Introducing CBPI: A New Way To Measure Bitcoin Network ...

Mining: Weird Time to Start, a Good Time to Think

Mining: Weird Time to Start, a Good Time to Think
Well, it’s supposed to be an optimistic article about most promising mining cryptos, but then something happened. No one was too naive to believe that the events unfolded around the COVID-19 pandemic will not affect global markets, but the turbulence that occurred was very significant and, what is most sad, it is still very difficult to say how soon the situation will stabilize.
https://preview.redd.it/9xxheofluzp41.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=cd8ca033faddf57ea041e82ceadee1037b8587f1
Many people were already bothered that crypto mining is becoming less profitable in 2020 and will be meaningless very soon, but even though big companies having bigger resources took over most of the industry, cryptocurrency mining using video cards remains available to common users and still has potential.
Despite, the volatility of the cryptocurrency market hashrate of the Bitcoin blockchain network yet remains almost at the same level and that is a quite positive sign. At the moment, the most reliable option seems to be to leave mining to large ASIC-farms and return when the stock panic subsides and the prospects will be clearer.
Although Bitcoin is still the most popular cryptocurrency on the market, every year the complexity of operations necessary for its production increases, and rewards fall (after halving in May 2020, we will talk about 6.25 BTC per block). For mining many altcoins, the threshold for entry is much lower, therefore it makes sense to look for a more profitable option among them.
But first, let’s try to understand a little what conditions we need for profitable mining.
There are several crucial aspects that determine how profitable mining will be. These are such obvious things as the price of the currency or the amount of reward for the generated block.
And this is the reason it is now very difficult to calculate the possible income. One way or another, the market price of altcoins depends on the position of bitcoin, which is experiencing bad times. For several months, the world of crypto mining has been preparing for the May halving, because the reduced supply led to a significant increase in prices. This time should not have been an exception, but now when bitcoin does not rise above $5500 and risks falling below $3500, we can only make vague guesses about its potential price in May. Many analysts tend to believe that closer to the middle of April, the negative effect of the crisis should be reduced, and positive expectations from halving and a large amount of cash from investors should have a positive impact on the price of bitcoin. Altcoins, as a rule, repeat the dynamics of the first cryptocurrency and will also continue their growth to historical highs in the year’s future.
Next, you should also pay attention to the complexity of mining because it affects the time and energy spent on generating the block. Do not forget about the cost of electricity in your region, as one extra-large bill can negate all your efforts to earn money on currency mining.
Do not forget about expenses on a mining rig and it’s amortisation.
In addition to the above, you should find out how practical the chosen currency is: whether it can be exchanged for fiat or more popular coins, what fees are charged by exchanges that work with it, and what reputation it has in general.
In order to avoid unpleasant mistakes, it is easier and more reliable to check the possible profit in one of the many calculators.

Best altcoins to mine in 2020

Monero is the currency with the highest anonymity rates, which stays attractive to many users and remains one of the strongest altcoins. The specific proof-of-work hashing algorithm does not allow ASIC-miners, so it is relatively easy to mine using personal computer’s processors and graphics cards. AMD graphic cards are preferable for this task, but NVidia suits as well. The current block reward is 2.47 XMR.
Litecoin is one of the oldest Bitcoin forks, but unlike it uses a different “Script” PoW algorithm which allows less powerful GPUs to mine coins. Litecoin is on the most popular, and successful Bitcoin forks and considered one of the most stable cryptocurrencies. Block mining reward is 12.5 LTC.
Ravencoin is another Bitcoin hardfork, and like Monero’s its X16R algorithm is practically unavailable for ASIC machines. Raven keeps gaining popularity for many reasons – it has faster block time, higher mining reward (5,000 RVN at the moment) and secure messaging system.
Dogecoin is not a joke anymore. Hard to believe, but this currency once made for fun, became one of the most valuable ones. Like Litecoin it uses Scrypt algorithm and great for mining with GPUs.
One more Bitcoin fork Bitcoin Gold was made specifically to kick out ASICs and clear the road for GPUs. It may not be the fastest-growing currency, but it is definitely one of the most stable.
That’s all for today. Stay safe, cause health is our most important asset.
Follow us on Medium, Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit to get StealthEX.io updates and the latest news about the crypto world. For all requests message us via [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
submitted by Stealthex_io to StealthEX [link] [comments]

Canaan's new ASIC is a Pipe Dream, not an Ethereum Threat

So, yesterday Kristy-Leigh Minehan posted on Twitter that a company named Canaan announced an ASIC that is capable of 0.68W/Mhs
That's 2200Mh/s running at 1500w
https://twitter.com/OhGodAGirl/status/1176938519866089473
Here is a list of how it compares to other ASICs and GPUs.
https://blog.miningstore.com/blog/ethereum-mining-hardware-for-2019
She used this tweet to promote the need for ProgPoW
Today, I am attempting to explain that Canaan is not a threat to centralize Ethereum mining with their ASICs.
First, I cannot find any information regarding Canaan announcing an Ethereum ASIC other than Kristy's twitter post
There is only one article written about it and it uses Kristy's twitter post as their source.
https://cryptoslate.com/ethereum-asic-dominates-gpu-performance/
Nothing on Canaan's website talks about this miner
Nor does Canaan's twitter account mention anything like this.
If we look closely at Kristy's twitter picture, you can see the Canaan Ethereum miner will be called the V10.
I cannot find any info anywhere on this miner.
You would think that if Canaan is unveiling a new product, they would be talking about it more to spread awareness and raise hype, but they aren't.
I mean, they made a big to-do when they announced the A10 bitcoin miner in March, so why are they posting nothing about the V10 ethereum miner.
https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1111513725733724160
And a google search will show many many more articles written about the bitcoin A10 after its announcement.
I'm not saying the announcement isn't real, just that I find it odd that the company isn't talking about it themselves.
Canaan did respond to a tweet from “cryptoState”, the writer's of the article based on Kristy's tweet.
Canaan replied that the v10 is not an official worldwide Canaan product.
https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1177088253431668736
and further in the cryptostate article, Canaan says “It is a little hard to explain, but those are not products designed and built by Canaan engineering. They are products sold by the domestic sales team and are not an official worldwide Canaan product,”
I do not know what that means exactly. If it means it's not an official Canaan product, or that it won't be available worldwide, or what.
But this is the first clue to me that it isn't anything to worry about.
If it's not an official Canaan product, then it doesn't seem like it will have support from Canaan to bring it to market.
It won't be marketed by Canaan, use it's supply chain, it's business resources and contacts, use it's support system, or be built by Canaan.
Next, yes 0.68W/Mhs is more efficient than GPUs, but that isn't all that matters when miners choose the devices to use.
What matters also is how much the machine costs.
If the V10 is price too high, then it's not something to worry about.
Without a price, Kristy can't claim in good faith that the V10 is something Ethereum needs to worry about and a reason ProgPoW needs to be adopted.
I'm not sure how to price the thing, myself, but at current ETH prices and hashrate, it would make $2200 in 4 months.
I think generally ASIC mfgs price their machines to break even in 3-4 months.
So that would be the machine will cost around $2200.
BUT, that's only if ONE machine is running on the network.
The more machines on the network, the less profitable they are.
If we look at the Avalon A1066, it's november batch costs $1390, and has a break-even time of 464 months at current bitcoin prices.
So it seems to me the Canaan V10 will be quite a bit more expensive than $2200.
Which doesn't make it feasible for that many people to buy.
Next, there was no product on display at the New Era Mining Summit, where this product was announced.
Only some graphics of numbers they claim.
Nor can I find any technical documentation talking about how they plan to achieve the advertised hashrate
I tweeted Kristy telling her that this seems, at best, like just an idea to me, to help them raise money and that it takes more than an idea to bring an ASIC to market.
https://twitter.com/AltcoinXP/status/1177290387205054464
Kristy then blocked me on Twitter and told me to stop spreading misinformation.
https://imgur.com/lWEAWbd
So, now let's talk about the article I replied to her with, claiming that Canaan doesn't have enough funding for this.
Granted, I said this without doing as much research as I could've, but let's see if what I said holds true.
Here is the article I linked in the tweet.
https://www.coindesk.com/avalon-bitcoin-miner-maker-canaan-is-plotting-another-ipo-attempt
Notice the date this article was published. March 27th 2019.
Notice that Avalon announce their Bitcoin A10 miner the next day.
https://twitter.com/canaanio/status/1111513725733724160
Perhaps to help attract funding from new investors, which the Coindesk article says they haven't been able to bring on any new investors in a long time.
I'm not going to cite the whole article here, read it for yourself, but it generally explains that Canaan is unable to attract new funding.
Also, Xianfu Lui, a 17.2% shareholder in Canaan left the company in February, so I doubt he invested money into Canaan.
https://www.coindesk.com/co-founder-quits-avalon-mining-chip-maker-canaan-over-differences
Here are some more Coindesk articles speaking about Canaan trying to raise money.
https://www.coindesk.com/huobi-plans-backdoor-ipo-attempt-in-hong-kong-document-suggests
“After mining giant Bitmain’s IPO attempt in Hong Kong was allowed to expire, apparently due to reluctance from HKEX, it’s reportedly now planning to list in the U.S. Another miner manufacturer, Canaan Creative, is also reported to have already confidentially filed in the U.S. after a failed HKEX attempt. “
https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miner-maker-canaan-confidentially-files-for-ipo-in-us-report
https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-miner-canaans-ipo-likely-delayed-after-hong-kong-filing-expires
“The Reuters report, citing anonymous sources, further said the HKEX and financial regulators in Hong Kong have raised questions over Canaan’s business model, given the volatile nature of cryptocurrencies. As such, the news agency said the IPO might not go ahead this year, since there have been no updates from a listing hearing with the HKEX. “
So seems to be Caanan is having a hard time finding funding for their endeavors. Pretty much every single article on Coindesk about them is about them trying to get funding and failing at it.
So do they have enough money to bring the V10 to market AND bring enough V10s to be a problem?
They would need to produce 45,000 units to get 50% of the Ethereum mining power.
Current network is 197TH/s https://bitinfocharts.com/ethereum/
Currently Bitmain is estimated to have produced less than 20,000 units since the Antminer E3's announcement in April 2018.
https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/d8fuvj/an_argument_against_progpow_a_day_part_1/f1axc2c/
https://www.coindesk.com/bitmain-confirms-release-first-ever-ethereum-asic-miners
Bitmain being a much larger company than Canaan, it seems unlikely they will produce 45,000 units quick enough to become a problem.
Anyway,
For those of you that don't know, Canaan manages the Avalon bitcoin ASICs and have done so since 2014. Canaan is fulling in charge of Avalon.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Avalon
Maybe I should've said that sooner, I don't know. I'm just typing as I come up with stuff.
But we can look at Avalon's bitcoin past to determine what the future ethereum miner supply might look like. Keep in mind though, this was also during a time when they were well-funded.
I'm not sure what their bank account looks like now, but they have been in the red every year since their existance, so I have to assume they have less money now than when they were releasing bitcoin miners
Avalon announce the A10 March 2019, and started shipping pre-orders in October 2019.
If the V10 follows suit, we won't see a V10 in the hands of miners until April 2020
https://www.coindesk.com/demand-for-new-bitcoin-miners-is-again-outstripping-supply
Ok, I'm done. That's all I put together and why I don't believe the Canaan ASIC that was announced is a concern warranting the immediate adoption of ProgPoW
Thanks for reading.
submitted by Anthony-AltcoinXP to ethereum [link] [comments]

Miner donations will not be implemented. I will vote No in the hashrate vote.

