A Literature Review on Bitcoin: Transformation of Crypto ...

Bob The Magic Custodian



Summary: Everyone knows that when you give your assets to someone else, they always keep them safe. If this is true for individuals, it is certainly true for businesses.
Custodians always tell the truth and manage funds properly. They won't have any interest in taking the assets as an exchange operator would. Auditors tell the truth and can't be misled. That's because organizations that are regulated are incapable of lying and don't make mistakes.

First, some background. Here is a summary of how custodians make us more secure:

Previously, we might give Alice our crypto assets to hold. There were risks:

But "no worries", Alice has a custodian named Bob. Bob is dressed in a nice suit. He knows some politicians. And he drives a Porsche. "So you have nothing to worry about!". And look at all the benefits we get:
See - all problems are solved! All we have to worry about now is:
It's pretty simple. Before we had to trust Alice. Now we only have to trust Alice, Bob, and all the ways in which they communicate. Just think of how much more secure we are!

"On top of that", Bob assures us, "we're using a special wallet structure". Bob shows Alice a diagram. "We've broken the balance up and store it in lots of smaller wallets. That way", he assures her, "a thief can't take it all at once". And he points to a historic case where a large sum was taken "because it was stored in a single wallet... how stupid".
"Very early on, we used to have all the crypto in one wallet", he said, "and then one Christmas a hacker came and took it all. We call him the Grinch. Now we individually wrap each crypto and stick it under a binary search tree. The Grinch has never been back since."

"As well", Bob continues, "even if someone were to get in, we've got insurance. It covers all thefts and even coercion, collusion, and misplaced keys - only subject to the policy terms and conditions." And with that, he pulls out a phone-book sized contract and slams it on the desk with a thud. "Yep", he continues, "we're paying top dollar for one of the best policies in the country!"
"Can I read it?' Alice asks. "Sure," Bob says, "just as soon as our legal team is done with it. They're almost through the first chapter." He pauses, then continues. "And can you believe that sales guy Mike? He has the same year Porsche as me. I mean, what are the odds?"

"Do you use multi-sig?", Alice asks. "Absolutely!" Bob replies. "All our engineers are fully trained in multi-sig. Whenever we want to set up a new wallet, we generate 2 separate keys in an air-gapped process and store them in this proprietary system here. Look, it even requires the biometric signature from one of our team members to initiate any withdrawal." He demonstrates by pressing his thumb into the display. "We use a third-party cloud validation API to match the thumbprint and authorize each withdrawal. The keys are also backed up daily to an off-site third-party."
"Wow that's really impressive," Alice says, "but what if we need access for a withdrawal outside of office hours?" "Well that's no issue", Bob says, "just send us an email, call, or text message and we always have someone on staff to help out. Just another part of our strong commitment to all our customers!"

"What about Proof of Reserve?", Alice asks. "Of course", Bob replies, "though rather than publish any blockchain addresses or signed transaction, for privacy we just do a SHA256 refactoring of the inverse hash modulus for each UTXO nonce and combine the smart contract coefficient consensus in our hyperledger lightning node. But it's really simple to use." He pushes a button and a large green checkmark appears on a screen. "See - the algorithm ran through and reserves are proven."
"Wow", Alice says, "you really know your stuff! And that is easy to use! What about fiat balances?" "Yeah, we have an auditor too", Bob replies, "Been using him for a long time so we have quite a strong relationship going! We have special books we give him every year and he's very efficient! Checks the fiat, crypto, and everything all at once!"

"We used to have a nice offline multi-sig setup we've been using without issue for the past 5 years, but I think we'll move all our funds over to your facility," Alice says. "Awesome", Bob replies, "Thanks so much! This is perfect timing too - my Porsche got a dent on it this morning. We have the paperwork right over here." "Great!", Alice replies.
And with that, Alice gets out her pen and Bob gets the contract. "Don't worry", he says, "you can take your crypto-assets back anytime you like - just subject to our cancellation policy. Our annual management fees are also super low and we don't adjust them often".

How many holes have to exist for your funds to get stolen?
Just one.

Why are we taking a powerful offline multi-sig setup, widely used globally in hundreds of different/lacking regulatory environments with 0 breaches to date, and circumventing it by a demonstrably weak third party layer? And paying a great expense to do so?
If you go through the list of breaches in the past 2 years to highly credible organizations, you go through the list of major corporate frauds (only the ones we know about), you go through the list of all the times platforms have lost funds, you go through the list of times and ways that people have lost their crypto from identity theft, hot wallet exploits, extortion, etc... and then you go through this custodian with a fine-tooth comb and truly believe they have value to add far beyond what you could, sticking your funds in a wallet (or set of wallets) they control exclusively is the absolute worst possible way to take advantage of that security.

The best way to add security for crypto-assets is to make a stronger multi-sig. With one custodian, what you are doing is giving them your cryptocurrency and hoping they're honest, competent, and flawlessly secure. It's no different than storing it on a really secure exchange. Maybe the insurance will cover you. Didn't work for Bitpay in 2015. Didn't work for Yapizon in 2017. Insurance has never paid a claim in the entire history of cryptocurrency. But maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe your exact scenario will buck the trend and be what they're willing to cover. After the large deductible and hopefully without a long and expensive court battle.

And you want to advertise this increase in risk, the lapse of judgement, an accident waiting to happen, as though it's some kind of benefit to customers ("Free institutional-grade storage for your digital assets.")? And then some people are writing to the OSC that custodians should be mandatory for all funds on every exchange platform? That this somehow will make Canadians as a whole more secure or better protected compared with standard air-gapped multi-sig? On what planet?

Most of the problems in Canada stemmed from one thing - a lack of transparency. If Canadians had known what a joke Quadriga was - it wouldn't have grown to lose $400m from hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast. And Gerald Cotten would be in jail, not wherever he is now (at best, rotting peacefully). EZ-BTC and mister Dave Smilie would have been a tiny little scam to his friends, not a multi-million dollar fraud. Einstein would have got their act together or been shut down BEFORE losing millions and millions more in people's funds generously donated to criminals. MapleChange wouldn't have even been a thing. And maybe we'd know a little more about CoinTradeNewNote - like how much was lost in there. Almost all of the major losses with cryptocurrency exchanges involve deception with unbacked funds.
So it's great to see transparency reports from BitBuy and ShakePay where someone independently verified the backing. The only thing we don't have is:
It's not complicated to validate cryptocurrency assets. They need to exist, they need to be spendable, and they need to cover the total balances. There are plenty of credible people and firms across the country that have the capacity to reasonably perform this validation. Having more frequent checks by different, independent, parties who publish transparent reports is far more valuable than an annual check by a single "more credible/official" party who does the exact same basic checks and may or may not publish anything. Here's an example set of requirements that could be mandated:
There are ways to structure audits such that neither crypto assets nor customer information are ever put at risk, and both can still be properly validated and publicly verifiable. There are also ways to structure audits such that they are completely reasonable for small platforms and don't inhibit innovation in any way. By making the process as reasonable as possible, we can completely eliminate any reason/excuse that an honest platform would have for not being audited. That is arguable far more important than any incremental improvement we might get from mandating "the best of the best" accountants. Right now we have nothing mandated and tons of Canadians using offshore exchanges with no oversight whatsoever.

Transparency does not prove crypto assets are safe. CoinTradeNewNote, Flexcoin ($600k), and Canadian Bitcoins ($100k) are examples where crypto-assets were breached from platforms in Canada. All of them were online wallets and used no multi-sig as far as any records show. This is consistent with what we see globally - air-gapped multi-sig wallets have an impeccable record, while other schemes tend to suffer breach after breach. We don't actually know how much CoinTrader lost because there was no visibility. Rather than publishing details of what happened, the co-founder of CoinTrader silently moved on to found another platform - the "most trusted way to buy and sell crypto" - a site that has no information whatsoever (that I could find) on the storage practices and a FAQ advising that “[t]rading cryptocurrency is completely safe” and that having your own wallet is “entirely up to you! You can certainly keep cryptocurrency, or fiat, or both, on the app.” Doesn't sound like much was learned here, which is really sad to see.
It's not that complicated or unreasonable to set up a proper hardware wallet. Multi-sig can be learned in a single course. Something the equivalent complexity of a driver's license test could prevent all the cold storage exploits we've seen to date - even globally. Platform operators have a key advantage in detecting and preventing fraud - they know their customers far better than any custodian ever would. The best job that custodians can do is to find high integrity individuals and train them to form even better wallet signatories. Rather than mandating that all platforms expose themselves to arbitrary third party risks, regulations should center around ensuring that all signatories are background-checked, properly trained, and using proper procedures. We also need to make sure that signatories are empowered with rights and responsibilities to reject and report fraud. They need to know that they can safely challenge and delay a transaction - even if it turns out they made a mistake. We need to have an environment where mistakes are brought to the surface and dealt with. Not one where firms and people feel the need to hide what happened. In addition to a knowledge-based test, an auditor can privately interview each signatory to make sure they're not in coercive situations, and we should make sure they can freely and anonymously report any issues without threat of retaliation.
A proper multi-sig has each signature held by a separate person and is governed by policies and mutual decisions instead of a hierarchy. It includes at least one redundant signature. For best results, 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7.

History has demonstrated over and over again the risk of hot wallets even to highly credible organizations. Nonetheless, many platforms have hot wallets for convenience. While such losses are generally compensated by platforms without issue (for example Poloniex, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gatecoin, Coincheck, Bithumb, Zaif, CoinBene, Binance, Bitrue, Bitpoint, Upbit, VinDAX, and now KuCoin), the public tends to focus more on cases that didn't end well. Regardless of what systems are employed, there is always some level of risk. For that reason, most members of the public would prefer to see third party insurance.
Rather than trying to convince third party profit-seekers to provide comprehensive insurance and then relying on an expensive and slow legal system to enforce against whatever legal loopholes they manage to find each and every time something goes wrong, insurance could be run through multiple exchange operators and regulators, with the shared interest of having a reputable industry, keeping costs down, and taking care of Canadians. For example, a 4 of 7 multi-sig insurance fund held between 5 independent exchange operators and 2 regulatory bodies. All Canadian exchanges could pay premiums at a set rate based on their needed coverage, with a higher price paid for hot wallet coverage (anything not an air-gapped multi-sig cold wallet). Such a model would be much cheaper to manage, offer better coverage, and be much more reliable to payout when needed. The kind of coverage you could have under this model is unheard of. You could even create something like the CDIC to protect Canadians who get their trading accounts hacked if they can sufficiently prove the loss is legitimate. In cases of fraud, gross negligence, or insolvency, the fund can be used to pay affected users directly (utilizing the last transparent balance report in the worst case), something which private insurance would never touch. While it's recommended to have official policies for coverage, a model where members vote would fully cover edge cases. (Could be similar to the Supreme Court where justices vote based on case law.)
Such a model could fully protect all Canadians across all platforms. You can have a fiat coverage governed by legal agreements, and crypto-asset coverage governed by both multi-sig and legal agreements. It could be practical, affordable, and inclusive.

