Hi gang, Some guy came over and forced PPC in front of me. I have looked into it, for maybe an hour. I read this paper, and probably understood 70%, I was most interested in proof-of-stake. I have read the wiki a few times now. I know bitcoin quite well, and mined it. On that reddit I didn't get enough corrections. I have some questions / theoretical misunderstandings that I would be delighted if you could answer. I cannot see that PPC is a superior system to BTC (but assume you know it to be)
I worry that proof-of-dinner does not incentivise technological development, I wonder if this is an issue (it sounds like it would be).
I fear that PPC would be mined by a hard-core ancient elite, who were the only ones who could make any money out of mining. They could then be considered 'a centralised mining force' and I assume that PPC is interested in the strength of the network (ie - non centralisation), as bitcoin is.
Maybe it would be in stakeholders interest to form super-pools.
I assume that a 51% attack is still a technical worry (but is supposedly less likely under this system).
I wonder if a 51% attack could be carried out by the major stakeholders, or their children.
I assume that bitcoin is less vulnerable (probably not at all vulnerable now) to a 51% because the network is now strong enough, and that because PPC's network is not a strong (but still, an amazing 10% of bitcoin!?) then it's still technically more susceptible to 51%.
In summary, it seems to me that PPC incentivised miners to be loyal in the early days, and also not to sell. This drove up prices, and protected from a 51% in the very early days. Now it seems that mining is not profitable (for you or I) even if we get hold of some Expensive mining equipment. Using my limited understanding of both, it seems bitcoin is the better design, because it uses the idea that 'we are stronger together' and that everything is network driven. I truly welcome your thoughts and corrections.
Hi, I'm new here so please excuse my ignorance, but I have some questions about ppcoin. 1) What is the point of having multiple crypto-currencies (e.g. litecoin,ppcoin,worldcoin, etc.), when they all do the same thing ? 2)Does "there could only be one" apply to crypto-currencies ? 3)Why are there so many businesses and charities that accept bitcoin but not accept other digital currencies, like ppcoin? Is it because of exposure or is their no point? 4)Lastly, since there are a lot of flaws with bitcoin, (like its uses for money laundering and selling and buying illegal "items", a 51% attack,stealing bitcoins, the amount of power it takes to mine the coins) couldn't the bitcoin system be edited and adjusted to fix these flaws or is that not an option? I say this because Sunny King is working on a new version of ppcoin v.04, so I'm assuming its possible to edit the system.
Thoughts about Proof of Stake coins (NovaCoin,PPCoin)
I've done a little bit of research into these coins because the basic goal is pretty neat: Long-term they aim to be energy enefficient, meaning less power consumption to secure the network. While this might not seem like a very important goal, if you think about bitcoin becoming mainstream and generating a trillion dollar market cap, with billions of dollars in fees, the cost of the bitcoin network becomes roughly equal to the cost of electricity in relation to fees (meaning mining would cause a significant increase in power consumption world wide, making electricity more expensive and slowing down the economy). The way proof of stake solves this is by "burning" coin days to mine a proof of stake block. While I'm not entirely sure how this would work (would you need lots of coins to mine PoS, would you donate coins to a pool with others to mine PoS?) what this means is that the cost of a 51% attack is roughly equal to half of the coin stake that's being donated to secure the network, offsetting the cost of hardware/electricity to the value of the coin itself. The problem with PoS is the question of how do you distribute the innitial amount of coins in the network? While both NVC and PPC promiss about 1% inflation per year as your "reward" for mining you can't start at 0 coins because you can't generate 1% of 0. So the way NVC and PPC solved this is by distributing an initial base of coins through traditional proof of work mining. Except instead of using a planed, known release schedule like BTC/LTC, they released coins as a function of hashing power where more hashing power = less coins per block. Bassically when there were only one or two miners during the first couple days of the release they were generating thousands of times as many coins amoung themselves as later miners would get. This is different from BTC/LTC because no matter how many people are mining, the block reward for BTC/LTC remains the same. PPC/NVC on the other hand respond to additional miners by dramatically reducing the block reward so that a majority of the total number of coins that will ever be produced were mined by the first couple miners. The theory here I think is that more miners means more electricity consumption so to compensate, the amount of coins generated decreases, removing any incentive for more miners to join the network. I, like many others, see this as incredibly unfair and in fact early NVC miners were forced to "destroy" coins because people saw it as a premine. You can see this premine of PPC here: http://i.imgur.com/K2B8UKq.jpg (from AndyRossy's PPC Charts). The actual code / methodology for the mining process, while realtively easy to find for NVC, required a bit of digging before I could make sense of PPC's algorithm. NVC: nBlockReward = 100 / (nMaxTarget / nCurrentTarget) ^ (1/6) Roughly understood to be reward = 100 / (difficulty ^ 1/6) Source: NVC faq and generous, well explained comments in the source code.
PPC: blockReward = 9999 / (bnProofOfWorkLimit / bnTarget) ^ (1/4) Roughly understood to be reward = 9999 / (diffificulty ^ 1/4) Source: Poking around in obscuficated code that looked similar enough to NVC's to make sense of. PPC appears to attempt to hide the specifics of their block reward algorithm while NVC, despite being bassed on PPC's code, is very open about it, even posting an explanation in their FAQ.
For comparison, BTC's block reward algorithm looks like this: blockValue = 50 / 2 ^ (nHeight / 210000) Where 210000 blocks is roughly 4 years.
Another difference is instead of adding fees to the block reward, PPC/NVC simply destroy transaction fees. This is enforced by the network to be 0.01, not by the market / miners, regauradless of the size of your transaction, reguardless how old your coins are, reguardless how much the coin is actually worth, the fee is always 0.01 (although I assume devs can adjust this in the future). Because of their honesty I would probably trust NVC before trusting PPC, although I think both coins are misguided and potentially scams. Had they used scheduled releases like BTC/LTC the story might be a little different. The problem of course is that PoS only really kicks in after PoW (proof of work) making PoS mostly inactive until the coin actually matured. Meaning you'd either be stuck with a premined coin or a coin that wont use PoS until years into the future. If someone can figure out a way to mint a PoS coin without a premine it might be worth while. Also one other thing that was pointed out to me recently is that it would be fairly trivial for bitcoin (or any other coin) to add PoS if it were deamed necesary in the future. Granted most people would probably be against it but if it were shown to have actual benefits it could be easily added. tl;dr:
Proof-of-Stake attempts to secure the coin from 51% attacks by adding stake blocks which "burn" coins in the process.
The main benefit of this is reduced power consumption.
All current PoS coins are pre-mined and pre-mining is basically built into the code and is required for initial minting.
Fees, which are hard enforced by the network, are simply destroyed (for no good reason as far as I can tell).
For what it's worth NVC appears to be a more honest coin than PPC which attempted to obfuscate their minting process. NVC devs also destroyed a lot of their coins from early minting whereas PPC devs still have their coins (which were being minted at 2,000,000 per day).
It would be very easy for BTC/LTC/TRC or any other PoW (proof-of-work) coin to add PoS in the future if it were found to have actual benefit for cryptocurrencies.
Superscript download sources Add note about fractions Add sources for download links
Comment with any suggestions or ideas you have. What is Peercoin? Peercoin (Project name: PPCoin) is a relatively new cryptocurrency (August 19, 2012) which like all other major cryptocurrencies is based on Bitcoin. Peercoin is currently the cryptocurrency with the greatest number of innovations. The key difference being that it implements a proof-of-stake system in place of the proof-of-work system. This system is designed not only to make Peercoin truly energy efficient in the long run, but also to dramatically raise the cost of a 51 percent attack, and to facilitate a steady predictable inflation rate of one percent per year. Terminology Peercoin is what you'll likely call it in daily speech. It's easily pronounced and looks good in text. PPCoin is the official name of the project and coin. PPC is its currency code and an acronym for Peer-to-Peer Coin. Cryptocurrency is a currency relying on cryptography for authenticity. How do I buy Peercoins? The most common way is to buy Bitcoins and trade them for Peercoins at an exchange. Popular exchanges are listed in the sidebar. HowToBuyBitcoins.info List of ways to buy Bitcoins Note: You can buy fractions, i.e. half a Bitcoin or 0.31415 BTC. How do I get a Peercoin wallet?
Install and open. Note: Until the wallet has synchronised with the network, you may not see coins sent to your address.
Encrypt and backup the wallet. (optional, but strongly recommended!)
How many Peercoins will exist? Simple explanation. Was Peercoin premined? No, the first block was not mined until 18:19:16 UTC, whereas the coin software was released to the public at 17:57:38 UTC. Additionally, Peercoin has had arguably one of the most fair launches of any cryptocurrency to date.
Its release was announced 9 days ahead, so that early comers could not just mine a couple hundred blocks in a row. The next best is Litecoin which was announced 4 days early.
Its initial difficulty was set artificially high (at 256 rather than 1) for the same reason.
spend was executed on the Bitcoin Gold network. For this reason, the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) algorithm, which already has advantages of energy efﬁciency and throughput, is attracting attention as an alternative to the PoW algorithm. With a PoS, the attacker needs to obtain 51% of the cryptocurrency to carry out a 51% attack. But unlike PoW, attacker in a PoS system is highly discouraged from ... 51% attack and Bitcoin . What is a 51% Attack - Bitcoin Tutorial. So, put yourself in the place of an attacker who intended to gain control of the blockchain. Let him manage to split the chain in the above way. One of the formed branches he controls, how to make it so that the network discarded the other? This requires that the aggregate complexity of the blocks in that branch be greater than ... The 51 attack is still a looming risk. Then there’s the huge amount of energy “wasted” in the mining process – not great from an environmental standpoint. I’m not the first person to point these issues out, and in response, many people have already released other virtual currencies that aim to improve upon the movement that Bitcoin has started. Litecoin, Ripple, PPCoin, Feathercoin ... This attack is practical right now with any size mining pool: Anyone can launch this attack successfully right now, and make revenues in excess of what they would otherwise make. Under the best theoretical conditions, Bitcoin requires at least 2/3rds of the miners to be honest : It was previously believed that the Bitcoin ecosystem was safe as long as a majority were honest. To employ a well timed 51% attack… But I’d like to bring up the argument here that this option really won’t work afterall. Continue reading → This entry was posted in General stuff, Guvmint Resistance, Price Speculation and tagged 51 percent attack, 51% attack, attack bitcoin network, attacking bitcoin, destroy bitcoin, futility of 51 percent attack, how to destroy bitcoin, majority ...
Andreas Antonopoulos - 51% Bitcoin Attack - YouTube
Bitcoin Shadow attack can result in chain reorg which could lead to double spending. Get blockchain certified: https://academy.ivanontech.com join 20,000 stu... Hello everyone, In today's video we will learn why a 51% attack is impossible on Bitcoin As you know, Bitcoin makes use of a public ledger which is called "B... A 51% attack is a potential attack on a blockchain network, where a single entity or organization is able to control the majority of the hash rate, potential... 51% attack is when an individual miner or group of miners manage to control more than 50% of a network’s hashing power. This would allow the attacker to disrupt the network and rewrite history ... Andreas Antonopoulos - 51% Bitcoin Attack