5 Steps to Install Bitcoin-Qt Faster - Bitcoin-en.com

Gridcoin 5.0.0.0-Mandatory "Fern" Release

https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/releases/tag/5.0.0.0
Finally! After over ten months of development and testing, "Fern" has arrived! This is a whopper. 240 pull requests merged. Essentially a complete rewrite that was started with the scraper (the "neural net" rewrite) in "Denise" has now been completed. Practically the ENTIRE Gridcoin specific codebase resting on top of the vanilla Bitcoin/Peercoin/Blackcoin vanilla PoS code has been rewritten. This removes the team requirement at last (see below), although there are many other important improvements besides that.
Fern was a monumental undertaking. We had to encode all of the old rules active for the v10 block protocol in new code and ensure that the new code was 100% compatible. This had to be done in such a way as to clear out all of the old spaghetti and ring-fence it with tightly controlled class implementations. We then wrote an entirely new, simplified ruleset for research rewards and reengineered contracts (which includes beacon management, polls, and voting) using properly classed code. The fundamentals of Gridcoin with this release are now on a very sound and maintainable footing, and the developers believe the codebase as updated here will serve as the fundamental basis for Gridcoin's future roadmap.
We have been testing this for MONTHS on testnet in various stages. The v10 (legacy) compatibility code has been running on testnet continuously as it was developed to ensure compatibility with existing nodes. During the last few months, we have done two private testnet forks and then the full public testnet testing for v11 code (the new protocol which is what Fern implements). The developers have also been running non-staking "sentinel" nodes on mainnet with this code to verify that the consensus rules are problem-free for the legacy compatibility code on the broader mainnet. We believe this amount of testing is going to result in a smooth rollout.
Given the amount of changes in Fern, I am presenting TWO changelogs below. One is high level, which summarizes the most significant changes in the protocol. The second changelog is the detailed one in the usual format, and gives you an inkling of the size of this release.

Highlights

Protocol

Note that the protocol changes will not become active until we cross the hard-fork transition height to v11, which has been set at 2053000. Given current average block spacing, this should happen around October 4, about one month from now.
Note that to get all of the beacons in the network on the new protocol, we are requiring ALL beacons to be validated. A two week (14 day) grace period is provided by the code, starting at the time of the transition height, for people currently holding a beacon to validate the beacon and prevent it from expiring. That means that EVERY CRUNCHER must advertise and validate their beacon AFTER the v11 transition (around Oct 4th) and BEFORE October 18th (or more precisely, 14 days from the actual date of the v11 transition). If you do not advertise and validate your beacon by this time, your beacon will expire and you will stop earning research rewards until you advertise and validate a new beacon. This process has been made much easier by a brand new beacon "wizard" that helps manage beacon advertisements and renewals. Once a beacon has been validated and is a v11 protocol beacon, the normal 180 day expiration rules apply. Note, however, that the 180 day expiration on research rewards has been removed with the Fern update. This means that while your beacon might expire after 180 days, your earned research rewards will be retained and can be claimed by advertising a beacon with the same CPID and going through the validation process again. In other words, you do not lose any earned research rewards if you do not stake a block within 180 days and keep your beacon up-to-date.
The transition height is also when the team requirement will be relaxed for the network.

GUI

Besides the beacon wizard, there are a number of improvements to the GUI, including new UI transaction types (and icons) for staking the superblock, sidestake sends, beacon advertisement, voting, poll creation, and transactions with a message. The main screen has been revamped with a better summary section, and better status icons. Several changes under the hood have improved GUI performance. And finally, the diagnostics have been revamped.

Blockchain

The wallet sync speed has been DRASTICALLY improved. A decent machine with a good network connection should be able to sync the entire mainnet blockchain in less than 4 hours. A fast machine with a really fast network connection and a good SSD can do it in about 2.5 hours. One of our goals was to reduce or eliminate the reliance on snapshots for mainnet, and I think we have accomplished that goal with the new sync speed. We have also streamlined the in-memory structures for the blockchain which shaves some memory use.
There are so many goodies here it is hard to summarize them all.
I would like to thank all of the contributors to this release, but especially thank @cyrossignol, whose incredible contributions formed the backbone of this release. I would also like to pay special thanks to @barton2526, @caraka, and @Quezacoatl1, who tirelessly helped during the testing and polishing phase on testnet with testing and repeated builds for all architectures.
The developers are proud to present this release to the community and we believe this represents the starting point for a true renaissance for Gridcoin!

Summary Changelog

Accrual

Changed

Most significantly, nodes calculate research rewards directly from the magnitudes in EACH superblock between stakes instead of using a two- or three- point average based on a CPID's current magnitude and the magnitude for the CPID when it last staked. For those long-timers in the community, this has been referred to as "Superblock Windows," and was first done in proof-of-concept form by @denravonska.

Removed

Beacons

Added

Changed

Removed

Unaltered

As a reminder:

Superblocks

Added

Changed

Removed

Voting

Added

Changed

Removed

Detailed Changelog

[5.0.0.0] 2020-09-03, mandatory, "Fern"

Added

Changed

Removed

Fixed

submitted by jamescowens to gridcoin [link] [comments]

How I synced on a 2013 ultrabook in a few days

Note: I don't know exactly how long it took because I didn't do it in one go. I guess it was like 4,5 days doing it only at night. At some points(2015Q3, 2018Q2) it slows down and ETA goes up to 16 weeks or something.
The main bottleneck is IO. My 2013 mobile i3 has enough processing power to sync, I only used 3 threads and most of the time only one was close to 100%. The two directories that need to be written and read from intensively are chainstate and blocks/index. I pruned to 2GB and chainstate didn't go much over 3GB during the entire process. blocks/index is like 100MB.
The best solution is to move chainstate and blocks/index to a ramdisk. If you don't have enough ram the linux kernel has a thing called zram. Zram creates a compressed swap(cache) file in ram, this effectively increases your ram size at the cost of a bit of processing power and access speed(of the compressed part). On my machine I can net a bit more than 1GB of extra ram. That's right, with linux you can download more ram! The second best solution is to leave chainstate and block/index on a sdd. From what I've tested it should take up between 5 whole days and 2 weeks.
With regards to config, I didn't see much benefit in increasing the db cache over the default 450MB in bitcoin-qt. If I recall correctly, smaller prune sizes make chainstate larger.
After the initial sync keeping up to date is very easy on resources. You can catch up a week in a few minutes. At the moment bitcoind is using 400MB but I'm still working on bringing that number down.
Remember: If you want safety or if you want to help the network you need o run a full node. A full node is a node that verifies all transactions. A pruned node is a full node.
Edit: bitocoind really likes to hover around 400MB, sometimes it gets higher than that, some times it get's lower. A lot of that is data, not code, so if you start running out of ram your OS should drop those pages and get down to 250~300MiB. If you really want the memory to be this low all the time, on linux, you can either: Use cgroups to set the swappiness of the process to 99 so all data gets swapped but not code does; Use systemd and set MemoryLimit=300MiB(for example) so almost all data gets swapped but no code. I don't think any of those options are worth the small setup hassle.
submitted by nothing_works4me to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

(Updated) [Staking] Reddcoin Core client GUI wallet on a Raspberry Pi Model 3B

Intro

This thread is an update to my first Reddcoin staking tutorial that was written 7 months ago.
 
The reason for the update
My Reddcoin Core software crashed and became unusable. My Raspberry Pi 3B would lag and freeze, I couldn't stake anymore.
 
Instead of just redoing everything the same way, I wanted to see if I could improve on 3 points:
 
The updates
 
If you would like to tip me
Writing a tutorial like this takes time and effort; tips are appreciated. My Reddcoin address: RqvdnNX5MTam855Y2Vudv7yVgtXdcYaQAW.
     

Overview

 

Steps

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     

Video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Snr5e8bzftI
This video shows how long it takes to start Reddcoin Core.   TL;DR:
     

Extra

Backup
Backup your wallet to prevent losing the RDDs in your wallet! There are two methods to backup, do both. Make new backups if you create a new receiving address!
 
 
   
Boot with only 1 USB drive plugged in:
Make sure only the USB drive (with the swap partition and data partition) is plugged in when you boot up your Raspberry Pi. This to make sure the swap partition (/dev/sda1) is recognized correctly.   If you boot up with multiple USB drives, Lubuntu might see the USB drive with the swap partition as the second drive (instead of the first drive), and ignore the 2 GB swap partition. If this happens, starting Reddcoin can render the Raspberry Pi unresponsive.
   
Connection issues If you have issues syncing the blockchain because you have 0 network connections, please follow the instructions in this thread.
   
Start Reddcoin Core easier
Run a shell script (.sh file), so you can start Reddcoin just by double clicking on an icon on your Desktop.
   
Minimization options
Adjust minimization options, so you can safely press on the X button (the close/exit button on the upper right corner).
   
RealVNC VNC Viewer (client) and VNC Connect (server): To remote connect to the Raspberry Pi, I use VNC Viewer ad VNC Connect from RealVNC.
 
   
Chromium as browser: The updates break Firefox, the browser crashes when you try to run it. Install another browser, Chromium, to solve this issue.
   
Updates / Upgrades
If Software Updater shows up and tells you that there is updated software available, do not install the updates using Software Updater. Use LXTerminal to update Lubuntu.  
     

Credits:

   
Credits in previous tutorial:
submitted by Yavuz_Selim to reddCoin [link] [comments]

Beginners guide to Syscoin (SYS) and why you should be investing in this cryptocurrency in 2018

What is Syscoin?

Some have described Syscoin (SYS) as the Shopify, Amazon and Ebay of the blockchain world. Syscoin is a revolutionary cryptocurrency that offers near zero cost financial transactions, incredible speed and provides businesses the infrastructure to trade goods, assets, digital certificates and data securely. Syscoin isn’t just about money and trading, it has the ability to attract various business types thanks to its native set of features geared towards business on the blockchain. From eBay traders and High Street shops to Medical applications, Insurance and Gaming, Syscoin’s decentralized network benefits everyone!
Syscoin is developed by Blockchain Foundry (BF). BF provides blockchain technology based services, projects and products for a wide variety of use cases with the stated aim of disrupting markets by leveraging the potential of blockchain technology. Syscoin is mainly known to be the first cryptocurrency to offer a fully decentralized marketplace based on blockchain. What is lesser known is that this is only a part of what Syscoin offers.
With the introduction of Masternodes in February or March 2018 SYS will be transformed from just a ’marketplace coin’ to a completely ‘utilitarian coin’. The Masternode infrastructure allows the addition of decentralized databases and file storage, increased transaction speed to surpass POS/Visa/Mastercard capabilities, true Turing complete smart contract capabilities for unlimited business logic, sidechains, application layers and an identity layer. This will all be accessible through an API, rather than a new language, enabling nearly any developer to create any blockchain application they can conceive. This will usher in the next generation of blockchain applications - made for new or existing businesses - by conveniently offering everything available from the blockchain space today.

SYS Origin

The blockchain as conceptualized by Satoshi Nakamoto back in 2008 envisioned a peer-to-peer electronic cash network that would prevent double-spending. A year later, the blockchain became an integral part of bitcoin, serving as the latter's public ledger of transactions. Although Nakamoto's reference client mentioned a decentralized marketplace service, the subsequent implementation did not incorporate this due to a lack of resources.
Syscoin was initially described in a 2014 draft whitepaper that envisioned Decentralized Marketplace Creation, Decentralized Smart Contracts and Documents, Decentralized Certificate Issuance and Transfer, and Decentralized Data Storage and Retrieval, as among the services that it would offer upon its release.
Syscoin aimed to bring Nakamoto's vision of a decentralized marketplace back into the blockchain, among the other commercial-grade services it aims to deliver to clients. Other services that Syscoin plans to provide include secure data storage and transfer, and unique user aliases that link their owners to the services controlled by the alias.
The early Syscoin wallet was superseded by the release of Blockmarket Desktop 1.0 on September 12, 2017, marking the culmination of Syscoin's vision of a fully decentralized marketplace with a desktop GUI based on the blockchain.
The planned release of Blockmarket Web, a fully web-based version, and Blockmarket Professional in 2018 takes that vision one step further, as more advanced seller stores become a reality.

The Team

The Team that NEVER quits! Before the launch of Syscoin (Q3 2014), there was a presale ICO by Moolah (as a partner), which turned out to be detrimental for Syscoin. The project raised around 1,000BTC for development but the Syscoin Team only managed to access 250BTC which were used for price support. Moolah (Ryan Kennedy) absconded with the bulk of the ICO funds and the Syscoin team were left with ~30million Syscoin at a price around 400 satoshi. Even after this tragic event, the devs didn’t quit and continued to work on the project without stopping. The case against Moolah is still on-going. See the article from CoinDesk here: http://www.coindesk.com/uk-court-syscoin-injunction-moolah-750-btc/.
What is this detail telling us about the dev team? While some crypto projects are just scams and bring little to no innovation, they’ve proven that they are in it for the long term - ably demonstrated by the fact that they continued to work despite their funds being stolen. And now that hard work is beginning to pay off with the entire team going full-time for the first time in January 2018 and new developers being hired following VC funding for BF.

Team Page: https://syscoin.org/team/

Blockchain Foundry Products

https://www.blockchainfoundry.co/products

What is Blockmarket Desktop?

Building on the World's First Decentralized Marketplace, Blockmarket is the newest generation of Syscoin's Desktop wallet with a complete, state-of-the-art marketplace built-in where you can securely and reliably buy and sell any items you wish. Entire stores can be created directly through the marketplace where you can sell your own products or re-sell others’ products for commission. Use of blockchain technology eliminates middlemen, credit card fees, maintenance fees, downtime and political interference. Persons are literally able to buy or sell anything to anyone, anytime, anywhere on Earth! Blockmarket Desktop was launched on September 12, 2017.

Key Blockmarket Features

• Price Pegging to currencies such as USD, EUR, GBP, CAD, CNY and BTC
• Bitcoin and Zcash as payment options
• Arbitrated Escrow
• Encrypted Messaging
• KYC/AML Compliance
• Images
• Unlimited Inventory Items

Name Aliases

Wallet addresses for cryptocurrencies generally consist of a unique string of between 27-34 alphanumeric characters. Such an address isn’t easy to memorize. Although the addresses can be added to an address book within the wallet, Syscoin has taken the user's convenience one step further, allowing you to create a unique Alias for your wallet address, such as a name, title, or characters specific to a username. These can be used to send SYS from home, to a mobile wallet, to work, to friends, to common suppliers or to repeat customers easily, without requiring any memorizing, writing it down, copy & pasting or emailing yourself the address.

Digital Certificates

Using the cryptography of the blockchain persons can issue, authorize, and exchange digital certificates of any kind. With Syscoin anyone can issue provably-unique certificates with text or ASCII content to one or multiple parties on the Syscoin blockchain. These certificates can be authenticated by anyone via Syscoin’s cryptographic proof of work. This allows for the creation and free exchange of any kind of digital asset such as ownership certificates, warranties, receipts, tickets, certifications, diplomas, software licenses and more.

Integrated Exchanges

Integrated Crypto exchanges - Flypme and Changelly will facilitate exchanging 30+ cryptos for SYS, directly within the Blockmarket wallet.

Security Audit Verified

Blockmarket was successfully and independently security audited by Digital Boundary Group and was deemed low risk. Audit Results: [https://medium.com/@BlockchainFoundry/blockmarket-security-audit-results-and-next-steps-f69f94f149bf]

Blockmarket Web – (The Key to Mass Adoption)

BM web will bring SYS’s existing decentralized marketplace and all its features into a web-based version, enabling ease of use with a simple email and password login (grandma friendly) without any need for downloading a wallet or waiting for sync. Blockmarket web will be launched in February 2018.

Key Syscoin Developments

Masternodes

Ability for world-class transactions-per-second performance to scale-out with added nodes (theoretically 100k TPS per 1000 Masternodes, 300k TPS/3k masternodes, etc). In later releases, masternodes will also process smart contracts and facilitate sharded+encrypted offchain file-storage (with onchain anchors), among other touted functionality. They should also result in steadying the price movements - less volatility as holding will be incentivized

Smart Contracts

Scalable Ethereum Virtual Machine: Allows Turing complete smart contracts to be executed following the ethereum protocol at a much faster speed and at a fraction of the ethereum gas price.

Assets & Token Issuance

With its token issuance service, Syscoin allows anyone to create a custom asset token which can then be sent directly to anyone else on the network. This facilitates a variety of use cases including ICO token issuance, supply chain management, reward points, and loyalty programs.

Anonymous Transactions

Anonymous transactions: via mixing/shuffling at user-specified denomination. Afterwards, additional tech will be added in the near future which will further compound the degree of anonymity provided -Add ValueShuffle running on top of the masternode layer and you have the world's most advanced privacy tech in any coin. This brings true money fungibility to Syscoin and the missing link for true economic sovereignty. https://twitter.com/realSidhuJag/status/948588279540035584

Instant Send

Transactions can be sent and received instantly. This represents a similar sending capability as Dash, but is a step beyond- A type of backend node locking will allow an instantly received sum to be sent immediately, without delay, and without network risk of double-spend.

Why Invest in Syscoin?

https://medium.com/@StevenVoros88/the-most-undervalued-project-in-the-crypto-world-not-for-long-96814ac66b08 https://medium.com/@danieljasonwestby/syscoin-the-hidden-gem-of-2018-96f973b81b9 https://twitter.com/Asbsvc/status/939959284246380545 https://twitter.com/CryptoBulld0g/status/935915911776784384 https://medium.com/@BlockchainFoundry/syscoin-to-disrupt-ebay-and-real-estate-industries-96aa55ef709a https://medium.com/@thecryptojournal.com/top-crypto-investment-for-2017-b99656491c6f https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNDprLJhGys

Merchants

https://medium.com/@BlockchainFoundry/merchant-pilot-program-update-7479fe451639

Partnerships

(Microsoft Azure)[https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/syscoin-joins-azure/]

Decentralized Identity Foundation

https://medium.com/@BlockchainFoundry/consensus-decentralized-identity-foundation-blockmarket-beta-3-beyond-6f830419ea55

White Paper

http://syscoin.org/whitepaper.pdf
Note: It is anticipated that the whitepaper will be updated by the team in the near future due to recent developments

Roadmap

http://syscoin.org/images/roadmap_2018__1024.png

Blockchain Application Development Architecture

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1200/1*bUO6_nRI7q805edG59e0DQ.png

Feature List 2017 & 2018

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUJwbI_X4AI3QL_.jpg

Where to Buy

• Bittrex • Poloniex • Upbit • Tux Exchange • Livecoin • Yobit • AEX • Bittylicious • Changelly • Flyp.me

Wallets

• Block Market Wallet 1.2 – Windows and Mac. Download from https://syscoin.org/
• QT Wallet for Developers: Download from https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin2/releases/tag/2.1.6
• Coinomi – Syscoin MultiCoin Wallet (only supports send/receive)
• HolyTransaction – Syscoin Multicoin Web Wallet (desktop & android)

Other Sources

https://syscoin.org/ https://twitter.com/syscoin https://www.blockchainfoundry.co/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syscoin
Disclaimer This post was created particularly to aid those who are new to Syscoin. Please note that the content provided within this post is for information purposes only and is not to be construed as investment advice.
submitted by one22manytimes to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Useful Beginner's Guide to Syscoin

What is Syscoin?

Some have described Syscoin (SYS) as the Shopify, Amazon and Ebay of the blockchain world. Syscoin is a revolutionary cryptocurrency that offers near zero cost financial transactions, incredible speed and provides businesses the infrastructure to trade goods, assets, digital certificates and data securely. Syscoin isn’t just about money and trading, it has the ability to attract various business types thanks to its native set of features geared towards business on the blockchain. From eBay traders and High Street shops to Medical applications, Insurance and Gaming, Syscoin’s decentralized network benefits everyone!   Syscoin is developed by Blockchain Foundry (BF). BF provides blockchain technology based services, projects and products for a wide variety of use cases with the stated aim of disrupting markets by leveraging the potential of blockchain technology. Syscoin is mainly known to be the first cryptocurrency to offer a fully decentralized marketplace based on blockchain. What is lesser known is that this is only a part of what Syscoin offers.   With the introduction of Masternodes in February or March 2018 SYS will be transformed from just a ’marketplace coin’ to a completely ‘utilitarian coin’. The Masternode infrastructure allows the addition of decentralized databases and file storage, increased transaction speed to surpass POS/Visa/Mastercard capabilities, true Turing complete smart contract capabilities for unlimited business logic, sidechains, application layers and an identity layer. This will all be accessible through an API, rather than a new language, enabling nearly any developer to create any blockchain application they can conceive. This will usher in the next generation of blockchain applications - made for new or existing businesses - by conveniently offering everything available from the blockchain space today. In simple terms think Dash + Ethereum/Lisk + Monero + Nano + Storj + Particl capabilities all in one coin!    

