Best Bitcoin Mining Software of 2020 - Make Money Personal
Perfect Money - How to Enable Cookies
5 Best Bitcoin Mining Hardware ASIC Machines (2020 Rigs)
Buy & Hold vs Mining Bitcoin – Which strategy will ...
Let's set aside the tickename issue for a second and think as scientists about the upcoming experiment. Assuming there will be a split, I think it's going to be interesting. (If the split is somehow avoided, then all of the following makes no sense, of course) I frankly think the experiment of "hashrate-funded centrally-developed Bitcoin Cash" vs "hodler-funded multi-team-developed Bitcoin Cash" is very interesting. I don't mean "centrally-developed" as an offence here, it's just a fact - ABC will be developing it. Before you start throwing in tomatos, let's think about it. We all have front-row seats - each gets equal amount of both coins, so either coin wins - you have your cut. It might even be that BOTH coins will be winners, since unlike the BSV situation, this is going to be probably developed under MIT license, so either side can copy code from other side. (Unless, of course, ABC goes BSV-way and protects their code with a restrictive license, while the other side will be using MIT/BSD licenses for sure) Let's consider both sides' pros and cons.
I don't really like IFP, but I think what Amaury did was pretty clever and worth considering. With this plan he gets to control his coin fully and impose any rules he sees as best for his coin, be it drift correction, 6-month releases or whatever else. He believes in his power to make this coin the best, so let's see if he can. [+] Corporations are often pretty efficient at what they do. Usually, with capitalism and democracy they will perfect their game like no one, because of competition. [-] But this won't be exactly like capitalism, more like socialism, because ABC/Amaury will get paid no matter their performance. They will always get 8%. That makes people lazy. Why bother if you get your salary anyway? [+] ABC has a track record of 3 years and BCH didn't die, which gives them some credit that they could do it. [+] Amaury and ABC will get paid in their own coin, so the more valuable it is, the richer they get. (Unless they sell for USD immediately) Also, they will get close to $8 million in funding in first year alone (at the current price), which would allow him to hire, well, best of the best in their class (cryptographers, developers, etc...). Amaury knows that and he's right - developers are freaking expensive ($100,000+/year). (Well, again, assuming Amaury will be hiring...) [-] They don't have to listen to the community, so they have no force feedback if what they do is of any value or is it a useless distraction.
BCHN + others
[+] Hodler-funded means that you don't get paid unless you promise to deliver useful value and have proven to provide value in the past. So you have to perfect your game always - that's much closer to capitalism. [-] Very hard to raise funds. Amaury will get $8m/year while BCHN and other nodes barely managed to collect $100-200K, probably for the next year or so. Hodlers don't want to give away their money too much, because it might 10x or 20x in very short amount of time. [+] If BCHN/other nodes do their job well and the coin value raise - their money becomes more valuable, so $100K might become $1M in a year. Assuming they haven't sold for USD. Something tells me they didn't. [-] Grass-roots things can be short-lived. People are free to join and leave any time, so eventually you get tired of everything.
Potential problems with the experiment
Tickename, obviously pretty bad issue;
Reputation/community loss (BCH splitting again);
Confusion for next few years about what Bitcoin Cash is (just like it was with BCH/BTC split);
No replay protection (this one is nasty), so it's hard to split your money at fork time, you need to wait to get some miner dust to mix in with your coins to split them properly;
Potential that one side might be without wallets at first (i.e. if all wallets and services like Fountainhead/rest.bitcoin.com, which are used by wallets, leave ABC - how would you transfer your money?) - that surely will be a blow, but it's fixable. BCH started this way too.
EDIT: Merchant dis-adoption. Many will be tired of non-stop drama and leave. Maybe, stability of BCHN site will lure some back later. (comment about this)
I don't see miners as an issue (I explained why here and here) I'm actually curious. Whether corporate efficiency (but with a bit of socialism) or grass-roots (barely with any funding in comparison) will get ahead. Even though there is already a similar experiment going (BSV), but it's still interesting - each corporation is different and where Apple succeeded, many other phone/computer companies failed. Is listening to market critical? Remember Henry Ford: "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." On the other hand we have plenty of coins with a lot of funding not even in Top 10. Get your tickets (coins) ready, we're in for a ride!
Since a few people appreciated my list last week figured I'd drop it again for everyone not just the few people that I constantly chat with 8/2 WEEKLY WATCHLIST [P.S. Only enter positions you feel the most comfortable with. Your money is your soldier only send him into the battle you think you'll win. Some of these I have taken positions. Some I am looking to take positions. I've posted how many shares I own of what multiple times ] 💸PENNIES💸 [💎-Long time gold][⁉️-Could go both ways][🚀Rocket Emoji-I think this is gonna shoot up][🔥-This is a HOT pick][⚠️-Already ran a bit be careful][👀-Watching this one closely] 🚀💸PENNYS💸🚀 $AMTX - Golden triangle. Looks to still have fuel in the rocket. $1.10-$1.15 imo isn't a bad entry. $1.12 is the WEEKLY support. Overall support is a freefall to $0.80 I expect a $1.40-$1.45 run. PR on Tuesday⚠️👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $BNGO - Big virtual booth Aug 4-5th. Huge biotech upcoming company. Support at $0.74 & $0.65. Resistance at $0.82 than $0.95. This could rip up with the right volume👀🔥 [Rocket Emoji]🚀 $AIM - Web conference Monday 1:30EST. I honestly see this hitting $5 in the long future but should run up Friday into Monday. About 70% shareholders are breakeven or at a loss. Decent support at $2.72. Godly support at $2.44. Resistance at $3/$3.35.💎🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $ATNM - Balance sheet shows easily enough money for another quarter without an offering. Earnings Aug 7th. [Estimated 56% growth]. Sabby is playing with this[scary] but this monster "should" RIP UP! Support is $0.52-$0.54. Weak support at $0.57. Resistances at $0.61/$0.64/$0.68🔥👀[Twitter pumping this too] $BKYI - African Contracts need to be finalized and this is gonna ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM! Had a single buyer with a 200k share bid at $0.75. Looks like it made a new support at $0.69 off old resistance levels. Seems to be rough resistance at the $0.71-$0.74 range . After that could run $0.77-$0.82🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $BIOC - Insider buys 7/14 of 20k shares. Bullish uptrend. Decent support at $0.68, $0.63 $0.60. DEC 7th until for compliance. So decent amount of time still. I'm bullish AF to $0.80 Maybe $1. Broke $0.725 resistance. Talks of a RESPLIT THOUGH! 6/25 Golden Cross![Chart if you wanna see just ask] $CHEK - 70% of shareholders at a lose. Mad support at $0.53 area. Above $0.61 I'd be super bullish. I see an ascending triangle. This baby wants to break out.Macd is setup perfectly. Volume Friday smacked it up. This company is REALLY dedicated to pushing for $1 for conpliance!🔥💎👀 $IZEA - AUG 18th Webinar. Tiktok partnership RUMOR?!?! Insane Support at $1.02. Small resistance at $1.47 I see resistances at $1.66👀🔥⚠️[Rocket Emoji]🚀🚀🚀 $SXTC - 99% Shareholders breakeven or at loss. Had Insane support at $0.40-$0.40 and broke down. New support is $0.36. Something tells me this is an EASY gap up to $0.42-$0.44 Low float🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $JFU - UNGODLY OVERSOLD 90% Shareholders breakeven or at a loss. MACD setup on daily. Should EASILY gap up to $2.40-$2.60. BITCOIN PLAY🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $MARA/$RIOT -BTC Plays. Mara imo is the better option. They are debt free vs RIOT 200m debt👀🔥⚠️ [Rocket Emoji]🚀 $ENZ- Has FDA approval noone else has this test. Monopoly. Schools testing. State colleges already buying them.98% shareholders are breakeven or loss! REVENUE UP 121% IN 2019. Looks to be at support at $2.35 beyond that around $2.08. Resistainces sitting at around $2.55 and $2.70.👀 $MYT - $0.40 Offering price. I wouldnt mind getting it around $0.38-$0.42. US store in trial phase. $DLPN - FORSEE a HUGE gap up here! Support at $0.82 than a freefall to $0.49. SMALL resistance at $0.91. Than resistance at $1/$1.07. Had an offering at $1.05 2months ago.Only scarey thing is they might split due to compliance👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $LPCN - FDA Approval Aug 28th. This has been a CONSTANT RUNNER 💎🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $BOXL - Offering closed Friday. PR is imminent. 99% Shareholders are at a LOSS! Chart looks like a BULLISH pennant.$2.20 is OKAY support. $1.70 is pretty strong support. $2.30 looks like the first soft resistance. $2.45 gets broken we could see a $3 Run👀 $ONTX - Made compliance on Friday. Massive support at $1.12. Dropping Twitter PR like wildfire. Resistance seems to be in $0.05 invervals starting at $1.20. Afte $1.45 Its a straight RIP up to $2.65👀[Rocket Emoji] $IDEX - Looks like old$1.38-$1.40 Support is being rebuilt. Bullish as hell if this breaks $1.51. Earnings August 11th🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 💰HONORABLE MENTIONS💰 : $VERB - [Offering at $1.10 good around that price]$NAK $UAVS $MVIS $GAU[Gold mine]🔥 $PZG[Gold mine]🔥$JAN🔥👀 💰Non-Pennys💰 $MGM - EPS was BETTER than projected. Revenue in the gutter. Didn't have the sell off i thought. Still a good price LONG. MGM is 1/3 casinos with liscensing in Japan. By 2030 this should be a $40-$45 ticker💎🔥⚠️👀 [Rocket Emoji]🚀 $CZR aka $ERI - COME BACK KING! Hasnt been this cheap since 2017. THIS SHOULD RUN UP to $35-$38 shortly. Biggest casino/hotel chain in the WORLD after buying out caesars. Should be $70-$100 ticker by 2030-2035💎🔥⚠️👀 [Rocket Emoji]🚀 $O - MONTHLY dividend. [5% yearly] GREAT LONG term investment. 💎 $JMIA - Monthly MACD Setup so perfectly for this, Has been running lately but no where near pre-rona levels. HOPING FOR A SELL OFF TO TAKE A POSITION. Offering at $8.59 BUT its a shelf offering which means they don't have to sell it currently. This could drop down to that or continue its run until the offering block is dropped.👀⚠️🔥 $CNTG - Around 80-90% shareholders BREAKEVEN or at a LOSS!600 USA school+3 german airports so far.US mobile semi truck lab. So oversold its asking for change!🔥[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $WIMI - $8 OFFERING. I LOVE OFFERING plays without mass dillution<3 🔥💎 👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 $SPAQ - Tons of pre-orders aka free revenue without advertising. This should take off like NKLA did eventually. 4hr chart approaching oversold. 94% Of shareholders at breakeven or loss! $10.60 is a strong af support. $13.95 is the first real resistance. If this breaks the $12.45/50 range SUPER bullish. Fisker dropping mad PR Hints on twitter 🔥👀[Rocket Emoji]🚀 🔥🌾Gold/Silver🌾🔥 $AGC - 2x silver. Aka silver -1% AGC -2%. This is a day or swing trade. Depreciates🔥 $SLV - Long term silver hold🔥 $JNUG - 2x Gold/Silver Junior Miners 🔥 $NUGT - 2x Gold/Silver Miners🔥 $GLD - Long term gold holds👀🔥 🔮BET AGAINST THE MARKET🔮 $SPXS - 3X Inverse of SPY [The overall market] Spy +1% SPXS -3%. Spy -3% SPXS +9% $VXX - Fear index/Volatility Index. This goes up with market feaunsurity. USUALLY inverses $SPY🚀🚀 Newfilter.io [USE THIS SITE, LOVE THIS SITE, BEFRIEND THIS SITE] It gives live news [1-5mins delayed]. I refresh the FDA approval constantly and the latest news pretty often PS. I have CALLS for $VXX [I believe market volatility/unsurity is going to SPIKE high as hell this week the longer the feds take with unemployment stimulus and the stimulus in general] I have put spreads on $SPY I believe $SPY is going to drop for the above reason
I get a lot of questions about bitcoin from friends and family members. I wrote this up and to the best of my knowledge covers everything a NOOB should know about bitcoin. That being said I probably made some mistakes and welcome any feedback from the community I could get on cleaning up the verbiage. Thanks in advance! Bitcoin For NOOBS Peer to peer digital currency that is scares. It is digitally secure through cryptography and decentralized through open protocol mining principals. Peer to peer: USD: paper dollars can be exchanged peer to peer but any other form of USD exchange requires your banks permission to use your own money. In fact if you try to pull out too much paper USD your bank may question you. BTC: Can be exchanged with no middle man. No bank or government permissions needed for any amount and can be exchanged across the global at any time. Scarsity USD: Print more money just write an IOU to the banks no big deal. Inflationary. BTC: The number of BTCs that will ever exists is a fixed number it will never change. Deflationary. Cryptography: USD: With USD the “keys” to your wallet lie with your identity. If I can gain access to your identity I can gain access to your funds. BTC: Your identity does not travel with the coin ledger. Stealing your identity does not mean your funds can be accessed. Decentralization USD: The federal reserve banks are owned by unknown individuals. Make no mistake the illuminate exists. When the fed prints money the write those unknown individuals and IOU. Out of thin air wealth is created to individuals not the government. You don’t know who they are and never will. BTC: Anyone can mine bitcoin. You dedicate your hardware to mining aka processing transactions. It costs you money to run that hardware. Your reward for your hardware costs is bitcoin. The mathematical principals behind bitcoin do a check for how many mining machines decided if a transaction is real or not. 51% wins. The more bitcoin is used and the more people that dedicate hardware to mining the more digitally secure it becomes. Bitcoins case for calling it gold 2.0: Currently bitcoin is not acting like the USD but instead acting more like gold a store of value. Long ago before the dollar gold was the standard. The government attempted to issue greenbacks however no one wanted them since gold was the tradition and was scares in supply. The government decided to back the dollar with federal gold reserves. Federal reserves no longer exist as they once have in fact if you invest in gold via the stock market there is a slim chance it is backed by any type of gold reserve it’s really just all digital money for the most part now a days. While bitcoin is truly limited in supply and scares not only is it a great store of value but it has even more use than gold. It can be exchanged electronically peer to peer across the globe and used via smart contracts etc. A quick google search say that the total value of gold in the world is at roughly 7.5trillon dollars. Gold does has more use than just a store of value via jewlery electronics etc but let’s compare the numbers side by side. Gold 7.5 trillion BTC market cap 170.5 billion If you agree BTC is a better store of value or at least a decent store of value since it’s truly limited in supply with more usability then it’s easy to see how much upside potential is left on the table. As the fed continues to put out more money during these economic hard times they are causing inflation while BTC has just undergone a halving aka it’s harder for miners to produce a bitcoin reward meaning deflation. Bitcoin is the perfect place for you to store that big fat government stimulus check if you don’t need the money for awhile. Edit: added these sections based on feedback from friends. Dollars and cents: USD: One dollar can be broken down into .01 dollars or 1 cent. This is the smallest unit of measure in USD. BTC: 1 Bitcoin can be broken down into .00000001 bitcoins or 1 sats which is short for Satoshi’s. 1 sat is the smallest unit of measure in terms of BTC. Owning Bitcoin: You can own bitcoin a few different ways but we will talk about two methods in general. Owning coins through a 3rd party such as Coinbase or Robinhood vs owning your coins via your own hardware wallet. 3rd Party: The platform you use can hold some control over you and limit your funds etc just like a bank. They will take additional fees for each transaction you place etc. This really isn’t what bitcoin was intended for but it’s how most people use it currently. Hardware wallet: You own the currency on a hardware wallet like a Ledger wallet etc. there is no middle man. You own the coin and the “keys”
AMA Recap of CEO and Co-founder of Chromia, Henrik Hjelte in the @binancenigeria Telegram group on 03/05/2020.