Now, we are at a crossroads. We can happily give up our freedom, our innovation, and our money. We can pay hefty expenses to auditors, lawyers, and regulators year after year (and make no mistake - this cost will grow to many millions or even billions as the industry grows - and it will be borne by all Canadians on every platform because platforms are not going to eat up these costs at a loss). We can make it nearly impossible for any new platform to enter the marketplace, forcing Canadians to use the same stagnant platforms year after year. We can centralize and consolidate the entire industry into 2 or 3 big players and have everyone else fail (possibly to heavy losses of users of those platforms). And when a flawed security model doesn't work and gets breached, we can make it even more complicated with even more people in suits making big money doing the job that blockchain was supposed to do in the first place. We can build a system which is so intertwined and dependent on big government, traditional finance, and central bankers that it's future depends entirely on that of the fiat system, of fractional banking, and of government bail-outs. If we choose this path, as history has shown us over and over again, we can not go back, save for revolution. Our children and grandchildren will still be paying the consequences of what we decided today.
Or, we can find solutions that work. We can maintain an open and innovative environment while making the adjustments we need to make to fully protect Canadian investors and cryptocurrency users, giving easy and affordable access to cryptocurrency for all Canadians on the platform of their choice, and creating an environment in which entrepreneurs and problem solvers can bring those solutions forward easily. None of the above precludes innovation in any way, or adds any unreasonable cost - and these three policies would demonstrably eliminate or resolve all 109 historic cases as studied here - that's every single case researched so far going back to 2011. It includes every loss that was studied so far not just in Canada but globally as well.
Unfortunately, finding answers is the least challenging part. Far more challenging is to get platform operators and regulators to agree on anything. My last post got no response whatsoever, and while the OSC has told me they're happy for industry feedback, I believe my opinion alone is fairly meaningless. This takes the whole community working together to solve. So please let me know your thoughts. Please take the time to upvote and share this with people. Please - let's get this solved and not leave it up to other people to do.

Facts/background/sources (skip if you like):



Thoughts?
submitted by azoundria2 to QuadrigaInitiative [link] [comments]

Function X: A Concept Paper introducing the f(x) ecosystem, a universal decentralized internet powered by blockchain technology and smart devices

Function X: A Concept Paper introducing the f(x) ecosystem, a universal decentralized internet powered by blockchain technology and smart devices

https://preview.redd.it/yylq6k0yqrv21.png?width=633&format=png&auto=webp&s=089ffe83e18baeceb87d465ca6fad184939490e4

Prologue

This is a Concept Paper written to introduce the Function X Ecosystem, which includes the XPhone. It also addresses the relationship between the XPOS and Function X.
Pundi X has always been a community-driven project. We have lived by the mission of making sure the community comes first and we are constantly learning from discussions and interactions on social media and in real-life meetings.
As with all discussions, there is always background noise but we have found gems in these community discussions. One such example is a question which we found constantly lingering at the back of our mind, “Has blockchain changed the world as the Internet did in the ’90s, and the automobile in the ‘20s?”. Many might argue that it has, given the rise of so many blockchain projects with vast potential in different dimensions (like ours, if we may add). But the question remains, “can blockchain ever become what the Internet, as we know it today, has to the world?”
Function X, a universal decentralized internet which is powered by blockchain technology and smart devices.
Over the past few months, in the process of implementing and deploying the XPOS solution, we believe we found the answer to the question. A nimble development team was set up to bring the answer to life. We discovered that it is indeed possible to bring blockchain to the world of telephony, data transmission, storage and other industries; a world far beyond financial transactions and transfers.
This is supported by end-user smart devices functioning as blockchain nodes. These devices include the XPOS and XPhone developed by Pundi X and will also include many other hardware devices manufactured by other original equipment manufacturers.
The vision we want to achieve for f(x) is to create a fully autonomous and decentralized network that does not rely on any individual, organization or structure.
Due to the nature of the many new concepts introduced within this Concept Paper, we have included a Q&A after each segment to facilitate your understanding. We will continuously update this paper to reflect the progress we’re making.

Function X: The Internet was just the beginning

The advent of the Internet has revolutionized the world. It created a communications layer so robust that it has resulted in TCP/IP becoming the network standard.
The Internet also created a wealth of information so disruptive that a company like Amazon threatened to wipe out all the traditional brick-and-mortar bookstores. These bookstores were forced to either adapt or perish. The same applies to the news publishing sector: the offerings of Google and Facebook have caused the near extinction of traditional newspapers.
The digitalization of the world with the Internet has enabled tech behemoths like Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook to dominate and rule over traditional companies. The grip of these tech giants is so extensive that it makes you wonder if the choices you make are truly your own or influenced by the data they have on you as a user.
We see the blockchain revolution happening in three phases. The first was how Bitcoin showed the world what digital currency is. The second refers to how Ethereum has provided a platform to build decentralized assets easily. The clearest use case of that has come in the form of the thousands of altcoins seen today that we all are familiar with. The third phase is what many blockchain companies are trying to do now: 1) to bring the performance of blockchain to a whole new level (transaction speed, throughput, sharding, etc.) and 2) to change the course of traditional industries and platforms—including the Internet and user dynamics.
Public blockchains allow trustless transactions. If everything can be transacted on the blockchain in a decentralized manner, the information will flow more efficiently than traditional offerings, without the interception of intermediators. It will level the playing field and prevent data monopolization thus allowing small innovators to develop and flourish by leveraging the resources and data shared on the blockchain.

The Blockchain revolution will be the biggest digital revolution

In order to displace an incumbent technology with something new, we believe the change and improvement which the new technology has to bring will have to be at least a tenfold improvement on all aspects including speed, transparency, scalability and governance (consensus). We are excited to say that the time for this 10-times change is here. It’s time to take it up 10x with Function X.
Function X or f(x) is an ecosystem built entirely on and for the blockchain. Everything in f(x) (including the application source code, transmission protocol and hardware) is completely decentralized and secure. Every bit and byte in f(x) is part of the blockchain.
What we have developed is not just a public chain. It is a total decentralized solution. It consists of five core components: Function X Operating System (OS); Function X distributed ledger (Blockchain); Function X IPFS; FXTP Protocol and Function X Decentralized Docker. All five components serve a single purpose which is to decentralize all services, apps, websites, communications and, most importantly, data.
The purpose of Function X OS is to allow smart hardware and IoTs to harness the upside and potential utility of the decentralization approach. We have built an in-house solution for how mobile phones can leverage Function X OS in the form of the XPhone. Other companies can also employ the Function X OS and further customize it for their own smart devices. Every smart device in the Function X ecosystem can be a node and each will have its own address and private key, uniquely linked to their node names. The OS is based on the Android OS 9.0, therefore benefiting from backward compatibility with Android apps. The Function X OS supports Android apps and Google services (referred to as the traditional mode), as well as the newly developed decentralized services (referred to as the blockchain mode). Other XPhone features powered by the Function X OS will be elaborated on in the following sections.
Using the Function X Ecosystem (namely Function X FXTP), the transmission of data runs on a complex exchange of public and private key data and encryption but never through a centralized intermediary. Hence it guarantees communication without interception and gives users direct access to the data shared by others. Any information that is sent or transacted over the Function X Blockchain will also be recorded on the chain and fully protected by encryption so the ownesender has control over data sharing. And that is how a decentralized system for communications works.
For developers and users transitioning to the Function X platform, it will be a relatively seamless process. We have intentionally designed the process of creating and publishing new decentralized applications (DApps) on Function X to be easy, such that the knowledge and experience from developing and using Android will be transferable. With that in mind, a single line of code in most traditional apps can be modified, and developers can have their transmission protocol moved from the traditional HTTP mode (centralized) to a decentralized mode, thus making the transmission “ownerless” because data can transmit through the network of nodes without being blocked by third parties. How services can be ported easily or built from scratch as DApps will also be explained in the following sections, employing technologies in the Function X ecosystem (namely Function X IPFS, FXTP Protocol and Decentralized Docker).

f(x) Chain

f(x) chain is a set of consensus algorithms in the form of a distributed ledger, as part of the Function X ecosystem. The blockchain is the building block of our distributed ledger that stores and verifies transactions including financials, payments, communications (phone calls, file transfers, storage), services (DApps) and more.
Will Function X launch a mainnet?
Yes. The f(x) chain is a blockchain hence there will be a mainnet.
When will the testnet be launched?
Q2 2019 (projected).
When will the mainnet be launched?
Q3 2019 (projected).
How is the Function X blockchain designed?
The f(x) chain is designed based on the philosophy that any blockchain should be able to address real-life market demand of a constantly growing peer-to-peer network. It is a blockchain with high throughput achieved with a combination of decentralized hardware support (XPOS, XPhone, etc.) and open-source software toolkit enhancements.
What are the physical devices that will be connected to the Function X blockchain?
In due course, the XPOS OS will be replaced by the f(x) OS. On the other hand, the XPhone was designed with full f(x) OS integration in mind, from the ground up. After the f(x) OS onboarding, and with adequate stability testings and improvements, XPOS and XPhone will then be connected to the f(x) Chain.
What are the different elements of a block?
Anything that is transmittable over the distributed network can be stored in the block, including but not limited to phone call records, websites, data packets, source code, etc. It is worth noting that throughout these processes, all data is encrypted and only the owner of the private key has the right to decide how the data should be shared, stored, decrypted or even destroyed.
Which consensus mechanism is used?
Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT).
What are the other implementations of Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT)?
Flight systems that require very low latency. For example, SpaceX’s flight system, Dragon, uses PBFT design philosophy. [Appendix]
How do you create a much faster public chain?
We believe in achieving higher speed, thus hardware and software configurations matter. If your hardware is limited in numbers or processing power, this will limit the transaction speed which may pose security risks. The Ethereum network consists of about 25,000 nodes spread across the globe now, just two years after it was launched. Meanwhile, the Bitcoin network currently has around 7,000 nodes verifying the network. As for Pundi X, with the deployment plan (by us and our partners) for XPOS, XPhone and potentially other smart devices, we anticipate that we will be able to surpass the number of Bitcoin and Ethereum nodes within 1 to 2 years. There are also plans for a very competitive software implementation of our public blockchain, the details for which we will be sharing in the near future.

