Das Bitcoin Mining wird durch China nicht bedroht werden

Jameson Lopp: "If Bitcoin Core changes the protocol to kill a small mining optimization, it implies that miners should ask permission before innovating."

Jameson Lopp: submitted by Egon_1 to btc [link] [comments]

Jameson Lopp Talking About Bitcoin - Privacy, Lightning, Mining Centralisation, Future...

Jameson Lopp Talking About Bitcoin - Privacy, Lightning, Mining Centralisation, Future... submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Jameson Lopp Talking About Bitcoin - Privacy, Lightning, Mining Centralisation, Future...

Jameson Lopp Talking About Bitcoin - Privacy, Lightning, Mining Centralisation, Future... submitted by cryptoanalyticabot to cryptoall [link] [comments]

Jameson Lopp: "If Bitcoin Core changes the protocol to kill a small mining optimization, it implies that miners should ask permission before innovating."

Jameson Lopp: submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

China’s Mining Dominance Unlikely to Last: Lopp

China’s dominance in Bitcoin mining may not last as more mining chips are produced and other countries offer cheap power sources, said cypherpunk Jameson Lopp in a blog post.  Lopp noted China has a virtual monopoly on Bitcoin mining mainly because most of the facilities that manufacture of mining chips are in Asia and its […]
submitted by FuzzyOneAdmin to fuzzyone [link] [comments]

Why Chinese Miners Won’t Stage a 51% Attack on Bitcoin

China accounts for more than half of the world’s Bitcoin mining capacity but Jameson Lopp, the co-founder and CTO of Casa, has hosed down fears that Chinese miners are a threat to Bitcoin in a blog post on Aug. 9. Although many people have raised concerns over the concentration of such much hashpower being located in […]
submitted by FuzzyOneAdmin to fuzzyone [link] [comments]

ASIC Resistant Hard Fork Discussion Overview

I am speaking on behalf of myself, Hudson Jameson, and not on behalf of the Ethereum Foundation or any other entity. However, I am a lawyedoctor and this post is both medical and legal advice. Just kidding, it isn't.
Hey all!
I've been closely following the debate that has been happening across social media and chat channels the past 2 weeks regarding the possibility of designing and implementing a new ASIC resistant proof-of-work algorithm. The debate is over whether or not we should hard fork the Ethereum network in order to prevent ASIC miners from operating. I am in the unique position of organizing and running the bi-weekly core developer meetings and have been active in the ecosystem for a while. I want to make sure both sides feel like they are heard. This post is meant to provide context and offer next steps for both sides of the argument.

Facts

This next section is my best effort at summarizing the arguments from both sides. I am numbering them to make it easier to reference a specific argument for or against.

Pro ASIC Resistance (PAR)

There are 2 great resources that provide more detail to these bullet points.
  1. Medium Article - Why Ethereum should adjust algo on next planned Hardfork? From a Miner’s perspective by bitsbetrippin.
  2. /EtherMining Thread - Regarding Threads on Bitmain and ASIC Resistance (Mega Thread!) by Robbbbbbbbb.

Pro Doing Nothing (PDN)

There are 2 great resources that provide more detail to these bullet points.
  1. Blog post - Anti-ASIC Forks Considered Harmful by Phil Daian.
  2. Ethereum Core Developer Meeting #36 Notes/Video. Arguments described in the recent core developer meeting have a timestamp linking to the video.

How long until Casper is launched?

This seems to be a sticking point in many of the arguments. Here is the latest: Researchers are in the process of finalizing the code for the 2nd stage of the testnet with the goal of completing and freezing the full specification of the Casper PoS algorithm. geth and Parity could start implementing parts of the Casper today. Casper is currently being formally verified by Runtime Verification which should take another 4-5 months to complete. Multiple academic groups are also looking at Casper. A formal EIP on Casper is being worked on and will be released for review in the next 2 weeks. The plan is to have Runtime Verification formally verify Casper, relaunch a custom Casper testnet with specs from the EIP, relaunch the contract on an Ethereum testnet, and finally launch Casper on the mainnet. There is no official timeline and there is unlikely to be one, in my opinion, until we get much closer to Casper being formally verified. (40:23)

So what now?

Well I for one am going to make myself a whiskey. Not because this was stressful, but because I enjoy whiskey. I actually find this pretty fun.
Anyways, if you are in the PAR group I suggest you act on your convictions and help with some of the EIPs being produced. If you are in the PDN group you can provide counter-arguments to the PAR group in forums/chat rooms. Currently the rough consensus of Ethereum core developers is that of the PDN group. However, my experience is that they are open to whatever the community wants as long as community consensus, or something close to it, can be demonstrated. There are many ways to determine this, including voting and discussions and EIPs. I encourage everyone to participate in this process.

You said a thing wrong!

If you feel like I left off an argument or made a mistake in this post let me know in the comments. I'll track edits at the bottom of this post.
Later!
submitted by Souptacular to ethereum [link] [comments]

Critque of Roger Ver vs. Tone Vays debate.

  1. With respect to the price of bitcoin transactions. Roger Ver is lying here. You can go and see what the average fee is and the average fee hasn't come close to 3 dollars. Where he might get this is from his wallet which purposefully has high fees. That's programming he put in and is not reflective of the real world use of Bitcoin. Tone's assessment of the fees is actually accurate.
  2. Bitcoin Cash is not secure. It doesn't have the proper hashrate and since it uses the same algorithm as Bitcoin a far larger network it's inherently vulnerable to 51 % attacks. It recently just went through a reorg carried out by 2 of the large mining pools on Bitcoin Cash. Bitcoin Cash proponents claim that unconfirmed transactions are safe. Satoshi never believed unconfirmed transactions were safe for a number of reasons. Despite numerous double spends being executed on the network the proponents continue to make this lie. lightning transactions are cheaper than bitcoin cash. Lightning is suitable for micro transactions (actually less than a satoshi) and they are secure. 99% as secure as bitcoin transactions since it is the Bitcoin blockchain that is behind them. The only issue would be some kind of issue where you couldn't be on the network for an extended period of time and you're connected to a node that tries to steal from you. This will be resolved in the future (also thanks to segwit).
  3. You're really only in complete control of your own money if you run a full node. SPV wallets are great, but you're trusting other nodes. The Eclair wallet is similar to an SPV wallet (uses that same technology) but it is more secure. On Chain SPV wallets you are trusting nodes every transaction. With a SPV/Lightning wallet like Eclair you're only trusting it for 2 transactions per channel and from there you can have many secure transactions. You can also run a full node lightning network as well. It's slightly more cumbersome. Setting up a full node lightning wallet takes 2 times as long as setting up a full node bitcoin wallet because of the extra indexing that is required. It takes roughly the same amount of time to setup a full node bitcoin wallet as it does to do a full node bitcoin cash wallet. Roger isn't comparing apples to apples here. You're not in full control of your money with an SPV wallet using Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash, but it's a fine solution for most people doing day to day transactions.
Roger always tries to setup his debates in order to win. He typically has easy opponents. The Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash debate comes down to the technicals. If you believe in money owned by the people then look at the technicals you will see that Bitcoin Cash does not provide this as an option. The one time Roger had a debate with a technical person he was dominated it was on the Tom Woods show with Jameson Lopp I believe. Roger's political level debates (where logical fallacies are quite effective) works well because he keeps it about economics "bribing" the people with promises of fast/cheap transactions when in reality he uses half truths to make these claims.
There is a lot of money behind the disinformation marketing campaign behind Bitcoin Cash. As evidence I reference the Bitcoin.com wallet which purposefully uses insane fees for Bitcoin to slander Bitcoin.
Don't trust me. Look at the fundamentals of Bitcoin and Blockchains in general and you'll see Bitcoin has a great path and excellent development behind it.
submitted by lizard450 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