What is EPIC CASH? Epic Cash is the final point in the journey toward true P2P internet cash, the cornerstone of a private financial system. The Epic currency aims to become the world’s most effective privacy-protecting form of digital money. In order to fulfill that goal, it satisfies the three principal functions of money: 1. Store of Value — can be saved, retrieved, and exchanged at a later time, and of predictable value when retrieved; 2. Medium of Exchange — anything accepted as representing a standard of value and exchangeable for goods or services; 3. Unit of Account — the unit by which the value of a thing is accounted for and compared. Website: http://epic.tech Whitepapers: http://epic.tech/whitepaper Epic Cash Community: https://t.me/EpicCash Miner Chat: https://t.me/EpicMiners Gitlab: gitlab.com/epiccash Twitter: twitter.com/EpicCashTech Social Media: http://epic.tech/social-media Exchanges: https://epic.tech/service-list Oleg✌🏻 Hello community! Our AMA with EPIC begins🚀 We are very happy to have you here, on our joint AMA👌 So, lets start! The very first question for you. Can you introduce yourself? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble I’m Max Freeman, which stands for “Maximum Freedom for Mankind” — we believe that the existing fiat money system enslaves people by unfairly confiscating their wealth through inflation. By using an honest money system such as Epic, we can improve the quality of life for billions of people worldwide. Yoga Dude Hello, I am Yoga Dude 🙂 I handle Marketing and PR, in crypto since 2011 started as Bitcoin miner, and in 2014 in Monero, and in 2015 in Ethereum, oh and briefly in DOGE for fun and unexpected profit. Heard about Epic Cash while learning about the Mimblewimble algo and joined the team last year. JLong I am John, Doing the general engineering and managerial work Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble I have been involved in early stage cryptos for the past 3 years, after building a global trading business for the past 20 years. Oleg✌🏻 nice to meet you🙂 Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble Epic is a decentralized community project like Bitcoin or Monero, there is no central authority or corporation involved. We had no ICO and no premine, we had a fair launch at 0 supply last September. Yoga Dude Great to meet everyone :) Oleg✌🏻 Here we go the 1st question for you ~ 1. What is Epic Cash about? Yoga Dude Epic Cash is designed to fulfill Satoshi’s original vision of P2P electronic cash, adjusting for what we learned from Bitcoin, a medium of exchange that is fast, free, open to all, while being private and fungible. We launched in September 2019 as a Proof of Work mineable crypto, without an ICO or a premine. Oleg✌🏻 Look like a real Bitcoin🙂 Yoga Dude with privacy and fungibility 😄 Oleg✌🏻 Sounds cool! move on to the next question… 2. What makes Epic Cash better than Monero or other privacy coins? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble First off, we have a lot of respect for Monero and other privacy coins, we learned a lot from what they did right and what they did wrong, Our blockchain is much lighter than Monero or Bitcoin, our transaction engine is faster than Monero or ZCash. We use a three mining algo approach to allow more users the ability to obtain Epic Cash. We are a new, highly undervalued, coin and we look great not only for future use but for today's investment. Our blockchain is 90+% smaller than Monero or Bitcoin. Coins such as Zcash have optional privacy. Epic makes all transactions private, and it is impossible to trace movements of coins by watching wallet addresses. Oleg✌🏻 Young and hot😋 security and privacy level is very important now but… 3. Why copy the same supply economics as Bitcoin? Yoga Dude It is hard to compete with the success of Bitcoin today, part of the elegance and the appeal of Bitcoin is the responsible emission rate, terminating at 21million highly sub dividable coins. Like the Bitcoin supply curve, Epic Cash encourages early adopters, and with subsequent halvenings maintains a gradually diminishing flow of additional currency while preserving the overall value. Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble In 2028, the supply of Epic matches that of Bitcoin and they stay in sync until the final coin is mined in 2140. We have 4 halvenings between now and then, which is demonstrated in Bitcoin to drive the value over market cycles. Epic is a chance for people who were late to Bitcoin to ride the wave and not miss their opportunity this time. Oleg✌🏻 Interesting! 4. Why Choose Epic Cash over Grin and Beam? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble First of all, we have tremendous respect for all Mimblewimble currencies and their talented teams, they all taught us a lot and we are thankful for that. Without sounding too contentious, the choice seems obvious. We offer the same core tech, but with a much more responsible emission curve — Grin is an endless fountain of emission and inflation (60 per second forever), and Beam is even more frontloaded outpacing even Grin’s aggressive emission schedule for the next several years… We respect Grin and Beam, we learned from them, and we believe we are the next evolutionary step. Additionally, as we mentioned earlier, we offer more ways to mine Epic Cash, both with GPU and CPU and ASICs, this gives us more potential users and miners, vs Grin and Beam that are only mineable with GPUs. Yoga Dude Yes, all that ☝️😄 Oleg✌🏻 I hope the miners read it all carefully 👌 Next question 5. Why have a development fund tax and what will it be used for? Yoga Dude Dev fund tax today is at a reasonable 7.77% dropping by 1.11% every year until it hits zero. As Epic Cash grows in value these funds will become increasingly more relevant in additional technical, marketing, and fintech partnerships developments. Oleg✌🏻 Very smart! 6. What is the advantage of 3 mining algorithms? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble By having multiple mining algorithms we are able to attract CPU, GPU, and ASIC miners simultaneously. Currently all other Mimblewimble currencies are mineable with GPU only ignoring a large segment of CPU miners. Monero made a splash migrating to the RandomX CPU mining algo. Epic Cash from the beginning embraces all mining communities. Many miners are successfully using older hardware such as Xeon processors to help secure the network. We use RandomX for CPU, ProgPow for GPU, and Cuckoo for ASIC. Longer term, our flexible architecture means we can have many algorithms, not just 3. Our roadmap includes an allocation for SHA3 Keccak, which will help further decentralize the network and keep it unstoppable. Yoga Dude We love miners 🙂 and Epic Cash can be mined with laptops and gaming rigs 🙂 Oleg✌🏻 A wide selection of mining methods is a great way to create a stable, decentralized and large network👌 Let’s talk about persons… 7. Who are the people developing Epic Cash? Yoga Dude We are blessed with a very talented team of skilled developers with diverse backgrounds, many of them are volunteers who believe in what Epic Cash stands for and contribute with product and usability innovation. Our teams main focus is to make Epic Cash the best, most secure, most user friendly and usable product on the market, without making it unnecessarily techie, with as much mainstream user appeal as possible. This is a serious challenge but we are up for it 😄 Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble It is also important to note that we are a truly open ecosystem that anyone can participate in. Our community has developed wallets, mining pools, educational content, and much else besides. We are not limited by the funding generated during an ICO or VC investment, our users are an essential element of our team. Oleg✌🏻 Sounds very attractive. 8. What do you think is currently lack in today’s crypto? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble We believe there is not enough privacy, anonymity and fungibility, although there is a growing awareness in the community as to why these are necessary. People are waking up to the fact that privacy is a right for everyone but today it is being exploited and violated by corporations, governments and unscrupulous individuals. Privacy does not mean that you have something to hide. We have doors on our houses, curtains on our windows, we wear clothes, and we have security on our bank accounts and businesses, not because we are criminals. Fungibility (the property of not being able to distinguish one unit of currency from another) also has become a hot issue as people have started to get in trouble because of someone else’s misdeeds. Tainted money (coins that are blacklisted or restricted) is a problem for Bitcoin and Ethereum, the top two cryptos today. Mimblewimble eliminates the risk of tainted coins making them indistinguishable from each other. With traceable coins, you always have to worry if the coins you are getting were involved in a hack, or perhaps the darknet. Oleg✌🏻 It’s good to see strong and safe coin in our time Let’s talk about your future… 9. What does the Epic Cash roadmap look like going forward? Yoga Dude First and foremost, we are focused on security and usability. We are working on a new, improved GUI wallet to incorporate the community feedback on ways to improve it. We are in the process of completing final testing phases for the next iteration of Epic Cash which will make it more secure and stable. Once that is done, we will be rolling out Android and iOS support to make Epic Cash usable on leading smartphones and smartwatches. Beyond that without going into too much detail we are focused on continuous evolution of privacy, ease of mining, and overall speed and usability. And of course we are constantly looking to add more exchanges both with and without KYC. Oleg✌🏻 Are you working on Android and IOS wallet ? What will your application be? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble Yes, we will release a mobile wallet this year. It will bring us one step closer to people being able to actually use cryptocurrency as money in daily life. Yoga Dude The idea is to be able to access Epic Cash from any platform and device Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble Epic is very lightweight, which means that low-end devices such as smartwatches can participate. Oleg✌🏻 Ok, got it. Thanks for clarification! 10. What else can you tell us about Epic Cash? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble Well one thing I really want to mention is our great Epic Cash community. We’ve been building a decentralized community organically, without the talk of price pumps, pressure to HODL and other BS crypto-gimmicks. Our community is truly global and consists of developers, volunteers, miners, and other Epic enthusiasts spreading the word about Epic Cash, helping us reach millions of people around the world to improve their quality of life through social media and directly. Everyone is an evangelist, everyone is an influencer, everyone has the power to make the world a better place to live in. As we continue to grow — the future looks Epic 😊 Yoga Dude Definitely the community! We got a talented crowd of very cool and motivated people from all over the world! Oleg✌🏻 Thank you guys, for such informative answers 🙂 Now we proceed to Section 3, where a Community can ask their questions to the EPIC team Now I’ll open chat for the quite some time … Oleg✌🏻 Thank you all, dear community! EPIC team, please choose the 10 best questions you want to answer. AngeI Everyone likes Privacy & Epic Cash provides their Best Privacy to users But, Which Technologies are being used by Epic Cash to make Blockchain very Private and Completely untrackable ? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble From the wallet to the node, Epic uses Dandelion++ to bounce transactions around the world before they go into the mempool for mining. Within the blockchain itself, Cut-Through merges all transactions in a block together, with CoinJoin automatically mixing all coins. Beyond that, there are no addresses, so it’s impossible to watch someone’s wallet. Arnold Even litecoin is implementing mimblewimble, Don’t you think it’s a significant threat for Epic if they implement it, then why would anyone use a less popular and a new cryptocurrency. Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble LTC is implementing mw as an “extension block”, meaning that it is optional and not all transactions will use it. This is very different than the core protocol leveraging mw to make all transactions private and all coins fungible. Aluta Why Epic cash so much focus on fungibility? Does fungibility matters that much? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble Fungibility is going to be one of the key issues within the cryptocurrency space in the coming years. Today, if you accept traceable coins from a seller, you are liable if they have ever been used in any illegal activity. This has led to a two tier market where freshly minted coins sell for more than circulated coins. When coins are fungible, like Epic, you don’t have to worry that you will run into a problem when an exchange or merchant blocks your transaction. Joxes It is a pleasure. When I first researched EpicCash, google showed me a youtube video that talked about how to mine with EpicCash. It made me ask: is this mining activity profitable so far? We are in the early stages of development I guess, what adoption strategies are you taking to have sustained growth? is it feasible to reach N ° 500 rank in coinmarketcap in the medium term? Yoga Dude When I got into crypto, it was by mining Bitcoin back in 2011 when you could still solve blocks on a single computer, but Bitcoin at the time was anything but profitable 😄 Today Epic Cash is still new, still young, and still undervalued. I believe it is mining-worthy because of its potential, not because of today’s price. By allowing Epic Cash to be mined with GPU and CPU on gaming rigs, servers, and even laptops we offer maximum public participation in our project. More people involved in the project, the more evangelists there are. We empower people to mine Epic Cash and to promote it. S.P.A.D.E What new features of Epic Cash provide that Grin or Beam does not offer. Why do we need Epic Cash? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble They are great coins, but there are some ways in which Epic improves. Epic has better tokenomics than Grin and a more sustainable model than Beam, that has a company behind it that needs to repay investors via its high dev tax. this article explains in more detail https://medium.com/@frodofreeman/overview-of-mimblewimble-cryptocurrencies-7c70be146f50 Sahil What’s the Minimum Hardware / setup Required for Mining of EPIC Cash coins? Is Mining Profitable and Can we Mine EPIC Cash coins at Home? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble It is possible to mine on an ordinary laptop or desktop from the last 5 years, sometimes older. Epic is open to everyone, and our friendly community is standing by to help you get started at t.me/epicminers Erven James Sato “TOKEN BURN” is BENEFECIAL for any projects, in able to CONTROL THE NUMBER OF TOKEN CIRCULATION and TO PROVIDE GREATER INCENTIVES TO INVESTORS. Does your GREAT PROJECT have plan about TOKEN BURN? Xenolink For deflating projects It is beneficial to drive the demand / scarcity / and price up in a faster pace. Epic Cash is here for the organic long run not the short run. However when it comes to long term economics elastic supplies whether inflating or deflating will not be a solid long term economic model. This has been heavily discussed already with Bitcoins inelastic Fixed 21 million supply in the past. Having a fixed model demonstrates good long term economics without worrying about balancing a deflating/inflating model. Bitcoin is a perfect example of a 21 million inelastic fixed supply model that has been proving itself till today. Which is why we are also using the same fixed 21 million supply model. Epic Cash plans to have a solid organic long term future to bring free private fungible money and make this world a better place. Red Z🔥🤙 No one predicted the COVID-19 pandemic while developing their business model. But the crisis and recession of the global economy is our present with you and it affects all sectors, including blockchain. Will you make or have already made changes to the project roadmap, tokenomics? Do you have a plan in case the situation does not improve in the coming months and will affect the crypto industry even more? Yoga Dude One thing we have seen as the result of the COVID-19 is more governments are talking about moving to digital cash — digital dollar in USA, digital Lira in Turkey, etc… If in the past the idea of digital money was not graspable by some people, today its the governments that are educating the people for us about the value of digital currency… What is ironic, the governments, by printing money to solve the economic consequences of COVID-19 also educating the consumer about the true “value” of fiat… What we offer is a touch free, borderless, private, anonymous, fungible currency that can not be printed beyond the initial defined algo. We are more responsible than the printing presses of the governments 🤔 kunlefighter How does the Dandelion++ Protocol, Confidential Transactions (CT) and CoinJoin assist in protecting the privacy of individuals and their transactions on Epic Cash Blockchain? Max Freeman | Epic Cash | Mimblewimble Dandelion++ bounces transactions around before committing them to the blockchain, making it impossible to determine where they originated from. Confidential Transactions means that all tx are private, you can’t tell anything about where the coins have been or who they belonged to. CoinJoin in essence melts down and re-mints each coin every time it is used, making it impossible to track their ownership or usage history. Epic provides comprehensive privacy to everyone, without the compromises that other pre-mimblewimble coins have. Dr Mönica Hello sir @maxfreeman4@Johnsstec@Yogadude Thanks for the ama I notice that Epic Cash has 2 type of new algorithm, progPoW version 0.15.0 and randomX version 1.0.3 NOW , CAN you tell me why you choose these 2 algorithm??? Yoga Dude We went with RandomX because it is a solid and very popular CPU centric algo used by several coins — most recently Monero. Most miners today heavily favor ASICs or GPUs, leaving a lot of solid high end users in the dust unable to mine emerging cryptos. As far as ProgPow, again its an established algo for GPU miners, and thanks to many cryptos starting with Bitcoin/Monero/Ethe etc there is no shortage of GPU rigs out there :) plus again the casual user with a video gaming caliber card can get in on the action. Oleg✌🏻Perfect!It was a great AMA, but it is coming to an end, thanks to everyone who was with us. Thanks EPIC team for taking the time👏. I hope our projects will be able to collaborate even more closely in the future and achieve new successes. Cheers!🎉
05-16 08:14 - 'Can't the same be said for any industry though? All industries use energy and some of that energy will inherently come from fossil fuels. If burning coal is the cheaper option vs. renewables, then 9/10 companies will choose coal...' by /u/sc0obyd0o removed from /r/news within 9-19min
''' Can't the same be said for any industry though? All industries use energy and some of that energy will inherently come from fossil fuels. If burning coal is the cheaper option vs. renewables, then 9/10 companies will choose coal, irrespective of whether the company has anything to do with bitcoins. If free / low-cost renewable solutions become cheaper than coal, then naturally companies will switch away from coal, bitcoin mining is no different. The value of the currency is not intrinsically tied to dirty energy. Bitcoin miners will go where it's cheapest to mine, regardless of energy type. Although I do see your point on the Visa vs. Bitcoin energy used per transaction argument, most of us, myself included, get along fine with Visa and Paypal which work 99% of the time. I think the trade off would be that a Bitcoin transaction is arguably worth "more" since it's censorship free and deflationary. In 2011 PayPal freezes WikiLeak's account due to them publishing military documents & videos outlining the civilian casualties in the Afghan war. Bitcoin saved WikiLeaks from collapsing since its impossible to "block" a Bitcoin transaction or "freeze" a Bitcoin account. Bitcoin solves the double-spend problem in computer science meaning that anyone can receive bitcoin without the need for a middle man ( Paypal / Visa). No one can even attempt to censor you since there is no middle man to pressure. [[link]2 Of course, most of us have no need for an unstoppable, non-confiscatable, supplied capped type of money. But for more libertarian minded folks that believe freedom of speech includes money and that perhaps money and state should be divided; then Bitcoin is the perfect solution. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: sc0obyd0o 1: ww**forb***c*m/site*/*ogerhu*n**2019/04/26*how-*itco*n*a**-*i*ile*k*-sav*d-e*ch-*the#6fb9423474a* 2: *w***orbe***om/s*tes*roger**ang*2019/04/26**ow-bi*coin-and**ikilea*s-saved*eac**o*h*#*f*9423474a5*^^1 Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
This is a followup of my older post about the history of payment channel mechanisms. The "modern" payment channel system is Lightning Network, which uses bidirectional indefinite-lifetime channels, using HTLCs to trustlessly route through the network. However, at least one other payment channel mechanism was developed at roughly the same time as Lightning, and there are also further proposals that are intended to replace the core payment channel mechanism in use by Lightning. Now, in principle, the "magic" of Lightning lies in combining two ingredients:
Offchain updateable systems.
HTLCs to implement atomic cross-system swaps.
We can replace the exact mechanism implementing an offchain updateable system. Secondly we can replace the use of HTLCs with another atomic cross-system swap, which is what we would do when we eventually switch to payment points and scalars from payment hashes and preimages. So let's clarify what I'll be discussing here:
I will be discussing mechanisms for the offchain updateable system, which are generally called "payment channel mechanisms". The exact contracts that can be transported across such systems, such as HTLCs, the Scriptless-Script point-based variant, and Discrete Log Contracts, will have to wait another post.
Payment channel mechanisms are designed to be trust-minimized. They might not achieve this design goal (consider the broken Satoshi sequence numbers, or the pre-SegWit Spilman, which I still class as "payment channel mechanism"), but mechanisms which invoke trust in one participant or other as inherent parts of their design are not true payment channels. Such constructions might be of interest, but I will not discuss them here.
Now I might use "we" here to refer to what "we" did to the design of Bitcoin, but it is only because "we" are all Satoshi, except for Craig Steven Wright. So, let's present the other payment channel mechanisms. But first, a digression.
Digression: the new nSequence and OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY
The new relative-timelock semantics of nSequence. Last time we used nSequence, we had the unfortunate problem that it would be easy to rip off people by offering a higher miner fee for older state where we own more funds, then convince the other side of the channel to give us goods in exchange for a new state with tiny miner fees, then publish both the old state and the new state, then taunt the miners with "so which state is gonna earn you more fees huh huh huh?". This problem, originally failed by Satoshi, was such a massive facepalm that, in honor of miners doing the economically-rational thing in the face of developer and user demands when given a non-final nSequence, we decided to use nSequence as a flag for the opt-in replace-by-fee. Basically, under opt-in replace-by-fee, if a transaction had an nSequence that was not 0xFFFFFFFF or 0xFFFFFFFE, then it was opt-in RBF (BIP125). Because you'd totally abuse nSequence to bribe miners in order to steal money from your bartender, especially if your bartender is not a werebear. Of course, using a 4-byte field for a one-bit flag (to opt-in to RBF or not) was a massive waste of space, so when people started proposing relative locktimes, the nSequence field was repurposed. Basically, in Bitcoin as of the time of this writing (early 2020) if nSequence is less than 0x80000000 it can be interpreted as a relative timelock. I'll spare you the details here, BIP68 has them, but basically nSequence can indicate (much like nLockTime) either a "real world" relative lock time (i.e. the output must have been confirmed for X seconds before it can be spent using a transaction with a non-zero nSequence) or the actual real world, which is measured in blocks (i.e. the output must have been confirmed for N blocks before it can be spent using a transaction with a non-zero nSequence). Of course, this is the Bitcoin universe and "seconds" is a merely human delusion, so we will use blocks exclusively. And similarly to OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY, we also added OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY in BIP112. This ensures that the nSequence field is a relative-locktime (i.e. less than 0x80000000) and that it is the specified type (block-based or seconds-based) and that it is equal or higher to the specified minimum relative locktime. It is important to mention the new, modern meaning of nSequence, because it is central to many of the modern payment channel mechanisms, including Lightning Poon-Dryja. Lessons learned?
Poetic justice is a thing. Go go new nSequence!
Decker-Wattenhofer "Duplex Micropayment Channels"
Mechanisms-within-mechanisms for a punishment-free bidirectional indefinite-lifetime payment channel. The Decker-Wattenhofer paper was published in 2015, but the Poon-Dryja "Lightning Network" paper was published in 2016. However, the Decker-Wattenhofer paper mentions the Lightning mechanism, specifically mentioning the need to store every old revocation key (i.e. the problem I mentioned last time that was solved using RustyReddit shachains). Maybe Poon-Dryja presented the Lightning Network before making a final published paper in 2016, or something. Either that or cdecker is the Bitcoin time traveler. It's a little hard to get an online copy now, but as of late 2019 this seems to work: copy Now the interesting bit is that Decker-Wattenhofer achieves its goals by combining multiple mechanisms that are, by themselves, workable payment channel mechanisms already, except each has some massive drawbacks. By combining them, we can minimize the drawbacks. So let's go through the individual pieces.
Indefinite-lifetime Spilman channels
As mentioned before, Spilman channels have the drawback that they have a limited lifetime: the lock time indicated in the backoff transaction or backoff branch of the script. However, instead of an absolute lock time, we can use a relative locktime. In order to do so, we use a "kickoff" transaction, between the backoff transaction and the funding transaction. Our opening ritual goes this way, between you and our gender-neutral bartender-bancho werebear:
First, you compute the txid for the funding transaction and the kickoff transaction. The funding transaction takes some of your funds and puts it into a 2-of-2 between you and the bartender, and the kickoff is a 1-input 1-output transaction that spends the funding transaction and outputs to another 2-of-2 between you and the bartender.
Then, you generate the backoff transaction, which spends the kickoff transaction and returns all the funds to you. The backoff has a non-zero nSequence, indicating a delay of a number of blocks agreed between you, which is a security/convenience tradeoff parameter
You sign the backoff transaction, then send it to the bartender.
The bartender signs the backoff, and gives back the fully-signed transaction to you.
You sign the kickoff transaction, then send it to the bartender.
The bartender signs the kickoff, and gives it back to you fully signed.
You sign and broadcast the funding transaction, and both of you wait for the funding transaction to be deeply confirmed.
The above setup assumes you're using SegWit, because transaction malleability fix. At any time, either you or the bartender can broadcast the kickoff transaction, and once that is done, this indicates closure of the channel. You do this if you have drunk enough alcoholic beverages, or the bartender could do this when he or she is closing the bar. Now, to get your drinks, you do:
Sign a transaction spending the kickoff, and adding more funds to the bartender, to buy a drink. This transaction is not encumbered with an nSequence.
Hand the signed transaction to the bartender, who provides you with your next drink.
The channel is closed by publishing the kickoff transaction. Both of you have a fully-signed copy of the kickoff, so either of you can initiate the close. On closure (publication and confirmation of the kickoff transaction), there are two cases:
You fail to pick up any chicks at the bar (I prefer female humans of optimum reproductive age myself rather than nestling birds, but hey, you do you) so you didn't actually spend for drinks at all. In this case, the bartender is not holding any transactions that can spend the kickoff transaction. You wait for the agreed-upon delay after the kickoff is confirmed, and then publish the backoff transaction and get back all the funds that you didn't spend.
You spend all your money on chicks and end up having to be kicked into a cab to get back to your domicile, because even juvenile birds can out-drink you, you pushover. The bartender then uses the latest transaction you gave (the one that gives the most money to him or her --- it would be foolish of him or her to use an earlier version with less money!), signs it, and broadcasts it to get his or her share of the money from the kickoff transaction.
Pro: Number of updates is limited only by the amount of money you have in the "payer" side of the channel.
Pro: no lifetime limit. You can keep the channel open indefinitely if you don't transact over it.
Pro: The delay can be very small.