f(x) OS

The f(x) OS is an Android-modified operating system that is also blockchain-compatible. You can switch seamlessly between the blockchain and the traditional mode. In the blockchain mode, every bit and byte is fully decentralized including your calls, messages, browsers and apps. When in traditional mode, the f(x) OS supports all Android features.
Android is the most open and advanced operating system for smart hardware with over 2 billion monthly active users. Using Android also fits into our philosophy of being an OS/software designer and letting third-party hardware makers produce the hardware for the Function X Ecosystem.
What kind of open source will it be?
This has not been finalized, but the options we are currently considering are Apache or GNU GPLv3.
What kind of hardware will it work on?
The f(x) OS works on ARM architecture, hence it works on most smartphones, tablet computers, smart TVs, Android Auto and smartwatches in the market.
Will you build a new browser?
We are currently using a modified version of the Google Chrome browser. The browser supports both HTTP and FXTP, which means that apart from distributed FXTP contents, users can view traditional contents, such ashttps://www.google.com.
What is the Node Name System (NNS)?
A NNS is a distributed version of the traditional Domain Name System. A NNS allows every piece of Function X hardware, including the XPhone, to have a unique identity. This identity will be the unique identifier and can be called anything with digits and numbers, such as ‘JohnDoe2018’ or ‘AliceBob’. More on NNS in the following sections.
Will a third-party device running the f(x) OS be automatically connected to the f(x) blockchain?
Yes, third-party devices will be connected to the f(x) blockchain automatically.

f(x) FXTP

A transmission protocol defines the rules to allow information to be sent via a network. On the Internet, HTTP is a transmission protocol that governs how information such as website contents can be sent, received and displayed. FXTP is a transmission protocol for the decentralized network.
FXTP is different from HTTP because it is an end-to-end transmission whereby your data can be sent, received and displayed based on a consensus mechanism rather than a client-server based decision-making mechanism. In HTTP, the server (which is controlled by an entity) decides how and if the data is sent (or even monitored), whereas in FXTP, the data is sent out and propagates to the destination based on consensus.
HTTP functions as a request–response protocol in the client-server computing model. A web browser, for example, may be the client and an application running on a computer hosting a website may be the server. FXTP functions as a propagation protocol via a consensus model. A node that propagates the protocol and its packet content is both a “client” and a “server”, hence whether a packet reaches a destination is not determined by any intermediate party and this makes it more secure.

f(x) IPFS

IPFS is a protocol and network designed to store data in a distributed system. A person who wants to retrieve a file will call an identifier (hash) of the file, IPFS then combs through the other nodes and supplies the person with the file.
The file is stored on the IPFS network. If you run your own node, your file would be stored only on your node and available for the world to download. If someone else downloads it and seeds it, then the file will be stored on both your node the node of the individual who downloaded it (similar to BitTorrent).
IPFS is decentralized and more secure, which allows faster file and data transfer.

f(x) DDocker

Docker is computer program designed to make it easier to create, deploy, and run applications. Containers allow a developer to package up an application including libraries, and ship it all out as a package.
As the name suggests, Decentralized Docker is an open platform for developers to build, ship and run distributed applications. Developers will be able to store, deploy and run their codes remote in different locations and the codes are secure in a decentralized way.

XPhone

Beyond crypto: First true blockchain phone that is secured and decentralized to the core
XPhone is the world’s first blockchain phone which is designed with innovative features that are not found on other smartphones.
Powered by Function X, an ecosystem built entirely on and for the blockchain, XPhone runs on a new transmission protocol for the blockchain age. The innovation significantly expands the use of blockchain technology beyond financial transfers.
Unlike traditional phones which require a centralized service provider, XPhone runs independently without the need for that. Users can route phone calls and messages via blockchain nodes without the need for phone numbers.
Once the XPhone is registered on the network, for e.g., by a user named Pitt, if someone wants to access Pitt’s publicly shared data or content, that user can just enter FXTP://xxx.Pitt. This is similar to what we do for the traditional https:// protocol.
Whether Pitt is sharing photos, data, files or a website, they can be accessed through this path. And if Pitt’s friends would like to contact him, they can call, text or email his XPhone simply by entering “call.pitt”, “message.pitt”, or “mail.pitt”.
The transmission of data runs on a complex exchange of public and private key data with encryption. It can guarantee communication without interception and gives users direct access to the data shared by others. Any information that is sent or transacted over the Function X Blockchain will also be recorded on the chain.
Toggle between now and the future
Blockchain-based calling and messaging can be toggled on and off on the phone operating system which is built on Android 9.0. XPhone users can enjoy all the blockchain has to offer, as well as the traditional functionalities of an Android smartphone.
We’ll be sharing more about the availability of the XPhone and further applications of Function X in the near future.

DApps

DApps for mass adoption
So far the use of decentralized applications has been disappointing. But what if there was a straightforward way to bring popular, existing apps into a decentralized environment, without rebuilding everything? Until now, much of what we call peer-to-peer or ‘decentralized’ services continue to be built on centralized networks. We set out to change that with Function X; to disperse content now stored in the hands of the few, and to evolve services currently controlled by central parties.
Use Cases: Sharing economy
As seen from our ride-hailing DApp example that was demonstrated in New York back in November 2018, moving towards true decentralization empowers the providers of services and not the intermediaries. In the same way, the XPhone returns power to users over how their data is being shared and with whom. Function X will empower content creators to determine how their work is being displayed and used.
Use Cases: Free naming
One of the earliest alternative cryptocurrencies, Namecoin, wanted to use a blockchain to provide a name registration system, where users can register their names to create a unique identity. It is similar to the DNS system mapping to IP addresses. With the Node Name System (NNS) it is now possible to do this on the blockchain.
NNS is a distributed version of the traditional Domain Name System. A NNS allows every piece of Function X hardware, including the XPhone, to have a unique identifier that can be named anything with digits and numbers, such as ‘JohnDoe2018’ or ‘AliceBob’.
Use Cases: Mobile data currency
According to a study, mobile operator data revenues are estimated at over $600 billion USD by 2020, equivalent to $50 billion USD per month [appendix]. Assuming users are able to use services such as blockchain calls provided by XPhone (or other phones using Function X) the savings will be immense and the gain from profit can be passed on to providers such as DApp developers in Function X. In other words, instead of paying hefty bills to a mobile carrier for voice calls, users can pay less by making blockchain calls, and the fees paid are in f(x) coins. More importantly users will have complete privacy over their calls.
Use Cases: Decentralized file storage
Ethereum contracts claim to allow for the development of a decentralized file storage ecosystem, “where individual users can earn small quantities of money by renting out their own hard drives and unused space can be used to further drive down the costs of file storage.” However, they do not necessarily have the hardware to back this up. With the deployment of XPOS, smart hardware nodes and more, Function X is a natural fit for Decentralized File Storage. In fact, it is basically what f(x) IPFS is built for.
These are just four examples of the many use cases purported, and there can, will and should be more practical applications beyond these; we are right in the middle of uncharted territories.

Tokenomics

Decentralized and autonomous
The f(x) ecosystem is fully decentralized. It’s designed and built to run autonomously in perpetuity without the reliance or supervision of any individual or organization. To support this autonomous structure, f(x) Coin which is the underlying ‘currency’ within the f(x) ecosystem has to be decentralized in terms of its distribution, allocation, control, circulation and the way it’s being generated.
To get the structure of f(x) properly set up, the founding team will initially act as ‘initiators’ and ‘guardians’ of the ecosystem. The role of the team will be similar to being a gatekeeper to prevent any bad actors or stakeholders playing foul. At the same time, the team will facilitate good players to grow within the ecosystem. Once the f(x) ecosystem is up and running, the role of the founding team will be irrelevant and phased out. The long term intention of the team is to step away, allowing the ecosystem to run and flourish by itself.

Utility

In this section, we will explore the utility of the f(x) Coin. f(x) Coin is the native ‘currency’ of the Function X blockchain and ecosystem. All services rendered in the ecosystem will be processed, transacted with, or “fueled” by the f(x) Coin. Some of the proposed use cases include:
  • For service providers: Getting paid by developers, companies and consumers for providing storage nodes, DDocker and improvement of network connections. The role of service providers will be described in greater detail in the rest of the paper.
  • For consumers: Paying for service fees for the DApps, nodes, network resources, storage solutions and other services consumed within the f(x) ecosystem.
  • For developers: Paying for services and resources rendered in the ecosystem such as smart contract creation, file storage (paid to IPFS service provider), code hosting (paid to DDocker service provider), advertisements (paid to other developers) and design works. Developers can also get paid by enterprises or organizations that engaged in the developer’s services.
  • For enterprises or organizations: Paying for services provided by developers and advertisers. Services provided to consumers will be charged and denominated in f(x) Coin.
  • For phone and hardware manufacturers: Paying for further Function X OS customizations. It is worth noting that Pundi X Labs plan to only build a few thousand devices of the XPhone flagship handsets, and leave the subsequent market supply to be filled by third-party manufacturers using our operating system.
  • For financial institutions: receiving payments for financial services rendered in the ecosystem.
  • Applications requiring high throughput.
Hence f(x) Coin can be used as ‘currency’ for the below services,
  • In-app purchases
  • Blockchain calls
  • Smart contract creations
  • Transaction fees
  • Advertisements
  • Hosting fees
  • Borderless/cross-border transactions
We believe f(x) Coin utilization will be invariably higher than other coins in traditional chains due to the breadth of the f(x) ecosystem. This includes storage services and network resources on f(x) that will utilize the f(x) Coin as “fuel” for execution and validation of transactions.
Example 1: A developer creates a ride-hailing DApp called DUber.
DUber developer first uploads the image and data to IPFS (storage) and code to DDocker, respectively. The developer then pays for a decentralized code hosting service provided by the DDocker, and a decentralized file hosting service provided by the IPFS. Please note the storage hosting and code hosting services can be provided by a company, or by a savvy home user with smart nodes connected to the Function X ecosystem. Subsequently, a DUber user pays the developer.
Example 2: User Alice sends an imaginary token called ABCToken to Bob.
ABCToken is created using Function X smart contract. Smart nodes hosted at the home of Charlie help confirms the transaction, Charlie is paid by Alice (or both Alice and Bob).

