Croutonrant #331 - Marketing a waste of time/money currently! Also PoW is an exclusionary dead end!
- Thread starter thelonecrouton
- Start date
moli
Well-known member
Of course I read BCT, not every stupid post, but I skim through to see if Evan has posted anything there, or there's something worthwhile to read from some smart people there, and yes, I do see your dumb posts trying to fix the supposedly non-trolling trolls.LOL
on BCT ? WTF, you are on BCT
you are just watching right, and bickering after ?
hold on
fixed that for you
:wink:
Heh, I might have an answer that solves all problems except a steady miner income, as pools aren't going to work.
I have said that this can be done purely with MNs but objections about reliability and the need for a physically separate network have been voiced, so:
Each block MNs choose a subset of miners. Only those assigned miners out of all connected miners validate transactions for that block. All mining logic is the same, just carried out by that subset. Plus a control group or three for extra security.
Furthermore, all connected wallets with a unique IP address are miners. (To avoid people firing up ten thousand wallets each.) And no expensive hardware or the ability to pay running costs are needed because there's no hardware arms race any more. All connected wallets are chosen amongst each block, The chosen subset does what miners usually do, but without the need for megawatts, bake that block and distribute to all. Next block, new subset, etc.
We would have
1. Near perfect decentralisation of mining.
2. Blockchain security on a par with IX and DS security. Even better in fact as hopefully there will be many more users/miners than Masternodes.
3. Inherently higher tx capacity as it should be faster to achieve consensus among a smaller set of nodes.
4. No wasteful make-work.
5. Separation of MNs and mining.
6. No hashrate fluctuations, as there wouldn't be any hashrate, so currency emission would be perfectly predictable.
7. Peace on Earth.
Now, tell me why this wouldn't be awesome. :grin:
edit: solved the miner income problem too - it could work the same way as MN payments, on a FIFO rolling basis. Again, Evan has already written the code for this...
8. Steady and predictable miner income while avoiding the p2pool dust problem as only elected miners are paid each block. :smile:
Last edited by a moderator:
oh moli
what a pleasure to hear more from you
please keep it coming, i will be online all day
darkwing
Active member
moli
Well-known member
Tungfa started all this if you read his first post on this thread. And this is not a personal issue between us, it's an issue related to this thread and crouton is one of the members in the extended team. Sorry if this bothers you but I think we could take this to somewhere else, sure.Moli Tunga both of you. Take it to PM throw rocks at each other daggers whatever. Get it all out. Then buy each other a beer and return to measured discussion. Don't lower the tone to BCT level. Much respect to both. Better POW systems is more interesting
crouton asked to be removed from the extended Dev Team some time ago
he is not listed anymore
(just to clarify)
https://www.dashpay.io/team/
he is not listed anymore
(just to clarify)
https://www.dashpay.io/team/
If it works and solves all the problems, you can call it what you like. :tongue:I'll sleep on it. All wallets are miners smells like POS.
Actually I see one difficulty, but it isn't insurmountable: if the MN network suffers major catastrophe, how will the miner-subset be chosen?
Two possible WIP answers:
1. Choose them in advance to some specified time on a rolling basis, with miners identified by a minerprivkey which they are assigned whenever they connect to the network.
2. A fallback mechanism among the miners themselves.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't recall insulting you at all, in fact I have praised you in this thread.
However, since you are now feeling insulted, you might also feel some empathy for the 2500 Masternode operators who have had to listen to various people imply, over and over, that they are all knuckledragging idiots who cannot be trusted to make informed decisions about their own future.
Heh, I did indeed ask to be removed as an official tester as I couldn't commit the time to it any more, but Fernando's last words to me were: "if you confirm one more time I'll let go" - that was March 12th, and I was still listed as recently as a week or so ago I think, so maybe Mr Moncado had me fired for being a pain in his neck. :grin:
moli
Well-known member
OH wow.... This is new to me... I don't check that site often but I didn't see you removed from it until just now...
Why would the general idea be to have all MN owner voting if anybody would think they are knuckleheads ? Where is that coming from
Ed has nothing to do with on or off Dev team or listed on page
Another misconception of the "power of ed "
Ed has nothing to do with on or off Dev team or listed on page
Another misconception of the "power of ed "
Last edited by a moderator:
You are either being obtuse here or you have not read the DGBB thread at all. Numerous people objected to the idea that funds be approved first before being diverted from infrastructure providers because, to paraphrase them, "MN owners are morons who will vote no to everything for their short term gain and no spending will ever get approved."
In case you missed it: https://dashtalk.org/threads/self-sustainable-decentralized-governance-by-blockchain.4708/
Nobody knows what the hell Ed is up to, apart from posting word-salads and telling us we're a pack of gullible numpties.