SYS Origin

The blockchain as conceptualized by Satoshi Nakamoto back in 2008 envisioned a peer-to-peer electronic cash network that would prevent double-spending. A year later, the blockchain became an integral part of bitcoin, serving as the latter's public ledger of transactions. Although Nakamoto's reference client mentioned a decentralized marketplace service, the subsequent implementation did not incorporate this due to a lack of resources.   Syscoin was initially described in a 2014 draft whitepaper that envisioned Decentralized Marketplace Creation, Decentralized Smart Contracts and Documents, Decentralized Certificate Issuance and Transfer, and Decentralized Data Storage and Retrieval, as among the services that it would offer upon its release.   Syscoin aimed to bring Nakamoto's vision of a decentralized marketplace back into the blockchain, among the other commercial-grade services it aims to deliver to clients. Other services that Syscoin plans to provide include secure data storage and transfer, and unique user aliases that link their owners to the services controlled by the alias.   The early Syscoin wallet was superseded by the release of Blockmarket Desktop 1.0 on September 12, 2017, marking the culmination of Syscoin's vision of a fully decentralized marketplace with a desktop GUI based on the blockchain.   The planned release of Blockmarket Web, a fully web-based version, and Blockmarket Professional in 2018 takes that vision one step further, as more advanced seller stores become a reality.    

The Team

The Team that NEVER quits! Before the launch of Syscoin (Q3 2014), there was a presale ICO by Moolah (as a partner), which turned out to be detrimental for Syscoin. The project raised around 1,000BTC for development but the Syscoin Team only managed to access 250BTC which were used for price support. Moolah (Ryan Kennedy) absconded with the bulk of the ICO funds and the Syscoin team were left with ~30million Syscoin at a price around 400 satoshi. Even after this tragic event, the devs didn’t quit and continued to work on the project without stopping. The case against Moolah is still on-going. See the article from CoinDesk here: http://www.coindesk.com/uk-court-syscoin-injunction-moolah-750-btc/.   What is this detail telling us about the dev team? While some crypto projects are just scams and bring little to no innovation, they’ve proven that they are in it for the long term - ably demonstrated by the fact that they continued to work despite their funds being stolen. And now that hard work is beginning to pay off with the entire team going full-time for the first time in January 2018 and new developers being hired following VC funding for BF.
View Team Page.    

Blockchain Foundry Products

BF Products    

What is Blockmarket Desktop?

Building on the World's First Decentralized Marketplace, Blockmarket is the newest generation of Syscoin's Desktop wallet with a complete, state-of-the-art marketplace built-in where you can securely and reliably buy and sell any items you wish. Entire stores can be created directly through the marketplace where you can sell your own products or re-sell others’ products for commission. Use of blockchain technology eliminates middlemen, credit card fees, maintenance fees, downtime and political interference. Persons are literally able to buy or sell anything to anyone, anytime, anywhere on Earth! Blockmarket Desktop was launched on September 12, 2017. Download Blockmarket Desktop 1.2    

Key Blockmarket Features

- Decentralized Marketplace

The marketplace platform provides a decentralized and high redundant channel for selling goods and services. Features include: • Price Pegging to currencies such as USD, EUR, GBP, CAD, CNY and BTC • Bitcoin and Zcash as payment options • Arbitrated Escrow • Encrypted Messaging • KYC/AML Compliance • Images • Unlimited Inventory Items  

- Name Aliases

Wallet addresses for cryptocurrencies generally consist of a unique string of between 27-34 alphanumeric characters. Such an address isn’t easy to memorize. Although the addresses can be added to an address book within the wallet, Syscoin has taken the user's convenience one step further, allowing you to create a unique Alias for your wallet address, such as a name, title, or characters specific to a username. These can be used to send SYS from home, to a mobile wallet, to work, to friends, to common suppliers or to repeat customers easily, without requiring any memorizing, writing it down, copy & pasting or emailing yourself the address.  

- Digital Certificates

Using the cryptography of the blockchain persons can issue, authorize, and exchange digital certificates of any kind. With Syscoin anyone can issue provably-unique certificates with text or ASCII content to one or multiple parties on the Syscoin blockchain. These certificates can be authenticated by anyone via Syscoin’s cryptographic proof of work. This allows for the creation and free exchange of any kind of digital asset such as ownership certificates, warranties, receipts, tickets, certifications, diplomas, software licenses and more.  

- Integrated Exchanges

Integrated Crypto exchanges - Flypme and Changelly will facilitate exchanging 30+ cryptos for SYS, directly within the Blockmarket wallet.  

- Security Audit Verified

Blockmarket was successfully and independently security audited by Digital Boundary Group and was deemed low risk. View Audit Results.    

Blockmarket Desktop – Quickstart Tutorials (16 short vids)

BM Desktop – Quickstart Tutorials    

Blockmarket Web – (The Key to Mass Adoption)

BM web will bring SYS’s existing decentralized marketplace and all its features into a web-based version, enabling ease of use with a simple email and password login (grandma friendly) without any need for downloading a wallet or waiting for sync. Blockmarket web will be launched in Q1 2018.   This launch will be accompanied by a marketing campaign roll-out that seeks to build brand recognition with audiences within the existing crypto ecosystem and more significantly with the broader, global, non-crypto audience. For this reason Ballistic Arts, a full-service marketing agency was retained by BF. BF Engages Marketing Agency    

Primary Target Market + Value Potential

The primary target market for BF’s Syscoin/Blockmarket web flagship is the retail e-commerce industry. This sets up their decentralized marketplace to rival such commercial giants as Amazon ($648B market cap), Alibaba ($453B market cap) and eBay ($43B market cap). According to eMarketer’s Worldwide Retail and Ecommerce Sales report, global retail e-commerce sales for 2017 were $2.3 Trillion. This is expected to reach an estimated $4 Trillion by 2020 reflecting the rapid growth within this sector.   To perform a very simple assessment of the Syscoin/Blockmarket web’s potential let’s assume that a 1% portion of the forecasted $4 trillion market is captured, which represents $40 billion in revenue. Assuming a sales to market cap ratio of 1:1 for simplicity, the circulating supply of 531 million SYS, with a $40 billion market cap yields a price of roughly $75 per coin. However, with masternodes that limit the circulating supply and token utility that extends beyond retail e-commerce, the SYS price could likely reach much higher. Please note that these are just very simple assumptions and projections for this exercise, however the real world driven potential that this project has is clearly evident.    

Key Syscoin Developments

- Z-DAG: Zero Confirmation Transactions with Double Spend Protection (WORLD’S FIRST)

View Developer’s Twitter post View Syscoin’s Twitter post  

- Masternodes

Ability for world-class transactions-per-second performance to scale-out with added nodes (theoretically 100k TPS per 1000 Masternodes, 300k TPS/3k masternodes, etc). In later releases, masternodes will also process smart contracts and facilitate sharded+encrypted offchain file-storage (with onchain anchors), among other touted functionality. They should also result in steadying the price movements - less volatility as holding will be incentivized.  

- Masternode Rewards + Min. Hardware Specs

Masternode Rewards + Min. Hardware Specs Masternode ROI Calculator  

- Smart Contracts

Scalable Ethereum Virtual Machine: Allows Turin complete smart contracts to be executed following the ethereum protocol at a much faster speed and at a fraction of the ethereum gas price.  

- Assets & Token Issuance

With its token issuance service, Syscoin allows anyone to create a custom asset token which can then be sent directly to anyone else on the network. This facilitates a variety of use cases including ICO token issuance, supply chain management, reward points, and loyalty programs.  

- Anonymous Transactions

Anonymous transactions: via mixing/shuffling at user-specified denomination. Afterwards, additional tech will be added in the near future which will further compound the degree of anonymity provided -Add ValueShuffle running on top of the masternode layer and you have the world's most advanced privacy tech in any coin. This brings true money fungibility to Syscoin and the missing link for true economic sovereignty. View Developer’s Twitter post.  

- Instant Send

Transactions can be sent and received instantly. This represents a similar sending capability as Dash, but is a step beyond- A type of backend node locking will allow an instantly received sum to be sent immediately, without delay, and without network risk of double-spend.    

Why Invest in Syscoin?

 

Merchants

Merchant Pilot Program    

Partnerships

Development Updates

White Paper

White Paper.pdf Note: It is anticipated that the whitepaper will be updated by the team in the near future due to recent developments    

Roadmap

Roadmap 2017-2018.png    

Blockchain Application Development Architecture

Blockchain Application Development Architecture.png    

Feature List 2017 & 2018

Feature List 2017 & 2018.jpg    

Where to Buy

BittrexPoloniexUpbitTux ExchangeLivecoinYobitAEXBittyliciousChangellyFlyp.me    

Wallets

• Block Market Wallet 1.2 – Windows and Mac. Download from https://syscoin.org/ • QT Wallet for Developers: Download from https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin2/releases/tag/2.1.6Coinomi – Syscoin MultiCoin Wallet (only supports send/receive)HolyTransaction – Syscoin Multicoin Web Wallet (desktop & android)    

Need Help or Want to Contribute?

If you need help for an important wallet issue or if you want to know how you can contribute in promoting Syscoin Join the Slack channel where the SYS team and community members are active, helpful and responsive.    

Credit To

Other Sources

https://syscoin.org/ https://twitter.com/syscoin https://www.blockchainfoundry.co/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syscoin    

Last Updated

This post was last updated on Feb 10 2018.    

