the headline of the OP of this thread and include "Test the decentralized web!" or similar

It's not only bitconnect, tho.

There are several cryptos right now, which I pressurably think are scams or get-rich quick schemes for developers.

Thanks, for your info @d5000, can you provide link for it ? Is it the same as it was?

Coinsmarkets is down (again...), so I hope yobit, will list us.

The Fuseki instance is now finally working correctly, so it's usually 100 blocks behind the Slimcoin blockchain. I haven't solved the seeding problem of the test site though (I could seed it from my personal computer, there it seems to work, but it would be offline half of the day then ...). So for testing, it's maybe better if anybody uses his/her own test inscriptions/sites for web2web.

You mean the economic consequences of "Proof of burn" (e.g. long-term-investment incentive, speculations about a "stabilizing effect", "users control supply" etc.), right? I can write something, but please give me some time

A hard fork would be possible, but the problem is that there must be a client that includes both protocols (old and new), so at least one stable group switches "together" to the new chain.
The snapshot -> new genesis block approach (like Bitcoin Gold did it with Bitcoin) would be surely much simpler technically (for the developers), but has its own flaws - all services (exchanges etc.) would have to stop working and reimplement the new chain, and there would be a time where Slimcoin would be "sleeping" (between the snapshot and the blockchain start). That doesn't mean it's impossible, but it must be carefully planned.

That would also be my proposal, it would be the path with less pressure for developers.

@gjhiggins: Thank you again for your insights. And for the link to the Bitconnect case. I think it's a shame for the crypto community that such a coin is placed that high in terms of "market capitalization", but it illustrates the greed that's governing the scene these times.

Yeah, I think you told, me sometime ago, that to update codebase it would mean to create a new coin.

Even tho, I thought it wouldn't be possible with a hard fork? Or copy balances to the new chain?

I think it's something to think of, on the foreseable future. What about going with peercoin development path?
They have in future plans upgrade to newer codebase than 0.8, as I have seen.

AIUI, the optimization of the protocol structure (from block templates to header templates) that was introduced in Bitcoin Core 0.10 resulted in the disappearance from the protocol of some information that was key to the stake calculations performed by PoS coins. So, until someone publishes a general solution, the upgrade path for nearly all Bitcoin protocol PoS alts is capped at Core 0.9.

To my current knowledge, there are only three exceptions: PIVX, Navcoin and Spectre. I don't know much about Spectre, I only found out about it while assembling this response. I can't argue with Max Guevara's opinion of PIVX, so that's not a solution - and anyway it's a Dash clone so that pins it to a variant of Core 0.11. Navcoin is a clone of 0.13 with some elements of 0.14 back-ported.

I've been investigating the possibility of removing the proprietary anon stuff from Navcoin and cross-referencing it back against Bitcoin Core 0.13 to create it as a vanilla PoS 0.13 to use as a new base for Beecoin. It's basically complete afaict (all the expected tests pass), I just need to work out how to kickstart a PoS coin.

I wouldn't bother mentioning it except for the fact that the Navcoin clone retained the original proof-of-work code and so a plain PoS version with the PoW re-enabled might be a potential candidate for a future Bitcoin Core implementation of Slimcoin.

Such an implementation would require a re-write of the Slimcoin PoW, PoS, PoB code and the emission control routines to use contemporary Bitcoin Core objects and methods, i.e. pretty much the creation of a new coin --- so it might as well be launched as one (from the perspective of whoever's grafting away on the code) - because it's going to involve a lot of technically demanding work.

Cheers

Graham

I will be interested in seeing how this plays out ...

https://www.ssb.texas.gov/sites/default/files/BitConnect_ENF-18-CDO-1754.pdf

(Texas Securities Board issues Emergency Cease and Desist against BitConnect using some very interesting accusations.)

Cheers

Graham

I'm going to write medium article about Slimcoin's economy basing information on our website. Would you write something too? @ksdme probably would write about his work on PoC of Slimpedia and w2w attachment.

Yeah, about us, would at least make some light, to those, who don't go to github.

I'll try to make some of it in weekend. For now I'm reorganising reddit.

Reddit reorganized, check now: https://www.reddit.com/r/slimcoin/

For now, I would like to come to chat maybe too like discord and telegram.

You're right, I have a sharing issue with the torrent of the test site when I share it from the server (I hope to solve it today or tomorrow, may be a firewall issue). I had also an issue with the cronjob that updates Fuseki earlier today, so unfortunately there's still no correct real-time updating.

I'm not really interested in that and I don't think it's necessary for "transparency", as Slimcoin is not an ICO project nor a business or a coin where "devs" need to justify a premine. Development can be followed totally transparently at Github. A short section on the About site of the website listing some of the contributors, without details and with pseudonyms for those who want, would be OK, however.

For me web2web was only displaying torrent hash, for Europe it didnt work, I guess.

Btw. I thought about be more 'transparent', to include basic info about core contributors, maybe not a team, but decentralized core contributors to project, like @gjhiggins, @d5000, @ksdme, maybe me, I can post my details about me, Kilari I think so too, I dont know if Graham would want. As I say, I dont say to be team, but main development is revolved around those people, if anyone would contribute I would add him.

To everybody that's testing web2web:

I've begun to sync the RDF blockchain automatically. The solution for reorgs is still not implemented, so as a workaround I'm syncing until the 100thst block before the current blockheight. That means that after you add a new inscription to the blockchain, it will appear about 1-2 hours later in the web2web gateway. (It's not using blocknotify still but a cronjob).

I think that reorgs of more than 100 blocks should occur not very frequently. If somebody has data about that, they're welcome, because if I could set the limit lower (blockheight - 20 blocks, for example) then the waiting time would be much shorter.

The implementation of the final solution (the way suggested by Graham) is not really difficult, only the way how the orphan blocks are deleted from the RDF chain (it's a TDB database) is something I still have to "interiorize" myself with.

I'm working also to provide, instead of the whole blockchain, a RDF graph that provides only the blocks which cointain OP_RETURN transactions. This would drastically reduce the size of the data set (there are less than 5 OP_RETURN tx as of now) and improve performance - even if it will obviously grow after web2web is used more. That's still not "the final solution"; the ideal would be to show only the OP_RETURN data and the associated addresses, without other outputs/transactions, but for that a new ontology scheme would have to be created and the SPARQL query would have to be modified.

On another database I will provide the burn address balance in realtime, so I can set up a service to provide the "circulating supply" like demanded by Coinmarketcap. This dataset would be larger than the OP_RETURN set but also significantly smaller than the whole blockchain.

Yeah, it's gone down, because it has to scale, as they say for couple of hours.

I want some of you, to help me with reddit, 4chan, twitter, fb campaign, if you could write to me, to help be more visible in social media.

I'm going to do more of marketing effort, but would be glad, if you will help me.


Also signature campaign. For anyone wearing signature like mine, I can give 100SLM for 2 weeks for full members, 50SLM for normal members and 25 for new accounts.

Is Coinsmarket down?

Yes, these are the implications of decentralization.

So it looks like our development resources are quite limited. So Graham, what do you suggest - should we aim at updating Slimcoin's code to modern Bitcoin code? And if yes, how?

Hm, but there are many coins with less than $1000 daily trading volume:

https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/coinsmarkets/

Doesn't make sense to me.

I think, if everything will go well, we will be added to yobit.

I tried to send a request to coinmarketcap but it does not update if the markets have not at least $1000 USD equivalent of daily trading volume.

In the last days, Slimcoin was traded for about 0.06$ on coinsmarkets, hopefully coinmarketcap will update the data