r/Bitcoin recap - May 2019

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the 29th monthly Bitcoin news recap. (sorry a bit late this month)
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
You can see recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in May 2019
Adoption
Development
Security
Mining
Business
Research
Education
Regulation & Politics
Archeology (Financial Incumbents)
Price & Trading
Fun & Other
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

r/Bitcoin recap - March 2018

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the fifteenth monthly Bitcoin news recap.
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in Bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best) overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
And a lot has happened. It's easy to forget with so much focus on the price. Take a moment and scroll through the list below. You'll find an incredibly eventful month.
You can see recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in March 2018
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[7 mbtc] Quizchain2 block 53

Thank you for playing the quizchain. One of the smart wizard Minmins challenging 52 came up with the solution fast, good job. So I feel like doing another challenging block now.
For the first time, the solution will be an URL. No need for a TOMI field in that case. But I do expect this to need a hint, which will come up 24 hours from now. On the other hand, I expected that for 52 as well, so maybe the collective mind mining power of people playing here gets it again in the first day.
Normal 7 mbtc block, funding transaction below.
https://www.smartbit.com.au/tx/68c6f4f253c4501ea1ab3b53420cb73ed0253a24cfc30a9c244bca5dd2f3f561
Question: Superman
Format: [solution], solution format is relevant URL unchanged.
FIrst three digits of MD5 hash (not MP5, spelled correctly this time) are 4c1.
Checking now if googling "Superman Bitcoin" gets the solution on the first page. It does not, but the answer to the question "why does Superman hate trading bitcoin at three am" is a nice joke.
Have fun challenging this block and stay tuned for block 54 scheduled for tomorrow (Sunday) 1 pm Japanese time.
Update: As noted in block 54 (already solved) there is a connection from Superman to Satoshi (Hal FInney). That is a hint for this block. Another is the fact that the URL will change depending on what kind of hardware you use. I used a mobile device. And the maybe decisive hint is "warm miners", though that one also does not lead to the solution with a simple Google search.
If this needs another hint, said hint will come up another 24 hours from now and will be so decisive that the block will be solved minutes after that hint.
Update: Solved and prize claimed. As noted by the winner, the URL in question was
https://mobile.twitter.com/lopp/status/1143879778170232833
which is a Tweet by Jameson Lopp showing a picture of Hal Finney in a Superman t-shirt.
I did not notice that the "mobile" part in the URL could be a problem for people solving on laptops or PCs. Sorry for that mistake. Next block will be 77 mbtc because of that, even if it is relatively easy to solve.
Congrats to the winner and thank you everyone for playing.
submitted by AoiNakamoto to Grycoin [link] [comments]

Jameson Lopp discusses Bitcoin adoption as analysts predict 2020 bull run (current BTC/USD price is $7,280.96)

Latest Bitcoin News:
Jameson Lopp discusses Bitcoin adoption as analysts predict 2020 bull run
Other Related Bitcoin Topics:
Bitcoin Price | Bitcoin Mining | Blockchain
The latest Bitcoin news has been sourced from the CoinSalad.com Bitcoin Price and News Events page. CoinSalad is a web service that provides real-time Bitcoin market info, charts, data and tools. Follow us on Twitter @CoinSalad.
submitted by coinsaladcom to CoinSalad [link] [comments]

A comprehensive review of miner arguments against issuance reduction

First I wanted to start by saying Hudson Jameson did a phenomenal job wrangling all these different stakeholders to the core devs meeting today and playing the part of an effective, neutral moderator. It was a really interesting meeting and great to hear all viewpoints. I'm sure many of you live streamed it as well.
I’m an Ethereum investor and active user, and I took notes on the most prominent miner arguments against issuance reduction along with my thoughts on each. Would love to hear any thoughts or any ones I may have missed.
GPUs that leave network after issuance reduction can be used to attack Network Security (Xin Xu)
Xin Xu argues that a decline in issuance from 3 to 2 (33%) will cause a drop in hashrate by 33%, and that such a large drop in hashrate will lead to an influx of GPUs on the market that can be used to attack Ethereum. This argument is predicated on the idea that hashrate will drop significantly. However, any drop in hashrate will decrease difficulty so mathematically a 33% drop in issuance should have at most a ~18% impact to total hashrate assuming a linear relationship. I don't believe that a drop in Ethereum Network Hashrate from current levels (280 TH/s) to January 2018 levels (230 TH/s) is a doomsday scenario. And the real drop will certainly be much smaller for two reasons. 1) Historical data shows that hashrate is extremely resilient against drops in price as well as issuance (source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DlTEyKBV4AERGtB.jpg:large). 2) Historical data also shows that all Ethereum and Bitcoin issuance reductions were followed by price increases which could partially or completely offset the decline in hashrate.
Issuance Reduction will drive a dramatic shift in hardware composition of the network (Brian Venturo)
Brian Venturo argues that a reduction in issuance will price out GPU miners and cause the network to dramatically shift towards ASIC miners in the short term, increasing mining centralization. However, miners on the call pointed out that currently available ASICS (Antminer E3) is in-line with top GPUs in terms of mining efficiency. It’s only when we compare claims from as-yet unreleased ASIC manufacturers (Innosilicon A10) to 2-year old GPU technology (GTX 1080) that we see any risk of an efficiency gap. Second, the total Ethereum network hashrate is 280 TH/s. This is equivalent to 577,000 Innosilicon A10s, which would cost $3.3 Billion (at $5700 each). Any shift of even 10-20% in Ethereum network hardware composition will be slow and steady, and as we heard on the call, miners looking to spend significant capital on new hardware are considering major ROI headwinds from 1) upcoming shift to PoS and 2) possible exploration of new ASIC-resistant algos like ProgPOW. Both of these would brick current generation ASICS while GPUS would retain their resale value. More work needs to be done exploring ASIC-resistant POW algorithms, and there's no reason why issuance-reduction EIPs should be roadblocked in the interim.
EIP 1295 as an alternative (Brian Venturo)
Brian Venturo cites the current rules around Uncle and Nephew rewards as causing weird incentives that miners are exploiting to maximize uncle rate and squeeze higher issuance out of the network. This is a super interesting point, and one that I would love to see explored in more detail (as the downstream implications could be quite complex) in addition to EIP-1234. There’s no reason why 1295 is mutually exclusive with EIP-1234, and positioning it that way is a clever tactic to delay any issuance reduction. Brian himself suggested an issuance reduction in 2019 on top of EIP-1295.
My Final thought
I am in full support of EIP-1234 as a moderate issuance reduction to reduce Ethereum inflation and the amount we are overpaying miners for security. Looking back on it, last year’s 40% reduction from 5 eth/block to 3 eth/block has turned out to be a phenomenally good decision. Since then, hashrates have increased 3x while price has declined 20% (was $330 pre-fork), all while we reduced inflation by 40%. Another modest issuance reduction is a prudent decision that is a natural step in Ethereum’s growth and consistent with the original vision for inflation. In contrast, a difficulty bomb delay without a corresponding issuance reduction should be viewed as an issuance increase.
The quicker we can get this decision behind us, the better. As long as this question looms, investors will lack confidence in Ethereum’s monetary policy, and mining stakeholders will have massive incentive to decrease Ethereum price until Constantinople to increase the chance they can mine at inflated rates through 2019
submitted by AZA214 to ethtrader [link] [comments]

What is ProgPoW? Why Ethereum needs it moving forward.