Disclaimer

This post was created particularly to aid those who are new to Syscoin. Please note that the content provided within this post is for information purposes only and is not to be construed as investment advice.
submitted by idbrews to SysCoin [link] [comments]

Interested in contributing to the BTC network? Here is the steps to get a full node up and running in Linux.

These instructions will work both on a VPS cloud server or a personal computer. You may find cheap VPS somewhere online for rent.
What Is A Full Node?
A full node is a program that fully validates transactions and blocks. Almost all full nodes also help the network by accepting transactions and blocks from other full nodes, validating those transactions and blocks, and then relaying them to further full nodes.
Most full nodes also serve lightweight clients by allowing them to transmit their transactions to the network and by notifying them when a transaction affects their wallet. If not enough nodes perform this function, clients won’t be able to connect through the peer-to-peer network—they’ll have to use centralized services instead.
Many people and organizations volunteer to run full nodes using spare computing and bandwidth resources—but more volunteers are needed to allow Bitcoin to continue to grow. This document describes how you can help and what helping will cost you.
Costs And Warnings
Running a Bitcoin full node comes with certain costs and can expose you to certain risks. This section will explain those costs and risks so you can decide whether you’re able to help the network.
Special Cases
Miners, businesses, and privacy-conscious users rely on particular behavior from the full nodes they use, so they will often run their own full nodes and take special safety precautions. This document does not cover those precautions—it only describes running a full node to help support the Bitcoin network in general.
Please consult an expert if you need help setting up your full node correctly to handle high-value and privacy-sensitive tasks.
Secure Your Wallet
It’s possible and safe to run a full node to support the network and use its wallet to store your bitcoins, but you must take the same precautions you would when using any Bitcoin wallet. Please see the securing your wallet page for more information.
Minimum Requirements
Bitcoin Core full nodes have certain requirements. If you try running a node on weak hardware, it may work—but you’ll likely spend more time dealing with issues. If you can meet the following requirements, you’ll have an easy-to-use node.
Note: many operating systems today (Windows, Mac, and Linux) enter a low-power mode after the screensaver activates, slowing or halting network traffic. This is often the default setting on laptops and on all Mac OS X laptops and desktops. Check your screensaver settings and disable automatic “sleep” or “suspend” options to ensure you support the network whenever your computer is running.
Possible Problems
Legal: Bitcoin use is prohibited or restricted in some areas.
Bandwidth limits: Some Internet plans will charge an additional amount for any excess upload bandwidth used that isn’t included in the plan. Worse, some providers may terminate your connection without warning because of overuse. We advise that you check whether your Internet connection is subjected to such limitations and monitor your bandwidth use so that you can stop Bitcoin Core before you reach your upload limit.
Anti-virus: Several people have placed parts of known computer viruses in the Bitcoin block chain. This block chain data can’t infect your computer, but some anti-virus programs quarantine the data anyway, making it more difficult to run a full node. This problem mostly affects computers running Windows.
Attack target: People who want to disrupt the Bitcoin network may attack full nodes in ways that will affect other things you do with your computer, such as an attack that limits your available download bandwidth or an attack that prevents you from using your full node’s wallet for sending transactions.
Linux Instructions
The following instructions describe installing Bitcoin Core on Linux systems.
Ubuntu 14.10 Instructions for Bitcoin Core 0.10.0.
If you use Ubuntu Desktop, click the Ubuntu swirl icon to start the Dash and type “term” into the input box. Choose any one of the terminals listed:
Alternatively, access a console or terminal emulator using another method, such as SSH on Ubuntu Server or a terminal launcher in an alternative desktop environment.
Type the following line to add the Bitcoin Personal Package Archive (PPA) to your system:
sudo apt-add-repository ppa:bitcoin/bitcoin
You will be prompted for your user password. Provide it to continue. Afterwards, the following text will be displayed:
Stable Channel of bitcoin-qt and bitcoind for Ubuntu, and their dependencies
More info: https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin/+archive/ubuntu/bitcoin
Press [ENTER] to continue or ctrl-c to cancel adding it
Press enter to continue. The following text (with some variations) will be displayed and you will be returned to the command line prompt:
gpg: keyring /tmp/tmpixuqu73x/secring.gpg' created gpg: keyring/tmp/tmpixuqu73x/pubring.gpg' created gpg: requesting key 8842CE5E from hkp server > > > >keyserver.ubuntu.com gpg: /tmp/tmpixuqu73x/trustdb.gpg: trustdb created gpg: key 8842CE5E: public key "Launchpad PPA for Bitcoin" imported gpg: no ultimately trusted keys found gpg: Total number processed: 1 pg: imported: 1 (RSA: 1) OK
Type the following line to get the most recent list of packages:
sudo apt-get update
A large number of lines will be displayed as different update files are downloaded. This step may take several minutes on a slow Internet connection.
To continue, choose one of the following options
sudo apt-get install bitcoin-qt
sudo apt-get install bitcoind
sudo apt-get install bitcoin-qt bitcoind
After choosing what packages to install, you will be asked whether you want to proceed. Press enter to continue.
If you’re logged in as an administrative user with sudo access, you may log out. The steps in this section should be performed as the user you want to run Bitcoin Core. (If you’re an expert administrator, you can make this a locked account used only by Bitcoin Core.)
Before using the Bitcoin Core daemon, bitcoind, you need to create its configuration file with a user name and password. First create the .bitcoin directory, create (touch) the file, and set the file’s permissions so that only your user account can read it. From the terminal, type:
mkdir ~/.bitcoin touch ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf chmod 600 ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf
Then you can run the command bitcoind. It will print output similar to this:
bitcoind Error: To use the "-server" option, you must set a rpcpassword in the configuration file: /home/bitcoinorg/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf It is recommended you use the following random password: rpcuser=bitcoinrpc rpcpassword=XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (you do not need to remember this password)
The username and password MUST NOT be the same.
If the file does not exist, create it with owner-readable-only file permissions. It is also recommended to set alertnotify so you are notified of problems; for example: alertnotify=echo %s | mail -s "Bitcoin Alert" [email protected] The “rpcpassword” displayed will be unique for your system. You can copy the rpcuser and rpcpassword lines into your configuration file using the following commands. Note that in most Ubuntu terminals, you need to press Ctrl-Shift-C to copy and Ctrl-Shift-V to paste because Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V have different meanings in a Unix-style terminal.
echo rpcuser=bitcoinrpc >> ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf echo rpcpassword=XXXXXX >> ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf (Warning: Don’t use XXXXXX as your RPC password. Copy the rpcpassword displayed by bitcoind for your system.)
Now you can start Bitcoin Core daemon for real. Type the following command:
bitcoind -daemon
It will print a message that Bitcoin Core is starting. To interact with Bitcoin Core daemon, you will use the command bitcoin-cli (Bitcoin command line interface). Note: it may take up to several minutes for Bitcoin Core to start, during which it will display the following message whenever you use bitcoin-cli:
error: {"code":-28,"message":"Verifying blocks..."}
After it starts, you may find the following commands useful for basic interaction with your node:
to safely stop your node, run the following command:
bitcoin-cli stop
A complete list of commands is available in the Bitcoin.org developer reference.
When Bitcoin Core daemon first starts, it will begin to download the block chain. This step will take at least several hours, and it may take a day or more on a slow Internet connection or with a slow computer. During the download, Bitcoin Core will use a significant part of your connection bandwidth. You can stop Bitcoin Core at any time using the stop command; it will resume from the point where it stopped the next time you start it.
Optional: Start Your Node At Boot
Starting your node automatically each time your computer boots makes it easy for you to contribute to the network. The easiest way to do this is to start Bitcoin Core daemon from your crontab. To edit your crontab, run the following command:
crontab -e
@reboot bitcoind -daemon Save the file and exit; the updated crontab file will be installed for you. Now Bitcoin Core daemon will be automatically started each time your reboot your computer.
If you’re an Ubuntu expert and want to use an init script instead, see this Upstart script.
You have now completed installing Bitcoin Core. If you have any questions, please ask in one of Bitcoin’s many communities, such as Bitcoin StackExchange, BitcoinTalk technical support, or the #bitcoin IRC chatroom on Freenode.
To support the Bitcoin network, you also need to allow incoming connections. Please read the Network Configuration section for details.
Network Configuration
If you want to support the Bitcoin network, you must allow inbound connections.
When Bitcoin Core starts, it establishes 8 outbound connections to other full nodes so it can download the latest blocks and transactions. If you just want to use your full node as a wallet, you don’t need more than these 8 connections—but if you want to support lightweight clients and other full nodes on the network, you must allow inbound connections.
Servers connected directly to the Internet usually don’t require any special configuration. You can use the testing instructions below to confirm your server-based node accepts inbound connections.
Home connections are usually filtered by a router or modem. Bitcoin Core will request your router automatically configure itself to allow inbound connections to Bitcoin’s port, port 8333. Unfortunately many routers don’t allow automatic configuration, so you must manually configure your router. You may also need to configure your firewall to allow inbound connections to port 8333. Please see the following subsections for details.
Testing Connections
The BitNodes project provides an online tool to let you test whether your node accepts inbound connections. To use it, start Bitcoin Core (either the GUI or the daemon), wait 10 minutes, and then visit the GetAddr page (https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/). The tool will attempt to guess your IP address—if the address is wrong (or blank), you will need to enter your address manually.
For more instruction and reviews based off BTC please follow my subreddit /BTC_Reviews
all material from this post was found here --> https://bitcoin.org/en/full-node
submitted by Mattjhagen to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Is anyone else freaked out by this whole blocksize debate? Does anyone else find themself often agreeing with *both* sides - depending on whichever argument you happen to be reading at the moment? And do we need some better algorithms and data structures?

Why do both sides of the debate seem “right” to me?
I know, I know, a healthy debate is healthy and all - and maybe I'm just not used to the tumult and jostling which would be inevitable in a real live open major debate about something as vital as Bitcoin.
And I really do agree with the starry-eyed idealists who say Bitcoin is vital. Imperfect as it may be, it certainly does seem to represent the first real chance we've had in the past few hundred years to try to steer our civilization and our planet away from the dead-ends and disasters which our government-issued debt-based currencies keep dragging us into.
But this particular debate, about the blocksize, doesn't seem to be getting resolved at all.
Pretty much every time I read one of the long-form major arguments contributed by Bitcoin "thinkers" who I've come to respect over the past few years, this weird thing happens: I usually end up finding myself nodding my head and agreeing with whatever particular piece I'm reading!
But that should be impossible - because a lot of these people vehemently disagree!
So how can both sides sound so convincing to me, simply depending on whichever piece I currently happen to be reading?
Does anyone else feel this way? Or am I just a gullible idiot?
Just Do It?
When you first look at it or hear about it, increasing the size seems almost like a no-brainer: The "big-block" supporters say just increase the blocksize to 20 MB or 8 MB, or do some kind of scheduled or calculated regular increment which tries to take into account the capabilities of the infrastructure and the needs of the users. We do have the bandwidth and the memory to at least increase the blocksize now, they say - and we're probably gonna continue to have more bandwidth and memory in order to be able to keep increasing the blocksize for another couple decades - pretty much like everything else computer-based we've seen over the years (some of this stuff is called by names such as "Moore's Law").
On the other hand, whenever the "small-block" supporters warn about the utter catastrophe that a failed hard-fork would mean, I get totally freaked by their possible doomsday scenarios, which seem totally plausible and terrifying - so I end up feeling that the only way I'd want to go with a hard-fork would be if there was some pre-agreed "triggering" mechanism where the fork itself would only actually "switch on" and take effect provided that some "supermajority" of the network (of who? the miners? the full nodes?) had signaled (presumably via some kind of totally reliable p2p trustless software-based voting system?) that they do indeed "pre-agree" to actually adopt the pre-scheduled fork (and thereby avoid any possibility whatsoever of the precious blockchain somehow tragically splitting into two and pretty much killing this cryptocurrency off in its infancy).
So in this "conservative" scenario, I'm talking about wanting at least 95% pre-adoption agreement - not the mere 75% which I recall some proposals call for, which seems like it could easily lead to a 75/25 blockchain split.
But this time, with this long drawn-out blocksize debate, the core devs, and several other important voices who have become prominent opinion shapers over the past few years, can't seem to come to any real agreement on this.
Weird split among the devs
As far as I can see, there's this weird split: Gavin and Mike seem to be the only people among the devs who really want a major blocksize increase - and all the other devs seem to be vehemently against them.
But then on the other hand, the users seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of a major increase.
And there are meta-questions about governance, about about why this didn't come out as a BIP, and what the availability of Bitcoin XT means.
And today or yesterday there was this really cool big-blockian exponential graph based on doubling the blocksize every two years for twenty years, reminding us of the pure mathematical fact that 210 is indeed about 1000 - but not really addressing any of the game-theoretic points raised by the small-blockians. So a lot of the users seem to like it, but when so few devs say anything positive about it, I worry: is this just yet more exponential chart porn?
On the one hand, Gavin's and Mike's blocksize increase proposal initially seemed like a no-brainer to me.
And on the other hand, all the other devs seem to be against them. Which is weird - not what I'd initially expected at all (but maybe I'm just a fool who's seduced by exponential chart porn?).
Look, I don't mean to be rude to any of the core devs, and I don't want to come off like someone wearing a tinfoil hat - but it has to cross people's minds that the powers that be (the Fed and the other central banks and the governments that use their debt-issued money to run this world into a ditch) could very well be much more scared shitless than they're letting on. If we assume that the powers that be are using their usual playbook and tactics, then it could be worth looking at the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins, to get an idea of how they might try to attack Bitcoin. So, what I'm saying is, they do have a track record of sending in "experts" to try to derail projects and keep everyone enslaved to the Creature from Jekyll Island. I'm just saying. So, without getting ad hominem - let's just make sure that our ideas can really stand scrutiny on their own - as Nick Szabo says, we need to make sure there is "more computer science, less noise" in this debate.
When Gavin Andresen first came out with the 20 MB thing - I sat back and tried to imagine if I could download 20 MB in 10 minutes (which seems to be one of the basic mathematical and technological constraints here - right?)
I figured, "Yeah, I could download that" - even with my crappy internet connection.
And I guess the telecoms might be nice enough to continue to double our bandwidth every two years for the next couple decades – if we ask them politely?
On the other hand - I think we should be careful about entrusting the financial freedom of the world into the greedy hands of the telecoms companies - given all their shady shenanigans over the past few years in many countries. After decades of the MPAA and the FBI trying to chip away at BitTorrent, lately PirateBay has been hard to access. I would say it's quite likely that certain persons at institutions like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs and the Fed might be very, very motivated to see Bitcoin fail - so we shouldn't be too sure about scaling plans which depend on the willingness of companies Verizon and AT&T to double our bandwith every two years.
Maybe the real important hardware buildout challenge for a company like 21 (and its allies such as Qualcomm) to take on now would not be "a miner in every toaster" but rather "Google Fiber Download and Upload Speeds in every Country, including China".
I think I've read all the major stuff on the blocksize debate from Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Greg Maxwell, Peter Todd, Adam Back, and Jeff Garzick and several other major contributors - and, oddly enough, all their arguments seem reasonable - heck even Luke-Jr seems reasonable to me on the blocksize debate, and I always thought he was a whackjob overly influenced by superstition and numerology - and now today I'm reading the article by Bram Cohen - the inventor of BitTorrent - and I find myself agreeing with him too!
I say to myself: What's going on with me? How can I possibly agree with all of these guys, if they all have such vehemently opposing viewpoints?
I mean, think back to the glory days of a couple of years ago, when all we were hearing was how this amazing unprecedented grassroots innovation called Bitcoin was going to benefit everyone from all walks of life, all around the world:
...basically the entire human race transacting everything into the blockchain.
(Although let me say that I think that people's focus on ideas like driverless cabs creating realtime fare markets based on supply and demand seems to be setting our sights a bit low as far as Bitcoin's abilities to correct the financial world's capital-misallocation problems which seem to have been made possible by infinite debt-based fiat. I would have hoped that a Bitcoin-based economy would solve much more noble, much more urgent capital-allocation problems than driverless taxicabs creating fare markets or refrigerators ordering milk on the internet of things. I was thinking more along the lines that Bitcoin would finally strangle dead-end debt-based deadly-toxic energy industries like fossil fuels and let profitable clean energy industries like Thorium LFTRs take over - but that's another topic. :=)
Paradoxes in the blocksize debate
Let me summarize the major paradoxes I see here:
(1) Regarding the people (the majority of the core devs) who are against a blocksize increase: Well, the small-blocks arguments do seem kinda weird, and certainly not very "populist", in the sense that: When on earth have end-users ever heard of a computer technology whose capacity didn't grow pretty much exponentially year-on-year? All the cool new technology we've had - from hard drives to RAM to bandwidth - started out pathetically tiny and grew to unimaginably huge over the past few decades - and all our software has in turn gotten massively powerful and big and complex (sometimes bloated) to take advantage of the enormous new capacity available.
But now suddenly, for the first time in the history of technology, we seem to have a majority of the devs, on a major p2p project - saying: "Let's not scale the system up. It could be dangerous. It might break the whole system (if the hard-fork fails)."
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here, maybe someone else could enlighten me, but I don't think I've ever seen this sort of thing happen in the last few decades of the history of technology - devs arguing against scaling up p2p technology to take advantage of expected growth in infrastructure capacity.
(2) But... on the other hand... the dire warnings of the small-blockians about what could happen if a hard-fork were to fail - wow, they do seem really dire! And these guys are pretty much all heavyweight, experienced programmers and/or game theorists and/or p2p open-source project managers.
I must say, that nearly all of the long-form arguments I've read - as well as many, many of the shorter comments I've read from many users in the threads, whose names I at least have come to more-or-less recognize over the past few months and years on reddit and bitcointalk - have been amazingly impressive in their ability to analyze all aspects of the lifecycle and management of open-source software projects, bringing up lots of serious points which I could never have come up with, and which seem to come from long experience with programming and project management - as well as dealing with economics and human nature (eg, greed - the game-theory stuff).
So a lot of really smart and experienced people with major expertise in various areas ranging from programming to management to game theory to politics to economics have been making some serious, mature, compelling arguments.
But, as I've been saying, the only problem to me is: in many of these cases, these arguments are vehemently in opposition to each other! So I find myself agreeing with pretty much all of them, one by one - which means the end result is just a giant contradiction.
I mean, today we have Bram Cohen, the inventor of BitTorrent, arguing (quite cogently and convincingly to me), that it would be dangerous to increase the blocksize. And this seems to be a guy who would know a few things about scaling out a massive global p2p network - since the protocol which he invented, BitTorrent, is now apparently responsible for like a third of the traffic on the internet (and this despite the long-term concerted efforts of major evil players such as the MPAA and the FBI to shut the whole thing down).
Was the BitTorrent analogy too "glib"?
By the way - I would like to go on a slight tangent here and say that one of the main reasons why I felt so "comfortable" jumping on the Bitcoin train back a few years ago, when I first heard about it and got into it, was the whole rough analogy I saw with BitTorrent.
I remembered the perhaps paradoxical fact that when a torrent is more popular (eg, a major movie release that just came out last week), then it actually becomes faster to download. More people want it, so more people have a few pieces of it, so more people are able to get it from each other. A kind of self-correcting economic feedback loop, where more demand directly leads to more supply.