Decrementing nSequence channels
Enforcing order by reducing relative locktimes. I believe this to be novel to the Decker-Wattenhofer mechanism, though I might be missing some predecessor. This again uses the new relative-locktime meaning of nSequence. As such, it also uses a kickoff transaction like the above indefinite-lifetime Spilman channel. Set up is very similar to the setup of the above indefinite-lifetime Spilman channel, except that because this is bidirectional, we can actually have both sides put money into the initial starting backoff transaction. We also rename the "backoff" transaction to "state" transaction. Basically, the state transaction indicates how the money in the channel is divided up between the two participants. The "backoff" we sign during the funding ritual is now the first state transaction. Both sides keep track of the current state transaction (which is initialized to the first state transaction on channel establishment). Finally, the starting nSequence of the first state transaction is very large (usually in the dozens or low hundreds of blocks). Suppose one participant wants to pay the other. The ritual done is then:
A new version of the current state transaction is created with more money in the payee side.
This new version has nSequence that is one block lower than the current state transaction (in practice it should be a few blocks lower, not just one, because sometimes miners find blocks in quick succession).
Both sides exchange signatures for the new state transaction.
Both sides set the new state transaction as the current state transaction that will be the basis for the next payment.
When the channel is closed by publication of the kickoff transaction, then the transaction with the lowest nSequence becomes valid earlier than the other state transactions. This is enough to enforce that the most recent state transaction (the one with the lowest nSequence, and thus the first to become valid) is published.
Pro: indefinite lifetime, at least if no updates are done.
Pro: it shows that life is not without a sense of irony. The original design for nSequence replacement required an incrementing nSequence using the original Satoshi's Vision interpretation of nSequence (which doesn't work). But this channel mechanism instead uses a decrementing nSequence using the new Bitcoin Core interpretation of nSequence as a relative timelock (which does, in fact, work).
Con: Number of updates is limited by the starting maximum nSequence delay. Increasing this delay increases the encumbrance if the channel is closed without any activity, but reducing this delay reduces the number of payments in either direction you can use before you have to close the channel and recreate it. For example, let's have a maximum of 144 blocks of delay. Each update, we decrement the nSequence by 4, because that handles up to the very rare case where up to 3 blocks arrive in very close succession to each other. That only gives us 36 updates for a worst-case of one day of delay, a very bad tradeoff.
Con: You can only be safely offline for a number of blocks equal to the "step", but the maximum delay you may incur is the product of the step times the number of updates you want to make. So you want a small step (because you don't want your worst-case lock time to be large) but you want a big step (because you want to still be safe even if you go offline for a long time).
Combining the ingredients of the Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels concoction. Of note is that we can "chain" these mechanisms together in such a way that we strengthen their strengths while covering their weaknesses. A note is that both the indefinite-lifetime nSequence Spilman variant, and the above decrementing nSequence mechanism, both have "kickoff" transactions. However, when we chain the two mechanisms together, it turns out that the final transaction of one mechanism also serves as the kickoff of the next mechanism in the chain. So for example, let's chain two of those decrementing nSequence channels together. Let's make them 144 blocks maximum delay each, and decrement in units of 4 blocks, so each of the chained mechanisms can do 37 updates each. We start up a new channel with the following transactions:
A funding transaction paying to a 2-of-2, confirmed deeply onchain. All other transactions are offchain until closure.
A kickoff transaction spending the funding transaction output, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 1" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the kickoff, with current nSequence 144, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 2" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the stage 1, with current nSequence 144, paying to the initial state of the channel.
When we update this channel, we first update the "stage 2" state transaction, replacing it with an nSequence lower by 4 blocks. So after one update our transactions are:
A funding transaction paying to a 2-of-2, confirmed deeply onchain. All other transactions are offchain until closure.
A kickoff transaction spending the funding transaction output, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 1" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the kickoff, with current nSequence 144, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 2" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the stage 1, with current nSequence 140, paying to the second state of the channel.
The first 3 transactions are the same, only the last one is replaced with a state transaction with lower `nSequence. Things become interesting when we reach the "stage 2" having nSequence 0. On the next update, we create a new "stage 1", with an nSequence that is 4 lower, and "reset" the "stage 2" back to an nSequence of 144. This is safe because even though we have a "stage 2" with shorter nSequence, that stage 2 spends a stage 1 with an nSequence of 144, and the stage 1 with nSequence of 140 would beat it to the blockchain first. This results in us having, not 36 + 36 updates, but instead 36 * 36 updates (1296 updates). 1296 updates is still kinda piddling, but that's much better than just a single-stage decrementing nSequence channel. The number of stages can be extended indefinitely, and your only drawback would be the amount of blockchain space you'd spend for a unilateral close. Mutual cooperative closes can always shortcut the entire stack of staged transactions and cut it to a single mutual cooperative close transaction. But that's not all! You might be wondering about the term "duplex" in the name "Duplex Micropayment Channels". That's because the last decrementing nSequence stage does not hold the money of the participants directly. Instead, the last stage holds two indefinite-lifetime Spilman channels. As you might remember, Spilman channels are unidirectional, so the two Spilman channels represent both directions of the channel. Thus, duplex. Let's go back to you and your favorite werebear bartender. If you were using a Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channel, you'd have several stages of decrementing nSequence, terminated in two Spilman channels, a you-to-bartender channel and a bartender-to-you channel. Suppose that, while drinking, the bartender offers you a rebate on each drink if you do some particular service for him or her. Let us not discuss what service this is and leave it to your imagination. So you pay for a drink, decide you want to get the rebate, and perform a service that the bartender finds enjoyable. So you transfer some funds on the you-to-bartender direction, and then later the bartender transfers some funds in the bartender-to-you channel after greatly enjoying your service. Suppose you now exhaust the you-to-bartender direction. However, you note that the rebates you've earned are enough to buy a few more drinks. What you do instead is to update the staged decrementing nSequence mechanisms, and recreate the two Spilman directions such that the you-to-bartender direction contains all your current funds and the bartender-to-you direction contains all the bartender's funds. With this, you are now able to spend even the money you earned from rebates. At the same time, even if the staged decrementing nSequence mechanisms only have a few hundred thousand updates, you can still extend the practical number of updates as long as you don't have to reset the Spilman channels too often.
Pro: chaining allows more possible updates!
Pro: no "toxic waste"! That is, old backups of your channel state database won't cause you to lose funds automatically.
Con: unilateral closes have long lock times, due to the chaining of decrementing-nSequence mechanisms.
Con: unilateral closes put a lot of transactions onchain, due to the chaining of multiple nested mechanisms.
Con: HTLCs are affected by the total nSequence delay needed by the mechanism. This is because HTLCs have an absolute timelock in their contract, and this can only be enforced onchain. However, the existence of nSequence delays means that absolute timelocks need to trigger unilateral closes several blocks before the absolute timelock, by the nSequence total delta of all the stacked mechanisms. In Poon-Dryja you can safely keep a channel open until just before the absolute timelock expires.
Con: It's not clear to me if the cancellable HTLCs used by Lightning can be hosted by Spilman channels. The HTLCs used in Lightning are "cancellable" because of a nifty ability of every offchain update mechanism: every contract has an additional clause "... or if every signer of the offchain update mechanism agrees, we can ignore this contract and place its funds wherever we agree on". This is not a degradation of security since the HTLCs in a channel are between the two users of the channel, so both of them need to agree anyway in order to accept such a cancellation. This ability is used to propagate forwarding failures back to the payer: instead of waiting for the HTLCs to time out, the node just says to the sender "between you and me, this HTLC won't propagate anyway, because 'insert some reason here', so let's just put the money in it back to you". However, this seems unsafe with Spilman channels, as a cancelled HTLC will still be available on older states of the Spilman channel, and potentially claimable by the payee end up until the timelock. Removing the Spilman channels at the end would remove this issue, but now you are limited to a few hundred thousand updates even with lots of decrementing-nSequence layers.
Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer Channel Factories
Because you like channels so much, you put channels inside channels so you could pay while you pay. I N C E P T I O N The Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels introduced the possibility of nesting a channel mechanism inside another channel mechanism. For example, it suggests nesting a decrementing-nSequence mechanism inside another decrementing-nSequence mechanism, and having as well an unlimited-lifetime Spilman channel at the end. In the Decker-Wattenhofer case, it is used to support the weakness of one mechanism with the strength of another mechanism. One thing to note is that while the unlimited-lifetime Spilman channel variant used is inherently two-participant (there is one payer and one payee), the decrementing-nSequence channel mechanism can be multiparticipant. Another thing of note is that nothing prevents one mechanism from hosting just one inner mechanism, just as it is perfectly fine for a Lightning Network channel to have multiple HTLCs in-flight, plus the money in your side, plus the money in the counterparty's side. As these are "just" Bitcoin-enforceable contracts, there is no fundamental difference between an HTLC, and a payment channel mechanism. Thus the most basic idea of the Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer Channel Factories paper is simply that we can have a multiparticipant update mechanism host multiple two-party update mechanisms. The outer multiparticipant update mechanism is called a "channel factory" while the inner two-party update mechanisms are called "channels". The exact mechanism used in the Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer paper uses several decrementing-nSequence mechanisms to implement the factory, and Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels to implement the channel layer. However, as noted before, there is no fundamental difference between a Poon-Dryja channel and an HTLC. So it is in fact possible to have chained Decker-Wattenhofer decrementing-nSequence mechanisms to implement the factory level, while the channels are simply Poon-Dryja channels.
So this concludes for now an alternative mechanism to the classic Poon-Dryja that Lightning uses. The tradeoffs are significantly different between Decker-Wattenhofer vs Poon-Dryja:
Decker-Wattenhofer: No toxic waste: old data stolen from you, or which you inadvertently use, is not going to lose all your funds.
Decker-Wattenhofer: Multiple participants in a single offchain mechanism, enabling things like Channel Factories.
Poon-Dryja: Doesn't have ridiculously long lock times in the unilateral close case.
Poon-Dryja: Supports HTLCs for trustless forwarding (not clear if Decker-Wattenhofer fully supports this without sacrificing the duplexed indefinite-lifetime Spilman channels at the end).
Copyright 2020 Alan Manuel K. Gloria. Released under CC-BY.
RE will not be outright stopped in order to help price performance. Its kind of like suggesting that miners stop mining Bitcoin so that the price stop going down.
First of all to stop the KRE would immediatley stop the inflow of free kin, no one says to end the KRE but to stop it for the time being until you found an incentive model which actual works, because how the KRE funtions now is one thing not healthy for the ecosystem. To compare it to mining of Bitcoin, you do realize a rather big fraction of BTC compared to kin has to be used up in order to keep the network alive so ppl can send btc from a to b and validize the blockchain. So explain me or us what or how has a KRE payment to do with the security and well being of the network of kin? Nonsense spotted!
Without the KRE there is no Kin Ecosystem
Says who? Why is that? So you telling us now that without the KRE none of all apps would participate or keep kin? Sounds they must be super confident in the technology of kin if their only reason to use kin, is to get free rewards. If that is true then end kin right here cuz there is no future when your money ran out or kin is complete worthless. If your buisness case is based soley on KRE and not the network and techside of kin , then this project is done. This just came from Kevin_from_Kin. How can KF then beleive in a future of kin? What is your solution to this challenge?
We are much more interested in tweaking the model, analyzing inflation per the data, better incentivizing creating more demand > supply,
Exactly thats why if you do a KRE, then payout in Dollars and payout the KRE to apps who brought measurable demand and not just activitiy with no monetary value. It is very simple. Stop giving out Kin and start create sarcity , by giving Dollars as KRE the apps then have to rebuy kin, which would mean you have an closed economic cycle. Where as now you exponetial reward kin , which flows freely in the market which is only taken up by some speculative demand nd your economic circle is not complete. The result is every week another ATL. It is the basic of the basic economics.
holding vs selling, improving liquidity, and more along those lines.
You can bet many of the investors who still here are holding, the ones are selling, are the devs and they confirmed mutlitple times they doing so. That is another reason stop rewarding in KIN and if you must then in Dollars. Improving liquidity , this has been said for two years, how about you not just say and post it over and over again and just do it. Get the listings done, get them bot armies to do their work, do a buy back program, wotever it takes. But the 1000 post about improving liquidity , is just taking the piss.
Miners cause inflation, and early adopters suffer most, it's an unfortunate fact of life for any coin with a tapering emmission schedule.
You do realize the miners have a different purpose than the KRE and the inflation of the miners is nothing compared the KRE rewards, and with the BTC halving , BTC actually creates sarcity to keep the price presure. Where is kin solution to create sarcity? There should be a KRE halving and a freezing of the total kin supply connected to a mechanism where new kin can only be circulated once certain demand levels (MAU , MAS or real money spend on kin) are reached. Very simple. If you compare BTC to Kin then do it right and created an incentive to hold kin creating scarcity and not to flood kin and create an incentive to sell kin. In fact you can learn a lot from BTC right there.
Stopping the KRE wouldn't actually solve anything.
Wrong, a temporary stop of the KRE would be a signal to all / the market that you have understood the model you have choosen has not worked out well and needs rethinking. Additionally you could see out of your 80 apps who really believes in KIN , and who is in for the tech , the vision etc.. and not just the free money. Or do you not have any confidence in your own product? I hope you guys really reconsider, you cannot deni the price performance of kin especially after the KRE payouts. I do not see if you not tacle this problem that kin can ever succeed. From an economical standpoint of view it just cant and performance wise this view is confirmed. I said it multiple times fix this asasp , as long as you can. The reputation is already burned, some confidence is left, but when that is burned with a market price evaluation converting to 0, your project is done. May be this was not the plan and may be a drastic change will mean apps will drop out, but devs who bleieve in this project will stay especially when we see the creation of scarcity of kin. Your plan would have perfectly worked if the demand had matched the payouts but it has not and it still does not, so it means it needs fixing!
arriving at consensus AND distributing coins via burning Bitcoin instead of electricity/equipment to create permissionless, unfakeable, green, and trust minimized basis over every aspect of sidechain control.
creating Bitcoin peg from altcoin chain to mainchain (the hard direction) by allocating small percentage of Bitcoin intended for burning to reimbursing withdrawals, effectively making it a childchain/sidechain (no oracles or federated multisigs)
This is not an altcoin thread. I'm not making anything. The design discussed options for existing altcoins and new ways to built on top of Bitcoin inheriting some of its security guarantees. 2 parts: First, the design allows any altcoins to switch to securing themselves via Bitcoin instead of their own PoW or PoS with significant benefits to both altcoins and Bitcoin (and environment lol). Second, I explain how to create Bitcoin-pegged assets to turn altcoins into a Bitcoin sidechain equivalent. Let me know if this is of interest or if it exists, feel free to use or do anything with this, hopefully I can help.
how to create continuous sunk costs, permissionless entry, high cost of attacks?
how to do it without needing to build up a new source of hardware capital or energy costs?
how to peg another chain's token value w/o incentivized collusion risk of federation or oracles?
how to make sidechain use fully optional for all Bitcoin parties?
how to allow programmable Bitcoins w/ unlimited permissionless expressiveness w/o forcing mainchain into additional risks?