Update: ASIC Manufacture say they can make a ProgPoW ASIC

Disclosure, I'm a avid GPU miner with some 90 Nvidia GPUs running out of my garage. I've been in and out of the mining scene since 2011,2014, and recently 2017. I Hold BTC, ETH, RVN. I directly benefit from them moving to ProgPOW, but not without a good reason. Everytime I've gotten into home GPU mining ASICs comes out BTC, LTC, I've had to give up every time. I refuse to see it happen to another excellent coin.

I've been a proponent of Ethereum following there ASIC resistance stance outlined in the original white-paper. Now that ProgPOW has been given the "Green-light" by Hudson Jameson to move forward with ProgPOW. I really think its time to discuss the Algorithm. What it is, who created it, why Ethereum needs it and dismiss crazy theories such as Nvidia funding development.

Before we start highly suggest everyone watch BitsBeTrippin's video where she breaks down ProgPOW at devcon4.

A Quick breakdown of What is ProgPOW?
ProgPoW is a proof-of-work algorithm designed to close the efficency gap available to specialized ASICs. It utilizes almost all parts of commodity hardware (GPUs), and comes pre-tuned for the most common hardware utilized in the Ethereum network.

From reading the white paper listed on Github the main idea behind ProgPOW is NOT to achieve total ASIC-resistance. The idea is to kill the 50-1000x Efficiency gains from specialized ASIC hardware. Such as what we saw recently with Equihash 200/9 coins where 50x was achieved over GPUs. ProgPOW algorithm uses most of the GPU minus a few parts. It takes the original Eth-Hash algorithm and add more features.
The main elements of the algorithm are:
ProgPOW will Inherit Eth-Hash current DAG size meaning 2GB and 3GB will not be able to mine still. Additionally no advantage is given to Either Nvidia or AMD GPUs
ProgPoW has been designed to be a vendor-neutral proof-of-work, or more specifically, proof-of-GPU. ProgPoW has intentionally avoided using features that only one core architecture has, such as LOP3 on NVIDIA, or indexed register files on AMD.

According to Kristy, she has had direct contact with AMD and Nvidia on testing ProgPOW.
As part of its review process, ProgPoW was submitted to (and reviewed by) both AMD and NVIDIA engineers. The group known as IfDefElse — of which I am a part of — has been actively working with both companies to ensure this effectively closes the efficiency gap that we speak publicly of in our papers and articles
This does not mean one side is favored over the other. She's giving and getting input from the major GPU manufactures in order to support Crypto-mining. Additionally she says "AMD is actively working with us to optimize ProgPoW for their architectures.". Using ProgPOW optimized for GPUs rids us of bowing to Bitmain, innosilicon, halong and there scandalous ways for hardware.

ProgPOW IS NOT the "God-sent savior of all GPUS" Even Kristy understand that complete ASIC-resistance is a fallacy. This will never be achieved. However By working with GPU manufactures and Crypto Dev's we can make a coin where GPUs run along-side with ASICs, but the efficiency gains are diluted. Meaning the time and money invested into an ProgPOW ASIC machine does not make economical sense. Rather just buy the actual GPU.

Quote sources from Kristy's Medium article.

Why does Ethereum need ProgPOW?

I suggest reading Siacoin's good medium article on the subject of ASICs.
It's too much to cover here but in short why we need ProgPOW against current ASICs and future ASICs
At his point in time we actually don't need ProgPOW. However we do need it as time goes on. Early Bitcoin ASICs didn't dominate BTC however as time went on, they became better more efficient than GPUs, and started dominating BTC's network. The same fate happens to any "ASIC-Resistant coin" that decides it's not a big deal (looking at you ZEN). Without a set date on POS Ethereum would have suffered the same fate. As Siacoin Dev states;
We also had loose designs for ethash (Ethereum’s algorithm). Admittedly, ethash was not as easily amenable to ASICs as equihash, but as we’ve seen from products on the market today, you can still do well enough to obsolete GPUs.
What makes ASICs bad? Isn't it better to get Hash/watt ratio? This saves tons of electric. One of PoW biggest faults. I think there is nothing bad about the ASICs hardware. Equihash ASICs achieved 20 1080ti level hashrate at 1/20 of the power. That's impressive. The problem with ASIC hardware is who, where it comes from, and there shady business practices.

  1. "It’s estimated that Monero’s secret ASICs made up more than 50% of the hashrate for almost a full year before discovery, and during that time, nobody noticed." How much of ETH hashrate could be ASICs? We won't know till the fork.
  2. I've heard a lot that ASICs aren't all that big of a deal. Focus on POS. Take in account Siacoins own network hashrate which allowed bitmain/innosilicon ASICs on the network till they forked in favor of their own ASICs after just a year (Siacoins drops 96% network hashrate).
  3. "In the case of Halong’s Decred miner, we saw them “sell out” of an unknown batch size of $10,000 miners. After that, it was observed that more than 50% of the mining rewards were collecting into a single address that was known to be associated with Halong, meaning that they did keep the majority of the hashrate and profits to themselves." GPU manufactures would not and cannot be do the same.
ASICs destroy networks, centralize the pools, and hardware. Leading to them to be controlled by large entity in this case its Chinese companies. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fool. Of course this doesn't happen overnight, hence my original statement that we don't need ProgPoW now. In a years time that may totally change and it will be far to late.

GPUs allow anyone to support the network. Think of the crypto run-up. Fry's Electronics, Microceneter, online E-tailers were SOLD OUT OF GPUs. Think of that! People were buying GPUs to support the network for token rewards(worth money) How many new miners, people, got interested in crypto because of this? How about friends who saw the rigs and word of mouth spread that you could go out buy a graphics card, built a rig, and earn money? obviously we know the effects because it wasn't sustainable in the remotest. However it's an attest that GPU mineable coins makes it accessible to everyone.

For Ethereum to successfully go POS it cannot hand it network over to ASIC mining companies in the meantime. POS is on an unknown release date/timeframe. I understand Vitalk does not like PoW however that's what currently securing the network. Because of this Ethereum must maintain as much decentralization as possible with GPU mining. This is what ProgPOW does. It gives AMD and Nvidia GPUs the advantage they need over ASICs created by Bitmain or others. It allows me to continue to secure the Ethereum network with my 90 GPUs until full POS switch.