Jiang Zhuoer, the founder of Leibite mining pool, said in a Weibo post.
It was him who first proposed the plan, and it was also him who stood up and said that he would vote against it. The taste is only known to the BCH community who has been sawing for more than a month.
Planned preform
All this has to start from January 22. On this day, Jiang Zhuoer also published the article "Infrastructure Funding Plan (IFP) for Bitcoin Cash" on Weibo and medium at the same time. In his opinion, the current BCH has a problem of developer operating funds, only A few companies donate to developers, and the other members are hitchhikers, which can be called a tragedy of the commons.
In fact, it is not just BCH. Many early projects without 1CO lack a continuous source of funds. BTC and LTC also rely on the sustainable funding of companies and individuals to donate to developers. Regarding this, Jiang Zhuoer added at the subsequent AMA held by Reddit that a few companies continued to donate, and these companies' right to speak would increase, which might affect the development in the future, which is also a major hidden danger.
So based on the consideration of stable development funds, he said that several major mining pools on BCH (BTC.TOP, Antpool, BTC.com, ViaBTC, Bitcoin.com) will implement a new donation plan that will reward BCH for block explosions. 12.5% ​​was donated to a specially established fund to support BCH infrastructure, which aims to provide sufficient funds for BCH developers. Blocks that are unwilling to participate in this donation plan will be isolated.
According to its disclosure, the donation will last 6 months and the estimated amount is about 6 million US dollars. A Hong Kong company has been set up to accept and distribute funds. At the end of the article, Jiang Zhuoer, Wu Jihan, Yang Haibo and Roger Ver were stated to be supporters of this plan.
The response was extremely intense
After the news came out, BCH communities at home and abroad had a heated discussion. There are mixed voices in China. Some people think that this is a great benefit to the BCH currency price. Some people think that this is a miner sacrificing part of their own interests to support infrastructure construction. It is a manifestation of the spirit of the community, but some people allege that this is a pumping behavior ... these are evident in the comments below Jiang Zhuo's blog post.
The foreign community, which has gathered most of the BCH developers and core personnel, is even more dramatic.
On January 23, the day after the BCH miner donation plan was issued, Amaury Séchet (@deadalnix), the chief developer of the ABC team of BCH, posted a post on read.cash [1], which is the platform for the donation plan. He said this plan It has been brewing for a long time. The operation of the team needs financial support, clarifying that this is not the so-called "compulsory miner tax". What's more notable is that he thinks that there is no problem as long as the endowment fund can be transparent, and even Mao has recommended himself that he and Jonald Fyookball, the chief developer of Electron Cash, a light wallet developed by BCH, are qualified to control the fund.
Later, the Jonald Fyookball he mentioned also posted on read.cash [2], which also said that it would be beneficial to the team and miners. I have tried many measures on development funds before, but none of them worked. One will be a short six-month trial and will be upgraded in the next BCH agreement.
However, the core people in the community took the lead to speak out in support of this, but it could not stop the tide of opposition afterwards.
In order to fight for the miners' donation, the moderators of read.cash also created a special "Debate section" [4] for the community to express their opinions.
On January 26, Peter Rizun, chief scientist of the Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) team, posted a post on it [5], explaining in detail the operation of funds in this scheme. (It is necessary to add here that the BCH network is composed of two major clients, ABC and BU, which together account for more than 95% of the 1,510 public nodes in the BCH network.)
According to his article, the 12.5% ​​block reward BCH tokens will be sent directly to the new company in Hong Kong, and the developer's operating funds will come from the funds obtained by the new company from selling these BCH tokens on the exchange.
After the mining revenue decreases, the hash rate of the network will drop by about the same percentage. Since BCH accounts for about 3% of the SHA256 hash rate, and other conditions remain unchanged, the total income of SHA256 miners will fall by ~ 0.4%. The following figure graphically shows the flow of these donated tokens: In fact, the mining The merchant lost only a small part of its profits. The group of investors who ultimately bought the BCH tokens out of the Hong Kong company. In the text, Peter Rizun pointed out that this is simply the developer service tax of BCH, and corruption will arise.
In addition, the Bitcoin protocol has been eleven years so far. At present, what BCH needs to do is how to make the protocol more stable. The role of developer should gradually fade away, and the continuous growth of users is the core. Peter Rizun even stated at the end of the article that the monopolistic miners are still trying to adopt such a plan, and the greed is obvious and disgusting, and the BU team will probably not accept this donation plan.
On the same day, BCH developer Imaginary Username posted that he believes that the development team's funds can come directly from capital investment, sponsorship, shareholder contributions and voluntary payments by miners, rather than forcing miners to pay. c After this, a BCH crowdfunding plan named Flipstarter.cash was announced online [7], and proposed other fundraising schemes other than donations from miners, and emphasized that this would be a new proposal based on voluntary.
In general, opponents of these donation programs acknowledge that developers need revenue and infrastructure needs to be maintained, but also said that if the final plan is passed, those who do not support this plan will be lonely and violate the blockchain. spirit. Whether the taxation in disguise causes corruption, whether it will be carried out for a long time, or whether it violates the spirit of blockchain decentralization is the focus of debate.
Things are still fermenting. Subsequently, Bitcoin.com also began to counter water, thinking that there is no consensus on this plan at present, and the development team needs to be clear about their use of funds. Bitcoin.com will also adopt a more prudent attitude and will not risk the risk of chain forks To support this decision.
Regenerate
In the face of various oppositions, Jiang Zhuoer released a new donation plan on February 1 [9], stating that the issue of donation ratio is in fact questionable, and reiterated that this plan will be democratic and encourage miners to perform computing power. Vote for your opinion. This plan will only be implemented if more than two-thirds of the computing power vote in favor of the donation. On February 16, Jiang Zhuoer updated the donation plan again, which reduced the original 12.5% ​​to 5%.
However, the release of the new version did not solve the doubts in the community.
In response, digital currency commentator WhalePanda tweeted that the miner's tax rate is very funny, and any block that is not donated will be blocked. This is actually a totalitarian totalitarian regime, accompanied by a 51% attack threat.
On the same day on the 16th, Roger ver, the founder of the Bitcoin.com wallet, posted a YouTube video [10]. He believed that the donation ratio was 12.5% ​​or 5% a bit random, and said "probably because of communication problems". His donation plan supporters have his name, but in fact he and Bitcoin.com do not support the plan.
In fact, aside from the question of donation ratio, it is worth considering whether this so-called hashrate voting has practical significance. According to data from BTC.com, the five mining pools of the four supporters mentioned by Jiang Zhuoer have a total BCH computing power of more than 51%, reaching 54.5%, occupying a considerable say, and it is difficult for other miners to have a real speech right.
Despite the opposition of the plan, it was still proceeding methodically.
On February 18, according to an official BitcoinABC tweet, the ABC team has added the code for the donation plan to the ABC version 0.21.0 client. At the same time, TobiasRuck and Antony Zegers of the ABC team, and the BCHD team have stated their support for the donation plan at this node.
On the one hand, there is no consensus, and on the other hand, donations need to be opened.
This self-talking attitude caused strong dissatisfaction in the community. On February 19th, Freetrader, one of the earliest developers in the BCH ecosystem, created a full node called BCH Node (BCHN) [11], This version will remove the donation plan, express protest, and then release the PGP signatures of the BCHN project supporters. The supporters gathered, including Alexander Levin Jr, CEO of Asicseer.com, Pokkst of Crescent Cash wallet, Tipbitcoin cash, bitcoincashj , Tubing host Collin Enstad and others.
Fragmentation and unification
To this point, the community split into two camps, led by the ABC team and Electron Cash wallet, BCHD, etc. to support the donation plan, and BU, BCHN, etc. formed an opposition. In fact, various disputes have already raised concerns from the domestic and foreign communities that BCH may fork again.
Fragmentation, strife ...
This softened Jiang Zhuoer's attitude in LongBit's online live broadcast, saying that at least basic community consensus must be reached before donations can begin.
Subsequently, at the second meeting of the BCH developers, Séchet of the ABC team who initially stood up to support this plan also said loosely that there are currently differences, and miners will not ignore these opinions and go their own ways. If the community becomes better, Alternatives can also be implemented.
The concessions of the Séchets became a sign of gradual strife in foreign communities. Regarding the end of the entire donation plan, it ended with a post by Jiang Zhuoer's Weibo.
In the article "Talking about the differences and recent market trends of BTC, BCH, and BSV" on March 5, Jiang Zhuoer said that due to a lot of opposition from the community, especially from major BCH supporters like Roger, the donations of miners will not be implemented. . The dispute, which lasted more than a month, finally ended with the termination of the donation plan.
In fact, the donation plan was updated many times, and the donation share easily changed without letting us see the basis for its formulation, as Roger ver said "somewhat randomly". And "voluntary and democratic" computing power voting, if someone finally voted No in the computing power vote can influence the result, which will also lead to thinking about computing power dictatorship.
submitted by FmzQuant to u/FmzQuant [link] [comments]

Vertcoin Mining AMA

What is Vertcoin?

Vertcoin was created in 2014. It is a direct hedge against long term mining consensus centralization on the Bitcoin mining network. Vertcoin achieves its mining consensus solely through Graphics Cards as they are the most abundant / widely available consensus devices that produce a reasonable amount of hashrate. This is done using a mining algorithm that deliberately geared against devices like ASICs, FPGAs and CPUs (due to botnets) making them extremely inefficient. Consensus distribution over time is the most important aspect of a blockchain and should not be taken lightly. It is critical that you understand what blockchain specifications mean/do to fully understand Vertcoin.

Mining Vertcoin

When users of our network send each other Vertcoin, their transactions are secured by a process called mining. Miners will compose a so-called block out of the pending transactions, and need to perform a large number of computations called hashes in order to produce the Proof-of-Work. With this Proof-of-Work, the block is accepted by the network and the transactions in it become confirmed.
Mining is essentially a race. Whoever finds a valid Proof-of-Work and gets the block propagated over more than half of the Vertcoin network first, wins this race and is allowed to reward themselves with the block reward. The block reward is how new Vertcoin come in circulation. This block reward started at 50 VTC when Vertcoin was launched, and halves every four years. The current block reward is 25 VTC.
Vertcoin's One Click Miner: https://github.com/vertcoin-project/One-Click-Minereleases
Learn more about mining here: https://vertcoin.org/mine/
Specification List:
· Launch date: Jan 11, 2014
· Proof-Of-Work (Consensus Mechanism)
· Total Supply: 84,000,000 Vertcoin
· Preferred Consensus Device: GPU
· Mining Algorithm: Lyra2REv3 (Made by Vertcoin)
· Blocktime: 2.5 minutes
· SegWit: Activated
· Difficulty Adjustment Algorithm: Kimoto Gravity Well (Every Block)
· Block Halving: 4 year interval
· Initial Block Reward: 50 coins
· Current Block Reward: 25 coin
More spec information can be found here: https://vertcoin.org/specs-explained/

Why Does Vertcoin Use GPUs Then?

ASIC’s (Manufactuer Monopoly)
If mining were just a spade sure, use the most powerful equipment which would be an ASIC. The problem is ASICs are not widely available, and just happen to be controlled by a monopoly in China.
So, you want the most widely available tool that produces a fair amount of hashrate, which currently manifests itself as a Graphics Card.
CPUs would be great too but unfortunately there are viruses that take over hundreds of thousands of computers called Botnets (they’re almost as bad as ASICs).

Mining In Pools

Because mining is a race, it’s difficult for an individual miner to acquire enough computational power to win this race solo. Therefore there’s a concept called pool-mining. With pool-mining, miners cooperate in finding the correct Proof-of-Work for the block, and share the block reward based on the work contributed. The amount of work contributed is measured in so-called shares. Finding the Proof-of-Work for a share is much easier than finding it for a block, and when the cooperating miners find the Proof-of-Work for the block, they distribute the reward based on the number of shares each miner found. Vertcoin always recommends using P2Pool to keep mining as decentralized as possible.
How Do I Get Started?
If you want to get started mining, check out the Mine Vertcoin page.

