Song co in bitcointalk news

An award-winning team of journalists, designers, and videographers who tell brand stories through Fast Company's distinctive lens. The future of innovation and technology in government for the greater good. Leaders who are shaping the future of business in creative ways. New workplaces, new food sources, new medicine--even an entirely new economic system. With a puffy top hat, bug-eyed goggles, and mesmerizing monotone, Thomas Hunt spouts the news from every corner of the Bitcoinverse in a daily video digest in the opposite of Jim Cramer style. In the nascent ecosystem of Bitcoin reporting, Hunt says he saw a lot of long coverage but no bite-sized digest.

We are searching data for your request:

Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Content:

• Bitcoin boss Danny Brewster wanted in Cyprus on suspicion of fraud
• Bitcoin Was First Used To Buy Pizza. Other Interesting Tidbits
• Does Vezt Provide Songwriters With Their Business Model of the Future?
• Lightning Network
• Whale Moves $230 Million for 57 Cents Using Bitcoin
• Bitcoin theft causes Bitfloor exchange to go offline

WATCH RELATED VIDEO: NETVRK FULL REVIEW - Be the first in NetVRk's new VR universe!

Bitcoin boss Danny Brewster wanted in Cyprus on suspicion of fraud

All: this thread has over comments. Why link to the archive. Ethereum people got mod access to the subreddit and deleted everything pointing out the fraud. Of course, that isn't true, because it's not possible to break asymmetric cryptography by brute force with expenditure equal to whatever is protected.

Same applies to PoS. It's maliciously created nonsense, which is most visible when he slyly equates locked tokens to wasted glucose.

The whole point of the economy is to manipulate real resources - various forms of matter and energy [1] and locking tokens is just a different way of social organization. That's the objective metric underneath it all, and clearly PoS is a more efficient way of organizing massive human cooperation than PoW. Not quite. There's more to securing PoS than asymmetric cryptography -- namely, you have to convince everyone that your keys and the coins attached to them are legitimate, and not the next guy's keys and coins on a fork.

Convincing people of this isn't a cost-free task, especially if there's wealth to be accumulated through convincing more and more people that your coins are legitimate, and everyone else's conflicting coins on different forks are not.

This game of convincing people that your fork is the true fork is exactly what stake-grinding is. Given a choice, and no a priori knowledge, which history of the PoS chain is the true history?

What would convince you that one is legitimate, and the other is not? The article argues that the act of convincing you is, itself, a form of PoW. After all, without PoW, looking at the chainstate isn't convincing -- if you have staked coins today, you could easily create a fork of the chain history where everyone else stopped spending except for you. Without no 3rd party way to verify if that actually happened, you could go around trying to bribe people to accept that your subsequent transactions on this fork are the chain's "true" transactions.

There's many tactics for doing this -- you could go on Twitter and spam everyone; you could organize events and rallies; you could even take malicious actions and disable your rivals. You and everyone trying to do the same thing would be in competition to convince everyone else that your fork is the "true" fork. But regardless of the tactics, all of them require expenditures on your part in the forms of time, energy, health, stress, etc. Hence the "PoW by obscurity" argument.

Here's a concrete example. ETH is worth more because more people value it. If ETH were PoS at the time of the split, it would be a lot less obvious from the chainstate which one people would choose to use.

Both chains' participants would try to make it look like their chains had more users by some other means. But the point in the article is that those "other means" are not only costly actions, but also the marginal cost each fork can afford for these actions is, in equilibrium, equal to their respective marginal revenues. Now in hindsight it is obvious but during the chaotic days, it wasn't obvious which chain would be worth more in the future.

You had to use other means to decide which chain to use. You are right that there was uncertainty at first -- and it was reflected in how much PoW each chain got! Which is exactly my point. There's an additional assumption in the article: he writes about marginal cost and revenue, but what he actually assumes is a system where average cost is equal to marginal cost, as it is in PoW under perfect competition.

He starts from the assumption that PoS uses exactly same resources as PoW and then shows it's true based on the assumption. What does 'true' and 'legitimate' mean here? The whole point is to interact with other people, so naturally I'm going to use the same network that people I want to interact with use.

Same whether it's PoW or PoS - no real difference between choosing forks from some block height vs choosing networks with completely different genesis blocks and names. Once the network is chosen a node has to follow it. The question of 'how long it's safe to be offline to reproduce the behavior of being online all the time' has a complex answer of percentage of slashed stake if two conflicting histories exist.