The flow of f(x) Coin

Four main participants in f(x): Consumer (blue), Developer (blue), Infrastructure (blue), and Financial Service Provider (green)
Broadly speaking, there can be four main participants in the f(x) ecosystem, exhibited by the diagram above:
  • Consumer: Users enjoy the decentralized services available in the f(x) ecosystem
  • Infrastructure Service Provider: Providing infrastructures that make up the f(x) ecosystem such as those provided by mobile carriers, decentralized clouds services.
  • Developer: Building DApp on the f(x) network such as decentralized IT, hospitality and financial services apps.
  • Financial Service Provider: Providing liquidity for the f(x) Coin acting as an exchange.
The f(x) ecosystem’s value proposition:
  • Infrastructure service providers can offer similar services that they already are providing in other markets such as FXTP, DDocker and IPFS, to earn f(x) Coin.
  • Developers can modify their existing Android apps to be compatible with the f(x) OS environment effortlessly, and potentially earn f(x) Coin.
  • Developers, at the same time, also pay for the infrastructure services used for app creation.
  • Consumers immerse in the decentralized app environments and pay for services used in f(x) Coin.
  • Developer and infrastructure service providers can earn rewards in f(x) Coin by providing their services. They can also monetize it through a wide network of financial service providers to earn some profit, should they decide to do so.
Together, the four participants in this ecosystem will create a positive value flow. As the number of service providers grow, the quality of service will be enhanced, subsequently leading to more adoption. Similarly, more consumers means more value is added to the ecosystem by attracting more service providers,and creating f(x) Coin liquidity. Deep liquidity of f(x) Coin will attract more financial service providers to enhance the stability and quality of liquidity. This will attract more service providers to the ecosystem.
Figure: four main participants of the ecosystem The rationale behind f(x) Coin generation is the Proof of Service concept (PoS)
Service providers are crucial in the whole f(x) Ecosystem, the problem of motivation/facilitation has become our priority. We have to align our interests with theirs. Hence, we have set up a Tipping Jar (similar to mining) to motivate and facilitate the existing miners shift to the f(x) Ecosystem and become part of the infrastructure service provider or attract new players into our ecosystem. Income for service provider = Service fee (from payer) + Tipping (from f(x) network generation)
The idea is that the f(x) blockchain will generate a certain amount of f(x) Coin (diminishing annually) per second to different segments of service provider, such as in the 1st year, the f(x) blockchain will generate 3.5 f(x) Coin per second and it will be distributed among the infrastructure service provider through the Proof of Service concept. Every service provider such as infrastructure service providers, developers and financial service providers will receive a ‘certificate’ of Proof of Service in the blockchain after providing the service and redeeming the f(x) Coin.
Example: There are 3 IPFS providers in the market, and the total Tipping Jar for that specific period is 1 million f(x) Coin. Party A contributes 1 TB; Party B contributes 3 TB and Party C contributes 6 TB. So, Party A will earn 1/10 * 1 million = 100k f(x) Coin; Party B will earn 3/10 * 1 million = 300k f(x) Coin. Party C will earn 6/10 * 1 million = 600k f(x) Coin.
Note: The computation method of the distribution of the Tipping Jar might vary due to the differences in the nature of the service, period and party.
Figure: Circulation flow of f(x) Coin
The theory behind the computation.
Blockchain has integrated almost everything, such as storage, scripts, nodes and communication. This requires a large amount of bandwidth and computation resources which affects the transaction speed and concurrency metric.
In order to do achieve the goal of being scalable with high transaction speed, the f(x) blockchain has shifted out all the ‘bulky’ and ‘heavy duty’ functions onto other service providers, such as IPFS, FXTP, etc. We leave alone what blockchain technology does best: Calibration. Thus, the role of the Tipping Jar is to distribute the appropriate tokens to all participants.
Projected f(x) Coin distribution per second in the first year
According to Moore’s Law, the number of transistors in a densely integrated circuit doubles about every 18 -24 months. Thus, the performance of hardware doubles every 18-24 months. Taking into consideration Moore’s Law, Eric Schmidt said if you maintain the same hardware specs, the earnings will be cut in half after 18-24 months. Therefore, the normal Tipping Jar (reward) for an infrastructure service provider will decrease 50% every 18 months. In order to encourage infrastructure service providers to upgrade their hardware, we have set up another iteration and innovation contribution pool (which is worth of 50% of the normal Tipping Jar on the corresponding phase) to encourage the infrastructure service provider to embrace new technology.
According to the Andy-Bill’s law, “What Andy gives, Bill takes away”; software will always nibble away the extra performance of the hardware. The more performance a piece of hardware delivers, the more the software consumes. Thus, the developer will always follow the trend to maintain and provide high-quality service. The Tipping Jar will increase by 50% (based upon the previous quota) every 18 months.
Financial service providers will have to support the liquidation of the whole ecosystem along the journey, the Tipping Jar (FaaS) will increase by 50% by recognizing the contribution and encouraging innovation.
From the 13th year (9th phase), the Tipping Jar will reduce by 50% every 18 months. We are well aware that the “cliff drop” after the 12th year is significant. Hence, we have created a 3year (two-phase) diminishing transition period. The duration of each phase is 18 months. There are 10 phases in total which will last for a total of 15 years.
According to Gartner’s report, the blockchain industry is forecast to reach a market cap of
3.1 trillion USD in 2030. Hence, we believe a Tipping Jar of 15 years will allow the growth of Function X into the “mature life cycle” of the blockchain industry.

f(x) Coin / Token Allocation

Token allocation We believe great blockchain projects attempt to equitably balance the interests of different segments of the community. We hope to motivate and incentivize token holders by allocating a total of 65% of tokens from the Token Generation Event (TGE). Another 20% is allocated to the Ecosystem Genesis Fund for developer partnerships, exchanges and other such related purposes. The remaining 15% will go to engineering, product development and marketing. There will be no public or private sales for f(x) tokens.
NPXS / NPXSXEM is used to make crypto payments as easy as buying bottled water, while f(x) is used for the operation of a decentralized ecosystem and blockchain, consisting of DApps and other services. NPXS / NPXSXEM will continue to have the same functionality and purpose after the migration to the Function X blockchain in the future. Therefore, each token will be expected to assume different fundamental roles and grant different rights to the holders.
https://preview.redd.it/xohy6c6pprv21.png?width=509&format=png&auto=webp&s=a2c0bd0034805c5f055c3fea4bd3ba48eb59ff07
65% of allocation for NPXS / NPXSXEM holders is broken down into the following: 15% is used for staking (see below) 45% is used for conversion to f(x) tokens. (see below) 5% is used for extra bonus tasks over 12 months (allocation TBD).

https://preview.redd.it/6jmpfhmxprv21.png?width=481&format=png&auto=webp&s=c9eb2c124e0181c0851b7495028a317b5c9cd6b7
https://preview.redd.it/1pjcycv0qrv21.png?width=478&format=png&auto=webp&s=c529d5d99d760281efd0c3229edac494d5ed7750
Remarks All NPXS / NPXSXEM tokens that are converted will be removed from the total supply of NPXS / NPXSXEM; Pundi X will not convert company's NPXS for f(x) Tokens. This allocation is designed for NPXS/NPXSXEM long term holders. NPXS / NPXSXEM tokens that are converted will also be entitled to the 15% f(x) Token distribution right after the conversion.

Usage

Management of the Ecosystem Genesis Fund (EGF)
The purpose of setting up the Ecosystem Initialization Fund, is to motivate, encourage and facilitate service providers to join and root into the f(x) Ecosystem and, at the same time, to attract seed consumers to enrich and enlarge the f(x) Ecosystem. EIF comes from funds raised and will be used as a bootstrap mechanism to encourage adoption before the Tipping Jar incentives fully kicks in.
The EGF is divided into 5 parts:
  1. Consumer (10%): To attract consumers and enlarge the customer base;
  2. Developer (20%): To encourage developers to create DApps on the f(x) blockchain;
  3. Infrastructure Service Provider (20%): To set up or shift to the f(x) infrastructure;
  4. Financial Service Provider (20%): To create a trading platform for f(x) Coin and increase liquidity; and
  5. Emergency bridge reserve (30%): To facilitate or help the stakeholders in f(x) during extreme market condition
To implement the spirit of decentralization and fairness, the EGF will be managed by a consensus-based committee, called the f(x) Open Market Committee (FOMC).

Summary

Time moves fast in the technology world and even faster in the blockchain space. Pundi X’s journey started in October 2017, slightly over a year ago, and we have been operating at a lightning pace ever since, making progress that can only be measured in leaps and bounds. We started as a blockchain payment solution provider and have evolved into a blockchain service provider to make blockchain technology more accessible to the general public, thereby improving your everyday life.
The creation of Function X was driven by the need to create a better suited platform for our blockchain point-of sale network and through that process, the capabilities of Function X have allowed us to extend blockchain usage beyond finance applications like payment solutions and cryptocurrency.
The complete decentralized ecosystem of Function X will change and benefit organizations, developers, governments and most importantly, society as a whole.
The XPhone prototype which we have created is just the start to give everyone a taste of the power of Function X on how you can benefit from a truly decentralized environment. We envision a future where the XPOS, XPhone and other Function X-enabled devices work hand-in-hand to make the decentralized autonomous ecosystem a reality.
You may wonder how are we able to create such an extensive ecosystem within a short span of time? We are fortunate that in today’s open source and sharing economy, we are able to tap onto the already established protocols (such as Consensus algorithm, FXTP, etc), software (like Android, IPFS, PBFT, Dockers, etc.) and hardware (design knowledge from existing experts) which were developed by selfless generous creators. Function X puts together, aggregates and streamlines all the benefits and good of these different elements and make them work better and seamlessly on the blockchain. And we will pay it forward by making Function X as open and as decentralized as possible so that others may also use Function X to create bigger and better projects.
To bring Function X to full fruition, we will continue to operate in a transparent and collaborative way. Our community will continue to be a key pillar for us and be even more vital as we get Function X up and running. As a community member, you will have an early access to the Function X ecosystem through the f(x) token conversion.
We hope you continue to show your support as we are working hard to disrupt the space and re-engineer this decentralized world.

