• Breaking News

    Sunday, July 29, 2018

    Home Unlabelled BTC Even those inside Core are starting to wake up... (GitHub Conversation Excerpt)

    BTC Even those inside Core are starting to wake up... (GitHub Conversation Excerpt)

    July 29, 2018

    BTC Even those inside Core are starting to wake up... (GitHub Conversation Excerpt)

    Even those inside Core are starting to wake up... (GitHub Conversation Excerpt)

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 07:34 PM PDT

    Bitcoincore.org officially removes bitcoin.org from their list of web resources, 2 days after the lead maintainer of bitcoin.org publicly stated he liked aspects of Bitcoin Cash, and that people can have nuanced opinions about it.

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 04:41 PM PDT

    A picture worth a thousand words.

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 09:34 PM PDT

    There are lots of BCH accepting restaurants in Korea. Can someone get them added to the Marco Coino app so it is easy for foreigners to find them?

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 09:48 PM PDT

    Cobra: “@orionwl Very political move! Why on earth should we continue to promote Bitcoin Core software [...]”

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 03:35 PM PDT

    Paper Tiger 'BitPico' seems to have disappeared after failing to disrupt the BCH network. No Github or twitter activity for over 2 weeks.

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 08:32 PM PDT

    Be sure to tip the most recent r/millionairemakers winner some Bitcoin Cash! (They've even got links to all the BCH tipping bots.)

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 07:08 PM PDT

    Progression

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 09:01 PM PDT

    Core minions encourage Theymos to takeover/steal Bitcoin.org ...��

    Posted: 29 Jul 2018 01:51 AM PDT

    The Bitcoin Cash Sticker Scratcher has striked again, so I made them a challenge to see how tall they are

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 07:27 AM PDT

    The Story of How Bitcoin Was Compromised

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 04:36 PM PDT

    New black market vendor The Sip Road

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 04:03 PM PDT

    Bitcoin Cash hard-forked *back* to Bitcoin. While Bitcoin Legacy soft-forked *into* SegWitted Bitcoin.

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 11:18 AM PDT

    The JoyStream Master Plan – JoyStream – Medium

    Posted: 29 Jul 2018 01:00 AM PDT

    Bitcoin.org removed from BCore's BTC "Bitcoin" Core client. They spend years debating a blocksize change getting nowhere, however a change like this they do in days!

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 11:05 AM PDT

    It's time to remind that we don't want a BCH core dev but multiple dev team.

    Posted: 29 Jul 2018 01:19 AM PDT

    https://twitter.com/deadalnix/status/1023297854968872960?s=09

    By insulting CSW (memo cash, nchain, décentralised exchange) who did a lot for bch beside is past... Amaury sechet (a French dev of BCH "deadalnix" ) is attacking décentralisation, the devs, the different team must respect each other!

    submitted by /u/caepri43
    [link] [comments]

    Andreas Antonopoulos gets "Satoshi's Vision" completely wrong and shows his misunderstanding of the system. He thinks 1 cpu 1 vote means 1 user 1 vote, a common mistake from people on the Core side.

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 10:30 AM PDT

    In this video at the 6m20s mark Andreas Antonopoulos speaks about Satoshi's vision. He speaks about "1 cpu 1 vote" saying that Satoshi designed the system to be decentralized as possible, but Andreas completely misunderstands the meaning of 1 cpu 1 vote. He is falling into the common trap of conflating 1cpu 1 vote with 1 user 1 vote.

    Andreas, haven't you even read nChains paper about POW and Theory of the Firm? A cpu is an economic resource:

    One of the little-known aspects of bitcoin is the nature of the proof of work system. There are many people, especially those who support a UASF or PoW change that believe a distributed system should be completed as a mesh. In this, they confuse centralised systems with centrality. The truth of the matter, no matter which proof of work system is implemented, they all follow a maximal growth curve that reflects the nature of the firm as detailed in 1937 by Ronald Coase (1937).