Solution to first few points:
Continuous Proof of Bitcoin Burn (CPoBB) to distribute supply control and sidechain consensus control to independent parties
Distributes an altcoin for permissionless access and sidechain-only sybil protection.
In case of sidechain block-producer censorship, Bitcoin's independent data availability makes sidechain nodes trivially aware
PoW altcoin switching to CPoBB would trade:
cost of capital and energy -> cost of burnt bitcoin
finality of their PoW -> finality of Bitcoin's PoW
impact on environment -> 0 impact on environment
unforgeable costliness of work -> unforgeable costliness of burn
contract logic can include conditions dependent on real Bitcoins as it's Bitcoin-aware
PoS altcoin switching to CPoBB would trade:
permissioned by coin holders entry -> permissionless entry by anyone with access to Bitcoin
no incentive to give up control or sell coins -> incentive to sell coins to cover the cost of burnt bitcoin
incentivized guaranteed centralization of control over time by staking -> PoW guarantees with same 0 environmental impact
nothing at stake -> recovering sunk costs at stake
contract logic can include conditions dependent on real Bitcoins as it's Bitcoin-aware
We already have a permissionless, compact, public, high-cost-backed finality base layer to build on top - Bitcoin! It will handle sorting, data availability, finality, and has something of value to use instead of capital or energy that's outside the sidechain - the Bitcoin coins. The sunk costs of PoW can be simulated by burning Bitcoin, similar to concept known as Proof of Burn where Bitcoin are sent to unspendable address. Unlike ICO's, no contributors can take out the Bitcoins and get rewards for free. Unlike PoS, entry into supply lies outside the alt-chain and thus doesn't depend on permission of alt-chain stake-coin holders. It's hard to find a more bandwidth or state size protective blockchain to use other than Bitcoin as well so altcoins can be Bitcoin-aware at little marginal difficulty - 10 years of history fully validates in under a day.
What are typical issues with Proof of Burn?
limited burn time window prevents permissionless entry in the future. how many years did it take for most heavily mined projects to become known and well reviewed? many. thus entry into control of supply that's vital to control of chain cannot be dependent on the earliest stage of the project. (counterparty)
"land grabs" - by having limited supply without continuous emission or inflation we encourage holding vs spending.
These issues can be fixed by having Proof of Burn be permanently accessible and continuous: Continuous Proof of Bitcoin Burn CPoBB
This should be required for any design for it to stay permissionless. Optional is constant fixed emission rate for altcoins not trying to be money if goal is to maximize accessibility. Since it's not depending on brand new PoW for security, they don't have to depend on massive early rewards giving disproportionate fraction of supply at earliest stage either. If 10 coins are created every block, after n blocks, at rate of 10 coins per block, % emission per block is = (100/n)%, an always decreasing number. Sidechain coin doesn't need to be scarce money, and could maximize distribution of control by encouraging further distribution. If no burners exist in a block, altcoin block reward is simply added to next block reward making emission predictable. Sidechain block content should be committed in burn transaction via a root of the merkle tree of its transactions. Sidechain state will depend on Bitcoin for finality and block time between commitment broadcasts. However, the throughput can be of any size per block, unlimited number of such sidechains can exist with their own rules and validation costs are handled only by nodes that choose to be aware of a specific sidechain by running its consensus compatible software. Important design decision is how can protocol determine the "true" side-block and how to distribute incentives. Simplest solution is to always :
Agree on the valid sidechain block matching the merkle root commitment for the largest amount of Bitcoin burnt, earliest inclusion in the bitcoin block as the tie breaker
Distribute block reward during the next side-block proportional to current amounts burnt
Bitcoin fee market serves as deterrent for spam submissions of blocks to validate
sidechain block reward is set always at 10 altcoins per block Bitcoin block contains the following content embedded and part of its transactions: tx11: burns 0.01 BTC & OP_RETURN tx56: burns 0.05 BTC & OP_RETURN ... <...root of valid sidechain block version 1> ... tx78: burns 1 BTC & OP_RETURN ... <...root of valid sidechain block version 2> ... tx124: burns 0.2 BTC & OP_RETURN ... <...root of INVALID sidechain block version 3> ...
Validity is deterministic by rules in client side node software (e.g. signature validation) so all nodes can independently see version 3 is invalid and thus burner of tx124 gets no reward allocated. The largest valid burn is from tx78 so version 2 is used for the blockchain in sidechain. The total valid burn is 1.06 BTC, so 10 altcoins to be distributed in the next block are 0.094, 0.472, 9.434 to owners of first 3 transactions, respectively. Censorship attack would require continuous costs in Bitcoin on the attacker and can be waited out. Censorship would also be limited to on-sidechain specific transactions as emission distribution to others CPoB contributors wouldn't be affected as blocks without matching coin distributions on sidechain wouldn't be valid. Additionally, sidechains can allow a limited number of sidechain transactions to happen via embedding transaction data inside Bitcoin transactions (e.g. OP_RETURN) as a way to use Bitcoin for data availability layer in case sidechain transactions are being censored on their network. Since all sidechain nodes are Bitcoin aware, it would be trivial to include. Sidechain blocks cannot be reverted without reverting Bitcoin blocks or hard forking the protocol used to derive sidechain state. If protocol is forked, the value of sidechain coins on each fork of sidechain state becomes important but Proof of Burn natively guarantees trust minimized and permissionless distribution of the coins, something inferior methods like obscure early distributions, trusted pre-mines, and trusted ICO's cannot do. More bitcoins being burnt is parallel to more hash rate entering PoW, with each miner or burner getting smaller amount of altcoins on average making it unprofitable to burn or mine and forcing some to exit. At equilibrium costs of equipment and electricity approaches value gained from selling coins just as at equilibrium costs of burnt coins approaches value of altcoins rewarded. In both cases it incentivizes further distribution to markets to cover the costs making burners and miners dependent on users via markets. In both cases it's also possible to mine without permission and mine at a loss temporarily to gain some altcoins without permission if you want to. Altcoins benefit by inheriting many of bitcoin security guarantees, bitcoin parties have to do nothing if they don't want to, but will see their coins grow more scarce through burning. The contributions to the fee market will contribute to higher Bitcoin miner rewards even after block reward is gone.
What is the ideal goal of the sidechains? Ideally to have a token that has the bi-directionally pegged value to Bitcoin and tradeable ~1:1 for Bitcoin that gives Bitcoin users an option of a different rule set without compromising the base chain nor forcing base chain participants to do anything different. Issues with value pegs:
federation based pegs allow collusion to steal bitcoins stored in multi-party controlled accounts
even if multisig participants are switched or weighted in some trust minimized manner, there's always incentive to collude and steal more
smart contract pegs (plasma, rollups) on base chain would require bitcoin nodes and miners to validate sidechain transactions and has to provide block content for availability (e.g. call data in rollups), making them not optional.
bitcoin nodes shouldn't be sidechain aware so impossible to peg the value
Let's get rid of the idea of needing Bitcoin collateral to back pegged coins 1:1 as that's never secure, independent, or scalable at same security level. As drive-chain design suggested the peg doesn't have to be fast, can take months, just needs to exist so other methods can be used to speed it up like atomic swaps by volunteers taking on the risk for a fee. In continuous proof of burn we have another source of Bitcoins, the burnt Bitcoins. Sidechain protocols can require some minor percentage (e.g. 20%) of burner tx value coins via another output to go to reimburse those withdrawing side-Bitcoins to Bitcoin chain until they are filled. If withdrawal queue is empty that % is burnt instead. Selection of who receives reimbursement is deterministic per burner. Percentage must be kept small as it's assumed it's possible to get up to that much discount on altcoin emissions. Let's use a really simple example case where each burner pays 20% of burner tx amount to cover withdrawal in exact order requested with no attempts at other matching, capped at half amount requested per payout. Example:
withdrawal queue: request1: 0.2 sBTC request2: 1.0 sBTC request3: 0.5 sBTC same block burners: tx burns 0.8 BTC, 0.1 BTC is sent to request1, 0.1 BTC is sent to request2 tx burns 0.4 BTC, 0.1 BTC is sent to request1 tx burns 0.08 BTC, 0.02 BTC is sent to request 1 tx burns 1.2 BTC, 0.1 BTC is sent to request1, 0.2 BTC is sent to request2 withdrawal queue: request1: filled with 0.32 BTC instead of 0.2 sBTC, removed from queue request2: partially-filled with 0.3 BTC out of 1.0 sBTC, 0.7 BTC remaining for next queue request3: still 0.5 sBTC
Withdrawal requests can either take long time to get to filled due to cap per burn or get overfilled as seen in "request1" example, hard to predict. Overfilling is not a big deal since we're not dealing with a finite source. The risk a user that chooses to use the sidechain pegged coin takes on is based on the rate at which they can expect to get paid based on value of altcoin emission that generally matches Bitcoin burn rate. If sidechain loses interest and nobody is burning enough bitcoin, the funds might be lost so the scale of risk has to be measured. If Bitcoins burnt per day is 0.5 BTC total and you hope to deposit or withdraw 5000 BTC, it might take a long time or never happen to withdraw it. But for amounts comparable or under 0.5 BTC/day average burnt with 5 side-BTC on sidechain outstanding total the risks are more reasonable. Deposits onto the sidechain are far easier - by burning Bitcoin in a separate known unspendable deposit address for that sidechain and sidechain protocol issuing matching amount of side-Bitcoin. Withdrawn bitcoins are treated as burnt bitcoins for sake of dividing block rewards as long as they followed the deterministic rules for their burn to count as valid and percentage used for withdrawals is kept small to avoid approaching free altcoin emissions by paying for your own withdrawals and ensuring significant unforgeable losses. Ideally more matching is used so large withdrawals don't completely block everyone else and small withdrawals don't completely block large withdrawals. Better methods should deterministically randomize assigned withdrawals via previous Bitcoin block hash, prioritized by request time (earliest arrivals should get paid earlier), and amount of peg outstanding vs burn amount (smaller burns should prioritize smaller outstanding balances). Fee market on bitcoin discourages doing withdrawals of too small amounts and encourages batching by burners. The second method is less reliable but already known that uses over-collateralized loans that create a oracle-pegged token that can be pegged to the bitcoin value. It was already used by its inventors in 2014 on bitshares (e.g. bitCNY, bitUSD, bitBTC) and similarly by MakerDAO in 2018. The upside is a trust minimized distribution of CPoB coins can be used to distribute trust over selection of price feed oracles far better than pre-mined single trusted party based distributions used in MakerDAO (100% pre-mined) and to a bit lesser degree on bitshares (~50% mined, ~50% premined before dpos). The downside is 2 fold: first the supply of BTC pegged coin would depend on people opening an equivalent of a leveraged long position on the altcoin/BTC pair, which is hard to convince people to do as seen by very poor liquidity of bitBTC in the past. Second downside is oracles can still collude to mess with price feeds, and while their influence might be limited via capped price changes per unit time and might compromise their continuous revenue stream from fees, the leverage benefits might outweight the losses. The use of continous proof of burn to peg withdrawals is superior method as it is simply a minor byproduct of "mining" for altcoins and doesn't depend on traders positions. At the moment I'm not aware of any market-pegged coins on trust minimized platforms or implemented in trust minimized way (e.g. premined mkr on premined eth = 2 sets of trusted third parties each of which with full control over the design). _______________________________________
Brief issues with current altchains options:
PoW: New PoW altcoins suffer high risk of attacks. Additional PoW chains require high energy and capital costs to create permissionless entry and trust minimized miners that are forever dependent on markets to hold them accountable. Using same algorithm or equipment as another chain or merge-mining puts you at a disadvantage by allowing some miners to attack and still cover sunk costs on another chain. Using a different algorithm/equipment requires building up the value of sunk costs to protect against attacks with significant energy and capital costs. Drive-chains also require miners to allow it by having to be sidechain aware and thus incur additional costs on them and validating nodes if the sidechain rewards are of value and importance.
PoS: PoS is permissioned (requires permission from internal party to use network or contribute to consensus on permitted scale), allows perpetual control without accountability to others, and incentivizes centralization of control over time. Without continuous source of sunk costs there's no reason to give up control. By having consensus entirely dependent on internal state network, unlike PoW but like private databases, cannot guarantee independent permissionless entry and thus cannot claim trust minimization. Has no built in distribution methods so depends on safe start (snapshot of trust minimized distributions or PoW period) followed by losing that on switch to PoS or starting off dependent on a single trusted party such as case in all significant pre-mines and ICO's.
Proof of Capacity: PoC is just shifting costs further to capital over PoW to achieve same guarantees.
PoW/PoS: Still require additional PoW chain creation. Strong dependence on PoS can render PoW irrelevant and thus inherit the worst properties of both protocols.
Tokens inherit all trust dependencies of parent blockchain and thus depend on the above.