Reference

Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance
http://pmg.csail.mit.edu/papers/osdi99.pdf
Byzantine General Problem technical paper
https://web.archive.org/web/20170205142845/http://lamport.azurewebsites.net/pubs/byz.pdf
Global mobile data revenues to reach $630 billion by 2020
https://www.parksassociates.com/blog/article/pr-07112016
NPXSXEM token supply
https://medium.com/pundix/a-closer-look-at-npxsxem-token-supply-843598d0e7b6
NPXS circulating token supply and strategic purchaser
https://medium.com/pundix/total-token-supply-and-strategic-investors-b41717021583
[total supply might differ from time to time due to token taken out of total supply aka “burn”]
ELC: SpaceX lessons learned (PBFT mentioned) https://lwn.net/Articles/540368/

Full: https://functionx.io/assets/file/Function_X_Concept_Paper_v2.0.pdf
submitted by crypt0hodl1 to PundiX [link] [comments]

TrustNote, A Decentralized, world’s top secure encrypted notes app


https://preview.redd.it/h2p2s143yk431.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=716213710526d7e595bf274f50ed9b76c7de2d57

Based on cryptocurrency technology, TrustNote rearchitected the world's top secure encrypted notes app. With end-to-end encryption, all notes were strongly encrypted and were signed by user's private key, and were synced in real time with multiple servers and multiple devices.


WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?


WHY IS TRUSTNOTE A REAL SECURE ENCRYPTED NOTES APP?

A TrustNote block
Every note was encrypted and was signed with user’s private key, we call it a TrustNote block.
https://preview.redd.it/2us4dcy6yk431.png?width=451&format=png&auto=webp&s=a1afd8c71c21ec270b38f9638de1bb09d58eb5b1
And, all the blocks build a virtual block-chain, looks like this:
https://preview.redd.it/9l9eksc8yk431.png?width=728&format=png&auto=webp&s=224f02aa9df48e0343873ba097b23fe92c86f608

Secure Encryption Algorithm
TrustNote encrypt notes by AES-256 encryption algorithm. The AES-256 is a military-grade, NSA-certified, currently the most secure encryption algorithm. The diagram below shows the process how TrustNote generates an AES-256 secret.
https://preview.redd.it/ie36erx9yk431.png?width=290&format=png&auto=webp&s=61a4bf8f82f8d5f60336b68fca8517e2d831300b

Secure Unique Key
TrustNote generates a global unique private key for every user by the same algorithm as Bitcoin generating a private key for users, and helps users back up the private key via mnemonic.The security of Bitcoin is absolutely trustworthy, and so is TrustNote's private key.

End-to-End Encryption
TrustNote strongly encrypt notes by AES-256 encryption algorithm before they were sent to others over the network.Therefore, no matter what type of network eavesdropping, attackers will get nothing while the notes were transmitting on the network.TrustNote has the ability to promise you that nobody except yourself would know what you noted.

Data Signature
TrustNote signed notes with ECDSA algorithm by user’s private key. If a TrustNote block coming from network fails to pass the signature verification, this block will be discarded. So, even if the storage server was hacked, it is impossible to tamper with any of your notes by attackers.

Key Protection
To protect user’s private key, TrustNote encrypts the mnemonic(for generating/restoring deterministic private key) multiple times with AES-256 encryption algorithm by a password user set.

Completely Encrypted
TrustNote strongly encrypted the original contents of every note with AES-256 encryption algorithm by user’s private key and then save it into the local storage on user’s device.

Completely Decentralized
TrustNote does not have any centralized servers. All your notes were saved on peer-to-peer network and synced by hubs like Github or ipfs all over the world.TrustNote has the ability to keep notes synchronizing with multiple third-party servers and multiple devices in real time by block-chain technology.Comparing with traditional network applications, there is no registration required, no sign in required.But the most important thing is that you have to keep your private key mnemonic in a safe place.

for more details, please visit: https://www.trustnote.com/
submitted by trustnoteinc to crypto [link] [comments]

TrustNote, A Decentralized, world’s top secure encrypted notes app

TrustNote, A Decentralized, world’s top secure encrypted notes app

https://preview.redd.it/l5e8mvnk1l431.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=a2fcd13aa1dcf7f4c7391384904722b8243aaf9f
Based on cryptocurrency technology, TrustNote rearchitected the world's top secure encrypted notes app. With end-to-end encryption, all notes were strongly encrypted and were signed by user's private key, and were synced in real time with multiple servers and multiple devices.


WHY IS TRUSTNOTE A REAL SECURE ENCRYPTED NOTES APP?

A TrustNote block
Every note was encrypted and was signed with user’s private key, we call it a TrustNote block.
https://preview.redd.it/qg4aqost1l431.png?width=451&format=png&auto=webp&s=14afb3002d779034cec6bba57514c8b0083f90e8
And, all the blocks build a virtual block-chain, looks like this:
https://preview.redd.it/a94avt7v1l431.png?width=728&format=png&auto=webp&s=86aa7a50db5157c290efef1e9486ca6099217d73
Secure Encryption Algorithm
TrustNote encrypt notes by AES-256 encryption algorithm. The AES-256 is currently the most secure encryption algorithm recommended by the US military. The diagram below shows the process how TrustNote generates an AES-256 secret.
https://preview.redd.it/u1o5qibw1l431.png?width=290&format=png&auto=webp&s=0b5214e62219d5b1d719d634f66ff439783b407e

Secure Unique Key TrustNote generates a global unique private key for every user by the same algorithm as Bitcoin generating a private key for users, and helps users back up the private key via mnemonic. The security of Bitcoin is absolutely trustworthy, and so is TrustNote's private key.
End-to-End Encryption TrustNote strongly encrypt notes by AES-256 encryption algorithm before they were sent to others over the network. Therefore, no matter what type of network eavesdropping, attackers will get nothing while the notes were transmitting on the network. TrustNote has the ability to promise you that nobody except yourself would know what you noted.
Data Signature TrustNote signed notes with ECDSA algorithm by user’s private key. If a TrustNote block coming from network fails to pass the signature verification, this block will be discarded. So, even if the storage server was hacked, it is impossible to tamper with any of your notes by attackers.
Key Protection To protect user’s private key, TrustNote encrypts the mnemonic(for generating/restoring deterministic private key) multiple times with AES-256 encryption algorithm by a password user set.
Completely Encrypted TrustNote strongly encrypted the original contents of every note with AES-256 encryption algorithm by user’s private key and then save it into the local storage on user’s device.
Completely Decentralized TrustNote does not have any centralized servers. All your notes were saved on peer-to-peer network and synced by hubs like Github or ipfs all over the world. TrustNote has the ability to keep notes synchronizing with multiple third-party servers and multiple devices in real time by block-chain technology. Comparing with traditional network applications, there is no registration required, no sign in required. But the most important thing is that you have to keep your private key mnemonic in a safe place.

for more details, please visit https://www.trustnote.com/
submitted by trustnoteinc to encryption [link] [comments]