Conclusion
Did it have to be ProgPOW? No, as UBIQ has shown they created there own unique ASIC-resistant algorithm. ProgPOW was given to us by the Ifdefelse team completed. This required no work from the ETH devs at all. It's open source and has been reviewed by the Etheruem Dev team. If they haven't found any issues with it yet, I don't see why we cannot implement it.

An argument can be made that if we do switch we risk security, because we'll lose network hashrate and decrease the cost to attack the network. I have two things to say to that. One since ProgPOW is new, Nicehash has not added it to it's network to rent yet. I wouldn't know how long nicehash would take to it add it, but it gives us a short while to get people on new ETH POW network. Additionally to attack the network, they would need massive coordination from GPU mining farms. Such a thing has never been recorded.

The 51% attacks that have happened recently (BCD/BTG/ZEN) and as of 1/8/18, ETC. These were all ASIC mineable coins. In the case of equihash coins, an ASIC that achieved 50x more efficiency had just came to market. It's not proven, but it leads me to believe a bad actor with early access to ASICs was able to attack those coins. All except ZEN have switched to Zhash algorithm. Even ZCASH/Zelcash has funded ProgPOW development. While I disagree they should do this, because that's entirely the problem too many coins using too many of the same algorithm, in the end it's up to the devs.

TL:DR; ASIC-Resistance is futile and a fallacy. PoS or other solutions are needed but to get there we need to keep PoW as Decentralized as possible this is what ProgPOW does.


submitted by Xazax310 to EtherMining [link] [comments]

10 Reasons Why The Perfect Storm is Brewing for AION

The perfect storm is brewing for Aion to become a leader in the crypto space:
 
1. AIONEX, EDCON & CONSENSUS 2018 conferences have introduced AION to more people, developers & institutional investors than ever before. Matthew Spoke's performance on Consensus Interoperability Panel with Ripple, Polkadot & Litecoin left everlasting reactions & received the only applauses at the end of the Interoperability Panel.
AION's inaugural Dev conference AIONEX at Toronto on May 02, had 650 attendees. This is a record unseen by any other crypto's inaugural dev conference to date, compared to just 40 attendees at 1st Ethereum Devcon in 2014. And if Devcon grew to 350 attendees in 2015, it's not hard to see that the next AION Dev conference attendance will be in the thousands.
 
2. Token Swap from Aion ERC-20 to native Aion coins will soon be announced. The ETH-AION cross-chain bridge is already built & was showcased live on stage at AIONEX & EDCON, so it's only a matter of time before it's released.
 
3. US, Korean & Chinese exchanges are clearly waiting for the Token Swap to take place before they list native Aion coins rather than Aion ERC-20 tokens, they don't want to painstakingly swap ERC-20 tokens themselves as seen in ICON's token swap delay that's taking exchanges about 2-months & still not accomplished.
 
4. AION team has grown to 60 in-house team members in 4 different Aion offices in North America, Europe & Asia and plan to grow to 100 people by EOY. This is extremely rare in the crypto space & can only be compared to less than half a dozen of massive platform projects like CARDANO & EOS.
 
Aion GitHub activity is continuously ranked in top 10 platforms on Darpal Rating and CryptoMiso. Github activity, along with commits quality, are important metrics that get overlooked all the time when people compare Aion to other projects based on number of telegram users. Ethereum & Neo never even had telegram... Fat Protocol Ecosystems are not built by telegram hype but rather by worldwide Dev meetups & armies of developers that can build or contribute something that can change the world.
 
5. AION PR & Marketing are shifting into high gears now that the Mainnet is live. AIONEX, EDCON & CONSENSUS 2018 have put AION on the radar of the media. Matt Spoke is slowly becoming crypto's poster boy as seen on RBC's Disruptors Panel. It's only a matter of time before the mainstream media finds out about AION.
 
6. AION is introducing Real Technological Break-throughs with the first Cross-Chain bridge that completely moves tokens seamlessly between different blockchains using the Burn/Mint mechanism, unlike all Dapp platform projects since Ethereum that are still simple blockchain 2.0 platforms with no cross-chain capability or Atomic Swap projects that only transfer value between chains, but come with major limitations.
 
Another important point that gets forgotten in the Aion vs other interoperability projects is that Aion is all these 3 things at the same time:
 
AION is increasingly recognized as the leader of Interoperability —the holy grail of blockchain tech— that will solve scalability, privacy & isolation issues to unlock the true potential of Distributed Ledger Technologies. "This is the internet, decentralized."
 
7. METCALFE’s LAW states that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2). This was proven repeatedly in the growth patterns of fat protocols like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Neo. Metcalfe’s Law favors interoperability projects even more, because Aion native tokens have utility far beyond the main Aion-1 blockchain:
 
8. Major AION Partners & Clients like Deloitte, TMX group (Canada's largest stock exchange), Moog Space & Defense Group, Vodafone, TD Bank, etc... are slowly moving their blockchain infrastructure to AION blockchain as they announced at AIONEX conference. This is taking place & growing the AION ecosystem while other Dapp platforms are rushing to parade their new Dapp ICOs that have little to no legitimate need for blockchain tech in the first place, but were rushed to launch ICOs to simply boast their Dapp numbers & suck more ICO funds from unsuspecting investors.
 
9. Future Partnerships will be relatively easy for AION to acquire given AION team's role as a founding board member of the Ethereum Enterprise Alliance, with the likes of Microsoft, Intel & JP Morgan (not just a regular EEA member like most other crypto projects) & the Blockchain Research Institute.
 
Aion cofounder Matthew Spoke has also strong credentials as the Fintech Advisor for the Ontario Securities Commission & Ministry of Finance and as a cofounder of the Muskoka Group along with the Tapscotts & Ethereum cofounder & ConsenSys founder Joeseph Lubin.
 
Not to mention Aion's unmatched advisory board from TMX group VP & Board of Directors and connections to Ethereum cofounders; Anthony Di lorio, Joeseph Lubin, Vitalik who's an advisor to Nuco.io & his father Dmitry Buterin who's an Angel investor in Nuco.io the company building Aion.
 
10. The TRS is coming to an end soon; however, the end of the token release schedule will slowly starts to get priced in long before the last release of Nov 2018; the date after which no more Aion will be released to public ever. Only mining/staking rewards will continue thereafter. The TRS also helps AION market cap climb up the MarketCap list with every release, adding to the increasing visibility & exposure that AION is getting.
 
People have seen what happened to fat protocols like Ethereum, Neo & Cardano, but it takes a special breed of people (and a bit of luck) to foresee why AION network interoperability will have a much bigger growth & impact potential on the entire crypto space. (This is not a financial advice. DYOR.)
submitted by Unleash-The-Kraken to ethtrader [link] [comments]

What is ProgPoW? Why Ethereum needs it moving forward.

Update: ASIC Manufacture say they can make a ProgPoW ASIC

Disclosure, I'm a avid GPU miner with some 90 Nvidia GPUs running out of my garage. I've been in and out of the mining scene since 2011,2014, and recently 2017. I Hold BTC, ETH, RVN. I directly benefit from them moving to ProgPOW, but not without a good reason. Every-time I've gotten into home GPU mining ASICs comes out BTC, LTC, I've had to give up every time. I refuse to see it happen to another excellent coin.