Embedded consensus (counterparty, veriblock?, omni): Lacks mechanism for distribution, requires all tx data to be inside scarce Bitcoin block space so high cost to users instead of compensated miners. If you want to build a very expressive scripting language, might very hard & expensive to fit into Bitcoin tx vs CPoBB external content of unlimited size in a committed hash. Same as CPoBB is Bitcoin-aware so can respond to Bitcoin being sent but without source of Bitcoins like burning no way to do any trust minimized Bitcoin-pegs it can control fully.
Few extra notes from my talks with people:
fees must be high to be included in next block (and helps pay and bribe bitcoin miners), RBF use is encouraged to cancel late transactions
what if not enough burners, just passive nodes? you can burn smallest amount of bitcoin yourself when you have a transaction you want to go through
using commit hashes on bitcoin to lock altcoin state isn't new (e.g. kmd) but usually those rely on some federation or permissioned proof of stake mechanism with no real costs. this is combination of both.
this is not exactly like counterparty's embedded consensus as block data and transactions are outside Bitcoin, but consensus is derived with help of embedded on Bitcoin data.
deterministic randomness (e.g. via that block's hash) could be used to assign winning sidechain block weighted by amount burned to allow occasional blocks formed by others curbing success rate of censorship by highest burner
wants to transition away from using proof of burn via tunable proofs and native proof of work (whitepaper)
a dominant premine (trust maximized) relative to emission that defeats the purpose of distributing control over incentives (figure 3 in tokenpaper suggests premine still ~30%-70% by year 2050)
variable emission rate "adaptive mint and burn" makes supply unpredictable (and possibly gameable)
additional rewards that aren't trust minimized like "app mining" and "user incentives" possibly gameable with premine
election of a leader includes their own PoW to be elected even at start (5% cap), why lol?
blockstack also suggested use of randomness that depends on that block so Bitcoin miners that already spent energy mining that block can't just re-do it to get picked at no cost
if can burn bitcoins directly via op_return tx would help to use 1 less output and be provably prunable for utxo set (not sure if that's relayed as standard)
Main questions to you:
why not? (other than blocktime)
can this be done without an altcoin? (Not sure and don't think so w/o compromising unforgeable costliness and thus trust minimization. At least it's not using an altcoin that's clearly centralized.)
how to make it less detectable by Bitcoin miners? ( BMM could use some techniques described here: https://twitter.com/SomsenRuben/status/1210040270328254464 ) ( Perhaps since sidechain nodes receive proposed blocks independently and can figure out their hash, the commit message ( sidechain id + block commit + miner address) can be hashed one more time before its placed on Bitcoin, making miners unaware until after Bitcoin block is found that this is that sidechain's burn. Sidechain block producers would have to delay sidechain block propagation until after Bitcoin block is propagated, 10 minutes blocktime helps here. Hiding the fact that Bitcoin is burnt until after the fact is another possibly important matter. )
Should reward be split between all valid blocks or just winner gets all? (Blockstacks approach does not reward blocks marked by different from leader chaintip. That seems dangerous since sidechain tx sorting would be difficult to match and could take significant time to be compensated for perfectly valid work and coins burned. It doesn't seem as necessary in burning since we're not expending costs based on only one previous block version, the costs are independent of block assembly. Tradeoff is between making it easier for independent "mining" of sidechain and making it easier to validate for full nodes on sidechain)
r/Ethereum - I wrote this to explain Ethereum in depth to newbies. Please check for accuracy!
Hello ethereum - I'm currently in Singapore exploring all of the cool blockchain tech that's going on here. I'm also writing a blog that aims to explain blockchain technology simply to anyone whose interested. www.cryptoambit.com If you guys could spot check my Ethereum post for accuracy, I'd appreciate it. If you like it, would also appreciate some subscribers! Thanks By now, most people know Ethereum as the second most valuable cryptocurrency, currently valued at over $60 billion dollars. Well, it turns out that Ethereum isn't actually a cryptocurrency - it's a software platform that let's programmers build applications on top of blockchain technology. Within the ethereum platform, is a cryptocurrency called ether that is used to power applications built on the Ethereum blockchain. From Bitcoin to Ethereum Bitcoin uses a global network of computers that maintain a shared ledger called a blockchain that keeps track of who owns bitcoin. Once blockchain technology was introduced to the world, people realized that blockchains could be used to keep track of anything of value. In 2013, a 19 year old named Vitalik Buterin introduced the Ethereum white paper, which proposed an open source platform that would let programmers build blockchain applications that could facilitate the exchange of money, content, property, shares or anything of value. Much like with Satoshi Nakamoto's paper, Buterin's was met with widespread excitement from software developers around the world who began building toward the vision Buterin laid out. Much like Bitcoin, Ethereum isn't owned or controlled by any one person. Unlike Bitcoin, whose creator remains anonymous, Ethereum has a leader in Vitalik Buterin (pictured below). While Buterin doesn't control Ethereum in the way that a CEO does, his word carries tremendous weight in dictating the direction of the project - something that is considered a strength or a weakness, depending on who you ask. Smart Contracts The basic function that programs built on Ethereum perform are called smart contracts. Smart contracts are digital agreements that execute automatically based on real world data. An easy way to think of them is an "If-then statement." IF condition A exists, THEN perform function B. Let's say for example Grandma wants to make sure she never forgets to give Little Billy birthday money each year. She could write a smart contract that says IF it's Little Billy's birthday, THEN pay him $10 from Grandma's account. Once this contract is broadcast to the Ethereum network, it will execute automatically each year on Little Billy's birthday. Smart contracts have applications far beyond improving the reliability and efficiency of Grandmothers around the world. Another simple application of a smart contract is for rental payments: IF date = 1st of the month, THEN pay landlord rent amount. Processes that currently involve manual interactions between two parties can now be automated and the value can be moved in real time over the blockchain rather than settling days later as with traditional banking. A Real World Example Ethereum and smart contracts are a big deal because they have the ability to usher in what's been dubbed the "smart economy" - one in which slow manual processes prone to human error and deceit are replaced with automated processes that are completely transparent and trustworthy. A real world example that typifies the new "smart economy" is a project being run by a French insurance company called AXA. AXA offers a flight insurance product that pays out a policy holder in the event that a flight is delayed by two hours or more. It currently has a product in trial that will pay out insurance claims using smart contracts and the Ethereum blockchain. The smart contract is simple: IF flight is over two hours late, THEN pay policyholder. The smart contract is connected to a database that monitors flight times. If the database shows that the flight is over two hours late, the smart contract is triggered and the policyholder is paid automatically over the blockchain. Without the smart contract, the policyholder would have to file a claim and wait for the insurance company's claims department to process it, which could take anywhere from 1 to 2 weeks. With the smart contract, neither the insurance company nor the policyholder has to do anything. This also creates trust between the two parties because there are no grey areas - the customer can review the smart contract prior to purchasing the policy and feel comfortable that he will receive his claim in the event of a delay. Ethereum vs Ether As stated in the intro, Ethereum is a platform for building blockchain applications using smart contracts. What you may have just purchased on Coinbase is called Ether, which is the cryptocurrency that fuels the Ethereum network. Ether functions more like a digital commodity than a digital currency. Just like you need gasoline to fuel your car, you need Ether to run applications on the Ethereum blockchain. In the Grandmother example cited above, Grandma would have to purchase small amounts of Ether to fuel her smart contract that pays Little Billy his birthday money. The Ethereum blockchain functions in the same way as the Bitcoin blockchain: a network of computers run software that validates transactions through majority consensus. The people running these computers are called miners. Bitcoin miners are compensated for their resources by being paid in Bitcoin. Ethereum miners are compensated in Ether. On Little Billy's birthday, Grandma's ether transaction fee will go to whichever miner adds the block containing Grandma's transaction to the blockchain. That miner will also receive new Ether in the process. The same supply/demand economics that apply to commodities like oil and gas also apply to Ether. Oil is valuable because it powers many of the things we use in our everyday life - it heats our homes and fuels our engines. The more people and enterprises that rely on Ethereum based applications, the higher the demand will be for Ether which will increase its value. As with all cryptocurrencies, there's plenty of speculation baked into the price - speculation that the demand for Ether will increase in the future. Since Ether is valuable, exchangeable and transferable, certain merchants are also starting to accept it as a currency. dApps - Decentralized Apps Applications that run smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain are called "dApps," or decentralized apps. Just as any app developer can build apps on top of Apple's IOS operating system, developers can build on top of Ethereum's blockchain infrastructure. To the end user of a dApp, it might not look and feel any different than the apps you use today. It's the underlying blockchain infrastructure that make them different. Since dApps function on top of the blockchain, they can be used to transfer value peer-to-peer. To return to our Grandmother example, there could be a dApp that Granny can download that lets her schedule Little Billy's birthday payments without having to code the smart contract herself. dApps are also completely open sourced so other people can access the code and build on top of them. Someone could take the code to the birthday payment dApp and add the ability for Grandma to add a note that says, "Happy Birthday Billy!" Running dApps on the blockchain also offers added security benefits. Since the transactions are distributed and encrypted across the Ethereum blockchain, there is no central place for a hacker to breach and gain access to all of the world's Grandmother to grandson birthday payment data. At this point, I'm really beating the GrandmotheLittle Billy example to death because I think it represents a simple illustration for the kinds of applications that can be built on the Ethereum blockchain. In reality, the dApps that are being built are much more complex. Here are a few examples:
Weifund - blockchain crowdfunding: Users can launch traditional crowdfunding campaigns, but through the use of smart contracts, backers can gain a financial stake in the project. If an indie film gets funded on Weifund, a backer who financed 10% of the project can collect 10% of the film's revenues. Payments will be issued in real time as the film generates revenue.
Ujo Music - Music licensing via the blockchain: An artist can create an original song and register it on Ujo's platform and set their own licensing terms. If a film producer wants to use that song in a movie, they can purchase the rights based on the terms set by the artist who will then get paid directly. This erases the need for industry middlemen like Warner Brothers who end up taking the lion's share of their artist's profits.
Virtue Poker - Online poker secured by the blockchain: At the height of it's popularity, online poker platforms like PokerStars were marred with issues that ranged from deck rigging to the abuse of player funds held by the company. Virtue Poker using Ethereum allows players to fund their bets directly, insuring that no central party can access and misappropriate player money. Their code is open sourced so that users can understand how hands are dealt, insuring that no one can rig the deck. Lastly, players are paid out their winnings in real time over the blockchain so no more waiting weeks for a check to come in the mail.
Ethereum Tokens So now that you understand that Ethereum is a network for building decentralized applications that require a cryptocurrency called Ether to run, I'm going to introduce a confusing concept. Many dApps built on Ethereum have their own cryptocurrencies or "tokens." In order to interact with the dApps, customers need to purchase the dApp's native token. Here's a helpful analogy I came across - when you go to a waterpark, you pay the admission fee and in return, you get a wristband. That wristband gives you the ability to ride the waterslides in the water park. With certain dApps, the token is the wristband, and a user must purchase it to interact with whatever the dApp offers. Let's take a dApp called Golem as an example. Golem lets people rent out their excess computing power to people who need it - kind of like a computer AirBnb. To cite this article from Laura Shin, if I'm a computer graphics artist that wants to render some kind of computationally intense animation, I can purchase Golem tokens that let me tap into the Golem network to generate my animation. I then pay the people who are renting me their computers with the Golem tokens. The Golem token is a form of smart contract and this transaction is recorded on the Ethereum blockchain. Since Golem tokens are also a cryptocurrency, they can be traded on the free market. If I'm a speculator who has no intention of using the Golem network to rent computing power, I can still buy the Golem token on an exchange in hopes that it appreciates in value. Like bitcoin, there is a fixed supply of Golem tokens so if the demand for the service increases, so will the value of the token. If I bought Golem at its original price of around 1 penny and held it to today, I would have made 35X my initial investment since Golem tokens currently trade around 35 cents a piece. ICOs ICO stands for, "Initial Coin Offering" which is a fundraising mechanism for cryptocurrencies which has exploded in popularity this year - the majority of them are held on the Ethereum network. Similar to a kickstarter campaign, they allow entrepreneurs to raise money for projects by giving investors an early opportunity to purchase the cryptocurrency before the final product has been built. If the project is successful, the value of the cryptocurrency will rise in value and early investors can sell it on the open market for a profit. ICOs have stirred up a lot of controversy because they represent a risky proposition with zero investor protection. Let's say I wanted to build a casino and to finance it, I gave investors the opportunity to buy chips that can be used at my roulette tables once the casino opened. If you bought $100K in roulette chips from me and I decide that I no longer want to build the casino, you're stuck holding worthless chips. If investors don't do their due diligence, they may end up buying tokens for a project whose creators never intended on building it in he first place - the creators walk away with the money and the investors have no way of recouping their funds. On the other hand, early investors in projects that go on to be successful have the opportunity to make enormous returns. For example, people who invested $1,000 in the Golem ICO would be sitting on $35,000 at it's current price of $0.35 - if it ever goes to $10, they're all millionaires. Another positive aspect of ICOs is that they let anyone, rich or poor get involved in early stage investing. To invest in a company like Twitter or Facebook pre-IPO (initial public offering), you need to be an accredited investor - this basically means you're already a rich person. With ICOs, all you need is an internet connection and a little bit of money and you have the potential to become wealthy by investing in the right projects. Far From Perfect Ethereum has the potential to change the way humans transact with one another but it is still a very young technology and it hasn't been without its problems. While the blockchain architecture underlying the Ethereum network is secure, not all of the applications built on top of it are. Faulty code can and has made applications vulnerable to hacking and malfunctions. Here are two prime examples: DAO Hack - DAO was a dApp built on Ethereum that enabled crowd based venture capital. DAO token holders were given the right to vote on projects they wanted to support - if projects went on to be successful, DAO token holders would receive financial rewards. The DAO ICO received $168 million in funding. The DAO software was hosted on the Ethereum blockchain and was publically visible by all. A hacker spotted a flaw in the DAO's code that enabled him to route $55M in ether held by the DAO into an account that he controlled. The Ethereum team had do do something called a hard fork (something I won't get into now) to reverse return the stolen funds. Parity Wallet Freeze - Parity is a wallet where people store Ether. A flaw in Parity's code let a user delete a specific line of code that was necessary for accessing funds in a Parity wallet. This led to $280 million dollars worth of ether being frozen - it hasn't been stolen but it can't be accessed either. Parity Technologies has proposed another hard fork to correct the issue - something that is sure to divide the Ethereum community and rattle user confidence. Despite the world changing implications that Ethereum dApps and smart contracts have, the trouble is that any programmer can write them - if they aren't written properly, they can behave in unintended ways and be exploited like in the above listed examples. Ethereum is still a very young network and security issues with dApps and smart contracts will have to be sorted out if its to reach its true aspirations. Leading The Decentralized Revolution “Ethereum aims to take the promise of decentralization, openness and security that is at the core of blockchain technology and brings it to almost anything that can be computed.” - Vitalik Buterin With dApps, smart contracts and blockchain technology, Ethereum is leading the decentralized revolution. Bitcoin is the world's first decentralized currency, that operates on a global network of computers outside of central intermediaries. Ethereum gives programmers a platform to develop a decentralized version of just about anything. Decentralized networks like Ethereum have the power to remove the intermediaries that currently exist between producer and consumer. Let's take a company like Uber. Uber is a platform that brings people who need rides together with people who have cars. To facilitate this interaction, Uber collects 20% of every ride. With Ethereum and blockchain technology, there is nothing to prevent a bunch of software developers from writing a dApp that creates a decentralized Uber. Instead of 20% per ride, transaction fees are paid to the network and the driver takes home the lions share of the transaction. Tokens can be issued that represent ownership in the network. Coders who work on improving the network can get paid for their efforts in ownership tokens. Non-technical people can come up with marketing campaigns that spread awareness for the network and also get compensated in ownership tokens. As the decentralized Uber network grows and improves, the value of its ownership token increases, rewarding the people that built it. The result is whats referred to as a "Decentralized Autonomous Organization" and theres a strong possibility that DAOs replace a lot of the world's biggest corporations. This may sound like a radical concept but blockchain technology enables these kinds of decentralized organizations to exist - Ethereum provides the tools for people to go out and build them.