INT - Comparison with Other IoT Projects

What defines a good IoT project? Defining this will help us understand what some of the problems they might struggle with and which projects excel in those areas. IoT will be a huge industry in the coming years. The true Internet 3.0 will be one of seamless data and value transfer. There will be a tremendous amount of devices connected to this network, from your light bulbs to your refrigerator to your car, all autonomously transacting together in an ever growing network in concert, creating an intelligent, seamless world of satisfying wants and needs.
.
Let’s use the vastness of what the future state of this network is to be as our basis of what makes a good project.
.
Scalability
In that future we will need very high scalability to accommodate the exponential growth in transaction volume that will occur. The network doesn’t need to have the ability to do high transactions per second in the beginning, just a robust plan to grow that ability as the network develops. We’ve seen this issue already with Bitcoin on an admittedly small market penetration. If scaling isn’t a one of the more prominent parts of your framework, that is a glaring hole.
.
Applicability
Second to scalability is applicability. One size does not fit all in this space. Some uses will need real-time streaming of data where fast and cheap transactions are key and others will need heavier transactions full of data to be analyzed by the network for predictive uses. Some uses will need smart contracts so that devices can execute actions autonomously and others will need the ability to encrypt data and to transact anonymously to protect the privacy of the users in this future of hyper-connectivity. We cannot possibly predict the all of the future needs of this network so the ease of adaptability in a network of high applicability is a must.
.
Interoperability
In order for this network to have the high level of applicability mentioned, it would need to have access to real world data outside of it’s network to work off of or even to transact with. This interoperability can come in several forms. I am not a maximalist, thinking that there will be one clear winner in any space. So it is easy, therefore, to imagine that we would want to be able to interact with some other networks for payment/settlement or data gathering. Maybe autonomously paying for bills with Bitcoin or Monero, maybe smart contracts that will need to be fed additional data from the Internet or maybe even sending an auto invite for a wine tasting for the wine shipment that’s been RFID’d and tracked through WTC. In either case, in order to afford the highest applicability, the network will need the ability to interact with outside networks.
.
Consensus
How the network gains consensus is often something that is overlooked in the discussion of network suitability. If the network is to support a myriad of application and transaction types, the consensus mechanism must be able to handle it without choking the network or restricting transaction type. PoW can become a bottleneck as the competition for block reward requires an increase in difficulty for block generation, you therefore have to allow time for this computation in between blocks, often leading to less than optimal block times for fast transactions. This can create a transaction backlog as we have seen before. PoS can solve some of these issues but is not immune to this either. A novel approach to gaining consensus will have to be made if it is going to handle the variety and volume to be seen.
.
Developability
All of this can be combined to create a network that is best equipped to take on the IoT ecosystem. But the penetration into the market will be solely held back by the difficulty in connecting and interacting with the network from the perspective of manufacturers and their devices. Having to learn a new code language in order to write a smart contract or create a node or if there are strict requirements on the hardware capability of the devices, these are all barriers that make it harder and more expensive for companies to work with the network. Ultimately, despite how perfect or feature packed your network is, a manufacturer will more likely develop devices for those that are easy to work with.
.
In short, what the network needs to focus on is:
-Scalability – How does it globally scale?
-Applicability – Does it have data transfer ability, fast, cheap transactions, smart contracts, privacy?
-Interoperability – Can it communicate with the outside world, other blockchains?
-Consensus – Will it gain consensus in a way that supports scalability and applicability?
-Developability – Will it be easy for manufactures to develop devices and interact with the network?
.
.
The idea of using blockchain technology to be the basis of the IoT ecosystem is not a new idea. There are several projects out there now that are aiming at tackling the problem. Below you will see a high level breakdown of those projects with some pros and cons from how I interpret the best solution to be. You will also see some supply chain projects listed below. Supply chain solutions are just small niches in the larger IoT ecosystem. Item birth record, manufacturing history, package tracking can all be “Things” which the Internet of Things track. In fact, INT already has leaked some information hinting that they are cooperating with pharmaceutical companies to track the manufacture and packaging of the drugs they produce. INT may someday include WTC or VEN as one of its subchains feeding in information into the ecosystem.
.
.
IOTA
IOTA is a feeless and blockchain-less network called a directed acyclic graph. In my opinion, this creates more issues than it fixes.
The key to keeping IOTA feeless is that there are no miners to pay because the work associated with verifying a transaction is distributed to among all users, with each user verifying two separate transactions for their one. This creates some problems both in the enabling of smart contracts and the ability to create user privacy. Most privacy methods (zk-SNARKs in specific) require the one doing the verifying to use computationally intensive cryptography which are outside the capability of most devices on the IoT network (a weather sensor isn’t going to be able to build the ZK proof of a transaction every second or two). In a network where the device does the verifying of a transaction, cryptographic privacy becomes impractical. And even if there were a few systems capable of processing those transactions, there is no reward for doing the extra work. Fees keep the network safe by incentivizing honesty in the nodes, by paying those who have to work harder to verify a certain transaction, and by making it expensive to attack the network or disrupt privacy (Sybil Attacks).
IOTA also doesn’t have and may never have the ability to enable smart contracts. By the very nature of the Tangle (a chain of transactions with only partial structure unlike a linear and organized blockchain), establishing the correct time order of transactions is difficult, and in some situations, impossible. Even if the transactions have been time stamped, there is no way to verify them and are therefore open to spoofing. Knowing transaction order is absolutely vital to executing step based smart contracts.
There does exist a subset of smart contracts that do not require a strong time order of transactions in order to operate properly. But accepting this just limits the use cases of the network. In any case, smart contracts will not be able to operate directly on chain in IOTA. There will need to be a trusted off chain Oracle that watches transactions, establishes timelines, and runs the smart contract network
.
-Scalability – High
-Applicability – Low, no smart contracts, no privacy, not able to run on lightweight devices
-Interoperability – Maybe, Oracle possibility
-Consensus – Low, DAG won’t support simple IoT devices and I don’t see all devices confirming other transactions as a reality
-Developability – To be seen, currently working with many manufacturers
.
.
Ethereum
Ethereum is the granddaddy of smart contract blockchain. It is, arguably, in the best position to be the center point of the IoT ecosystem. Adoption is wide ranging, it is fast, cheap to transact with and well known; it is a Turing complete decentralized virtual computer that can do anything if you have enough gas and memory. But some of the things that make it the most advanced, will hold it back from being the best choice.
Turing completeness means that the programming language is complete (can describe any problem) and can solve any problem given that there is enough gas to pay for it and enough memory to run the code. You could therefore, create an infinite variety of different smart contracts. This infinite variability makes it impossible to create zk-SNARK verifiers efficiently enough to not cost more gas than is currently available in the block. Implementing zk-SNARKs in Ethereum would therefore require significant changes to the smart contract structure to only allow a small subset of contracts to permit zk-SNARK transactions. That would mean a wholesale change to the Ethereum Virtual Machine. Even in Zcash, where zk-SNARK is successfully implemented for a single, simple transaction type, they had to encode some of the network’s consensus rules into zk-SNARKs to limit the possible outcomes of the proof (Like changing the question of where are you in the US to where are you in the US along these given highways) to limit the computation time required to construct the proof.
Previously I wrote about how INT is using the Double Chain Consensus algorithm to allow easy scaling, segregation of network traffic and blockchain size by breaking the network down into separate cells, each with their own nodes and blockchains. This is building on lessons learned from single chain blockchains like Bitcoin. Ethereum, which is also a single chain blockchain, also suffers from these congestion issues as we have seen from the latest Cryptokitties craze. Although far less of an impact than that which has been seen with Bitcoin, transaction times grew as did the fees associated. Ethereum has proposed a new, second layer solution to solve the scaling issue: Sharding. Sharding draws from the traditional scaling technique called database sharding, which splits up pieces of a database and stores them on separate servers where each server points to the other. The goal of this is to have distinct nodes that store and verify a small set of transactions then tie them up to a larger chain, where all the other nodes communicate. If a node needs to know about a transaction on another chain, it finds another node with that information. What does this sound like? This is as close to an explanation of the Double Chain architecture as to what INT themselves provided in their whitepaper.
.
-Scalability – Neutral, has current struggles but there are some proposals to fix this
-Applicability – Medium, has endless smart contract possibilities, no privacy currently with some proposals to fix this
-Interoperability – Maybe, Oracle possibility
-Consensus – Medium, PoW currently with proposals to change to better scaling and future proofing.
-Developability – To be seen
.
.
IoTeX
A young project, made up of several accredited academics in cryptography, machine learning and data security. This is one of the most technically supported whitepapers I have read.They set out to solve scalability in the relay/subchain architecture proposed by Polkadot and used by INT. This architecture lends well to scaling and adaptability, as there is no end to the amount of subchains you can add to the network, given node and consensus bandwidth.
The way they look to address privacy is interesting. On the main parent (or relay) chain, they plan on implementing some of the technology from Monero, namely, ring signatures, bulletproofs and stealth addresses. While these are proven and respected technologies, this presents some worries as these techniques are known to not be lightweight and it takes away from the inherent generality of the core of the network. I believe the core should be as general and lightweight as possible to allow for scaling, ease of update, and adaptability. With adding this functionality, all data and transactions are made private and untraceable and therefore put through heavier computation. There are some applications where this is not optimal. A data stream may need to be read from many devices where encrypting it requires decryption for every use. A plain, public and traceable network would allow this simple use. This specificity should be made at the subchain level.
Subchains will have the ability to define their needs in terms of block times, smart contracting needs, etc. This lends to high applicability.
They address interoperability directly by laying out the framework for pegging (transaction on one chain causing a transaction on another), and cross-chain communication.
They do not address anywhere in the whitepaper the storage of data in the network. IoT devices will not be transaction only devices, they will need to maintain data, transmit data and query data. Without the ability to do so, the network will be crippled in its application.
IoTeX will use a variation of DPoS as the consensus mechanism. They are not specific on how this mechanism will work with no talk of data flow and node communication diagram. This will be their biggest hurdle and why I believe it was left out of the white paper. Cryptography and theory is easy to elaborate on within each specific subject but tying it all together, subchains with smart contracts, transacting with other side chains, with ring signatures, bulletproofs and stealth addresses on the main chain, will be a challenge that I am not sure can be done efficiently.
They may be well positioned to make this work but you are talking about having some of the core concepts of your network being based on problems that haven’t been solved and computationally heavy technologies, namely private transactions within smart contracts. So while all the theory and technical explanations make my pants tight, the realist in me will believe it when he sees it.
.
-Scalability – Neutral to medium, has the framework to address it with some issues that will hold it back.
-Applicability – Medium, has smart contract possibilities, privacy baked into network, no data framework
-Interoperability – Medium, inherent in the network design
-Consensus – Low, inherent private transactions may choke network. Consensus mechanism not at all laid out.
-Developability – To be seen, not mentioned.
.
.
CPChain
CPC puts a lot of their focus on data storage. They recognize that one of the core needs of an IoT network will be the ability to quickly store and reference large amounts of data and that this has to be separate from the transactional basis of the network as to not slow it down. They propose solving this using distributed hash tables (DHT) in the same fashion as INT, which stores data in a decentralized fashion so no one source owns the complete record. This system is much the same as the one used by BitTorrent, which allows data to be available regardless of which nodes will be online at a given time. The data privacy issue is solved by using client side encryption with one-to-many public key cryptography allowing many devices to decrypt a singly encrypted file while no two devices share the same key.
This data layer will be run on a separate, parallel chain as to not clog the network and to enable scalability. In spite of this, they don’t discuss how they will scale on the main chain. In order to partially solve this, it will use a two layer consensus structure centered on PoS to increase consensus efficiency. This two layer system will still require the main layer to do the entirety of the verification and block generation. This will be a scaling issue where the network will have no division of labor to segregate congestion to not affect the whole network.
They do recognize that the main chain would not be robust or reliable enough to handle high frequency or real-time devices and therefore propose side chains for those device types. Despite this, they are adding a significant amount of functionality (smart contracts, data interpretation) to the main chain instead of a more general and light weight main chain, which constrains the possible applications for the network and also makes it more difficult to upgrade the network.
So while this project, on the surface level (not very technical whitepaper), seems to be a robust and well thought out framework, it doesn’t lend itself to an all-encompassing IoT network but more for a narrower, data centric, IoT application.
.
-Scalability – Neutral to medium, has the framework to address it somewhat, too much responsibility and functionality on the main chain may slow it down.
-Applicability – Medium, has smart contract possibilities, elaborate data storage solution with privacy in mind as well has high frequency applications thought out
-Interoperability – Low, not discussed
-Consensus – Low to medium, discussed solution has high reliance on single chain
-Developability – To be seen, not mentioned.
.
.
ITC
The whitepaper reads like someone just grabbed some of the big hitters in crypto buzzword bingo and threw them in there and explained what they were using Wikipedia. It says nothing about how they will tie it all together, economically incentivize the security of the network or maintain the data structures. I have a feeling none of them actually have any idea how to do any of this. For Christ sake they explain blockchain as the core of the “Solutions” portion of their whitepaper. This project is not worth any more analysis.
.
.
RuffChain
Centralization and trust. Not very well thought out at this stage. DPoS consensus on a single chain. Not much more than that.
.
.
WaltonChain
Waltonchain focuses on tracking and validating the manufacture and shipping of items using RFID technology. The structure will have a main chain/subchain framework, which will allow the network to segregate traffic and infinitely scale by the addition of subchains given available nodes and main chain bandwidth.
DPoST (Stake & Trust) will be the core of their consensus mechanism, which adds trust to the traditional staking structure. This trust is based on the age of the coins in the staker’s node. The longer that node has held the coins, combined with the amount of coins held, the more likely that node will be elected to create the block. I am not sure how I feel about this but generally dislike trust.
Waltonchain's framework will also allow smart contracts on the main chain. Again, this level of main chain specificity worries me at scale and difficulty in upgrading. This smart contract core also does not lend itself to private transactions. In this small subset of IoT ecosystem, that does not matter as the whole basis of tracking is open and public records.
The whitepaper is not very technical so I cannot comment to their technical completeness or exact implementation strategy.
This implementation of the relay/subchain framework is a very narrow and under-utilized application. As I said before, WTC may someday just be one part of a larger IoT ecosystem while interacting with another IoT network. This will not be an all-encompassing network.
.
-Scalability – High, main/subchain framework infinitely scales
-Applicability – Low to medium, their application is narrow
-Interoperability – Medium, the framework will allow it seamlessly
-Consensus – Neutral, should not choke the network but adds trust to the equation
-Developability – N/A, this is a more centralized project and development will likely be with the WTC
.
.
VeChain
\*Let me preface this by saying I realize there is a place for centralized, corporatized, non-open source projects in this space.* Although I know this project is focused mainly on wider, more general business uses for blockchain, I was requested to include it in this analysis. I have edited my original comment as it was more opinionated and therefore determined not to be productive to the conversation. If you would like to get a feel for my opinion, the original text is in the comments below.\**
This project doesn't have much data to go off as the white paper does not contain much technical detail. It is focused on how they are positioning themselves to enable wider adoption of blockchain technology in the corporate ecosystem.
They also spend a fair amount of time covering their node structure and planned governance. What this reveals is a PoS and PoA combined system with levels of nodes and related reward. Several of the node types require KYC (Know Your Customer) to establish trust in order to be part of the block creating pool.
Again there is not much technically that we can glean from this whitepaper. What is known is that this is not directed at a IoT market and will be a PoS and PoA Ethereum-like network with trusted node setup.
I will leave out the grading points as there is not enough information to properly determine where they are at.
.
.
.
INT
So under this same lens, how does INT stack up? INT borrows their framework from Polkadot, which is a relay/subchain architecture. This framework allows for infinite scaling by the addition of subchains given available nodes and relay chain bandwidth. Custom functionality in subchains allows the one setting up the subchain to define the requirements, be it private transactions, state transaction free data chain, smart contracts, etc. This also lends to endless applicability. The main chain is inherently simple in it’s functionality as to not restrict any uses or future updates in technology or advances.
The consensus structure also takes a novel two-tiered approach in separating validating from block generation in an effort to further enable scaling by removing the block generation choke point from the side chains to the central relay chain. This leaves the subchain nodes to only validate transactions with a light DPoS allowing a free flowing transaction highway.
INT also recognizes the strong need for an IoT network to have robust and efficient data handling and storage. They are utilizing a decentralize storage system using DHT much like the BitTorrent system. This combined with the network implementation of all of the communication protocols (TCP/IP, UDP/IP, MANET) build the framework of a network that will effortlessly integrate any device type for any application.
The multi-chain framework easily accommodates interoperability between established networks like the Internet and enables pegging with other blockchains with a few simple transaction type inclusions. With this cross chain communication, manufactures wouldn’t have to negotiate their needs to fit an established blockchain, they could create their own subchain to fit their needs and interact with the greater network through the relay.
The team also understands the development hurdles facing the environment. They plan to solve this by standardizing requirements for communication and data exchange. They have heavy ties with several manufacturers and are currently developing a IoT router to be the gateway to the network.
.
-Scalability – High, relay/subchain framework enables infinite scalability
-Applicability – High, highest I could find for IoT. Subchains can be created for every possible application.
-Interoperability – High, able to add established networks for data support and cross chain transactions
-Consensus – High, the only structure that separates the two responsibilities of verifying and block generation to further enable scaling and not choke applicability.
-Developability – Medium, network is set up for ease of development with well-known language and subchain capability. Already working with device manufacturers. To be seen.
.
.
So with all that said, INT may be in the best place to tackle this space with their chosen framework and philosophy. They set out to accomplish more than WTC or VEN in a network that is better equipped than IOTA or Ethereum. If they can excecute on what they have laid out, there is no reason that they won’t become the market leader, easily overtaking the market cap of VeChain ($2.5Bn, $10 INT) in the short term and IOTA ($7Bn, $28 INT) in the medium term.
submitted by Graytrain to INT_Chain [link] [comments]