PoW doesn't change anything here, it's an arbitrary fork like any other. People that ended up with coins from mining can receive coins on your fork too, made with a much smaller mining difficulty. Mining cost is irrelevant because that's destroyed wealth - nobody ends up with it. The reason it won't happen in reality is because of network effects - even if you have external wealth able to pay enough at once to everyone that has to be paid, no single person wants to be left alone on a new fork - they would all have to move at once.

This sounds exactly like a special case of the game of convincing people that your fork is the true fork. NXT stakers each have their own preferred forks i. Maybe it's not well-written here, but his argument is that PoS ultimately will require the same energy commitments as PoW through the act of each staker trying to convince both other stakers and newcomers i. A PoS chain may not take the same initial resources as a PoW chain, but it will over time.

Source: I've spoken to the author at conferences. And how do we know which fork this is, out of all the alternatives? You either have to ask people i. Except, this is not what's happening in real life. People follow the canonical chain, and PoW helps them all determine what the canonical chain is without having to ask around. Computers are just tools to make that easier. It's a fundamental contradiction to assume you can use any blockchain to make any economic transactions without interacting with other people - because economic transactions require other economic entities.

Of course when you assume something false you can prove any absurd result, like that PoS wastes same resources as PoW. PoS is extremely safe in the short term, and only maybe falls back on social coordination in the long term again, only in the case of an attack , which is the correct security model.

Mining revenue is an insignificant part of what the real consensus in any PoW coin is. For a while BCH had biggest revenues after the fork because of their difficulty algorithm. Did I say otherwise? Well, no widely-used PoS system exists so we have no real-world examples to learn from , but despite this, you're insisting that no PoS system will use more than PoW from now until the last blockchain goes offline, despite these systems in expectation driving essentially unbound amounts of revenue.

That's quite an extraordinary claim! Let's steel-man this. Let's assume that a PoS blockchain becomes so widely successful that its token becomes a major world currency. Then what? Controlling a PoS node would be like controlling a country's reserve banks and mints.

So, what keeps these nodes safe from asshats breaking into them and using them print themselves money? Like, why can't an armed band of asshats show up at my server rack and physically steal my validators' keys? The answer of course is that the building security and law enforcement officers keep this from happening. But, where do these people come from? Who pays them?

Where do they get their equipment? What do they do with the asshats they catch? How do they deal with escalations from asshats, and stay ahead of the asshats' tactics? How much energy is going into keeping these PoS nodes secure? It appears that there is energy involved in keeping the PoS system running in the face of asshattery, and that energy is proportional to how important it is that it remains usable for the societies that rely on it. It seems, then, that the more successful PoS becomes, the more it co-opts the very infrastructure that keeps today's financial systems secure.

That's a lot of energy! So, in the event of success, I have no reason to believe that PoS will take less energy to secure than PoW, once I think about what has to go into securing a successful PoS system. At least with PoW, I can rest assured that if the asshats hijack a mining rig to print money, they'll have to continuously out-mine the rest of the world in perpetuity in order for their coins to remain realized on the canonical chain. PoS doesn't have that resiliency, which necessitates building and maintaining an extrinsic security apparatus to keep the staked coins from getting stolen in the first place.

This security apparatus -- including all the laws, supply chains, manufacturing, and so on to keep it going as it becomes a more and more valuable target to asshats -- is on the MC side of the equation.

You've completely misread my comment. Miners mine on the chain that is most profitable to them, and the blockchains they mine on encode the history of their activities.

Even though during a chain split it's not immediately apparent which resulting chain will attract the most miners over time, it does become apparent quickly enough. The revenues and thus profits come from users actually demanding the coins.

I thought it was widely understood that Bitcoin and Ethereum are not the same thing? If there is contention between two forks of the same blockchain , then PoW provides you a way to determine which one has more demand. PoW doesn't tell you anything about two different blockchains with two different difficulty algorithms but it might tell you something about two different blockchains with the same difficult algorithm, such as Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash.

CryptoPunk 8 months ago root parent prev next [—]. In POW you still have to ask around, to find out what the canonical consensus protocol is. Having more POW alone is not enough to have your chain accepted, as it still needs to be valid according to the other rules of the protocol. No one is arguing that you don't have a trusted computing base. What is being argued is, why make the TCB bigger when it doesn't need to be?

Why trust someone to tell me what the current validator set or fork tip when I boot up my node, when there exists protocols whereby the node figures this out automatically? Some people say that the energy cost of PoS justifies this, but that's not really true in the long run.

PoW does this as well, but it gains you an in-band way to discover this, thereby making the TCB lower than it would be in PoS. CryptoPunk 8 months ago root parent next [—]. That's the point of debate: of course PoS proponents argue you can get more security at a given economic cost than you can with PoW, and that more than makes up for the security loss from the TCB bigger. Sztorc's argument is heavily disputed in this thread, and you can see the arguments against it in the critiques provided.

If you pick the wrong validator set when you boot your node up, you're fucked -- your node will never discover the chain history which represents actual user activity [1]. PoS is the blockchain equivalent of forcing users to pick out which TLS certificates they trust when they install their OS.

Bitcoin Was First Used To Buy Pizza. Other Interesting Tidbits

All: this thread has over comments. Why link to the archive. Ethereum people got mod access to the subreddit and deleted everything pointing out the fraud. Of course, that isn't true, because it's not possible to break asymmetric cryptography by brute force with expenditure equal to whatever is protected.

Does Vezt Provide Songwriters With Their Business Model of the Future?

Bfg software crypto. One of the things that we love about this Bitcoin mining software is that it lets users monitor hardware temperature, and you can also manage your rigs remotely. Trusted by over 21 million users worldwide. Best Bitcoin mining software CGminer. BFG is a well-regarded dividend-paying company that has been able to sustain great financial health over the past. BetFury is a Curacao-based online crypto gambling platform that was launched in Get exclusive crypto bonus codes.

Lightning Network

The Lightning Network LN is a "layer 2" payment protocol layered on top of a blockchain-based cryptocurrency such as bitcoin or litecoin. Normal use of the Lightning Network consists of opening a payment channel by committing a funding transaction to the relevant base blockchain layer 1 , followed by making any number of Lightning Network transactions that update the tentative distribution of the channel's funds without broadcasting those to the blockchain, optionally followed by closing the payment channel by broadcasting the final version of the settlement transaction to distribute the channel's funds. To settle the payments the channel must be closed. To initiate this process one node broadcasts the most up to date settlement transaction to the network. The next events can broadly be thought of in two ways, a cooperative closure in which both parties confirm a distribution and funds are immediately settled and an uncooperative closure.

Whale Moves $230 Million for 57 Cents Using Bitcoin

By Shaurya Malwa The broader crypto market recorded its second day of growth ahead of a U. Federal Reserve statement. By Marcel Deer What are altcoins? By Jordan Finneseth The cryptocurrency market faced another day of erratic price movements on Jan. Out of all the various indexes,. The granddaddy of crypto, Bitcoin BTC , reached an all-time high.

Bitcoin theft causes Bitfloor exchange to go offline

The blockchain was created by Charlie Lee, a software engineer who had worked at Google and crypto exchange Coinbase, and it was launched on the bitcointalk forum in October Litecoin has a total capped supply of 84 million tokens. The project then established a reward of 50 litecoin per block at its inception, with the block reward halving occurring every , blocks thereafter. The last block is expected to be mined in LTC price history includes peaks intersected by long periods of sideways activity. Another characteristic that makes Litecoin different from Bitcoin is the time it takes to confirm blocks. It takes Bitcoin nine minutes on average to produce a block, while it takes Litecoin two and a half minutes to produce a block on its network. For example, Litecoin integrated the Lightning Network — a second-layer technology for Bitcoin to create micropayment channels for payments — ahead of Bitcoin.

Beluga coin. Jeffery Epstein and Tupac when they hear Betty White is coming to the same hiding location. Made in France. We started out with 1 coin design.

There are some theories floating around on Twitter as to who the whale is. Loaded is as well-known for his posts on the forum as he is for his stash of 40, BTC. Bitcointalk's famous whale Loaded is moving its 40k BTC stash again. Further theories floated around on the forum itself that it was Loaded who made the transaction — although the user has not confirmed or denied that they made the transaction. It should be noted that the Bitcoin in the address shows a pattern of moving from one address to the next for no apparent reason according to the transaction history on Blockchain.

Skip Navigation. Crypto derivatives hit an all-time high in January ' Bitcoin miners are helping the Texas grid brace for winter storm impact. MacKenzie Sigalos Thu, Feb 3rd Ryan Browne Thu, Feb 3rd Emerging NFT frauds: 'Wash trading' and money laundering. Bitcoin evangelist Michael Saylor says crypto regulations would speed adoption.

Worst pizza ever. New York style, Chicago deep dish, or maybe Gjelina's thin crust tickles your fancy. And this is coming from a man who, prior to … Grimaldi's: Worst Pizza Ever! May We Suggest.