I've been a proponent of Ethereum following there ASIC resistance stance outlined in the original white-paper. Now that ProgPOW has been given the "Green-light" by Hudson Jameson to move forward with ProgPOW. I really think its time to discuss the Algorithm. What it is, who created it, why Ethereum needs it and dismiss crazy theories such as Nvidia funding development.

Before we start highly suggest everyone watch BitsBeTrippin's video where she breaks down ProgPOW at devcon4.

A Quick breakdown of What is ProgPOW?
ProgPoW is a proof-of-work algorithm designed to close the efficency gap available to specialized ASICs. It utilizes almost all parts of commodity hardware (GPUs), and comes pre-tuned for the most common hardware utilized in the Ethereum network.

From reading the white paper listed on Github the main idea behind ProgPOW is NOT to achieve total ASIC-resistance. The idea is to kill the 50-1000x Efficiency gains from specialized ASIC hardware. Such as what we saw recently with Equihash 200/9 coins where 50x was achieved over GPUs. ProgPOW algorithm uses most of the GPU minus a few parts. It takes the original Eth-Hash algorithm and add more features.
The main elements of the algorithm are:
ProgPOW will Inherit Eth-Hash current DAG size meaning 2GB and 3GB will not be able to mine still. Additionally no advantage is given to Either Nvidia or AMD GPUs
ProgPoW has been designed to be a vendor-neutral proof-of-work, or more specifically, proof-of-GPU. ProgPoW has intentionally avoided using features that only one core architecture has, such as LOP3 on NVIDIA, or indexed register files on AMD.

According to Kristy, she has had direct contact with AMD and Nvidia on testing ProgPOW.
As part of its review process, ProgPoW was submitted to (and reviewed by) both AMD and NVIDIA engineers. The group known as IfDefElse — of which I am a part of — has been actively working with both companies to ensure this effectively closes the efficiency gap that we speak publicly of in our papers and articles
This does not mean one side is favored over the other. She's giving and getting input from the major GPU manufactures in order to support Crypto-mining. Additionally she says "AMD is actively working with us to optimize ProgPoW for their architectures.". Using ProgPOW optimized for GPUs rids us of bowing to Bitmain, innosilicon, halong and there scandalous ways for hardware.

ProgPOW IS NOT the "God-sent savior of all GPUS" Even Kristy understand that complete ASIC-resistance is a fallacy. This will never be achieved. However By working with GPU manufactures and Crypto Dev's we can make a coin where GPUs run along-side with ASICs, but the efficiency gains are diluted. Meaning the time and money invested into an ProgPOW ASIC machine does not make economical sense. Rather just buy the actual GPU.

Quote sources from Kristy's Medium article.

Why does Ethereum need ProgPOW?

I suggest reading Siacoin's good medium article on the subject of ASICs.
It's too much to cover here but in short why we need ProgPOW against current ASICs
At his point in time we actually don't need ProgPOW. However we do need it as time goes on. Early Bitcoin ASICs didn't dominate BTC however as time went on, they became better more efficient than GPUs, and started dominating BTC's network. The same fate happens to any "ASIC-Resistant coin" that decides it's not a big deal (looking at you ZEN). Without a set date on POS Ethereum would have suffered the same fate. As Siacoin Dev states;
We also had loose designs for ethash (Ethereum’s algorithm). Admittedly, ethash was not as easily amenable to ASICs as equihash, but as we’ve seen from products on the market today, you can still do well enough to obsolete GPUs.
What makes ASICs bad? Isn't it better to get Hash/watt ratio? This saves tons of electric. One of PoW biggest faults. I think there is nothing bad about the ASICs hardware. Equihash ASICs achieved 20 1080ti level hashrate at 1/20 of the power. That's impressive. The problem with ASIC hardware is who, where it comes from, and there shady business practices.

  1. "It’s estimated that Monero’s secret ASICs made up more than 50% of the hashrate for almost a full year before discovery, and during that time, nobody noticed." How much of ETH hashrate could be ASICs? We won't know till the fork.
  2. I've heard a lot that ASICs aren't all that big of a deal. Focus on POS. Take in account Siacoins own network hashrate which allowed bitmain/innosilicon ASICs on the network till they forked in favor of their own ASICs after just a year (Siacoins drops 96% network hashrate).
  3. "In the case of Halong’s Decred miner, we saw them “sell out” of an unknown batch size of $10,000 miners. After that, it was observed that more than 50% of the mining rewards were collecting into a single address that was known to be associated with Halong, meaning that they did keep the majority of the hashrate and profits to themselves." GPU manufactures would not and cannot be do the same.
ASICs destroy networks, centralize the pools, and hardware. Leading to them to be controlled by large entity in this case its Chinese companies. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fool. Of course this doesn't happen overnight, hence my original statement that we don't need ProgPoW now. In a years time that may totally change and it will be far to late.

GPUs allow anyone to support the network. Think of the crypto run-up. Fry's Electronics, Microceneter, online E-tailers were SOLD OUT OF GPUs. Think of that! People were buying GPUs to support the network for token rewards(worth money) How many new miners, people, got interested in crypto because of this? How about friends who saw the rigs and word of mouth spread that you could go out buy a graphics card, built a rig, and earn money? obviously we know the effects because it wasn't sustainable in the remotest. However it's an attest that GPU mineable coins makes it accessible to everyone.

For Ethereum to successfully go POS it cannot hand it network over to ASIC mining companies in the meantime. POS is on an unknown release date/timeframe. I understand Vitalk does not like PoW however that's what currently securing the network. Because of this Ethereum must maintain as much decentralization as possible with GPU mining. This is what ProgPOW does. It gives AMD and Nvidia GPUs the advantage they need over ASICs created by Bitmain or others. It allows me to continue to secure the Ethereum network with my 90 GPUs until full POS switch.

Conclusion
Did it have to be ProgPOW? No, as UBIQ has shown they created there own unique ASIC-resistant algorithm. ProgPOW was given to us by the Ifdefelse team completed. This required no work from the ETH devs at all. It's open source and has been reviewed by the Etheruem Dev team. If they haven't found any issues with it yet, I don't see why we cannot implement it.

An argument can be made that if we do switch we risk security, because we'll lose network hashrate and decrease the cost to attack the network. I have two things to say to that. One, since ProgPOW is new, Nicehash has not added it to it's network to rent yet. I wouldn't know how long nicehash would take to it add it, but it gives us a short while to get people on new ETH POW network. Additionally to attack the network, they would need massive coordination from GPU mining farms. Such a thing has never been recorded.

The 51% attacks that have happened recently (BCD/BTG/ZEN) and as of 1/8/18, ETC. These were all ASIC mineable coins. In the case of equihash coins, an ASIC that achieved 50x more efficiency had just came to market. It's not proven, but it leads me to believe a bad actor with early access to ASICs was able to attack those coins. All except ZEN have switched to Zhash algorithm. Even ZCASH/Zelcash has funded ProgPOW development. While I disagree they should do this, because that's entirely the problem too many coins using too many of the same algorithm, in the end it's up to the devs.

TL:DR; ASIC-Resistance is futile and a fallacy. PoS or other solutions are needed but to get there we need to keep PoW as Decentralized as possible this is what ProgPOW does.


Update 10/10/19 See medium article on ProgPoW FAQs.
submitted by Xazax310 to gpumining [link] [comments]

Are Bitcoin fundamentals getting stronger or weaker?

Well, I follow Bitcoin only since early 2017 but fundamentals (in equity you use quantitative and qualitative metrics) which are (directly or indirectly impacting Bitcoin) in my opinion:
Thanks to Jameson Lopp and Willy Woo
2018 commits & contributors : Bitcoin 3274 , LND 3050
Bitcoin Lightning evolution + Blockstream Satellite launch
Google scholar articles mentioning bitcoin in 2018 : 14,400 (from 136 in 2010, 4'680 2015)
Segwit adoption near 50%: https://transactionfee.info/charts/payments/segwit ( full SegWit adoption will bring blocks up to 2-4 mb range ?)
Mining difficulty strongly trending upward + GEForce GTX 1080 out of stock
Blockchain industry Venture capital funding in 2018: 3B USD from 0.8B in 2017 and 0.3B in 2014
Growth rate of Bitcoin reddit subscribers +61% in 2018.
FIO Protocol evolution : https://fio.foundation/ for a killer app, user friendly/mass adoption?
Guys like Spencer Bogart, Pantera Capital, Mike Novogratz, Tom Lee, Anthony Pompliano, Tim Draper putting huge ressources on it. (Yes they are speculators I know, but speculators also help providing blood to the bitcoin's heart. Tony Robbins also talking about it
Crypo ATM market doubled in 2018.
Can book 550K hotels in 210 countries in the world using Bitcoin : https://Travala.com
Guys like Andreas Antonopoulos, Erik Voorhees, Max Keiser supporting and educating us about Bitcoin on a daily basis.
Maybe the price overshooted fundamentals in december 2017 but they seem improving not deteriorating. Sure for now sentiment is a strong "fundamental".
Well I could write a book with all the Bitcoin direct on indirect fundamentals, ho thanks to the The Bitcoin Standard: The Decentralized Alternative to Central Banking by Saifedean Ammou.
Hope they are getting stronger. "Every year Bitcoin survives, it demonstrates the resilience and robustness of the protocol, market, and industry that supports it."
submitted by Sylfaen8 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Trying to see both sides of the scaling debate

Hi there,
I am going to post this to both /btc and /bitcoin, for fairness. You may or may not be aware that I have a little podcast where I interview people in the Crypto and Bitcoin space.
My little place in the community is as someone who is not the most technically proficient but trying desperately to understand scaling. I know that from my community, there are many like me.
One thing most of us can agree on, is that we want Cryptocurrencies to grow, and be successful, therefore we want more people to join, buy coins and spend them. We also encourage people to do their research and understand what they are investing in.
As a non-technical person coming into the space, it is very hard to try and find an impartial view on the Bitcoin scaling debate. There are two very passionate camps who appear to have very passionate views on how Bitcoin should be scaled but the tribalism is scary. I have been sucked into this myself at times.
From my experience of this, I have met various people from both camps. So far I have interviewed Jameson Lopp, Charlie Lee, Roger Ver and Craig Wright. Despite the opinions people have on who I choose to interview, I try to be fair and have both sides. Also, I am not perfect, interviewing is something I am learning and new to.
An awful lot of work goes into preparing each interview, trying to research as much as I can, so I can try and see the points of view and look for gaps for which I can question. Handling each interview is difficult to, especially trying to manage a discussion, get people to answer tough questions, accept that an interview might move into an unexpected area which I don't have the knowledge of, listen to and respond to the interviewee, while also keep to my own question structure. Trust me, it is much harder than you think, especially when you are up against experienced people, if you don't believe me, try it.
In the last week alone I have interviewed a journalist from South America, and thus have been researching the history of Venezuela and socliasm, I have interviewed Roger Ver and Samson Mow, so I have tried to understand the full history of the scaling debate and the current technologies being worked on. I have flown to Japan and back, into England to spend a day with my children and then out to New York. I am not looking for sympathy, I just want people to be aware of what goes into all this.
I am trying to become more impartial but I will make mistakes and I will make judgements. There are many smart and clever people who have the debate and get into quite good technical detail, there are also many people like me who want things to be a bit simpler and want an impartial view.
When a new investor goes onto Coinbase, they will see two Bitcoin's. If they want to research which to buy, they can be met with a wall of propaganda, hate and accusations. This is very difficult to navigate and I am yet to find a solid impartial breakdown of the two.
From both sides of the debate, I have received abuse, false accusations, insults, heavy criticism of everything from my technical knowledge to my ability.
There has also been intimidation and threats.
Everything which has happened has come from both sides of the debate and from people in both camps.
Yesterday when asking questions about Lightning Network I was told that Roger had got into my head and I was becoming a big blocker. Another person sent me a DM, relentlessly arguing with me, even though I explained I was busy preparing an interview, then told me I am a small blocker idiot. This doesn't help anyone.
My own view is that I can see positives and negatives from both sides and I am happy to explore this. There are really smart people working on both sides of the scaling argument, people I respect.
I will continue to do what I do, whatever people say to me. What I do hope is that people can try and slow down a little, try and talk rather than aggressively pursue their own narrative.
What the scaling debate appears to me is different philosophical, technical and economic views on what should happen and how it should be scaled. If you have a different opinion, that is what it is, a different opinion. All others arguments and accusations which come alongside this are just wrapping the opinion.
Neither BTC or BCH are going away. It is a live split test and nobody can say with 100% absolute certainty, how this will play out. Both exist today, both will likely exist in a year, both will likely exist in 3 years but as time goes on each will face new challenges.
My hope is that both camps now just focus on themselves, focus on their approach and work on their solution. My expectation though is that it won't, the endless infighting, accusations, counter-accusations, abuse and trolling will continue.
I will do what I do and I appreciate those who have not been abusive and have been thankful and supportive to what I am doing.
Good luck, happy to answer any non-abusive questions.
Peter PS I currently mine and own both BTC and BCH but am considering selling all of both to remain as neutral as possible.
submitted by mccormack555 to btc [link] [comments]

More lies incoming: "54% of reachable Bitcoin ABC (bcash) nodes are running on Hangzhou Alibaba virtual servers in China"