Homelab collective ressources post!

Hey guys!
I'm fairly new to this sub and to having a home lab in general and I found this community to be so kind and helping, I wanted to give back what I've learned. I'm seeing a lot of questions asked around on improvements and on what to do with x extra hardware so I thought it would be nice to have a thread to regroup that.
 
I'll put here some stuff I gathered and the most common questions I've seen, feel free to contribute and i'll update the post along.
 
Latest Additions
 
Homelab Dashboard
Posts about dashboards have been growing lately and here are some of the best that were kind enough to provide us with their sources.
User Screenshot Source
yours truly http://imgur.com/a/GhCNH https://github.com/Gabisonfire/dashboard-q
lastditchefrt http://i.imgur.com/5zQdao4.png https://github.com/d4rk22/Network-Status-Page
_SleepingBag_ http://i.imgur.com/Ql9ZM4W.png https://github.com/jsank/homelabdash
NiknakSi https://niknak.org/extras/sysinfo TBA
DainBramaged http://imgur.com/jYNlUEQ https://github.com/gordonturneBigBoard
michaelh4u https://i.imgur.com/XkZwMKj.png https://github.com/michaelh4u/homelabfrontpage
spigotx http://imgur.com/a/1zMht https://github.com/spigotx/HomeLab2
SirMaster https://nicko88.com/ https://github.com/dashbad/plex-server-status
yourofl10 http://imgur.com/a/AyROa TBA
TheBobWiley http://imgur.com/a/oU6d3 https://github.com/TheBobWiley/ManageThis-LandingPages
0110010001100010 http://i.imgur.com/iwtQcsL.jpg https://github.com/danodemano/monitoring-scripts
mescon & SyNiK4L https://i.imgur.com/gqdVM6p.jpg https://github.com/mescon/Muximux
ak_rex http://i.imgur.com/a/RJkrT https://github.com/ak-rex/homelab-dashboard
 
Or build yours from scratch: PRTG API, ELK, Grafana, freeboard, JumpSquares
 
Some other resources: Custom Monitoring Scripts by 0110010001100010
 
Credits to apt64 for his original post
= Pi specific =
 
= Download Automation =
 
= Virtualization =
 
= Monitoring =
 
= Media Center =
 
= Remote access =
 
= VOIP =
 
= Networking =
 
= File Servers/Storage/RAID =
 
= Cameras =
 
= Documentation =
 
= Dynamic DNS =
 
= Backup =
 
= Creating network diagrams =
 
= Guides =
 
= Misc =
 
That's all I could come up with on top of my head + some research, passing over to you guys so we can get a nice complete list!
 
Let's try and stick with free(or mostly) softwares, let me know if you guys feel otherwise.
submitted by Gabisonfire to homelab [link] [comments]

Three real reasons you should not buy the Nintendo Switch Online Service.

Three real reasons you should not buy the Nintendo Switch Online Service.

1. Online multiplayer should not be locked behind a paywall.

In response to the argument that the subscription will improve the servers that handle online matchmaking etc.
How is paying a subscription to Nintendo going to help fix the rubbish internet connectivity offered by my ISP. Could someone please explain?
If it does anything it will probably make it that much more difficult for me to upgrade to a better ISP/ network hardware. So it won't improve online multiplayer, there will still be plenty of disconnections and lagging players.
That isn’t to say that their online service will be bad. However I do believe that it will be the same as it was for the Wii U, and the same as it is now, currently, for the Switch.
This is the reality of the situation, if a player's internet connection is poor, then improving and upgrading the servers in some way isn't going to make any real difference.

Dedicated servers
The fact is there are reasons for using a dedicated serve servers for each game type, and Nintendo simply aren't going to implement them for smaller networks which are easy to manage, and in fact work faster without that middleman.
Dedicated servers won't improve games like Splatoon 2, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe or Smash Ultimate, since, for those games at least, it is quicker to communicate Peer to Peer, rather than Peer to Server to Peer again.
The diagrams below are simplified to show what a basic Client/Server topology looks like vs a Peer to Peer one.
Fortnite Battle Royale uses the Client/Server model because there are up to 100 players participating in each round.
In reality in the case of Fortnite Battle Royale there would be up to 100 consoles connected to a remote server. Large networks like this are not as easy to achieve using Peer to Peer. So they trade the faster, direct, distributed connections for the slower, indirect, bundled connections, because this would not be manageable without the server in between.
Splatoon 2 does not have that many players all playing simultaneously in each match. Hence it uses either the Peer to Peer model or the Client Hosted model, because these are more efficient for games with small numbers of players.
In Splatoon there are only up to 8 players in each match, which means 8 consoles, so the network is smaller, more easily manageable, and they can use direct connections (which are faster) between all the consoles.
So you should not pay the subscription, because they have no intention of implementing dedicated servers for these games. This is part of the reason online multiplayer should be free, since not every online game will benefit from dedicated servers.

Client/ Server vs Peer to Peer

"I've seen people time and time again say dedicated servers will make everything better, and that is a gross over generalisation, and it is not as straightforward as that. For example something like Splatoon 2 would probably actually benefit from being this whole Peer to Peer thing that we've got at the moment."
Source;
https://youtu.be/UZCavitV3-w?t=13m38s

"Peer-to-peer is generally considered obsolete for action games, but is still common in the real-time strategy genre due to its suitability for games with large numbers of tokens and small numbers of players. Instead of constantly transmitting the positions of 1000 troops, the game can make a one-off transmission of the fact that 1000 troops are selected and that the player in command of them just issued a move order."
Source;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_server

So it is dependent on the type of game, whether or not to use Peer to Peer. For something that has low numbers of players like Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Splatoon 2 and Smash Ultimate, either the Peer to Peer model or the Client Hosted model is used. However for something with hundreds of players or more, like an MMO, dedicated servers or the Client/Server model is used.
Where small numbers of players are involved it is quicker for each console to talk directly to one another, than it is for them to have to go through a remote server to get the information to one another.
I have already solved my problems with lag and disconnecting, and they aren't simply to do with the fact that they are using Peer to Peer or Client Hosted networking models for these games. If Peer to Peer was so hopeless, as many people claim, Bitcoin, the world's most successful decentralised crypto-currency would not be able to function.
Even if Nintendo were to implement dedicated servers for one or two of their online games, Fortnite Battle Royale already has dedicated servers, provided by a third party for free, so what are we paying Nintendo for again? Also Steam on PC has a variety of online multiplayer games that use dedicated servers, but they seem to be able to sustain those servers, despite the fact that it is free to play online.