    The bitcoin White Paper was very specific. users of the system "vote with their CPU power" [1]. What this means, is that the system was never generated to give one vote per person. It is designed purely around economic incentives individuals with more hash power will have provided more investment into the system. These individuals who invest more in the system gain more say in the system. At the same time, no one or even two individuals can gain complete control of the system. We'll explore the nature of cartels in a separately, but these always fail without government intervention. The reason for cartels failing comes down to the simple incentivisation of the most efficient member. The strongest cartel member always ends up propping up the weakest. This leads to a strategy of defection.

    No proof of work-based solution ever allows for a scenario where you have one vote to one person. The anti-sybiling functions of bitcoin and all other related systems based on proof of work or similar derivatives are derived from an investment based strategy. Solutions to the implementation of ASIC based systems are constantly proposed as a methodology of limiting the centralisation of proof of work systems as it is termed. The truth of the matter is that the mining function within any proof of work system naturally aligns to business interests. This leads to corporations running machines within data centres. On the way that democracies and republics have migrated away from small groups of people individually voting for an outcome towards a vote for a party, the transactional costs associated with individual choice naturally leads to corporate solutions. In this, the corporation mirrors a political party.

    In this paper, we address the issues of using alternate approval work systems with regards to either incorporating alternate functions in an extension of simply securing the network against the use of proof of work systems to create a one person one vote scenario in place of economic incentivisation. We will demonstrate conclusively that all systems migrate to a state of economic efficiency. The consequence of this is that systems form into groups designed to maximise returns. The effect is that bitcoin is not only incentive compatible but is optimal. No system can efficiently collapse into an order of one vote one individual and remain secure. In the firm-based nature of bitcoin, we demonstrate that the inherent nature of the firm is reflected within mining pools. Multiple aggregation strategies exist. The strategies range from the creation of collective firms where members can easily join or leave (mining pools) through to more standard corporate structures

    Proof of Work as it relates to the theory of the firm. that are successful within any proof of work system. The system was determined to be based on one- vote per CPU (Satoshi, 2008) and not one vote per person or one vote per IP address. The reasons for this is simple, there is no methodology available that can solve byzantine consensus on an individual basis. The solution developed within bitcoin solves this economically using investment. The parties signal their intent to remain bound to the protocol through a significant investment. Those parties that follow the protocol are rewarded. The alternative strategy takes us back to the former and failed systems such as e-cash that could not adequately solve Sybil attacks and decentralise the network. Bitcoin manages to maintain the decentralise nature of the network through a requirement that no individual party can ever achieve more than 50% of the network hash rate.

    In all proof of work systems, there are requirements to inject a costly signal into the network that is designed as the security control. To many people, they believe that the cryptographic element, namely the hashing process is the security feature of bitcoin. This is a fallacy, it is the economic cost that is relevant to the overall system and not the individual element.

    The benefits of a hash function are that they are difficult to solve in the nature of the proof of work algorithm but are easy to verify. This economic asymmetry is one of the key features of bitcoin. Once a user has found a solution, they know it can be quickly broadcast and verified by others. Additionally, the hash algorithm provides a fair distribution system based on the amount of invested hash rate. The distinction from proof of stake solution as has been proposed comes in the requirement to constantly reinvest. A proof of stake system requires a single investment. Once this investment is created, the system is incentivised towards the protection of the earlier investment. This leads to a scenario known as a strategic oligopoly game.

    The solution using a proof of work algorithm is the introduction of an ongoing investment. This is different to an oligopoly game in that sunk cost cannot make up for continued investment. In a proof of stake system, prior investment is crystallised allowing continued control with little further investment. Proof of work differs in that it requires continuous investment. More than this, it requires innovation. As with all capitalist systems, they are subject to Schumpeterian dynamical change (Shumpeter, 1994). The system of creative destruction allows for cycles of innovation. Each innovation leads to waves of creation over the destruction of the old order.

    This process creates continued growth. Proof of work-based systems continue to grow and continue to update and change. Any incumbent corporation or other entity needs to continue to invest knowing that their continued dominance is not assured. In bitcoin, we have seen innovative leaps as people moved from CPU-based mining into GPU-based systems. This initial innovation altered the software structure associated with the mining process in bitcoin. That change significantly altered the playing field leading to novel techniques associated with FPGAs and later ASICs dedicated to a specific part of the mining process.