Your Guide to Monero, and Why It Has Great Potential
/////Your Guide to Monero, and Why It Has Great Potential/////
Marketing. It's a dirty word for most members of the Monero community. It is also one of the most divisive words in the Monero community. Yet, the lack of marketing is one of the most frustrating things for many newcomers. This is what makes this an unusual post from a member of the Monero community. This post is an unabashed and unsolicited analyzation of why I believe Monero to have great potential. Below I have attempted to outline different reasons why Monero has great potential, beginning with upcoming developments and use cases, to broader economic motives, speculation, and key issues for it to overcome. I encourage you to discuss and criticise my musings, commenting below if you feel necessary to do so.
Bulletproofs - A Reduction in Transaction Sizes and Fees Since the introduction of Ring Confidential Transactions (Ring CT), transaction amounts have been hidden in Monero, albeit at the cost of increased transaction fees and sizes. In order to mitigate this issue, Bulletproofs will soon be added to reduce both fees and transaction size by 80% to 90%. This is great news for those transacting smaller USD amounts as people commonly complained Monero's fees were too high! Not any longer though! More information can be found here. Bulletproofs are already working on the Monero testnet, and developers were aiming to introduce them in March 2018, however it could be delayed in order to ensure everything is tried and tested. Multisig Multisig has recently been merged! Mulitsig, also called multisignature, is the requirement for a transaction to have two or more signatures before it can be executed. Multisig transactions and addresses are indistinguishable from normal transactions and addresses in Monero, and provide more security than single-signature transactions. It is believed this will lead to additional marketplaces and exchanges to supporting Monero. Kovri Kovri is an implementation of the Invisible Internet Project (I2P) network. Kovri uses both garlic encryption and garlic routing to create a private, protected overlay-network across the internet. This overlay-network provides users with the ability to effectively hide their geographical location and internet IP address. The good news is Kovri is under heavy development and will be available soon. Unlike other coins' false privacy claims, Kovri is a game changer as it will further elevate Monero as the king of privacy. Mobile Wallets There is already a working Android Wallet called Monerujo available in the Google Play Store. X Wallet is an IOS mobile wallet. One of the X Wallet developers recently announced they are very, very close to being listed in the Apple App Store, however are having some issues with getting it approved. The official Monero IOS and Android wallets, along with the MyMonero IOS and Android wallets, are also almost ready to be released, and can be expected very soon. Hardware Wallets Hardware wallets are currently being developed and nearing completion. Because Monero is based on the CryptoNote protocol, it means it requires unique development in order to allow hardware wallet integration. The Ledger Nano S will be adding Monero support by the end of Q1 2018. There is a recent update here too. Even better, for the first time ever in cryptocurrency history, the Monero community banded together to fund the development of an exclusive Monero Hardware Wallet, and will be available in Q2 2018, costing only about $20! In addition, the CEO of Trezor has offered a 10BTC bounty to whoever can provide the software to allow Monero integration. Someone can be seen to already be working on that here. TAILS Operating System Integration Monero is in the progress of being packaged in order for it to be integrated into TAILS and ready to use upon install. TAILS is the operating system popularised by Edward Snowden and is commonly used by those requiring privacy such as journalists wanting to protect themselves and sources, human-right defenders organizing in repressive contexts, citizens facing national emergencies, domestic violence survivors escaping from their abusers, and consequently, darknet market users. In the meantime, for those users who wish to use TAILS with Monero, u/Electric_sheep01 has provided Sheep's Noob guide to Monero GUI in Tails 3.2, which is a step-by-step guide with screenshots explaining how to setup Monero in TAILS, and is very easy to follow. Mandatory Hardforks Unlike other coins, Monero receives a protocol upgrade every 6 months in March and September. Think of it as a Consensus Protocol Update. Monero's hard forks ensure quality development takes place, while preventing political or ideological issues from hindering progress. When a hardfork occurs, you simply download and use the new daemon version, and your existing wallet files and copy of the blockchain remain compatible. This reddit post provides more information. Dynamic fees Many cryptocurrencies have an arbitrary block size limit. Although Monero has a limit, it is adaptive based on the past 100 blocks. Similarly, fees change based on transaction volume. As more transactions are processed on the Monero network, the block size limit slowly increases and the fees slowly decrease. The opposite effect also holds true. This means that the more transactions that take place, the cheaper the fees! Tail Emission and Inflation There will be around 18.4 million Monero mined at the end of May 2022. However, tail emission will kick in after that which is 0.6 XMR, so it has no fixed limit. Gundamlancer explains that Monero's "main emission curve will issue about 18.4 million coins to be mined in approximately 8 years. (more precisely 18.132 Million coins by ca. end of May 2022) After that, a constant "tail emission" of 0.6 XMR per 2-minutes block (modified from initially equivalent 0.3 XMR per 1-minute block) will create a sub-1% perpetual inflatio starting with 0.87% yearly inflation around May 2022) to prevent the lack of incentives for miners once a currency is not mineable anymore. Monero Research Lab Monero has a group of anonymous/pseudo-anonymous university academics actively researching, developing, and publishing academic papers in order to improve Monero. See here and here. The Monero Research Lab are acquainted with other members of cryptocurrency academic community to ensure when new research or technology is uncovered, it can be reviewed and decided upon whether it would be beneficial to Monero. This ensures Monero will always remain a leading cryptocurrency. A recent end of 2017 update from a MRL researcher can be found here.
///Monero's Technology - Rising Above The Rest///
Monero Has Already Proven Itself To Be Private, Secure, Untraceable, and Trustless Monero is the only private, untraceable, trustless, secure and fungible cryptocurrency. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are TRACEABLE through the use of blockchain analytics, and has lead to the prosecution of numerous individuals, such as the alleged Alphabay administrator Alexandre Cazes. In the Forfeiture Complaint which detailed the asset seizure of Alexandre Cazes, the anonymity capabilities of Monero were self-demonstrated by the following statement of the officials after the AlphaBay shutdown: "In total, from CAZES' wallets and computer agents took control of approximately $8,800,000 in Bitcoin, Ethereum, Monero and Zcash, broken down as follows: 1,605.0503851 Bitcoin, 8,309.271639 Ethereum, 3,691.98 Zcash, and an unknown amount of Monero". Privacy CANNOT BE OPTIONAL and must be at a PROTOCOL LEVEL. With Monero, privacy is mandatory, so that everyone gets the benefits of privacy without any transactions standing out as suspicious. This is the reason Darknet Market places are moving to Monero, and will never use Verge, Zcash, Dash, Pivx, Sumo, Spectre, Hush or any other coins that lack good privacy. Peter Todd (who was involved in the Zcash trusted setup ceremony) recently reiterated his concerns of optional privacy after Jeffrey Quesnelle published his recent paper stating 31.5% of Zcash transactions may be traceable, and that only ~1% of the transactions are pure privacy transactions (i.e., z -> z transactions). When the attempted private transactions stand out like a sore thumb there is no privacy, hence why privacy cannot be optional. In addition, in order for a cryptocurrency to truly be private, it must not be controlled by a centralised body, such as a company or organisation, because it opens it up to government control and restrictions. This is no joke, but Zcash is supported by DARPA and the Israeli government!. Monero provides a stark contrast compared to other supposed privacy coins, in that Monero does not have a rich list! With all other coins, you can view wallet balances on the blockexplorers. You can view Monero's non-existent rich list here to see for yourself. I will reiterate here that Monero is TRUSTLESS. You don't need to rely on anyone else to protect your privacy, or worry about others colluding to learn more about you. No one can censor your transaction or decide to intervene. Monero is immutable, unlike Zcash, in which the lead developer Zooko publicly tweeted the possibility of providing a backdoor for authorities to trace transactions. To Zcash's demise, Zooko famously tweeted:
" And by the way, I think we can successfully make Zcash too traceable for criminals like WannaCry, but still completely private & fungible. …"
Ethereum's track record of immutability is also poor. Ethereum was supposed to be an immutable blockchain ledger, however after the DAO hack this proved to not be the case. A 2016 article on Saintly Law summarised the problematic nature of Ethereum's leadership and blockchain intervention:
" Many ethereum and blockchain advocates believe that the intervention was the wrong move to make in this situation. Smart contracts are meant to be self-executing, immutable and free from disturbance by organisations and intermediaries. Yet the building block of all smart contracts, the code, is inherently imperfect. This means that the technology is vulnerable to the same malicious hackers that are targeting businesses and governments. It is also clear that the large scale intervention after the DAO hack could not and would not likely be taken in smaller transactions, as they greatly undermine the viability of the cryptocurrency and the technology."
Monero provides Fungibility and Privacy in a Cashless World As outlined on GetMonero.org, fungibility is the property of a currency whereby two units can be substituted in place of one another. Fungibility means that two units of a currency can be mutually substituted and the substituted currency is equal to another unit of the same size. For example, two $10 bills can be exchanged and they are functionally identical to any other $10 bill in circulation (although $10 bills have unique ID numbers and are therefore not completely fungible). Gold is probably a closer example of true fungibility, where any 1 oz. of gold of the same grade is worth the same as another 1 oz. of gold. Monero is fungible due to the nature of the currency which provides no way to link transactions together nor trace the history of any particular XMR. 1 XMR is functionally identical to any other 1 XMR. Fungibility is an advantage Monero has over Bitcoin and almost every other cryptocurrency, due to the privacy inherent in the Monero blockchain and the permanently traceable nature of the Bitcoin blockchain. With Bitcoin, any BTC can be tracked by anyone back to its creation coinbase transaction. Therefore, if a coin has been used for an illegal purpose in the past, this history will be contained in the blockchain in perpetuity. A great example of Bitcoin's lack of fungibility was reposted by u/ViolentlyPeaceful:
"Imagine you sell cupcakes and receive Bitcoin as payment. It turns out that someone who owned that Bitcoin before you was involved in criminal activity. Now you are worried that you have become a suspect in a criminal case, because the movement of funds to you is a matter of public record. You are also worried that certain Bitcoins that you thought you owned will be considered ‘tainted’ and that others will refuse to accept them as payment."
This lack of fungibility means that certain businesses will be obligated to avoid accepting BTC that have been previously used for purposes which are illegal, or simply run afoul of their Terms of Service. Currently some large Bitcoin companies are blocking, suspending, or closing accounts that have received Bitcoin used in online gambling or other purposes deemed unsavory by said companies. Monero has been built specifically to address the problem of traceability and non-fungibility inherent in other cryptocurrencies. By having completely private transactions Monero is truly fungible and there can be no blacklisting of certain XMR, while at the same time providing all the benefits of a secure, decentralized, permanent blockchain. The world is moving cashless. Fact. The ramifications of this are enormous as we move into a cashless world in which transactions will be tracked and there is a potential for data to be used by third parties for adverse purposes. While most new cryptocurrency investors speculate upon vaporware ICO tokens in the hope of generating wealth, Monero provides salvation for those in which financial privacy is paramount. Too often people equate Monero's features with criminal endeavors. Privacy is not a crime, and is necessary for good money. Transparency in Monero is possible OFF-CHAIN, which offers greater transparency and flexibility. For example, a Monero user may share their Private View Key with their accountant for tax purposes. Monero aims to be adopted by more than just those with nefarious use cases. For example, if you lived in an oppressive religious regime and wanted to buy a certain item, using Monero would allow you to exchange value privately and across borders if needed. Another example is that if everybody can see how much cryptocurrency you have in your wallet, then a certain service might decide to charge you more, and bad actors could even use knowledge of your wallet balance to target you for extortion purposes. For example, a Russian cryptocurrency blogger was recently beaten and robbed of $425k. This is why FUNGIBILITY IS ESSENTIAL. To summarise this in a nutshell:
"A lack of fungibility means that when sending or receiving funds, if the other person personally knows you during a transaction, or can get any sort of information on you, or if you provide a residential address for shipping etc. – you could quite potentially have them use this against you for personal gain"
Major Investors And Crypto Figureheads Are Interested Ari Paul is the co-founder and CIO of BlockTower Capital. He was previously a portfolio manager for the University of Chicago's $8 billion endowment, and a derivatives market maker and proprietary trader for Susquehanna International Group. Paul was interviewed on CNBC on the 26th of December and when asked what was his favourite coin was, he stated "One that has real fundamental value besides from Bitcoin is Monero" and said it has "very strong engineering". In addition, when he was asked if that was the one used by criminals, he replied "Everything is used by criminals including the US dollar and the Euro". Paul later supported these claims on Twitter, recommending only Bitcoin and Monero as long-term investments. There are reports that "Roger Ver, earlier known as 'Bitcoin Jesus' for his evangelical support of the Bitcoin during its early years, said his investment in Monero is 'substantial' and his biggest in any virtual currency since Bitcoin. Charlie Lee, the creator of Litecoin, has publicly stated his appreciation of Monero. In a September 2017 tweet directed to Edward Snowden explaining why Monero is superior to Zcash, Charlie Lee tweeted:
All private transactions, More tested privacy tech, No tax on miners to pay investors, No high inflation... better investment.