Vertcoin just forked to Lyra2REv3 and we are currently working on Verthash

Verthash is and was under development before we decided to hard fork to Lyra2REv3. While Verthash would’ve resulted in the same effect for ASICs (making them useless for mining Vertcoin), the timeline was incompatible with the desire to get rid of ASICs quickly. Verthash is still under development and tries to address the outsourcability problem.
Verthash is an I/O bound algorithm that uses the blockchain data as input to the hashing algorithm. It therefore requires miners to have all the blockchain data available to them, which is currently about 4 GB of data. By making this mining data mandatory, it will become harder for auto profit switching miners — like the ones that rent out their GPU to Nicehash — because they will need to keep a full node running while mining other algorithms for the moment Verthash becomes more profitable — the data needs to be available immediately since updating it can take a while.
Over the past month, we have successfully developed a first implementation of Verthash in the Vertcoin Core code base. Within the development team we have run a few nodes on Testnet to test the functionality — and everything seems to work properly. The next step is to build out the GPU miners for AMD and Nvidia. This is a NOETA at the moment, since we’re waiting on GPU developers which are in high demand. Once the miners are ready, we’ll be releasing the Vertcoin 0.15 beta that hardforks the testnet together with the miners for the community to have a testrun. Given the structural difference between Lyra2RE and Verthash, we’ll have to run the testnet for a longer period than we did with the Lyra2REv3 hard fork. We’ll have to make sure the system is reliable before hardforking our mainnet. So the timeline will be longer than with the Lyra2REv3 hard fork.
Some people in the community have voiced concerns about the fact that Verthash development is not being done “out in the open”, i.e.: the code commits are not visible on Github. The main two reasons for us to keep our cards to our chest at this stage are: (1) only when the entire system including miners has been coded up can we be sure the system works, we don’t want to release preliminary stuff that doesn’t work or isn’t secure. Also (2) we don’t want to give hardware manufacturers or mining outsourcing platforms a head start on trying to defeat the mechanisms we’ve put in place.

Links and Resources

· Twitter: https://twitter.com/Vertcoin
· Donations: vertcoin.org/donate
· Join our Discord: https://discord.gg/vertcoin
· Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/vertcoin/
· Official Website: https://vertcoin.org/
· Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/vertcoin
· Vertcoin Talk: https://soundcloud.com/vertcoin-talk
· Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/vertcoin
submitted by Canen01 to gpumining [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: Monero top posts from 2019-01-07 to 2020-01-05 20:57 PDT

Period: 363.37 days
Submissions Comments
Total 1000 32255
Rate (per day) 2.75 88.32
Unique Redditors 413 4359
Combined Score 87276 146123

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 11193 points, 116 submissions: dEBRUYNE_1
    1. 'Monero in many respects is closer to what Bitcoin was intended to be than Bitcoin itself' - binaryFate (245 points, 61 comments)
    2. "It was a huge misstep that Satoshi’s original design has weak privacy. It set in stone an expectation that digital assets must have worse privacy than cash. Didn’t have to be this way." - Udi Wertheimer ‏ (215 points, 61 comments)
    3. 'Privacy should not be optional (and that’s why we made it a default).' - Firefox (214 points, 24 comments)
    4. Monero receives 'not a security' rating (best possible rating) by Crypto Rating Council (joint council created by Coinbase, Kraken, Circle/Poloniex, Bittrex, Paxos/itBit, Cumberland, Genesis and Grayscale) (214 points, 30 comments)
    5. GUI v0.14.1.0 'Boron Butterfly' (with Ledger Nano X and Trezor Model T support) released! (213 points, 243 comments)
    6. 'Apple CEO Tim Cook says privacy isn't a feature that should be built into products after the fact' (212 points, 39 comments)
    7. "you’ve been asking... we finally delivered! $XMR is live in [Exodus] Eden version 19.2.2" (202 points, 68 comments)
    8. The Bitcoin.com Exchange has listed Monero (190 points, 73 comments)
    9. Preliminary information thread regarding the scheduled protocol upgrade of November 30 (183 points, 141 comments)
    10. GUI v0.15.0.1 'Carbon Chamaeleon' released! (177 points, 278 comments)
  2. 3214 points, 41 submissions: SamsungGalaxyPlayer
    1. Some generous donor(s) topped off ALL of the proposals in funding required! (193 points, 38 comments)
    2. Tentative Monero 0.15 Release Schedule (162 points, 51 comments)
    3. Monero: Monero Adds Blockchain Pruning and Improves Transaction Efficiency (143 points, 23 comments)
    4. Logs from the 2.5 hr dev meeting on Monero's PoW (124 points, 124 comments)
    5. New logo for the Monero Community Workgroup YouTube channel, courtesy of u/anhdres! (119 points, 19 comments)
    6. Announcing the "Beware of Bitcoin" campaign for Mastering Monero (117 points, 98 comments)
    7. Preliminary support for Monero on BTCPayServer has been merged! (116 points, 19 comments)
    8. OpenBazaar dev call tomorrow discussing proof of concept for Monero integration (111 points, 21 comments)
    9. "Linking Anonymous Transactions via Remote Side-Channel Attacks" - Now-Fixed Network Analysis Attacks on Monero and Zcash (102 points, 50 comments)
    10. Monero added to Exodus mobile (100 points, 33 comments)
  3. 3157 points, 32 submissions: OsrsNeedsF2P
    1. Alright everybody pack it up. US Attorney General says encryption creates a security risk; if your wallet requires a password to unlock, you're doing acts that are used by terrorists, and it's time to stop. (317 points, 56 comments)
    2. What a shame Monero isn't included ¯_(ツ)_/¯ (254 points, 47 comments)
    3. Linus Tovalds believes processor vendors are approaching the end of Moore's Law, and optimization of code is going to be needed to increase performance (245 points, 61 comments)
    4. Fluffypony Appreciation Thread (199 points, 62 comments)
    5. IRS wants to subpoena Google, Apple & Microsoft to see if users have downloaded cryptocurrency related applications (190 points, 96 comments)
    6. Soon ™ (151 points, 55 comments)
    7. Privacy matters: Bitpay donations to Hong Kong Free Press not going through (141 points, 20 comments)
    8. IBM, MIT and Elliptic release world’s largest labeled dataset of bitcoin transactions to help identify "Bad Actors" (119 points, 22 comments)
    9. Celebrating 10 years of Tails (114 points, 5 comments)
    10. Former CTO of Purism, the developers of the Librem 5 Linux mobile phone, notes the PR momentum they got with GNOME, Matrix, and Monero (96 points, 12 comments)
  4. 2106 points, 29 submissions: ErCiccione
    1. Church Of Monero: Enough is enough - How the leader of the Church tried to fool the community to make look like the Church is organizing the Monero Konferenco and even adding his own Monero address on the flyer (166 points, 268 comments)
    2. [URGENT]Call for translators! - We have two days to submit as many translations as possible for the next release of the GUI wallet! We need your help! (123 points, 46 comments)
    3. Monero translators, we need you to make one final sprint! The code freeze is imminent. (112 points, 15 comments)
    4. 2 new projects joined the Monero Ecosystem! MoneroBox, a plug-and-play, zero-configuration Monero full node and Monero-Javascript, Monero wallet and daemon JavaScript API (107 points, 12 comments)
    5. PSA: We've posted an announcement regarding the potentially compromised CLI binaries on getmonero.org (101 points, 47 comments)
    6. New language for Monerujo: Esperanto! Will be available in next release (97 points, 6 comments)
    7. Monero Python - A comprehensive Python module for handling Monero cryptocurrency, has officially joined the Monero Ecosystem Project! (94 points, 12 comments)
    8. Getmonero.org is now available in German! (89 points, 16 comments)
    9. Getmonero.org updated: New user friendly download page, Welcome video in Brazilian Portuguese, 5 new merchants accepting Monero and more (76 points, 12 comments)
    10. My last proposal as coordinator of the Localization Workgroup has ended. A recap, some updates, plans for the future of the internationalization of Monero and a huge thanks (73 points, 22 comments)
  5. 1257 points, 14 submissions: xmrhaelan
    1. A response to the Reuters article about Monero (183 points, 28 comments)
    2. CoinDesk research shows Monero is #4 by Reddit post volume community metrics. Kudos to you all! (172 points, 57 comments)
    3. A response to Coinbase regarding their criticism of Monero’s approach to PoW security (171 points, 91 comments)
    4. Graphic idea for Boron Butterfly release, courtesy of Monero Outreach (170 points, 36 comments)
    5. PSA: Seeking Volunteer Reviewers for PoW RandomX (104 points, 55 comments)
    6. PSA: Mine Monero to Support the Network (77 points, 80 comments)
    7. Looking for ways to help, volunteer, or contribute to the Monero community? Look no further! (70 points, 20 comments)
    8. SWOT Analysis of Monero [draft] (59 points, 35 comments)
    9. Monero Konferenco Press Release (55 points, 9 comments)
    10. A Simplified Guide to Monero Wallets, from Monero Outreach (40 points, 9 comments)
  6. 1220 points, 9 submissions: geonic_
    1. Monero is second only to Bitcoin in terms of number of commits for the past 4 years! (269 points, 59 comments)
    2. Joe Weisenthal (Bloomberg): Until true anonymity (or near anonymity) is developed into Bitcoin, it's still incomplete, and not delivering on its promise. Without anonymity, there's no censorship resistance, and no store of value. (173 points, 38 comments)
    3. Nick Szabo puts Monero on an equal footing with Bitcoin: “deeply safe Bitcoin & Monero” (170 points, 41 comments)
    4. Chainalysis: Bitcoin is the most popular cryptocurrency accepted on dark markets, followed by Monero. Dark web spending to reach $1B this year. (150 points, 39 comments)
    5. BTC maximalist QOTD: “If you send me bitcoin, I would prefer if you used coinjoin first. I would prefer to not know the history of your sats. Don't put that liability on me. Thanks.” (142 points, 45 comments)
    6. Peter Todd wishes Bitcoin had perpetual inflation -- 2140 is much closer than you think (101 points, 89 comments)
    7. nopara73, creator of Wasabi Wallet: "Compared to privacy coins Wasabi is just a temporary hack. I think without Confidential Transactions, as the transaction fees grow, privacy will be priced out of Bitcoin's main chain." (95 points, 48 comments)
    8. Scott Stornetta, inventor of the first blockchain: “When I first read the Bitcoin white paper I thought [...] there’s no privacy at all here! What you’ve got is a completely traceable record of what’s going on.” @12:00 (68 points, 17 comments)
    9. Let's discuss: is Monero a privacy tool (i.e. Tor, CoinJoin, etc.) or a secure layer one protocol (https)? how aligned is it with Bitcoin ideologically (consider current vs original Bitcoin ideology)? is Monero's blockchain a temporary solution? (52 points, 27 comments)
  7. 1186 points, 12 submissions: hyc_symas
    1. RandomX Audit Status (148 points, 29 comments)
    2. RandomX Status Update (134 points, 82 comments)
    3. RandomX Audit Status - Final (130 points, 54 comments)
    4. RandomX Audit Status (116 points, 9 comments)
    5. RandomX Audit Status (110 points, 24 comments)
    6. RandomX testnet (99 points, 23 comments)
    7. Blockchain Growth stats (87 points, 26 comments)
    8. RandomX Auditor Selection (86 points, 47 comments)
    9. CCS: RandomX Audit now in Funding Required (78 points, 45 comments)
    10. RandomX Audit Funding Request (76 points, 14 comments)
  8. 1171 points, 13 submissions: Thunderosa
    1. Blend in the Crowd with Carbon Chamaeleon v0.15.0.0 (161 points, 25 comments)
    2. @monero Twitter banner (141 points, 25 comments)
    3. A little Christmas card for my favorite freaks. Happy Holidays! (136 points, 4 comments)
    4. Boron Butterfly ASCII (117 points, 23 comments)
    5. Monero Torch (111 points, 73 comments)
    6. Konferenco funding! (105 points, 19 comments)
    7. supportxmr-gui Update - Twice the features, half the size. All vanilla. (98 points, 15 comments)
    8. Happy 5th (70 points, 16 comments)
    9. Explore the expert speakers and important topics of Monero Konferenco 2019! (57 points, 11 comments)
    10. RandomX - Monero and Arweave to Validate New Proof-of-Work Algorithm (52 points, 12 comments)
  9. 1129 points, 14 submissions: pinkphloid
    1. [NEWS] CAKE WALLET for Monero has crossed 20,000 unique installs on iOS. (123 points, 69 comments)
    2. [PUBLIC BETA] Cake Wallet for Monero is now available on Android! (104 points, 48 comments)
    3. Going to the Monero Konferenco? Don’t miss MoneroTalk’s party Saturday night Casa De Monero! It’s THE party of the weekend! (99 points, 13 comments)
    4. [UPDATE] Cake Wallet version 3.1.7, now with Address book, Back-up to iCloud and other locations, and BCH is back in the exchange! (92 points, 70 comments)
    5. [UPDATE] Cake Wallet version 3.1.17 with Hidden balance mode plus other new useful features! (90 points, 16 comments)
    6. Cake Wallet is hiring! (88 points, 14 comments)
    7. If you like using Cake Wallet, please vote! Thank you 🙏🏼🙏🏼 (87 points, 20 comments)
    8. NYC Monero meetup featuring guest speaker Justin Ehrenhofer of XMR Community Work Group. - by Cake Wallet and Monero Talk (82 points, 10 comments)
    9. [UPDATE] Cake Wallet - Version 3.1.20 Black Forest Cake Edition (73 points, 23 comments)
    10. Cake Wallet (small news) - we have acquired the domain cakewallet.com! (67 points, 16 comments)
  10. 1054 points, 13 submissions: jman76358
    1. Monero receives A rating (194 points, 43 comments)
    2. Exodus Wallet now supports Monero (128 points, 38 comments)
    3. I tell a lot of people about Monero who don't know anything about crypto and they instantly get it. They ask me the same thing over and over, so why do people still use Bitcoin? (127 points, 119 comments)
    4. How trustyworthy is the Cake wallet for iOS? (80 points, 43 comments)
    5. Why don't other coin devs like talking about fungibility? They seem to shrug it off even though it's a necessary component to being a currency. (77 points, 85 comments)
    6. Any idea what's going on with the Official Monero Twitter page? (67 points, 33 comments)
    7. Should Quantum Resistance research for XMR be started soon? I would love to see what the great minds of the dev community could come up with ! (64 points, 55 comments)
    8. The End of Mainstream Privacy is Upon Us (62 points, 28 comments)
    9. Non-KYC exchanges coming to an end, even for small amounts. DEX with Monero as main coin when? (57 points, 18 comments)
    10. I find it funny that people think the gov doesn’t want people to use bitcoin, trust me , they’re estatic that people want to voluntarily be tracked and surveilled. (55 points, 45 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. dEBRUYNE_1 (9070 points, 1572 comments)
  2. OsrsNeedsF2P (5373 points, 757 comments)
  3. hyc_symas (2954 points, 332 comments)
  4. gingeropolous (2345 points, 313 comments)
  5. SamsungGalaxyPlayer (1897 points, 271 comments)
  6. rbrunner7 (1844 points, 299 comments)
  7. spirtdica (1835 points, 544 comments)
  8. pebx (1596 points, 318 comments)
  9. SarangNoether (1244 points, 115 comments)
  10. Same_As_It_Ever_Was (1234 points, 248 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. VLC accepts XMR for donations. Owner has turned down millions to keep it open source and ad-free. by tempMonero123 (468 points, 34 comments)
  2. Monero’s New Mascot by deepdarksea (433 points, 33 comments)
  3. Monero fashion spotted in the wild by Peterb88 (406 points, 34 comments)
  4. Found this in Basel, Switzerland. Then bought 0.968745 with no ID. by _0_1 (395 points, 120 comments)
  5. Bye-bye ASIC's! :-) by TheFuzzStone (357 points, 167 comments)
  6. Art by me by nikitko13 (328 points, 58 comments)
  7. Analysis: More than 85% of the current Monero Hashrate is ASICs and each machine is doing 128 kh/s by MoneroCrusher (324 points, 427 comments)
  8. Hi guys, long time no see 😁 this is what I do when not painting. Tools are printed on 3D printer. by cryptopaintings (322 points, 47 comments)
  9. Alright everybody pack it up. US Attorney General says encryption creates a security risk; if your wallet requires a password to unlock, you're doing acts that are used by terrorists, and it's time to stop. by OsrsNeedsF2P (317 points, 56 comments)
  10. India's ban could be Monero's boon by whotookmycrypto (313 points, 60 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 175 points: MoneroTipsBot's comment in Soon ™
  2. 139 points: MoneroCrusher's comment in Analysis: More than 85% of the current Monero Hashrate is ASICs and each machine is doing 128 kh/s
  3. 132 points: jonaemahina's comment in Kidnappers demand Monero ransom for wife of one of the Richest men in Norway.
  4. 116 points: leonardochaia's comment in Monero's Fluffypony reveals why he stepped down
  5. 111 points: katiecharm's comment in Tax Ramifications of Buying Coffee with Cryptocurrency
  6. 102 points: AlexAnarcho's comment in Kidnappers demand Monero ransom for wife of one of the Richest men in Norway.
  7. 100 points: fluffyponyza's comment in Fluffypony Appreciation Thread
  8. 96 points: Same_As_It_Ever_Was's comment in [Moderation Announcement] Religion related posts are now considered off-topic and will be removed
  9. 94 points: Flenst's comment in Security Warning: CLI binaries available on getmonero.org may have been compromised at some point during the last 24h.
  10. 93 points: moneroh's comment in Name Monero 0.14!
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