You need a Wii LAN adapter.
(Also, do not use Powerline kits. The reason why powerline is also affected by this relates to the way data is transmitted in the electrical circuit of your home, using a certain frequency, or range of frequencies in the case of multiple powerline adapters. So powerline data transmission may also suffer from problems with interference, due to electrical noise that may be present in that circuit. This is another important piece of information to remember, as many people who start using a wired Ethernet connection may be under the impression that it does not improve online multiplayer, if they are still using it in combination with a powerline kit.)
"Most of the networking issues in online games are caused inside the player's local network, where WiFi and powerline are the biggest offenders.
WiFi (wireless LAN) is prone to interference, the 2.4GHz band is crowded, the 5Ghz band has shorter range, and the low effective bandwidth quickly causes network congestion.
Another major drawback of WiFi is that unless you have a MU-MIMO access point, your clients can't "talk" to the access point all at once. This causes higher latency and latency variation (jitter) as your PC must wait for "its turn" to talk to the access point, which also increases the risk of packet loss.
So, while the comfort provided by WiFi is great, it’s terrible for online gaming, which is why WiFi should be avoided at all costs."
https://www.pcgamer.com/netcode-explained/2/
When I first started playing online multiplayer, I was relying on a Wi-Fi connection to my Router, and I was experiencing a lot of lag and disconnections. I searched for a reason for this problem, and I found that Wi-Fi does not provide a stable enough connection between the console and your gateway. It was only when I started using a Wired Ethernet connection to my Router that I could play without the massive number of disconnections I was experiencing.
You will still experience a few disconnections occasionally, since the stability of the game depends on not just your connection, but that of the other players (who also need to be using wired LAN or you will still experience lag).
If any of the other 7 players in Splatoon are not using a LAN adapter, you will see them lag and possibly disconnect in the game. But I must emphasise that even if they did completely rewrite Splatoon 2 to use dedicated servers, you would still see those players lagging and disconnecting because this is a problem related to the notorious instability that you experience when using Wi-Fi. So it is the players local connection that really makes the difference.

There is a simple test you can use to verify what I am talking about regarding Wi-Fi instability.
If you have a PC or Laptop which has both a wired Ethernet adapter and a Wi-Fi adapter, you can run the ping command to check the latency of the connection between the computer and your gateway/ router, by pinging the IP address of the gateway/ router.
I ran this test using a Wi-Fi connection to my router from my PC. I could see how the latency of the connection between the PC and router was constantly going up and down, which isn't good for real time communication and stability.
I ran the test again using the same PC and router, but this time I used the wired Ethernet connection to the router. This time it stayed mostly constant. It no longer jumped around between 1ms and 9ms. It would stay at 1ms or 2ms.
But it was obvious this was the real problem, once I started using a wired connection for online multiplayer.

This is the real problem with Nintendo’s online multiplayer games, and it is compounded by the fact that Nintendo did not integrate an Ethernet connection into the Wii U or the dock for the Switch, so the majority of players are still using the built in Wi-Fi connection of their consoles to play online multiplayer.
Wi-Fi does not work well, when it comes to the real time communications required for online multiplayer. Basically this is because its wireless, and subject to interference very easily.
Nintendo need to produce a decent LAN adapter for the Switch. The officially licensed Hori LAN adapter isn't even USB 3.0, where the port in the back of the dock is USB 3.0. I know that it may not yet be functioning at USB 3.0 speeds, but that is supposed to be coming.
You can also use the official Wii/ Wii U LAN adapter with the Switch, since it is listed as being compatible on Nintendo's support site. So you don't need to buy another one, if you already have that.
Link;
What LAN Adapters Are Compatible With Nintendo Switch?
Just be careful which LAN adapter you buy, some third party adapters may not work at all with the console.
(Using a LAN adapter is only one part of the solution.)
Also don't connect two routers in series, since you will create a double NAT problem. Use a networking switch and a router. Enable UPnP in your router's settings, or try manual port forwarding. If this doesn't help then its an issue with the way your ISP works or your network hardware. You should be able to get NAT Type 2 if your ISP is any good.
The use of a networking switch is only recommended where it is absolutely necessary. If you can directly wire the console to your gateway/ router, then this is what you should do. But if you have no option, then I would recommend using a networking switch which prioritises certain ethernet ports for applications like online video games. There are simple unmanaged networking switches that will prioritise the traffic through one of their ports in order to minimise any delays, and in many cases you will see them being marketed towards people who play online video games.

ZyXEL GS-105B v3 5-Port Desktop Gigabit Switch


This is another reason online multiplayer should be free because if you pay the subscription, you aren't actually paying to fix anything regarding the actual multiplayer part of the service.

"How To Reduce Lag In Super Smash Bros. 4"
https://youtu.be/U3RPJu7c4XI

"Wii U Ethernet Adapter VS Wifi / Review?"
(Lag in last match is probably due to the opposing player using Wi-Fi or having a bad ISP)
https://youtu.be/x5zwbXN8mF8

"Squid Tip: Optimize Your Internet Connection!"
https://youtu.be/Gvejfuuypqc

In relation to input lag in games on Wii U and the Switch;
Input lag occurs because either people are using the 5GHz radio communication of the Gamepad, or they are using a Pro Controller which uses 2.4GHz Bluetooth communication. This is why many people prefer to use a wired Gamecube controller along with the Gamecube controller adapter for Smash 4.
The Gamepad and the Pro Controller both use wireless communication which can also experience interference.

Also once they start charging, it will increase. It is inevitable. Just look at how the subscription price has increased for PS Plus. And I don't believe it will stop increasing once they start. Perhaps slowly, but surely.

2. There should be a free local save data backup option.

Allow both local and online save backups for games like Splatoon 2.

Nintendo have made the excuse, that they will not allow people to backup save data for games like Splatoon 2 in order to combat cheating.
The following simple, yet effective, restrictions can be implemented in the system firmware of the console, in order to prevent cheating, while also allowing people to backup their save progress for these games;

  1. Only allow the system to restore data if there is no save data, or it has become corrupted.
  2. Do not allow people to erase the save data for those types of games.

Formatting the whole system would obviously erase the save data, but this would still deter players from simply erasing and restoring their save data, like when they lose their rank in Splatoon 2.

(Please note that these restrictions cannot be based on file date as that is subject to manipulation, this is why I believe it should be based simply on the presence of valid, uncorrupted save data.)

For games that require these restrictions, they could easily be integrated into the System Firmware. Just have the system perform the check on whether or not there is already valid save data.
This is the advantage of this solution. It is so simple to implement, it would work with existing games like Splatoon 2 without needing to patch every single competitive game that you wanted to be protected by these restrictions. No need for complex handshakes with online servers, where you may need to alte write additional servlets, and then have to patch all the games to work with those servlets.

People who want the "Save Data Cloud" are covered.
People who want local backups are also covered.
It can be done.

Nintendo can't expect people to start a game as challenging as Splatoon 2 all over again from scratch, and to be constantly in fear of losing their hard earned progress on a portable system. That would be extremely frustrating, especially when there is no need for it if they used the restrictions above.
I have read at least one comment where a Splatoon 2 player actually quit playing the game when all their progress was lost, and I am willing to bet there are many others.
Remember video games are supposed to be fun.

3. Apart from the instant games library that comes with the subscription, people should always have the option to purchase, and own a video game.

If people want a service where they have instant access to a library of games, along with a save data cloud backup then that is okay, but do not dictate to other people that, those should be the only options.

submitted by BasicConversation9 to u/BasicConversation9 [link] [comments]

How Does Bitcoin Work? - YouTube 'Fake Bitcoin' - How this Woman Scammed the World, then ... Bitcoin Update : Bitcoin Chart Analysis English How Many Bitcoin Should You Own? - YouTube Bitcoin: Beyond The Bubble - Full Documentary - YouTube

Bitcoin mining is done by specialized computers. The role of miners is to secure the network and to process every Bitcoin transaction. Miners achieve this by solving a computational problem which allows them to chain together blocks of transactions (hence Bitcoin’s famous “blockchain”).. For this service, miners are rewarded with newly-created Bitcoins and transaction fees. Bitcoin works on sophisticated cryptography supported by a local community in a peer-to-peer network. This study reviews scholarly articles to understand how bitcoin is addressed in the literature. The study reports on the attributes of bitcoin through a systematic literature review. The paper is based on primary data from existing literature and secondary data from relevant case studies in ... Currency Statistics Block Details Mining Information Network Activity Wallet Activity Market Signals. Popular Stats. Market Price. The average USD market price across major bitcoin exchanges. Average Block Size (MB) The average block size over the past 24 hours in megabytes. Transactions Per Day. The aggregate number of confirmed transactions in the past 24 hours. Mempool Size (Bytes) The ... • Ethereum outperformt Bitcoin • DeFi-Markt wächst rasant • Große Hoffnungen auf Ethereum 2.0 Neben Bitcoin ist Ethereum wohl eine der bekanntesten Kryptowährungen weltweit. Laut ... What is Bitcoin and how does it work? Definition: Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency, a form of electronic money. It is a decentralized digital currency without is independent of banks and can be sent from user to user on the peer-to-peer bitcoin blockchain network without the need for intermediaries. Updated April 2019 If you want to know what is Bitcoin, how you can get it, and how it can help you ...

[index] [41701] [38502] [50764] [40048] [35319] [43933] [47877] [17790] [46298] [25921]

How Does Bitcoin Work? - YouTube

Start trading Bitcoin and cryptocurrency here: http://bit.ly/2Vptr2X Bitcoin is the first decentralized digital currency. All Bitcoin transactions are docume... Get an additional $10 in Bitcoins from Coinbase when purchasing through my referral link http://fredyen.com/get/Bitcoins Here is a quick beginner's guide on ... The virtual goldrush to mine Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies leads us to Central Washington state where a Bitcoin mine generates roughly $70,000 a day min... Whether or not it's worth investing in, the math behind Bitcoin is an elegant solution to some complex problems. Hosted by: Michael Aranda Special Thanks: Da... Bitcoin Update : Bitcoin Chart Analysis English This video i am making to help those people who are in confusion that at what price they purchase Bitcoins or sell Bitcoins. In this video i have ...

#