The best Bitcoin videos, infographics and podcasts - CoinDesk

Alpha Rovers greatest moments V2.0

It's been about 6 months since this list was last updated, let's see if we can get to 101. Currently at 76.
1-Pushes his cat in a cat stroller
2 -Gets another man to change a lightbulb
3 -Rides around on a 9bot
4 -Choked on a shot of whiskey
5 -Complained about his drawn butter
6 -Makes homosexual jokes about co-workers
7 -Mocks people with speech impediments and/or disabilities
8 -Watched all Twilight and 50 Shades movies
9 -Drinks Champagne all year round
10 -Befriended a mouse that lives in bushes outside his house. Claims mouse had "little mouse hands". (credit thehotsister)
11 -Asks women if they like backdoor action
12 -Asks women when they started developing breasts
13 -Facetimes with an 8 year old girl regularly
14 -Likes to tell stories about his threesomes with another dude, not sure as if he recalls having a threesome with 2 females. (Chaka7511) (Terryballsonchin)
15 -Started wrestling boys around the same time he started masturbating, not sure as if he recalls wrestling a girl. (Chaka7511)
16 -Likes to befriend turtles. (rawdog87)
17 -Hates every popular thing for inexplicable reasons . (blueskynoise88)
18 -Lets ex girlfriend Duji walk all over him. (blueskynoise88)
19 -Has never exceeded 199.99 pounds. (blueskynoise88)
20 -Dislikes people that are passionate about stuff. (jt312)
21 -Once downed a tub of animal crackers over the course of one show. (ThrashemCatchem)
22 -Calls B2's dad for anything that involes tools. (qigger)
23 -Once picked up a hammer and was rushed to ER by B2mywife for a sliver that was undetectable with modern medical technology. (SnitzTheGoat)
24 -Doesn't feel comfortable eating chocolate covered bananas in public. (Sanity0004)
25 -Sprained his wrist while attempting to vacuum. Bought a Roomba instead. (DetroitLightningSF)
26 -Loves telling long stories about the shit ton of dippin dots he ate over weekend. (Subtle_OG)
27 -Has expressed interest in learning more about soccer. (liluzipurp)
28 -Likes to freeze his chocolate dusted nuts. Claims they are delicious. (jeffmoss262)
29 -Got married in swishy pants. (Triceratastic)
30 -Plays the flute. (notdongbobbler)
31 -Has wife pump gas when he's not in his Tesla, that he owns, because it's electric and thus doesn't need gas. (MrsHoose6)
32 -Was shot but fortunately the bullet only grazed him and didn't leave much of a scar.
33 -Rarely mentions this subreddit and says Reddit like he's unsure what it is.
34 -Deleted message board from his website and claims he doesn't read internet comments.
35 -Doesn't like to acknowledge the city that made him. Prefers "The City where the show is based" and sometimes "Up north here"
36 -Wears a "nail bracelet" that his wife gave him for "nailing her so good". (hspencer1)
37 -When Anderson Cooper comes up, Rover likes to mention at least 3 times that he really likes Anderson Cooper.
38 -Was once kidnapped by a large woman and possibly sexually assaulted, but not sure...
39 -Favorite insults are "What a doooosh" and "What a jacknut"
40 -Invites a tech expert on show to take calls, makes a joke suggesting the tech expert is a pervert, then proceeds to answer calls himself.
41 -Ahhbsessed with anal sex. Likes to tell every hookup girl the proper way to do it. LOTS OF LUBE!
42 -Shaves all of his body hair, including his anus. Hmm...
43 -Chose to travel the world with Charlie, whom he insists is a beta homosexual. Strange coincidence...
44 -Bought an orginal Star Trek outfit for over a thousand dollars. Says Game of Thrones fans are nerds. (jerichosway) (lucky917)
45 -Claims he has never told B2 his wife that he loves her. (SnitzTheGoat)
46 -Allegedly told Duji he loves her when they dated.
47 -Had sex with Duji for a decade.
48 -Married a girl out of his league, B2mywife, but seemingly prefers masturbating in bed while she sleeps instead of sex.
49 -Had B2 his wife assemble his grill.
50 -Never spoke on the phone with B2 his wife until they married. Later shocks his fans by admitting that he did in fact speak to her before the marriage. (hspcencer1)
51 -Talks to Duji on the phone every morning on his way to work.
52 -Made a sex tape with Duji. Ewww that is sick!
53 -Would send emails to Duji posing as his cat.
54 -Took time off work when his cat died.
55 -Found out his dad died on the air. Shrugged it off.
56 -Sent his Uber driver back to pick up his baseball cap. (CantLookAway99)
57 -Doesn't understand how Charlie and Snitz have so much time to watch netflix and hulu. Proceeds to watch 86 episodes of the Sopranos in 2 weeks.
58 -Watches every Oscar nominated movie to prepare for the Oscars, then spends two days gabbing all about it.
59 -Cried in bed next to Duji when he was allegedly dumped by a local news reporter.
60 -Makes fun of Rush Limbaughs fake radio voice, used to sound an awful lot like Rush Limbaugh. See Dieter vs Butterbean.
61 -Likes to interrupt people to correct their pronunciation.
62 -Likes to stop in the middle of an email to point out a misspelled word.
63 -Doesn't follow anyone on twitter.
64 -Doesn't recall if he was engaged to Duji.
65 -Doesn't have kids, but cut ones umbilical cord.
66 - Claims rock is dead and thus has no choice but to listen to Pink, Taylor Swift and Camila Cabello. Even had a Range Rover that only played Pink. (Cantlookaway99) (Chaka7511) (Dieterswig)
67 -According to one eye witness Rover was seen dancing on his boat to a Pink song. (Mtneer24)
68 -Comes up with painful and/or humiliating competitions for his underlings but never competes himself.
69 -Used to pick up chicks by pretending to be an australian actor, complete with accent and his black friend Tyrone playing the part of bodyguard.
70 -Had an indian friend Patel, says he smelled of curry and didn't even know it.
71 -Said the girls of Babymetal were hot, not realizing they were 12-14 at the time.
72 -Thinks Track Jackets and Hurley hats are cool.
73 -Can not say the word "podcast" without immense disdain.
74 -His show is always #1 when an affiliate drops him.
75 -Handles criticism by talking louder than caller, then claiming said caller hung up.
76 -Says he was #1 before JLR and will be #1 after JLR. Most viewed youtube clip is JLR.
77 -Drinks La Croix.
Update 2.0
78 -Wrestles with co-workers 9 year old girl
79 -Plays mysterious "sleeping monster" game with co-workers 9 year old girl
80 -Kicked out of Auschwitz for squeaky shoes
81 -Says Cindy on The Brady Bunch was "the hot one"
82 -Called his co-workers morons for jumping on the Bitcoin bandwagon while secretly investing himself (calipiterseverywhere)
83 -Hosted illegal warehouse parties during his rebellious teenage flute playing years. (BigGulpsx)
84 -Wears hoodies in the summer. Too Alpha for AC. (chongo11)
85 -Lost wedding ring playing in the snow with ex-girlfriends daughter (chongo11)
86 -Asks for an opinion, proceeds to explain how opinion is wrong, just wrong! (NwoNW)
87 -Approves of a rejoin shitting on other shows for doing lists, proceeds to do 1-2 lists per show. (NwoNW)
88 -Gets tour bus with his face plastered all over it to get the show more exposure, then hides bus in secluded parking lots. (jeffmoss262)
89 -Wants gun regulations for people with mental health issues. Lost his shit when his ex-girlfriend went on a date. (PeterMEWL)
90 -Wore zippers fashioned into a jacket in Paris. (Fartboxboy4life)
91 -Shits on Dieter for keeping his girlfriend now wife secret. Was in secret relationship with Duji for a decade. (Fartboxboy4life)
92 -Gets an upset tummy when he drinks beer. Going to Germany for Oktoberfest.
93 -Frequent emergency bowel movements and avoidance of B2 suggests leaky butt and explosive diarrhea, possibly from a stretched/weakened sphincter. (DeeJayShawDay)
94 -Has spent entire segments arguing over the correct pronunciation of Maybach.
95 -Is pro eugenics
96 -Explained away a pile of tissues next to his bed as being the result of so much sex with B2mywife.
97 -Laughs at JLR for getting a prostitute. Brags about dating a porn star.
98 -Flooded the engine of his sport suv by driving through a puddle (sandiegotaco)
99 -Still claims he's never told his wife that he loves her but is sure to tell her how much he appreciates her everyday. (Roger4Pres)
100 -Has pictures of co-workers 9 year old daughter all over his workcenter. (Roger4Pres)
101 -Rover during his teenage years of running from cops and banging chicks left and right. https://imgur.com/gallery/MzRS0h4 (DeeJayShawDay)
102 -Claims he can throw a baseball 75+ mph but on the day he was going to prove it his wrist starting hurting. (Roger4Pres)
103 -Claims he has a friend. What's more, this friends name is "Crank" and Rover talks to him about once a year. (Roger4Pres)
104 -Became an expert in mental health after working in a mental hospital for 1 year, but doesn't like to mention this more than once every 3 hours. (mos661)
105 -Is sure to let every black celebrity he interviews know that he had a single mother and they were poor when he was growing up in Vegas. (mos661)
106 -Made his wife quit her job to “help” with all of his business. Does not pay her anything, then bitches when she wants something. “B2 is looking for a new car, well I guess I’m getting a new car cuz I’m paying for it” (hspencer1)
107 -Made the decision to become a soccer fan at the age of 42 and immediately flew to London to watch a game. Not interested in Cleveland sports teams or even acknowledging they exist.
108 -Somehow grew up poor despite his parents being a doctor and a lawyer.
109 -Loves gabbing about his non-processed diet. Goes to Dairy Queen at least once a week with some little girl.
110 -Once spent an entire segment bitching at Charlie for using a day and a half of vacation time. Meanwhile, Rover is going to Europe for 3rd or 4th vacation this year.
111 -Will CANCEL your RMG+ membership if you bitch about RMG+. Gained Legendary Alpha status as a result. (hspencer1)
112 -When he walks around the block by his house he is always traveling uphill. It is currently unknown how he achieves this seemingly impossible feat. (multiple mentions)
113 -Was surpised by the speed of a turtle he tried to catch.
114 -Won't push a shopping cart or carry out leftovers as these are the job of a woman. (hspencer1)
115 -Has his 93 pound wife drag the garbage cans to the curb. (hspencer1)
116 -Has B2 deal with handymen that do work around the house so he can pretend he's too busy to fix things himself.
117 -Suggests he's going to fire Duji for her poor news reading skills on a daily basis for close to 20 years.
118 -Had a marker thrown in his face by Duji. Promised to get back at her one day. This was around 2015.
119 -Continues to do a poor impersonation of JLR despite universal hatred for it.
120 -Kept quiet while Gene Simmons treated him like a little bitch.
121 -Said Rob was a horrible person for denying he was the father of a child. Rover continues to deny he has any kids despite spending all his time with one that looks just like him.
122 -According to a recent poll, Rover is the second least liked person on his own show. This might explain why Duji is still around.
123 -Says everything on Reddit is a lie. Everything on this list is a verifiable fact except a few that are more speculation.
124 -Says "Iced" instead of "fired"
125 -Says "The hiv" instead of "HIV"
126 -Instead of coming up with entertaining radio bits he prefers to spend his time working on the technical side of the show like the "WIRES!" and the broken video player that is RMGTV. Too full of himself to hire a professional. (johnclevohio)
127 -Instead of simply calling it "the news" he insists on calling it "the shizzy, the news" (moss661)
128 -Went to a sex club and got serviced by some hot chick but can’t quite recall any of the details (NwoNW)
129 -Says a little bit of JLR goes a long way. Fans say hire JLR full time and get him in the studio.
130 -Claims he is lifting 30lb dumbbells, could easily prove it but chooses not to.
131 -Takes a girl he claims he's not the father of to "Daddy daughter dances"
132 -Was enraged when he learned Snitz was making 1 to 10 dollars a week on Twitch. Says fans were only donating that money because of his RMG fame.
133 -At 5 years old he experienced a lifetime of adventures.
134 -Made his wife cry when she bought the wrong candy bars for Halloween.
135 -Befriended an insect, possibly a silverfish, that lived in a hole in his shower. (zdriver7)
136 -Flew First Class while his wife rode coach. (zdriver7)
137 -Is so dedicated to putting on a good show that he arrives a full minute before the show goes live. Only arrives late 1-3 times a month.
138 -Shits on Bob and Tom for fake laughing but acts oblivious to Duji's incredibly fake and annoying laughing.
139 -Promised a 10 year retrospective. 10 years ago.
140 -Allegedly gave Duji a six figure payout when they broke up.
141 -Frequently inquires about the age of Snitz's daughters.
142 -Rates his wife a 7. Also rates Duji a 7.
143 -Asked a guest if his sons were "well hung"
144 -Made his wife cry by taking 30 seconds to make reservations at a restaurant (LarryJarocque)
145 -Complained for years about pain in the tip of his penis. Was cured by a finger up his butt. (LarryJarocque)
146 -Frequently shows up to work with a white substance on his lips (LarryJarocque)
147 -Was spotted in the wild wearing these https://imgur.com/a/FVMlwhg (Roger4Pres) (notdongbobbler)
148 -Says Americans are fat and stuff their faces with Doritos and cheeseburgers all day. Is fat and stuffs his face with animal crackers.
149 -Buys a million dollar bus to tour the country and go to all the big events. Goes to something called Spiedie Fest instead. A festival dedicated to cubed chicken in a bun...
150 -Blocked his door with a heavy old typewriter so he could have his virginity taken without interruption. (NwoNW)
151 -Chose not to get his wife anything for their first anniversary.
152 -Has special wipes for his oily eyelids.
153 -Only buys the douchiest of vehicles. Ranger Rovers, Teslas and possibly a G-wagon soon.
154 -Isn't comfortable drinking tap water because it runs through pipes while recognizing the fact that bottled water also runs through pipes. (jtr489)
Any suggestions not added means they're most likely covered already.
submitted by Icanttaedujianymore to RoversMorningGlory [link] [comments]

How much would a Bitcoin node handling 1GB blocks cost today? I did some back-on-the-envelope calculations.

1GB blocks would be able to confirm more than 5000tx/s. That would be VISA-level scale (which handles, on average, 1736tx/s). We often hear that we shouldn't raise the blocksize because then nodes would become too expensive to run. But how expensive exactly?
We have the following costs to take into account:
For now, I'm going to assume a non-pruned full node (i.e. a node that stores all transactions of the blockchain) for personal use, i.e. for a computer built at home. I'll add in the calculations for a pruned node at the end, which would likely be the prefered option for people who merely want to verify the blockchain for themselves. If you don't care about the assumptions and calculations, you can just jump right to the end of this post. If you spotted any error, please inform me and I'll update my calculation.

Storage

There's, on average, one block every 10 minutes, that is 144 every day and 4320 blocks every thirty days. I was able to find a 3TB HDD for $47,50 on Amazon, that is $0.018/GB. Storing all blocks with all transactions of a month (4320GB) would be $78.96/mo. Prices for storage halved from 2014 to 2017, so we can assume that to half in 2022, thus we can reasonably assume it'd cost around $40/mo. in 2022.
But would such an inexpensive hard disk be able to keep up with writing all the data? I found a comparable cheap HDD which can write 127MB/s sequentially (which would be the writing mode of Bitcoin). That would be enough even for 76GB blocks!
Edit: For the UTXO set, we need very fast storage for both reading and writing. Peter__R, in his comment below, estimates this to be 1TB for 4 billion users (which would make ~46,000tx/s if everyone would make 1tx/day, so id'd require about 10GB blocks). jtoomim seems more pessimistic on that front, he says that much of that has to be in RAM. I'll add the $315 I've calculated below to account for that (which would be rather optimistic, keep in mind).