Mining for Profitability - Horizen (formerly ZenCash) Thanks Early GPU Miners

Mining for Profitability - Horizen (formerly ZenCash) Thanks Early GPU Miners
Thank you for inviting Horizen to the GPU mining AMA!
ZEN had a great run of GPU mining that lasted well over a year, and brought lots of value to the early Zclassic miners. It is mined using Equihash protocol, and there have been ASIC miners available for the algorithm since about June of 2018. GPU mining is not really profitable for Horizen at this point in time.
We’ve got a lot of miners in the Horizen community, and many GPU miners also buy ASIC miners. Happy to talk about algorithm changes, security, and any other aspect of mining in the questions below. There are also links to the Horizen website, blog post, etc. below.
So, if I’m not here to ask you to mine, hold, and love ZEN, what can I offer? Notes on some of the lessons I’ve learned about maximizing mining profitability. An update on Horizen - there is life after moving on from GPU mining. As well as answering your questions during the next 7 days.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mining for Profitability - Horizen (formerly ZenCash) Thanks Early GPU Miners

Author: Rolf Versluis - co-founder of Horizen

In GPU mining, just like in many of the activities involved with Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, there is both a cycle and a progression. The Bitcoin price cycle is fairly steady, and by creating a personal handbook of actions to take during the cycle, GPU miners can maximize their profitability.
Maximizing profitability isn't the only aspect of GPU mining that is important, of course, but it is helpful to be able to invest in new hardware, and be able to have enough time to spend on building and maintaining the GPU miners. If it was a constant process that also involved losing money, then it wouldn't be as much fun.

Technology Progression

For a given mining algorithm, there is definitely a technology progression. We can look back on the technology that was used to mine Bitcoin and see how it first started off as Central Processing Unit (CPU) mining, then it moved to Graphical Processing Unit (GPU) mining, then Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), and then Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC).
Throughout this evolution we have witnessed a variety of unsavory business practices that unfortunately still happen on occasion, like ASIC Miner manufacturers taking pre-orders 6 months in advance, GPU manufacturers creating commercial cards for large farms that are difficult for retail customers to secure and ASIC Miner manufacturers mining on gear for months before making it available for sale.
When a new crypto-currency is created, in many cases a new mining algorithm is created also. This is important, because if an existing algorithm was used, the coin would be open to a 51% attack from day one, and may not even be able to build a valid blockchain.
Because there's such a focus on profitable software, developers for GPU mining applications are usually able to write a mining application fairly rapidly, then iterate it to the limit of current GPU technology. If it looks like a promising new cryptocurrency, FPGA stream developers and ASIC Hardware Developers start working on their designs at the same time.
The people who create the hashing algorithms run by the miners are usually not very familiar with the design capabilities of Hardware manufacturers. Building application-specific semiconductors is an industry that's almost 60 years old now, and FPGA’s have been around for almost 35 years. This is an industry that has very experienced engineers using advanced design and modeling tools.
Promising cryptocurrencies are usually ones that are deploying new technology, or going after a big market, and who have at least a team of talented software developers. In the best case, the project has a full-stack business team involving development, project management, systems administration, marketing, sales, and leadership. This is the type of project that attracts early investment from the market, which will drive the price of the coin up significantly in the first year.
For any cryptocurrency that's a worthwhile investment of time, money, and electricity for the hashing, there will be a ASIC miners developed for it. Instead of fighting this technology progression, GPU miners may be better off recognizing it as inevitable, and taking advantage of the cryptocurrency cycle to maximize GPU mining profitability instead.

Cryptocurrency Price Cycle

For quality crypto projects, in addition to the one-way technology progression of CPU -> GPU -> FPGA -> ASIC, there is an upward price progression. More importantly, there is a cryptocurrency price cycle that oscillates around an overall upgrade price progression. Plotted against time, a cycle with an upward progressions looks like a sine wave with an ever increasing average value, which is what we see so far with the Bitcoin price.

Cryptocurrency price cycle and progression for miners
This means mining promising new cryptocurrencies with GPU miners, holding them as the price rises, and being ready to sell a significant portion in the first year. Just about every cryptocurrency is going to have a sharp price rise at some point, whether through institutional investor interest or by being the target of a pump-and-dump operation. It’s especially likely in the first year, while the supply is low and there is not much trading volume or liquidity on exchanges.
Miners need to operate in the world of government money, as well as cryptocurrency. The people who run mining businesses at some point have to start selling their mining proceeds to pay the bills, and to buy new equipment as the existing equipment becomes obsolete. Working to maximize profitability means more than just mining new cryptocurrencies, it also means learning when to sell and how to manage money.

Managing Cash for Miners

The worst thing that can happen to a business is to run out of cash. When that happens, the business usually shuts down and goes into bankruptcy. Sometimes an investor comes in and picks up the pieces, but at the point the former owners become employees.
There are two sides to managing cash - one is earning it, the other is spending it, and the cryptocurrency price cycle can tell the GPU miner when it is the best time to do certain things. A market top and bottom is easy to recognize in hindsight, and harder to see when in the middle of it. Even if a miner is able to recognize the tops and bottoms, it is difficult to act when there is so much hype and positivity at the top of the cycle, and so much gloom and doom at the bottom.
A decent rule of thumb for the last few cycles appears to be that at the top and bottom of the cycle BTC is 10x as expensive compared to USD as the last cycle. Newer crypto projects tend to have bigger price swings than Bitcoin, and during the rising of the pricing cycle there is the possibility that an altcoin will have a rise to 100x its starting price.
Taking profits from selling altcoins during the rise is important, but so is maintaining a reserve. In order to catch a 100x move, it may be worth the risk to put some of the altcoin on an exchange and set a very high limit order. For the larger cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin it is important to set trailing sell stops on the way up, and to not buy back in for at least a month if a sell stop gets triggered. Being able to read price charts, see support and resistance areas for price, and knowing how to set sell orders are an important part of mining profitability.

Actions to Take During the Cycle

As the cycle starts to rise from the bottom, this is a good time to buy mining hardware - it will be inexpensive. Also to mine and buy altcoins, which are usually the first to see a price rise, and will have larger price increases than Bitcoin.
On the rise of the cycle, this is a good time to see which altcoins are doing well from a project fundamentals standpoint, and which ones look like they are undergoing accumulation from investors.
Halfway through the rise of the cycle is the time to start selling altcoins for the larger project cryptos like Bitcoin. Miners will miss some of the profit at the top of the cycle, but will not run out of cash by doing this. This is also the time to stop buying mining hardware. Don’t worry, you’ll be able to pick up that same hardware used for a fraction of the price at the next bottom.
As the price nears the top of the cycle, sell enough Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to meet the following projected costs:
  • Mining electricity costs for the next 12 months
  • Planned investment into new miners for the next cycle
  • Additional funds needed for things like supporting a family or buying a Lambo
  • Taxes on all the capital gains from the sale of cryptocurrencies
It may be worth selling 70-90% of crypto holdings, maintaining a reserve in case there is second upward move caused by government bankruptcies. But selling a large part of the crypto is helpful to maintaining profitability and having enough cash reserves to make it through the bottom part of the next cycle.
As the cycle has peaked and starts to decline, this is a good time to start investing in mining facilities and other infrastructure, brush up on trading skills, count your winnings, and take some vacation.
At the bottom of the cycle, it is time to start buying both used and new mining equipment. The bottom can be hard to recognize.
If you can continue to mine all the way through bottom part of the cryptocurrency pricing cycle, paying with the funds sold near the top, you will have a profitable and enjoyable cryptocurrency mining business. Any cryptocurrency you are able to hold onto will benefit from the price progression in the next higher cycle phase.

An Update on Horizen - formerly ZenCash

The team at Horizen recognizes the important part that GPU miners played in the early success of Zclassic and ZenCash, and there is always a welcoming attitude to any of ZEN miners, past and present. About 1 year after ZenCash launched, ASIC miners became available for the Equihash algorithm. Looking at a chart of mining difficulty over time shows when it was time for GPU miners to move to mining other cryptocurrencies.