John McAfee, arguably cryptocurrency's most controversial character at the moment, has publicly supported Monero numerous times over the last twelve months(before he started shilling ICOs), and has even claimed it will overtake Bitcoin. Playboy instagram celebrity Dan Bilzerian is a Monero investor, with 15% of his portfolio made up of Monero. Finally, while he may not be considered a major investor or figurehead, Erik Finman, a young early Bitcoin investor and multimillionaire, recently appeared in a CNBC Crypto video interview, explaining why he isn't entirely sold on Bitcoin anymore, and expresses his interest in Monero, stating:
"Monero is a really good one. Monero is an incredible currency, it's completely private."
There is a common belief that most of the money in cryptocurrency is still chasing the quick pump and dumps, however as the market matures, more money will flow into legitimate projects such as Monero. Monero's organic growth in price is evidence smart money is aware of Monero and gradually filtering in. The Bitcoin Flaw A relatively unknown blogger named CryptoIzzy posted three poignant pieces regarding Monero and its place in the world. The Bitcoin Flaw: Monero Rising provides an intellectual comparison of Monero to other cryptocurrencies, and Valuing Cryptocurrencies: An Approach outlines methods of valuing different coins. CryptoIzzy's most recent blog published only yesterday titled Monero Valuation - Update and Refocus is a highly recommended read. It touches on why Monero is much more than just a coin for the Darknet Markets, and provides a calculated future price of Monero. CryptoIzzy also published The Power of Money: A Case for Bitcoin, which is an exploration of our monetary system, and the impact decentralised cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Monero will have on the world. In the epilogue the author also provides a positive and detailed future valuation based on empirical evidence. CryptoIzzy predicts Monero to easily progress well into the four figure range. Monero Has a Relatively Small Marketcap Recently we have witnessed many newcomers to cryptocurrency neglecting to take into account coins' marketcap and circulating supply, blindly throwing money at coins under $5 with inflated marketcaps and large circulating supplies, and then believing it's possible for them to reach $100 because someone posted about it on Facebook or Reddit. Compared to other cryptocurrencies, Monero still has a low marketcap, which means there is great potential for the price to multiply. At the time of writing, according to CoinMarketCap, Monero's marketcap is only a little over $5 billion, with a circulating supply of 15.6 million Monero, at a price of $322 per coin. For this reason, I would argue that this is evidence Monero is grossly undervalued. Just a few billion dollars of new money invested in Monero can cause significant price increases. Monero's marketcap only needs to increase to ~$16 billion and the price will triple to over $1000. If Monero's marketcap simply reached ~$35 billion (just over half of Ripple's $55 billion marketcap), Monero's price will increase 600% to over $2000 per coin. Another way of looking at this is Monero's marketcap only requires ~$30 billion of new investor money to see the price per Monero reach $2000, while for Ethereum to reach $2000, Ethereum's marketcap requires a whopping ~$100 billion of new investor money. Technical Analysis There are numerous Monero technical analysts, however none more eerily on point than the crowd-pleasing Ero23. Ero23's charts and analysis can be found on Trading View. Ero23 gained notoriety for his long-term Bitcoin bull chart published in February, which is still in play today. Head over to his Trading View page to see his chart: Monero's dwindling supply. $10k in 2019 scenario, in which Ero23 predicts Monero to reach $10,000 in 2019. There is also this chart which appears to be freakishly accurate and is tracking along perfectly today. Coinbase Rumours Over the past 12 months there have been ongoing rumours that Monero will be one of the next cryptocurrencies to be added to Coinbase. In January 2017, Monero Core team member Riccardo 'Fluffypony' Spagni presented a talk at Coinbase HQ. In addition, in November 2017 GDAX announced the GDAX Digit Asset Framework outlining specific parameters cryptocurrencies must meet in order to be added to the exchange. There is speculation that when Monero has numerous mobile and hardware wallets available, and multisig is working, then it will be added. This would enable public accessibility to Monero to increase dramatically as Coinbase had in excess of 13 million users as of December, and is only going to grow as demand for cryptocurrencies increases. Many users argue that due to KYC/AML regulations, Coinbase will never be able to add Monero, however the Kraken exchange already operates in the US and has XMfiat pairs, so this is unlikely to be the reason Coinbase is yet to implement XMfiat trading. Monero Is Not an ICO Scam It is likely most of the ICOs which newcomers invest in, hoping to get rich quick, won't even be in the Top 100 cryptocurrencies next year. A large portion are most likely to be pumps and dumps, and we have already seen numerous instances of ICO exit scams. Once an ICO raises millions of dollars, the developers or CEO of the company have little incentive to bother rolling out their product or service when they can just cash out and leave. The majority of people who create a company to provide a service or product, do so in order to generate wealth. Unless these developers and CEOs are committed and believed in their product or service, it's likely that the funds raised during the ICO will far exceed any revenue generated from real world use cases. Monero is a Working Currency, Today Monero is a working currency, here today. The majority of so called cryptocurrencies that exist today are not true currencies, and do not aim to be. They are a token of exchange. They are like a share in a start-up company hoping to use blockchain technology to succeed in business. A crypto-assest is a more accurate name for coins such as Ethereum, Neo, Cardano, Vechain, etc. Monero isn't just a vaporware ICO token that promises to provide a blockchain service in the future. It is not a platform for apps. It is not a pump and dump coin. Monero is the only coin with all the necessary properties to be called true money. Monero is private internet money. Some even describe Monero as an online Swiss Bank Account or Bitcoin 2.0, and it is here to continue on from Bitcoin's legacy. Monero is alleviating the public from the grips of banks, and protests the monetary system forced upon us. Monero only achieved this because it is the heart and soul, and blood, sweat, and tears of the contributors to this project. Monero supporters are passionate, and Monero has gotten to where it is today thanks to its contributors and users.
///Key Issues for Monero to Overcome///
Scalability While Bulletproofs are soon to be implemented in order to improve Monero's transaction sizes and fees, scalability is an issue for Monero that is continuously being assessed by Monero's researchers and developers to find the most appropriate solution. Ricardo 'Fluffypony' Spagni recently appeared on CNBC's Crypto Trader, and when asked whether Monero is scalable as it stands today, Spagni stated that presently, Monero's on-chain scaling is horrible and transactions are larger than Bitcoin's (because of Monero's privacy features), so side-chain scaling may be more efficient. Spagni elaborated that the Monero team is, and will always be, looking for solutions to an array of different on-chain and off-chain scaling options, such as developing a Mimblewimble side-chain, exploring the possibility of Lightning Network so atomic swaps can be performed, and Tumblebit. In a post on the Monero subreddit from roughly a month ago, monero moderator u/dEBRUYNE_1 supports Spagni's statements. dEBRUYNE_1 clarifies the issue of scalability:
"In Bitcoin, the main chain is constrained and fees are ludicrous. This results in users being pushed to second layer stuff (e.g. sidechains, lightning network). Users do not have optionality in Bitcoin. In Monero, the goal is to make the main-chain accessible to everyone by keeping fees reasonable. We want users to have optionality, i.e., let them choose whether they'd like to use the main chain or second layer stuff. We don't want to take that optionality away from them."
"Monero has all the mechanisms it needs to find the balance between transaction load, and offsetting the costs of miner infrastructure/profits, while making sure the network is useful for users. But like the interviewer said, the question is directed at "right now", and Fluffys right to a certain extent, Monero's transactions are huge, and compromises in blockchain security will help facilitate less burdensome transactional activity in the future. But to compare Monero to Bitcoin's transaction sizes is somewhat silly as Bitcoin is nowhere near as useful as monero, and utility will facilitate infrastructure building that may eventually utterly dwarf Bitcoin. And to equate scaling based on a node being run on a desktop being the only option for what classifies as "scalable" is also an incredibly narrow interpretation of the network being able to scale, or not. Given the extremely narrow definition of scaling people love to (incorrectly) use, I consider that a pretty crap question to put to Fluffy in the first place, but... ¯_(ツ)_/¯"
u/xmrusher also contributed to the discussion, comparing Bitcoin to Monero using this analogous description:
"While John is much heavier than Henry, he's still able to run faster, because, unlike Henry, he didn't chop off his own legs just so the local wheelchair manufacturer can make money. While Morono has much larger transactions then Bitcoin, it still scales better, because, unlike Bitcoin, it hasn't limited itself to a cripplingly tiny blocksize just to allow Blockstream to make money."
Setting up a wallet can still be time consuming It's time consuming and can be somewhat difficult for new cryptocurrency users to set up their own wallet using the GUI wallet or the Command Line Wallet. In order to strengthen and further decentralize the Monero network, users are encouraged to run a full node for their wallet, however this can be an issue because it can take up to 24-48 hours for some users depending on their hard-drive and internet speeds. To mitigate this issue, users can run a remote node, meaning they can remotely connect their wallet to another node in order to perform transactions, and in the meantime continue to sync the daemon so in the future they can then use their own node. For users that do run into wallet setup issues, or any other problems for that matter, there is an extremely helpful troubleshooting thread on the Monero subreddit which can be found here. And not only that, unlike some other cryptocurrency subreddits, if you ask a question, there is always a friendly community member who will happily assist you. Monero.how is a fantastic resource too! Despite still being difficult to use, the user-base and price may increase dramatically once it is easier to use. In addition, others believe that when hardware wallets are available more users will shift to Monero.
I actually still feel a little shameful for promoting Monero here, but feel a sense of duty to do so. Monero is transitioning into an unstoppable altruistic beast. This year offers the implementation of many great developments, accompanied by the likelihood of a dramatic increase in price. I request you discuss this post, point out any errors I have made, or any information I may have neglected to include. Also, if you believe in the Monero project, I encourage you to join your local Facebook or Reddit cryptocurrency group and spread the word of Monero. You could even link this post there to bring awareness to new cryptocurrency users and investors. I will leave you with an old on-going joke within the Monero community - Don't buy Monero - unless you have a use case for it of course :-) Just think to yourself though - Do I have a use case for Monero in our unpredictable Huxleyan society? Hint: The answer is ? Edit: Added in the Tail Emission section, and noted Dan Bilzerian as a Monero investor. Also added information regarding the XMR.TO payment service. Added info about hardfork
It is a home Bitcoin miner that may actually turn a profit, unlike Bitcoin USB miners. Some of these problems mentioned above have been addressed and as a miner you can do it as a hobby while also making some money. This home Bitcoin miner is not only a good fit for hobby miners but also helps to improve the decentralization of Bitcoin mining as a whole. The more distributed the hash power ... Honey Miner. The Honey Miner software offers users a chance to join the crypto space without owning any sophisticated device, while at the same earning passive income. It is a perfect avenue to gain cryptocurrencies without learning the tedious trading process. Honeyminer is user-friendly because getting started is very easy. Users are only required to have an email address before they start ... Perfect Money payment system discovers the safest and easiest financial service to make money transfers worldwide.Accept e-currency, bank wire and SMS payments on you e-commerce website.Buy gold, send or receive money with the most secure payment processor on the Internet. How Much a Miner Earns . The rewards for bitcoin mining are halved every four years or so. When bitcoin was first mined in 2009, mining one block would earn you 50 BTC. In 2012, this was halved to ... Mine and Hold daily profits: a miner buys a mining rig and sells enough Bitcoin to cover operational expenses to cash daily and holds the remainder in Bitcoin; For this analysis, we will compare bitcoin mining throughout the life of an Antminer S9 vs buying & holding Bitcoin. Buying Bitcoin vs. Mining Bitcoin ($0.07kWh electricity)
maximum supply of PMT is set to 21 000 000 which makes it scarce just like Bitcoin is; 👉 no pre-mining means contract owners do not have a lot of tokens to dump its rate or manipulate it ... Bitcoin and cryptocurrency mining explained with the Byzantine Generals Problem. We use it to explain the essence of cryptocurrency mining. https://www.udemy... Are you looking for options on how to exchange Perfect Money to Bitcoin? Visit this link: https://goo.gl/Sm87qG where to exchange perfect money to bitcoin, p... This video goes over my 7 day 1 week Bitcoin Mining experiment. I let my computer Mine for Bitcoin for a week straight, to see how much money I could generat... Site de troca: https://www.mistermoneybrasil.com/pt/MMB305985 🔥Saiba Como Me Tornei Renda Alta, Aqui: http://bit.ly/Entenda-Como-Comecei 🔥ENTRE na LISTA VIP:...