Bandwidth

Bandwidth is more complicated, because that can't just be shipped around like HDDs. I'll just take prices for my country, Germany, using the provider T-online, because I don't know how it works in the US. You can plug in your own numbers based on the calculations below.
1GB blocks/10 minute mean 1.7MB/s. However, this is an average, and we need some wiggle room for transaction spikes, for example at Christmas or Black Friday. VISA handles 150 million transactions per day, that is 1736tx/s, but can handle up to 24,000tx/s (source). So we should be able to handle 13.8x the average throughput, which would be 1.7MB/s x 13.8 = 23.46M/s, or 187.68Mbit/s. The plan on T-online for 250Mbit/s (translated) would be 54.95€/mo (plus setup minus a discount for the first 6 months which seems to cancel out so we'll ignore it), which would be $61.78/mo. This plan is an actual flatrate, so we don't have to worry about hitting any download limit.
Note, however, that we don't order bandwidth for only our Bitcoin node, but also for personal use. If we only needed 2MB/s for personal use, the plan would be 34.95€, thus our node would actually only cost the difference of 20€ per month, or $22.50/mo. Nielsen's Law of Internet Bandwidth claims that a high-end user's connection speed grows by 50% per year. If we assume this is true for pricing too, the bandwidth cost for ~200Mbit/s/mo. would go down to 12.5% (forgot how exponential growth works) 29.6% of its today's cost by 2022, which decreases our number to $2.81/mo. $6.66/mo.
Edit: jtoomim, markblundeberg and CaptainPatent point out that the node would have a much higher bandwidth for announcing transactions and uploading historical blocks. In theory, it would not be necessary to do any of those things and still be able to verify one's own transactions, by never broadcasting any transactions. That would be quite leechy behaviour, though. If we were to pick a higher data plan to get 1000MBit/s downstream and 500MBit/s upstream, it would cost 119.95€/mo., however this plan isn't widely available yet (both links in German). 500MBit/s of upstream would give us max. 21 connected nodes at transaction spikes, or max. 294 connected nodes at average load. That would cost $39.85 in 2022 (with correct exponential growth).

CPU/Memory

CPU/Memory will be bought once and can then run for tens of years, so we'll count these as setup costs. The specs needed, of course, depend on the optimization of the node software, but we'll assume the current bottlenecks will have been removed once running a node actually becomes demanding hardware-wise.
This paper establishes that a 2.4GHz Intel Westmere (Xeon E5620) CPU can verify 71000 signatures per second... which can be bought for $32.88 a pair on Ebay (note: this CPU is from Q1'10). We'd need to verify 76659tx/s at spikes (taking the 13.8x number), so that pair of CPUs (handle 142,000tx/s) seem to just fit right in (given one signature per tx). We'd also have to account for multiple signatures per transaction and all the other parts of verification of transactions, but it seems like the CPU costs are neglegible anyway if we don't buy the freshest hardware available. ~$100 at current prices seem reasonable. Given Moore's Law, we can assume that prices for CPUs half every two years (transistor count x1.4162), so in three years, the CPU(s) should cost around $35.22 ($100/1.4163).
For memory, we again have to take into account the transaction spikes. If we're very unlucky, and transactions spike and there won't be a block for ~1h, the mempool can become very large. If we take the factor of 13.8x from above, and 1h of unconfirmed transactions (20,000,000tx usually, 276,000,000tx on spikes), we'd need 82.8GB (for 300B per transaction).
I found 32GB of RAM (with ECC) for $106, so three of those give us 96GB of RAM for $318 and plenty remaining space for building hash trees, connection management and the operating system. Buying used hardware doesn't seem to decrease the cost significantly (we actually do need a lot of RAM, compared to CPU power).
Price of RAM seems to decrease by a factor of x100 every 10 years (x1.58510), so we can expect 96GB to cost around $79.89 ($318/1.5853) in 2022.
Of course, CPU and memory need to be compatible, which I haven't taken into account. Chug a mainboard (~$150) and a power supply (~$50) into the mix, and the total would be just over $600 for today's prices. Even if mainboard and power supply prices remain the same, we'd still only have to pay around $315 for the whole setup in 2022.

Electricity

I found the following power consumptions:
So we'd have 129W 147.6W + N*6W. Electricity cost average at 12ct/kWh in the US, in Germany this is higher at 30.22ct/kWh. In the US, it would cost $11.14 $12.75 + N*$0.52 (P*12ct/kWh / 1000 * 24h/day *30days / 100ct/$), in Germany 28.06€ 32.11€ + N*1.30€.
At the end of the first year, it would cost $20.12 $21.73/mo. in the US and 50.52€ 54.57€/mo. in Germany.
At the end of the second year, it would cost $29.11 $30.72/mo. for the US and 72.98€ 77.03€/mo. for Germany. It increases by $8.98/mo. per year in the US and by 22.46€/mo. per year in Germany.
Electricity prices in Germany have increased over time due to increased taxation; in the US the price increase has been below inflation rate the last two decades. As it's difficult to predict price changes here, I'm going to assume prices will remain the same.

Conclusion

In summary, we get:
If we add everything up, for today's prices, we get (E: updated all following numbers, but only changed slightly) $132/mo. (US), $187/mo. (DE) for the second year and $71.92/mo. $78/mo. (US), $115.79/mo. $124/mo. (DE) in 2022.
It definitely is quite a bit of money, but consider what that machine would actually do; it would basically do the equivalent of VISA's payment verification multiple times over, which is an amazing feat. Also, piano lessons cost around $50-$100 each, so if we consider a Bitcoin hobbyist, he would still pay much less for his hobby than a piano player, who'd pay about $400 per month. So it's entirely reasonable to assume that even if we had 1GB blocks, there would still be lots of people running full-nodes just so.
How about pruned nodes? Here, we only have to store the Unspent Transaction Output Set (UTXO set), which currently clocks in at 2.8GB. If blocks get 1000 times bigger, we can assume the UTXO set to become 2.8TB. I'll assume ordinary HDD's aren't goint to cut it for reading/writing the UTXO set at that scale, so we'll take some NVMe SSDs for that, currently priced at $105/TB. Three of them would increase our setup by $315 to $915, but decrease our monthly costs. E: However this UTXO set is also required for the non-pruned node, therefore the setup costs stay at $915. Even in the highest power state, the 3 SSDs will need only 18.6W in total, so we'll get a constant 147.6W for the whole system.
In total, this is:
In total, this is $35.25/mo. in the US and $58.57/mo. in Germany for today's prices, or (E:) $19.41/mo. (US) and (E:) $42.73/mo. (DE) in 2022's prices. Which looks very affordable even for a non-hobbyist.
E: spelling
E²: I've added the 3 NVEe SSDs for the UTXO set, as pointed out by others and fixed an error with exponentials, as I figured out.
submitted by eyeofpython to btc [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: CryptoTechnology top posts from 2017-12-23 to 2020-01-20 15:51 PDT

Period: 758.36 days
Submissions Comments
Total 956 13660
Rate (per day) 1.26 18.01
Unique Redditors 584 3144
Combined Score 21553 44566