Horizen Historical Block Difficulty Graph
Looking at the hashrate chart, it is straightforward to see that ASIC miners were deployed starting June 2018. It appears that there was a jump in mining hashrate in October of 2017. This may have been larger GPU farms switching over to mine Horizen, FPGA’s on the network, or early version of Equihash ASIC miners that were kept private.
The team understands the importance of the cryptocurrency price cycle as it affects the funds from the Horizen treasury and the investments that can be made. 20% of each block mined is sent to the Horizen non-profit foundation for use to improve the project. Just like miners have to manage money, the team has to decide whether to spend funds when the price is high or convert it to another form in preparation for the bottom part of the cycle.
During the rise and upper part of the last price cycle Horizen was working hard to maximize the value of the project through many different ways, including spending on research and development, project management, marketing, business development with exchanges and merchants, and working to create adoption in all the countries of the world.
During the lower half of the cycle Horizen has reduced the team to the essentials, and worked to build a base of users, relationships with investors, exchanges, and merchants, and continue to develop the higher priority software projects. Lower priority software development, going to trade shows, and paying for business partnerships like exchanges and applications have all been completely stopped.
Miners are still a very important part of the Horizen ecosystem, earning 60% of the block reward. 20% goes to node operators, with 20% to the foundation. In the summer of 2018 the consensus algorithm was modified slightly to make it much more difficult for any group of miners to perform a 51% attack on Horizen. This has so far proven effective.
The team is strong, we provide monthly updates on a YouTube live stream on the first Wednesday of each month where all questions asked during the stream are addressed, and our marketing team works to develop awareness of Horizen worldwide. New wallet software was released recently, and it is the foundation application for people to use and manage their ZEN going forward.
Horizen is a Proof of Work cryptocurrency, and there is no plan to change that by the current development team. If there is a security or centralization concern, there may be change to the algorithm, but that appears unlikely at this time, as the hidden chain mining penalty looks like it is effective in stopping 51% attacks.
During 2019 and 2020 the Horizen team plans to release many new software updates:
  • Sidechains modification to main software
  • Sidechain Software Development Kit
  • Governance and Treasury application running on a sidechain
  • Node tracking and payments running on a sidechain
  • Conversion from blockchain to a Proof of Work BlockDAG using Equihash mining algorithm
After these updates are working well, the team will work to transition Horizen over to a governance model where major decisions and the allocation of treasury funds are done through a form of democratic voting. At this point all the software developed by Horizen is expected to be open source.
When the governance is transitioned, the project should be as decentralized as possible. The goal of decentralization is to enable resilience and preventing the capture of the project by regulators, government, criminal organizations, large corporations, or a small group of individuals.
Everyone involved with Horizen can be proud of what we have accomplished together so far. Miners who were there for the early mining and growth of the project played a large part in securing the network, evangelizing to new community members, and helping to create liquidity on new exchanges. Miners are still a very important part of the project and community. Together we can look forward to achieving many new goals in the future.

Here are some links to find out more about Horizen.
Horizen Website – https://horizen.global
Horizen Blog – https://blog.horizen.global
Horizen Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/Horizen/
Horizen Discord – https://discord.gg/SuaMBTb
Horizen Github – https://github.com/ZencashOfficial
Horizen Forum – https://forum.horizen.global/
Horizen Twitter – https://twitter.com/horizenglobal
Horizen Telegram – https://t.me/horizencommunity
Horizen on Bitcointalk – https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2047435.0
Horizen YouTube Channel – https://www.youtube.com/c/Horizen/
Buy or Sell Horizen
Horizen on CoinMarketCap – https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/zencash/

About the Author:

Rolf Versluis is Co-Founder and Executive Advisor of the privacy oriented cryptocurrency Horizen. He also operates multiple private cryptocurrency mining facilities with hundreds of operational systems, and has a blog and YouTube channel on crypto mining called Block Operations.
Rolf applies his engineering background as well as management and leadership experience from running a 60 person IT company in Atlanta and as a US Navy nuclear submarine officer operating out of Hawaii to help grow and improve the businesses in which he is involved.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you again for the Ask Me Anything - please do. I'll be checking the post and answering questions actively from 28 Feb to 6 Mar 2019 - Rolf
submitted by Blockops to gpumining [link] [comments]

Bitcoin is about to halve, maybe you could mine DISC?

There are less than 200 days to Bitcoin's halving cycle, and the bull market is coming soon? Sorry, I don't know if the bull market will come, but I know that there will be a large number of small hashrate miners who can't participate in BTC mining. Under the effect of halving, the reward for a single block will be reduced to 6.5 Bitcoins. If you want to maintain the current revenue, this means that the miner's hashrate must increase. You said that the mining machine is tens of thousands, and there is no money to add hashrate? Sorry, then you can only quit, no money, you may be unable to mine Bitcoin.
"The risk of leverage is high, the contract does not dare to join, and life can only be maintained by mining." - Che Guevara Miner
Although it is a joke, it is indeed a true portrayal of most miners, especially small miners. The biggest shortcoming of a small miner is that there is no money in the pocket, so they will choose to mine. After all, the risk of mining is lower and the revenue is relatively stable compared to the coin trading.
In this way, mining is really a good way, don't be too happy. Looking at the previous article, Bitcoin will soon be halved! This means that the fullnet hashrate will increase dramatically, the mining machine will have higher hashrate, and the individual is likely to no longer be able to participate in mining.
Then where should this group of small miners go? There are still tens of thousands of dollars, can you mine? I can tell you very responsible,yes, you can! And you can mine all the time, what will we mine? DISC!
What is DISC?
DISC is a crypto currency that uses CPOC (Conditioned Proof Of Capacity). You could use hardisk to mine the DISC. Is it incredible, and the hardisk can also mine? Don't be surprised, when the graphics card was used to mine Bitcoin, a large group of people was also surprised.
What is POC?
POC is the hardisk mining, POC uses the mechanical hardisk to store the answers needed for mining. The whole mining process is just using the computer's CPU to scan the hardisk space. Whoever has the larger hardisk capacity, who has a greater probability to crack the Block puzzles and get the block rewards.
POC strictly speaking, it can not be regarded as a new consensus algorithm, it is also a kind of POW, the biggest difference between the two is that one uses computing equipment (CPU, GPU, ASIC chip) mining, one use Storage equipment (mechanical hardisk) mining.
What are the advantages of DISC+POC?
It is no exaggeration to tell you that the current cost of mining a Bitcoin is about 40,000 kWh. Bitcoin miners are not paying for electricity, or they are on the way to paying electricity. Well, when it comes to this, you should be able to guess what the advantages of DISC are. Yes, it is power saving. The reasons are as follows:
The process of mining Bitcoin is to calculate the answer required for mining. This is similar to the students who do not work hard. When they are doing the work, they need to keep checking the books all the time, which is time-consuming and laborious. Mining Bitcoin is not only extremely inefficient, but also wastes a lot of power because of the long-term use of computationally intensive equipment.
The DISC hardisk mining is like a hard-working student. When you are doing a problem, you only need to fill in the answers in your head, which is easy and enjoyable. DISC hardisk mining, high efficiency and low power consumption, mainly before the start of mining, it uses the CPU, GPU to calculate a large number of answers, and then store the answer of the mining in the hardisk, the mining process is only every Scan the hardisk space in a few minutes.
This is the first advantage of DISC, saving power.
Some people may refute it: I have paid money on Bitcoin mining fees, and the electricity bill has been handed over to the country. Bitcoin has driven economic development. Yes, it is undeniable that Bitcoin has indeed brought some opportunities for economic development in some economically underdeveloped inland areas. But don't forget other reasons to mine Bitcoin in the inland area.
Anyone who knows Bitcoin mining knows that mining machines that mine Bitcoins are often overloaded, in which case machines often generate huge amounts of noise and heat. If the human body is in an environment of 80 to 90 decibels for a long time, permanent hearing damage will occur. It is said that if you are in a high-noise environment for a long time, you will be deaf. You said that a machine will not affect anything, then a Mine with hundreds of thousands of mining machines?
Bitcoin mining will accelerate global warming. In addition to the heat emitted by the machine itself, a large number of thermal power stations will release a large amount of carbon emissions. Bitcoin currently generates 22 million tons of carbon emissions per year. The global Internet's carbon dioxide emissions are only 33 million tons, and Bitcoin mining produces carbon emissions equivalent to one year's emissions in Hamburg, Germany or Las Vegas.
The mechanical hardisk used in DISC mining has its own characteristics of low power consumption, low heat and low noise. Even if you mine at home, it will not affect anyone or anything.
This is the second advantage of DISC hardisk mining. Energy saving and environmental protection.
In addition to power consumption and environmental protection, Bitcoin mining has problems such as high risk and centralization.
The risk is high. As mentioned earlier, Bitcoin mining requires 24 hours of uninterrupted calculations and the machine is in an overloaded state for a long time. In this case, the mining machine is prone to irreparable conditions. In many cases, the mining machine is damaged. In addition, the impact of the currency price on the mining machine is also very large. The ASIC integrated chip used by the Bitcoin mining machine is a device that only has one function (mining). If the price of the currency drops sharply, because the power consumed by the mining machine itself is extremely high, and the electricity expenditure of mining is the majority of the revenue, it is easy to make ends meet. At this time, the miners can only stop mining.
The hardisk and the graphics card, in addition to being used for mining, and the role of storing data, even if you can not participate in mining, you could format the hardisk, used to save movies, photos is also a good choice. And the price of the hardisk is extremely low, you can not use it, you can also sell it to people in need at low prices.
This is the third advantage of DISC hardisk mining. The residual value of the equipment is high and the risk of mining is low.
After 10 years of development, Bitcoin has gradually changed from a white paper concept of one person to one vote to a game in which only a few elites can participate. At present, the six mines headed by Bitland have mastered a hashrate of over 51%. In this case, it is very simple for six mines to do evil. They can modify the algorithm, roll back the transaction, and more. You can think that these six mines have controlled the Bitcoin network.
In addition to being a mining pool, Bitland has a status as a mining machine manufacturer. Bitcoin mining equipment can only be manufactured by a few mining machine manufacturers. They are both your friendly and your enemy. So it is not difficult to explain why Bitcoin is becoming more and more centralized. The mining machines they manufacture, the mine pool they control.
Everything is controlled by others, what else do you play?
The hardisk itself is the cornerstone of the construction of the Internet world. Therefore, it has many brands and large shipments. There is no one or two hardisk businesses monopolizing the hardisk. You raise the price and I go elsewhere to buy it. Therefore, from the source to eliminate the harvest of the hardisk business.
DISC hardisk mining through the hardisk capacity as a consensus basis, so that everyone can participate in mining at a very low cost, this way more decentralized, nodes are more dispersed, so its decentralization is higher than Bitcoin.
This is the fourth advantage of DISC hardisk mining, with a higher degree of decentralization.
Summary
The first decade of the blockchain belongs to Bitcoin, but POW also brings a lot of "troubles" to Bitcoin. The monopoly caused by centralization, the huge consumption of electricity, and environmental pollution have all become the pain points of the mining industry. The emergence of DISC has once again seen hope.
In a gossip, many people feel that the DISC, including the entire hardisk mining, has no hope. Indeed, the performance of the currency price is not satisfactory, but I hope that everyone will hold it and wait for the bull market to come. You only need to look at the advantages of DISC, it does not consume electricity.
The last sentence is given to a firm DISC believer. "hold coins in the bear market, makes money in the bull market, and when the bull market comes, you fly." - DISC Miner
submitted by Diskcoin to DiskcoinOrg [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]

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]

All About Mining

All About Mining

https://preview.redd.it/sq9bzi34o8931.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=5917b541c4067fb2bbf5944f5b0c820167b4c66c
Since blockchain-based systems are decentralized, they do their decision-making by using consensus mechanisms. As per Wikipedia, “Consensus decision-making is a group decision-making process in which group members develop, and agree to support a decision in the best interest of the whole.” The mechanism by which the consensus is achieved is called consensus mechanism.