Jameson Lopp tweeted this:
"54% of reachable Bitcoin ABC (bcash) nodes are running on Hangzhou Alibaba virtual servers in China. Compare that to 2% of reachable Bitcoin nodes running on Hangzhou Alibaba servers."
(He's talking about Bitcoin Cash, not about bcash, an easy mistake to make /s)
When asked about sources, he said:
"I had to do some manual counting on bitnodes with a network filter: https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/?q=Hangzhou+Alibaba …"
Of course non-mining nodes don't even help the network (1, 2)
But, even taking that aside - is the actual number 54% real?? Was it really calculated or "manual counting" means massaging the numbers?
Ok, let's go to https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/?q=NODE_CASH now, let's actually count the nodes (pastebin with all nodes list below):
Location Nodes Percentage
Hangzhou, China 419 31.77%
So...
Not 54%, but only 31%... Just like.. almost two times less.. who cares?
The rest?
Location Nodes Percentage
Hangzhou, China 419 31.77%
Germany 72 5.46%
Frankfurt, Germany 44 3.34%
Hong Kong 42 3.18%
San Mateo, United States 42 3.18%
France 38 2.88%
Singapore 35 2.65%
Singapore, Singapore 35 2.65%
Ashburn, United States 28 2.12%
Dublin, Ireland 27 2.05%
Sydney, Australia 22 1.67%
Dallas, United States 19 1.44%
Tokyo, Japan 19 1.44%
Mumbai, India 18 1.36%
San Jose, United States 18 1.36%
Montreal, Canada 16 1.21%
London, United Kingdom 13 0.99%
Netherlands 13 0.99%
Fremont, United States 12 0.91%
United States 11 0.83%
Boardman, United States 9 0.68%
Newark, United States 9 0.68%
Amsterdam, Netherlands 8 0.61%
Mountain View, United States 8 0.61%
Atlanta, United States 7 0.53%
Beijing, China 6 0.45%
Korea, Republic of 5 0.38%
Lithuania 5 0.38%
Moscow, Russian Federation 5 0.38%
.... 272 locations in total!
You can check the results here and count yourself and see that those IPs are in the original link. https://pastebin.com/jJCg0D3R
But facts aren't really that interesting, are they? FUD is always much more fun! "Centralization! China coin!! Pump and dump" /s
EDIT: I also explain here (to best of my understanding) why this is not an issue at all, not at 54%, not at 31%.
EDIT2: Misspelled Jameson Lopp's name
submitted by fromaratom to btc [link] [comments]

10 Reasons Why The Perfect Storm is Brewing for AION

The perfect storm is brewing for Aion to become a leader in the crypto space:
 
1. AIONEX, EDCON & CONSENSUS 2018 conferences have introduced AION to more people, developers & institutional investors than ever before. Matthew Spoke's performance on Consensus Interoperability Panel with Ripple, Polkadot & Litecoin left everlasting reactions & received the only applauses at the end of the Interoperability Panel.
AION's inaugural Dev conference AIONEX at Toronto on May 02, had 650 attendees. This is a record unseen by any other crypto's inaugural dev conference to date, compared to just 40 attendees at 1st Ethereum Devcon in 2014. And if Devcon grew to 350 attendees in 2015, it's not hard to see that the next AION Dev conference attendance will be in the thousands.
 
2. Token Swap from Aion ERC-20 to native Aion coins will soon be announced. The ETH-AION cross-chain bridge is already built & was showcased live on stage at AIONEX & EDCON, so it's only a matter of time before it's released.
 
3. US, Korean & Chinese exchanges are clearly waiting for the Token Swap to take place before they list native Aion coins rather than Aion ERC-20 tokens, they don't want to painstakingly swap ERC-20 tokens themselves as seen in ICON's token swap delay that's taking exchanges about 2-months & still not accomplished.
 
4. AION team has grown to 60 in-house team members in 4 different Aion offices in North America, Europe & Asia and plan to grow to 100 people by EOY. This is extremely rare in the crypto space & can only be compared to less than half a dozen of massive platform projects like CARDANO & EOS.
 
Aion GitHub activity is continuously ranked in top 10 platforms on Darpal Rating and CryptoMiso. Github activity, along with commits quality, are important metrics that get overlooked all the time when people compare Aion to other projects based on number of telegram users. Ethereum & Neo never even had telegram... Fat Protocol Ecosystems are not built by telegram hype but rather by worldwide Dev meetups & armies of developers that can build or contribute something that can change the world.
 
5. AION PR & Marketing are shifting into high gears now that the Mainnet is live. AIONEX, EDCON & CONSENSUS 2018 have put AION on the radar of the media. Matt Spoke is slowly becoming crypto's poster boy as seen on RBC's Disruptors Panel. It's only a matter of time before the mainstream media finds out about AION.
 
6. AION is introducing Real Technological Break-throughs with the first Cross-Chain bridge that completely moves tokens seamlessly between different blockchains using the Burn/Mint mechanism, unlike all Dapp platform projects since Ethereum that are still simple blockchain 2.0 platforms with no cross-chain capability or Atomic Swap projects that only transfer value between chains, but come with major limitations.
 
Another important point that gets forgotten in the Aion vs other interoperability projects is that Aion is all these 3 things at the same time:
 
AION is increasingly recognized as the leader of Interoperability —the holy grail of blockchain tech— that will solve scalability, privacy & isolation issues to unlock the true potential of Distributed Ledger Technologies. "This is the internet, decentralized."
 
7. METCALFE’s LAW states that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2). This was proven repeatedly in the growth patterns of fat protocols like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Neo. Metcalfe’s Law favors interoperability projects even more, because Aion native tokens have utility far beyond the main Aion-1 blockchain:
 
8. Major AION Partners & Clients like Deloitte, TMX group (Canada's largest stock exchange), Moog Space & Defense Group, Vodafone, TD Bank, etc... are slowly moving their blockchain infrastructure to AION blockchain as they announced at AIONEX conference. This is taking place & growing the AION ecosystem while other Dapp platforms are rushing to parade their new Dapp ICOs that have little to no legitimate need for blockchain tech in the first place, but were rushed to launch ICOs to simply boast their Dapp numbers & suck more ICO funds from unsuspecting investors.
 
9. Future Partnerships will be relatively easy for AION to acquire given AION team's role as a founding board member of the Ethereum Enterprise Alliance, with the likes of Microsoft, Intel & JP Morgan (not just a regular EEA member like most other crypto projects) & the Blockchain Research Institute.
 
Aion cofounder Matthew Spoke has also strong credentials as the Fintech Advisor for the Ontario Securities Commission & Ministry of Finance and as a cofounder of the Muskoka Group along with the Tapscotts & Ethereum cofounder & ConsenSys founder Joeseph Lubin.
 
Not to mention Aion's unmatched advisory board from TMX group VP & Board of Directors and connections to Ethereum cofounders; Anthony Di lorio, Joeseph Lubin, Vitalik who's an advisor to Nuco.io & his father Dmitry Buterin who's an Angel investor in Nuco.io the company building Aion.
 
10. The TRS is coming to an end soon; however, the end of the token release schedule will slowly starts to get priced in long before the last release of Nov 2018; the date after which no more Aion will be released to public ever. Only mining/staking rewards will continue thereafter. The TRS also helps AION market cap climb up the MarketCap list with every release, adding to the increasing visibility & exposure that AION is getting.
 
People have seen what happened to fat protocols like Ethereum, Neo & Cardano, but it takes a special breed of people (and a bit of luck) to foresee why AION will have a much bigger growth & impact potential on the entire crypto space. (This is not a financial advice. DYOR.)
submitted by Unleash-The-Kraken to AionNetwork [link] [comments]

Constantinople Hard Fork Discussion

Constantinople is planned upcoming hard fork of Ethereum main net, believed to roll out Q4 this year, although no timeline has officially been given.

Majority of EIPs planned to be included in Constantinople have strong support among devs and community, however there are three contentious propositions that need to be discussed. Those are: 1) Difficulty Bomb delay, 2) Ether issuance reduction, and 3) ASIC resistance.
As with every problem there are many points of view and issues, but for quick gist of it here is short summary: Difficulty Bomb will soon take effect, gradually prolonging block time until Ethereum will virtually come to a halt. To secure block time of 15 s, delaying Difficulty Bomb is proposed, as has already been done in Byzantium hard fork. However delaying Difficulty Bomb would greatly affect Ether issuance. Therefore block mining reward reduction has been proposed (from 3 to 2, 1 or 0.5 Ether). But issuance reduction decreases mining profitability, cutting out smaller miners and favoring ASIC, resulting in centralization and lesser network security. To mitigate this issue ASIC resistance has been proposed to eliminate mining cartels.

Here is list of previous discussions around mentioned issues:

1) Difficulty Bomb:
2) Issuance reduction:
3) ASIC resistance

What to do?

Voice your opinion! Read, research and participate in discussion! Devs are in final stages of selecting EIPs for Constantinople hard fork. Next Devs Call is on 24th of August.

Full disclosure

I am strongly against eliminating Difficulty Bomb, however I am in favor of delaying it to no later than 30th July 2019. I also think Ethereum is overpaying network security, therefore I support block reward reduction to 1 ETH coupled with implementation of ASIC resistance. If ASIC resistance is rejected, I would like to see community discuss block reward reduction to 1.5 or 2 ETH with block time of 30s.
submitted by svarov to ethereum [link] [comments]

Untangling a few things about network consolidation and "too few nodes on the network to serve all users"

I see this mentioned more and more even on this subreddit. The idea is that the network is at risk of having too few nodes running to serve all users and that there needs to be some external motivation to store the blockchain and propagate transactions.
Satoshi explained both very early on and throughout his later communications with the community that he expected there to eventually be only a few large hashing nodes incentivized to keep LAN farms of mining equipment or blockchain holding "client nodes", in extension enabling SPV wallets for others through their "client only mode" intended for ordinary users.
The key word here is incentivized. Bitcoin relies only on market forces and requires no central planning — external or internal — of the network or prices regarding any of its key functions.
He approximated that the network would never reach more than a hundred thousand unidentified nodes, probably less, before it was no longer worth it for more to join in. At this new equilibrium, the network would instead start its consolidation.
The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users.
The common worries over Pools, ASICs and not enough propagating or blockchain storing nodes in the network are thus completely overblown. Satoshi encouraged every step on this ladder of evolution. He mined more than anyone at the time, implemented multi-core mining, helped on gpu-mining and encouraged pooled mining. He even considered dropping the number of nodes on the network drastically by introducing "client only mode" (Simplified Payment Verification) as the standard mode of the Bitcoin reference software.
As you would know from carefully reading the whitepaper, SPV was fully capable of being implemented. No extra "fraud proofs" were actually necessary for it, even if they may have helped to increase security. The concept was incredibly simple and only relied on following proof of the longest chain with the most work (Proof of Work) rather than relying on conventional "trust".
In may of 2010, Satoshi made it clear again on one of the old forums that
SPV is not implemented yet, and won't be implemented until far in the future, but all the current implementation is designed around supporting it.
Yet again, this makes clear that if someone suggests something like SegWit or any other new technology to be a necessity for Simplified Payment Verification to work, they are not getting the design (the paper) at all.
Now, all respect to various individuals like Jameson Lopp, Peter Todd and others on the subjects they generally know well; Code and developer standards. But they are not the engineers of a full blown peer to peer electronic cash system and they lack the economic understanding of how scaling a market based (peacefully hierarchical) system of sound money must work.
Further more, which is not in the slightest to suggest that the network would need it, there may still be other businesses than miners that run their own "idle" so called "client nodes" even though they do not mine. This is because large organizations with more frequent payments are likely to seek higher security whenever they can and if the price is right.
As it says in the design
Businesses that receive frequent payments will probably still want to run their own nodes for more independent security and quicker verification.
But this is a "probability" and Bitcoin was not made to depend on it at all.
submitted by fruitsofknowledge to btc [link] [comments]

The Beginner’s Guide to Bitcoin Part 12: Bitcoin Privacy & OpSec with Jameson Lopp John Jameson live with Tom & Tommy O'Brien Talking Bitcoin and Block Chain Beginner’s Guide #12: Bitcoin Privacy & OpSec with Jameson Lopp Going Deeper On Bitcoin with Jameson Lopp Bitcoin Philosophy and Tech with Jameson Lopp

Bitcoin depends on its mining, this is one of the most fundamental activities for its operation. However, in recent years the mining ecosystem has been characterized by low transparency, which makes it difficult for the community to really understand how it works, says Bitcoin developer Jameson Lopp. China stellt keine Bedrohung für Bitcoin dar. Jameson Lopp, Gründer von Casa Wallet und Mitwirkender von Bitcoin, sagte, dass die chinesischen Miner keine Bedrohung für Bitcoin darstellen. Sein Post kam inmitten lang gehegter Ängste vor einer Zentralisierung durch Unternehmen in der fernöstlichen Nation, die über 70 Prozent der weltweiten Hash-Rate von Bitcoin beherrschen. Anzeige. Seit ... This is an episode of The Pomp Podcast with host Anthony “Pomp” Pompliano and guest, Jameson Lopp, a co-founder at Casa. He is one of the most well known technical minds in Bitcoin and has quickly become an expert on personal privacy. In this conversation, Jameson and Anthony discuss the Bitcoin halving, personal privacy, individual […] Jameson Lopp, a former Engineer for BitGo and the current Engineer for CasaHODL, claims that over BTC 4 million have been lost and over BTC 2 million have been stolen. This suggests that there are much fewer Bitcoins in circulation than the total supply of BTC 17.13 million that have been mined since the genesis block. Jameson Lopp, the CTO at Casa, a Bitcoin focused security company, notes that since the industrialization of BTC mining began in 2015, there have been concerns regarding the concentration of ...

[index] [36419] [13030] [4449] [8808] [3374] [28652] [6617] [41917] [51041] [46805]

The Beginner’s Guide to Bitcoin Part 12: Bitcoin Privacy & OpSec with Jameson Lopp

Today we are joined by another Bitcoin Curious Expert, Jameson Lopp. Jameson Lopp is a software engineer at BitGo, creator of statoshi.info and founder of bitcoinsig.com. Jameson and Calvin Wayman ... In Part 12 of the Beginner's Guide to Bitcoin, I talk to Jameson Lopp, co-founder and CTO at Casa, and renowned Bitcoin privacy expert. We discuss Bitcoin privacy, best practices and operational ... In this podcast, I chat with Cypherpunk and BitGo engineer Jameson Lopp aka @lopp. We discuss both the philosophical and technical aspects of Bitcoin, the scaling debates, forks and the various ... John Jameson joins the show this morning talking bitcoin at $11,000, where will blockchain technology take us, and what to expect from cryptocurrencies in the months and years to come! In Part 12 of the Beginner's Guide to Bitcoin, I talk to Jameson Lopp, co-founder and CTO at Casa, and renowned Bitcoin privacy expert. We discuss Bitcoin privacy, best practices and operational ...

#