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 1166 points, 43 submissions: Neophyte-
    1. "Do you need a Blockchain?" - this paper is fantastic, everyone should read this before evaluating a coin and if requires a block chain to solve a solution the coin is promising to solve. (136 points, 41 comments)
    2. Do any of you foresee a crypto being widely adopted as a general purpose payment coin? nano, btc, btccash etc (take your pick). I think it won't happen for reasons in this post. What do you think? (59 points, 54 comments)
    3. Noticed the huge rise of EOS lately what does it have over NEO and ethereum and to a lesser extent Cardano? I tried researching it, but wasn't sold. (54 points, 55 comments)
    4. Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later ~Vitalik (46 points, 1 comment)
    5. I had a Q&A with Bruno head architect / CEO of oyster, thought you guys might like it. (45 points, 2 comments)
    6. A good article that explains in simple terms how Eth2 works, how it will be rolled out and migrated from eth1 (42 points, 4 comments)
    7. DAI the stablecoin can now be transferred GAS free (article explaining how it works via new MCD DAI contract). This holds alot of promise for the so called "Web3" (40 points, 8 comments)
    8. Veriblock is consuming 27% of bitcoins block space - what does this mean for bitcoins future? (39 points, 16 comments)
    9. Vitalik: Alternative proposal for early eth1 <-> eth2 merge (38 points, 3 comments)
    10. Is launching a PoW permissionless blockchain still possible today? or would it be too susceptible to a 51% attack? (37 points, 37 comments)
  2. 578 points, 16 submissions: crypto_ha
    1. Why is Ripple considered a cryptocurrency (by many)? (109 points, 63 comments)
    2. So reportedly there are serious vulnerabilities found in EOS’ code. And it seems like those are more than just random software bugs. (97 points, 29 comments)
    3. Guide: How to get started with Blockchain development? (60 points, 6 comments)
    4. A newly found vulnerability in Nano's Android wallet (44 points, 12 comments)
    5. The history and state of Ethereum's Casper research - Vitalik Buterin (39 points, 4 comments)
    6. What is the difference between Sidechain vs Child Chain vs Off Chain? (39 points, 12 comments)
    7. EOS mainnet is official live (finally), but... (36 points, 24 comments)
    8. Bitcoin's "doomsday" economics - Bank of International Settlements (34 points, 23 comments)
    9. How Wall Street’s embrace could undermine Bitcoin (30 points, 9 comments)
    10. Ethereum ERC 1497: DApp Dispute Evidence Standard (24 points, 0 comments)
  3. 513 points, 20 submissions: ndha1995
    1. Ethereum Classic is currently being 51% attacked (103 points, 31 comments)
    2. Why are there so many garbage posts the past 24 hours? (58 points, 10 comments)
    3. Google Unveils 72-Qubit Quantum Processor With Low Error Rates (48 points, 24 comments)
    4. IOTA's Network-Bound PoW consensus, is it feasible? (42 points, 13 comments)
    5. The Challenges of Investigating Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain Related Crime (29 points, 7 comments)
    6. Deep dive into zk-STARKs with Vitalik Buterin's blog posts (26 points, 3 comments)
    7. Tether discussion thread (26 points, 21 comments)
    8. Vitalik Buterin Proposes a Consensus Algorithm That Requires Only 1% to Be Honest (24 points, 8 comments)
    9. Can somebody compare Qtum vs. NEO, technology-wise? (E.g. PoS vs. PoW; smart contract protocols...) (21 points, 15 comments)
    10. Introduction to Non Fungible Tokens (NFTs) (21 points, 9 comments)
  4. 377 points, 16 submissions: turtleflax
    1. Around 13% of DASH's privateSends are traceable to their origin (69 points, 3 comments)
    2. "Big Bang" attack could leverage Monero's dynamic blocksize to bloat the blockchain to 30TB in only 36 hours (52 points, 3 comments)
    3. The case for the obsolescence of Proof of Work and why 2018 will be the year of Proof of Stake (41 points, 29 comments)
    4. Monero vs PIVX: The First Scheduled Privacy Coin Debate Thread on /CryptoCurrency (38 points, 12 comments)
    5. Introducing the Privacy Coin Matrix, a cross-team collaboration comparing 20 privacy coins in 100 categories (26 points, 25 comments)
    6. Do permissioned blockchains have any merits? (25 points, 23 comments)
    7. The State of Hashing Algorithms — The Why, The How, and The Future (21 points, 4 comments)
    8. How Zerocoin Works in 5 Minutes (19 points, 5 comments)
    9. Errors made by Satoshi (17 points, 8 comments)
    10. How Much Privacy is Enough? Threats, Scaling, and Trade-offs in Blockchain Privacy Protocols - Ian Miers (Cornell Tech, Zerocoin, Zerocash) (17 points, 4 comments)
  5. 321 points, 6 submissions: Qwahzi
    1. Technical comparison of LIGHTNING vs TANGLE vs HASHGRAPH vs NANO (133 points, 37 comments)
    2. Addressing Nano's weaknesses (bandwidth usage and disk IO). Nano voting traffic to be reduced by 99.9% by implementing vote by hash, lazy bootstrapping, and reduced vote rebroadcasting (x-post CryptoCurrency) (78 points, 8 comments)
    3. Emergent centralization due to economies of scale (PoW vs DPoS) – Colin LeMahieu (52 points, 37 comments)
    4. Nano community member developing a distributed "mining" service to pay people to do PoW for third-parties (e.g. exchanges, light wallet services, etc) (32 points, 20 comments)
    5. What do you think about OpenCAP, the cryptocurrency alias protocol that mirrors traditional email addresses? (15 points, 12 comments)
    6. Bitcoin would be a calamity, not an economy (11 points, 52 comments)
  6. 256 points, 4 submissions: rockyrainy
    1. Bitcoin Gold hit by Double Spend Attack (51% attack). The Attacker reversed 22 blocks. (179 points, 102 comments)
    2. ZK-starks white paper published (44 points, 16 comments)
    3. [Q] How does a network reach consensus on what time it is? (21 points, 17 comments)
    4. Stateless (no history) Cryptocurrency via snapshots? (12 points, 7 comments)
  7. 244 points, 3 submissions: HSPremier
    1. From a technical standpoint: Why does every blockchain projects need their own coins? (181 points, 50 comments)
    2. What is Reddit's obsession with REQ? (61 points, 43 comments)
    3. What is the technological difference between a privacy coin and a privacy coin platform? Won't a privacy coin platform be more superior than a privacy coin? (2 points, 3 comments)
  8. 234 points, 2 submissions: Realness100
    1. A Guided Reading of Bitcoin’s Original White Paper (202 points, 10 comments)
    2. A Guided Reading of Ethereum's Original White Paper! (32 points, 5 comments)
  9. 185 points, 4 submissions: tracyspacygo
    1. My brief observation of most common Consensus Algorithms (159 points, 49 comments)
    2. What are the main Trends/Challenges for Bitcoin and whole crytpocurrencies industry? (12 points, 33 comments)
    3. Guideline for Newbies: Trying out Bitcoin transactions with TESTNET (7 points, 1 comment)
    4. Most advanced Cryptocurrencies Comparison Table (7 points, 8 comments)
  10. 177 points, 9 submissions: benmdi
    1. What's the best argument against cryptotechnology? I.e. Steelman the cryptocurrency skeptic (43 points, 42 comments)
    2. Would there be interest from this community in crypto resources aimed at developers? If so, what topics? (29 points, 14 comments)
    3. Has the window for bootstrapping a new PoW coin closed? (24 points, 57 comments)
    4. What can we, as a community, learn from the rise & acquisition of GitHub (23 points, 8 comments)
    5. 🍱 Rollup Roundup: Understanding Ethereum's Emerging Layer 2 (19 points, 1 comment)
    6. Video Tutorial: Introducing An Experience Dev To Smart Contract Coding (17 points, 3 comments)
    7. Do we need a blockchain to be decentralized? What questions would you ask a self described fan of decentralization, but blockchain skeptic? (11 points, 19 comments)
    8. ETH Block Rewards And Second Order Effects On Hardware Availability (7 points, 8 comments)
    9. Which Of The Big Tech Companies Is Most Likely To Bring Crypto Mainstream? Here's Why I Think It's Apple (4 points, 7 comments)
  11. 175 points, 9 submissions: galan77
    1. Is the Lightning Network a massive threat to the blockchain? (49 points, 66 comments)
    2. TPS of Lightning Network vs. Sharding, which one does better? (28 points, 7 comments)
    3. Are there any major downsides to sharding? (21 points, 33 comments)
    4. What's the difference between trustlessness and permissionlessness (19 points, 7 comments)
    5. Which consensus algorithm is the best, PoW, PoS, PoAuthority, PoAsset? (18 points, 57 comments)
    6. How can XRP reach 50,000 TPS when they have no sharding and every node has to validate every single transaction. (15 points, 14 comments)
    7. A few questions about the Lightning Network (14 points, 6 comments)
    8. Pascalcoin can do 72,000 tps apparently. Is this legit? The new Nano? (8 points, 39 comments)
    9. How does Ripple's (XRB's) consensus algorithm Proof of Correctness work, are there any downsides? (3 points, 23 comments)
  12. 175 points, 1 submission: ilielezi
    1. Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional? (175 points, 88 comments)
  13. 165 points, 6 submissions: CryptoMaximalist
    1. Facebook's Libra (48 points, 55 comments)
    2. “Fake Stake” attacks on some Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrencies responsibly disclosed by researchers from the Decentralized Systems Lab at UIUC (31 points, 9 comments)
    3. Quantum Computing and the Cryptography in Crypto (27 points, 14 comments)
    4. PING and REJECT attacks on ZCash (Patch available) | Stanford Applied Crypto Group (22 points, 1 comment)
    5. Introduction to Cryptography: Part 1 - Jinglan Wang (19 points, 1 comment)
    6. New site howmanyconfs.com shows the amount of time and confirmations of Proof of Work coins to match 6 confirmations on Bitcoin (18 points, 11 comments)
  14. 163 points, 10 submissions: GainsLean
    1. Videos For Developers Who Want To Learn Blockchain In A Practical Way (36 points, 17 comments)
    2. What Do You Want To Learn? (32 points, 20 comments)
    3. Get Involved With The Smart Contract Coding Challenge (25 points, 4 comments)
    4. Solution To $10K Art Prize (25 points, 3 comments)
    5. Blockchain Course Outline Has Been Released - Feedback warranted (22 points, 12 comments)
    6. Introduction To Distributed Systems And Consensus Protocols (9 points, 2 comments)
    7. Are there any closed source crypto wallets? (4 points, 19 comments)
    8. Are there any successful proof of identity projects? (4 points, 8 comments)
    9. SPV Wallets Vs API Wallets (4 points, 1 comment)
    10. 12 Popular Consensus Algorithms - Explained (2 points, 0 comments)
  15. 163 points, 7 submissions: QRCollector
    1. Part 5. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fifth part of the series talking about an advanced vulnerability of BTC. (43 points, 43 comments)
    2. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the third part of the series introducing Quantum resistant blockchains. (36 points, 4 comments)
    3. Part 4B. I’m writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fourth part of the series explaining the special quality of going quantum resistant from genesis block. (25 points, 21 comments)
    4. Part 6. (Last part) I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. Failing shortcuts in an attempt to accomplish Quantum Resistance (24 points, 38 comments)
    5. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the first part of the series introducing the basic concept of blockchain and what makes it reliable. (23 points, 10 comments)
    6. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the fourth part of the series explaining the special quality of going quantum resistant from genesis block. (7 points, 1 comment)
    7. Part 2. I'm writing a series about blockchain tech and possible future security risks. This is the second part of the series: An accessible description of hashing and signature schemes. (5 points, 0 comments)
  16. 162 points, 3 submissions: FashionistaGuru
    1. How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency? (118 points, 54 comments)
    2. Which cryptos have the best new user experience? (30 points, 34 comments)
    3. Why does Apple prevent many crypto apps from entering the App Store? (14 points, 8 comments)
  17. 157 points, 7 submissions: SamsungGalaxyPlayer
    1. Breaking Monero Episodes 1-3: Introduction, Ring Signatures, 0-Decoy and Chain Reactions (45 points, 1 comment)
    2. "No, dPoW Isn't a Perfect Solution" (35 points, 48 comments)
    3. Breaking Mimblewimble’s Privacy Model - Dragonfly Research (27 points, 10 comments)
    4. Breaking Monero (and Zcash) Episodes 7-9: Remote Nodes, Timing Attacks, Poisoned Outputs (EAE Attack) (21 points, 2 comments)
    5. "Attacker Collection of IP Metadata" (18 points, 10 comments)
    6. "Tracing Transactions Across Cryptocurrency Ledgers" Using Shapeshift and Changelly (6 points, 4 comments)
    7. Breaking Monero Episodes 4-6: Chain Splits (Key Image Attack), Input Selection Algorithm, Unusual Ringsize (5 points, 2 comments)
  18. 147 points, 1 submission: shunsaitakahashi
    1. Proof-of-Approval: Stake Based, 1 Block Finality & History Attack Defense (147 points, 4 comments)
  19. 146 points, 6 submissions: themoderndayhercules
    1. "The selfish mining fallacy" explained and debunked (60 points, 8 comments)
    2. A Discussion of Stable coins and Decentralized Oracles (35 points, 8 comments)
    3. A Selfish Mining Double Spending attack Simulator (25 points, 2 comments)
    4. Why reputation systems don't work (15 points, 12 comments)
    5. A better incentivization for Swarm (6 points, 0 comments)
    6. When Mises met Szabo - A Discussion of the value of Bitcoin (5 points, 16 comments)
  20. 143 points, 7 submissions: KomodoWorld
    1. Komodo Platform's core developer and founder jl777 has started his own blog on Medium. The blog is aimed for senior developers who want to learn about blockchain. (46 points, 15 comments)
    2. Delayed Proof of Work (dPoW) security explained (36 points, 46 comments)
    3. Proof-of-Gameplay (19 points, 3 comments)
    4. Good guide for getting started with the Custom Consensus tech for Komodo-based blockchains (17 points, 0 comments)
    5. Cross-chain migration of coins with Crypto Conditions - by smk762 (12 points, 0 comments)
    6. A step-by-step example of working with a Crypto Conditions based Oracle - by smk762 (10 points, 0 comments)
    7. Changing consensus rules on the fly with Crypto Conditions (3 points, 0 comments)
  21. 141 points, 8 submissions: Stormy1997
    1. What technical/business advantages does a private blockchain have over a SQL server? (49 points, 79 comments)
    2. Is sharding to scale bad? (24 points, 28 comments)
    3. How would one create a fiat gateway theoretically? (19 points, 19 comments)
    4. Looking for Stellar smart contract/side chain code examples (16 points, 1 comment)
    5. Question - Securing personal information on a centralized server with user-owned keys (13 points, 3 comments)
    6. How do blockchains/smart contracts communicate with oracles? (10 points, 4 comments)
    7. Bandwidth scaling for TPS (8 points, 2 comments)
    8. Best method to transmit detailed data between two parties via existing platforms (2 points, 1 comment)
  22. 141 points, 3 submissions: seventyfiver
    1. Why does Ethereum use Solidity while other ecosystems like NEO stick with popular ones like Java and C#? (94 points, 26 comments)
    2. Chainlink's initial Go implementation went live this morning. Has anyone reviewed the code and can comment on it's quality? (40 points, 3 comments)
    3. What are some great books on cryptoeconomics or blockchain technology? (7 points, 4 comments)
  23. 134 points, 6 submissions: johnny_milkshakes
    1. Sub dedicated to DAG based coins (42 points, 8 comments)
    2. Thoughts on this? (28 points, 38 comments)
    3. This is very interesting (24 points, 19 comments)
    4. Educational presentation by Clara Shikhelman (18 points, 0 comments)
    5. Ethics question. (12 points, 40 comments)
    6. How to scale on chain? (10 points, 30 comments)
  24. 127 points, 4 submissions: sukitrebek
    1. What are you currently obsessed with, and why? (58 points, 150 comments)
    2. Crypto-based social network without a cryptocurrency. (42 points, 23 comments)
    3. How does underlying architecture affect what kinds of applications are possible? (17 points, 3 comments)
    4. Holochain vs. Radix DLT (10 points, 11 comments)
  25. 126 points, 1 submission: RufusTheFirefly
    1. Everytime I try to investigate the technology behind Cardano(Ada), I come across the words "scientific" and "peer-reviewed" over and over but almost no actual details. Can someone fill how this coin actually works and where they are in development? (126 points, 49 comments)
  26. 112 points, 1 submission: rocksolid77
    1. Can we have a real debate about the Bitcoin scaling issue? (112 points, 89 comments)
  27. 110 points, 4 submissions: kelluk
    1. What one can learn from browsing 30 million Ethereum addresses (72 points, 21 comments)
    2. I wanted to categorize all coins/tokens, and this is my proposal (23 points, 33 comments)
    3. Should whitepapers be understood by ordinary people? (10 points, 41 comments)
    4. Querying the Ethereum blockchain: how to & what to? (5 points, 5 comments)
  28. 107 points, 1 submission: NewDietTrend
    1. Outside of currency and voting, blockchain is awful and shouldnt be used. Can anyone explain where blockchain is worth the cost? (107 points, 166 comments)
  29. 105 points, 1 submission: insette
    1. /CryptoTech PSA: there are broadly TWO TYPES of Decentralized Exchanges. Which type are you investing in? (105 points, 55 comments)
  30. 103 points, 3 submissions: dtheme
    1. How to accept crypto payments for digital downloads if you are a small business? Solutions, e-commerce sites are lacking (46 points, 38 comments)
    2. How many 24 letter seeds and "Bitcoin" keys can there be? (34 points, 24 comments)
    3. Is there any reason why the big tech companies are not getting into crypto? (23 points, 36 comments)
  31. 103 points, 3 submissions: dvnielng
    1. Why do so many of these businesses need a token? (Unsure) (61 points, 86 comments)
    2. DAPPS - Only coins that have intrinsic value? Ethereum , Neo? (31 points, 10 comments)
    3. How could blockchain work for expensive purchases/escrow? (11 points, 2 comments)
  32. 101 points, 1 submission: kickso
    1. Is NANO everything it says it is? (101 points, 96 comments)
  33. 98 points, 3 submissions: heart_mind_body
    1. How can we breathe some life into this sub? (56 points, 22 comments)
    2. Can anyone give an example for a technology that provides a "public permissioned blockchain"? (28 points, 16 comments)
    3. Can we do a discussion on ICON and "clusters of private chains connected to a public chain" ? (14 points, 13 comments)
  34. 97 points, 8 submissions: kelraku
    1. Thoughts on Mimblewimble? (23 points, 13 comments)
    2. Has anyone looked at the lelantus protocol? (18 points, 6 comments)
    3. How much control do developers have over the coins (18 points, 6 comments)
    4. Lesser known protocols? (11 points, 17 comments)
    5. Zerocoin and Blockchain Analysis (9 points, 5 comments)
    6. Zerocoin vs Cryptonote (7 points, 14 comments)
    7. Lightning network privacy (6 points, 13 comments)
    8. Integrity of the DAG (5 points, 17 comments)
  35. 96 points, 6 submissions: blockstasy
    1. How to Get to One Million Devs (32 points, 12 comments)
    2. The Decade in Blockchain — 2010 to 2020 in Review (27 points, 4 comments)
    3. Ethereum by the Numbers – The Year of 2019 (26 points, 9 comments)
    4. Knowledge Drop: Mining and the role it plays with the Ethereum blockchain (5 points, 0 comments)
    5. A great article that explains Ethereum’s Muir Glacier Update (4 points, 0 comments)
    6. Youtube Silences Crypto Community (2 points, 6 comments)
  36. 93 points, 3 submissions: OneOverNever
    1. Which is the last WHITE PAPER you've read that's truly impacted you? (77 points, 81 comments)
    2. [CMV] Bitcoin's intrinsic technological value. (14 points, 29 comments)
    3. What are some weak points that still hold XVG back from becoming a top player in crypto? (Technically speaking, not marketing and etc.) (2 points, 19 comments)
  37. 93 points, 3 submissions: ryano-ark
    1. (ARK) ACES Completes Integration of ARK Channels for Two-way Transfers for Easy ICOs When Paired With ARK Deployer (Push-Button-Blockchains) (57 points, 5 comments)
    2. (ARK) ACES Releases Fast (Ansible) Deployments for all ACES Applications. (23 points, 4 comments)
    3. A Future of Cryptocurrencies and Blockchains (13 points, 3 comments)
  38. 92 points, 2 submissions: BobUltra
    1. Our blockchains are all centralized! (51 points, 34 comments)
    2. List of qualities needed to dethrone Bitcoin. (41 points, 43 comments)
  39. 90 points, 1 submission: refreshx2
    1. CMV: It doesn't make sense for (crypto)companies to create coins linked to their tech (90 points, 18 comments)
  40. 89 points, 1 submission: perceptron01
    1. What does Nano do better than Steem? (89 points, 55 comments)
  41. 87 points, 1 submission: Shuk
    1. How does one begin to develop an employable skill in blockchain development? (87 points, 25 comments)
  42. 87 points, 1 submission: conorohiggins
    1. I spent three weeks researching and writing a huge guide to stablecoins. Enjoy! (87 points, 36 comments)
  43. 86 points, 1 submission: Bacon_Hero
    1. ELI5: Why did it take so long for blockchain technology to be created? (86 points, 66 comments)
  44. 85 points, 3 submissions: theFoot58
    1. If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we? (65 points, 53 comments)
    2. If the Internet had its Genesis Block, what would it be? (14 points, 9 comments)
    3. Coin grouping - ruby and CryptoCompare API (6 points, 1 comment)
  45. 85 points, 1 submission: youngm2
    1. Which decentralised exchange has the most promise for 2018? (85 points, 89 comments)
  46. 84 points, 4 submissions: bLbGoldeN
    1. On Mass Adoption of Cryptocurrencies (28 points, 68 comments)
    2. Join the Bloom team for our first tech AMA tomorrow (Tuesday, March 13th) at 7 PM GMT! (23 points, 2 comments)
    3. Join the Decred team for an AMA - Friday, June 1st from 19:00 to 22:00 UTC (17 points, 10 comments)
    4. Join the district0x team for an AMA Monday, April 2nd at 5:00 PM (GMT) (16 points, 0 comments)
  47. 82 points, 2 submissions: SubsequentDownfall
    1. Has a 51% attack ever been witnessed? (45 points, 46 comments)
    2. Is a DAG coin like RaiBlocks able to be private like Monero? (37 points, 40 comments)
  48. 82 points, 2 submissions: guidre
    1. Tron and other source Code (42 points, 24 comments)
    2. Why Will companies adopt blockchain, the user interface is complex and i'm not sure that many companies want all their internal dealings made public. (40 points, 19 comments)
  49. 81 points, 4 submissions: solar128
    1. New Atomic Swap Tools Released (35 points, 4 comments)
    2. Using Blockchain to make a censorship-resistant Reddit (28 points, 14 comments)
    3. Best security practices for addressing Spectre & Meltdown (13 points, 0 comments)
    4. Influence of on-chain governance weighted by wealth - good or bad? (5 points, 2 comments)
  50. 81 points, 2 submissions: Blockchainsapiens
    1. Blockchain study finds 0.00% success rate and vendors don't call back when asked for evidence (47 points, 30 comments)
    2. The elephant in the room: would the public ever use a volatile currency over a stable currency? (34 points, 45 comments)
  51. 81 points, 1 submission: Mycryptopedia
    1. Understanding the Tech Behind RaiBlocks (81 points, 7 comments)
  52. 81 points, 1 submission: davidvanbeveren
    1. Article thoroughly analysing / comparing IOTA and RaiBlocks (x-post /CryptoCurrency) (81 points, 10 comments)
  53. 77 points, 4 submissions: DeleteMyOldAccount
    1. HD Wallets Explained: What they are, and how to make them coin agnostic (28 points, 11 comments)
    2. Bitcoin Cash May 15th fork (23 points, 22 comments)
    3. So you want to build a Bitcoin HD wallet? Part 1 (23 points, 3 comments)
    4. Applications of Blockchain in Supply Chain (3 points, 9 comments)
  54. 76 points, 3 submissions: kryptofinger
    1. Why would anyone bother using any DPOS coins for dapps like Eos over normal systems like AWS? (44 points, 104 comments)
    2. Could a state backed privacy coin work? (22 points, 32 comments)
    3. Thoughts on Elastos? (10 points, 8 comments)
  55. 76 points, 1 submission: francohab
    1. 55% of the Nano representative nodes are "official representatives", presumably held by developers. How big of an issue is that? (76 points, 46 comments)
  56. 75 points, 2 submissions: MerkleChainsaw
    1. The biggest challenge for cryptocurrencies and how to mitigate it (73 points, 37 comments)
    2. Short and long term design tradeoffs in crypto (2 points, 2 comments)
  57. 75 points, 1 submission: jatsignwork
    1. Raiblocks & Spam (75 points, 60 comments)
  58. 74 points, 1 submission: behindtext
    1. Hello, this is Jake Yocom-Piatt. Ask me anything about Decred! (74 points, 49 comments)
  59. 73 points, 2 submissions: TexasRadical83
    1. Why use a new "currency" at all? (40 points, 48 comments)
    2. Why are big price increases for crypto a good thing? (33 points, 41 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. Neophyte- (1649 points, 746 comments)
  2. ndha1995 (583 points, 98 comments)
  3. turtleflax (406 points, 116 comments)
  4. senzheng (326 points, 193 comments)
  5. holomntn (294 points, 40 comments)
  6. manly_ (286 points, 43 comments)
  7. signos_de_admiracion (250 points, 18 comments)
  8. fgiveme (231 points, 77 comments)
  9. crypto_kang (222 points, 45 comments)
  10. jatsignwork (220 points, 37 comments)
  11. GainsLean (218 points, 76 comments)
  12. benthecarman (211 points, 48 comments)
  13. rockyrainy (200 points, 39 comments)
  14. hungryforitalianfood (197 points, 58 comments)
  15. rocksolid77 (190 points, 20 comments)
  16. bannercoin (189 points, 11 comments)
  17. insette (181 points, 47 comments)
  18. DiogenicOrder (175 points, 41 comments)
  19. islanavarino (173 points, 51 comments)
  20. behindtext (172 points, 14 comments)
  21. takitus (171 points, 25 comments)
  22. sukitrebek (170 points, 42 comments)
  23. UnknownEssence (170 points, 31 comments)
  24. crypto_ha (170 points, 26 comments)
  25. AlexCoventry (167 points, 17 comments)
  26. DragonWhsiperer (165 points, 38 comments)
  27. stop-making-accounts (164 points, 57 comments)
  28. KnifeOfPi2 (157 points, 13 comments)
  29. Edgegasm (156 points, 42 comments)
  30. ippond (152 points, 15 comments)
  31. dontlikecomputers (151 points, 61 comments)
  32. QRCollector (150 points, 46 comments)
  33. alexrecuenco (145 points, 18 comments)
  34. BobUltra (144 points, 88 comments)
  35. SpamCamel (135 points, 22 comments)
  36. InterdisciplinaryHum (133 points, 107 comments)
  37. theglitteringone (132 points, 10 comments)
  38. ChocolateSunrise (128 points, 23 comments)
  39. PM_ME_UR_QUINES (125 points, 4 comments)
  40. narwhale111 (122 points, 15 comments)
  41. pepe_le_shoe (121 points, 47 comments)
  42. Darius510 (119 points, 39 comments)
  43. glen-hodl (118 points, 21 comments)
  44. HOG_ZADDY (117 points, 23 comments)
  45. coranos2 (116 points, 44 comments)
  46. etherenvoy (116 points, 15 comments)
  47. johnny_milkshakes (115 points, 55 comments)
  48. galan77 (115 points, 52 comments)
  49. hybridsole (113 points, 40 comments)
  50. funciton (113 points, 8 comments)
  51. Mr0ldy (110 points, 24 comments)
  52. Corm (109 points, 42 comments)
  53. cryptoscopia (109 points, 7 comments)
  54. ReportFromHell (106 points, 39 comments)
  55. broscientologist (105 points, 26 comments)
  56. straytjacquet (104 points, 28 comments)
  57. Quadling (101 points, 24 comments)
  58. BlockEnthusiast (101 points, 17 comments)
  59. thats_not_montana (99 points, 37 comments)
  60. TheRealMotherOfOP (98 points, 27 comments)
  61. yarauuta (96 points, 11 comments)
  62. pegasuspect93 (96 points, 1 comment)
  63. andrew_bao (93 points, 40 comments)
  64. samdotla (93 points, 6 comments)
  65. melodious_punk (91 points, 34 comments)
  66. Mquantum (91 points, 31 comments)
  67. TJ_Hooker15 (91 points, 27 comments)
  68. NoFaptain99 (91 points, 3 comments)
  69. ilielezi (87 points, 10 comments)
  70. Raapop (87 points, 2 comments)
  71. Allways_Wrong (86 points, 36 comments)
  72. bLbGoldeN (86 points, 19 comments)
  73. ResIpsaLoquiturrr (86 points, 15 comments)
  74. kabelman93 (85 points, 29 comments)
  75. no_pants_gamer (84 points, 9 comments)
  76. AnkurTechracers (83 points, 16 comments)
  77. ric2b (83 points, 11 comments)
  78. Big_Goose (83 points, 10 comments)
  79. Lifeistooshor1 (82 points, 21 comments)
  80. vornth (82 points, 11 comments)
  81. Sargos (81 points, 25 comments)
  82. refreshx2 (81 points, 16 comments)
  83. Qwahzi (78 points, 27 comments)
  84. StupidRandomGuy (77 points, 35 comments)
  85. WikiTextBot (77 points, 24 comments)
  86. SnootyEuropean (77 points, 5 comments)
  87. cryptogainz (76 points, 14 comments)
  88. frequentlywrong (76 points, 4 comments)
  89. the_defiant (76 points, 4 comments)
  90. BrangdonJ (75 points, 28 comments)
  91. hendrik_v (75 points, 7 comments)
  92. solar128 (74 points, 18 comments)
  93. foobazzler (74 points, 8 comments)
  94. ginger_beer_m (73 points, 35 comments)
  95. kAhmij (73 points, 25 comments)
  96. DeleteMyOldAccount (73 points, 20 comments)
  97. sn0wr4in (73 points, 9 comments)
  98. Dyslectic_Sabreur (72 points, 5 comments)
  99. X7spyWqcRY (71 points, 8 comments)
  100. Krapser (70 points, 5 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. A Guided Reading of Bitcoin’s Original White Paper by Realness100 (202 points, 10 comments)
  2. From a technical standpoint: Why does every blockchain projects need their own coins? by HSPremier (181 points, 50 comments)
  3. Bitcoin Gold hit by Double Spend Attack (51% attack). The Attacker reversed 22 blocks. by rockyrainy (179 points, 102 comments)
  4. Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional? by ilielezi (175 points, 88 comments)
  5. My brief observation of most common Consensus Algorithms by tracyspacygo (159 points, 49 comments)
  6. Proof-of-Approval: Stake Based, 1 Block Finality & History Attack Defense by shunsaitakahashi (147 points, 4 comments)
  7. "Do you need a Blockchain?" - this paper is fantastic, everyone should read this before evaluating a coin and if requires a block chain to solve a solution the coin is promising to solve. by Neophyte- (136 points, 41 comments)
  8. Technical comparison of LIGHTNING vs TANGLE vs HASHGRAPH vs NANO by Qwahzi (133 points, 37 comments)
  9. Everytime I try to investigate the technology behind Cardano(Ada), I come across the words "scientific" and "peer-reviewed" over and over but almost no actual details. Can someone fill how this coin actually works and where they are in development? by RufusTheFirefly (126 points, 49 comments)
  10. How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency? by FashionistaGuru (118 points, 54 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 160 points: holomntn's comment in ELI5: Why did it take so long for blockchain technology to be created?
  2. 121 points: KnifeOfPi2's comment in How do we change the culture around cryptocurrency?
  3. 105 points: theglitteringone's comment in Outside of currency and voting, blockchain is awful and shouldnt be used. Can anyone explain where blockchain is worth the cost?
  4. 102 points: benthecarman's comment in If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we?
  5. 96 points: pegasuspect93's comment in If crypto now is like 'the Internet' of the past, where are we?
  6. 95 points: bannercoin's comment in Realistically, why would anybody expect the startup crypto platforms to beat out the corporate giants who are developing their own Blockchain as a Service (BaaS) solutions? Ex. IBM, SAP, JP Morgan...
  7. 83 points: AlexCoventry's comment in Ethereum private key with all zeroes leads to an account with 5000$ on it
  8. 82 points: deleted's comment in Is blockchain really useful ?
  9. 81 points: signos_de_admiracion's comment in Why white papers in crypto world are so unprofessional?
  10. 78 points: NoFaptain99's comment in Why do so many of these businesses need a token? (Unsure)
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Questions and Answers from OKEx AMA with Tron Black - 2/18/2020

https://twitter.com/OKEx/status/1228212766126661633
The AMA was a huge success! THANK YOU TRON!
If you want to see all the questions that poured in when they opened the AMA up for questions from the audience, here they are: https://pastebin.com/KVpyXmgu The Telegram admins had to temporarily mute the group because there were so many questions flooding in from so many people. A *good problem* to have. :)
Below are all the ANSWERED questions.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected], [18.02.20 05:09]
Here’s question#1:What is your background and how did you come to the idea to create RVN [email protected]

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:12]
Sorry, I was locked out for minute.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:12]
I'm just a tiny part of Ravencoin, and there are some amazing developers (Jeremy, Mark, Cade, and Corbin) that have been brought the new capabilities to mainnet. The core idea of bringing assets to a bitcoin-derived blockchain platform came from Bruce Fenton, a former Executive Director of the Bitcoin Foundation with life-long experience in the traditional finance and stockbroker world. Medici Ventures is allowing some of its developers to contribute to the project. I was fortunate enough to have the right background to help with this project. I have a CS degree, C++ coding skills, economics background, early entrepreneurial success, teaching experience, an MBA, and a burning passion for the crypto-space and how it can change the world for the better.

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:12]
Thanks. Here's question#2: Why did you name the project Raven? What was Raven created to solve? What is the business model of the project?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:12]
The name came from Bruce Fenton. Ravens are clever birds with a rich history. Ravencoin makes it easy to create and transfer your own asset. There isn’t a business model for the project. It is a gift to the world in the spirit of Bitcoin. Medici Ventures has allowed some of its top developers to contribute time and effort to the project. Medici Ventures does hold some mined RVN, so it may be a win-win.

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:14]
Thank you for answering. Let's move on to the next question# 3. What are the $RVN tokens used for? What gives it value?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:15]
Thank you for asking.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:15]
The RVN tokens are used to purchase your own token on the Ravencoin platform.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:16]
Those RVN are burned.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:16]
RVN is also used to incentivize the miners to secure the chain.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:16]
RVN is also used for transaction fees for tranferring RVN or user-created (your) assets.

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:17]
Cool. Here's question# 4:In your opinion what is the unique "selling" point, or best feature, of Ravencoin?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:17]
This is like being asked "who is your favorite child."

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:18]
Except answering it doesn't cost children thousands in therapy so I'll give it a shot.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:18]
The best feature of Ravencoin, with the most unexpected results, has been its linkage to IPFS.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:19]
This was originally done to ensure that meta-dat about a token doesn't get lost like it has on other platforms like Counterparty.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:19]
The linkage to IPFS has RECENTLY been extended to include messaging, and memos.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:20]
You can now include information, even a PDF, or a video clip with every transaction.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:20]
This is powerful, and I can't wait to see how it gets used.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:20]
--------------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:20]
Quesiton#5 What are the advantages of using Ravencoin for assets tokenization compared to other blockchain protocols?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:21]
Wow. Where do I start?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:21]
First, the meta-data about the token can be recorded via IPFS, so everyone knows what the token represents.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:22]
Second, the token has a unique name which can help with preventing fake tokens, and allows humang readable "root-of-trust" for the token that isn't just 40 characters of hex (ERC-20).

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:22]
There explorers for assets, like: https://ravencoin.asset-explorer.com

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:23]
and https://www.mangofarmassets.com/assetviewer

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:23]
Wallets like RVN Wallet, MangoFarms Wallet, and Zelcore wallet support Ravencoin assets.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:23]
--------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:23]
Here's our next question from Twitter# 6: Does being fully community-driven blockchain have its own drawbacks for rvn? You know, voluntarism means no marketing or legal team.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:24]
Yes, oh yes.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:24]
But the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks.

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:24]
[ Photo ]
📣Group is Off Commenting for a while due to AMA. Will allow back when Q&A session later. Kindly be Patience with us. Thank You🥰

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:24]
It is just technology that people choose to use.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:24]
Ravencoin has attracted the right kinds of people, including donated legal help when it was needed.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:25]
The lack of a marketing budget does slow the awareness.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:25]
In some ways this is good, and the demand for RVN isn't reliant on promotion.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:25]
As other projects stop promotion, or run out of marketing funds, they are at risk.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:26]
Ravencoin is just growing slowly and steadily as more people learn about it.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:26]
Consider yourself fortunate to have learned about Ravencoin early.😁

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:26]
---------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:27]
Great!!! Here's the next question from Twitter# 7:is it apple to apple if I say that ravencoin is going to disrupt wall street just like bitcoin is disrupting to central banking?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:28]
At the very least, Ravencoin will help show the way that tokenization can improve capital formation. It is up to others to take advantage of these new tools, technologies, and features.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:28]
It might happen first in countries other than the U.S.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:29]
Look at the story of Blockbuster Video (former leader in video rental), and Netflix (current video streaming leader) to see what might happen in the future. Is Wall Street the new Blockbuster Video?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:30]
I see similar patterns of arrogance, but only time will tell.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:30]
---------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:30]
Here's the next question# 8: How will Ravencoin defend hashrate distribution (algo question) if there are important securities issued on this platform (double spend attack)?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:31]
Ravencoin doesn't re-org after 60 blocks which helps prevent double-spend attacks -- a feature called NLR.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:31]
Also, something to be aware of is that in most cases tokens are redeemed by an issuer which removes the incentive to double-spend.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:32]
Example: Let's say the token is a share of real-estate. The laws of the jurisdiction for the real-estate would apply when redeeming for dividends, etc.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:33]
Also If the issuer is using the Restricted Assets feature of Ravencoin which have tokens that start with $, then the stolen tokens can be frozen.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:33]
Note: Regular assets (not starting with $) can't be frozen.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:33]
The issuer of the token should specify how redemption is handled.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:33]
--------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:34]
Thank you for your detailed answer. and Quesiton#9 How does RVN works? What problem did RVN solve? How do the Tokenomics work?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:34]
RVN works like BTC, because it is a code fork of BTC.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:34]
RVN lets you create your own tokens in under a minute. It is easy!!!

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:34]
RVN is required to create your own token.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:35]
Heres' the breakdown:

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:35]
500 RVN burned to create a root asset with a unique name. 100 RVN is burned to create a sub-asset (under a root asset). 5 RVN is burned to create a unique asset (NFT). 1000 RVN burned to be a qualifier. 1500 RVN burned to create a Restricted Asset with special superpowers. 0.1 RVN burned to attach a tag to a Ravencoin address. A small amount of RVN is used, but not burned to transfer assets.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:35]
------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:35]
Let's move on to the next question#10 Safety and security are always the most important things. So what is the security mechanism of RavenCoin to ensure user assets do not become the target of hackers?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:36]
Ravencoin has a strong network of miners.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:36]
Most of the original code is from Bitcoin which is probably the most vetted code in the world.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:36]
We have run a bug bounty to hopefully find any flaws before release to mainnet.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:36]
With all that said, there are no guarantees as this is just source code provided for free that folks choose to run.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:37]
If you need absolute assurance, then you should commission an audit of the code. There is no Ravencoin company, just a GitHub repository and a lot of passionate supporters.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:37]
-------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:37]
Quesiton#11 Nowaday most investors $RVN simply focus on the price of the token in the short term, and not on the real value of the project. Can you tell us about the motivation and advantages of an investor $RVN in the long term?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:38]
I can't speak to the motivations of individual investors.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:38]
RVN is a great token with good liquidity (world-wide).

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:38]
RVN is used to incentivize the miners and help protect the Ravencoin asset platform, so it has a use case.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:39]
RVN can be a store-of-value, and a medium-of-exchange.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:39]
One of my favorite things about Ravencoin is that it is tricky to classify, as it has so many uses.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:39]
I love seeing how people build using this technology platform.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:39]
Ravencoin makes new things possible.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:39]
--------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:40]
Here's the next question #12 Who are your competitors and how do you intend to thrive amongst them?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:40]
This may sound strange, but I don't see crypto technologies as competitors.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:41]
The crypto space is tiny compared to the legacy systems we've had for fifty years, so I look at every project as a way to bring new people into crypto-ecosystem.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:41]
If we add value, features, and capabilities, then more people will learn about the Ravencoin platform and what it can do for them.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:41]
The ERC-20 smart contract is an alternative asset issuance option, but Ravencoin is much better for most uses, so more education is needed.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:41]
https://medium.com/@tronblack/ravencoin-better-than-erc-20-88a276d3e434

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:41]
--------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:42]
Quesiton#13 What is the uniqueness of the Raven token? Why should investors (including me) invest in Raven?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:42]
Ravencoin is a platform.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:42]
You should evaluate the capabilities of the Ravencoin platform and ask yourself whether it will be used, and whether it adds value over other platforms like ETH, EOS, or TEZOS.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:42]
Hint: It does. I try not to provide investment advice, so do your own research.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:43]
https://ravencoin.org

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:43]
https://medium.com/@tronblack

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:43]
---------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:43]
Quesiton#14 What your plans in place for global expansion, are you focusing on only market at this time? Or focus on building and developing or getting customers and users, or partnerships? Can you explain this?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:43]
Ravencoin is already a global phenomenon.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:44]
South Korea has been onto Ravencoin for some time now, and I had the opportunity to speak at a South Korean Ravencoin meetup that filled an Art Hall with a waiting list.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:44]
Because of OKEx, that awareness will expand to China.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:44]
Our focus is building and education about Ravencoin.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:44]
There is no marketing budget, and we raised no funds.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:45]
The success so far has been completely organic, and Ravencoin has the best community of any coin, anywhere.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:45]
------------

[email protected], [18.02.20 05:45]
Here is THE LAST question#10 from Twitter before we accept questions from the Telegram chat. what are your hopes with the $RVN listing on u/OKEx Okex going forward?

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:45]
I hope the OKEx $RVN listing brings awareness of Ravencoin to new parts of the world.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:46]
The project is more capable than most people know, and because it was launched without raising any funds, there isn't a marketing budget.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:46]
It is up to smart individuals, like yourselves, to figure out what Ravencoin can do, and use the technology to make new companies and new projects.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:46]
------------------


+++++++++++++++++++++

Tron Black, [18.02.20 05:57]
>>> When is mainnet launch?
January 3, 2018

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:01]
>>> A project's Technical development may not always be reflected on the price of it's token. What is raven doing specifically to increase price of its token?
I agree. And I think it is especially true in the case of Ravencoin. The true value may not be reflected in the short-term. The Ravencoin project isn't a company. It will take time. There isn't a marketing dept or budget, but through events like these, and podcasts, and blogs, and new projects building on top of Ravencoin, I think the value will eventually be reflected.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:06]
>>>> Give me some important reasons why we need to buy RVN token where in fact hundreds of project failed and it went to bankruptcy or even developers run when they collect millions/billions of funds…? Can you explain it to us

Many got burned during the crazy ICO phase of 2017. Ravencoin did not participate. Ravencoin is technology and a passionate community. If I get hit by a bus tomorrow (heaven forbid), the project will continue because it is free, open-source and anyone can carry it on, or contribute, or use it, or copy it. Ravencoin can't go to bankruptcy. It is code, and it doesn't borrow, or or have debt. Some of the core develoepers, myself included, are allowed to work on the project while working for Medici Ventures. This is a great arrangement.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:06]
-----------------

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:10]
>>>> How does RAVENCOIN evaluate the importance of the user community? In the near future, does RAVEN have any special plans to attract and expand the community ?

The Ravencoin community is the most important and valuable part of the project. There are already clones of the code, but not of the passionate, helpful, and dedicated community. We invite you to become a part of it, and help expand it in Asia.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:10]
--------------------

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:13]
>>>>. RVN is regulatory compliant project for assets tokenization in U.S. Meaning that the assets issued in RVN protocol is fine with the U.S authorities.

Ravencoin provides features that help U.S. issuers stay legal under the existing U.S. rules. I've written about how this can be done, but I would always recommend having your plans reviewed by a competent attorney. The U.S. rules are complex, and from a different era.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:13]
---------------
Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:18]
>>>> Ravencoin is constantly finding new big partners.Audience is constantly growing.What’s the secret to this growth rate?

A vibrant, and welcoming community. Technology that solves real tokenization problems. Easy-to-use, so anyone can participate. Not launching as an ICO, so it is fair for everyone.

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:18]
--------------

Tron Black, [18.02.20 06:20]
Thank you everyone for the fantastic questions. I would like to answer every one of them, but it is after 4am and I should get some sleep. I really appreciate all the participation, and I hope your trading on OKEx goes very well for all of you!!!
submitted by __pathfinder__ to Ravencoin [link] [comments]

Transcript of discussion between an ASIC designer and several proof-of-work designers from #monero-pow channel on Freenode this morning

[08:07:01] lukminer contains precompiled cn/r math sequences for some blocks: https://lukminer.org/2019/03/09/oh-kay-v4r-here-we-come/
[08:07:11] try that with RandomX :P
[08:09:00] tevador: are you ready for some RandomX feedback? it looks like the CNv4 is slowly stabilizing, hashrate comes down...
[08:09:07] how does it even make sense to precompile it?
[08:09:14] mine 1% faster for 2 minutes?
[08:09:35] naturally we think the entire asic-resistance strategy is doomed to fail :) but that's a high-level thing, who knows. people may think it's great.
[08:09:49] about RandomX: looks like the cache size was chosen to make it GPU-hard
[08:09:56] looking forward to more docs
[08:11:38] after initial skimming, I would think it's possible to make a 10x asic for RandomX. But at least for us, we will only make an ASIC if there is not a total ASIC hostility there in the first place. That's better for the secret miners then.
[08:13:12] What I propose is this: we are working on an Ethash ASIC right now, and once we have that working, we would invite tevador or whoever wants to come to HK/Shenzhen and we walk you guys through how we would make a RandomX ASIC. You can then process this input in any way you like. Something like that.
[08:13:49] unless asics (or other accelerators) re-emerge on XMR faster than expected, it looks like there is a little bit of time before RandomX rollout
[08:14:22] 10x in what measure? $/hash or watt/hash?
[08:14:46] watt/hash
[08:15:19] so you can make 10 times more efficient double precisio FPU?
[08:16:02] like I said let's try to be productive. You are having me here, let's work together!
[08:16:15] continue with RandomX, publish more docs. that's always helpful.
[08:16:37] I'm trying to understand how it's possible at all. Why AMD/Intel are so inefficient at running FP calculations?
[08:18:05] midipoet ([email protected]/web/irccloud.com/x-vszshqqxwybvtsjm) has joined #monero-pow
[08:18:17] hardware development works the other way round. We start with 1) math then 2) optimization priority 3) hw/sw boundary 4) IP selection 5) physical implementation
[08:22:32] This still doesn't explain at which point you get 10x
[08:23:07] Weren't you the ones claiming "We can accelerate ProgPoW by a factor of 3x to 8x." ? I find it hard to believe too.
[08:30:20] sure
[08:30:26] so my idea: first we finish our current chip
[08:30:35] from simulation to silicon :)
[08:30:40] we love this stuff... we do it anyway
[08:30:59] now we have a communication channel, and we don't call each other names immediately anymore: big progress!
[08:31:06] you know, we russians have a saying "it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about ravines"
[08:31:12] So I need a bit more details
[08:31:16] ha ha. good!
[08:31:31] that's why I want to avoid to just make claims
[08:31:34] let's work
[08:31:40] RandomX comes in Sep/Oct, right?
[08:31:45] Maybe
[08:32:20] We need to audit it first
[08:32:31] ok
[08:32:59] we don't make chips to prove sw devs that their assumptions about hardware are wrong. especially not if these guys then promptly hardfork and move to the next wrong assumption :)
[08:33:10] from the outside, this only means that hw & sw are devaluing each other
[08:33:24] neither of us should do this
[08:33:47] we are making chips that can hopefully accelerate more crypto ops in the future
[08:33:52] signing, verifying, proving, etc.
[08:34:02] PoW is just a feature like others
[08:34:18] sech1: is it easy for you to come to Hong Kong? (visa-wise)
[08:34:20] or difficult?
[08:34:33] or are you there sometimes?
[08:34:41] It's kind of far away
[08:35:13] we are looking forward to more RandomX docs. that's the first step.
[08:35:31] I want to avoid that we have some meme "Linzhi says they can accelerate XYZ by factor x" .... "ha ha ha"
[08:35:37] right? we don't want that :)
[08:35:39] doc is almost finished
[08:35:40] What docs do you need? It's described pretty good
[08:35:41] so I better say nothing now
[08:35:50] we focus on our Ethash chip
[08:36:05] then based on that, we are happy to walk interested people through the design and what else it can do
[08:36:22] that's a better approach from my view than making claims that are laughed away (rightfully so, because no silicon...)
[08:36:37] ethash ASIC is basically a glorified memory controller
[08:36:39] sech1: tevador said something more is coming (he just did it again)
[08:37:03] yes, some parts of RandomX are not described well
[08:37:10] like dataset access logic
[08:37:37] RandomX looks like progpow for CPU
[08:37:54] yes
[08:38:03] it is designed to reflect CPU
[08:38:34] so any ASIC for it = CPU in essence
[08:39:04] of course there are still some things in regular CPU that can be thrown away for RandomX
[08:40:20] uncore parts are not used, but those will use very little power
[08:40:37] except for memory controller
[08:41:09] I'm just surprised sometimes, ok? let me ask: have you designed or taped out an asic before? isn't it risky to make assumptions about things that are largely unknown?
[08:41:23] I would worry
[08:41:31] that I get something wrong...
[08:41:44] but I also worry like crazy that CNv4 will blow up, where you guys seem to be relaxed
[08:42:06] I didn't want to bring up anything RandomX because CNv4 is such a nailbiter... :)
[08:42:15] how do you guys know you don't have asics in a week or two?
[08:42:38] we don't have experience with ASIC design, but RandomX is simply designed to exactly fit CPU capabilities, which is the best you can do anyways
[08:43:09] similar as ProgPoW did with GPUs
[08:43:14] some people say they want to do asic-resistance only until the vast majority of coins has been issued
[08:43:21] that's at least reasonable
[08:43:43] yeah but progpow totally will not work as advertised :)
[08:44:08] yeah, I've seen that comment about progpow a few times already
[08:44:11] which is no surprise if you know it's just a random sales story to sell a few more GPUs
[08:44:13] RandomX is not permanent, we are expecting to switch to ASIC friendly in a few years if possible
[08:44:18] yes
[08:44:21] that makes sense
[08:44:40] linzhi-sonia: how so? will it break or will it be asic-able with decent performance gains?
[08:44:41] are you happy with CNv4 so far?
[08:45:10] ah, long story. progpow is a masterpiece of deception, let's not get into it here.
[08:45:21] if you know chip marketing it makes more sense
[08:45:24] linzhi-sonia: So far? lol! a bit early to tell, don't you think?
[08:45:35] the diff is coming down
[08:45:41] first few hours looked scary
[08:45:43] I remain skeptical: I only see ASICs being reasonable if they are already as ubiquitous as smartphones
[08:45:46] yes, so far so good
[08:46:01] we kbew the diff would not come down ubtil affter block 75
[08:46:10] yes
[08:46:22] but first few hours it looks like only 5% hashrate left
[08:46:27] looked
[08:46:29] now it's better
[08:46:51] the next worry is: when will "unexplainable" hashrate come back?
[08:47:00] you hope 2-3 months? more?
[08:47:05] so give it another couple of days. will probably overshoot to the downside, and then rise a bit as miners get updated and return
[08:47:22] 3 months minimum turnaround, yes
[08:47:28] nah
[08:47:36] don't underestimate asicmakers :)
[08:47:54] you guys don't get #1 priority on chip fabs
[08:47:56] 3 months = 90 days. do you know what is happening in those 90 days exactly? I'm pretty sure you don't. same thing as before.
[08:48:13] we don't do any secret chips btw
[08:48:21] 3 months assumes they had a complete design ready to go, and added the last minute change in 1 day
[08:48:24] do you know who is behind the hashrate that is now bricked?
[08:48:27] innosilicon?
[08:48:34] hyc: no no, and no. :)
[08:48:44] hyc: have you designed or taped out a chip before?
[08:48:51] yes, many years ago
[08:49:10] then you should know that 90 days is not a fixed number
[08:49:35] sure, but like I said, other makers have greater demand
[08:49:35] especially not if you can prepare, if you just have to modify something, or you have more programmability in the chip than some people assume
[08:50:07] we are chipmakers, we would never dare to do what you guys are doing with CNv4 :) but maybe that just means you are cooler!
[08:50:07] and yes, programmability makes some aspect of turnaround easier
[08:50:10] all fine
[08:50:10] I hope it works!
[08:50:28] do you know who is behind the hashrate that is now bricked?
[08:50:29] inno?
[08:50:41] we suspect so, but have no evidence
[08:50:44] maybe we can try to find them, but we cannot spend too much time on this
[08:50:53] it's probably not so much of a secret
[08:51:01] why should it be, right?
[08:51:10] devs want this cat-and-mouse game? devs get it...
[08:51:35] there was one leak saying it's innosilicon
[08:51:36] so you think 3 months, ok
[08:51:43] inno is cool
[08:51:46] good team
[08:51:49] IP design house
[08:51:54] in Wuhan
[08:52:06] they send their people to conferences with fake biz cards :)
[08:52:19] pretending to be other companies?
[08:52:26] sure
[08:52:28] ha ha
[08:52:39] so when we see them, we look at whatever card they carry and laugh :)
[08:52:52] they are perfectly suited for secret mining games
[08:52:59] they made at most $6 million in 2 months of mining, so I wonder if it was worth it
[08:53:10] yeah. no way to know
[08:53:15] but it's good that you calculate!
[08:53:24] this is all about cost/benefit
[08:53:25] then you also understand - imagine the value of XMR goes up 5x, 10x
[08:53:34] that whole "asic resistance" thing will come down like a house of cards
[08:53:41] I would imagine they sell immediately
[08:53:53] the investor may fully understand the risk
[08:53:57] the buyer
[08:54:13] it's not healthy, but that's another discussion
[08:54:23] so mid-June
[08:54:27] let's see
[08:54:49] I would be susprised if CNv4 ASICs show up at all
[08:54:56] surprised*
[08:54:56] why?
[08:55:05] is only an economic question
[08:55:12] yeah should be interesting. FPGAs will be near their limits as well
[08:55:16] unless XMR goes up a lot
[08:55:19] no, not *only*. it's also a technology question
[08:55:44] you believe CNv4 is "asic resistant"? which feature?
[08:55:53] it's not
[08:55:59] cnv4 = Rabdomx ?
[08:56:03] no
[08:56:07] cnv4=cryptinight/r
[08:56:11] ah
[08:56:18] CNv4 is the one we have now, I think
[08:56:21] since yesterday
[08:56:30] it's plenty enough resistant for current XMR price
[08:56:45] that may be, yes!
[08:56:55] I look at daily payouts. XMR = ca. 100k USD / day
[08:57:03] it can hold until October, but it's not asic resistant
[08:57:23] well, last 24h only 22,442 USD :)
[08:57:32] I think 80 h/s per watt ASICs are possible for CNv4
[08:57:38] linzhi-sonia where do you produce your chips? TSMC?
[08:57:44] I'm cruious how you would expect to build a randomX ASIC that outperforms ARM cores for efficiency, or Intel cores for raw speed
[08:57:48] curious
[08:58:01] yes, tsmc
[08:58:21] Our team did the world's first bitcoin asic, Avalon
[08:58:25] and upcoming 2nd gen Ryzens (64-core EPYC) will be a blast at RandomX
[08:58:28] designed and manufactured
[08:58:53] still being marketed?
[08:59:03] linzhi-sonia: do you understand what xmr wants to achieve, community-wise?
[08:59:14] Avalon? as part of Canaan Creative, yes I think so.
[08:59:25] there's not much interesting oing on in SHA256
[08:59:29] Inge-: I would think so, but please speak
[08:59:32] hyc: yes
[09:00:28] linzhi-sonia: i am curious to hear your thoughts. I am fairly new to this space myself...
[09:00:51] oh
[09:00:56] we are grandpas, and grandmas
[09:01:36] yet I have no problem understanding why ASICS are currently reviled.
[09:01:48] xmr's main differentiators to, let's say btc, are anonymity and fungibility
[09:01:58] I find the client terribly slow btw
[09:02:21] and I think the asic-forking since last may is wrong, doesn't create value and doesn't help with the project objectives
[09:02:25] which "the client" ?
[09:02:52] Monero GUI client maybe
[09:03:12] MacOS, yes
[09:03:28] What exactly is slow?
[09:03:30] linzhi-sonia: I run my own node, and use the CLI and Monerujo. Have not had issues.
[09:03:49] staying in sync
[09:03:49] linzhi-sonia: decentralization is also a key principle
[09:03:56] one that Bitcoin has failed to maintain
[09:04:39] hmm
[09:05:00] looks fairly decentralized to me. decentralization is the result of 3 goals imo: resilient, trustless, permissionless
[09:05:28] don't ask a hardware maker about physical decentralization. that's too ideological. we focus on logical decentralization.
[09:06:11] physical decentralization is important. with bulk of bitnoin mining centered on Chinese hydroelectric dams
[09:06:19] have you thought about including block data in the PoW?
[09:06:41] yes, of course.
[09:07:39] is that already in an algo?
[09:08:10] hyc: about "centered on chinese hydro" - what is your source? the best paper I know is this: https://coinshares.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Mining-Whitepaper-Final.pdf
[09:09:01] linzhi-sonia: do you mine on your ASICs before you sell them?
[09:09:13] besides testing of course
[09:09:45] that paper puts Chinese btc miners at 60% max
[09:10:05] tevador: I think everybody learned that that is not healthy long-term!
[09:10:16] because it gives the chipmaker a cost advantage over its own customers
[09:10:33] and cost advantage leads to centralization (physical and logical)
[09:10:51] you guys should know who finances progpow and why :)
[09:11:05] but let's not get into this, ha ha. want to keep the channel civilized. right OhGodAGirl ? :)
[09:11:34] tevador: so the answer is no! 100% and definitely no
[09:11:54] that "self-mining" disease was one of the problems we have now with asics, and their bad reputation (rightfully so)
[09:13:08] I plan to write a nice short 2-page paper or so on our chip design process. maybe it's interesting to some people here.
[09:13:15] basically the 5 steps I mentioned before, from math to physical
[09:13:32] linzhi-sonia: the paper you linked puts 48% of bitcoin mining in Sichuan. the total in China is much more than 60%
[09:13:38] need to run it by a few people to fix bugs, will post it here when published
[09:14:06] hyc: ok! I am just sharing the "best" document I know today. it definitely may be wrong and there may be a better one now.
[09:14:18] hyc: if you see some reports, please share
[09:14:51] hey I am really curious about this: where is a PoW algo that puts block data into the PoW?
[09:15:02] the previous paper I read is from here http://hackingdistributed.com/2018/01/15/decentralization-bitcoin-ethereum/
[09:15:38] hyc: you said that already exists? (block data in PoW)
[09:15:45] it would make verification harder
[09:15:49] linzhi-sonia: https://the-eye.eu/public/Books/campdivision.com/PDF/Computers%20General/Privacy/bitcoin/meh/hashimoto.pdf
[09:15:51] but for chips it would be interesting
[09:15:52] we discussed the possibility about a year ago https://www.reddit.com/Monero/comments/8bshrx/what_we_need_to_know_about_proof_of_work_pow/
[09:16:05] oh good links! thanks! need to read...
[09:16:06] I think that paper by dryja was original
[09:17:53] since we have a nice flow - second question I'm very curious about: has anyone thought about in-protocol rewards for other functions?
[09:18:55] we've discussed micropayments for wallets to use remote nodes
[09:18:55] you know there is a lot of work in other coins about STARK provers, zero-knowledge, etc. many of those things very compute intense, or need to be outsourced to a service (zether). For chipmakers, in-protocol rewards create an economic incentive to accelerate those things.
[09:19:50] whenever there is an in-protocol reward, you may get the power of ASICs doing something you actually want to happen
[09:19:52] it would be nice if there was some economic reward for running a fullnode, but no one has come up with much more than that afaik
[09:19:54] instead of fighting them off
[09:20:29] you need to use asics, not fight them. that's an obvious thing to say for an asicmaker...
[09:20:41] in-protocol rewards can be very powerful
[09:20:50] like I said before - unless the ASICs are so useful they're embedded in every smartphone, I dont see them being a positive for decentralization
[09:21:17] if they're a separate product, the average consumer is not going to buy them
[09:21:20] now I was talking about speedup of verifying, signing, proving, etc.
[09:21:23] they won't even know what they are
[09:22:07] if anybody wants to talk about or design in-protocol rewards, please come talk to us
[09:22:08] the average consumer also doesn't use general purpose hardware to secure blockchains either
[09:22:14] not just for PoW, in fact *NOT* for PoW
[09:22:32] it requires sw/hw co-design
[09:23:10] we are in long-term discussions/collaboration over this with Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash. just talk right now.
[09:23:16] this was recently published though suggesting more uptake though I guess https://btcmanager.com/college-students-are-the-second-biggest-miners-of-cryptocurrency/
[09:23:29] I find it pretty hard to believe their numbers
[09:24:03] well
[09:24:09] sorry, original article: https://www.pcmag.com/news/366952/college-kids-are-using-campus-electricity-to-mine-crypto
[09:24:11] just talk, no? rumors
[09:24:18] college students are already more educated than the average consumer
[09:24:29] we are not seeing many such customers anymore
[09:24:30] it's data from cisco monitoring network traffic
[09:24:33] and they're always looking for free money
[09:24:48] of course anyone with "free" electricity is inclined to do it
[09:24:57] but look at the rates, cannot make much money
[09:26:06] Ethereum is a bloated collection of bugs wrapped in a UI. I suppose they need all the help they can get
[09:26:29] Bitcoin Cash ... just another get rich quick scheme
[09:26:38] hmm :)
[09:26:51] I'll give it back to you, ok? ha ha. arrogance comes before the fall...
[09:27:17] maye we should have a little fun with CNv4 mining :)
[09:27:25] ;)
[09:27:38] come on. anyone who has watched their track record... $75M lost in ETH at DAO hack
[09:27:50] every smart contract that comes along is just waiting for another hack
[09:27:58] I just wanted to throw out the "in-protocol reward" thing, maybe someone sees the idea and wants to cowork. maybe not. maybe it's a stupid idea.
[09:29:18] linzhi-sonia: any thoughts on CN-GPU?
[09:29:55] CN-GPU has one positive aspect - it wastes chip area to implement all 18 hash algorithms
[09:30:19] you will always hear roughly the same feedback from me:
[09:30:52] "This algorithm very different, it heavy use floating point operations to hurt FPGAs and general purpose CPUs"
[09:30:56] the problem is, if it's profitable for people to buy ASIC miners and mine, it's always more profitable for the manufacturer to not sell and mine themselves
[09:31:02] "hurt"
[09:31:07] what is the point of this?
[09:31:15] it totally doesn't work
[09:31:24] you are hurting noone, just demonstrating lack of ability to think
[09:31:41] what is better: algo designed for chip, or chip designed for algo?
[09:31:43] fireice does it on daily basis, CN-GPU is a joke
[09:31:53] tevador: that's not really true, especially in a market with such large price fluctuations as cryptocurrency
[09:32:12] it's far less risky to sell miners than mine with them and pray that price doesn't crash for next six months
[09:32:14] I think it's great that crypto has a nice group of asicmakers now, hw & sw will cowork well
[09:32:36] jwinterm yes, that's why they premine them and sell after
[09:32:41] PoW is about being thermodynamically and cryptographically provable
[09:32:45] premining with them is taking on that risk
[09:32:49] not "fork when we think there are asics"
[09:32:51] business is about risk minimization
[09:32:54] that's just fear-driven
[09:33:05] Inge-: that's roughly the feedback
[09:33:24] I'm not saying it hasn't happened, but I think it's not so simple as saying "it always happens"
[09:34:00] jwinterm: it has certainly happened on BTC. and also on XMR.
[09:34:19] ironically, please think about it: these kinds of algos indeed prove the limits of the chips they were designed for. but they don't prove that you cannot implement the same algo differently! cannot!
[09:34:26] Risk minimization is not starting a business at all.
[09:34:34] proof-of-gpu-limit. proof-of-cpu-limit.
[09:34:37] imagine you have a money printing machine, would you sell it?
[09:34:39] proves nothing for an ASIC :)
[09:35:05] linzhi-sonia: thanks. I dont think anyone believes you can't make a more efficient cn-gpu asic than a gpu - but that it would not be orders of magnitude faster...
[09:35:24] ok
[09:35:44] like I say. these algos are, that's really ironic, designed to prove the limitatios of a particular chip in mind of the designer
[09:35:50] exactly the wrong way round :)
[09:36:16] like the cache size in RandomX :)
[09:36:18] beautiful
[09:36:29] someone looked at GPU designs
[09:37:31] linzhi-sonia can you elaborate? Cache size in RandomX was selected to fit CPU cache
[09:37:52] yes
[09:38:03] too large for GPU
[09:38:11] as I said, we are designing the algorithm to exactly fit CPU capabilities, I do not claim an ASIC cannot be more efficient
[09:38:16] ok!
[09:38:29] when will you do the audit?
[09:38:35] will the results be published in a document or so?
[09:38:37] I claim that single-chip ASIC is not viable, though
[09:39:06] you guys are brave, noone disputes that. 3 anti-asic hardforks now!
[09:39:18] 4th one coming
[09:39:31] 3 forks were done not only for this
[09:39:38] they had scheduled updates in the first place
[09:48:10] Monero is the #1 anti-asic fighter
[09:48:25] Monero is #1 for a lot of reasons ;)
[09:48:40] It's the coin with the most hycs.
[09:48:55] mooooo
[09:59:06] sneaky integer overflow, bug squished
[10:38:00] p0nziph0ne ([email protected]/vpn/privateinternetaccess/p0nziph0ne) has joined #monero-pow
[11:10:53] The convo here is wild
[11:12:29] it's like geo-politics at the intersection of software and hardware manufacturing for thermoeconomic value.
[11:13:05] ..and on a Sunday.
[11:15:43] midipoet: hw and sw should work together and stop silly games to devalue each other. to outsiders this is totally not attractive.
[11:16:07] I appreciate the positive energy here to try to listen, learn, understand.
[11:16:10] that's a start
[11:16:48] <-- p0nziph0ne ([email protected]/vpn/privateinternetaccess/p0nziph0ne) has quit (Quit: Leaving)
[11:16:54] we won't do silly mining against xmr "community" wishes, but not because we couldn'd do it, but because it's the wrong direction in the long run, for both sides
[11:18:57] linzhi-sonia: I agree to some extent. Though, in reality, there will always be divergence between social worlds. Not every body has the same vision of the future. Reaching societal consensus on reality tomorrow is not always easy
[11:20:25] absolutely. especially at a time when there is so much profit to be made from divisiveness.
[11:20:37] someone will want to make that profit, for sure
[11:24:32] Yes. Money distorts.
[11:24:47] Or wealth...one of the two
[11:26:35] Too much physical money will distort rays of light passing close to it indeed.
submitted by jwinterm to Monero [link] [comments]

I demand my 16k back from Bitfinex. Follow my legal struggles with them here.

I demand my 16k back from Bitfinex. Follow my legal struggles with them here.
I'll save you guys the hassle and give you a tl;dr first.
You can scroll through my dealings with Bitfinex. Every post is on chronological order. If anyone is experiencing similar issues regarding the negligence of Bitfinex in the handling of the BCH hard fork, give me a direct message. I can help you to the details of my lawyer and we can even coordinate our efforts or just share our findings. I know some trolls here are p*** by Bitfinex to shut us up or make readers doubt what's going on here. Don't get distracted by them. They will come at me trying to discredit my story. Crypto exchanges think they can use us their clients as cash cows, but when they screw up, they don't even think twice about screwing you over. This is my story:
  • Bitfinex stated in a public announcement that all trading on BCH pairs would be stopped at 16:40 PM UTC on November 15th;
  • I started the morning of November 15th with about ~16k in equity on my margin account. I had been scalping throughout the morning/afternoon and had a position open just before the hard fork took place;
  • Bitfinex screwed up by allowing trading to continue after the hard fork time, causing the price to drop from $ ~430 to $ 250 as depicted in the chart below (Exhibit 0) in a few minutes time;
  • During the flash crash that followed (mind you, this happens after the hard fork at 16:40), I tried to close my position manually trying to market close the whole position of 100 BCH - their engine didn't allow the whole position to go through and only 40 BCH went through in increments of 10. As you can imagine they closed at prices wayyyy below the original base price, which was $ ~435 at 16:40;
  • But what happens next is where it gets interesting. After price hits $ 250, Bitfinex decided it was time to close my position and only reimburse 60% of my position in spot BSV / BAB (60 instead of the 100);
  • My account balance started showing weird numbers not making any sense (4.38 BAB and 4.38 BSV, ?!??). After a while my ending balance becomes: $ -13,875 | 60 BAB | 60 BSV. Which at current prices equals $ -13,875 + ( 60 x 129.19 ) + ( 60 x 75,34 ) = $ -1,603;
  • Numerous mistakes followed, the amount of negligence here is shocking, a response time unworthy of a legitimate exchange, among others, caused my account to go from a net account balance of $16k (my equity) to currently -1,6k (yes really!); and here comes the weird stuff;
  • BFX accepted their negligence and came up with the following proposal to reimburse me: $ -21,785 | 100 BAB | 100 BSV;
  • At current prices, this absurd proposal would amount to: $ -21,785 + ( 100 x 129.19 ) + ( 100 x 75,34 ) = $ -1,332. Meaning that I would still owe them 1,3k, for destroying my account balance; and
  • Mind blowing stuff.
Exhibit 0
1. Bitfinex announcement regarding the Bitcoin Cash Hard Fork
  • Snapshot Event at 16:40 PM UTC on November 15, all BCH balances to be frozen and BCH trading to be halted.
Exhibit 1
2. Day 1: E-mail received from Bitfinex, "Position nearing liquidation", at 16:42 pm (UTC) on November 15th
  • Remember, trading should have stopped at 16:40. It did not;
  • Date and time of e-mail received from BFX (see 1); and
  • E-mail content announcing that my position is nearing liquidation at 16:42 PM (see 2).
Exhibit 2
3. Day 1: Order history imported from BFX Ledger
  • I started trading on 15 November with a short position of 70 BCH, built up between 11:14 and 11:30 AM;
    • Closed position in profit between 12:07 and 12:35 PM;
  • Second position of in total 80 BCH short created between 13:13 and 13:18 PM;
    • Closed position in profit between 13:42 and 14:43; and
  • The third position is where everything wrong. Went long with 100 BCH, created between 13:47 and 13:58;
    • Market executed 4 x 10 BCH between 16:41:57 and 16:43:29 at average prices way below the settlement price (keep in mind that settlement should have happened at hard fork time: 16:40 and ~$ 435); and
    • I tried to market close the whole position but the system wouldn't allow it.
Exhibit 3
4. Day 1: Conversation started with BFX Telegram Admin shortly after on 15 November at 18:16 PM (UTC +1)
  • Conversation started after requesting to direct message an admin in the BFX Public Channel (from which I got banned on 19 November after ventilating my frustration about its incredible slow support service and how they could let trading continue; and
  • The conversation continues for a few days during which I give him all the information there is about what has occurred. Initially he tells me I received the correct amount, namely 60 BCH, not wanting to admit BFX screwed up badly here (you'll see that they admit to this eventually).
Exhibit 4
5. Day 1: Support ticket sent to BFX on Thursday 15 November at 17:26 PM
  • Ticket opened after TG Admin' suggestion; and
  • Requesting guidance regarding the BCH flash crash.
Exhibit 5
6. Day 2: Second e-mail to BFX Support Service at 17:23 PM on 16 November
  • I'm asking what to do with my negative account balance, which at the time was changing constantly with weird numbers that didn't make any sense;
  • Asking whether to settle the spot 60 BCH that was credited to me by selling them immediately or not do anything to prevent making things worse than they are; and
  • Notified Bitfinex Support of my conversation with TG admin, and requested to have the conversation added to the ticket.
Exhibit 6
7. Day 3: Initial reply by BFX to ticket received at 03:10 AM on 17 November
  • Initial reply by support indicates that 0 research was done regarding the situation. He just copy pasted my ledger, a copy which I had already sent their TG admin explaining why it was wrong. Have a look at the time of the ledger entries and it tells you enough ;);
  • Position was claimed at 17:03:54 (the snapshot should have been taken at 16:30) as stated by BFX itself; and
  • Wrong amount credited to my account, 60 instead of 100.
Exhibit 7
8. Day 3: Reply to previous e-mail on 17 November at 12:44 PM
  • My reply shows screenshots from my BFX ledger stating the following:
    • i ) trading continued wrongfully and snapshot time should have been 16:40;
    • ii) market executing 4 times 10 BCH between 16:41:57 and 16:43:29; and
    • iii ) trading after 16:40 PM should NOT have been possible, which this guy has trouble understanding.
Exhibit 8
9. Day 6: An apologetic reply by BFX (one of many): issue forwarded to relevant team, promises to 'get back soon' on 20 November at 03:33 AM
  • Reminder sent between day 3 and day 6.
Exhibit 9
10. Day 7: Reminder sent, requesting an indication for a reply, stating full reimbursement on Wednesday 21 November at 14:32 PM
Exhibit 10
11. Day 9: E-mail by BFX: settling negative balances following BCH hard fork on Friday 23 November at 08:45 AM & reply
Exhibit 11
12. Day 13: Reminder sent to previous e-mail received on Day 9, no information, just 'inundated with support requests regarding the BCH fork' on Tuesday 27 November at 22:00
  • What a shocker, I'm not the only experiencing this issue.
Exhibit 12
13. Day 20: Another apologetic e-mail, investigation continuing, promises to have a response shortly, received on Tuesday 4 December at 10:13 AM & Day 21: Answer to previous e-mail and requesting to have account reinstated, sent on Wednesday 5 December at 10:53 AM
Exhibit 13
14. Day 23: No info besides 'explanation taking slightly longer than anticipated on Friday 7 December at 11:38 AM & Day 28: Another reminder sent on Wednesday 12 December at 10:24
  • Of course they aren't stalling for time...
Exhibit 14
15. Day 29: Proposal in progress, "continue to trade", will not affect decision and proposal by further actions on the platform on Thursday 13 December at 10:52 AM
  • Account balance is still negative, their suggestion to continue trading would mean that I would have to add back 4k from my own money to get to a net account balance of 0 (see Exhibit 17);
  • Only any additions after that would allow me to be able to trade again ([email protected]#!$); and
Exhibit 15
  • Meanwhile my 'Net trading balance' sits at -4,087.07, yes really ([email protected]$), numerous reminders followed.
16. Day 38: Proposal finally in my inbox. What follows is an admittance of guilt and the proposal to settle. Looks like a happy end right? Not so fast. Proposal received on December 22nd at 09:33 AM & Day 39: Requesting confirmation of the stated reimbursement, sent on 23 December at 13:02
The highlights are:
  • "Your BCH position was claimed at an incorrect time..... being claimed at an incorrect base price.";
  • "...you were credited far less.... than should have been";
  • "...orders after the 16:40:00 timestamp should not have gone through.";
  • Your USD balance prior to the claim was 16,042 USD; remember this?; and
  • "In light of this error".
  • This initial offer would mean: $ -7,603 + 100x130,11 + 100x75,96 = $ 13,004. That's still 3k less than my initial account balance before this shit show. But alright, it looks like we're getting somewhere right?
Exhibit 16
18. Day 44: "it seems I misspoke in my previous outline", how many screwups are possible? Received on 28 December at 04:57 AM
Exhibit 17
19. Day 54: Demand letter by my lawyer sent on 7 January at 13:10 & Day 55: Quickest reply I've ever seen from BFX, wow. Received on 8 January at 02:37 AM & Day 61: E-mail by lawyer requesting my account balance to be reinstated to $ 16,042 (my equity before they screwed up). Sent on 14 January at 14:52 PM
  • My lawyer sent a demand letter requesting my $$$ back;
  • 10 day deadline given;
  • Response by BFX is the quickest I've ever seen from them during the past 2 months; and
  • They are trying to bury us in details here, mostly details that aren't of any importance. I'm a Finance as well as Financial Law major. I (heart) details.
Exhibit 18
20. Day 69: Lawyer BFX replies with "I trust that this comprehensive explanation of the proposal will satisfy your client's concern and we can move to wrap up settlement of this matter"
  • This, redditors, is called stalling for time by their lawyers:
Exhibit 19

You know the weird part in all of this. When, not if, the Supervisory Board of iFinex finds out it has several investigations going on against them - because of a mere 16k - they are going to have a field day with these people, mark my words.

submitted by EvilPhantom to bitfinex [link] [comments]

Transcript of the community Q&A with Steve Shadders and Daniel Connolly of the Bitcoin SV development team. We talk about the path to big blocks, new opcodes, selfish mining, malleability, and why November will lead to a divergence in consensus rules. (Cont in comments)

We've gone through the painstaking process of transcribing the linked interview with Steve Shadders and Daniell Connolly of the Bitcoin SV team. There is an amazing amount of information in this interview that we feel is important for businesses and miners to hear, so we believe it was important to get this is a written form. To avoid any bias, the transcript is taken almost word for word from the video, with just a few changes made for easier reading. If you see any corrections that need to be made, please let us know.
Each question is in bold, and each question and response is timestamped accordingly. You can follow along with the video here:
https://youtu.be/tPImTXFb_U8

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT:

Connor: 02:19.68,0:02:45.10
Alright so thank You Daniel and Steve for joining us. We're joined by Steve Shadders and Daniel Connolly from nChain and also the lead developers of the Satoshi’s Vision client. So Daniel and Steve do you guys just want to introduce yourselves before we kind of get started here - who are you guys and how did you get started?
Steve: 0,0:02:38.83,0:03:30.61
So I'm Steve Shadders and at nChain I am the director of solutions in engineering and specifically for Bitcoin SV I am the technical director of the project which means that I'm a bit less hands-on than Daniel but I handle a lot of the liaison with the miners - that's the conditional project.
Daniel:
Hi I’m Daniel I’m the lead developer for Bitcoin SV. As the team's grown that means that I do less actual coding myself but more organizing the team and organizing what we’re working on.
Connor 03:23.07,0:04:15.98
Great so we took some questions - we asked on Reddit to have people come and post their questions. We tried to take as many of those as we could and eliminate some of the duplicates, so we're gonna kind of go through each question one by one. We added some questions of our own in and we'll try and get through most of these if we can. So I think we just wanted to start out and ask, you know, Bitcoin Cash is a little bit over a year old now. Bitcoin itself is ten years old but in the past a little over a year now what has the process been like for you guys working with the multiple development teams and, you know, why is it important that the Satoshi’s vision client exists today?
Steve: 0:04:17.66,0:06:03.46
I mean yes well we’ve been in touch with the developer teams for quite some time - I think a bi-weekly meeting of Bitcoin Cash developers across all implementations started around November last year. I myself joined those in January or February of this year and Daniel a few months later. So we communicate with all of those teams and I think, you know, it's not been without its challenges. It's well known that there's a lot of disagreements around it, but some what I do look forward to in the near future is a day when the consensus issues themselves are all rather settled, and if we get to that point then there's not going to be much reason for the different developer teams to disagree on stuff. They might disagree on non-consensus related stuff but that's not the end of the world because, you know, Bitcoin Unlimited is free to go and implement whatever they want in the back end of a Bitcoin Unlimited and Bitcoin SV is free to do whatever they want in the backend, and if they interoperate on a non-consensus level great. If they don't not such a big problem there will obviously be bridges between the two, so, yeah I think going forward the complications of having so many personalities with wildly different ideas are going to get less and less.
Cory: 0:06:00.59,0:06:19.59
I guess moving forward now another question about the testnet - a lot of people on Reddit have been asking what the testing process for Bitcoin SV has been like, and if you guys plan on releasing any of those results from the testing?
Daniel: 0:06:19.59,0:07:55.55
Sure yeah so our release will be concentrated on the stability, right, with the first release of Bitcoin SV and that involved doing a large amount of additional testing particularly not so much at the unit test level but at the more system test so setting up test networks, performing tests, and making sure that the software behaved as we expected, right. Confirming the changes we made, making sure that there aren’t any other side effects. Because of, you know, it was quite a rush to release the first version so we've got our test results documented, but not in a way that we can really release them. We're thinking about doing that but we’re not there yet.
Steve: 0:07:50.25,0:09:50.87
Just to tidy that up - we've spent a lot of our time developing really robust test processes and the reporting is something that we can read on our internal systems easily, but we need to tidy that up to give it out for public release. The priority for us was making sure that the software was safe to use. We've established a test framework that involves a progression of code changes through multiple test environments - I think it's five different test environments before it gets the QA stamp of approval - and as for the question about the testnet, yeah, we've got four of them. We've got Testnet One and Testnet Two. A slightly different numbering scheme to the testnet three that everyone's probably used to – that’s just how we reference them internally. They're [1 and 2] both forks of Testnet Three. [Testnet] One we used for activation testing, so we would test things before and after activation - that one’s set to reset every couple of days. The other one [Testnet Two] was set to post activation so that we can test all of the consensus changes. The third one was a performance test network which I think most people have probably have heard us refer to before as Gigablock Testnet. I get my tongue tied every time I try to say that word so I've started calling it the Performance test network and I think we're planning on having two of those: one that we can just do our own stuff with and experiment without having to worry about external unknown factors going on and having other people joining it and doing stuff that we don't know about that affects our ability to baseline performance tests, but the other one (which I think might still be a work in progress so Daniel might be able to answer that one) is one of them where basically everyone will be able to join and they can try and mess stuff up as bad as they want.
Daniel: 0:09:45.02,0:10:20.93
Yeah, so we so we recently shared the details of Testnet One and Two with the with the other BCH developer groups. The Gigablock test network we've shared up with one group so far but yeah we're building it as Steve pointed out to be publicly accessible.
Connor: 0:10:18.88,0:10:44.00
I think that was my next question I saw that you posted on Twitter about the revived Gigablock testnet initiative and so it looked like blocks bigger than 32 megabytes were being mined and propagated there, but maybe the block explorers themselves were coming down - what does that revived Gigablock test initiative look like?
Daniel: 0:10:41.62,0:11:58.34
That's what did the Gigablock test network is. So the Gigablock test network was first set up by Bitcoin Unlimited with nChain’s help and they did some great work on that, and we wanted to revive it. So we wanted to bring it back and do some large-scale testing on it. It's a flexible network - at one point we had we had eight different large nodes spread across the globe, sort of mirroring the old one. Right now we scaled back because we're not using it at the moment so they'll notice I think three. We have produced some large blocks there and it's helped us a lot in our research and into the scaling capabilities of Bitcoin SV, so it's guided the work that the team’s been doing for the last month or two on the improvements that we need for scalability.
Steve: 0:11:56.48,0:13:34.25
I think that's actually a good point to kind of frame where our priorities have been in kind of two separate stages. I think, as Daniel mentioned before, because of the time constraints we kept the change set for the October 15 release as minimal as possible - it was just the consensus changes. We didn't do any work on performance at all and we put all our focus and energy into establishing the QA process and making sure that that change was safe and that was a good process for us to go through. It highlighted what we were missing in our team – we got our recruiters very busy recruiting of a Test Manager and more QA people. The second stage after that is performance related work which, as Daniel mentioned, the results of our performance testing fed into what tasks we were gonna start working on for the performance related stuff. Now that work is still in progress - some of the items that we identified the code is done and that's going through the QA process but it’s not quite there yet. That's basically the two-stage process that we've been through so far. We have a roadmap that goes further into the future that outlines more stuff, but primarily it’s been QA first, performance second. The performance enhancements are close and on the horizon but some of that work should be ongoing for quite some time.
Daniel: 0:13:37.49,0:14:35.14
Some of the changes we need for the performance are really quite large and really get down into the base level view of the software. There's kind of two groups of them mainly. One that are internal to the software – to Bitcoin SV itself - improving the way it works inside. And then there's other ones that interface it with the outside world. One of those in particular we're working closely with another group to make a compatible change - it's not consensus changing or anything like that - but having the same interface on multiple different implementations will be very helpful right, so we're working closely with them to make improvements for scalability.
Connor: 0:14:32.60,0:15:26.45
Obviously for Bitcoin SV one of the main things that you guys wanted to do that that some of the other developer groups weren't willing to do right now is to increase the maximum default block size to 128 megabytes. I kind of wanted to pick your brains a little bit about - a lot of the objection to either removing the box size entirely or increasing it on a larger scale is this idea of like the infinite block attack right and that kind of came through in a lot of the questions. What are your thoughts on the “infinite block attack” and is it is it something that that really exists, is it something that miners themselves should be more proactive on preventing, or I guess what are your thoughts on that attack that everyone says will happen if you uncap the block size?
Steve: 0:15:23.45,0:18:28.56
I'm often quoted on Twitter and Reddit - I've said before the infinite block attack is bullshit. Now, that's a statement that I suppose is easy to take out of context, but I think the 128 MB limit is something where there’s probably two schools of thought about. There are some people who think that you shouldn't increase the limit to 128 MB until the software can handle it, and there are others who think that it's fine to do it now so that the limit is increased when the software can handle it and you don’t run into the limit when this when the software improves and can handle it. Obviously we’re from the latter school of thought. As I said before we've got a bunch of performance increases, performance enhancements, in the pipeline. If we wait till May to increase the block size limit to 128 MB then those performance enhancements will go in, but we won't be able to actually demonstrate it on mainnet. As for the infinitive block attack itself, I mean there are a number of mitigations that you can put in place. I mean firstly, you know, going down to a bit of the tech detail - when you send a block message or send any peer to peer message there's a header which has the size of the message. If someone says they're sending you a 30MB message and you're receiving it and it gets to 33MB then obviously you know something's wrong so you can drop the connection. If someone sends you a message that's 129 MB and you know the block size limit is 128 you know it’s kind of pointless to download that message. So I mean these are just some of the mitigations that you can put in place. When I say the attack is bullshit, I mean I mean it is bullshit from the sense that it's really quite trivial to prevent it from happening. I think there is a bit of a school of thought in the Bitcoin world that if it's not in the software right now then it kind of doesn't exist. I disagree with that, because there are small changes that can be made to work around problems like this. One other aspect of the infinite block attack, and let’s not call it the infinite block attack, let's just call it the large block attack - it takes a lot of time to validate that we gotten around by having parallel pipelines for blocks to come in, so you've got a block that's coming in it's got a unknown stuck on it for two hours or whatever downloading and validating it. At some point another block is going to get mined b someone else and as long as those two blocks aren't stuck in a serial pipeline then you know the problem kind of goes away.
Cory: 0:18:26.55,0:18:48.27
Are there any concerns with the propagation of those larger blocks? Because there's a lot of questions around you know what the practical size of scaling right now Bitcoin SV could do and the concerns around propagating those blocks across the whole network.
Steve 0:18:45.84,0:21:37.73
Yes, there have been concerns raised about it. I think what people forget is that compact blocks and xThin exist, so if a 32MB block is not send 32MB of data in most cases, almost all cases. The concern here that I think I do find legitimate is the Great Firewall of China. Very early on in Bitcoin SV we started talking with miners on the other side of the firewall and that was one of their primary concerns. We had anecdotal reports of people who were having trouble getting a stable connection any faster than 200 kilobits per second and even with compact blocks you still need to get the transactions across the firewall. So we've done a lot of research into that - we tested our own links across the firewall, rather CoinGeeks links across the firewall as they’ve given us access to some of their servers so that we can play around, and we were able to get sustained rates of 50 to 90 megabits per second which pushes that problem quite a long way down the road into the future. I don't know the maths off the top of my head, but the size of the blocks that can sustain is pretty large. So we're looking at a couple of options - it may well be the chattiness of the peer-to-peer protocol causes some of these issues with the Great Firewall, so we have someone building a bridge concept/tool where you basically just have one kind of TX vacuum on either side of the firewall that collects them all up and sends them off every one or two seconds as a single big chunk to eliminate some of that chattiness. The other is we're looking at building a multiplexer that will sit and send stuff up to the peer-to-peer network on one side and send it over splitters, to send it over multiple links, reassemble it on the other side so we can sort of transition the great Firewall without too much trouble, but I mean getting back to the core of your question - yes there is a theoretical limit to block size propagation time and that's kind of where Moore's Law comes in. Putting faster links and you kick that can further down the road and you just keep on putting in faster links. I don't think 128 main blocks are going to be an issue though with the speed of the internet that we have nowadays.
Connor: 0:21:34.99,0:22:17.84
One of the other changes that you guys are introducing is increasing the max script size so I think right now it’s going from 201 to 500 [opcodes]. So I guess a few of the questions we got was I guess #1 like why not uncap it entirely - I think you guys said you ran into some concerns while testing that - and then #2 also specifically we had a question about how certain are you that there are no remaining n squared bugs or vulnerabilities left in script execution?
Steve: 0:22:15.50,0:25:36.79
It's interesting the decision - we were initially planning on removing that cap altogether and the next cap that comes into play after that (next effective cap is a 10,000 byte limit on the size of the script). We took a more conservative route and decided to wind that back to 500 - it's interesting that we got some criticism for that when the primary criticism I think that was leveled against us was it’s dangerous to increase that limit to unlimited. We did that because we’re being conservative. We did some research into these log n squared bugs, sorry – attacks, that people have referred to. We identified a few of them and we had a hard think about it and thought - look if we can find this many in a short time we can fix them all (the whack-a-mole approach) but it does suggest that there may well be more unknown ones. So we thought about putting, you know, taking the whack-a-mole approach, but that doesn't really give us any certainty. We will fix all of those individually but a more global approach is to make sure that if anyone does discover one of these scripts it doesn't bring the node to a screaming halt, so the problem here is because the Bitcoin node is essentially single-threaded, if you get one of these scripts that locks up the script engine for a long time everything that's behind it in the queue has to stop and wait. So what we wanted to do, and this is something we've got an engineer actively working on right now, is once that script validation goad path is properly paralyzed (parts of it already are), then we’ll basically assign a few threads for well-known transaction templates, and a few threads for any any type of script. So if you get a few scripts that are nasty and lock up a thread for a while that's not going to stop the node from working because you've got these other kind of lanes of the highway that are exclusively reserved for well-known script templates and they'll just keep on passing through. Once you've got that in place, and I think we're in a much better position to get rid of that limit entirely because the worst that's going to happen is your non-standard script pipelines get clogged up but everything else will keep keep ticking along - there are other mitigations for this as well I mean I know you could always put a time limit on script execution if they wanted to, and that would be something that would be up to individual miners. Bitcoin SV's job I think is to provide the tools for the miners and the miners can then choose, you know, how to make use of them - if they want to set time limits on script execution then that's a choice for them.
Daniel: 0:25:34.82,0:26:15.85
Yeah, I'd like to point out that a node here, when it receives a transaction through the peer to peer network, it doesn't have to accept that transaction, you can reject it. If it looks suspicious to the node it can just say you know we're not going to deal with that, or if it takes more than five minutes to execute, or more than a minute even, it can just abort and discard that transaction, right. The only time we can’t do that is when it's in a block already, but then it could decide to reject the block as well. It's all possibilities there could be in the software.
Steve: 0:26:13.08,0:26:20.64
Yeah, and if it's in a block already it means someone else was able to validate it so…
Cory: 0,0:26:21.21,0:26:43.60
There’s a lot of discussions about the re-enabled opcodes coming – OP_MUL, OP_INVERT, OP_LSHIFT, and OP_RSHIFT up invert op l shift and op r shift you maybe explain the significance of those op codes being re-enabled?
Steve: 0:26:42.01,0:28:17.01
Well I mean one of one of the most significant things is other than two, which are minor variants of DUP and MUL, they represent almost the complete set of original op codes. I think that's not necessarily a technical issue, but it's an important milestone. MUL is one that's that I've heard some interesting comments about. People ask me why are you putting OP_MUL back in if you're planning on changing them to big number operations instead of the 32-bit limit that they're currently imposed upon. The simple answer to that question is that we currently have all of the other arithmetic operations except for OP_MUL. We’ve got add divide, subtract, modulo – it’s odd to have a script system that's got all the mathematical primitives except for multiplication. The other answer to that question is that they're useful - we've talked about a Rabin signature solution that basically replicates the function of DATASIGVERIFY. That's just one example of a use case for this - most cryptographic primitive operations require mathematical operations and bit shifts are useful for a whole ton of things. So it's really just about completing that work and completing the script engine, or rather not completing it, but putting it back the way that it was it was meant to be.
Connor 0:28:20.42,0:29:22.62
Big Num vs 32 Bit. I've seen Daniel - I think I saw you answer this on Reddit a little while ago, but the new op codes using logical shifts and Satoshi’s version use arithmetic shifts - the general question that I think a lot of people keep bringing up is, maybe in a rhetorical way but they say why not restore it back to the way Satoshi had it exactly - what are the benefits of changing it now to operate a little bit differently?
Daniel: 0:29:18.75,0:31:12.15
Yeah there's two parts there - the big number one and the L shift being a logical shift instead of arithmetic. so when we re-enabled these opcodes we've looked at them carefully and have adjusted them slightly as we did in the past with OP_SPLIT. So the new LSHIFT and RSHIFT are bitwise operators. They can be used to implement arithmetic based shifts - I think I've posted a short script that did that, but we can't do it the other way around, right. You couldn't use an arithmetic shift operator to implement a bitwise one. It's because of the ordering of the bytes in the arithmetic values, so the values that represent numbers. The little endian which means they're swapped around to what many other systems - what I've considered normal - or big-endian. And if you start shifting that properly as a number then then shifting sequence in the bytes is a bit strange, so it couldn't go the other way around - you couldn't implement bitwise shift with arithmetic, so we chose to make them bitwise operators - that's what we proposed.
Steve: 0:31:10.57,0:31:51.51
That was essentially a decision that was actually made in May, or rather a consequence of decisions that were made in May. So in May we reintroduced OP_AND, OP_OR, and OP_XOR, and that was also another decision to replace three different string operators with OP_SPLIT was also made. So that was not a decision that we've made unilaterally, it was a decision that was made collectively with all of the BCH developers - well not all of them were actually in all of the meetings, but they were all invited.
Daniel: 0:31:48.24,0:32:23.13
Another example of that is that we originally proposed OP_2DIV and OP_2MUL was it, I think, and this is a single operator that multiplies the value by two, right, but it was pointed out that that can very easily be achieved by just doing multiply by two instead of having a separate operator for it, so we scrapped those, we took them back out, because we wanted to keep the number of operators minimum yeah.
Steve: 0:32:17.59,0:33:47.20
There was an appetite around for keeping the operators minimal. I mean the decision about the idea to replace OP_SUBSTR, OP_LEFT, OP_RIGHT with OP_SPLIT operator actually came from Gavin Andresen. He made a brief appearance in the Telegram workgroups while we were working out what to do with May opcodes and obviously Gavin's word kind of carries a lot of weight and we listen to him. But because we had chosen to implement the May opcodes (the bitwise opcodes) and treat the data as big-endian data streams (well, sorry big-endian not really applicable just plain data strings) it would have been completely inconsistent to implement LSHIFT and RSHIFT as integer operators because then you would have had a set of bitwise operators that operated on two different kinds of data, which would have just been nonsensical and very difficult for anyone to work with, so yeah. I mean it's a bit like P2SH - it wasn't a part of the original Satoshi protocol that once some things are done they're done and you know if you want to want to make forward progress you've got to work within that that framework that exists.
Daniel: 0:33:45.85,0:34:48.97
When we get to the big number ones then it gets really complicated, you know, number implementations because then you can't change the behavior of the existing opcodes, and I don't mean OP_MUL, I mean the other ones that have been there for a while. You can't suddenly make them big number ones without seriously looking at what scripts there might be out there and the impact of that change on those existing scripts, right. The other the other point is you don't know what scripts are out there because of P2SH - there could be scripts that you don't know the content of and you don't know what effect changing the behavior of these operators would mean. The big number thing is tricky, so another option might be, yeah, I don't know what the options for though it needs some serious thought.
Steve: 0:34:43.27,0:35:24.23
That’s something we've reached out to the other implementation teams about - actually really would like their input on the best ways to go about restoring big number operations. It has to be done extremely carefully and I don't know if we'll get there by May next year, or when, but we’re certainly willing to put a lot of resources into it and we're more than happy to work with BU or XT or whoever wants to work with us on getting that done and getting it done safely.
Connor: 0:35:19.30,0:35:57.49
Kind of along this similar vein, you know, Bitcoin Core introduced this concept of standard scripts, right - standard and non-standard scripts. I had pretty interesting conversation with Clemens Ley about use cases for “non-standard scripts” as they're called. I know at least one developer on Bitcoin ABC is very hesitant, or kind of pushed back on him about doing that and so what are your thoughts about non-standard scripts and the entirety of like an IsStandard check?
Steve: 0:35:58.31,0:37:35.73
I’d actually like to repurpose the concept. I think I mentioned before multi-threaded script validation and having some dedicated well-known script templates - when you say the word well-known script template there’s already a check in Bitcoin that kind of tells you if it's well-known or not and that's IsStandard. I'm generally in favor of getting rid of the notion of standard transactions, but it's actually a decision for miners, and it's really more of a behavioral change than it is a technical change. There's a whole bunch of configuration options that miners can set that affect what they do what they consider to be standard and not standard, but the reality is not too many miners are using those configuration options. So I mean standard transactions as a concept is meaningful to an arbitrary degree I suppose, but yeah I would like to make it easier for people to get non-standard scripts into Bitcoin so that they can experiment, and from discussions of I’ve had with CoinGeek they’re quite keen on making their miners accept, you know, at least initially a wider variety of transactions eventually.
Daniel: 0:37:32.85,0:38:07.95
So I think IsStandard will remain important within the implementation itself for efficiency purposes, right - you want to streamline base use case of cash payments through them and prioritizing. That's where it will remain important but on the interfaces from the node to the rest of the network, yeah I could easily see it being removed.
Cory: 0,0:38:06.24,0:38:35.46
*Connor mentioned that there's some people that disagree with Bitcoin SV and what they're doing - a lot of questions around, you know, why November? Why implement these changes in November - they think that maybe the six-month delay might not cause a split. Well, first off what do you think about the ideas of a potential split and I guess what is the urgency for November?
Steve: 0:38:33.30,0:40:42.42
Well in November there's going to be a divergence of consensus rules regardless of whether we implement these new op codes or not. Bitcoin ABC released their spec for the November Hard fork change I think on August 16th or 17th something like that and their client as well and it included CTOR and it included DSV. Now for the miners that commissioned the SV project, CTOR and DSV are controversial changes and once they're in they're in. They can't be reversed - I mean CTOR maybe you could reverse it at a later date, but DSV once someone's put a P2SH transaction into the project or even a non P2SH transaction in the blockchain using that opcode it's irreversible. So it's interesting that some people refer to the Bitcoin SV project as causing a split - we're not proposing to do anything that anyone disagrees with - there might be some contention about changing the opcode limit but what we're doing, I mean Bitcoin ABC already published their spec for May and it is our spec for the new opcodes, so in terms of urgency - should we wait? Well the fact is that we can't - come November you know it's bit like Segwit - once Segwit was in, yes you arguably could get it out by spending everyone's anyone can spend transactions but in reality it's never going to be that easy and it's going to cause a lot of economic disruption, so yeah that's it. We're putting out changes in because it's not gonna make a difference either way in terms of whether there's going to be a divergence of consensus rules - there's going to be a divergence whether whatever our changes are. Our changes are not controversial at all.
Daniel: 0:40:39.79,0:41:03.08
If we didn't include these changes in the November upgrade we'd be pushing ahead with a no-change, right, but the November upgrade is there so we should use it while we can. Adding these non-controversial changes to it.
Connor: 0:41:01.55,0:41:35.61
Can you talk about DATASIGVERIFY? What are your concerns with it? The general concept that's been kind of floated around because of Ryan Charles is the idea that it's a subsidy, right - that it takes a whole megabyte and kind of crunches that down and the computation time stays the same but maybe the cost is lesser - do you kind of share his view on that or what are your concerns with it?
Daniel: 0:41:34.01,0:43:38.41
Can I say one or two things about this – there’s different ways to look at that, right. I'm an engineer - my specialization is software, so the economics of it I hear different opinions. I trust some more than others but I am NOT an economist. I kind of agree with the ones with my limited expertise on that it's a subsidy it looks very much like it to me, but yeah that's not my area. What I can talk about is the software - so adding DSV adds really quite a lot of complexity to the code right, and it's a big change to add that. And what are we going to do - every time someone comes up with an idea we’re going to add a new opcode? How many opcodes are we going to add? I saw reports that Jihan was talking about hundreds of opcodes or something like that and it's like how big is this client going to become - how big is this node - is it going to have to handle every kind of weird opcode that that's out there? The software is just going to get unmanageable and DSV - that was my main consideration at the beginning was the, you know, if you can implement it in script you should do it, because that way it keeps the node software simple, it keeps it stable, and you know it's easier to test that it works properly and correctly. It's almost like adding (?) code from a microprocessor you know why would you do that if you can if you can implement it already in the script that is there.
Steve: 0:43:36.16,0:46:09.71
It’s actually an interesting inconsistency because when we were talking about adding the opcodes in May, the philosophy that seemed to drive the decisions that we were able to form a consensus around was to simplify and keep the opcodes as minimal as possible (ie where you could replicate a function by using a couple of primitive opcodes in combination, that was preferable to adding a new opcode that replaced) OP_SUBSTR is an interesting example - it's a combination of SPLIT, and SWAP and DROP opcodes to achieve it. So at really primitive script level we've got this philosophy of let's keep it minimal and at this sort of (?) philosophy it’s all let's just add a new opcode for every primitive function and Daniel's right - it's a question of opening the floodgates. Where does it end? If we're just going to go down this road, it almost opens up the argument why have a scripting language at all? Why not just add a hard code all of these functions in one at a time? You know, pay to public key hash is a well-known construct (?) and not bother executing a script at all but once we've done that we take away with all of the flexibility for people to innovate, so it's a philosophical difference, I think, but I think it's one where the position of keeping it simple does make sense. All of the primitives are there to do what people need to do. The things that people don't feel like they can't do are because of the limits that exist. If we had no opcode limit at all, if you could make a gigabyte transaction so a gigabyte script, then you can do any kind of crypto that you wanted even with 32-bit integer operations, Once you get rid of the 32-bit limit of course, a lot of those a lot of those scripts come up a lot smaller, so a Rabin signature script shrinks from 100MB to a couple hundred bytes.
Daniel: 0:46:06.77,0:47:36.65
I lost a good six months of my life diving into script, right. Once you start getting into the language and what it can do, it is really pretty impressive how much you can achieve within script. Bitcoin was designed, was released originally, with script. I mean it didn't have to be – it could just be instead of having a transaction with script you could have accounts and you could say trust, you know, so many BTC from this public key to this one - but that's not the way it was done. It was done using script, and script provides so many capabilities if you start exploring it properly. If you start really digging into what it can do, yeah, it's really amazing what you can do with script. I'm really looking forward to seeing some some very interesting applications from that. I mean it was Awemany his zero-conf script was really interesting, right. I mean it relies on DSV which is a problem (and some other things that I don't like about it), but him diving in and using script to solve this problem was really cool, it was really good to see that.
Steve: 0:47:32.78,0:48:16.44
I asked a question to a couple of people in our research team that have been working on the Rabin signature stuff this morning actually and I wasn't sure where they are up to with this, but they're actually working on a proof of concept (which I believe is pretty close to done) which is a Rabin signature script - it will use smaller signatures so that it can fit within the current limits, but it will be, you know, effectively the same algorithm (as DSV) so I can't give you an exact date on when that will happen, but it looks like we'll have a Rabin signature in the blockchain soon (a mini-Rabin signature).
Cory: 0:48:13.61,0:48:57.63
Based on your responses I think I kinda already know the answer to this question, but there's a lot of questions about ending experimentation on Bitcoin. I was gonna kind of turn that into – with the plan that Bitcoin SV is on do you guys see like a potential one final release, you know that there's gonna be no new opcodes ever released (like maybe five years down the road we just solidify the base protocol and move forward with that) or are you guys more on the idea of being open-ended with appropriate testing that we can introduce new opcodes under appropriate testing.
Steve: 0:48:55.80,0:49:47.43
I think you've got a factor in what I said before about the philosophical differences. I think new functionality can be introduced just fine. Having said that - yes there is a place for new opcodes but it's probably a limited place and in my opinion the cryptographic primitive functions for example CHECKSIG uses ECDSA with a specific elliptic curve, hash 256 uses SHA256 - at some point in the future those are going to no longer be as secure as we would like them to be and we'll replace them with different hash functions, verification functions, at some point, but I think that's a long way down the track.
Daniel: 0:49:42.47,0:50:30.3
I'd like to see more data too. I'd like to see evidence that these things are needed, and the way I could imagine that happening is that, you know, that with the full scripting language some solution is implemented and we discover that this is really useful, and over a period of, like, you know measured in years not days, we find a lot of transactions are using this feature, then maybe, you know, maybe we should look at introducing an opcode to optimize it, but optimizing before we even know if it's going to be useful, yeah, that's the wrong approach.
Steve: 0:50:28.19,0:51:45.29
I think that optimization is actually going to become an economic decision for the miners. From the miner’s point of view is if it'll make more sense for them to be able to optimize a particular process - does it reduce costs for them such that they can offer a better service to everyone else? Yeah, so ultimately these decisions are going to be miner’s main decisions, not developer decisions. Developers of course can offer their input - I wouldn't expect every miner to be an expert on script, but as we're already seeing miners are actually starting to employ their own developers. I’m not just talking about us - there are other miners in China that I know have got some really bright people on their staff that question and challenge all of the changes - study them and produce their own reports. We've been lucky with actually being able to talk to some of those people and have some really fascinating technical discussions with them.
submitted by The_BCH_Boys to btc [link] [comments]

Franklyn [Crypto] - YouTube Ankit Jmd - YouTube I play Block Puzzle + for 3 minutes and 23 seconds Bitcoin Blockchain Explained in 5 Minutes  What is Bitcoin FOR DUMMIES  Vlog #1 Explaining Hypixel Skyblock in 3 minutes and 23 seconds

If you’re on the lookout for a Bitcoin alternative, then you might want to check out these three popular altcoins. Bitcoin might dominate the market, but its competitors are increasing in ... Although Bitcoin’s exact hashing power is unknown, it is possible to estimate it from the number of blocks being mined and the current block difficulty. Notes Daily numbers (raw values) may periodically rise or drop as a result of the randomness of block discovery : even with a hashing power constant, the number of blocks mined can vary in day. for 3 seconds. Bitcoin Payment System. Bitcoin, one of the latest digital currency processors is definitely not an alien term anymore, particularly, to people who participate in online transactions. This decentralized digital currency created by Satoshi Nakamoto is not a traditional payment processor though. A bit on Bitcoin. Bitcoin operates on a peer-to-peer technology and doesn"t have any ... What’s the difference between Bitcoin and Ethereum? First, it’s important to understand that there are two categories of digital coins: Cryptocurrencies (e.g. Bitcoin, Litecoin, ZCash, Monero, etc) and Tokens (e.g. Ethereum, Filecoin, Storj, Blockstack, etc.) Bitcoin is a “Cryptocurrency” Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are competing against existing money (and gold) to replace them ... Bitcoin difficulty is a value used to show how hard is it to find a hash that will be lower than target defined by system. Bitcoin mining difficulty is changed every 2016 blocks. The difficulty charts show that it has increased significantly.

[index] [27654] [12932] [14046] [39688] [16996] [11728] [48739] [47592] [34960] [28230]

Franklyn [Crypto] - YouTube

Lets SMASH 20 Likes?! (CROTA KILL IN 3 MINUTES 23 SECONDS) Like the video if you enjoyed. Thanks for watching! Song Used In The Intro - Bare - Fahrenheit ---... Litecoin.com [Franklyn] Money for the internet age Bringing you everything Litecoin 🎙 Equipment: Audio Technika AT 2020 Microphone Canon 600D (Rebel T3i) C... I will get bitcoin explained and show you the bitcoin blockchain, how it works! What is Bitcoin for Dummies, in this video I explained bitcoin in under 5 minutes and made very simple. OTHER RESOURCES 3 minutes and 23 seconds of the craziest glitch ever... This is the only working way to place MULTIPLE TRAPS on top of each other as well as place traps before you get shot down in v8.11 in Season ... London to Australia: the Longest Flights in the World - Duration: 5 minutes, 32 seconds. 3 years ago ; 79,128 views; Qantas has just announced a direct flight from London, UK to Perth, Australia ...

#