There are various types of consensus mechanisms out there, but the ones most commonly used are proof-of-work (PoW), aka “mining” and proof-of-stake (PoS). PoW’s ecosystem has a group of people called miners who use ASICs or GPUs to solve cryptographically-hard puzzles. PoS, on the other hand, has a staking model which takes care of consensus. If you want to know more about how PoW and PoS works, then check out this article.

In this article, we are going to be focussing on one of the biggest problems of mining, which makes it highly inefficient to achieve true decentralization. Later on, we are also going to see how staking mitigates this very problem

Mining and centralization
At the very heart of blockchain-based systems lies the concept of decentralization. PoW, as it turns out, is not as decentralization-friendly as we previously thought. The following is the current hashrate distribution chart of Bitcoin:

https://preview.redd.it/7bfje6s6o8931.png?width=871&format=png&auto=webp&s=5d29d3a090328527d5bdddde341b90a5769114cb
Bitcoin currently has four mining pools which own more than 50% of the network hashrate. It gets even worse when you look at Monero’s hashrate distribution:

https://preview.redd.it/l6y5emc8o8931.png?width=937&format=png&auto=webp&s=d882634608eab3ee1b09aae858bc69130bb29906
Monero has three mining pools which hold more than 60% of the network hashrate!

The main problem with this is that these dominant pools have an unfair advantage in the ecosystem:
  • Theoretically speaking, they can join forces and conduct a 51% attack on the ecosystem. If they do so, they can do whatever they want on the blockchain.
  • Since they own a significant percentage of the network hashrate, the probability of them successfully mining the blocks is significantly higher and, as a result, they will be receiving most of the mining rewards.

There is one more factor which gives large mining pools an extremely unfair advantage. To understand that, let’s look into a concept called “Economies of Scale.”

What is “Economies of Scale?”
There are two kinds of productions out there:
  • Short-run production: At least one of the input resources is fixed
  • Long-run production: None of the input resources are fixed. This is where economies of scale come in.

Let’s go a little deeper into the second point.
Assume that you are doubling the number of input resources in a long-run production. When you do that, there are three possible outcomes:
  • The output more than doubles, so you are getting increasing returns to scale.
  • The output doubles, so that’s a fixed return to scale.
  • The output doesn’t double, so you are getting decreasing returns to scale.
The following is a graphical depiction of economies of scale where the average cost of input resources is compared with the output value:

https://preview.redd.it/9oed4h3co8931.png?width=602&format=png&auto=webp&s=826968afd6d7ae0fcfab0120a73bba60bba87f5a
So, what is going on here?

  • When you want to increase your output from Q to Q2, your cost of production decreases from C to C1.
  • When you increase your output beyond Q2, the cost of production increases.
The implications of this are pretty staggering. The graph shows that until a particular limit, large corporations can actually increase their output value by decreasing the average cost of their input resources!

How does this apply to mining pools?

Larger and more powerful mining pools can leverage the economies of scale by, dollar-for-dollar, generating more hash-rate than other pools even if they spend the same amount of money.

Advantages that powerful mining pools have in a POW system
  • They can use their superior hashrate to mine more blocks and gain more rewards.
  • They can use the rewards to buy even more powerful ASICs and GPUs to give them an even greater advantage.
  • They can use economies of scale to generate more hashrate for the same amount of money as their competitors.
So, as you can see, powerful mining pools have a clear advantage in this ecosystem, which makes it a lot more centralized that you’d want to believe.

How POS mitigates this problem
POS mitigates this problem by making the mining process completely virtual. You are not using your computational power to mine resources anymore, you are merely staking your money. While in a POW system, large pools can generate more hashrate from a dollar, in a staking system, one dollar is still one dollar. Economies of scale don’t apply here.

This is one of the biggest reason why a lot of the newer blockchains, including FLETA, have chosen a staking model. A truly decentralized network will be essential to their success and staking mechanisms can achieve that far more efficiently than traditional crypto mining. FLETA uses a faster and more secure variation of the POS algorithm called Proof-of-Formulation(POF).

In traditional POS, the entire network takes part in the consensus algorithm. In POF, two sets of actors are chosen from the network:
  • Formulators: These are in charge of block generators. Based on their rankings, the Formulators will each get an opportunity to generate a block.
  • Observers: These nodes do real-time confirmation of the generated blocks and prevent double spending. Five observer nodes are assigned to each Formulator group. At least three of out the five observers need to sign off on a generated block for it to be confirmed.

You can read this article to gain a deeper understanding of POF. POF has so far achieved a throughput of 15,000 transactions per second (tested and verified) which is a lot faster than Ethereum (15–20 transactions per second) and EOS (max of 3,996 transactions per second).
submitted by fleta-official to fletachain [link] [comments]

AN INTRODUCTION TO DIGIBYTE

DigiByte

What are cryptocurrencies?
Cryptocurrencies are peer to peer technology protocols which rely on the block-chain; a system of decentralized record keeping which allows people to exchange unmodifiable and indestructible information “coins,” globally in little to no time with little to no fees – this translates into the exchange of value as these coins cannot be counterfeit nor stolen. This concept was started by Satoshi Nakamoto (allegedly a pseudonym for a single man or organization) whom described and coded Bitcoin in 2009.
What is DigiByte?
DigiByte (DGB) is a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin. It is also a decentralized applications protocol in a similar fashion to Neo or Ethereum.
DigiByte was founded and created by Jared Tate in 2014. DigiByte allows for fast (virtually instant) and low cost (virtually free) transactions. DigiByte is hard capped at 21 billion coins which will ever be mined, over a period of 21 years. DigiByte was never an ICO and was mined/created in the same way that Bitcoin or Litecoin initially were.
DigiByte is the fastest UTXO PoW scalable block-chain in the world. We’ll cover what this really means down below.
DigiByte has put forth and applied solutions to many of the problems that have plagued Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general – those being:
We will address these point by point in the subsequent sections.
The DigiByte Protocol
DigiByte maintains these properties through use of various technological innovations which we will briefly address below.
Why so many coins? 21 Billion
When initially conceived Bitcoin was the first of a kind! And came into the hands of a few! The beginnings of a coin such as Bitcoin were difficult, it had to go through a lot of initial growth pains which following coins did not have to face. It is for this reason among others why I believe Bitcoin was capped at 21 million; and why today it has thus secured a place as digital gold.
When Bitcoin was first invented no one knew anything about cryptocurrencies, for the inventor to get them out to the public he would have to give them away. This is how the first Bitcoins were probably passed on, for free! But then as interest grew so did the community. For them to be able to build something and create something which could go on to have actual value, it would have to go through a steady growth phase. Therefore, the control of inflation through mining was extremely important. Also, why the cap for Bitcoin was probably set so low - to allow these coins to amass value without being destroyed by inflation (from mining) in the same way fiat is today! In my mind Satoshi Nakamoto knew what he was doing when setting it at 21 million BTC and must have known and even anticipated others would take his design and build on top of it.
At DigiByte, we are that better design and capped at 21 billion. That's 1000 times larger than the supply of Bitcoin. Why though? Why is the cap on DigiByte so much higher than that of Bitcoin? Because DigiByte was conceived to be used not as a digital gold, nor as any sort of commodity, but as a real currency!
Today on planet Earth, we are approximately 7.6 billion people. If each person should want or need to use and live off Bitcoin; then equally split at best each person could only own 0.00276315789 BTC. The market cap for all the money on the whole planet today is estimated to have recently passed 80 trillion dollars. That means that each whole unit of Bitcoin would be worth approximately $3,809,523.81!
$3,809,523.81
This is of course in an extreme case where everyone used Bitcoin for everything. But even in a more conservative scenario the fact remains that with such a low supply each unit of a Bitcoin would become absurdly expensive if not inaccessible to most. Imagine trying to buy anything under a dollar!
Not only would using Bitcoin as an everyday currency be a logistical nightmare but it would be nigh impossible. For each Satoshi of a Bitcoin would be worth much, much, more than what is realistically manageable.
This is where DigiByte comes in and where it shines. DigiByte aims to be used world-wide as an international currency! Not to be hoarded in the same way Bitcoin is. If we were to do some of the same calculations with DigiByte we'd find that the numbers are a lot more reasonable.
At 7.6 billion people, each person could own 2.76315789474 DGB. Each whole unit of DGB would be worth approximately $3,809.52.
$3,809.52
This is much more manageable and remember in an extreme case where everyone used DigiByte for everything! I don't expect this to happen anytime soon, but with the supply of DigiByte it would allow us to live and transact in a much more realistic and fluid fashion. Without having to divide large numbers on our phone's calculator to understand how much we owe for that cup of coffee! With DigiByte it's simple, coffee cost 1.5 DGB, the cinema 2.8 DGB, a plane ticket 500 DGB!
There is a reason for DigiByte's large supply, and it is a good one!
Decentralisation
Decentralisation is an important concept for the block-chain and cryptocurrencies in general. This allows for a system which cannot be controlled nor manipulated no matter how large the organization in play or their intentions. DigiByte’s chain remains out of the reach of even the most powerful government. This allows for people to transact freely and openly without fear of censorship.
Decentralisation on the DigiByte block-chain is assured by having an accessible and fair mining protocol in place – this is the multi-algorithm (MultiAlgo) approach. We believe that all should have access to DigiByte whether through purchase or by mining. Therefore, DigiByte is minable not only on dedicated mining hardware such as Antminers, but also through use of conventional graphics cards. The multi-algorithm approach allows for users to mine on a variety of hardware types through use of one of the 5 mining algorithms supported by DigiByte. Those being:
Please note that these mining algorithms are modified and updated from time to time to assure complete decentralisation and thus ultimate security.
The problem with using only one mining algorithm such as Bitcoin or Litecoin do is that this allows for people to continually amass mining hardware and hash power. The more hash power one has, the more one can collect more. This leads to a cycle of centralisation and the creation of mining centres. It is known that a massive portion of all hash power in Bitcoin comes from China. This kind of centralisation is a natural tendency as it is cheaper for large organisations to set up in countries with inexpensive electricity and other such advantages which may be unavailable to the average miner.
DigiByte mitigates this problem with the use of multiple algorithms. It allows for miners with many different kinds of hardware to mine the same coin on an even playing field. Mining difficulty is set relative to the mining algorithm used. This allows for those with dedicated mining rigs to mine alongside those with more modest machines – and all secure the DigiByte chain while maintaining decentralisation.
Low Fees
Low fees are maintained in DigiByte thanks to the MultiAlgo approach working in conjunction with MultiShield (originally known as DigiShield). MultiShield calls for block difficulty readjustment between every single block on the chain; currently blocks last 15 seconds. This continuous difficulty readjustment allows us to combat any bad actors which may wish to manipulate the DigiByte chain.
Manipulation may be done by a large pool or a single entity with a great amount of hash power mining blocks on the chain; thus, increasing the difficulty of the chain. In some coins such as Bitcoin or Litecoin difficulty is readjusted every 2016 blocks at approximately 10mins each and 2mins respectively. Meaning that Bitcoin’s difficulty is readjusted about every two weeks. This system can allow for large bad actors to mine a coin and then abandon it, leaving it with a difficulty level far too high for the present hash rate – and so transactions can be frozen, and the chain stopped until there is a difficulty readjustment and or enough hash power to mine the chain. In such a case users may be faced with a choice - pay exorbitant fees or have their transactions frozen. In an extreme case the whole chain could be frozen completely for extended periods of time.
DigiByte does not face this problem as its difficulty is readjusted per block every 15 seconds. This innovation was a technological breakthrough and was adopted by several other coins in the cryptocurrency environment such as Dogecoin, Z-Cash, Ubiq, Monacoin, and Bitcoin Gold.
This difficulty readjustment along with the MultiAlgo approach allows DigiByte to maintain the lowest fees of any UTXO – PoW – chain in the world. Currently fees on the DigiByte block-chain are at about 0.0001 DGB per transaction of 100 000 DGB sent. This depends on the amount sent and currently 100 000 DGB are worth around $2000.00 with the fee being less than 0.000002 cents. It would take 500 000 transactions of 100 000 DGB to equal 1 penny’s worth. This was tested on a Ledger Nano S set to the low fees setting.
Fast transaction times
Fast transactions are ensured by the conjunctive use of the two aforementioned technology protocols. The use of MultiShield and MultiAlgo allows the mining of the DigiByte chain to always be profitable and thus there is always someone mining your transactions. MultiAlgo allows there to a greater amount of hash power spread world-wide, this along with 15 second block times allows for transactions to be near instantaneous. This speed is also ensured by the use DigiSpeed. DigiSpeed is the protocol by which the DigiByte chain will decrease block timing gradually. Initially DigiByte started with 30 second block times in 2014; which today are set at 15 seconds. This decrease will allow for ever faster and ever more transactions per block.
Robust security + The Immutable Ledger
At the core of cryptocurrency security is decentralisation. As stated before decentralisation is ensured on the DigiByte block chain by use of the MultiAlgo approach. Each algorithm in the MultiAlgo approach of DigiByte is only allowed about 20% of all new blocks. This in conjunction with MultiShield allows for DigiByte to be the most secure, most reliable, and fastest UTXO block chain on the planet. This means that DigiByte is a proof of work (PoW) block-chain where all transactional activities are stored on the immutable public ledger world-wide. In DigiByte there is no need for the Lightning protocol (although we have it) nor sidechains to scale, and thus we get to keep PoW’s security.
There are many great debates as to the robustness or cleanliness of PoW. The fact remains that PoW block-chains remain the only systems in human history which have never been hacked and thus their security is maximal.
For an attacker to divert the DigiByte chain they would need to control over 93% of all the hashrate on one algorithm and 51% of the other four. And so DigiByte is immune to the infamous 51% attack to which Bitcoin and Litecoin are vulnerable.
Moreover, the DigiByte block-chain is currently spread over 200 000 plus servers, computers, phones, and other machines world-wide. The fact is that DigiByte is one of the easiest to mine coins there is – this is greatly aided by the recent release of the one click miner. This allows for ever greater decentralisation which in turn assures that there is no single point of failure and the chain is thus virtually un-attackable.
On Chain Scalability
The biggest barrier for block-chains today is scalability. Visa the credit card company can handle around 2000 transactions per second (TPS) today. This allows them to ensure customer security and transactional rates nation-wide. Bitcoin currently sits at around 7 TPS and Litecoin at 28 TPS (56 TPS with SegWit). All the technological innovations I’ve mentioned above come together to allow for DigiByte to be the fastest PoW block-chain in the world and the most scalable.
DigiByte is scalable because of DigiSpeed, the protocol through which block times are decreased and block sizes are increased. It is known that a simple increase in block size can increase the TPS of any block-chain, such is the case with Bitcoin Cash. This is however not scalable. The reason a simple increase in block size is not scalable is because it would eventually lead to some if not a great amount of centralization. This centralization occurs because larger block sizes mean that storage costs and thus hardware cost for miners increases. This increase along with full blocks – meaning many transactions occurring on the chain – will inevitably bar out the average miner after difficulty increases and mining centres consolidate.
Hardware cost, and storage costs decrease over time following Moore’s law and DigiByte adheres to it perfectly. DigiSpeed calls for the increase in block sizes and decrease in block timing every two years by a factor of two. This means that originally DigiByte’s block sizes were 1 MB at 30 seconds each at inception in 2014. In 2016 DigiByte increased block size by two and decreased block timing by the same factor. Perfectly following Moore’s law. Moore’s law dictates that in general hardware increases in power by a factor of two while halving in cost every year.
This would allow for DigiByte to scale at a steady rate and for people to adopt new hardware at an equally steady rate and reasonable expense. Thus so, the average miner can continue to mine DigiByte on his algorithm of choice with entry level hardware.
DigiByte was one of the first block chains to adopt segregated witness (SegWit in 2017) a protocol whereby a part of transactional data is removed and stored elsewhere to decrease transaction data weight and thus increase scalability and speed. This allows us to fit more transactions per block which does not increase in size!
DigiByte currently sits at 560 TPS and could scale to over 280 000 TPS by 2035. This dwarfs any of the TPS capacities; even projected/possible capacities of some coins and even private companies. In essence DigiByte could scale worldwide today and still be reliable and robust. DigiByte could even handle the cumulative transactions of all the top 50 coins in coinmarketcap.com and still run smoothly and below capacity. In fact, to max out DigiByte’s actual maximum capacity (today at 560 TPS) you would have to take all these transactions and multiply them by a factor of 10!
Oher Uses for DigiByte
Note that DigiByte is not only to be used as a currency. Its immense robustness, security and scalability make it ideal for building decentralised applications (DAPPS) which it can host. DigiByte can in fact host DAPPS and even centralised versions which rely on the chain which are known as Digi-Apps. This application layer is also accompanied by a smart contract layer.
Thus, DigiByte could host several Crypto Kitties games and more without freezing out or increasing transaction costs for the end user.
Currently there are various DAPPS being built on the DigiByte block-chain, these are done independently of the DigiByte core team. These companies are simply using the DigiByte block-chain as a utility much in the same way one uses a road to get to work. One such example is Loly – a Tinderesque consensual dating application.
DigiByte also hosts a variety of other platform projects such as the following:
The DigiByte Foundation
As previously mentioned DigiByte was not an ICO. The DigiByte foundation was established in 2017 by founder Jared Tate. Its purpose is as a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting and developing the DigiByte block-chain.
DigiByte is a community effort and a community coin, to be treated as a public resource as water or air. Know that anyone can work on DigiByte, anyone can create, and do as they wish. It is a permissionless system which encourages innovation and creation. If you have an idea and or would like to get help on your project do not hesitate to contact the DigiByte foundation either through the official website and or the telegram developer’s channel.
For this reason, it is ever more important to note that the DigiByte foundation cannot exist without public support. And so, this is the reason I encourage all to donate to the foundation. All funds are used for the maintenance of DigiByte servers, marketing, and DigiByte development.
DigiByte Resources and Websites
DigiByte
Wallets
Explorers
Please refer to the sidebar of this sub-reddit for more resources and information.
Edit - Removed Jaxx wallet.
Edit - A new section was added to the article: Why so many coins? 21 Billion
Edit - Adjusted max capacity of DGB's TPS - Note it's actually larger than I initially calculated.
Edit – Grammar and format readjustment
Hello,
I hope you’ve enjoyed my article, I originally wrote this for the reddit sub-wiki where it generally will most likely, probably not, get a lot of attention. So instead I've decided to make this sort of an introductory post, an open letter, to any newcomers to DGB or for those whom are just curious.
I tried to cover every aspect of DGB, but of course I may have forgotten something! Please leave a comment down below and tell me why you're in DGB? What convinced you? Me it's the decentralised PoW that really convinced me. Plus, just that transaction speed and virtually no fees! Made my mouth water!
-Dereck de Mézquita
I'm a student typing this stuff on my free time, help me pay my debts? Thank you!
D64fAFQvJMhrBUNYpqUKQjqKrMLu76j24g
https://digiexplorer.info/address/D64fAFQvJMhrBUNYpqUKQjqKrMLu76j24g
submitted by xeno_biologist to Digibyte [link] [comments]

FAQ: What exactly is the fraud in Ethereum?

Most important above all else, Ethereum has never been decentralized since its distribution (i.e. premine) & thus value of incentives depend entirely on 1 trusted party, the exact opposite of decentralization or trust minimization [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Calling themselves decentralized is literally deception of others for profit, which is by the most standard definitions called fraud.
Below is an example of how this centralization manifests and the absolute lack of ethics & types of other fraud behind Ethereum:
Historic account of bailout, fraud, and centralization: how Ethereum Foundation demonstrated to have full control over the ethereum blockchain beyond reasonable doubt while advertising falsely for profit
Point by point summary (sources cited below):
  1. Ethereum Foundation (EF) sell centrally pre-mined/pre-made Eth coins in ICO for centralized funding/profit while advertising "unstoppable .. exactly as programmed" code (regular cryptocurrencies are 0% premined, EF had 72m coins premined on day 0 which is ~70% of current supply)
  2. Slock.it developers including eth co-founder create an app called DAO on it for the purposes of funding themselves even more with claims that their "code sets the terms and conditions" like no one has done before them for even more money.
  3. DAO code has a mistake and starts giving away money to a user, vocal fraction of community is divided whether to bailout DAO investors, many unofficial polls show conflicting results with extremely low participation making it unclear whether the super majority is even aware or cares about this 3rd party issue.
  4. EF members refuse to disclose if they are invested in the DAO after promoting it, and many are later found to have been invested in it.
  5. EF tells exchanges there will not be a minority chain surviving, ignoring the divided community, and making it impossible to sell no-bailout version
  6. EF makes the carbonvote the "official" vote 12 hours before the release of the client--after repeatedly claiming for weeks it had no official capacity, and after already having made support for the fork the default option in the codebase. The vote only shows 4% of possible consensus supporting bailout, 1/4 of it from one vote.
  7. Most automated nodes and miners that run "apt-get upgrade && apt-get update" switch over even if haven't seen the announcement 12 hours prior and fork is declared a success.
  8. No-bailout chain survives regardless despite Foundation's efforts, but Ethereum Foundation refuses to update it even if it increases in popularity or size.
  9. Ethereum projects are forced to choose between developed chain with ICO funding, bailout, roadmap and one with no funding, no clear devs, no roadmap. Most are forced to stay with Ethereum Foundation holding central ICO funding & updates hostage.
  10. EF sells the unsold premined coins they still own on the no-bailout chain (forked premine), thus damaging its value
  11. EF members participate in White Hat Group (WHG), use same method used to drain DAO to drain no-bailout chain DAO and then market sell no bail-out ether on the exchanges damaging no-bailout chain value further
  12. EF changed the properties of the security it sold and still falsely advertises "unstoppable .. exactly as written" code (despite proving it false) while profiting from all of it.
Almost all the above actions are fraud.
Details and sources:
Top left of the banner shows marked up graphic [1] of ethereum.org claims including
"decentralized platform that runs smart contracts exactly as programmed without any possibility of downtime, censorship, fraud".
Additionally, the third party app "the DAO" also re-iterated in their contract the similar premise that their code IS the terms and conditions [1,2]. Both DAO and Eth were sold advertised as such in their initial phases.
However, the DAO was programmed in a poorly done manner [1] and allowed loss of the investments put into it [2]. It was no secret members of the Ethereum Foundation (EF) were connected to the DAO often promoting it. Many were found to be invested in the DAO as time passed [1,2,3] , yet refused to disclose it when asked directly [4,5,6]. Despite the loss due to DAO contract being an issue of only minority of users, virtually all mentioned advertised properties of ethereum and the DAO were changed by the Ethereum Foundation to manually reverse the operations the smart contract ran while profiting from it.
How did they do it? By exploiting and proving centralization
Several centralized aspects of Ethereum were used to achieve this result:
  1. EF controls the defaults settings in codebase to get what they want. Only 12 hours before before the release of the client they selected carbonvote the "official" vote out of many varying options (after repeatedly claiming for weeks it had no official capacity, and after already having made support for the fork the default option in the codebase). This selected poll had many issues discussed below including 96% of possible votes not showing support for EF/DAO bailout. However the 4% vote with quarter from single vote with only hours of official notice before were used as justification anyway for bailout as default setting [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. By controlling the defaults, they easily took advantage of anyone not up to date on announcement hours earlier who automatically updated and/or the apathetic users to control the blockchain. By moving focus from what's best for majority via opt-in consensus (blockchain standard) to giving only a short window to opt-out, they can centrally manipulate the blockchain in almost any manner without enraging the majority into action [1,2]. As expected, the fork was quickly declared a success [1,2,3]. Control over codebase also allowed them to compromise those opting out by leaving them open to replay attacks, thus further damaging their value as can be seen celebrated by DAO and Eth cofounder Stephan Tual [1]. Effectively, this was equivalent to a successful 4% attack on a blockhain or even attack by a single centralized entity (EF). The approach is easily repeatable and exact opposite of expected censorship resistance against <50% attacks, thus proving it unsecure.
  2. EF has complete centralized ownership of the funds from 70% premine in form of eth and ICO BTC raised [1]. This made them the only well funded core developers and thus the only choice for rapid development and fully in control of what gets updated. By choosing to address this third party contract issue, by refusing to update the old chain, they effectively held their funding and updates hostage to make sure people can't opt out without significant costs [1,2]. Additionally, with such capital, it's trivial to affect the swing vote for under-represented polls with eth or hashpower making their polling governance methods unsecure. Furthermore, once the old chain did receive an exchange and thus possible value, the old chain coins from EF premine were used to damage the value of the old chain further [1].
  3. EF has name recognition as the founders, name ownership of "the real Eth" or ETH, with even a trademark [1]. Unlike volunteer based or anonymous core teams, EF is Swiss nonprofit operating as a single entity. When a high publicity issue appeared that threatened their money, they were able to stop trade on major exchanges with a simple message [1,2].
  4. Exchanges were deceived by the EF into belief there will be no one in dissent of the self-bailout fork (leaving the other fork without a market and 0 worth) and not prepared for people opting out of bailout [1,2,3], which was misleading due to highly uncertain polls (below). This deception allowed them to be the only chain with value following the fork, and allowed them to keep the name. Despite it all, dissent was also to exist by original chain surviving and prospering even under countless harmful actions of the EF (usually 1/3rd of Eth in number of transactions, 45-50% of marketcap at peak [3], and even longer chain on at least one occasion).
EF demonstrated ability and willingness to cease trade, fork, and affect entire network when a single app of their choosing fails while profiting from it [1]. The non-democratic nature of the decision was noted by many [1,2].
Changes in properties of the ether security - securities fraud
The "unstoppable" app was sending money to an unknown user. What followed was the controversial change of the advertised rules where EF stopped the app by censoring that transaction without consent and confiscated the transaction contents resulting in personal profit for EF devs and friends. The rule change that let EF and friends profit financially while harming someone else financially is very plausibly securities fraud [1,2,3,4]. Additionally, it was a clear conflict of interest in governance.
The change of the rules of the security associated platform to censor or run applications based on feelings of how it should run (e.g. liked/ok or disliked/exploit) by the Ethereum Foundation (a centralized entity) broke the EF and DAO earlier statements on decentralization, lack of censorship, and explicit execution of code. While the user followed all the known rules from statements of the platform and the app, the fork rule changes were applied not to fix a bug but to undo previous actions using new rules ex post facto. The changes were retroactive and arbitrary: stopping the app and censoring the user by reverting his money transfer back to where they could take it out, subjectively justified by calling it a theft. Blockchains gain value by decentralizing trust to numerous different parties thus creating censorship resistance against minority attacks and thus security. Ethereum Foundation supported ether asset changed from decentralized, trustless, secure, censorship-resistant platform asset to (proven based on EF actions) centralized, trust-requiring, unsecure, censorable platform asset hence damaging said value. However, to this day the advertisement of the properties of the ether security has not changed, long after EF actions proved virtually every statement in them false. No safeguards were put into place to prevent a repeat as well. This makes it a case of continuous securities fraud as well.
What choice did community have? Bad and worse.
No evidence of community support for bailout
The justifications of the self-bail out forks are often in the tone of it being a democratic decision or that there was agreement from the community. The survival of the original chain both in value and transactions despite being damaged in value by the EF and even when it had no market value is a demonstration it was not an insignificant disagreement. Additionally, often several voluntary polls are referred to with ~5% eth and 12% hash turnout and single digit 4% and 9% vote of all possible votes for self-bail out fork [1,2,3] - far from majority. Historic archives of the subreddit and simple online polls during the time show much stronger opposition to bailout [1,2,3,4,5].
Issues with official poll
  1. The low turnouts of a voluntary insignificant poll done on a little known subreddit instead of protocol level makes it statistically insignificant. EF made carbon vote the "official" vote 12 hours before the release of the client after claiming it had no official capacity and after making support for the EF-bailout fork default option in the code base [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Additionally, due to low turn out and polls could be easily manipulated for financial gain by buying eth or renting hash power momentarily just for the vote by third parties (thus breaking another earlier statement). About 1/4th of the 5% eth vote was from a single voter [1].
  2. Voluntary polls are extremely susceptible to biases. Voluntary response bias strongly favors those with stronger incentives to respond and thus results in sampling bias: the profit coming from self-bailout of a minor third party app investors is far stronger incentive than voting for standard operation of a blockchain. Uncast votes from apathy or not being up to date was prevalent accounting for 90%+ mentioned above. By setting the bailout as the default setting (unlike opt-in setting used typically elsewhere) with only 12 hour warning, anyone not paying attention was tricked into supporting the bailout. Nodes can simply automate "apt-get upgrade && apt-get update" so this setting took advantage of everyone who hasn't seen official announcement only hours earlier [1].
  3. Censorship resistance is often taken for granted in crypto projects as it is expected as the minimum requirement of something being called a blockchain. This expectation results in a bias from bystander effect [1] and diffusion of responsibility to ensure it: many assume vote for censorship resistance is a sure thing but will definitely happen by others voting. What can happen is a group expects someone else to vote and ends up in almost no one voting.
  4. By the EF labeling the unintended execution of a contract "an exploit" and the person doing it "the attacker" alleging "theft" (which was not a universal interpretation) and stating support for the bailout, they introduced leading question bias that increases tendency to vote in a way that favored bailout. Additionally, individuals and companies had to face a social desirability bias where they were more likely to vote in a way that would feel more socially acceptable.
In summary on 2 polls selected and referenced by the EF is that there is no conclusive evidence of majority support for the bailout fork. Similar conclusions were reached by others. [1]
Financial & value attacks
Ethereum Foundation refused to work on the older chain thus damaging the older security they sold [1,2]. Ethereum Foundation took the premine from the development of the original chain, which is possible theft. Ethereum Foundation took the money of a rule following user, which is possible theft [1]. Ethereum Foundation compromised security of the old chain by keeping it open to replay attacks hurting its value further[1]. Ethereum Foundation damaged the value of the competing asset of the original chain using the stolen premine by selling it on exchanges [1] and making fun of doing so [2]. Ethereum Foundation and closely related White Hat Group (WHG) not only took the remaining money from the DAO on their chain, but also on the original chain, and then used the funds to damage the price of the competing asset on the exchanges [1,2,3,4].
Every level of Ethereum proven to be unsecure and not trustworthy
Additionally, every level of ethereum after proven centralized requires trust. And it's easily shown how each level cannot be trusted thus lowering its value:
  1. Code: Ethereum Foundation (EF) via demonstration of centralized control stated and shown that they will decide how code should run instead of as written, so the code itself doesn't matter, and it can't be trusted to handle transactions, balances, apps.
  2. Apps: Ethereum foundation broke the promises of a third party app called DAO that very uniquely stated code sets the terms, so eth apps cannot be trusted.
  3. EF: Ethereum foundation also broke its own advertised statements about the platform when it censored users and stopped apps to take others money for subjective reasons. Additionally, their refusal to acknowledge conflict of interest, making a poll official only hours before pushing the update, and abusing power of defaults in the code shows so Ethereum Foundation cannot be trusted [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Additionally, centralization shown by EF makes it a weak spot for malicious actors to attack the entire platform using incentives (e.g. litigation, force, threat, pressure 1) to force them to exercise the control over the chain once again with existing precedent. There's no way to gain trust that this attack vector won't be used.
*
The self-bailout fork events demonstrated centralized Ethereum Foundation has complete centralized control over every level of this blockchain: every transaction and every app. It proved that EF has capability and the will to use it to overwrite operation of any smart contract even if it serves their self interest. In other words, Eth is a proven unsecure centralized censorable trust-requiring platform that can't be trusted on any level with any aspect of operation. There are zero safeguards currently in place to prevent EF from taking advantage of their control from occurring again. Additionally this is public information making it a well known centralized weakness and, thus, a known attack vector that could be used by interested third parties, which would be nothing new [1].
Nothing has been done to fix it and continues to be part of Ethereum's flawed premine controlled "economic forks"[1].
This subreddit is a curated collection of resources for education purposes only that would be difficult to find downvoted on biased ethereum subreddits to protect and warn people from being hurt by this fraud via investment or development on top of a nonsecure blockchain.
Other notable events about Ethereum to read about:
SUMMARY: Ethereum is an unsecure, trust-requiring, centralized, mutable platform that runs stoppable apps and censors people Ethereum Foundation (EF) dislikes - the opposite of what it advertises itself as. Ethereum Foundation misrepresents what Ethereum is to prospective investors for increasing the value of the traded asset ETH while profiting financially. This means, by definition, Ethereum Foundation is participating in fraud by continuously misleading investors. Furthermore, the act of suddenly changing the properties of the unregistered security after the sale of the security in the initial coin offering (ICO) and/or on exchanges while profiting personally constitutes securities fraud. Additionally, Ethereum Foundation is connected to damaging the value of sold assets, damaging the value of competing assets, theft from competition, and market manipulation of competing assets for profit.
Nothing has changed after historic actions proved centralization beyond reasonable doubt. Eth is still centralized, unsecure, and gains value only through fraud
submitted by newweeknewacct to ethereumfraud [link] [comments]

MAKING MONEY MINING BITCOINS - See How Some People Are Getting RICH from BITCOIN Miners ETF Bitcon not redeemable -- Bitcoin Network Hashrate up 500%? -- Law Firm Accepts Bitcoin HISTORICAL BITCOIN HASHRATE DROP!!! Does bitcoin hash rate Matter? Crypto Marketer Answers BITCOIN HASHRATE HITS A HIGH - BTC PRICE WILL FOLLOW SAYS MAX KEISER  7 Crypto’s Making Huge Moves

Bitcoin Network Hashrate Chart and Graph. Hash rate.Details: Bitcoin Gold, Zhash, 74 Mh/s; Mining Bitcoin Gold with the GTX 1050 TI:. GPU Graphics In Bitcoin, transactions form a one-way linked list that allows tracing pre- vious accounts depends on luck and hardware, but, with a GPU, an acceptable pool hash is found every You should check out the second article for a host of details on that I ... Bitcoin Hashrate historical chart Average hashrate (hash/s) per day 137.047 Ehash/s +4.25% in 24 hours. Share: btc eth ltc bch xrp bsv xmr zec etc dash doge btg vtc blk rdd nmc ftc nvc. Scale: linear log. Latest Prices: BTC/USD: 12995.08 (bitasset) BTC/USD: 12975.98 (hitbtc) BTC/USD: 12981.62 (simex) BTC/USD: 12996.69 (coinbasepro) Zoom: 3 months 6 months 1 year 2 years all time ... If the Bitcoin Network Hashrate is at 100 EH/s (100,000,000 TH/s), a WhatsMiner M20S ASIC miner with 68 TH/s, earns around 0.001224 BTC per day. It’s guaranteed by the pool regardless of luck. Hashrate is what keeps Bitcoin secure. When Satoshi created Bitcoin and gave it to the world, he took the idea of hashrate and used it to ensure that Bitcoin would remain decentralized and secure ... Bitcoin network difficulty self-adjusts once every 2,016 blocks, or roughly once every two-week period. This difficulty adjustment is to compensate for block production speed discrepancies and, thus, network hash rate fluctuations. Bitcoin network hash rate (Th/s) compared to difficulty, April 2015 to April 2020. Bitcoin GOLD network hashrate reflects the overall performance of all miners in the btg network. Currently, Bitcoin GOLD network hashrate is 830.84 KS/s = 830 842 S/s. Network hashrate is calculated using the current network difficulty, the average block find time set by the cryptocurrency network and/or the effective block find time of the ...

[index] [44004] [23184] [29226] [33812] [28206] [43836] [41124] [3925] [38999] [22756]

MAKING MONEY MINING BITCOINS - See How Some People Are Getting RICH from BITCOIN Miners

On this quick video, I will quickly explain what the term hashrate mean. Don't forget: to see if you qualify to be a part of my team for Bitcoin mining leverage, go here to answer a few questions ... At current Bitcoin prices of ~$6,000 we do have a problem. Mining is already centralized in China, but after the halving it seems that this will even be more the case. It won't be profitable ... Does Bitcoin's hashrate matter to the network's level of security and its price action on the market? Veteran crypto pro Yasha Harari answers the question. Question's source: Krown's Crypto Cave ... July 11, 2013 -- Nairobi, Kenya -- I'm the rule of three, telling you that there's no such thing as a free lunch in a Robinson Crusoe economy where a rising tide lifts all boats. -- Here are Today ... **UPDATE the Coinwars Network Hashrate for Vertcoin which I shown in the video was still calculating the old algorithm. So that is why those 2 weeks were very low in hashrate. So that is why those ...

#