None of that matters though, did you not notice I have just in theory perfected decentralised mining and unbreakable blockchain security, and also saved the Earth from global GPU warming?
Last edited by a moderator:
Dammit, I really wanted that mohawk. :sad:Vegas was a joke
As much as that haircut for you was a joke
Lol
I agree with darkwing here, this smells like selective/round robin PoS, without the stake. So with this model implemented, on the small scale I can install the DASH client on my cryptoclueless friend's/family's/coworker's computer the next time I work on it, and collect the reward next time I use the given machine? And on the large scale, if I were a programmer the client would be included in a virus and I would colllect "mined" funds from hundreds or thousands of unknowing device owners? These funds are generated from virtually nothing and I don't see how they would hold value in this instance.
I don't agree with the argument that wasting electricity gives value to cryptocurrencies. DASH has never been profitable to mine at the time and it's not unusual in that. Mining is a purely speculative activity that will always be out of the reach of most due not only to hardware and electricity costs, but the need for weird alien geekskills to get it all set up and running. As I said, it's exclusionary, in fact highly exclusionary.. Could your granny build a mining rig? I bet she could fire up a wallet and enter a 2FA code... (see below)
Also, nobody outside of the crypto scene, which is just about everyone, cares what it cost you to manufacture your digital token. 1's and 0's are free, right? They only care that it is useful to them. Being useful to the masses is where the real value lies. "This is worth $x because making it is the most stupendously inefficient and esoteric activity!" sounds like something from the art world, which I am not knocking, but not a technology aiming for global utility.
The botnet argument is not convincing either, at least I don't think it's a showstopper. Miners (all users in this case) could be required to do something like complete some anti-bot challenge like a CAPTCHA before being issued their unique privkey, or even better 2FA of the wallet could be required on wallet startup to qualify to receive block rewards. 2FA = botnet stopped dead.
There's also PGP keys, md5 sums, CRC checks etc - I'm not a cryptography expert but if a cryptocurrency network can't somehow cryptographically verify the integrity of a binary file and reject anything coming from a tampered-with source then we're doomed anyway. Masternodes seem to do a good job of banning bogus or misbehaving peers, can't wallets do the same?
Last edited by a moderator:
darkwing
Active member
It's not about electricity it's about work. It's work as a idealogical construct. Effort of some sort. And indeed competition. If it's hard to get it's harder to just throw away. If you have to run around the block three times to get a reward it's a reward. If you sit and watch TV and get rewarded it's fairydust.
If we changed to POS it would be a troll clusterfuck. And an internal meltdown. You would be happy, but all those who hate POS (and there are many who believe POW is a benchmark of honesty) would most certainly not be.
The only way I could see it working would be to have a portion of the mining done as POS so dual POW/POS so that in effect 51% would never be achievable. I'd still say minimum balance or minernodes or something similar though. Because free money is bollocks. But then you are reducing POW block rewards further and at some point you'd have rebellion.
Or the diff would just drop dramatically but that would be less of an issue..
The Granny factor comes down to UI/UX and everything would have to change visually and install wise to be as easy as possible. That's a separate issue.
If we changed to POS it would be a troll clusterfuck. And an internal meltdown. You would be happy, but all those who hate POS (and there are many who believe POW is a benchmark of honesty) would most certainly not be.
The only way I could see it working would be to have a portion of the mining done as POS so dual POW/POS so that in effect 51% would never be achievable. I'd still say minimum balance or minernodes or something similar though. Because free money is bollocks. But then you are reducing POW block rewards further and at some point you'd have rebellion.
Or the diff would just drop dramatically but that would be less of an issue..
The Granny factor comes down to UI/UX and everything would have to change visually and install wise to be as easy as possible. That's a separate issue.
It isn't PoStake. Users aren't staking anything, they're contributing a few CPU cycles now and again and getting a little in return. Earnings, not interest, how much DASH you have in your wallet makes no difference. Provide service, get paid, same as MNs.
And we'll have to disagree about where the value to the user comes from I suppose. Currency is a tool, and like any other product that costs money to purchase, whether someone buys a tool or not depends on the value it brings to them, not how much it cost to produce. Though I'll grant you that while manufacturing cost may be a factor in affordability for most tools, what a unit of currency costs to acquire is irrelevant as that cost is reclaimed upon spending of said currency unit.
I think every single user should be a value-adding participant, this is a way of achieving that.
And we'll have to disagree about where the value to the user comes from I suppose. Currency is a tool, and like any other product that costs money to purchase, whether someone buys a tool or not depends on the value it brings to them, not how much it cost to produce. Though I'll grant you that while manufacturing cost may be a factor in affordability for most tools, what a unit of currency costs to acquire is irrelevant as that cost is reclaimed upon spending of said currency unit.
I think every single user should be a value-adding participant, this is a way of achieving that.
Last edited by a moderator: