Die 7 besten Bitcoin Mining Software 2020 (Mac, Windows ...

Why i’m bullish on Zilliqa (long read)

Edit: TL;DR added in the comments
 
Hey all, I've been researching coins since 2017 and have gone through 100s of them in the last 3 years. I got introduced to blockchain via Bitcoin of course, analyzed Ethereum thereafter and from that moment I have a keen interest in smart contact platforms. I’m passionate about Ethereum but I find Zilliqa to have a better risk-reward ratio. Especially because Zilliqa has found an elegant balance between being secure, decentralized and scalable in my opinion.
 
Below I post my analysis of why from all the coins I went through I’m most bullish on Zilliqa (yes I went through Tezos, EOS, NEO, VeChain, Harmony, Algorand, Cardano etc.). Note that this is not investment advice and although it's a thorough analysis there is obviously some bias involved. Looking forward to what you all think!
 
Fun fact: the name Zilliqa is a play on ‘silica’ silicon dioxide which means “Silicon for the high-throughput consensus computer.”
 
This post is divided into (i) Technology, (ii) Business & Partnerships, and (iii) Marketing & Community. I’ve tried to make the technology part readable for a broad audience. If you’ve ever tried understanding the inner workings of Bitcoin and Ethereum you should be able to grasp most parts. Otherwise, just skim through and once you are zoning out head to the next part.
 
Technology and some more:
 
Introduction
 
The technology is one of the main reasons why I’m so bullish on Zilliqa. First thing you see on their website is: “Zilliqa is a high-performance, high-security blockchain platform for enterprises and next-generation applications.” These are some bold statements.
 
Before we deep dive into the technology let’s take a step back in time first as they have quite the history. The initial research paper from which Zilliqa originated dates back to August 2016: Elastico: A Secure Sharding Protocol For Open Blockchains where Loi Luu (Kyber Network) is one of the co-authors. Other ideas that led to the development of what Zilliqa has become today are: Bitcoin-NG, collective signing CoSi, ByzCoin and Omniledger.
 
The technical white paper was made public in August 2017 and since then they have achieved everything stated in the white paper and also created their own open source intermediate level smart contract language called Scilla (functional programming language similar to OCaml) too.
 
Mainnet is live since the end of January 2019 with daily transaction rates growing continuously. About a week ago mainnet reached 5 million transactions, 500.000+ addresses in total along with 2400 nodes keeping the network decentralized and secure. Circulating supply is nearing 11 billion and currently only mining rewards are left. The maximum supply is 21 billion with annual inflation being 7.13% currently and will only decrease with time.
 
Zilliqa realized early on that the usage of public cryptocurrencies and smart contracts were increasing but decentralized, secure, and scalable alternatives were lacking in the crypto space. They proposed to apply sharding onto a public smart contract blockchain where the transaction rate increases almost linear with the increase in the amount of nodes. More nodes = higher transaction throughput and increased decentralization. Sharding comes in many forms and Zilliqa uses network-, transaction- and computational sharding. Network sharding opens up the possibility of using transaction- and computational sharding on top. Zilliqa does not use state sharding for now. We’ll come back to this later.
 
Before we continue dissecting how Zilliqa achieves such from a technological standpoint it’s good to keep in mind that a blockchain being decentralised and secure and scalable is still one of the main hurdles in allowing widespread usage of decentralised networks. In my opinion this needs to be solved first before blockchains can get to the point where they can create and add large scale value. So I invite you to read the next section to grasp the underlying fundamentals. Because after all these premises need to be true otherwise there isn’t a fundamental case to be bullish on Zilliqa, right?
 
Down the rabbit hole
 
How have they achieved this? Let’s define the basics first: key players on Zilliqa are the users and the miners. A user is anybody who uses the blockchain to transfer funds or run smart contracts. Miners are the (shard) nodes in the network who run the consensus protocol and get rewarded for their service in Zillings (ZIL). The mining network is divided into several smaller networks called shards, which is also referred to as ‘network sharding’. Miners subsequently are randomly assigned to a shard by another set of miners called DS (Directory Service) nodes. The regular shards process transactions and the outputs of these shards are eventually combined by the DS shard as they reach consensus on the final state. More on how these DS shards reach consensus (via pBFT) will be explained later on.
 
The Zilliqa network produces two types of blocks: DS blocks and Tx blocks. One DS Block consists of 100 Tx Blocks. And as previously mentioned there are two types of nodes concerned with reaching consensus: shard nodes and DS nodes. Becoming a shard node or DS node is being defined by the result of a PoW cycle (Ethash) at the beginning of the DS Block. All candidate mining nodes compete with each other and run the PoW (Proof-of-Work) cycle for 60 seconds and the submissions achieving the highest difficulty will be allowed on the network. And to put it in perspective: the average difficulty for one DS node is ~ 2 Th/s equaling 2.000.000 Mh/s or 55 thousand+ GeForce GTX 1070 / 8 GB GPUs at 35.4 Mh/s. Each DS Block 10 new DS nodes are allowed. And a shard node needs to provide around 8.53 GH/s currently (around 240 GTX 1070s). Dual mining ETH/ETC and ZIL is possible and can be done via mining software such as Phoenix and Claymore. There are pools and if you have large amounts of hashing power (Ethash) available you could mine solo.
 
The PoW cycle of 60 seconds is a peak performance and acts as an entry ticket to the network. The entry ticket is called a sybil resistance mechanism and makes it incredibly hard for adversaries to spawn lots of identities and manipulate the network with these identities. And after every 100 Tx Blocks which corresponds to roughly 1,5 hour this PoW process repeats. In between these 1,5 hour, no PoW needs to be done meaning Zilliqa’s energy consumption to keep the network secure is low. For more detailed information on how mining works click here.
Okay, hats off to you. You have made it this far. Before we go any deeper down the rabbit hole we first must understand why Zilliqa goes through all of the above technicalities and understand a bit more what a blockchain on a more fundamental level is. Because the core of Zilliqa’s consensus protocol relies on the usage of pBFT (practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance) we need to know more about state machines and their function. Navigate to Viewblock, a Zilliqa block explorer, and just come back to this article. We will use this site to navigate through a few concepts.
 
We have established that Zilliqa is a public and distributed blockchain. Meaning that everyone with an internet connection can send ZILs, trigger smart contracts, etc. and there is no central authority who fully controls the network. Zilliqa and other public and distributed blockchains (like Bitcoin and Ethereum) can also be defined as state machines.
 
Taking the liberty of paraphrasing examples and definitions given by Samuel Brooks’ medium article, he describes the definition of a blockchain (like Zilliqa) as: “A peer-to-peer, append-only datastore that uses consensus to synchronize cryptographically-secure data”.
 
Next, he states that: "blockchains are fundamentally systems for managing valid state transitions”. For some more context, I recommend reading the whole medium article to get a better grasp of the definitions and understanding of state machines. Nevertheless, let’s try to simplify and compile it into a single paragraph. Take traffic lights as an example: all its states (red, amber, and green) are predefined, all possible outcomes are known and it doesn’t matter if you encounter the traffic light today or tomorrow. It will still behave the same. Managing the states of a traffic light can be done by triggering a sensor on the road or pushing a button resulting in one traffic lights’ state going from green to red (via amber) and another light from red to green.
 
With public blockchains like Zilliqa, this isn’t so straightforward and simple. It started with block #1 almost 1,5 years ago and every 45 seconds or so a new block linked to the previous block is being added. Resulting in a chain of blocks with transactions in it that everyone can verify from block #1 to the current #647.000+ block. The state is ever changing and the states it can find itself in are infinite. And while the traffic light might work together in tandem with various other traffic lights, it’s rather insignificant comparing it to a public blockchain. Because Zilliqa consists of 2400 nodes who need to work together to achieve consensus on what the latest valid state is while some of these nodes may have latency or broadcast issues, drop offline or are deliberately trying to attack the network, etc.
 
Now go back to the Viewblock page take a look at the amount of transaction, addresses, block and DS height and then hit refresh. Obviously as expected you see new incremented values on one or all parameters. And how did the Zilliqa blockchain manage to transition from a previous valid state to the latest valid state? By using pBFT to reach consensus on the latest valid state.
 
After having obtained the entry ticket, miners execute pBFT to reach consensus on the ever-changing state of the blockchain. pBFT requires a series of network communication between nodes, and as such there is no GPU involved (but CPU). Resulting in the total energy consumed to keep the blockchain secure, decentralized and scalable being low.
 
pBFT stands for practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance and is an optimization on the Byzantine Fault Tolerant algorithm. To quote Blockonomi: “In the context of distributed systems, Byzantine Fault Tolerance is the ability of a distributed computer network to function as desired and correctly reach a sufficient consensus despite malicious components (nodes) of the system failing or propagating incorrect information to other peers.” Zilliqa is such a distributed computer network and depends on the honesty of the nodes (shard and DS) to reach consensus and to continuously update the state with the latest block. If pBFT is a new term for you I can highly recommend the Blockonomi article.
 
The idea of pBFT was introduced in 1999 - one of the authors even won a Turing award for it - and it is well researched and applied in various blockchains and distributed systems nowadays. If you want more advanced information than the Blockonomi link provides click here. And if you’re in between Blockonomi and the University of Singapore read the Zilliqa Design Story Part 2 dating from October 2017.
Quoting from the Zilliqa tech whitepaper: “pBFT relies upon a correct leader (which is randomly selected) to begin each phase and proceed when the sufficient majority exists. In case the leader is byzantine it can stall the entire consensus protocol. To address this challenge, pBFT offers a view change protocol to replace the byzantine leader with another one.”
 
pBFT can tolerate ⅓ of the nodes being dishonest (offline counts as Byzantine = dishonest) and the consensus protocol will function without stalling or hiccups. Once there are more than ⅓ of dishonest nodes but no more than ⅔ the network will be stalled and a view change will be triggered to elect a new DS leader. Only when more than ⅔ of the nodes are dishonest (66%) double-spend attacks become possible.
 
If the network stalls no transactions can be processed and one has to wait until a new honest leader has been elected. When the mainnet was just launched and in its early phases, view changes happened regularly. As of today the last stalling of the network - and view change being triggered - was at the end of October 2019.
 
Another benefit of using pBFT for consensus besides low energy is the immediate finality it provides. Once your transaction is included in a block and the block is added to the chain it’s done. Lastly, take a look at this article where three types of finality are being defined: probabilistic, absolute and economic finality. Zilliqa falls under the absolute finality (just like Tendermint for example). Although lengthy already we skipped through some of the inner workings from Zilliqa’s consensus: read the Zilliqa Design Story Part 3 and you will be close to having a complete picture on it. Enough about PoW, sybil resistance mechanism, pBFT, etc. Another thing we haven’t looked at yet is the amount of decentralization.
 
Decentralisation
 
Currently, there are four shards, each one of them consisting of 600 nodes. 1 shard with 600 so-called DS nodes (Directory Service - they need to achieve a higher difficulty than shard nodes) and 1800 shard nodes of which 250 are shard guards (centralized nodes controlled by the team). The amount of shard guards has been steadily declining from 1200 in January 2019 to 250 as of May 2020. On the Viewblock statistics, you can see that many of the nodes are being located in the US but those are only the (CPU parts of the) shard nodes who perform pBFT. There is no data from where the PoW sources are coming. And when the Zilliqa blockchain starts reaching its transaction capacity limit, a network upgrade needs to be executed to lift the current cap of maximum 2400 nodes to allow more nodes and formation of more shards which will allow to network to keep on scaling according to demand.
Besides shard nodes there are also seed nodes. The main role of seed nodes is to serve as direct access points (for end-users and clients) to the core Zilliqa network that validates transactions. Seed nodes consolidate transaction requests and forward these to the lookup nodes (another type of nodes) for distribution to the shards in the network. Seed nodes also maintain the entire transaction history and the global state of the blockchain which is needed to provide services such as block explorers. Seed nodes in the Zilliqa network are comparable to Infura on Ethereum.
 
The seed nodes were first only operated by Zilliqa themselves, exchanges and Viewblock. Operators of seed nodes like exchanges had no incentive to open them for the greater public. They were centralised at first. Decentralisation at the seed nodes level has been steadily rolled out since March 2020 ( Zilliqa Improvement Proposal 3 ). Currently the amount of seed nodes is being increased, they are public-facing and at the same time PoS is applied to incentivize seed node operators and make it possible for ZIL holders to stake and earn passive yields. Important distinction: seed nodes are not involved with consensus! That is still PoW as entry ticket and pBFT for the actual consensus.
 
5% of the block rewards are being assigned to seed nodes (from the beginning in 2019) and those are being used to pay out ZIL stakers. The 5% block rewards with an annual yield of 10.03% translate to roughly 610 MM ZILs in total that can be staked. Exchanges use the custodial variant of staking and wallets like Moonlet will use the non-custodial version (starting in Q3 2020). Staking is being done by sending ZILs to a smart contract created by Zilliqa and audited by Quantstamp.
 
With a high amount of DS; shard nodes and seed nodes becoming more decentralized too, Zilliqa qualifies for the label of decentralized in my opinion.
 
Smart contracts
 
Let me start by saying I’m not a developer and my programming skills are quite limited. So I‘m taking the ELI5 route (maybe 12) but if you are familiar with Javascript, Solidity or specifically OCaml please head straight to Scilla - read the docs to get a good initial grasp of how Zilliqa’s smart contract language Scilla works and if you ask yourself “why another programming language?” check this article. And if you want to play around with some sample contracts in an IDE click here. The faucet can be found here. And more information on architecture, dapp development and API can be found on the Developer Portal.
If you are more into listening and watching: check this recent webinar explaining Zilliqa and Scilla. Link is time-stamped so you’ll start right away with a platform introduction, roadmap 2020 and afterwards a proper Scilla introduction.
 
Generalized: programming languages can be divided into being ‘object-oriented’ or ‘functional’. Here is an ELI5 given by software development academy: * “all programs have two basic components, data – what the program knows – and behavior – what the program can do with that data. So object-oriented programming states that combining data and related behaviors in one place, is called “object”, which makes it easier to understand how a particular program works. On the other hand, functional programming argues that data and behavior are different things and should be separated to ensure their clarity.” *
 
Scilla is on the functional side and shares similarities with OCaml: OCaml is a general-purpose programming language with an emphasis on expressiveness and safety. It has an advanced type system that helps catch your mistakes without getting in your way. It's used in environments where a single mistake can cost millions and speed matters, is supported by an active community, and has a rich set of libraries and development tools. For all its power, OCaml is also pretty simple, which is one reason it's often used as a teaching language.
 
Scilla is blockchain agnostic, can be implemented onto other blockchains as well, is recognized by academics and won a so-called Distinguished Artifact Award award at the end of last year.
 
One of the reasons why the Zilliqa team decided to create their own programming language focused on preventing smart contract vulnerabilities is that adding logic on a blockchain, programming, means that you cannot afford to make mistakes. Otherwise, it could cost you. It’s all great and fun blockchains being immutable but updating your code because you found a bug isn’t the same as with a regular web application for example. And with smart contracts, it inherently involves cryptocurrencies in some form thus value.
 
Another difference with programming languages on a blockchain is gas. Every transaction you do on a smart contract platform like Zilliqa or Ethereum costs gas. With gas you basically pay for computational costs. Sending a ZIL from address A to address B costs 0.001 ZIL currently. Smart contracts are more complex, often involve various functions and require more gas (if gas is a new concept click here ).
 
So with Scilla, similar to Solidity, you need to make sure that “every function in your smart contract will run as expected without hitting gas limits. An improper resource analysis may lead to situations where funds may get stuck simply because a part of the smart contract code cannot be executed due to gas limits. Such constraints are not present in traditional software systems”. Scilla design story part 1
 
Some examples of smart contract issues you’d want to avoid are: leaking funds, ‘unexpected changes to critical state variables’ (example: someone other than you setting his or her address as the owner of the smart contract after creation) or simply killing a contract.
 
Scilla also allows for formal verification. Wikipedia to the rescue: In the context of hardware and software systems, formal verification is the act of proving or disproving the correctness of intended algorithms underlying a system with respect to a certain formal specification or property, using formal methods of mathematics.
 
Formal verification can be helpful in proving the correctness of systems such as: cryptographic protocols, combinational circuits, digital circuits with internal memory, and software expressed as source code.
 
Scilla is being developed hand-in-hand with formalization of its semantics and its embedding into the Coq proof assistant — a state-of-the art tool for mechanized proofs about properties of programs.”
 
Simply put, with Scilla and accompanying tooling developers can be mathematically sure and proof that the smart contract they’ve written does what he or she intends it to do.
 
Smart contract on a sharded environment and state sharding
 
There is one more topic I’d like to touch on: smart contract execution in a sharded environment (and what is the effect of state sharding). This is a complex topic. I’m not able to explain it any easier than what is posted here. But I will try to compress the post into something easy to digest.
 
Earlier on we have established that Zilliqa can process transactions in parallel due to network sharding. This is where the linear scalability comes from. We can define simple transactions: a transaction from address A to B (Category 1), a transaction where a user interacts with one smart contract (Category 2) and the most complex ones where triggering a transaction results in multiple smart contracts being involved (Category 3). The shards are able to process transactions on their own without interference of the other shards. With Category 1 transactions that is doable, with Category 2 transactions sometimes if that address is in the same shard as the smart contract but with Category 3 you definitely need communication between the shards. Solving that requires to make a set of communication rules the protocol needs to follow in order to process all transactions in a generalised fashion.
 
And this is where the downsides of state sharding comes in currently. All shards in Zilliqa have access to the complete state. Yes the state size (0.1 GB at the moment) grows and all of the nodes need to store it but it also means that they don’t need to shop around for information available on other shards. Requiring more communication and adding more complexity. Computer science knowledge and/or developer knowledge required links if you want to dig further: Scilla - language grammar Scilla - Foundations for Verifiable Decentralised Computations on a Blockchain Gas Accounting NUS x Zilliqa: Smart contract language workshop
 
Easier to follow links on programming Scilla https://learnscilla.com/home Ivan on Tech
 
Roadmap / Zilliqa 2.0
 
There is no strict defined roadmap but here are topics being worked on. And via the Zilliqa website there is also more information on the projects they are working on.
 
Business & Partnerships
 
It’s not only technology in which Zilliqa seems to be excelling as their ecosystem has been expanding and starting to grow rapidly. The project is on a mission to provide OpenFinance (OpFi) to the world and Singapore is the right place to be due to its progressive regulations and futuristic thinking. Singapore has taken a proactive approach towards cryptocurrencies by introducing the Payment Services Act 2019 (PS Act). Among other things, the PS Act will regulate intermediaries dealing with certain cryptocurrencies, with a particular focus on consumer protection and anti-money laundering. It will also provide a stable regulatory licensing and operating framework for cryptocurrency entities, effectively covering all crypto businesses and exchanges based in Singapore. According to PWC 82% of the surveyed executives in Singapore reported blockchain initiatives underway and 13% of them have already brought the initiatives live to the market. There is also an increasing list of organizations that are starting to provide digital payment services. Moreover, Singaporean blockchain developers Building Cities Beyond has recently created an innovation $15 million grant to encourage development on its ecosystem. This all suggests that Singapore tries to position itself as (one of) the leading blockchain hubs in the world.
 
Zilliqa seems to already take advantage of this and recently helped launch Hg Exchange on their platform, together with financial institutions PhillipCapital, PrimePartners and Fundnel. Hg Exchange, which is now approved by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), uses smart contracts to represent digital assets. Through Hg Exchange financial institutions worldwide can use Zilliqa's safe-by-design smart contracts to enable the trading of private equities. For example, think of companies such as Grab, Airbnb, SpaceX that are not available for public trading right now. Hg Exchange will allow investors to buy shares of private companies & unicorns and capture their value before an IPO. Anquan, the main company behind Zilliqa, has also recently announced that they became a partner and shareholder in TEN31 Bank, which is a fully regulated bank allowing for tokenization of assets and is aiming to bridge the gap between conventional banking and the blockchain world. If STOs, the tokenization of assets, and equity trading will continue to increase, then Zilliqa’s public blockchain would be the ideal candidate due to its strategic positioning, partnerships, regulatory compliance and the technology that is being built on top of it.
 
What is also very encouraging is their focus on banking the un(der)banked. They are launching a stablecoin basket starting with XSGD. As many of you know, stablecoins are currently mostly used for trading. However, Zilliqa is actively trying to broaden the use case of stablecoins. I recommend everybody to read this text that Amrit Kumar wrote (one of the co-founders). These stablecoins will be integrated in the traditional markets and bridge the gap between the crypto world and the traditional world. This could potentially revolutionize and legitimise the crypto space if retailers and companies will for example start to use stablecoins for payments or remittances, instead of it solely being used for trading.
 
Zilliqa also released their DeFi strategic roadmap (dating November 2019) which seems to be aligning well with their OpFi strategy. A non-custodial DEX is coming to Zilliqa made by Switcheo which allows cross-chain trading (atomic swaps) between ETH, EOS and ZIL based tokens. They also signed a Memorandum of Understanding for a (soon to be announced) USD stablecoin. And as Zilliqa is all about regulations and being compliant, I’m speculating on it to be a regulated USD stablecoin. Furthermore, XSGD is already created and visible on block explorer and XIDR (Indonesian Stablecoin) is also coming soon via StraitsX. Here also an overview of the Tech Stack for Financial Applications from September 2019. Further quoting Amrit Kumar on this:
 
There are two basic building blocks in DeFi/OpFi though: 1) stablecoins as you need a non-volatile currency to get access to this market and 2) a dex to be able to trade all these financial assets. The rest are built on top of these blocks.
 
So far, together with our partners and community, we have worked on developing these building blocks with XSGD as a stablecoin. We are working on bringing a USD-backed stablecoin as well. We will soon have a decentralised exchange developed by Switcheo. And with HGX going live, we are also venturing into the tokenization space. More to come in the future.”
 
Additionally, they also have this ZILHive initiative that injects capital into projects. There have been already 6 waves of various teams working on infrastructure, innovation and research, and they are not from ASEAN or Singapore only but global: see Grantees breakdown by country. Over 60 project teams from over 20 countries have contributed to Zilliqa's ecosystem. This includes individuals and teams developing wallets, explorers, developer toolkits, smart contract testing frameworks, dapps, etc. As some of you may know, Unstoppable Domains (UD) blew up when they launched on Zilliqa. UD aims to replace cryptocurrency addresses with a human-readable name and allows for uncensorable websites. Zilliqa will probably be the only one able to handle all these transactions onchain due to ability to scale and its resulting low fees which is why the UD team launched this on Zilliqa in the first place. Furthermore, Zilliqa also has a strong emphasis on security, compliance, and privacy, which is why they partnered with companies like Elliptic, ChainSecurity (part of PwC Switzerland), and Incognito. Their sister company Aqilliz (Zilliqa spelled backwards) focuses on revolutionizing the digital advertising space and is doing interesting things like using Zilliqa to track outdoor digital ads with companies like Foodpanda.
 
Zilliqa is listed on nearly all major exchanges, having several different fiat-gateways and recently have been added to Binance’s margin trading and futures trading with really good volume. They also have a very impressive team with good credentials and experience. They don't just have “tech people”. They have a mix of tech people, business people, marketeers, scientists, and more. Naturally, it's good to have a mix of people with different skill sets if you work in the crypto space.
 
Marketing & Community
 
Zilliqa has a very strong community. If you just follow their Twitter their engagement is much higher for a coin that has approximately 80k followers. They also have been ‘coin of the day’ by LunarCrush many times. LunarCrush tracks real-time cryptocurrency value and social data. According to their data, it seems Zilliqa has a more fundamental and deeper understanding of marketing and community engagement than almost all other coins. While almost all coins have been a bit frozen in the last months, Zilliqa seems to be on its own bull run. It was somewhere in the 100s a few months ago and is currently ranked #46 on CoinGecko. Their official Telegram also has over 20k people and is very active, and their community channel which is over 7k now is more active and larger than many other official channels. Their local communities also seem to be growing.
 
Moreover, their community started ‘Zillacracy’ together with the Zilliqa core team ( see www.zillacracy.com ). It’s a community-run initiative where people from all over the world are now helping with marketing and development on Zilliqa. Since its launch in February 2020 they have been doing a lot and will also run their own non-custodial seed node for staking. This seed node will also allow them to start generating revenue for them to become a self sustaining entity that could potentially scale up to become a decentralized company working in parallel with the Zilliqa core team. Comparing it to all the other smart contract platforms (e.g. Cardano, EOS, Tezos etc.) they don't seem to have started a similar initiative (correct me if I’m wrong though). This suggests in my opinion that these other smart contract platforms do not fully understand how to utilize the ‘power of the community’. This is something you cannot ‘buy with money’ and gives many projects in the space a disadvantage.
 
Zilliqa also released two social products called SocialPay and Zeeves. SocialPay allows users to earn ZILs while tweeting with a specific hashtag. They have recently used it in partnership with the Singapore Red Cross for a marketing campaign after their initial pilot program. It seems like a very valuable social product with a good use case. I can see a lot of traditional companies entering the space through this product, which they seem to suggest will happen. Tokenizing hashtags with smart contracts to get network effect is a very smart and innovative idea.
 
Regarding Zeeves, this is a tipping bot for Telegram. They already have 1000s of signups and they plan to keep upgrading it for more and more people to use it (e.g. they recently have added a quiz features). They also use it during AMAs to reward people in real-time. It’s a very smart approach to grow their communities and get familiar with ZIL. I can see this becoming very big on Telegram. This tool suggests, again, that the Zilliqa team has a deeper understanding of what the crypto space and community needs and is good at finding the right innovative tools to grow and scale.
 
To be honest, I haven’t covered everything (i’m also reaching the character limited haha). So many updates happening lately that it's hard to keep up, such as the International Monetary Fund mentioning Zilliqa in their report, custodial and non-custodial Staking, Binance Margin, Futures, Widget, entering the Indian market, and more. The Head of Marketing Colin Miles has also released this as an overview of what is coming next. And last but not least, Vitalik Buterin has been mentioning Zilliqa lately acknowledging Zilliqa and mentioning that both projects have a lot of room to grow. There is much more info of course and a good part of it has been served to you on a silver platter. I invite you to continue researching by yourself :-) And if you have any comments or questions please post here!
submitted by haveyouheardaboutit to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Why i’m bullish on Zilliqa (long read)

Hey all, I've been researching coins since 2017 and have gone through 100s of them in the last 3 years. I got introduced to blockchain via Bitcoin of course, analysed Ethereum thereafter and from that moment I have a keen interest in smart contact platforms. I’m passionate about Ethereum but I find Zilliqa to have a better risk reward ratio. Especially because Zilliqa has found an elegant balance between being secure, decentralised and scalable in my opinion.
 
Below I post my analysis why from all the coins I went through I’m most bullish on Zilliqa (yes I went through Tezos, EOS, NEO, VeChain, Harmony, Algorand, Cardano etc.). Note that this is not investment advice and although it's a thorough analysis there is obviously some bias involved. Looking forward to what you all think!
 
Fun fact: the name Zilliqa is a play on ‘silica’ silicon dioxide which means “Silicon for the high-throughput consensus computer.”
 
This post is divided into (i) Technology, (ii) Business & Partnerships, and (iii) Marketing & Community. I’ve tried to make the technology part readable for a broad audience. If you’ve ever tried understanding the inner workings of Bitcoin and Ethereum you should be able to grasp most parts. Otherwise just skim through and once you are zoning out head to the next part.
 
Technology and some more:
 
Introduction The technology is one of the main reasons why I’m so bullish on Zilliqa. First thing you see on their website is: “Zilliqa is a high-performance, high-security blockchain platform for enterprises and next-generation applications.” These are some bold statements.
 
Before we deep dive into the technology let’s take a step back in time first as they have quite the history. The initial research paper from which Zilliqa originated dates back to August 2016: Elastico: A Secure Sharding Protocol For Open Blockchains where Loi Luu (Kyber Network) is one of the co-authors. Other ideas that led to the development of what Zilliqa has become today are: Bitcoin-NG, collective signing CoSi, ByzCoin and Omniledger.
 
The technical white paper was made public in August 2017 and since then they have achieved everything stated in the white paper and also created their own open source intermediate level smart contract language called Scilla (functional programming language similar to OCaml) too.
 
Mainnet is live since end of January 2019 with daily transaction rate growing continuously. About a week ago mainnet reached 5 million transactions, 500.000+ addresses in total along with 2400 nodes keeping the network decentralised and secure. Circulating supply is nearing 11 billion and currently only mining rewards are left. Maximum supply is 21 billion with annual inflation being 7.13% currently and will only decrease with time.
 
Zilliqa realised early on that the usage of public cryptocurrencies and smart contracts were increasing but decentralised, secure and scalable alternatives were lacking in the crypto space. They proposed to apply sharding onto a public smart contract blockchain where the transaction rate increases almost linear with the increase in amount of nodes. More nodes = higher transaction throughput and increased decentralisation. Sharding comes in many forms and Zilliqa uses network-, transaction- and computational sharding. Network sharding opens up the possibility of using transaction- and computational sharding on top. Zilliqa does not use state sharding for now. We’ll come back to this later.
 
Before we continue disecting how Zilliqa achieves such from a technological standpoint it’s good to keep in mind that a blockchain being decentralised and secure and scalable is still one of the main hurdles in allowing widespread usage of decentralised networks. In my opinion this needs to be solved first before blockchains can get to the point where they can create and add large scale value. So I invite you to read the next section to grasp the underlying fundamentals. Because after all these premises need to be true otherwise there isn’t a fundamental case to be bullish on Zilliqa, right?
 
Down the rabbit hole
 
How have they achieved this? Let’s define the basics first: key players on Zilliqa are the users and the miners. A user is anybody who uses the blockchain to transfer funds or run smart contracts. Miners are the (shard) nodes in the network who run the consensus protocol and get rewarded for their service in Zillings (ZIL). The mining network is divided into several smaller networks called shards, which is also referred to as ‘network sharding’. Miners subsequently are randomly assigned to a shard by another set of miners called DS (Directory Service) nodes. The regular shards process transactions and the outputs of these shards are eventually combined by the DS shard as they reach consensus on the final state. More on how these DS shards reach consensus (via pBFT) will be explained later on.
 
The Zilliqa network produces two types of blocks: DS blocks and Tx blocks. One DS Block consists of 100 Tx Blocks. And as previously mentioned there are two types of nodes concerned with reaching consensus: shard nodes and DS nodes. Becoming a shard node or DS node is being defined by the result of a PoW cycle (Ethash) at the beginning of the DS Block. All candidate mining nodes compete with each other and run the PoW (Proof-of-Work) cycle for 60 seconds and the submissions achieving the highest difficulty will be allowed on the network. And to put it in perspective: the average difficulty for one DS node is ~ 2 Th/s equaling 2.000.000 Mh/s or 55 thousand+ GeForce GTX 1070 / 8 GB GPUs at 35.4 Mh/s. Each DS Block 10 new DS nodes are allowed. And a shard node needs to provide around 8.53 GH/s currently (around 240 GTX 1070s). Dual mining ETH/ETC and ZIL is possible and can be done via mining software such as Phoenix and Claymore. There are pools and if you have large amounts of hashing power (Ethash) available you could mine solo.
 
The PoW cycle of 60 seconds is a peak performance and acts as an entry ticket to the network. The entry ticket is called a sybil resistance mechanism and makes it incredibly hard for adversaries to spawn lots of identities and manipulate the network with these identities. And after every 100 Tx Blocks which corresponds to roughly 1,5 hour this PoW process repeats. In between these 1,5 hour no PoW needs to be done meaning Zilliqa’s energy consumption to keep the network secure is low. For more detailed information on how mining works click here.
Okay, hats off to you. You have made it this far. Before we go any deeper down the rabbit hole we first must understand why Zilliqa goes through all of the above technicalities and understand a bit more what a blockchain on a more fundamental level is. Because the core of Zilliqa’s consensus protocol relies on the usage of pBFT (practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance) we need to know more about state machines and their function. Navigate to Viewblock, a Zilliqa block explorer, and just come back to this article. We will use this site to navigate through a few concepts.
 
We have established that Zilliqa is a public and distributed blockchain. Meaning that everyone with an internet connection can send ZILs, trigger smart contracts etc. and there is no central authority who fully controls the network. Zilliqa and other public and distributed blockchains (like Bitcoin and Ethereum) can also be defined as state machines.
 
Taking the liberty of paraphrasing examples and definitions given by Samuel Brooks’ medium article, he describes the definition of a blockchain (like Zilliqa) as:
“A peer-to-peer, append-only datastore that uses consensus to synchronise cryptographically-secure data”.
 
Next he states that: >“blockchains are fundamentally systems for managing valid state transitions”.* For some more context, I recommend reading the whole medium article to get a better grasp of the definitions and understanding of state machines. Nevertheless, let’s try to simplify and compile it into a single paragraph. Take traffic lights as an example: all its states (red, amber and green) are predefined, all possible outcomes are known and it doesn’t matter if you encounter the traffic light today or tomorrow. It will still behave the same. Managing the states of a traffic light can be done by triggering a sensor on the road or pushing a button resulting in one traffic lights’ state going from green to red (via amber) and another light from red to green.
 
With public blockchains like Zilliqa this isn’t so straightforward and simple. It started with block #1 almost 1,5 years ago and every 45 seconds or so a new block linked to the previous block is being added. Resulting in a chain of blocks with transactions in it that everyone can verify from block #1 to the current #647.000+ block. The state is ever changing and the states it can find itself in are infinite. And while the traffic light might work together in tandem with various other traffic lights, it’s rather insignificant comparing it to a public blockchain. Because Zilliqa consists of 2400 nodes who need to work together to achieve consensus on what the latest valid state is while some of these nodes may have latency or broadcast issues, drop offline or are deliberately trying to attack the network etc.
 
Now go back to the Viewblock page take a look at the amount of transaction, addresses, block and DS height and then hit refresh. Obviously as expected you see new incremented values on one or all parameters. And how did the Zilliqa blockchain manage to transition from a previous valid state to the latest valid state? By using pBFT to reach consensus on the latest valid state.
 
After having obtained the entry ticket, miners execute pBFT to reach consensus on the ever changing state of the blockchain. pBFT requires a series of network communication between nodes, and as such there is no GPU involved (but CPU). Resulting in the total energy consumed to keep the blockchain secure, decentralised and scalable being low.
 
pBFT stands for practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance and is an optimisation on the Byzantine Fault Tolerant algorithm. To quote Blockonomi: “In the context of distributed systems, Byzantine Fault Tolerance is the ability of a distributed computer network to function as desired and correctly reach a sufficient consensus despite malicious components (nodes) of the system failing or propagating incorrect information to other peers.” Zilliqa is such a distributed computer network and depends on the honesty of the nodes (shard and DS) to reach consensus and to continuously update the state with the latest block. If pBFT is a new term for you I can highly recommend the Blockonomi article.
 
The idea of pBFT was introduced in 1999 - one of the authors even won a Turing award for it - and it is well researched and applied in various blockchains and distributed systems nowadays. If you want more advanced information than the Blockonomi link provides click here. And if you’re in between Blockonomi and University of Singapore read the Zilliqa Design Story Part 2 dating from October 2017.
Quoting from the Zilliqa tech whitepaper: “pBFT relies upon a correct leader (which is randomly selected) to begin each phase and proceed when the sufficient majority exists. In case the leader is byzantine it can stall the entire consensus protocol. To address this challenge, pBFT offers a view change protocol to replace the byzantine leader with another one.”
 
pBFT can tolerate ⅓ of the nodes being dishonest (offline counts as Byzantine = dishonest) and the consensus protocol will function without stalling or hiccups. Once there are more than ⅓ of dishonest nodes but no more than ⅔ the network will be stalled and a view change will be triggered to elect a new DS leader. Only when more than ⅔ of the nodes are dishonest (>66%) double spend attacks become possible.
 
If the network stalls no transactions can be processed and one has to wait until a new honest leader has been elected. When the mainnet was just launched and in its early phases, view changes happened regularly. As of today the last stalling of the network - and view change being triggered - was at the end of October 2019.
 
Another benefit of using pBFT for consensus besides low energy is the immediate finality it provides. Once your transaction is included in a block and the block is added to the chain it’s done. Lastly, take a look at this article where three types of finality are being defined: probabilistic, absolute and economic finality. Zilliqa falls under the absolute finality (just like Tendermint for example). Although lengthy already we skipped through some of the inner workings from Zilliqa’s consensus: read the Zilliqa Design Story Part 3 and you will be close to having a complete picture on it. Enough about PoW, sybil resistance mechanism, pBFT etc. Another thing we haven’t looked at yet is the amount of decentralisation.
 
Decentralisation
 
Currently there are four shards, each one of them consisting of 600 nodes. 1 shard with 600 so called DS nodes (Directory Service - they need to achieve a higher difficulty than shard nodes) and 1800 shard nodes of which 250 are shard guards (centralised nodes controlled by the team). The amount of shard guards has been steadily declining from 1200 in January 2019 to 250 as of May 2020. On the Viewblock statistics you can see that many of the nodes are being located in the US but those are only the (CPU parts of the) shard nodes who perform pBFT. There is no data from where the PoW sources are coming. And when the Zilliqa blockchain starts reaching their transaction capacity limit, a network upgrade needs to be executed to lift the current cap of maximum 2400 nodes to allow more nodes and formation of more shards which will allow to network to keep on scaling according to demand.
Besides shard nodes there are also seed nodes. The main role of seed nodes is to serve as direct access points (for end users and clients) to the core Zilliqa network that validates transactions. Seed nodes consolidate transaction requests and forward these to the lookup nodes (another type of nodes) for distribution to the shards in the network. Seed nodes also maintain the entire transaction history and the global state of the blockchain which is needed to provide services such as block explorers. Seed nodes in the Zilliqa network are comparable to Infura on Ethereum.
 
The seed nodes were first only operated by Zilliqa themselves, exchanges and Viewblock. Operators of seed nodes like exchanges had no incentive to open them for the greater public.They were centralised at first. Decentralisation at the seed nodes level has been steadily rolled out since March 2020 ( Zilliqa Improvement Proposal 3 ). Currently the amount of seed nodes is being increased, they are public facing and at the same time PoS is applied to incentivize seed node operators and make it possible for ZIL holders to stake and earn passive yields. Important distinction: seed nodes are not involved with consensus! That is still PoW as entry ticket and pBFT for the actual consensus.
 
5% of the block rewards are being assigned to seed nodes (from the beginning in 2019) and those are being used to pay out ZIL stakers.The 5% block rewards with an annual yield of 10.03% translates to roughly 610 MM ZILs in total that can be staked. Exchanges use the custodial variant of staking and wallets like Moonlet will use the non custodial version (starting in Q3 2020). Staking is being done by sending ZILs to a smart contract created by Zilliqa and audited by Quantstamp.
 
With a high amount of DS & shard nodes and seed nodes becoming more decentralised too, Zilliqa qualifies for the label of decentralised in my opinion.
 
Smart contracts
 
Let me start by saying I’m not a developer and my programming skills are quite limited. So I‘m taking the ELI5 route (maybe 12) but if you are familiar with Javascript, Solidity or specifically OCaml please head straight to Scilla - read the docs to get a good initial grasp of how Zilliqa’s smart contract language Scilla works and if you ask yourself “why another programming language?” check this article. And if you want to play around with some sample contracts in an IDE click here. Faucet can be found here. And more information on architecture, dapp development and API can be found on the Developer Portal.
If you are more into listening and watching: check this recent webinar explaining Zilliqa and Scilla. Link is time stamped so you’ll start right away with a platform introduction, R&D roadmap 2020 and afterwards a proper Scilla introduction.
 
Generalised: programming languages can be divided into being ‘object oriented’ or ‘functional’. Here is an ELI5 given by software development academy: > “all programmes have two basic components, data – what the programme knows – and behaviour – what the programme can do with that data. So object-oriented programming states that combining data and related behaviours in one place, is called “object”, which makes it easier to understand how a particular program works. On the other hand, functional programming argues that data and behaviour are different things and should be separated to ensure their clarity.”
 
Scilla is on the functional side and shares similarities with OCaml: > OCaml is a general purpose programming language with an emphasis on expressiveness and safety. It has an advanced type system that helps catch your mistakes without getting in your way. It's used in environments where a single mistake can cost millions and speed matters, is supported by an active community, and has a rich set of libraries and development tools. For all its power, OCaml is also pretty simple, which is one reason it's often used as a teaching language.
 
Scilla is blockchain agnostic, can be implemented onto other blockchains as well, is recognised by academics and won a so called Distinguished Artifact Award award at the end of last year.
 
One of the reasons why the Zilliqa team decided to create their own programming language focused on preventing smart contract vulnerabilities safety is that adding logic on a blockchain, programming, means that you cannot afford to make mistakes. Otherwise it could cost you. It’s all great and fun blockchains being immutable but updating your code because you found a bug isn’t the same as with a regular web application for example. And with smart contracts it inherently involves cryptocurrencies in some form thus value.
 
Another difference with programming languages on a blockchain is gas. Every transaction you do on a smart contract platform like Zilliqa for Ethereum costs gas. With gas you basically pay for computational costs. Sending a ZIL from address A to address B costs 0.001 ZIL currently. Smart contracts are more complex, often involve various functions and require more gas (if gas is a new concept click here ).
 
So with Scilla, similar to Solidity, you need to make sure that “every function in your smart contract will run as expected without hitting gas limits. An improper resource analysis may lead to situations where funds may get stuck simply because a part of the smart contract code cannot be executed due to gas limits. Such constraints are not present in traditional software systems”. Scilla design story part 1
 
Some examples of smart contract issues you’d want to avoid are: leaking funds, ‘unexpected changes to critical state variables’ (example: someone other than you setting his or her address as the owner of the smart contract after creation) or simply killing a contract.
 
Scilla also allows for formal verification. Wikipedia to the rescue:
In the context of hardware and software systems, formal verification is the act of proving or disproving the correctness of intended algorithms underlying a system with respect to a certain formal specification or property, using formal methods of mathematics.
 
Formal verification can be helpful in proving the correctness of systems such as: cryptographic protocols, combinational circuits, digital circuits with internal memory, and software expressed as source code.
 
Scilla is being developed hand-in-hand with formalization of its semantics and its embedding into the Coq proof assistant — a state-of-the art tool for mechanized proofs about properties of programs.”
 
Simply put, with Scilla and accompanying tooling developers can be mathematically sure and proof that the smart contract they’ve written does what he or she intends it to do.
 
Smart contract on a sharded environment and state sharding
 
There is one more topic I’d like to touch on: smart contract execution in a sharded environment (and what is the effect of state sharding). This is a complex topic. I’m not able to explain it any easier than what is posted here. But I will try to compress the post into something easy to digest.
 
Earlier on we have established that Zilliqa can process transactions in parallel due to network sharding. This is where the linear scalability comes from. We can define simple transactions: a transaction from address A to B (Category 1), a transaction where a user interacts with one smart contract (Category 2) and the most complex ones where triggering a transaction results in multiple smart contracts being involved (Category 3). The shards are able to process transactions on their own without interference of the other shards. With Category 1 transactions that is doable, with Category 2 transactions sometimes if that address is in the same shard as the smart contract but with Category 3 you definitely need communication between the shards. Solving that requires to make a set of communication rules the protocol needs to follow in order to process all transactions in a generalised fashion.
 
And this is where the downsides of state sharding comes in currently. All shards in Zilliqa have access to the complete state. Yes the state size (0.1 GB at the moment) grows and all of the nodes need to store it but it also means that they don’t need to shop around for information available on other shards. Requiring more communication and adding more complexity. Computer science knowledge and/or developer knowledge required links if you want to dig further: Scilla - language grammar Scilla - Foundations for Verifiable Decentralised Computations on a Blockchain Gas Accounting NUS x Zilliqa: Smart contract language workshop
 
Easier to follow links on programming Scilla https://learnscilla.com/home Ivan on Tech
 
Roadmap / Zilliqa 2.0
 
There is no strict defined roadmap but here are topics being worked on. And via the Zilliqa website there is also more information on the projects they are working on.
 
Business & Partnerships  
It’s not only technology in which Zilliqa seems to be excelling as their ecosystem has been expanding and starting to grow rapidly. The project is on a mission to provide OpenFinance (OpFi) to the world and Singapore is the right place to be due to its progressive regulations and futuristic thinking. Singapore has taken a proactive approach towards cryptocurrencies by introducing the Payment Services Act 2019 (PS Act). Among other things, the PS Act will regulate intermediaries dealing with certain cryptocurrencies, with a particular focus on consumer protection and anti-money laundering. It will also provide a stable regulatory licensing and operating framework for cryptocurrency entities, effectively covering all crypto businesses and exchanges based in Singapore. According to PWC 82% of the surveyed executives in Singapore reported blockchain initiatives underway and 13% of them have already brought the initiatives live to the market. There is also an increasing list of organisations that are starting to provide digital payment services. Moreover, Singaporean blockchain developers Building Cities Beyond has recently created an innovation $15 million grant to encourage development on its ecosystem. This all suggest that Singapore tries to position itself as (one of) the leading blockchain hubs in the world.
 
Zilliqa seems to already taking advantage of this and recently helped launch Hg Exchange on their platform, together with financial institutions PhillipCapital, PrimePartners and Fundnel. Hg Exchange, which is now approved by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), uses smart contracts to represent digital assets. Through Hg Exchange financial institutions worldwide can use Zilliqa's safe-by-design smart contracts to enable the trading of private equities. For example, think of companies such as Grab, AirBnB, SpaceX that are not available for public trading right now. Hg Exchange will allow investors to buy shares of private companies & unicorns and capture their value before an IPO. Anquan, the main company behind Zilliqa, has also recently announced that they became a partner and shareholder in TEN31 Bank, which is a fully regulated bank allowing for tokenization of assets and is aiming to bridge the gap between conventional banking and the blockchain world. If STOs, the tokenization of assets, and equity trading will continue to increase, then Zilliqa’s public blockchain would be the ideal candidate due to its strategic positioning, partnerships, regulatory compliance and the technology that is being built on top of it.
 
What is also very encouraging is their focus on banking the un(der)banked. They are launching a stablecoin basket starting with XSGD. As many of you know, stablecoins are currently mostly used for trading. However, Zilliqa is actively trying to broaden the use case of stablecoins. I recommend everybody to read this text that Amrit Kumar wrote (one of the co-founders). These stablecoins will be integrated in the traditional markets and bridge the gap between the crypto world and the traditional world. This could potentially revolutionize and legitimise the crypto space if retailers and companies will for example start to use stablecoins for payments or remittances, instead of it solely being used for trading.
 
Zilliqa also released their DeFi strategic roadmap (dating November 2019) which seems to be aligning well with their OpFi strategy. A non-custodial DEX is coming to Zilliqa made by Switcheo which allows cross-chain trading (atomic swaps) between ETH, EOS and ZIL based tokens. They also signed a Memorandum of Understanding for a (soon to be announced) USD stablecoin. And as Zilliqa is all about regulations and being compliant, I’m speculating on it to be a regulated USD stablecoin. Furthermore, XSGD is already created and visible on block explorer and XIDR (Indonesian Stablecoin) is also coming soon via StraitsX. Here also an overview of the Tech Stack for Financial Applications from September 2019. Further quoting Amrit Kumar on this:
 
There are two basic building blocks in DeFi/OpFi though: 1) stablecoins as you need a non-volatile currency to get access to this market and 2) a dex to be able to trade all these financial assets. The rest are build on top of these blocks.
 
So far, together with our partners and community, we have worked on developing these building blocks with XSGD as a stablecoin. We are working on bringing a USD-backed stablecoin as well. We will soon have a decentralised exchange developed by Switcheo. And with HGX going live, we are also venturing into the tokenization space. More to come in the future.”*
 
Additionally, they also have this ZILHive initiative that injects capital into projects. There have been already 6 waves of various teams working on infrastructure, innovation and research, and they are not from ASEAN or Singapore only but global: see Grantees breakdown by country. Over 60 project teams from over 20 countries have contributed to Zilliqa's ecosystem. This includes individuals and teams developing wallets, explorers, developer toolkits, smart contract testing frameworks, dapps, etc. As some of you may know, Unstoppable Domains (UD) blew up when they launched on Zilliqa. UD aims to replace cryptocurrency addresses with a human readable name and allows for uncensorable websites. Zilliqa will probably be the only one able to handle all these transactions onchain due to ability to scale and its resulting low fees which is why the UD team launched this on Zilliqa in the first place. Furthermore, Zilliqa also has a strong emphasis on security, compliance, and privacy, which is why they partnered with companies like Elliptic, ChainSecurity (part of PwC Switzerland), and Incognito. Their sister company Aqilliz (Zilliqa spelled backwards) focuses on revolutionizing the digital advertising space and is doing interesting things like using Zilliqa to track outdoor digital ads with companies like Foodpanda.
 
Zilliqa is listed on nearly all major exchanges, having several different fiat-gateways and recently have been added to Binance’s margin trading and futures trading with really good volume. They also have a very impressive team with good credentials and experience. They dont just have “tech people”. They have a mix of tech people, business people, marketeers, scientists, and more. Naturally, it's good to have a mix of people with different skill sets if you work in the crypto space.
 
Marketing & Community
 
Zilliqa has a very strong community. If you just follow their Twitter their engagement is much higher for a coin that has approximately 80k followers. They also have been ‘coin of the day’ by LunarCrush many times. LunarCrush tracks real-time cryptocurrency value and social data. According to their data it seems Zilliqa has a more fundamental and deeper understanding of marketing and community engagement than almost all other coins. While almost all coins have been a bit frozen in the last months, Zilliqa seems to be on its own bull run. It was somewhere in the 100s a few months ago and is currently ranked #46 on CoinGecko. Their official Telegram also has over 20k people and is very active, and their community channel which is over 7k now is more active and larger than many other official channels. Their local communities) also seem to be growing.
 
Moreover, their community started ‘Zillacracy’ together with the Zilliqa core team ( see www.zillacracy.com ). It’s a community run initiative where people from all over the world are now helping with marketing and development on Zilliqa. Since its launch in February 2020 they have been doing a lot and will also run their own non custodial seed node for staking. This seed node will also allow them to start generating revenue for them to become a self sustaining entity that could potentially scale up to become a decentralized company working in parallel with the Zilliqa core team. Comparing it to all the other smart contract platforms (e.g. Cardano, EOS, Tezos etc.) they don't seem to have started a similar initiatives (correct me if I’m wrong though). This suggest in my opinion that these other smart contract platforms do not fully understand how to utilize the ‘power of the community’. This is something you cannot ‘buy with money’ and gives many projects in the space a disadvantage.
 
Zilliqa also released two social products called SocialPay and Zeeves. SocialPay allows users to earn ZILs while tweeting with a specific hashtag. They have recently used it in partnership with the Singapore Red Cross for a marketing campaign after their initial pilot program. It seems like a very valuable social product with a good use case. I can see a lot of traditional companies entering the space through this product, which they seem to suggest will happen. Tokenizing hashtags with smart contracts to get network effect is a very smart and innovative idea.
 
Regarding Zeeves, this is a tipping bot for Telegram. They already have 1000s of signups and they plan to keep upgrading it for more and more people to use it (e.g. they recently have added a quiz features). They also use it during AMAs to reward people in real time. It’s a very smart approach to grow their communities and get familiar with ZIL. I can see this becoming very big on Telegram. This tool suggests, again, that the Zilliqa team has a deeper understanding what the crypto space and community needs and is good at finding the right innovative tools to grow and scale.
 
To be honest, I haven’t covered everything (i’m also reaching the character limited haha). So many updates happening lately that it's hard to keep up, such as the International Monetary Fund mentioning Zilliqa in their report, custodial and non-custodial Staking, Binance Margin, Futures & Widget, entering the Indian market, and more. The Head of Marketing Colin Miles has also released this as an overview of what is coming next. And last but not least, Vitalik Buterin has been mentioning Zilliqa lately acknowledging Zilliqa and mentioning that both projects have a lot of room to grow. There is much more info of course and a good part of it has been served to you on a silver platter. I invite you to continue researching by yourself :-) And if you have any comments or questions please post here!
submitted by haveyouheardaboutit to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Coinbase clears up misconceptions about ASICs, ASIC-resistance and how Proof of work works in new blogpost

Edit this post and my other cross-posts here are being heavily downvote brigaded by the very aggressive and forceful monero community. In the last couple days alone I have lost more than 100 comment karma, from over 1100 to 948, to these aggressive individuals seeking to manipulate the narrative, and 'lean on me' to stop posting information they don't like. This thread itself had roughly 14-17 upvotes. Now 5-8. Proof that I'm being vote brigaded is that I have nearly 3 times the donuts in Ethtrader than I have comment and post karma, COMBINED! This is despite the fact that I rarely post there. Which shows that most people appreciate my posts, but the monero community wants to hide that and control the narrative!
If you look at my comment karma by sub breakdown, visible in this comment here, you can clearly see that if you sum up my comment karma, I should have around ~2200. In dashpay alone I have 1300 comment karma. Yet if you hover over my username, I only have 906. This is due to vote brigading and is damning proof of it.
They refuse to allow discussions to take place naturally because their coin is not very good. Its very slow, you can only spend your funds once every 20 minutes (!!!), and its privacy was severely broken in the past, Monero Privacy Protections Aren't as Strong as They Seem | WIRED , and they are using intimidation and breaking the rules of reddit by massively downvoting my posts and comments to hide this information, like bullies and thugs would do.
Guess what guys? I don't care! TAKE MY COMMENT KARMA DOWN TO 0!! THAT JUST PROVES THAT YOU'RE LOSERS WHO CAN'T ACCEPT THE TRUTH AND THEREFORE MUST RELY ON CENSORSHIP AND COERCION. I WILL NEVER STOP TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT YOUR COIN AND YOUR TOXIC COMMUNITY, SO DO YOUR WORST!
https://blog.coinbase.com/how-coinbase-views-proof-of-work-security-f4ba1a139da0
There has been a lot of discussion both in btc and the greater cryptocurrency community alike about the importance of POW and how it relates to the economic incentives that undergrid the day-to-day operation of cryptocurrency networks. I believe because so many people do not truly understand the innovation of POW that they become easily confused and fall for scams like POS and ASIC-resistance. Luckily, Coinbase has explained some of their rationale behind their decisions to accept certain coins after a certain number of blockchain confirmations.
Different cryptocurrencies add to their blockchains in different ways. In cryptocurrencies that utilize proof of work, the blockchain is extended by a process known as mining. Miners bundle newly announced transactions together into data structures called blocks, which are added to the blockchain.
A miner attempts to add a block by solving a proof of work puzzle unique to the proposed block. If the miner can find a solution to the puzzle, the miner will announce the block and its solution to the rest of the network. The rest of the network will recognize the valid proof of work solution and consider the proposed block as the most recent addition to the blockchain. Notice that there is no permission required for a miner to produce a block, a fact that allows miners to enter and leave the network at will.
Seems pretty standard, right?
Claim one: It is a security feature for a particular coin’s mining operations to be the dominant application of the hardware used to mine that coin.
This is important as we have seen for smaller coins with larger coins with the same mining hardware. As we've seen with BCH, its possible for larger coins to 'attack' coins with less hashpower, which is why the fliippening is so important for us as a community. As soon as the market prices in the fact that BCH has a superior user experience to BTC, then the miners will 'flip' their hashrate to BCH and BTC will maintain a minority position.
I contend, however, that for this to happen, we first need accurate pricing mechanisms so that when we assess how the market is responding, we are not being mislead by exchange price manipulation which I contend is very heavy currently in this thread: The REAL reason for the price decline or the anatomy of a shakedown! Exchange price manipulation is behind the recent 'decline'. If we use fair value instead to price our coins, we can see an actual, objective comparison. For example, BCH is now only $294.9 to BTC's $9,068.75 or only 3%, but how much of this is exchange manipulation? According to fair value, BCH is actually worth $528.24 while traditional BTC is only worth $6,096.09 for a ratio of ~9% which is 3 times better than exchange price would have you believe!
Owners of the hardware lose the value of their investment if the primary application of the hardware loses value.
Hardware owners are incentivized to consider the long term success of the main application of their hardware. The longer the lifetime of their equipment, the more invested they become in the long-term success of the hardware’s primary application. At time of writing, Bitcoin ASICs are beginning to have significantly longer useful lifespans as efficiency increases of newer models are diminishing.
Another thing they point out is that ASIC resistance is a fool's game:
Algorithm changes to “brick ASICs” simply allow the massive general purpose computational resources of the entire world to mine, and potentially disrupt, a cryptocurrency at will. Coins that have implemented “ASIC-resistant” algorithms have been, empirically, very susceptible to 51% attacks for this very reason. Notable examples of ASIC-resistant coins that have been successfully 51% attacked include BTG, VTC, and XVG. To date, there is not a single case where a coin that dominates its hardware class has been subject to a 51% double spend attack.
As I pointed out earlier this year in this thread, Further evidence that, despite what's detractors desperately want you to believe, fair value is accurately tracking the wealth in the market in real time! Monero's fair value decreases by 40% as miners leave network, Monero also was under a unique, far worse form of 51% attack this year that nearly completely destroyed their community. As further evidence I was correct above, only fair value accurately reflected the change in Monero's worth. The price, on the other hand, remained sky-high. This is heavy evidence of exchange price manipulation and another reason why ASIC resistance doesn't work.
By actively forcing and keeping ASICs off the network, the monero community continued building an ASIC-free ecosystem and economy based on low-hash CPU and GPUs. Which meant that when an asic was actually developed as we know they always will be that economy would be destroyed. You went from a 'large' community of solo miners on CPUs and GPUs to a single entity getting the majority of the hashrate and bankrupting the entire community. This happened wtih every coin when they moved to ASICs. The difference with Monero? Monero's move to ASICs will have been artificially delayed until the community is so large that the introduction will BANKRUPT the majority of economic participants mining! This is worse than a traditional 51% attack and it succinctly summarizes why ASIC resistance is bad idea.
The main takeway:
No algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant
For any particular computational problem, hardware specialized to solving specifically that problem will always be more efficient than general purpose hardware. In addition to the advantages of writing application-level logic directly into the circuitry, specialized hardware does not need to be burdened by other requirements of general purpose hardware, such as security isolation, clock interrupts, context switching, and other tasks required to support multiple applications. Thus, no proof-of-work algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant.
Empirically, ASIC-resistant algorithms have repeatedly failed to prevent the development of ASICs. Prominent examples include scrypt (LTC), equihash (ZEC, BTG), ethhash (ETH), and cryptonite[sic] (XMR).
So the takeaways from this are:
  1. If we want to have accurate, objective pricing information, we must use fair value to levelize the supplies between different coins, and to remove false price influences like Tether, whale movements and the fact that exchanges price all coins in BTC, which allows BTC the uncanny ability to move and negatively affect the entire market.
  2. ASIC-resistance is and always has been a fool's game. ASICs are a natural progression of cryptocurrencies that have grown sufficiently in size and popularity, and 'resisting' this move is a form of arrested development akin to 'puberty-resistance' or 'potty-training-resistance'. Its just nonsensical.
In order to make money in cryptocurrencies, we have to keep our heads on straight and not be swept away by popular opinion without good cause. ASIC-resistance is a red-herring that does nothing be destroy the value on your chain. Luckily, most communities like ZCash, Dash, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin accept and understand this basic fact. Thanks for reading!
submitted by thethrowaccount21 to ethfinance [link] [comments]

Coinbase clears up misconceptions about ASICs, ASIC-resistance and how Proof of work works in new blogpost

Edit this post and my other cross-posts here are being heavily downvote brigaded by the very aggressive and forceful monero community. In the last couple days alone I have lost more than 100 comment karma, from over 1100 to 948, to these aggressive individuals seeking to manipulate the narrative, and 'lean on me' to stop posting information they don't like.
This thread itself had roughly 8-10 upvotes. Now 0-1. If you look at my comment karma by sub breakdown, visible in this comment here, you can clearly see that if you sum up my comment karma, I should have around ~2200. Yet if you hover over my username, I only have 906. This is due to vote brigading and is damning proof of it.
They refuse to allow discussions to take place naturally because their coin is not very good. Its very slow, you can only spend your funds once every 20 minutes (!!!), and its privacy was severely broken in the past, Monero Privacy Protections Aren't as Strong as They Seem | WIRED , and they are using intimidation and breaking the rules of reddit by massively downvoting my posts and comments to hide this information, like bullies and thugs would do.
Guess what guys? I don't care! TAKE MY COMMENT KARMA DOWN TO 0!! THAT JUST PROVES THAT YOU'RE LOSERS WHO CAN'T ACCEPT THE TRUTH AND THEREFORE MUST RELY ON CENSORSHIP AND COERCION. I WILL NEVER STOP TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT YOUR COIN AND YOUR TOXIC COMMUNITY, SO DO YOUR WORST!
https://blog.coinbase.com/how-coinbase-views-proof-of-work-security-f4ba1a139da0
There has been a lot of discussion both in btc and the greater cryptocurrency community alike about the importance of POW and how it relates to the economic incentives that undergrid the day-to-day operation of cryptocurrency networks. I believe because so many people do not truly understand the innovation of POW that they become easily confused and fall for scams like POS and ASIC-resistance. Luckily, Coinbase has explained some of their rationale behind their decisions to accept certain coins after a certain number of blockchain confirmations.
Different cryptocurrencies add to their blockchains in different ways. In cryptocurrencies that utilize proof of work, the blockchain is extended by a process known as mining. Miners bundle newly announced transactions together into data structures called blocks, which are added to the blockchain.
A miner attempts to add a block by solving a proof of work puzzle unique to the proposed block. If the miner can find a solution to the puzzle, the miner will announce the block and its solution to the rest of the network. The rest of the network will recognize the valid proof of work solution and consider the proposed block as the most recent addition to the blockchain. Notice that there is no permission required for a miner to produce a block, a fact that allows miners to enter and leave the network at will.
Seems pretty standard, right?
Claim one: It is a security feature for a particular coin’s mining operations to be the dominant application of the hardware used to mine that coin.
This is important as we have seen for smaller coins with larger coins with the same mining hardware. As we've seen with BCH, its possible for larger coins to 'attack' coins with less hashpower, which is why the fliippening is so important for us as a community. As soon as the market prices in the fact that BCH has a superior user experience to BTC, then the miners will 'flip' their hashrate to BCH and BTC will maintain a minority position.
I contend, however, that for this to happen, we first need accurate pricing mechanisms so that when we assess how the market is responding, we are not being mislead by exchange price manipulation which I contend is very heavy currently in this thread: The REAL reason for the price decline or the anatomy of a shakedown! Exchange price manipulation is behind the recent 'decline'. If we use fair value instead to price our coins, we can see an actual, objective comparison. For example, BCH is now only $294.9 to BTC's $9,068.75 or only 3%, but how much of this is exchange manipulation? According to fair value, BCH is actually worth $528.24 while traditional BTC is only worth $6,096.09 for a ratio of ~9% which is 3 times better than exchange price would have you believe!
Owners of the hardware lose the value of their investment if the primary application of the hardware loses value.
Hardware owners are incentivized to consider the long term success of the main application of their hardware. The longer the lifetime of their equipment, the more invested they become in the long-term success of the hardware’s primary application. At time of writing, Bitcoin ASICs are beginning to have significantly longer useful lifespans as efficiency increases of newer models are diminishing.
Another thing they point out is that ASIC resistance is a fool's game:
Algorithm changes to “brick ASICs” simply allow the massive general purpose computational resources of the entire world to mine, and potentially disrupt, a cryptocurrency at will. Coins that have implemented “ASIC-resistant” algorithms have been, empirically, very susceptible to 51% attacks for this very reason. Notable examples of ASIC-resistant coins that have been successfully 51% attacked include BTG, VTC, and XVG. To date, there is not a single case where a coin that dominates its hardware class has been subject to a 51% double spend attack.
As I pointed out earlier this year in this thread, Further evidence that, despite what's detractors desperately want you to believe, fair value is accurately tracking the wealth in the market in real time! Monero's fair value decreases by 40% as miners leave network, Monero also was under a unique, far worse form of 51% attack this year that nearly completely destroyed their community. As further evidence I was correct above, only fair value accurately reflected the change in Monero's worth. The price, on the other hand, remained sky-high. This is heavy evidence of exchange price manipulation and another reason why ASIC resistance doesn't work.
By actively forcing and keeping ASICs off the network, the monero community continued building an ASIC-free ecosystem and economy based on low-hash CPU and GPUs. Which meant that when an asic was actually developed as we know they always will be that economy would be destroyed. You went from a 'large' community of solo miners on CPUs and GPUs to a single entity getting the majority of the hashrate and bankrupting the entire community. This happened wtih every coin when they moved to ASICs. The difference with Monero? Monero's move to ASICs will have been artificially delayed until the community is so large that the introduction will BANKRUPT the majority of economic participants mining! This is worse than a traditional 51% attack and it succinctly summarizes why ASIC resistance is bad idea.
The main takeway:
No algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant
For any particular computational problem, hardware specialized to solving specifically that problem will always be more efficient than general purpose hardware. In addition to the advantages of writing application-level logic directly into the circuitry, specialized hardware does not need to be burdened by other requirements of general purpose hardware, such as security isolation, clock interrupts, context switching, and other tasks required to support multiple applications. Thus, no proof-of-work algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant.
Empirically, ASIC-resistant algorithms have repeatedly failed to prevent the development of ASICs. Prominent examples include scrypt (LTC), equihash (ZEC, BTG), ethhash (ETH), and cryptonite[sic] (XMR).
So the takeaways from this are:
  1. If we want to have accurate, objective pricing information, we must use fair value to levelize the supplies between different coins, and to remove false price influences like Tether, whale movements and the fact that exchanges price all coins in BTC, which allows BTC the uncanny ability to move and negatively affect the entire market.
  2. ASIC-resistance is and always has been a fool's game. ASICs are a natural progression of cryptocurrencies that have grown sufficiently in size and popularity, and 'resisting' this move is a form of arrested development akin to 'puberty-resistance' or 'potty-training-resistance'. Its just nonsensical.
In order to make money in cryptocurrencies, we have to keep our heads on straight and not be swept away by popular opinion without good cause. ASIC-resistance is a red-herring that does nothing be destroy the value on your chain. Luckily, most communities like ZCash, Dash, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin accept and understand this basic fact. Thanks for reading!
submitted by thethrowaccount21 to CryptoTechnology [link] [comments]

Coinbase clears up misconceptions about ASICs, ASIC-resistance and how Proof of work works in new blogpost

Edit this post and my other cross-posts here are being heavily downvote brigaded by the very aggressive and forceful monero community. In the last couple days alone I have lost more than 100 comment karma, from over 1100 to 948, to these aggressive individuals seeking to manipulate the narrative, and 'lean on me' to stop posting information they don't like.
This thread itself had roughly 5 upvotes before. Now 0-1. If you look at my comment karma by sub breakdown, visible in this comment here, you can clearly see that if you sum up my comment karma, I should have around ~2200. In dashpay alone I have 1300 comment karma. Yet if you hover over my username, I only have 906. This is due to vote brigading and is damning proof of it.
Another proof that I'm being vote brigaded is that I have nearly 3 times more donuts (6,700) in Ethtrader than I have comment and post karma, COMBINED! 'Donuts' are like a separate karma system just for eth where you are rewarded by your participation level. This number comes about despite the fact that I rarely post here. Which shows that most people actually do appreciate my posts, but the monero community wants to hide that and control the narrative!
They refuse to allow discussions to take place naturally because their coin is not very good. Its very slow, you can only spend your funds once every 20 minutes (!!!), and its privacy was severely broken in the past, Monero Privacy Protections Aren't as Strong as They Seem | WIRED , and they are using intimidation and breaking the rules of reddit by massively downvoting my posts and comments to hide this information, like bullies and thugs would do.
Guess what guys? I don't care! TAKE MY COMMENT KARMA DOWN TO 0!! THAT JUST PROVES THAT YOU'RE LOSERS WHO CAN'T ACCEPT THE TRUTH AND THEREFORE MUST RELY ON CENSORSHIP AND COERCION. I WILL NEVER STOP TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT YOUR COIN AND YOUR TOXIC COMMUNITY, SO DO YOUR WORST!
https://blog.coinbase.com/how-coinbase-views-proof-of-work-security-f4ba1a139da0
There has been a lot of discussion both in btc and the greater cryptocurrency community alike about the importance of POW and how it relates to the economic incentives that undergrid the day-to-day operation of cryptocurrency networks. I believe because so many people do not truly understand the innovation of POW that they become easily confused and fall for scams like POS and ASIC-resistance. Luckily, Coinbase has explained some of their rationale behind their decisions to accept certain coins after a certain number of blockchain confirmations.
Different cryptocurrencies add to their blockchains in different ways. In cryptocurrencies that utilize proof of work, the blockchain is extended by a process known as mining. Miners bundle newly announced transactions together into data structures called blocks, which are added to the blockchain.
A miner attempts to add a block by solving a proof of work puzzle unique to the proposed block. If the miner can find a solution to the puzzle, the miner will announce the block and its solution to the rest of the network. The rest of the network will recognize the valid proof of work solution and consider the proposed block as the most recent addition to the blockchain. Notice that there is no permission required for a miner to produce a block, a fact that allows miners to enter and leave the network at will.
Seems pretty standard, right?
Claim one: It is a security feature for a particular coin’s mining operations to be the dominant application of the hardware used to mine that coin.
This is important as we have seen for smaller coins with larger coins with the same mining hardware. As we've seen with BCH, its possible for larger coins to 'attack' coins with less hashpower, which is why the fliippening is so important for us as a community. As soon as the market prices in the fact that BCH has a superior user experience to BTC, then the miners will 'flip' their hashrate to BCH and BTC will maintain a minority position.
I contend, however, that for this to happen, we first need accurate pricing mechanisms so that when we assess how the market is responding, we are not being mislead by exchange price manipulation which I contend is very heavy currently in this thread: The REAL reason for the price decline or the anatomy of a shakedown! Exchange price manipulation is behind the recent 'decline'. If we use fair value instead to price our coins, we can see an actual, objective comparison. For example, BCH is now only $294.9 to BTC's $9,068.75 or only 3%, but how much of this is exchange manipulation? According to fair value, BCH is actually worth $528.24 while traditional BTC is only worth $6,096.09 for a ratio of ~9% which is 3 times better than exchange price would have you believe!
Owners of the hardware lose the value of their investment if the primary application of the hardware loses value.
Hardware owners are incentivized to consider the long term success of the main application of their hardware. The longer the lifetime of their equipment, the more invested they become in the long-term success of the hardware’s primary application. At time of writing, Bitcoin ASICs are beginning to have significantly longer useful lifespans as efficiency increases of newer models are diminishing.
Another thing they point out is that ASIC resistance is a fool's game:
Algorithm changes to “brick ASICs” simply allow the massive general purpose computational resources of the entire world to mine, and potentially disrupt, a cryptocurrency at will. Coins that have implemented “ASIC-resistant” algorithms have been, empirically, very susceptible to 51% attacks for this very reason. Notable examples of ASIC-resistant coins that have been successfully 51% attacked include BTG, VTC, and XVG. To date, there is not a single case where a coin that dominates its hardware class has been subject to a 51% double spend attack.
As I pointed out earlier this year in this thread, Further evidence that, despite what's detractors desperately want you to believe, fair value is accurately tracking the wealth in the market in real time! Monero's fair value decreases by 40% as miners leave network, Monero also was under a unique, far worse form of 51% attack this year that nearly completely destroyed their community. As further evidence I was correct above, only fair value accurately reflected the change in Monero's worth. The price, on the other hand, remained sky-high. This is heavy evidence of exchange price manipulation and another reason why ASIC resistance doesn't work.
By actively forcing and keeping ASICs off the network, the monero community continued building an ASIC-free ecosystem and economy based on low-hash CPU and GPUs. Which meant that when an asic was actually developed as we know they always will be that economy would be destroyed. You went from a 'large' community of solo miners on CPUs and GPUs to a single entity getting the majority of the hashrate and bankrupting the entire community. This happened wtih every coin when they moved to ASICs. The difference with Monero? Monero's move to ASICs will have been artificially delayed until the community is so large that the introduction will BANKRUPT the majority of economic participants mining! This is worse than a traditional 51% attack and it succinctly summarizes why ASIC resistance is bad idea.
The main takeway:
No algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant
For any particular computational problem, hardware specialized to solving specifically that problem will always be more efficient than general purpose hardware. In addition to the advantages of writing application-level logic directly into the circuitry, specialized hardware does not need to be burdened by other requirements of general purpose hardware, such as security isolation, clock interrupts, context switching, and other tasks required to support multiple applications. Thus, no proof-of-work algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant.
Empirically, ASIC-resistant algorithms have repeatedly failed to prevent the development of ASICs. Prominent examples include scrypt (LTC), equihash (ZEC, BTG), ethhash (ETH), and cryptonite[sic] (XMR).
So the takeaways from this are:
  1. If we want to have accurate, objective pricing information, we must use fair value to levelize the supplies between different coins, and to remove false price influences like Tether, whale movements and the fact that exchanges price all coins in BTC, which allows BTC the uncanny ability to move and negatively affect the entire market.
  2. ASIC-resistance is and always has been a fool's game. ASICs are a natural progression of cryptocurrencies that have grown sufficiently in size and popularity, and 'resisting' this move is a form of arrested development akin to 'puberty-resistance' or 'potty-training-resistance'. Its just nonsensical.
In order to make money in cryptocurrencies, we have to keep our heads on straight and not be swept away by popular opinion without good cause. ASIC-resistance is a red-herring that does nothing be destroy the value on your chain. Luckily, most communities like ZCash, Dash, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin accept and understand this basic fact. Thanks for reading!
submitted by thethrowaccount21 to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Rhodium Mining Guide

Bitcoin Rhodium Mining Guide
Happy Mining!

All available XRC pools can be found on MiningPoolStats

Bitcoin Rhodium Mining Hardware

Baikal Giant+: 1.6 GH/s
Baikal Quad Cube: 1.2 GH/s
Baikal Giant: 900 MH/s
Baikal Quadruple Mini Miner: 600 MH/s
Baikal Miner Cube: 300 MH/s
Baikal Mini Miner: 150 MH/s

Mining Setup

To mine Bitcoin Rhodium you need to set up an XRC wallet and configure your miner of choice. You can choose between Web wallet, Electrum-XRC or Magnum wallet. To set up a web wallet please visit wallet.bitcoinrh.org. Or download and install Electrum-XRC wallet (recommended) for Windows, Linux and MacOS.
Web wallet: wallet.bitcoinrh.org
Electrum-XRC wallet: electrum.bitcoinrh.org
Magnum wallet: https://magnumwallet.co

Sign up for XRC web wallet if not yet done so

  1. Create an account, with your username, password and secure question.
  2. Sign in and click “Create Wallet”.
  3. Set up a strong transaction password. Make sure you store it securely in a secure password manager of choice.
  4. Copy the seed somewhere safe. It’d be a good idea to write seed on a hardcopy and keep it safe.
  5. Paste it to confirm you got it right.
  6. Grab an address for the mining step. Your wallet is now ready to mine XRC.

Instructions for mining XRC on the official pool

Pool link: poolcore.bitcoinrh.org
  1. Any miner that supports X13 will be able to mine XRC. We have a few examples below of miners that are well tested with Bitcoin Rhodium network.
  2. For any miner, configure the miner to point to:
(0–0.8 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3061
(0.8–2 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3062
(3–4 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3063
(5+ GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3064
with your XRC address as username and x as password. You don’t need to open an account on pool. You will be mining to XRC address and mined coins will be transferred to your wallet
after blocks reach 10 block maturity
after you mined up minimal amount of coins (currently 0.1 XRC)
sometimes mined blocks could get rejected by network (orphaned) after they were counted as valid blocks. This is normal network behavior to follow longest chain
  1. http://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org is used to follow your miner and network statistics.

CPU Miner-Multi

Source: https://github.com/tpruvot/cpuminer-multi
Sample configuration with CPU Miner tested on UBUNTU.
{
“url” : “stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3061”, “user” : “YOUR XRC ADDRESS”,
“pass” : “x”,
“algo” : “x13”, “threads” : 1,
“cpu-priority” : 5,
“cpu-affinity” : 1, “benchmark” : false, “debug” : true, “protocol”: true, “show-diff”: true, “quiet” : false
}
Command to run your CPUMiner: cpuminer -c cpuminer.json

SGMiner (ATI GPU)

SGMiner is a GPU-based mine: https://github.com/nicehash/sgminereleases
The configuration below was tested on Windows:
setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 0
setx GPU_MAX_HEAP_SIZE 100
setx GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS 1
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
setx GPU_SINGLE_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
cd C:\Software\sgminer-5.6.1-nicehash-51-windowsamd64 sgminer.exe
— gpu-platform 1 — algorithm x13mod -url stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh. org:3062 — pool-user — userpass :x — auto-fan — temp-target 70 — temp-over- heat 82 — temp-cutoff 85 — gpu-fan 65–85 — log-file log.txt — no-adl — no-extra- nonce -P –T

CCMiner (NVIDIA GPU)

CCMiner is a GPU-based miner (NVIDIA)
Command to run your CCMINER:
ccminer-x64.exe -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3062 -O :without -D — show-diff

Baikal miner

Settings: Url:
(0–2 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3062
(3–4 GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3063
(5+ GH/s) stratum+tcp://poolcore.bitcoinrh.org:3064
Algo: x13User: your XRC receiving address (make sure you set 2 distinct addresses for each hashing board)
Pass: x
Extranonce: leave off Priority set to 0 and 1
Once pool stratum address and your wallet as user are set up you should see your miner mining against XRC pool. When miner is working the status column is green. The pool and miner are incorrectly configured now as status says “Dead” highlighted in red.

Instructions for mining XRC on BSOD pool

Pool link: bsod.pw/en/pool/dashboard/XRC/
Use this code for your miner: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://pool.bsod.pw:2582 -u WALLET.rig
BSOD pool allows both solo and party mining.
For solo mining use code: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://pool.bsod.pw:2582 -u WALLET.rig -p m=solo And for party mining use: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://pool.bsod.pw:2582 -u WALLET.rig -p m=party.yourpassword
NOTICE: You can use us for North America and asia for Asia instead of euin your .bat file or config.
You can also use BSOD pool’s monitor app for Android and iOS.

Instructions for mining XRC on ZERGPOOL

Zergpool offers low fees (just 0.5%) and also SOLO and PARTY mining with no extra fees.
To mine XRC on Zergpool use this command lines for your miner:
Regular: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://x13.mine.zergpool.com:3633 -u -p c=XRC,mc=XRC Solo: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://x13.mine.zergpool.com:3633 -u -p c=XRC,mc=XRC,m=solo Party: -a x13 -o stratum+tcp://x13.mine.zergpool.com:3633 -u -p c=XRC,mc=XRC,m=party
Use your coin wallet address as username in mining software. Specify c=SYMBOL as password to identify payout wallet coin, and the same coin in mc=SYMBOL to specify mining coin.
For more information and support please visit http://zergpool.com
Notice that when there are more pools mining XRC in different geographic/availability locations choose the nearest to you as lowest priority and then add desirable fall back pool options in different geographic locations or pools. This is useful when one pool experiences issues, to fall back to different pool in Bitcoin Rhodium network.

Calculate your Bitcoin Rhodium mining profitability

WhatToMine: https://whattomine.com/coins/317-xrc-x13
CoinCalculators: https://www.coincalculators.io/coin/bitcoin-rhodium

Feel free to ask questions in Discord community. There are lots of helpful people around the world watching XRC 24x7.

Bitcoin Rhodium Dev Team
submitted by BitcoinRh to BitcoinRhodium [link] [comments]

Coinbase clears up misconceptions about ASICs, ASIC-resistance and how Proof of work works in new blogpost

Edit this post and my other cross-posts here are being heavily downvote brigaded by the very aggressive and forceful monero community. In the last couple days alone I have lost more than 100 comment karma, from over 1100 to 948, to these aggressive individuals seeking to manipulate the narrative, and 'lean on me' to stop posting information they don't like.
If you look at my comment karma by sub breakdown, visible in this comment here, you can clearly see that if you sum up my comment karma, I should have around ~2200. In dashpay alone I have 1300 comment karma. Yet if you hover over my username, I only have 906. This is due to vote brigading and is damning proof of it.
https://blog.coinbase.com/how-coinbase-views-proof-of-work-security-f4ba1a139da0
There has been a lot of discussion both in btc and the greater cryptocurrency community alike about the importance of POW and how it relates to the economic incentives that undergrid the day-to-day operation of cryptocurrency networks. I believe because so many people do not truly understand the innovation of POW that they become easily confused and fall for scams like POS and ASIC-resistance. Luckily, Coinbase has explained some of their rationale behind their decisions to accept certain coins after a certain number of blockchain confirmations.
Different cryptocurrencies add to their blockchains in different ways. In cryptocurrencies that utilize proof of work, the blockchain is extended by a process known as mining. Miners bundle newly announced transactions together into data structures called blocks, which are added to the blockchain.
A miner attempts to add a block by solving a proof of work puzzle unique to the proposed block. If the miner can find a solution to the puzzle, the miner will announce the block and its solution to the rest of the network. The rest of the network will recognize the valid proof of work solution and consider the proposed block as the most recent addition to the blockchain. Notice that there is no permission required for a miner to produce a block, a fact that allows miners to enter and leave the network at will.
Seems pretty standard, right?
Claim one: It is a security feature for a particular coin’s mining operations to be the dominant application of the hardware used to mine that coin.
This is important as we have seen for smaller coins with larger coins with the same mining hardware. As we've seen with BCH, its possible for larger coins to 'attack' coins with less hashpower, which is why the fliippening is so important for us as a community. As soon as the market prices in the fact that BCH has a superior user experience to BTC, then the miners will 'flip' their hashrate to BCH and BTC will maintain a minority position.
I contend, however, that for this to happen, we first need accurate pricing mechanisms so that when we assess how the market is responding, we are not being mislead by exchange price manipulation which I contend is very heavy currently in this thread: The REAL reason for the price decline or the anatomy of a shakedown! Exchange price manipulation is behind the recent 'decline'. If we use fair value instead to price our coins, we can see an actual, objective comparison. For example, BCH is now only $294.9 to BTC's $9,068.75 or only 3%, but how much of this is exchange manipulation? According to fair value, BCH is actually worth $528.24 while traditional BTC is only worth $6,096.09 for a ratio of ~9% which is 3 times better than exchange price would have you believe!
Owners of the hardware lose the value of their investment if the primary application of the hardware loses value.
Hardware owners are incentivized to consider the long term success of the main application of their hardware. The longer the lifetime of their equipment, the more invested they become in the long-term success of the hardware’s primary application. At time of writing, Bitcoin ASICs are beginning to have significantly longer useful lifespans as efficiency increases of newer models are diminishing.
Another thing they point out is that ASIC resistance is a fool's game:
Algorithm changes to “brick ASICs” simply allow the massive general purpose computational resources of the entire world to mine, and potentially disrupt, a cryptocurrency at will. Coins that have implemented “ASIC-resistant” algorithms have been, empirically, very susceptible to 51% attacks for this very reason. Notable examples of ASIC-resistant coins that have been successfully 51% attacked include BTG, VTC, and XVG. To date, there is not a single case where a coin that dominates its hardware class has been subject to a 51% double spend attack.
As I pointed out earlier this year in this thread, Further evidence that, despite what's detractors desperately want you to believe, fair value is accurately tracking the wealth in the market in real time! Monero's fair value decreases by 40% as miners leave network, Monero also was under a unique, far worse form of 51% attack this year that nearly completely destroyed their community. As further evidence I was correct above, only fair value accurately reflected the change in Monero's worth. The price, on the other hand, remained sky-high. This is heavy evidence of exchange price manipulation and another reason why ASIC resistance doesn't work.
By actively forcing and keeping ASICs off the network, the monero community continued building an ASIC-free ecosystem and economy based on low-hash CPU and GPUs. Which meant that when an asic was actually developed as we know they always will be that economy would be destroyed. You went from a 'large' community of solo miners on CPUs and GPUs to a single entity getting the majority of the hashrate and bankrupting the entire community. This happened wtih every coin when they moved to ASICs. The difference with Monero? Monero's move to ASICs will have been artificially delayed until the community is so large that the introduction will BANKRUPT the majority of economic participants mining! This is worse than a traditional 51% attack and it succinctly summarizes why ASIC resistance is bad idea.
The main takeway:
No algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant
For any particular computational problem, hardware specialized to solving specifically that problem will always be more efficient than general purpose hardware. In addition to the advantages of writing application-level logic directly into the circuitry, specialized hardware does not need to be burdened by other requirements of general purpose hardware, such as security isolation, clock interrupts, context switching, and other tasks required to support multiple applications. Thus, no proof-of-work algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant.
Empirically, ASIC-resistant algorithms have repeatedly failed to prevent the development of ASICs. Prominent examples include scrypt (LTC), equihash (ZEC, BTG), ethhash (ETH), and cryptonite[sic] (XMR).
So the takeaways from this are:
  1. If we want to have accurate, objective pricing information, we must use fair value to levelize the supplies between different coins, and to remove false price influences like Tether, whale movements and the fact that exchanges price all coins in BTC, which allows BTC the uncanny ability to move and negatively affect the entire market.
  2. ASIC-resistance is and always has been a fool's game. ASICs are a natural progression of cryptocurrencies that have grown sufficiently in size and popularity, and 'resisting' this move is a form of arrested development akin to 'puberty-resistance' or 'potty-training-resistance'. Its just nonsensical.
In order to make money in cryptocurrencies, we have to keep our heads on straight and not be swept away by popular opinion without good cause. ASIC-resistance is a red-herring that does nothing be destroy the value on your chain. Luckily, most communities like ZCash, Dash, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin accept and understand this basic fact. Thanks for reading!
submitted by thethrowaccount21 to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

Coinbase clears up misconceptions about ASICs, ASIC-resistance and how Proof of work works in new blogpost

Edit this post and my other cross-posts here are being heavily downvote brigaded by the very aggressive and forceful monero community. In the last couple days alone I have lost more than 100 comment karma, from over 1100 to 948, to these aggressive individuals seeking to manipulate the narrative, and 'lean on me' to stop posting information they don't like. This thread itself had roughly 8-10 upvotes. Now 3-5.
Further proof that I'm being vote brigaded is that I have nearly 3 times the donuts in Ethtrader than I have comment and post karma, COMBINED! This is despite the fact that I rarely post there. Which shows that most people appreciate my posts, but the monero community wants to hide that and control the narrative!
If you look at my comment karma by sub breakdown, visible in this comment here, you can clearly see that if you sum up my comment karma, I should have around ~2200. In dashpay alone I have 1300 comment karma. Yet if you hover over my username, I only have 906. This is due to vote brigading and is damning proof of it.
They refuse to allow discussions to take place naturally because their coin is not very good. Its very slow, you can only spend your funds once every 20 minutes (!!!), and its privacy was severely broken in the past, Monero Privacy Protections Aren't as Strong as They Seem | WIRED , and they are using intimidation and breaking the rules of reddit by massively downvoting my posts and comments to hide this information, like bullies and thugs would do.
Guess what guys? I don't care! TAKE MY COMMENT KARMA DOWN TO 0!! THAT JUST PROVES THAT YOU'RE LOSERS WHO CAN'T ACCEPT THE TRUTH AND THEREFORE MUST RELY ON CENSORSHIP AND COERCION. I WILL NEVER STOP TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT YOUR COIN AND YOUR TOXIC COMMUNITY, SO DO YOUR WORST!
https://blog.coinbase.com/how-coinbase-views-proof-of-work-security-f4ba1a139da0
There has been a lot of discussion both in btc and the greater cryptocurrency community alike about the importance of POW and how it relates to the economic incentives that undergrid the day-to-day operation of cryptocurrency networks. I believe because so many people do not truly understand the innovation of POW that they become easily confused and fall for scams like POS and ASIC-resistance. Luckily, Coinbase has explained some of their rationale behind their decisions to accept certain coins after a certain number of blockchain confirmations.
Different cryptocurrencies add to their blockchains in different ways. In cryptocurrencies that utilize proof of work, the blockchain is extended by a process known as mining. Miners bundle newly announced transactions together into data structures called blocks, which are added to the blockchain.
A miner attempts to add a block by solving a proof of work puzzle unique to the proposed block. If the miner can find a solution to the puzzle, the miner will announce the block and its solution to the rest of the network. The rest of the network will recognize the valid proof of work solution and consider the proposed block as the most recent addition to the blockchain. Notice that there is no permission required for a miner to produce a block, a fact that allows miners to enter and leave the network at will.
Seems pretty standard, right?
Claim one: It is a security feature for a particular coin’s mining operations to be the dominant application of the hardware used to mine that coin.
This is important as we have seen for smaller coins with larger coins with the same mining hardware. As we've seen with BCH, its possible for larger coins to 'attack' coins with less hashpower, which is why the fliippening is so important for us as a community. As soon as the market prices in the fact that BCH has a superior user experience to BTC, then the miners will 'flip' their hashrate to BCH and BTC will maintain a minority position.
I contend, however, that for this to happen, we first need accurate pricing mechanisms so that when we assess how the market is responding, we are not being mislead by exchange price manipulation which I contend is very heavy currently in this thread: The REAL reason for the price decline or the anatomy of a shakedown! Exchange price manipulation is behind the recent 'decline'. If we use fair value instead to price our coins, we can see an actual, objective comparison. For example, BCH is now only $294.9 to BTC's $9,068.75 or only 3%, but how much of this is exchange manipulation? According to fair value, BCH is actually worth $528.24 while traditional BTC is only worth $6,096.09 for a ratio of ~9% which is 3 times better than exchange price would have you believe!
Owners of the hardware lose the value of their investment if the primary application of the hardware loses value.
Hardware owners are incentivized to consider the long term success of the main application of their hardware. The longer the lifetime of their equipment, the more invested they become in the long-term success of the hardware’s primary application. At time of writing, Bitcoin ASICs are beginning to have significantly longer useful lifespans as efficiency increases of newer models are diminishing.
Another thing they point out is that ASIC resistance is a fool's game:
Algorithm changes to “brick ASICs” simply allow the massive general purpose computational resources of the entire world to mine, and potentially disrupt, a cryptocurrency at will. Coins that have implemented “ASIC-resistant” algorithms have been, empirically, very susceptible to 51% attacks for this very reason. Notable examples of ASIC-resistant coins that have been successfully 51% attacked include BTG, VTC, and XVG. To date, there is not a single case where a coin that dominates its hardware class has been subject to a 51% double spend attack.
As I pointed out earlier this year in this thread, Further evidence that, despite what's detractors desperately want you to believe, fair value is accurately tracking the wealth in the market in real time! Monero's fair value decreases by 40% as miners leave network, Monero also was under a unique, far worse form of 51% attack this year that nearly completely destroyed their community. As further evidence I was correct above, only fair value accurately reflected the change in Monero's worth. The price, on the other hand, remained sky-high. This is heavy evidence of exchange price manipulation and another reason why ASIC resistance doesn't work.
By actively forcing and keeping ASICs off the network, the monero community continued building an ASIC-free ecosystem and economy based on low-hash CPU and GPUs. Which meant that when an asic was actually developed as we know they always will be that economy would be destroyed. You went from a 'large' community of solo miners on CPUs and GPUs to a single entity getting the majority of the hashrate and bankrupting the entire community. This happened wtih every coin when they moved to ASICs. The difference with Monero? Monero's move to ASICs will have been artificially delayed until the community is so large that the introduction will BANKRUPT the majority of economic participants mining! This is worse than a traditional 51% attack and it succinctly summarizes why ASIC resistance is bad idea.
The main takeway:
No algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant
For any particular computational problem, hardware specialized to solving specifically that problem will always be more efficient than general purpose hardware. In addition to the advantages of writing application-level logic directly into the circuitry, specialized hardware does not need to be burdened by other requirements of general purpose hardware, such as security isolation, clock interrupts, context switching, and other tasks required to support multiple applications. Thus, no proof-of-work algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant.
Empirically, ASIC-resistant algorithms have repeatedly failed to prevent the development of ASICs. Prominent examples include scrypt (LTC), equihash (ZEC, BTG), ethhash (ETH), and cryptonite[sic] (XMR).
So the takeaways from this are:
  1. If we want to have accurate, objective pricing information, we must use fair value to levelize the supplies between different coins, and to remove false price influences like Tether, whale movements and the fact that exchanges price all coins in BTC, which allows BTC the uncanny ability to move and negatively affect the entire market.
  2. ASIC-resistance is and always has been a fool's game. ASICs are a natural progression of cryptocurrencies that have grown sufficiently in size and popularity, and 'resisting' this move is a form of arrested development akin to 'puberty-resistance' or 'potty-training-resistance'. Its just nonsensical.
In order to make money in cryptocurrencies, we have to keep our heads on straight and not be swept away by popular opinion without good cause. ASIC-resistance is a red-herring that does nothing be destroy the value on your chain. Luckily, most communities like ZCash, Dash, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin accept and understand this basic fact. Thanks for reading!
submitted by thethrowaccount21 to Bitcoincash [link] [comments]

Coinbase clears up misconceptions about ASICs, ASIC-resistance and how Proof of work works in new blogpost

Edit this post and my other cross-posts here are being heavily downvote brigaded by the very aggressive and forceful monero community. In the last couple days alone I have lost more than 100 comment karma, from over 1100 to 948, to these aggressive individuals seeking to manipulate the narrative, and 'lean on me' to stop posting information they don't like.
Proof that I'm being vote brigaded is that I have nearly 3 times more donuts in Ethtrader than I have comment and post karma, COMBINED! This is despite the fact that I rarely post here. Which shows that most people actually do appreciate my posts, but the monero community wants to hide that and control the narrative!
This thread itself had roughly 10-12 upvotes before. Now 2-4. If you look at my comment karma by sub breakdown, visible in this comment here, you can clearly see that if you sum up my comment karma, I should have around ~2200. In dashpay alone I have 1300 comment karma. Yet if you hover over my username, I only have 906. This is due to vote brigading and is damning proof of it.
https://blog.coinbase.com/how-coinbase-views-proof-of-work-security-f4ba1a139da0
There has been a lot of discussion both in btc and the greater cryptocurrency community alike about the importance of POW and how it relates to the economic incentives that undergrid the day-to-day operation of cryptocurrency networks. I believe because so many people do not truly understand the innovation of POW that they become easily confused and fall for scams like POS and ASIC-resistance. Luckily, Coinbase has explained some of their rationale behind their decisions to accept certain coins after a certain number of blockchain confirmations.
Different cryptocurrencies add to their blockchains in different ways. In cryptocurrencies that utilize proof of work, the blockchain is extended by a process known as mining. Miners bundle newly announced transactions together into data structures called blocks, which are added to the blockchain.
A miner attempts to add a block by solving a proof of work puzzle unique to the proposed block. If the miner can find a solution to the puzzle, the miner will announce the block and its solution to the rest of the network. The rest of the network will recognize the valid proof of work solution and consider the proposed block as the most recent addition to the blockchain. Notice that there is no permission required for a miner to produce a block, a fact that allows miners to enter and leave the network at will.
Seems pretty standard, right?
Claim one: It is a security feature for a particular coin’s mining operations to be the dominant application of the hardware used to mine that coin.
This is important as we have seen for smaller coins with larger coins with the same mining hardware. As we've seen with BCH, its possible for larger coins to 'attack' coins with less hashpower, which is why the fliippening is so important for us as a community. As soon as the market prices in the fact that BCH has a superior user experience to BTC, then the miners will 'flip' their hashrate to BCH and BTC will maintain a minority position.
I contend, however, that for this to happen, we first need accurate pricing mechanisms so that when we assess how the market is responding, we are not being mislead by exchange price manipulation which I contend is very heavy currently in this thread: The REAL reason for the price decline or the anatomy of a shakedown! Exchange price manipulation is behind the recent 'decline'. If we use fair value instead to price our coins, we can see an actual, objective comparison. For example, BCH is now only $294.9 to BTC's $9,068.75 or only 3%, but how much of this is exchange manipulation? According to fair value, BCH is actually worth $528.24 while traditional BTC is only worth $6,096.09 for a ratio of ~9% which is 3 times better than exchange price would have you believe!
Owners of the hardware lose the value of their investment if the primary application of the hardware loses value.
Hardware owners are incentivized to consider the long term success of the main application of their hardware. The longer the lifetime of their equipment, the more invested they become in the long-term success of the hardware’s primary application. At time of writing, Bitcoin ASICs are beginning to have significantly longer useful lifespans as efficiency increases of newer models are diminishing.
Another thing they point out is that ASIC resistance is a fool's game:
Algorithm changes to “brick ASICs” simply allow the massive general purpose computational resources of the entire world to mine, and potentially disrupt, a cryptocurrency at will. Coins that have implemented “ASIC-resistant” algorithms have been, empirically, very susceptible to 51% attacks for this very reason. Notable examples of ASIC-resistant coins that have been successfully 51% attacked include BTG, VTC, and XVG. To date, there is not a single case where a coin that dominates its hardware class has been subject to a 51% double spend attack.
As I pointed out earlier this year in this thread, Further evidence that, despite what's detractors desperately want you to believe, fair value is accurately tracking the wealth in the market in real time! Monero's fair value decreases by 40% as miners leave network, Monero also was under a unique, far worse form of 51% attack this year that nearly completely destroyed their community. As further evidence I was correct above, only fair value accurately reflected the change in Monero's worth. The price, on the other hand, remained sky-high. This is heavy evidence of exchange price manipulation and another reason why ASIC resistance doesn't work.
By actively forcing and keeping ASICs off the network, the monero community continued building an ASIC-free ecosystem and economy based on low-hash CPU and GPUs. Which meant that when an asic was actually developed as we know they always will be that economy would be destroyed. You went from a 'large' community of solo miners on CPUs and GPUs to a single entity getting the majority of the hashrate and bankrupting the entire community. This happened wtih every coin when they moved to ASICs. The difference with Monero? Monero's move to ASICs will have been artificially delayed until the community is so large that the introduction will BANKRUPT the majority of economic participants mining! This is worse than a traditional 51% attack and it succinctly summarizes why ASIC resistance is bad idea.
The main takeway:
No algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant
For any particular computational problem, hardware specialized to solving specifically that problem will always be more efficient than general purpose hardware. In addition to the advantages of writing application-level logic directly into the circuitry, specialized hardware does not need to be burdened by other requirements of general purpose hardware, such as security isolation, clock interrupts, context switching, and other tasks required to support multiple applications. Thus, no proof-of-work algorithm is ever ASIC-proof, merely ASIC-resistant.
Empirically, ASIC-resistant algorithms have repeatedly failed to prevent the development of ASICs. Prominent examples include scrypt (LTC), equihash (ZEC, BTG), ethhash (ETH), and cryptonite[sic] (XMR).
So the takeaways from this are:
  1. If we want to have accurate, objective pricing information, we must use fair value to levelize the supplies between different coins, and to remove false price influences like Tether, whale movements and the fact that exchanges price all coins in BTC, which allows BTC the uncanny ability to move and negatively affect the entire market.
  2. ASIC-resistance is and always has been a fool's game. ASICs are a natural progression of cryptocurrencies that have grown sufficiently in size and popularity, and 'resisting' this move is a form of arrested development akin to 'puberty-resistance' or 'potty-training-resistance'. Its just nonsensical.
In order to make money in cryptocurrencies, we have to keep our heads on straight and not be swept away by popular opinion without good cause. ASIC-resistance is a red-herring that does nothing be destroy the value on your chain. Luckily, most communities like ZCash, Dash, Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin accept and understand this basic fact. Thanks for reading!
submitted by thethrowaccount21 to ethtrader [link] [comments]

Of Wolves and Weasels - Day 122 - At The Cinema

Hey all! GoodShibe here!
Citizen DOGE. DOGE with the Wind. The Wizard of DOGE.
These are some of the great films of our time. The cinematic brilliance and remarkable acting found in these classics have not only helped us to find escape from the trials and travails of the markets, but fostered a deeper understanding of what it is to be a Shibe.
I mean, who doesn't remember such classic lines as:
"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a DOGE".
And who could forget a dying man's last, longing words for his childhood friend:
"DOGEbud..."
It's through these great works of cinema that Dogecoin first found its footholds in the world, helping folks to put aside Such Seriousness and finally find Much Wow together.
So, please, come with me for a trip down memory lane, to take a fond look back and marvel at how the effects of these great films - how the shadows cast by their legacies - can be felt through the ages.
In DOGE-Hur, the now classic tale of a coin fighting to break free of the herds of alts, we see a struggling Shibe, beaten, called to rise up against his Bitcoin oppressors. Those classic moments where all alts stood as one, throwing down their chains. "I AM DOGE-Hur!" ringing, together, throughout the rafters.
In The Grapes of DOGE, a family of Shibes suffers together through one of the greatest periods of Not WOW in our history. Their Mining Farm taken out from under them, they find themselves sent on the road to California as migrant workers, hashing algos by hand in the fields. It's a poignant tale of trial and triumph for Shibes everywhere.
In The DOGE Father, a reluctant young Shibe stands on the outskirts of the dominant Crypto-family, watching as the great Bitcoin Corleone wields his power and influence. But, little does he know, a DOGE Father lies waiting in the wings.
Sometimes those influences are harder to notice, but if you look closely, you can still see subtle hints - usually snuck in there by the great writers of their day:
In Star DOGE, with Luke Shibewalker and that great anti-hero DOGE Solo, they shared with us a powerful vision of a universe bereft of Dogecoin, haunted by an evil Empire fighting to destroy even the last traces of the once-powerful Sheddi.
In DOGE Runner, a hired gun for the great BTC corporations is sent to hunt down destructive 'DOGEs' in a dystopian future. Only as his world begins to unravel around him, the question is asked, is he, perhaps, a 'DOGE' himself?
In The Shibeshank Redemption, a poor DOGE finds himself banned from /dogecoin for 19 years and sent to a high security wallet where he meets a former DOGE named Red. Together they share many fun and heart-wrenching adventures on the 'inside' -- and who can forget that dramatic escape, dragging himself inch by inch through that SSH tunnel to freedom? Truly a classic.
I for one am thankful for all the hard work put in by Shibes over the ages to help the world understand the power of Dogecoin.
And I know that, silly as it may be, I am really looking forward to that DOGEzilla remake.
Tell me, my friends, what are your favorite DOGE contributions to cinema?
It's 8:55AM EST and we're at 76.91% of DOGEs found. Our Global Hashrate is seeing a slight rise from ~49 to ~50 Gigahashes per second and our Difficulty is spiking from ~613 to ~914.
As always, I appreciate your support!
GoodShibe
submitted by GoodShibe to dogecoin [link] [comments]

vDinar - miners' coin from Yugoslavia

Some notes about what vDinar ISN'T before reading everything else: - not an ICO/token; - no premine; - no masternodes.
Also, vDinar is already running since 1st February 2018; this topic is not introducing you a still not published coin.
TL;DR (longer explanation below): vDinar is a coin with a local target and a new slightly improved ASIC-resistant algorithm. • For every new block mined 2% of the mining reward goes to a donations address to be spent in the former Yugoslav area. • Team of journalists behind ready to help implement vDinar in everyone's life with articles and content. • A social network, exclusively made for vDinar, in SerboCroatian language, without ads but sharing the latter news to its users to divulgate the coin. • New implementation of the original "adaptive N Scrypt" which sets the N factor based on blockchain dimensions instead of hardcoded timestamps. Renamed to vCrypt as mining vDinar requires a different protocol and users should instantly know wether their software supports it.
Longer explanation! Index: • Introduction ~ [1.1] Why vDinar? ~ [1.2] Is localization useful? • Plan ~ [2.1] 2% donations ~ [2.2] Informing people • Technical explanation ~ [3.1] vCrypt algorithm ~ [3.2] Block structure ~ [3.3] Mining • Miscellaneous ~ [*.1] Useful links
[1.1] Why vDinar? The Southern Slavic area is, even if people rarely mention it, a very profitable cryptocurrency mining area which is in fact, full of miners. Many, many miners behind your average currencies are from there. At the same moment it is not a very useful thing, if not for investment targets, to handle cryptocurrencies in our area where there is no information at all about them. vDinar takes in mind this and tries to introduce itself, as a cryptocurrency which could also make them understand better the whole system, to local people from our area: through articles, visual content and explanations.
[1.2] Is localization useful? We all admire the beauty of globally used currencies, which is great indeed, but some middle steps could help the whole revolution include usually uninterested people and let them gradually understand what they got in front of them. Making cryptocurrencies with virtual and hypotethical countrylines could bring much more to the table and give a last opportunity to those who were skeptical about cryptocurrencies until now. vDinar has an easily reimplementable code one could retake for eventual new localized coins.
[2.1] 2% donations By taking a little tax over mining rewards which is to be redistributed through manual donations to people in need from the Southern Slavic area, vDinar does both assure to be a socially useful project and to maintain its core localized target audience without direct limits to its foreign users. Donations will be spent when the coin will be valued enough.
[2.2] Informing people vDinar is a long time planned project. It is backed by newspapers and networks created and built in the last 4 years with the final target of supporting vDinar through its course. By finding new users every day, vDinar is now to be shared to its target audience made of average people from the Southern Slavic area. Documents, articles and explanations will be made to help people understand how it works and how it may help them in their daily life.
[3.1] vCrypt algorithm The original Scrypt algorithm with adaptive N factor is kept, but it is assigned based on the block's height instead of hardcoded timestamps. Why? Let's take in consideration we're doing this to avoid the eventual creation of integrated circuits for mining use and we want to keep general-purpose devices on the top. By changing the N factor we are therefore cancelling the already existent ASICs. How many coins could you do in a N timespan? If you assign N based on blockchain dimensions, you will get a fixed number; if you assign it to hardcoded timestamps, there is still some flexibility one could get from the answer. It could be rare that one would design an ASIC just because of difficulty-timespan flexibilities, but Scrypt-N currencies are supposed to increase, or in vDinar's case double, N timespans every round. It is better to keep this protocol unbreakable and avoid exceptions. vCrypt has been renamed so because of block structuring (see [3.2] "Block structure") issues one would get if mining it with an average Scrypt-N mining software. In order to avoid miscomprehensions it is now called in a different way so that occasional miners will instantly understand wether their software supports vDinar or not.
[3.2] Block structure In order to send a 2% donation from the mining reward to the donations address, vDinar's block structure includes not one but two coinbase (no-input) transactions: one sending the 98% to the miner, and a second one for the 2% donation. This little change makes a big difference when it comes to setting up a pool, a mining software or whatever software having to mess with vDinar's blocks! vDinar does not use any premine, as it would be speculative: every coin produced should be proof, as the PoW system itself expects it to be, of computational work. That's the reason vDinar rather goes through a hard revolutionary process by having to rebuild the whole system around (pools, miners, explorers and so on) than joining the mass. Take note: vDinar applies nonces to both coinbase transactions! (This may be very useful to know if you're preparing a vDinar compatible software).
[3.3] Mining Exception made for some mining softwares (ex.: ccminer) finding their solo-mining solutions in untraditional ways, mining is exclusively possible through vCrypt compatible softwares made for the evenience. As this exception goes fine for solo mining, it does not even work for pooled mining. vDinar's pooled mining runs on a different protocol which allows only compatible miners to know the needed data for building the hash merkle root with the second coinbase transaction (2% donations). When passing variables such as "coinb1" and "coinb2", a vDinar compatible stratum server sends two new values: "doncoinb1" and "doncoinb2", splitting the second coinbase transaction (just as for the first one). vDinar stratum pools also need to calculate merkle steps considering there's an empty space of two transactions instead of one. A miner is supposed to hash those two transactions and keep working with merkle steps (starting from the second merkle tree level) and their hashing result as if it was one only usual coinbase transaction.
[*.1] Useful links vDinar wallet: https://github.com/AndreaDejanGrande/vDinareleases *Both Windows and Linux
Svarog Miner, the first vDinar compatible mining software, runs on CPU and is also mostly made for educational purposes about vDinar's protocols: https://github.com/AndreaDejanGrande/Svarog/releases *Both Windows and Linux
Svarog Pool, the first vDinar compatible pool (note you can't mine there without compatible miners): https://svarog.jugoslaven.com
"Jugoslaven", the SerboCroatian social network made to share vDinar to average people: https://www.jugoslaven.com
BitcoinTalk announcement: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2864886
To the moon? To Mars, the red planet!
submitted by _d3j4n to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Reddcoin Mining Profit!  Cryptocurrency Mining - Week 1 REVIEW! How to mine bitcoins (solo mining) with the core client ... BITCOIN: SOLO MINING VS MINING POOL! Bitcoin price analysis!- bitcoin may 29 Red Panda Mining - YouTube tutorial: Bitcoin mining with CGMiner - YouTube

Durch Bitcoins Mining können Sie Einheiten der virtuellen Bitcoin-Währung erhalten. Mit entsprechendem finanziellen Aufwand kann so jeder Computer-Besitzer nebenbei Geld verdienen. Wie das geht und was Sie dabei beachten sollten, erklären wir Ihnen in unserem Ratgeber. The first thing we need is a mining pool. You can solo mine, but the payouts could take months depending on how powerful your mining rig is, and the mining pools usually charge a very small fee (1% or less). Using a pool will allow you to receive consistent payouts, multiple times per day. For this tutorial we will use https://www.bitcorepool ... If you favour solo mining we would encourage you to use the official BitCore client as this ensures you are in consensus with the Bitcoin Network. If however you would rather join a mining pool then which you decide to opt for will be dependent on your personal beliefs regarding decentralisation, hard-forks, segwit and hash rate distribution. Der Mining-Prozess beinhaltet den Einsatz dedizierter Hardware (z.B. ASICs, FPGAs), die Verarbeitungsleistung nutzen, sowie Software-Anwendungen zur Verwaltung dieser Anlagen. Wenn Sie sich für Kryptowährung Mining entschieden haben, finden Sie hier einige der besten Bitcoin Mining-Software, mit der Sie anfangen können. Lesen Sie also weiter ... Best Coin to Mine for the Long Term (That’s Still Profitable Today) While Zcoin is the best coin to mine for profit today (though it might have potential in the long term if you consider its performance in 2017), the best coin to mine with a focus on the long term is Ethereum (ETH).. Ethereum started a movement by popularizing the idea of Blockchain 2.0, or using smart contracts to ...

[index] [47640] [12339] [16740] [10175] [29859] [24754] [37629] [12919] [2975] [46897]

Reddcoin Mining Profit! Cryptocurrency Mining - Week 1 REVIEW!

Newbie guide for those who want to try solo bitcoin and litecoin mining, using bfgminer and cgminer. The config files shown in the video are available in the... In this video I show you how to start mining Bitcoins with CGMiner and an account at your favorite miningpool. Get CGMiner at: https://bitcointalk.org/index.... Not an expert in anything, just a dude documenting his Crypto Mining journey! A Crypto Mining Bitcoin/Ethereum/Speculative Coin Channel! Thanks for stopping ... Follow my progress as I dive head first into investing, while trying not to lose it all!! Robinhood APP - Robinhood - Free Stock Trading Bitcoin - Bitcoin Mining Litecoin - Litecoin Mining ... We discuss how mining in bitcoin works and the differences between SOLO MINING VS MINING POOLS. Hope this video brings you a lot of value! Let´s keep on learning!

#