(BitTorrent manages to pull this off by essentially adding a certain structure to the file being shared, so that it's not simply like an append-only list of 1 MB blocks, but rather more like an random-access or indexed array of 1 MB chunks. Say you're downloading a film which is 700 MB. As soon as your "client" program has downloaded a single 1-MB chunk - say chunk #99 - your "client" program instantly turns into a "server" program as well - offering that chunk #99 to other clients. From my simplistic understanding, I believe the Bitcoin protocol does something similar, to provide a p2p architecture. Hence my - perhaps naïve - assumption that Bitcoin already had the right algorithms / architecture / data structure to scale.)
The efficiency of the BitTorrent network seemed to jive with that "network law" (Metcalfe's Law?) about fax machines. This law states that the more fax machines there are, the more valuable the network of fax machines becomes. Or the value of the network grows on the order of the square of the number of nodes.
This is in contrast with other technology like cars, where the more you have, the worse things get. The more cars there are, the more traffic jams you have, so things start going downhill. I guess this is because highway space is limited - after all, we can't pave over the entire countryside, and we never did get those flying cars we were promised, as David Graeber laments in a recent essay in The Baffler magazine :-)
And regarding the "stress test" supposedly happening right now in the middle of this ongoing blocksize debate, I don't know what worries me more: the fact that it apparently is taking only $5,000 to do a simple kind of DoS on the blockchain - or the fact that there are a few rumors swirling around saying that the unknown company doing the stress test shares the same physical mailing address with a "scam" company?
Or maybe we should just be worried that so much of this debate is happening on a handful of forums which are controlled by some guy named theymos who's already engaged in some pretty "contentious" or "controversial" behavior like blowing a million dollars on writing forum software (I guess he never heard that reddit.com software is open-source)?
So I worry that the great promise of "decentralization" might be more fragile than we originally thought.
Scaling
Anyways, back to Metcalfe's Law: with virtual stuff, like torrents and fax machines, the more the merrier. The more people downloading a given movie, the faster it arrives - and the more people own fax machines, the more valuable the overall fax network.
So I kindof (naïvely?) assumed that Bitcoin, being "virtual" and p2p, would somehow scale up the same magical way BitTorrrent did. I just figured that more people using it would somehow automatically make it stronger and faster.
But now a lot of devs have started talking in terms of the old "scarcity" paradigm, talking about blockspace being a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" - which seems kinda scary, and antithetical to much of the earlier rhetoric we heard about Bitcoin (the stuff about supporting our favorite creators with micropayments, and the stuff about Africans using SMS to send around payments).
Look, when some asshole is in line in front of you at the cash register and he's holding up the line so they can run his credit card to buy a bag of Cheeto's, we tend to get pissed off at the guy - clogging up our expensive global electronic payment infrastructure to make a two-dollar purchase. And that's on a fairly efficient centralized system - and presumably after a year or so, VISA and the guy's bank can delete or compress the transaction in their SQL databases.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if some guy buys a coffee on the blockchain, or if somebody pays an online artist $1.99 for their work - then that transaction, a few bytes or so, has to live on the blockchain forever?
Or is there some "pruning" thing that gets rid of it after a while?
And this could lead to another question: Viewed from the perspective of double-entry bookkeeping, is the blockchain "world-wide ledger" more like the "balance sheet" part of accounting, i.e. a snapshot showing current assets and liabilities? Or is it more like the "cash flow" part of accounting, i.e. a journal showing historical revenues and expenses?
When I think of thousands of machines around the globe having to lug around multiple identical copies of a multi-gigabyte file containing some asshole's coffee purchase forever and ever... I feel like I'm ideologically drifting in one direction (where I'd end up also being against really cool stuff like online micropayments and Africans banking via SMS)... so I don't want to go there.
But on the other hand, when really experienced and battle-tested veterans with major experience in the world of open-souce programming and project management (the "small-blockians") warn of the catastrophic consequences of a possible failed hard-fork, I get freaked out and I wonder if Bitcoin really was destined to be a settlement layer for big transactions.
Could the original programmer(s) possibly weigh in?
And I don't mean to appeal to authority - but heck, where the hell is Satoshi Nakamoto in all this? I do understand that he/she/they would want to maintain absolute anonymity - but on the other hand, I assume SN wants Bitcoin to succeed (both for the future of humanity - or at least for all the bitcoins SN allegedly holds :-) - and I understand there is a way that SN can cryptographically sign a message - and I understand that as the original developer of Bitcoin, SN had some very specific opinions about the blocksize... So I'm kinda wondering of Satoshi could weigh in from time to time. Just to help out a bit. I'm not saying "Show us a sign" like a deity or something - but damn it sure would be fascinating and possibly very helpful if Satoshi gave us his/hetheir 2 satoshis worth at this really confusing juncture.
Are we using our capacity wisely?
I'm not a programming or game-theory whiz, I'm just a casual user who has tried to keep up with technology over the years.
It just seems weird to me that here we have this massive supercomputer (500 times more powerful than the all the supercomputers in the world combined) doing fairly straightforward "embarassingly parallel" number-crunching operations to secure a p2p world-wide ledger called the blockchain to keep track of a measly 2.1 quadrillion tokens spread out among a few billion addresses - and a couple of years ago you had people like Rick Falkvinge saying the blockchain would someday be supporting multi-million-dollar letters of credit for international trade and you had people like Andreas Antonopoulos saying the blockchain would someday allow billions of "unbanked" people to send remittances around the village or around the world dirt-cheap - and now suddenly in June 2015 we're talking about blockspace as a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" and partially centralized, corporate-sponsored "Level 2" vaporware like Lightning Network and some mysterious company is "stess testing" or "DoS-ing" the system by throwing away a measly $5,000 and suddenly it sounds like the whole system could eventually head right back into PayPal and Western Union territory again, in terms of expensive fees.
When I got into Bitcoin, I really was heavily influenced by vague analogies with BitTorrent: I figured everyone would just have tiny little like utorrent-type program running on their machine (ie, Bitcoin-QT or Armory or Mycelium etc.).
I figured that just like anyone can host a their own blog or webserver, anyone would be able to host their own bank.
Yeah, Google and and Mozilla and Twitter and Facebook and WhatsApp did come along and build stuff on top of TCP/IP, so I did expect a bunch of companies to build layers on top of the Bitcoin protocol as well. But I still figured the basic unit of bitcoin client software powering the overall system would be small and personal and affordable and p2p - like a bittorrent client - or at the most, like a cheap server hosting a blog or email server.
And I figured there would be a way at the software level, at the architecture level, at the algorithmic level, at the data structure level - to let the thing scale - if not infinitely, at least fairly massively and gracefully - the same way the BitTorrent network has.
Of course, I do also understand that with BitTorrent, you're sharing a read-only object (eg, a movie) - whereas with Bitcoin, you're achieving distributed trustless consensus and appending it to a write-only (or append-only) database.
So I do understand that the problem which BitTorrent solves is much simpler than the problem which Bitcoin sets out to solve.
But still, it seems that there's got to be a way to make this thing scale. It's p2p and it's got 500 times more computing power than all the supercomputers in the world combined - and so many brilliant and motivated and inspired people want this thing to succeed! And Bitcoin could be our civilization's last chance to steer away from the oncoming debt-based ditch of disaster we seem to be driving into!
It just seems that Bitcoin has got to be able to scale somehow - and all these smart people working together should be able to come up with a solution which pretty much everyone can agree - in advance - will work.
Right? Right?
A (probably irrelevant) tangent on algorithms and architecture and data structures
I'll finally weigh with my personal perspective - although I might be biased due to my background (which is more on the theoretical side of computer science).
My own modest - or perhaps radical - suggestion would be to ask whether we're really looking at all the best possible algorithms and architectures and data structures out there.
From this perspective, I sometimes worry that the overwhelming majority of the great minds working on the programming and game-theory stuff might come from a rather specific, shall we say "von Neumann" or "procedural" or "imperative" school of programming (ie, C and Python and Java programmers).
It seems strange to me that such a cutting-edge and important computer project would have so little participation from the great minds at the other end of the spectrum of programming paradigms - namely, the "functional" and "declarative" and "algebraic" (and co-algebraic!) worlds.
For example, I was struck in particular by statements I've seen here and there (which seemed rather hubristic or lackadaisical to me - for something as important as Bitcoin), that the specification of Bitcoin and the blockchain doesn't really exist in any form other than the reference implementation(s) (in procedural languages such as C or Python?).
Curry-Howard anyone?
I mean, many computer scientists are aware of the Curry-Howard isomorophism, which basically says that the relationship between a theorem and its proof is equivalent to the relationship between a specification and its implementation. In other words, there is a long tradition in mathematics (and in computer programming) of:
And it's not exactly "turtles all the way down" either: a specification is generally simple and compact enough that a good programmer can usually simply visually inspect it to determine if it is indeed "correct" - something which is very difficult, if not impossible, to do with a program written in a procedural, implementation-oriented language such as C or Python or Java.
So I worry that we've got this tradition, from the open-source github C/Java programming tradition, of never actually writing our "specification", and only writing the "implementation". In mission-critical military-grade programming projects (which often use languages like Ada or Maude) this is simply not allowed. It would seem that a project as mission-critical as Bitcoin - which could literally be crucial for humanity's continued survival - should also use this kind of military-grade software development approach.
And I'm not saying rewrite the implementations in these kind of theoretical languages. But it might be helpful if the C/Python/Java programmers in the Bitcoin imperative programming world could build some bridges to the Maude/Haskell/ML programmers of the functional and algebraic programming worlds to see if any kind of useful cross-pollination might take place - between specifications and implementations.
For example, the JavaFAN formal analyzer for multi-threaded Java programs (developed using tools based on the Maude language) was applied to the Remote Agent AI program aboard NASA's Deep Space 1 shuttle, written in Java - and it took only a few minutes using formal mathematical reasoning to detect a potential deadlock which would have occurred years later during the space mission when the damn spacecraft was already way out around Pluto.
And "the Maude-NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) Protocol Analyzer (Maude-NPA) is a tool used to provide security proofs of cryptographic protocols and to search for protocol flaws and cryptosystem attacks."
These are open-source formal reasoning tools developed by DARPA and used by NASA and the US Navy to ensure that program implementations satisfy their specifications. It would be great if some of the people involved in these kinds of projects could contribute to help ensure the security and scalability of Bitcoin.
But there is a wide abyss between the kinds of programmers who use languages like Maude and the kinds of programmers who use languages like C/Python/Java - and it can be really hard to get the two worlds to meet. There is a bit of rapprochement between these language communities in languages which might be considered as being somewhere in the middle, such as Haskell and ML. I just worry that Bitcoin might be turning into being an exclusively C/Python/Java project (with the algorithms and practitioners traditionally of that community), when it could be more advantageous if it also had some people from the functional and algebraic-specification and program-verification community involved as well. The thing is, though: the theoretical practitioners are big on "semantics" - I've heard them say stuff like "Yes but a C / C++ program has no easily identifiable semantics". So to get them involved, you really have to first be able to talk about what your program does (specification) - before proceeding to describe how it does it (implementation). And writing high-level specifications is typically very hard using the syntax and semantics of languages like C and Java and Python - whereas specs are fairly easy to write in Maude - and not only that, they're executable, and you state and verify properties about them - which provides for the kind of debate Nick Szabo was advocating ("more computer science, less noise").
Imagine if we had an executable algebraic specification of Bitcoin in Maude, where we could formally reason about and verify certain crucial game-theoretical properties - rather than merely hand-waving and arguing and deploying and praying.
And so in the theoretical programming community you've got major research on various logics such as Girard's Linear Logic (which is resource-conscious) and Bruni and Montanari's Tile Logic (which enables "pasting" bigger systems together from smaller ones in space and time), and executable algebraic specification languages such as Meseguer's Maude (which would be perfect for game theory modeling, with its functional modules for specifying the deterministic parts of systems and its system modules for specifiying non-deterministic parts of systems, and its parameterized skeletons for sketching out the typical architectures of mobile systems, and its formal reasoning and verification tools and libraries which have been specifically applied to testing and breaking - and fixing - cryptographic protocols).
And somewhat closer to the practical hands-on world, you've got stuff like Google's MapReduce and lots of Big Data database languages developed by Google as well. And yet here we are with a mempool growing dangerously big for RAM on a single machine, and a 20-GB append-only list as our database - and not much debate on practical results from Google's Big Data databases.
(And by the way: maybe I'm totally ignorant for asking this, but I'll ask anyways: why the hell does the mempool have to stay in RAM? Couldn't it work just as well if it were stored temporarily on the hard drive?)
And you've got CalvinDB out of Yale which apparently provides an ACID layer on top of a massively distributed database.
Look, I'm just an armchair follower cheering on these projects. I can barely manage to write a query in SQL, or read through a C or Python or Java program. But I would argue two points here: (1) these languages may be too low-level and "non-formal" for writing and modeling and formally reasoning about and proving properties of mission-critical specifications - and (2) there seem to be some Big Data tools already deployed by institutions such as Google and Yale which support global petabyte-size databases on commodity boxes with nice properties such as near-real-time and ACID - and I sometimes worry that the "core devs" might be failing to review the literature (and reach out to fellow programmers) out there to see if there might be some formal program-verification and practical Big Data tools out there which could be applied to coming up with rock-solid, 100% consensus proposals to handle an issue such as blocksize scaling, which seems to have become much more intractable than many people might have expected.
I mean, the protocol solved the hard stuff: the elliptical-curve stuff and the Byzantine General stuff. How the heck can we be falling down on the comparatively "easier" stuff - like scaling the blocksize?
It just seems like defeatism to say "Well, the blockchain is already 20-30 GB and it's gonna be 20-30 TB ten years from now - and we need 10 Mbs bandwidth now and 10,000 Mbs bandwidth 20 years from - assuming the evil Verizon and AT&T actually give us that - so let's just become a settlement platform and give up on buying coffee or banking the unbanked or doing micropayments, and let's push all that stuff into some corporate-controlled vaporware without even a whitepaper yet."
So you've got Peter Todd doing some possibly brilliant theorizing and extrapolating on the idea of "treechains" - there is a Let's Talk Bitcoin podcast from about a year ago where he sketches the rough outlines of this idea out in a very inspiring, high-level way - although the specifics have yet to be hammered out. And we've got Blockstream also doing some hopeful hand-waving about the Lightning Network.
Things like Peter Todd's treechains - which may be similar to the spark in some devs' eyes called Lightning Network - are examples of the kind of algorithm or architecture which might manage to harness the massive computing power of miners and nodes in such a way that certain kinds of massive and graceful scaling become possible.
It just seems like a kindof tiny dev community working on this stuff.
Being a C or Python or Java programmer should not be a pre-req to being able to help contribute to the specification (and formal reasoning and program verification) for Bitcoin and the blockchain.
XML and UML are crap modeling and specification languages, and C and Java and Python are even worse (as specification languages - although as implementation languages, they are of course fine).
But there are serious modeling and specification languages out there, and they could be very helpful at times like this - where what we're dealing with is questions of modeling and specification (ie, "needs and requirements").
One just doesn't often see the practical, hands-on world of open-source github implementation-level programmers and the academic, theoretical world of specification-level programmers meeting very often. I wish there were some way to get these two worlds to collaborate on Bitcoin.
Maybe a good first step to reach out to the theoretical people would be to provide a modular executable algebraic specification of the Bitcoin protocol in a recognized, military/NASA-grade specification language such as Maude - because that's something the theoretical community can actually wrap their heads around, whereas it's very hard to get them to pay attention to something written only as a C / Python / Java implementation (without an accompanying specification in a formal language).
They can't check whether the program does what it's supposed to do - if you don't provide a formal mathematical definition of what the program is supposed to do.
Specification : Implementation :: Theorem : Proof
You have to remember: the theoretical community is very aware of the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Just like it would be hard to get a mathematician's attention by merely showing them a proof without telling also telling them what theorem the proof is proving - by the same token, it's hard to get the attention of a theoretical computer scientist by merely showing them an implementation without showing them the specification that it implements.
Bitcoin is currently confronted with a mathematical or "computer science" problem: how to secure the network while getting high enough transactional throughput, while staying within the limited RAM, bandwidth and hard drive space limitations of current and future infrastructure.
The problem only becomes a political and economic problem if we give up on trying to solve it as a mathematical and "theoretical computer science" problem.
There should be a plethora of whitepapers out now proposing algorithmic solutions to these scaling issues. Remember, all we have to do is apply the Byzantine General consensus-reaching procedure to a worldwide database which shuffles 2.1 quadrillion tokens among a few billion addresses. The 21 company has emphatically pointed out that racing to compute a hash to add a block is an "embarrassingly parallel" problem - very easy to decompose among cheap, fault-prone, commodity boxes, and recompose into an overall solution - along the lines of Google's highly successful MapReduce.
I guess what I'm really saying is (and I don't mean to be rude here), is that C and Python and Java programmers might not be the best qualified people to develop and formally prove the correctness of (note I do not say: "test", I say "formally prove the correctness of") these kinds of algorithms.
I really believe in the importance of getting the algorithms and architectures right - look at Google Search itself, it uses some pretty brilliant algorithms and architectures (eg, MapReduce, Paxos) which enable it to achieve amazing performance - on pretty crappy commodity hardware. And look at BitTorrent, which is truly p2p, where more demand leads to more supply.
So, in this vein, I will close this lengthy rant with an oddly specific link - which may or may not be able to make some interesting contributions to finding suitable algorithms, architectures and data structures which might help Bitcoin scale massively. I have no idea if this link could be helpful - but given the near-total lack of people from the Haskell and ML and functional worlds in these Bitcoin specification debates, I thought I'd be remiss if I didn't throw this out - just in case there might be something here which could help us channel the massive computing power of the Bitcoin network in such a way as to enable us simply sidestep this kind of desperate debate where both sides seem right because the other side seems wrong.
https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/neil.ghani/papers/ghani-calco07
The above paper is about "higher dimensional trees". It uses a bit of category theory (not a whole lot) and a bit of Haskell (again not a lot - just a simple data structure called a Rose tree, which has a wikipedia page) to develop a very expressive and efficient data structure which generalizes from lists to trees to higher dimensions.
I have no idea if this kind of data structure could be applicable to the current scaling mess we apparently are getting bogged down in - I don't have the game-theory skills to figure it out.
I just thought that since the blockchain is like a list, and since there are some tree-like structures which have been grafted on for efficiency (eg Merkle trees) and since many of the futuristic scaling proposals seem to also involve generalizing from list-like structures (eg, the blockchain) to tree-like structures (eg, side-chains and tree-chains)... well, who knows, there might be some nugget of algorithmic or architectural or data-structure inspiration there.
So... TL;DR:
(1) I'm freaked out that this blocksize debate has splintered the community so badly and dragged on so long, with no resolution in sight, and both sides seeming so right (because the other side seems so wrong).
(2) I think Bitcoin could gain immensely by using high-level formal, algebraic and co-algebraic program specification and verification languages (such as Maude including Maude-NPA, Mobile Maude parameterized skeletons, etc.) to specify (and possibly also, to some degree, verify) what Bitcoin does - before translating to low-level implementation languages such as C and Python and Java saying how Bitcoin does it. This would help to communicate and reason about programs with much more mathematical certitude - and possibly obviate the need for many political and economic tradeoffs which currently seem dismally inevitable - and possibly widen the collaboration on this project.
(3) I wonder if there are some Big Data approaches out there (eg, along the lines of Google's MapReduce and BigTable, or Yale's CalvinDB), which could be implemented to allow Bitcoin to scale massively and painlessly - and to satisfy all stakeholders, ranging from millionaires to micropayments, coffee drinkers to the great "unbanked".
submitted by BeYourOwnBank to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

It's about time Bitcoin was associated to biomedical research

Introducing Bitsolve, no it's not a alt coin. This is, however, a work in progress, and is constructed to provide a direction, if not, a potential architecture to how we can use Bitcoin technology to accomplish goals that directly contribute to the betterment and understanding of human health. Edits, correction, improvements are the goals for this post. Be explicit.
BitSolve: An open source incentivized decentralized free-market peer-2- peer architecture that harnesses the computational power of the world in order to solve complex and/or large-scale biological problems while providing real-time monetary compensation in bitcoin to anyone with a CPU.
The computational resources required to solve biological problems are hard to over-estimate. Since the 1990s, bioinformatics and computational biology have emerged as crucial elements in solving problems in virtually every field of biology. Such needs are predicted to increase as dataset generation explodes due to technologies such as next-generation sequencing, high-throughput proteomics, metabolomics and epigenomics. Furthermore, scientists are beginning to appreciate holistic approaches in modeling biological systems such as whole cell, and organ level dynamics via integrating several datasets from multiple sub-cellular technologies that utilize computationally intensive algorithms.
There is an enormous amount of computation power that is currently inaccessible to the life scientist. This power is available not in laboratories or institutions, but rather in personal computers in homes and hands (smart phones, tablets) that belong to people all around the world. These computers are often idle or are underperforming because of computationally trivial activities such as web browsing, checking e-mail or typing into a word processor. There would be an exponential boost in computation power available to life scientists if such CPU power could be harnessed for solving biological problems. Furthermore, as each individual would upgrade their hardware for their own private use, this would free scientists from this task, freeing them to focus on hypothesis testing and the scientific questions at hand.
BitSolve would enable any scientist in any part of the world to ask sophisticated questions from an ever more increasing dataset without ever having to worry about updating hardware or statistical software. Distributed computational architectures are not entirely novel, not even for biological analysis. However, previous systems have had one major flaw: they have relied on the voluntary donation of computation resources by individuals at home. As individuals have had zero monetary incentive to lend their power, many of them have been reluctant to do so.
We propose a system called BitSolve that provides a direct monetary incentive to anyone in the world with a computational unit and an internet connection, where individuals get paid directly and immediately for devoting their computer's CPU time over the internet. Such a system could have additional benefits as well. For instance, it would allow individuals and scientists to bid for a CPU poweprice that would drive down the price of computation power in a free market environment. This would encourage third world citizens to participate in the network due to their relatively lower electricity costs. BitSolve will thus enable truly global participation on an even competitive plane, where the mere ownership of a device with a computational unit will simultaneously be a revenue source for the owner, and a cheap and ample computational source for researchers.
How does it work?
The architecture would be a piece of software that anyone could download. The software would be coded in a cross-platform programming language such as C++, Java, QT etc, so that it could be run on most desktops, laptops, smart phones, and tablets. Once the software is run, the user's computational unit becomes part of a network of computers running the same software. Anyone running the software can choose to become a “CPU giver” or a “CPU requester.” It is important to note that, nowhere during the process is there a need for entering any personal information, making this a relatively friction free adoption technology.
A CPU giver: A CPU giver is someone whom has downloaded the software and agrees on renting out their CPU for a certain time on an agreed upon price. A “CPU giver” would ask for a certain price for example x BTC/min or at a market price. The software would determine the market price of the “CPU giver” after running a test on the CPU to estimate the available resources and then strike a price based on the real-time market exchange. The “CPU giver” could then leave the computational unit, which, if selected in the market, would conduct parts of an analysis, broadcast the completion of analysis, and after receiving confirmation from the network of true completion, would receive funds from the CPU requester that would directly be transferred to the CPU giver's wallet. All of this would happen automatically and without the need for a third party. A CPU requester: A CPU requester is someone who is seeking computational power in the network and has funds in bitcoin allotted for the required analysis. The CPU requester would have a statistical algorithm to be conducted with a certain dataset. After choosing the dataset and copying the R script to the software, the CPU requester then chooses the price that they are willing to pay for the analysis. “CPU givers” that have fast CPUs would ask for a high price, and those with slower CPUs would ask for a lower one. In other words, if CPU requesters wants the analysis conducted in a small amount of time, they would pay a higher price, whereas, they would bid for a lower price if the analysis can be run in a longer period of time. The software would also include a real time CPU/price exchange market that would serve as a reference for bidding. Once the price is chosen, the information is broadcasted across the network and CPU givers are chosen automatically (corresponding with asking prices). The request is then processed and the parts of the data are analyzed securely. Once the analysis is complete, the network using existing Bitcoin proof-of-work algorithm verifies the completion, and the payment of bitcoin is made from the CPU requester to the CPU giver. The results are then returned to the requester and operation is complete.
Can you describe the software?
The software would have four main components 1. R Statistical package (http://www.r-project.org/): R is the open source, statistical engine that would be the interface for the analyst to program their analysis. R is also the most widely used and rapidly evolving statistical platform used by life scientists due in part to its open source and thus free nature. 2. MutliThreader:Java based open source interpreter that converts the R program into smaller portions that can be sent to separate computers in the network to conduct the analysis and also handles the peer-2-peer communication. 3. A Bitcoin (http://bitcoin.org/en/) (open-source) client that would handle the real-time financial transactions. 4. Java based open source exchange system and handles the bidding for CPU by price for the CPU requester and the bidding of CPU by price for the CPU giver. 5. Java based open source allocation for integrating other types of computation not applicable to R for future expansion. * Note the specific software requirements are not mandatory but use the framework of what is possible in 2013. We also acknowledge that some parts of the systems can be implemented with software such as mastercoin (open-source) and colored coins(open-source). The two essential parts would be a bitcoin client and R statistical software. Why Peer-2-peer and not distributed? Is there a difference? Past architectures that have sought to harness the computational power of personal computers have been distributed from one to many, as in one laboratory aims to distribute their software to many individuals to conduct their analysis exclusively and specifically.(Pande Lab, Stanford). A peer-2- peer united open source system, would entail that any one that uses the free software can act as a CPU “giver” as well as a CPU “requester”. More importantly, because the entire process does not require personal information, the bidding process for CPU time would be free of considerations regarding project scope or vocational seniority. Due to this “freedom,” a graduate student in Boston, could program his personalized analysis of black hole dynamics to run on super computers in Stanford by bidding a higher price, while on the same market a precocious 15 year old in Korea, could bid a lower price to have his father's farm optimization algorithm run on slower and thus cheaper smart phones in India. The diversity in juxtapositions is intentional and should highlight that although this paper discusses the benefits with the life scientist in mind, the implementation does not limit, and to a certain degree, demands context and identity free analysis. This provision is primarily meant to ensure swift and diverse advancement of the software and to have enough CPU 'requesters' to implicate free market dynamics that will lower the prices and thus ensure highest value for CPU speed per houprice. It may be useful to note this will be the first time CPU speed/price will self stabilize on a global level to an optimal value that will be devoid of price inflation due to taxes associated with local governments and geographical distance to the CPU manufacturer etc. Peer-2-peer is extremely robust. Since previous distributed systems have had one governing computational node that does all its CPU requesting, they have been vulnerable to attacks and other security risks. Since this system is peer-2-peer, anonymous, and decentralized, there would never be a target to attack in the first place, ensuring security and robustness. Taking the system down would only be attainable by compromising the Internet in its entirety. Can you explain how the monetary compensation works? Bitcoin is a revolutionary technology. It is a completely decentralized, peer- 2-peer, open source, Internet currency/asset. Bitcoin uses peer-to-peer technology to operate with no central authority or banks. The network collectively carries out the managing of transactions and the issuing of bitcoins. Bitcoin's unique and groundbreaking properties make new applications for financial transactions that were virtually non-existent with legacy technologies now possible. This project would not be possible if monetary compensation of CPU givers entailed entering personal data, bank information etc. This would carry significant friction for scaling and in some countries wouldn't be possible even in theory because of high numbers of unbanked individuals and archaic financial systems. The only friction in this model is where anyone requesting a CPU would first need to exchange their local currency into bitcoin, which can be done in several online bitcoin exchanges that accept a plethora of local currencies. Since the ratio of CPU givers to CPU requesters is expected to be very high, this is unlikely to cause major problems in scaling now or in the future. CPU givers would only be required to download the software and run it in order to start accepting monetary compensation. It is also useful to note that the bitcoin network itself may be used as a source for computational power, although this would carry with it limited diversity in the type of computation possible.
submitted by bitcoinsSG to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

How to Download and Verify the Armory Bitcoin Wallet Bitcoin Core Wallet sync 100% result How to sign and Verify messages with your Bitcoin Adress from your Softwarewallet Increase slow download and sync of bitcoin blockchain on Mac prevent bitcoin-qt client from crashing on the mac

Download Bitcoin Core Latest version: 0.20.1 Download Bitcoin Core Bitcoin Core 0.20.1 ... Verify release signatures Download torrent Source code Show version history. Bitcoin Core Release Signing Keys v0.8.6 - 0.9.2.1 v0.9.3 - 0.10.2 v0.11.0+ Or choose your operating system. Windows exe - zip. Mac OS X dmg - tar.gz. Linux (tgz) 64 bit. ARM Linux 64 bit - 32 bit. Linux (Snap Store) Support ... Downloading through torrents is actually not faster than letting bitcoin-qt do the downloading. Used to be several years ago, but these days bitcoin itself does a better job than bittorrent and can then do validation in parallel to the downloading. The link you provided points to a 2014 torrent file. That shows how outdated this trick is. This means that to fully verify your download, you need to ask people you trust to confirm that the key fingerprint printed above belongs to the Bitcoin Core Project's release signing key. Linux verification instructions . Click the link in the list above to download the release for your platform and wait for the file to finish downloading. Download the list of cryptographic checksums ... Bitcoin version 0.5.0 is now available for download at: ... new RPC commands to sign a message withone of your private keys or verify that a message signed by the privatekey associated with a bitcoin address. GENERAL CHANGES----- Faster initial block download. ===== Thanks to everybody who contributed code or helped test this release: Alan ReinerAlex BAlex WatersAng Iong ChunCelilChris ... Again: the speed is dominated by how fast you can verify the blocks, not how fast you can download them. If you'd download them via BitTorrent, you'd still need 10 days to verify them in your setup, in addition to the 1 day to download it. Bitcoin Core verifies simultaneously with downloading, avoiding the need for double storage and needing to wait for the download to complete before starting ...

[index] [2841] [38722] [25567] [40603] [18741] [28684] [12394] [2170] [20047] [51250]

How to Download and Verify the Armory Bitcoin Wallet

In this video I show you how to download the Litecoin Core Wallet, also sometimes called the Litecoin Qt wallet. I make a mistake early on in the video when I say I "install" the wallet from terminal. How to Download & Verify the Bitcoin Core Wallet - Duration: 15:29. Rex Kneisley 18,966 views. 15:29 . What is a Bitcoin Full Node? Why would I want one? - Duration: 11:06. Off Chain with Jimmy ... But the Bitcoin plan calls for the creation of only 21 million bitcoins. In this way, Bitcoin will try to avoid the pitfalls of modern fiat currencies such as inflation, deflation, market ... How to Download & Verify the Bitcoin Core Wallet - Duration: 15:29. Rex Kneisley 18,412 views. 15:29. 6. bitcoin-qt - Duration: 6:50. 402 Payment Required 943 views. 6:50 . How to start Bitcoin ... Basic explanation of how to sign and verify a Bitcoin Adress from your Softwarewallet, example client was Bitcoin-qt. Feel free to donate to keep more Tutorials coming:

#