    The error held by many people is that this move from a CPU-based solution into more costly implementations could have been averted. A consequence of this has been the introduction of alternative proof of work systems into many of the alt-coins

    These systems have been implemented without the understanding that it is not the use of ASICs that is an issue. It is that the belief that individual users can individually mine in a mesh system will be able to be implemented as a successful proof of work. In the unlikely event that a specialised algorithm was implemented that could only run once on any one machine CPU, it would still lead to the eventual creation of corporate data centres for mining. In the section above, we showed using Arrow's theorem how only a single use proof of work system can be effective. If we extend this and look at the Theory of the Firm (Coase, 1937) we note that in a system in Litecoin and Dogecoin for example. A00137:

    Proof of Work as it relates to the theory of the firm. of prices, reduction could be carried out without any organisation. One issue against this arises from the cost of information. Interestingly, as we move into a world of increasingly more information, it becomes scarce information that is important. As the amount of information becomes more voluminous, the ability to uncover accurate and timely information becomes scarcer. The ability to specialise in the coordination of the various factors of production and the distribution of information leads towards vertical integration within firms. We see this first voiced in Adam Smith's (Smith, 1776) postulation on the firm:

    Everyone can choose to either seek further information or act on the information that they already have. This information can be in the form of market knowledge, product knowledge, or expertise, but at some point, the individual needs to decide to act. There is a cost to obtaining information. The returns on obtaining more information hit a maximum level and start to decrease at a certain point. The entrepreneur acts as a guiding influence managing the risk associated with incomplete information compared to the risk of not acting but rather waiting to obtain more information.

    In the instance of bitcoin mining, the firm can increase in size through the integration of multiple specialist roles. Even given the assumption that any one process can run on but a single CPU, we come to the scenario of high-end datacentre servers. The Intel Xeon Phi 7290f implements 72 Atom CPU Cores. Each core runs two threads. Even taking the control system into account, this leaves 142 processes able to run per system. With four cards per RU this allows for datacentre implementations of 5,964 mining processes to run on a pure CPU-based proof of work implementation. One person can manage a small number of mining server implementations within a home or small business environment. In large data centre-based organisations such as Facebook, a single administrator can run 20,000 servers

    The effect of this would be one individual managing 2,840,000 individual CPU-based mining processes. This alone is outside the scaling capabilities of any individual. This can be further enhanced as cost savings through the creation of large data centres, management savings and integrating multiple network and systems administrators is considered. As we start to add additional layers we come to a maximum where it is no longer profitable to grow the firm in size. Right up until that point, the firm will grow.

    submitted by /u/cryptorebel
    [link] [comments]

    Any BCH groups in Sydney

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 05:51 PM PDT

    Hi everyone,

    Just been starting to get into cryptocurrency and I was just wondering if there are any friendly BCH groups in Sydney that I can join as a newbie to learn more information.

    submitted by /u/mrp61
    [link] [comments]

    My bro just finished with the new Bitcoin Cash art for cryptograffiti.info (released into the public domain)

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 12:08 PM PDT

    Deep Web Roundup: BCH Adoption Increases and Dread Rises - Bitcoin News

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 04:48 PM PDT

    Bitcoin: Hash Cash with Inflation Control

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 07:07 AM PDT

    Presenting about cryptocurrencies to my college.

    Posted: 29 Jul 2018 12:03 AM PDT

    Hey guys Im doing a presentation on cryptocurrencies to my entire college Tomorrow, as far as I have seen less than 1% of the students and teachers know anything about it. After the presentation I'll be helping people set up bch wallets and sending them a tiny amount. Any ideas on how I could do it better would be helpful and if anyone wants to donate so I can help more people set up their wallets, I would be grateful. Thank you!

    submitted by /u/Romit-Radical
    [link] [comments]

    Calvin Ayre on Twitter : This says it all about how stupid anyone is to be thinking Segwit is going anywhere but down in the longer term

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 12:06 PM PDT

    (Out of the loop) Can someone explain the “You didn’t call it bcash” meme

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 11:48 AM PDT

    Now BTC maximalists claim BCH proponents are government agents..? Classic CIA confusion tactic?

    Posted: 28 Jul 2018 06:20 AM PDT
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment