Bitcoin Whale – What are crypto whales? – BitcoinWiki

testing blackcoin css

testing blackcoin css
[link]

Once again I am asking for your assistance. Years ago you helped me build my 1st PC. It is time to upgrade. Included pictures of battle station and other questions.

Hi everyone. My build is starting to show its age. The more I try to do, the more I see its age. at the bottom of the post you can see my current build.
What is your intended use for this build? The more details the better.
If gaming, what kind of performance are you looking for? (Screen resolution, framerate, game settings)
What is your budget (ballpark is okay)?
In what country are you purchasing your parts?
Post a draft of your potential build here (specific parts please). Consider formatting your parts list. Don't ask to be spoonfed a build (read the rules!).
PCPartPicker Part List
Type Item Price
CPU Intel Core i7-9700K 3.6 GHz 8-Core Processor $369.99 @ Best Buy
CPU Cooler Deepcool CASTLE 360EX 64.4 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler $141.99 @ Newegg
Motherboard ASRock Z370 Taichi ATX LGA1151 Motherboard $299.99 @ Amazon
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory $76.99 @ Newegg
Memory G.Skill Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3600 Memory $76.99 @ Newegg
Storage Samsung 850 EVO-Series 500 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive -
Video Card Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11 GB WINDFORCE Video Card $1099.99 @ Newegg
Case Fractal Design Define R5 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case $154.72 @ Amazon
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA G2 850 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply -
Monitor Asus ROG Strix XG438Q 43.0" 3840x2160 120 Hz Monitor $1099.99 @ Amazon
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total $3320.65
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-04-15 01:24 EDT-0400
Provide any additional details you wish below.
Here is the computer I got help on years ago on this sub.
PCPartPicker Part List
Type Item Price
CPU Intel Core i5-2500K 3.3 GHz Quad-Core Processor -
Motherboard Asus P8Z68 Deluxe ATX LGA1155 Motherboard -
Memory Kingston HyperX Fury Blue 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR3-1600 Memory -
Storage Samsung 850 EVO-Series 500 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive -
Video Card MSI Radeon RX 480 4 GB GAMING X Video Card -
Case Fractal Design Define R5 (Black) ATX Mid Tower Case $154.72 @ Amazon
Power Supply Thermaltake TR2 600 W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply -
Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts
Total $154.72
Generated by PCPartPicker 2020-04-15 01:34 EDT-0400
Questions I Have
Thanks for the help!
submitted by joeweezy10 to buildapc [link] [comments]

Australians, you need to start buying as much crypto as you can.

I’m Australian, this isn’t meant to be an alarmist or sensationalist post, but the economic situation in our country is a lot more serious than most of us think.
First off, the current economic situation.
Simply put, our economy is fucked. Our housing market is dangerously overleveraged and because of policies by our government at the time, we never experienced the correction the US and most of the rest of the world did during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. And now the chickens are coming home to roost. Australians are up to their eyeballs in debt, almost half of the housing loans are interest only, it’s the reason the Reserve Bank of Australia hasn’t raised the interest rates since 2016. Because as soon as they do, even by 0.01%, tens of thousands of Australians are going to default on their mortgages. It’s no secret that our housing market is one of the most expensive in the world, and anyone living in our country already knows this. The market value of Australian homes is 4 times the GDP of the country. Our housing market is beyond the point of saving and the bubble is about to pop. And while our mainstream media is trying to convince us that it will deflate slowly, history paints a different picture.
And that’s just the start of our problems. It’s no secret that China is our biggest trading partner. We rely on China more than any other developed country in the world. And what is currently happening on the greater global stage? Our most important military ally has engaged in a trade war with China, and the effects of that trade war are starting to be felt. Chinese stocks are in freefall, and that’s only going to be the beginning of the negative effects from Trump’s hardline approach to dealing with China. It doesn’t take a genius to see that this is going to have a devastating effect on our economy.
Our biggest trading partner is having a financial gunfight with the USA, which is going to result in them buying less of our stuff. And still that isn’t the end of it. Mining is down. Commodities prices are down. Our manufacturing sector is almost dead. The only thing we have going for us at the moment is agriculture and that can’t prop up the entire economy. You wanna turn white? Read this article from last year. Our economy is teetering on the precipice.
You think I’m being dramatic? Well even the Australian MSM can no longer ignore it. With articles like this appearing almost on the daily. Our dollar is in serious trouble, anyone who knows the slightest bit about TA go look at the graphs in that article. Our country is in serious economic trouble. And we don’t know shit about it because our media is a duopoly that makes most of its money from their real estate arms. All signs are pointing to our dollar about to be worth a hell of a lot less than it currently is.
What can we do?
Since this is the crypto subreddit the solution to this impending economic shitstorm should be painfully obvious. Buy fucking Bitcoin. Not the solution for the country, for you. The country isn’t going to do shit for anyone of us except saddle us with debt and a cooked economy that is going to take generations to get out of, if ever. So we should be diversifying. Sure buying gold probably isn’t a stupid idea either, but if you think that is proof against state intervention, read a history book. Even then, gold still needs to be converted into cash to be useful, and anyone paying attention can see that Australia is gearing up for a war on cash that borders on tyrannical. The only way for us as individuals to protect our wealth at the moment is to convert it into cryptocurrency.
But Bitcoin is low at the moment!
No shit. But if you think it’s going to stay that way you are 1. In the wrong subreddit, and 2. No paying attention to the macro factors of crypto. Wall St is gearing up to enter. The bank that runs the world is getting involved. And not just American banks. Bitcoin may be low now but if you know anything about market cycles, you know that it’ll be back. Here is a good comparison of BTC a few years ago as opposed to now. It’s almost at the point where it’s irresponsible not to be buying bitcoin, and I’m not the only one that holds this opinion. Worst case scenario, bitcoin falls to USD 3k. What do you think is going to happen after that? Bitcoin and crypto aren’t going anywhere and you’re kidding yourself if you think that the value of bitcoin isn’t going to be much higher in the years to come.
Of course the RBA is telling people that Bitcoin is dead, probably because they don’t want Australians to dump their soon to be worthless fiat currency. In fact one any given day you’ll see a bunch of anti-crypto propaganda on our MSM. The same MSM that has been telling us all to buy as many houses as we can for the last 20 years. The same MSM that up until now hasn’t said shit about the direction our economy is heading in.
The writing’s on the wall people. If we keep our wealth in AUD it’s going to be worth considerably less sooner rather than later. Our property sector is going to crash, our dollar is going to crash, our personal wealth is going to be stripped away from us. If you want to avoid this, if you want to protect your wealth, ensure a future that isn’t financial hardship, then we really only have one choice. Buy bitcoin. Personally I am converting half my pay each week into BTC and just holding it. Not putting it into alts. Just btc. I’d advise you do the same as well. I understand that this sounds super risky. But if you read the articles I’ve linked to in this post I’m sure you’ll see that the only risky move is doing nothing. This isn’t a joke or a false alarm. The notion that our economy has always been fine up until now isn’t valid anymore. If you want to protect your personal wealth and purchasing power in the next few years, you really should be buying as much btc as you can while it is this low. This is what crypto is for, avoiding the negative financial downturns of specific countries. It’s a globally traded commodity that is accessible by anyone with a computer. Our economy tanking isn’t going to affect the price one bit.
I hope some of this has been useful. Listen to me, don’t listen to me, it’s your choice. But this is the digital age, there’s no excuse for ignorance anymore.
submitted by Sendmyabar to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Investigation of (Dis-)Favor 1\3 questioning freedom of will (in Macro-society)

This item began as a simple idea to investigate "social construct" theory, a trendy theme in academia and identity politics. It turned into a staggeringly complex constellation of ideas, with surprises galore.
The idea occurs to me: validate (or not) 'social construction' of beauty. If not, then sense of beauty is innate (source is not one's society, but genetic or other episocial influences).
Natural Tendency towards Beauty in Humans: Evidence from Binocular Rivalry 2016 | plos (technical study)
Reading in Contemporary Aesthetics "Why Beauty Still Cannot Be Measured", by Ossi Naukkarinen, because beauty is a personal determination, and a metaphor of favor, but how is it determined? Example: which of these women looks beautiful to you? note: only descriptor for the AI search is "beautiful woman", AI learns about beauty by sifting mega-data; how effective is it? (achieves given goal?) AI results are socially constructed in the most explicit way possible! Beauty may not be measurable, but it can be selected (parsed) from non-beauty. Measurement is a comparison of some phenomenon to an abstract dimension. Selection is a go, no-go choice.
What is Nudge theory? This item straddles the fence between Macro and Micro societies, paradigmatic Nudges come from Macro sources, but include an option to choose without pressure to conform. Micro sources are always more direct; which side of the fence are you on, friend?. (Greener side, of course.)
What about searching for "good", images? note how often the WORD good is pictured. Good is a language construct that must be interpreted from the individual's perspective.
Ok, now search for "favor" images note that AI mostly interprets favor as a small gift, not as a preference (which is difficult to represent by image)
Well then, search for "preference", images note that the word preference happens to be used by a line of hair care products from L'Oreal, which dominates the returns... commerce rules!
social construct (def, search result)
validate (or not) 'social construction' of beauty
Is Socialism a social construct? (LoL) Socialism Defined (EVERY Country is Socialist!) 2.2k views Sep 29, 2019 Rokn'MrE
To (social) Construct, or Not to (social) Construct, is there a choice? (note most results are about gender)
Parsing gender
Discussion of gender is not my direction of choice in this part 1 investigation. I want to seek how an actor (esp. me) makes a choice, in a quest for freedom of will. Perhaps come back to gender in a future item.
person makes a choice, in a quest for freedom of will (selections available)
Exemplar Hyp (Harry) Frankfurt’s compatibilist theory of free will 2009 5pg.pdf
I notice my choice of article was partly determined, partly free, but parsing out those factors would be too much divergence from the goal here. But Truth (a two side coin) is my story, and I'm stickin' to it.
(previous link, compatibilism):
3 It explains our intuition that human beings, but not lower animals, have free will. Lower animals lack free will because they lack the second-order volitions which are constitutive of free will. (This item is unnecessary and probably not true; how do we know animals have no "second-order volitions"? Having no other language than "body", we can only surmise (guess) what their volitions are. Volitions come before actions, we cannot see them or interpret them in any way. Brain conditions might be interpreted with MRI scanning, but to put a subject in a scanning device is to prevent any other actions. Such measuring ruins the connection between mental state and volition being measured, except we can safely assume that every measurement of animals must default to the volition to escape the measuring device.)
That's the first-order, highlighted deviation from compatibility theory. Clarification of "second-order volition": a path from choice to action has an intermediate "middle-way" tunneling mode, contracting (taking on) a desire to make a choice, prior to making the choice. In order to prove freedom, one must establish the mental preference for an imagined outcome in order to prove that preference did come from within the person and was not forced by other external deciding factors (genetic factors are pre-determined).
incompatibilism Note: the approach is wrong by the universal assumption, IOW that the intersection of determined and free is zero. It's a supremacy position, or superposition principle (LoL), the error is in over-simplification. The Logic Argument (p.5) is not representative of reality, which is more nuanced. Therefore, Frankfurt's thesis is good (denial of incompatibilism), but not due to the case presented (superposition).
Take Frankfurt's case (p.4) of Black vs Jones4 to be analogy for State vs Individual. Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars (other sources exist, search for yourself)
The (myusername) determinism/free-will duality hypothesis (denial of incompatibilism due to non-zero intersection):
Most choices, including the choice of desires, are determined by contingencies of which one is the natural desire of the actor to optimize his/her outcomes ("best wishes"). Is a person always compelled to have best wishes? What is best depends on a person's mental state, which is usually determined by external factors, but those can vary in cogency (impact on behavior). Consider the choice to commit suicide, certainly not a trivial choice. (The Chosen means of execution (puns intended) is somewhat more trivial, but again, partly determined by external conditions.)
Some choices, nearly all trivial, are free because no interfering contingencies are apparent during the choosing interlude. It may happen in hindsight, that a past choice is observed to be a mistake, usually because some contingency was overlooked or unknown during the choosing. This observation should be remembered so as to avoid repeating a future choice like that mistake. Choices always have risks, including the choice to do nothing.
Different day, slightly different approach... parsing choice. 1 important choices that have many deep effects later, for instances a marriage partner, a new job, a new residence; 2 trivial choices which have minor effects, risks or physical involvement, for instances a choice of toothpaste at the market, to like or not a web-link or museum exhibit.
According to (myusername)'s determined/free paradigm, type 1 choices are nearly all determined by pre-existing conditions (not free). Type 2 choice is the arena of freedom. I suppose a person's low risk-aversion parameter could expand the envelope of freedom, but that's a characteristic that develops during maturation, one's history of choices and ensuing responses. Successful responses lead to more freedom, failures to less. So even when freedom exists, it accumulates a history (habits) which become a determinant.
Contracting the Social Construct Disorder (it's contagious) Take 1:
How does an actor (person in question who comes to an internal state, or inner-construct) interact with a community or society? Must it be IRL, or can virtual interaction suffice to construct internal states? And more to my point, must the interaction be two-way (containing feedback), or simply via broadcast medium? (broadcast includes published books, articles, records, radio, TV or Internet A/V shows, etc.)
Interaction with broadcast media can be summarized by: a choice, a degree of attention and focus (time spent on and attention given to item), a like/dislike or more complex reaction to item, having future behavior influenced by item, to continue a stream of behaviors (especially sequential item choices) as consequence of influence of item, to develop a complex of attitudes built upon stream of items (eg. just mentioned 'risk aversion parameter and habit).
Before going on, I notice that broadcast media is like Sunshine, Rain, and Grace. It is made available by participation in a community, and falls without curse or blessing, it's all there for the choosing (or ignoring), depending on the contingencies.
Mind control theory? (because mind is the inner source of volition... behavior, control the mind (easy), hence control the behaviors (difficult otherwise))
Mind control courtesy Tavistock Inst.
Construction of Favor (or any knowledge) upon Familiarity
What is Social Construction? (cntrlZ)
"For instance, trees are only differentiated from other plants by virtue of the fact that we have all learned to see them as "trees."
But we don't all know about trees to an equal degree. I know rather much about trees from my interaction with them: living among them, planting them, sawing them, moving them, burning them, etc., not from reading or talking about them. No doubt, there are many persons all over the world who have very little experience of trees, and cannot 'construct' treeness as well as me. Direct experience is more realistic and developed than social constructs.
Favor and Familiarity are interwoven by choice
I chose to live alone with trees and not alone with sea, or desert (for examples), because it was easier to go with trees. Was the choice free? I could have chosen city or suburb with even more ease than forest, so ease of choice was not the deciding factor, it was my preference of lonely forest over crowded urb that decided me. So maybe it wasn't really about trees, it was about independence or something else like that. When we choose, we may not understand the contingencies, but our decision (choice) may be due to habits or patterns that have developed in the maturity process. Habits are strong determinants, and they develop, according to Ian Plowman, 4 ways.
The cntrlZ article makes the case for 'Strong Social Construction' based on that 'knowing' which is all about language, certainly a social construct.
Within the social construction of language is the game. Outside the social construction is reality, the real world. (a list of social constructs follows)
That makes it clear. Experiences (direct ones) without resort to language are NOT social constructs. That observation makes another distinction clear: gender may be a social construct, as it's a language issue, but sex is not a social construct, it is a direct experience issue that develops in the maturation process: birth, infant, child, puberty, sexy adolescent, sexy adult, old (unsexy) adult, death. Prior to puberty, sex is incipient in its development, but comes to life, (like a flower blooms) after a decade or so. Knowing about sex as a child is by observation from outside (thru the looking glass), after puberty, it's direct experience, and much later, it's a fading memory.
Regarding Looking-glass self theory the notion of socially constructed identity (defining the self by differences/ affinities to others),
... the outcome of "taking the role of the other", the premise for which the self is actualized. Through interaction with others, we begin to develop an identity of our own as well as developing a capacity to empathize with others... Therefore, the concept of self-identity may be considered an example of a social construction.
... makes a spurious expansion of identity formation to include everyone (a unity), or nearly so. According to Reisman's Lonely Crowd, there is a triality of social nature, expounded by parsing people into tradition, inner, and other directed personalities. This theme was a scholar's response to the US trend toward consumerism and conformity to "norms", (local traditions, eg. "keeping up with the Joneses") mid-20th century. The social construct crowd would be Reisman's Other directed personality, which may truly be the majority, in USA certainly. However, the tradition-following and inner-directed personalities are a significant minority. Let's not ignore them (I'm in there.)
What is “Mob Mentality?”
Herd mentality | wkpd
Are All Personality Descriptions Social Constructions? Sep.2019 | psytdy
... that objective reality does not directly reveal itself to us, is true beyond a doubt.
The preceding statement author, JA Johnson, is way off (and his article is full of falseness). Objective reality IS direct experience, no more revealing modality exists. Denial of this obvious fact (just lied about above) is a redefinition of the term (a social construct). Experience is beyond language, thus beyond 'description'. However the following is a true reveal about (((Yews))) (the like of whom Dr. Johnson seems):
It is true that when we describe someone with socially undesirable traits... we are constructing for them a social reputation that might decrease their chance of success in life. This is precisely one of the concerns of (((social constructivists, like Dr. Johnson))), that certain categorizations (eg. a separate race) reduce power and status.
Proof that Truth is not a social construct (relative to culture, like morality absolutely is)... What do you believe in? Cultural Relativism
Conformity is a social construct (should be obvious, it's a social source of choices). What causes conformity? Social interactions, which traditionally occurred (Macro-version) in newspapers, magazines, cinema and radio programs. As culture changed the popular media to radio, TV and then to Internet, and church attendance fell out of vogue, the advertising industry became more powerful in defining social constructs. That's why Internet censorship is so important.
Who are the 'influencers' in society? (They used to be parents, teachers, peers... now it seems to be YouTubers, like PewDiePie. But an intentionally underplayed contingent of influencers is the predominantly Left-Leaning academia, who collectively promote Marxist preferences and political activism toward Socialist positions. Academia is pushing social construction because it provides an intellectual framework that denies the old (social injustice), and says ok to their preferred ideology, Cultural Marxism (new social "just us"; socially constructed ideas can be anything you want, their cogency depends on efficacy of publication).
Micro-Social Constructs are most cogent (due to conformity being human nature), discussed in part 2.
Bottom Line (part 1)
If you like freedom, and are serious about it, you must distance yourself from society, because it tries to reconstruct you according to the norm... conform!
Before you go, think about what is a hermit?, which should not be confused with Hermetic, name derived from Greek god Hermes. 7 Great Hermetic Principles – The Teachings of Thoth (illustrated)... same topic 2016
Investigation of (Dis-)Favor 2\3, Micro-Societies
Social Circles; Mates, Kin, Friends
note on Mates: school-, (prison) in-, marriage-, ship-, etc. note on my link choices, page rank has a strong influence
Social group (aka circle)
Is Conformity Human Nature? Don't blow this list off, if you want to understand social constructs. At least look at first item.
What is Social Proof?
Are Micro-societies any less 'constructing' than Macros? Or do some constructs exist for all realms, macro and micro? I think they are more constructing, because micros carry feedback, whereas macro is all absorption, individuals have negligible effects on society at large. They act in a statistical sense, with a few exceptions.
Concept vs Percept (concepts are stable mental recordings, and physical manifestations of them; percepts are changing sensations and reflexes which depend strongly on the situation, memories of which are variable too)
Favor, Good, and Beauty are words that belong in the same 'conceptual basket' (ward), they are alike, all refer to action 'like', as an affective (and affirmative) perception. Conversely for the word's opposites.
Perceptions are non-language reactions to stimuli, therefore not social constructs. They may be evoked into a social arena via language (or other virtual records), but these are only shadows of the perception, so what is evoked is drawn up from the receiver's own memories of perceptions.
Division of Labor (and role models) are Social Constructs
Sex is the most basic divider of labor, for all societies, especially the most primitive. As societies develop towards more technical, sex falls away from the divider, as natural talent and innate interest gain influence, until the basic operations of reproduction remain, the core division. What about rankings in the division?
natural tendency for dominance?
Are males naturally dominant in nature? | qra
(arguments opposing) Male Dominance (theory) with (bogus) "Explanations", by 2 feminist authors using Marxist ideology 2017 | verso While this blog seems to have obvious (to me) flaws, it does raise interesting ideas and references.
what attributes help males gain social status? Basic: status is competitive. It takes talent and effort to win.
To Raise Male Status (18 Rules) | @rctvmn (not because age 18 is best)
Dominance vs Prestige 2010 | psytdy Note: blatant bias toward Prestige via argument parsing Pride. (author is Jewish, maligns DJ Trump (nationalist), lauds John Lennon (globalist))
modes of thought: socially-controlled vs spontaneous
Major Component of Social-Construction: Public Education 3 Modes of Thought Jan.2019
Kaufman again: How Renaissance People Think 2011 | psytdy Note: We discussed concept vs percept, here Kaufman refers to fellow-Jew Seymour Epstein's dual modish rational vs experiential theory, same idea set.
polymath (short for Renaissance Man)
Favor-Goodness-Beauty paradigm
Favor is not favored in prior art, Truth takes Favor's place in the Transcendental Spectrum: Transcendentals 5pg.pdf
We have already seen the idea in part 1 that Truth is a disputed transcendental in the social-constructionism academic universe. Academics use the "universal fallacy" that their favored item is part of an incompatible pair, which by logic excludes everything not in their favor. They want to ignore the nuances in order to push an ideology toward a supremacy of thinking, just like in a totalitarian state.
Whereas the (myusername) principle of Truth, it has a dual nature, 1 relative to a society (democratic consensus); and 2 absolute to reality (math/science/technology). So 'Favor' is a better term because objective proof (no contest) is not required (except the meaning of objective that says 'objection!', meaning 'contest'). 'Favor' implies bias which is the subjective reaction that matches Goodness and Beauty better than 'Truth'.
Apply Truth-Goodness-Beauty paradigm to social construction
it is unconcerned with ontological issues...
because the aim of constructionists is to justify a collective "truth" of their own construction. A social construct is not absolute, it's anything a society wants it to be ("social proof"). That's a good description of tyranny... The Empowered Female Parasite 2014 (that's a surprising result, here is one not-surprising.)
Social Proof: established by culture media (mind control, a monopoly 2012 (scroll down long graphic), of the Juice 2015), go back to part 1, macrosocial constructs.
Does Appreciation of Beauty have any innate sources? (otherwise it's all a social construct) Neuroscience of Beauty; How does the brain appreciate art? 2011 | sciam (in brain)
Onward (Dis)-Favor Readers...
Investigation of (Dis-)Favor 3\3, House of Not-Friends
Contracting the Social Construct Disorder Take 2
Living outside the 'Normitory" (away from Dreamland (everybody's asleep), to where Nessun Dorma (nobody sleeps))
It so happens that an ethnic group which originated in eastern Mediterranean Middle-East evolved to specialize in intelligence, commerce, morally corrupt enterprises, and crime. Essential to their success was eugenic traditions that applied artificial selection to just those same specialties, which makes this ethnic group a formidable enemy. They have developed a very strong sense of in-groupness, and a vested interest in social construct studies. A unified collective is a more effective competitor than an inchoate population of diverse individuals.
This group has as ethnic traits: global dispersion (aka Diaspora), preference for urban environments (aka Cosmopolitan, or Globalist), covert inter-group rivalry (aka InfoWar), and deception (aka MOSSAD). This cosmopolitan group must operate covertly and deceptively, because those are effective tactics, and they are a small minority (2% of USA), therefore weak in the democratic sense.
Immoral Social Constructs enforced by 5th column subversives
wethefifth (political audio series)
serendipity: freethink
Another construct search, without gender reference
Is morality a social construct? If so, how can concepts such as 'good' exist? (note especially the links in top comment, to reddit posts)
"Good" can be understood as a variation of "Favor" as a direct experience (perception) of "like", rather than some idealized notion of an obvious social construct such as "greater good" (a theoretical derivation by interventionist actors-with-agendas trying to impose their own preferences upon others, IOW ideology hegemony pushers, for instance viz da wiz)
Cultural hegemony is the Chosen's mitzvah, that we all must go to Emerald City, land of Oz, where YHWH (impostor) rules.
Cultural hegemony
Concepts of Ideology, Hegemony, and Organic Intellectuals in Gramsci’s Marxism 1982
There is no universal morality. Morality is much like Beauty, in the mind of beholder (actor who holds to a specific moral code). Morality is a social construct, and varies between societies. (I think a fair definition of morality is a code of ethics which is community-specific.) For a society to sustain, it needs to be isolate from conflicting societies. If different societies, with different moralities must coexist, the natural tendency for actors in the same niche toward dominance will destroy or remake the subordinate societies, which reduces the conflicts.
Status Hierarchies: Do We Need Them? blog 2012 | psytd
a need for 'virtue signaling'? It's natural, and likely unavoidable, evidence pride displays.
Status Assignments: by birth (heredity) or merit (talent)?
Let's assume your morality values social effectiveness. The best path to that is to have talented persons dominant (meritocracy). Next we happen to know that talent is hereditary, but not perfectly so. Therefore birth (kinship, aka kingship) is only an indicator of talent, which is infrequent among low status groups, much higher among high status kinship groups. Thus we must conclude that awarding status by pedigree and family privilege is not the best way to effectiveness, but it often does work. What works best then, must be? a competitive system of merit-proving, with special attention to high-status families. (Helps if the natural tendency for snobbish repression is circumvented, for examples Han-style Civil Service Exams, and the Roman military promotion avenue, which occasionally led to top gun.)
Sustainable Competitive Advantages (aka moats): Network Effects 2019 | sEknα
Our Brain's Negative Bias 2003 | psytdA
Fear: it's the greatest (motivator) 2009 Owen Benjamin made a video about Fear over TIME 16 min.
Dominance Hierarchy employs FEAR to dominate
Dominance hierarchy | wkpd Social dominance theory | wkpd
scaring children is not ok, Sydney Watson blog 11 min
tools for social mobility and dominance (list)
9 Important Factors That Influence Social Mobility Social dominance orientation | wkpd SDO should theoretically be highly important to Jews, as their ethos tends strongly to emulate it among themselves and denigrate it towards outgroups (Goyim). Thus we should expect to see this field of study monopolized by Jewish scholars. Studying the Gentile: Fanciful Pseudoscience in the Service of Pathologizing the Covington Boys | OO
Contracting the Social Construct Disorder Take 3
Different day from Take 2. Re-consider interactions with a community or society: traditionally occurred locally, on Sunday meetings at church, parties, having a beer after work, town hall or children's group meetings, (eg. PTA, scouts) etc.
Re-consider "contracting". Original idea was meant to acquire, like a disease, not by design (choice), but determined by contingency (unlucky chance). Today, "contracting" means getting smaller, shrinking, like a cooling branding iron, or melting ice. Iron has several crystalline phases, the cooler, the more compact (more atomic order). Ice is contrary to most materials, as its crystalline structure is larger than its liquid phase, so as it melts (entropy always increases, going to less ordered) its atoms become more fluid. In both cases, the natural mode of change is toward ambient temperature. This trend (recursion to the mean) is maybe the most unbroken law of all physics.
Re-considering "Disorder"; original idea was meant as a mental disease, like ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder), IOW anomalous condition, out-of-order, (order being assumed normal) in the human behavior dimension. Today it means individuals out-of-line, like discontinuities in a crystal. (Discontinuities are what make metal harder.)
When all the atoms of a metal are aligned (continuous), the state is called "annealed". This is the softest condition. When the metal has been "work hardened" by hammering, or forging, it acquires discontinuities (crystalline order becomes mucked up). This is a harder state. Hardness is measured by forcing a small ball into a test material and measuring the resulting depression (dent). Discontinuities resist dents and every other kind of deforming force (decreased plasticity (weakness) means increased elasticity and maximum yield (resilience, see Young's Modulus, Indentation hardness, Impact Toughness and Moh's Hardness)).
Now make analogy of metal with society. Non-conformist individuals (like followers of Marginotions) make society (if he-he-heeded) more resistant to outside forces (like George Soros, or seekers of Tikkun Olam) trying to make a dent in the established order (tradition, Protestant Ethic).
Contracting the Social Construct Disorder Take 4
Different day Re-consider "contracting" again. Today, it means make-a-deal, as in commercial contract. This kind of contract is in flux nowadays, as the advent of bitcoin has introduced a mathematical means of authorizing legal agreements (aka contracts) in a distributed ledger that makes such agreements social in a very direct sense. The social part of "social construct" is present in a world wide network of participating computer operators, while the construct part is present in a software package (app) that is now called "smart", meaning has built-in security and ongoing timely operations, like confirmation checking. In this contract-paradigm, the "disorder" part is due to it being outside of previous power-holding elites who are chagrined by the prospect of losing some of their powers to the Internetwork, which is out of their control. IOW disorder for elites, and made-to-order for independents. (note on that quote)
Social Contract per britannica (briefly) per wkpd
explicit vs implicit contracts Differences Between Implicit & Explicit Agreements (law) 2017 more specific, social contracts Social Contract Theory UT (includes videos, glossary)
to be continued: fairness is a social construct (contrast with deterministic fate)
study notes (all 3 parts, this series)
Gentrification, Displacement and the Role of Public Investment: A Literature Review 2015 pdf
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Owen+Benjamin+made+video+about+Fear&atb=v81-4__&ia=videos
why is 'social construct' a popular theme?
https://www.success.com/8-daily-habits-to-build-your-mental-strength/
Pareto principle implications for marital harmony, a very brief summary of research by J Cacioppo)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_culture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_society
https://thejewishwars.blogspot.com/2019/03/aipac-traitor-jews-having-successfully.html
https://theevilofzionismexposedbyjews.weebly.com/14-what-zionist-and-anti-zionist-jews-have-said-about-education.html
submitted by acloudrift to AlternativeHypothesis [link] [comments]

An extensive list of blockchain courses, resources and articles to help you get a job working with blockchain.

u/Maximus_no and me spent some time at work collecting and analyzing learning material for blockchain development. The list contains resources for developers, as well as business analysts/consultants looking to learn more about blockchain use-cases and solutions.

Certifications and Courses

IIB Council
Link to course: IIB council : Certified Blockchain Professional
C|BP is an In-Depth, Industry Agnostic, Hands-On Training and Certification Course specifically tailored for Industry Professionals and Developers interested in implementing emerging technologies in the Data-Driven Markets and Digitized Economies.
The IIB Council Certified Blockchain Professional (C|BP) Course was developed to help respective aspiring professionals gain excessive knowledge in Blockchain technology and its implication on businesses.
WHO IS IT FOR:

Professionals

C|BP is developed in line with the latest industry trends to help current and aspiring Professionals evolve in their career by implementing the latest knowledge in blockchain technology. This course will help professionals understand the foundation of Blockchain technology and the opportunities this emerging technology is offering.

Developers

If you are a Developer and you are willing to learn blockchain technology this course is for you. You will learn to build and model Blockchain solutions and Blockchain-based applications for enterprises and businesses in multiple Blockchain Technologies.

Certified Blockchain Business Foundations (CBBF)

This exam is designed for non-technical business professionals who require basic knowledge about Blockchain and how it will be executed within an organization. This exam is NOT appropriate for technology professionals seeking to gain deeper understanding of Blockchain technology implementation or programming.

A person who holds this certification demonstrates their knowledge of:

· What is Blockchain? (What exactly is it?)
· Non-Technical Technology Overview (How does it work?)
· Benefits of Blockchain (Why should anyone consider this?)
· Use Cases (Where and for what apps is it appropriate?)
· Adoption (Who is using it and for what?)
· Future of Blockchain (What is the future?)

Certified Blockchain Solution Architect (CBSA)

A person who holds this certification demonstrates their ability to:

· Architect blockchain solutions
· Work effectively with blockchain engineers and technical leaders
· Choose appropriate blockchain systems for various use cases
· Work effectively with both public and permissioned blockchain systems

This exam will prove that a student completely understands:

· The difference between proof of work, proof of stake, and other proof systems and why they exist
· Why cryptocurrency is needed on certain types of blockchains
· The difference between public, private, and permissioned blockchains
· How blocks are written to the blockchain
· Where cryptography fits into blockchain and the most commonly used systems
· Common use cases for public blockchains
· Common use cases for private & permissioned blockchains
· What is needed to launch your own blockchain
· Common problems & considerations in working with public blockchains
· Awareness of the tech behind common blockchains
· When is mining needed and when it is not
· Byzantine Fault Tolerance
· Consensus among blockchains
· What is hashing
· How addresses, public keys, and private keys work
· What is a smart contract
· Security in blockchain
· Brief history of blockchain
· The programming languages of the most common blockchains
· Common testing and deployment practices for blockchains and blockchain-based apps

Certified Blockchain Developer - Ethereum (CBDE)

A person who holds this certification demonstrates their ability to:

· Plan and prepare production ready applications for the Ethereum blockchain
· Write, test, and deploy secure Solidity smart contracts
· Understand and work with Ethereum fees
· Work within the bounds and limitations of the Ethereum blockchain
· Use the essential tooling and systems needed to work with the Ethereum ecosystem

This exam will prove that a student completely understands how to:

· Implement web3.js
· Write and compile Solidity smart contracts
· Create secure smart contracts
· Deploy smart contracts both the live and test Ethereum networks
· Calculate Ethereum gas costs
· Unit test smart contracts
· Run an Ethereum node on development machines

Princeton: Sixty free lectures from Princeton on bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. Avg length ~15 mins

Basic course with focus on Bitcoin. After this course, you’ll know everything you need to be able to separate fact from fiction when reading claims about Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. You’ll have the conceptual foundations you need to engineer secure software that interacts with the Bitcoin network. And you’ll be able to integrate ideas from Bitcoin in your own projects.

MIT : BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGIES: BUSINESS INNOVATION AND APPLICATION

· A mid / basic understanding of blockchain technology and its long-term implications for business, coupled with knowledge of its relationship to other emerging technologies such as AI and IoT
· An economic framework for identifying blockchain-based solutions to challenges within your own context, guided by the knowledge of cryptoeconomics expert Christian Catalini
· Recognition of your newfound blockchain knowledge in the form of a certificate of completion from the MIT Sloan School of Management — one of the world’s leading business schools
Orientation Module: Welcome to Your Online Campus
Module 1: An introduction to blockchain technology
Module 2: Bitcoin and the curse of the double-spending problem
Module 3: Costless verification: Blockchain technology and the last mile problem
Module 4: Bootstrapping network effects through blockchain technology and cryptoeconomics
Module 5: Using tokens to design new types of digital platforms
Module 6: The future of blockchain technology, AI, and digital privacy

Oxford Blockchain Strategy Programme

· A mid / basic understanding of what blockchain is and how it works, as well as insights into how it will affect the future of industry and of your organization.
· The ability to make better strategic business decisions by utilizing the Oxford Blockchain Strategic framework, the Oxford Blockchain Regulation framework, the Oxford Blockchain Ecosystem map, and drawing on your knowledge of blockchain and affiliated industries and technologies.
· A certificate of attendance from Oxford Saïd as validation of your newfound blockchain knowledge and skills, as well as access to a global network of like-minded business leaders and innovators.
Module 1: Understanding blockchain
Module 2: The blockchain ecosystem
Module 3: Innovations in value transfer
Module 4: Decentralized apps and smart contracts
Module 5: Transforming enterprise business models
Module 6: Blockchain frontiers

Resources and Articles

Introduction to Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLT) https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/cloud/library/cl-blockchain-basics-intro-bluemix-trs/
Tomas’s Personal Favourite: 150+ Resources for going from web-dev to blockchain engineer https://github.com/benstew/blockchain-for-software-engineers
Hyperledger Frameworks Hyperledger is widely regarded as the most mature open-source framework for building private & permissioned blockchains.
Tutorials: https://www.hyperledger.org/resources/training
R3 Corda Open-source developer frameworks for building private, permissioned blockchains. A little better than Hyperledger on features like privacy and secure channels. Used mostly in financial applications.
Ethereum, Solidity, dApps and Smart-Contracts
Ethereum & Solidity Course (favourite): https://www.udemy.com/ethereum-and-solidity-the-complete-developers-guide/
An Introduction to Ethereum’s Token Standards: https://medium.com/coinmonks/anatomy-of-an-erc-an-exhaustive-survey-8bc1a323b541
How To Create Your First ERC20 Token: https://medium.com/bitfwd/how-to-do-an-ico-on-ethereum-in-less-than-20-minutes-a0062219374
Ethereum Developer Tools [Comprehensive List]: https://github.com/ConsenSys/ethereum-developer-tools-list/blob/masteREADME.md
CryptoZombies – Learn to code dApps through game-development: https://cryptozombies.io/
Intro to Ethereum Development: https://hackernoon.com/ethereum-development-walkthrough-part-1-smart-contracts-b3979e6e573e
Notes from Consensys Academy Participant (free): https://github.com/ScottWorks/ConsenSys-Academy-Notes
AWS Ethereum Templates: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/get-started-with-blockchain-using-the-new-aws-blockchain-templates/
Create dApps with better user-experience: https://blog.hellobloom.io/how-to-make-a-user-friendly-ethereum-dapp-5a7e5ea6df22
Solidity YouTube Course: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaWes1eWQ9TbzA695gl_PtA
[UX &UI] Designing a decentralized profile dApp: https://uxdesign.cc/designing-a-decentralized-profile-dapp-ab12ead4ab56
Scaling Solutions on Ethereum: https://media.consensys.net/the-state-of-scaling-ethereum-b4d095dbafae
Different Platforms for dApps and Smart-Contracts
While Ethereum is the most mature dApp framework with both the best developer tools, resources and community, there are other public blockchain platforms. Third generation blockchains are trying to solve Ethereum’s scaling and performance issues. Here is an overview of dApp platforms that can be worth looking into:
NEO - https://neo.org/ The second most mature dApp platform. NEO has better scalability and performance than Ethereum and has 1’000 TPS to ETH’s 15 by utilizing a dBFT consensus algorithm. While better infrastructure, NEO does not have the maturity of Ethereum’s developer tools, documentation and community.
A writeup on why a company chose to develop on NEO and not Ethereum: https://medium.com/orbismesh/why-we-chose-neo-over-ethereum-37fc9208ffa0
Cardano - https://www.cardano.org/en/home/ While still in alpha with a long and ambitious roadmap ahead of it, Cardano is one of the most anticipated dApp platforms out there. IOHK, the research and engineering company that maintains Cardano, has listed a lot of great resources and scientific papers that is worth looking into.
An Intro to Cardano: https://hackernoon.com/cardano-ethereum-and-neo-killer-or-overhyped-and-overpriced-8fcd5f8abcdf
IOHK Scientific Papers - https://iohk.io/research/papers/
Stellar - https://www.stellar.org/ If moving value fast from one party to another by using smart-contracts is the goal, Stellar Lumens is your platform. Initially as an open-source fork from Ripple, Stellar has become one of the mature frameworks for financial applications. Stellar’s focus lies in interoperability with legacy financial systems and cheap/fast value transfer. It’s smart-contract capability is rather limited in comparison to Ethereum and HyperLedger, so take that in consideration.
Ripplewww.ripple.com Ripple and its close cousin, Stellar, is two of the most well-known cryptocurrencies and DLT frameworks meant for the financial sector. Ripple enables instant settlement between banks for international transactions.

Consensus Algorithms

[Proof of Work] - very short, cuz it's well-known.
[1] Bitcoin - to generate a new block miner must generate hash of the new block header that is in line with given requirements.
Others: Ethereum, Litecoin etc.
[Hybrid of PoW and PoS]
[2] Decred - hybrid of “proof of work” and “proof of stake”. Blocks are created about every 5 minutes. Nodes in the network looking for a solution with a known difficulty to create a block (PoW). Once the solution is found it is broadcast to the network. The network then verifies the solution. Stakeholders who have locked some DCR in return for a ticket* now have the chance to vote on the block (PoS). 5 tickets are chosen pseudo-randomly from the ticket pool and if at least 3 of 5 vote ‘yes’ the block is permanently added to the blockchain. Both miners and voters are compensated with DCR : PoS - 30% and PoW - 60% of about 30 new Decred issued with a block. * 1 ticket = ability to cast 1 vote. Stakeholders must wait an average of 28 days (8,192 blocks) to vote their tickets.
[Proof of Stake]
[3] Nxt - The more tokens are held by account, the greater chance that account will earn the right to generate a block. The total reward received as a result of block generation is the sum of the transaction fees located within the block. Three values are key to determining which account is eligible to generate a block, which account earns the right to generate a block, and which block is taken to be the authoritative one in times of conflict: base target value, target value and cumulative difficulty. Each block on the chain has a generation signature parameter. To participate in the block's forging process, an active account digitally signs the generation signature of the previous block with its own public key. This creates a 64-byte signature, which is then hashed using SHA256. The first 8 bytes of the resulting hash are converted to a number, referred to as the account hit. The hit is compared to the current target value(active balance). If the computed hit is lower than the target, then the next block can be generated.
[4] Peercoin (chain-based proof of stake) - coin age parameter. Hybrid PoW and PoS algorithm. The longer your Peercoins have been stationary in your account (to a maximum of 90 days), the more power (coin age) they have to mint a block. The act of minting a block requires the consumption of coin age value, and the network determines consensus by selecting the chain with the largest total consumed coin age. Reward - minting + 1% yearly.
[5] Reddcoin (Proof of stake Velocity) - quite similar to Peercoin, difference: not linear coin-aging function (new coins gain weight quickly, and old coins gain weight increasingly slowly) to encourage Nodes Activity. Node with most coin age weight have a bigger chance to create block. To create block Node should calculate right hash. Block reward - interest on the weighted age of coins/ 5% annual interest in PoSV phase.
[6] Ethereum (Casper) - uses modified BFT consensus. Blocks will be created using PoW. In the Casper Phase 1 implementation for Ethereum, the “proposal mechanism" is the existing proof of work chain, modified to have a greatly reduced block reward. Blocks will be validated by set of Validators. Block is finalised when 2/3 of validators voted for it (not the number of validators is counted, but their deposit size). Block creator rewarded with Block Reward + Transaction FEES.
[7] Lisk (Delegated Proof-of-stake) - Lisk stakeholders vote with vote transaction (the weight of the vote depends on the amount of Lisk the stakeholder possess) and choose 101 Delegates, who create all blocks in the blockchain. One delegate creates 1 block within 1 round (1 round contains 101 blocks) -> At the beginning of each round, each delegate is assigned a slot indicating their position in the block generation process -> Delegate includes up to 25 transactions into the block, signs it and broadcasts it to the network -> As >51% of available peers agreed that this block is acceptable to be created (Broadhash consensus), a new block is added to the blockchain. *Any account may become a delegate, but only accounts with the required stake (no info how much) are allowed to generate blocks. Block reward - minted Lisks and transaction fees (fees for all 101 blocks are collected firstly and then are divided between delegates). Blocks appears every 10 sec.
[8] Cardano (Ouroboros Proof of Stake) - Blocks(slots) are created by Slot Leaders. Slot Leaders for N Epoch are chosen during n-1 Epoch. Slot Leaders are elected from the group of ADA stakeholders who have enough stake. Election process consist of 3 phases: Commitment phase: each elector generates a random value (secret), signs it and commit as message to network (other electors) saved in to block. -> Reveal phase: Each elector sends special value to open a commitment, all this values (opening) are put into the block. -> Recovery phase: each elector verifies that commitments and openings match and extracts the secrets and forms a SEED (randomly generated bytes string based on secrets). All electors get the same SEED. -> Follow the Satoshi algorithm : Elector who have coin which corresponded to SEED become a SLOT LEADER and get a right to create a block. Slot Leader is rewarded with minted ADA and transactions Fee.
[9] Tezos (Proof Of Stake) - generic and self-amending crypto-ledger. At the beginning of each cycle (2048 blocks), a random seed is derived from numbers that block miners chose and committed to in the penultimate cycle, and revealed in the last. -> Using this random seed, a follow the coin strategy (similar to Follow The Satoshi) is used to allocate mining rights and signing rights to stakeholders for the next cycle*. -> Blocks are mined by a random stakeholder (the miner) and includes multiple signatures of the previous block provided by random stakeholders (the signers). Mining and signing both offer a small reward but also require making a one cycle safety deposit to be forfeited in the event of a double mining or double signing.
· the more coins (rolls) you have - the more your chance to be a minesigner.
[10] Tendermint (Byzantine Fault Tolerance) - A proposal is signed and published by the designated proposer at each round. The proposer is chosen by a deterministic and non-choking round robin selection algorithm that selects proposers in proportion to their voting power. The proposer create the block, that should be validated by >2/3 of Validators, as follow: Propose -> Prevote -> Precommit -> Commit. Proposer rewarded with Transaction FEES.
[11] Tron (Byzantine Fault Tolerance) - This blockhain is still on development stage. Consensus algorithm = PoS + BFT (similar to Tendermint): PoS algorithm chooses a node as Proposer, this node has the power to generate a block. -> Proposer broadcasts a block that it want to release. -> Block enters the Prevote stage. It takes >2/3 of nodes' confirmations to enter the next stage. -> As the block is prevoted, it enters Precommit stage and needs >2/3 of node's confirmation to go further. -> As >2/3 of nodes have precommited the block it's commited to the blockchain with height +1. New blocks appears every 15 sec.
[12] NEO (Delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerance) - Consensus nodes* are elected by NEO holders -> The Speaker is identified (based on algorithm) -> He broadcasts proposal to create block -> Each Delegate (other consensus nodes) validates proposal -> Each Delegate sends response to other Delegates -> Delegate reaches consensus after receiving 2/3 positive responses -> Each Delegate signs the block and publishes it-> Each Delegate receives a full block. Block reward 6 GAS distributed proportionally in accordance with the NEO holding ratio among NEO holders. Speaker rewarded with transaction fees (mostly 0). * Stake 1000 GAS to nominate yourself for Bookkeeping(Consensus Node)
[13] EOS (Delegated Proof of Stake) - those who hold tokens on a blockchain adopting the EOS.IO software may select* block producers through a continuous approval voting system and anyone may choose to participate in block production and will be given an opportunity to produce blocks proportional to the total votes they have received relative to all other producers. At the start of each round 21 unique block producers are chosen. The top 20 by total approval are automatically chosen every round and the last producer is chosen proportional to their number of votes relative to other producers. Block should be confirmed by 2/3 or more of elected Block producers. Block Producer rewarded with Block rewards. *the more EOS tokens a stakeholder owns, the greater their voting power
[The XRP Ledger Consensus Process]
[14] Ripple - Each node receives transaction from external applications -> Each Node forms public list of all valid (not included into last ledger (=block)) transactions aka (Candidate Set) -> Nodes merge its candidate set with UNLs(Unique Node List) candidate sets and vote on the veracity of all transactions (1st round of consensus) -> all transactions that received at least 50% votes are passed on the next round (many rounds may take place) -> final round of consensus requires that min 80% of Nodes UNL agreeing on transactions. It means that at least 80% of Validating nodes should have same Candidate SET of transactions -> after that each Validating node computes a new ledger (=block) with all transactions (with 80% UNL agreement) and calculate ledger hash, signs and broadcasts -> All Validating nodes compare their ledgers hash -> Nodes of the network recognize a ledger instance as validated when a 80% of the peers have signed and broadcast the same validation hash. -> Process repeats. Ledger creation process lasts 5 sec(?). Each transaction includes transaction fee (min 0,00001 XRP) which is destroyed. No block rewards.
[The Stellar consensus protocol]
[15] Stellar (Federated Byzantine Agreement) - quite similar to Ripple. Key difference - quorum slice.
[Proof of Burn]
[16] Slimcoin - to get the right to write blocks Node should “burn” amount of coins. The more coins Node “burns” more chances it has to create blocks (for long period) -> Nodes address gets a score called Effective Burnt Coins that determines chance to find blocks. Block creator rewarded with block rewards.
[Proof of Importance]
[17] NEM - Only accounts that have min 10k vested coins are eligible to harvest (create a block). Accounts with higher importance scores have higher probabilities of harvesting a block. The higher amount of vested coins, the higher the account’s Importance score. And the higher amount of transactions that satisfy following conditions: - transactions sum min 1k coins, - transactions made within last 30 days, - recipient have 10k vested coins too, - the higher account’s Important score. Harvester is rewarded with fees for the transactions in the block. A new block is created approx. every 65 sec.
[Proof of Devotion]
[18] Nebulas (Proof of Devotion + BFT) - quite similar to POI, the PoD selects the accounts with high influence. All accounts are ranked according to their liquidity and propagation (Nebulas Rank) -> Top-ranked accounts are selected -> Chosen accounts pay deposit and are qualified as the blocks Validators* -> Algorithm pseudo-randomly chooses block Proposer -> After a new block is proposed, Validators Set (each Validator is charged a deposit) participate in a round of BFT-Style voting to verify block (1. Prepare stage -> 2. Commit Stage. Validators should have > 2/3 of total deposits to validate Block) -> Block is added. Block rewards : each Validator rewarded with 1 NAS. *Validators Set is dynamic, changes in Set may occur after Epoch change.
[IOTA Algorithm]
[19] IOTA - uses DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph) instead of blockchain (TANGLE equal to Ledger). Graph consist of transactions (not blocks). To issue a new transaction Node must approve 2 random other Transactions (not confirmed). Each transaction should be validate n(?) times. By validating PAST(2) transactions whole Network achieves Consensus. in Order to issue transaction Node: 1. Sign transaction with private key 2. choose two other Transactions to validate based on MCMC(Markov chain Monte Carlo) algorithm, check if 2 transactions are valid (node will never approve conflicting transactions) 3. make some PoW(similar to HashCash). -> New Transaction broadcasted to Network. Node don’t receive reward or fee.
[PBFT + PoW]
[20] Yobicash - uses PBFT and also PoW. Nodes reach consensus on transactions by querying other nodes. A node asks its peers about the state of a transaction: if it is known or not, and if it is a doublespending transaction or not. As follow : Node receives new transaction -> Checks if valid -> queries all known nodes for missing transactions (check if already in DAG ) -> queries 2/3 nodes for doublepsending and possibility -> if everything is ok add to DAG. Reward - nodes receive transaction fees + minting coins.
[Proof of Space/Proof of Capacity]
[21] Filecoin (Power Fault Tolerance) - the probability that the network elects a miner(Leader) to create a new block (it is referred to as the voting power of the miner) is proportional to storage currently in use in relation to the rest of the network. Each node has Power - storage in use verified with Proof of Spacetime by nodes. Leaders extend the chain by creating a block and propagating it to the network. There can be an empty block (when no leader). A block is committed if the majority of the participants add their weight on the chain where the block belongs to, by extending the chain or by signing blocks. Block creator rewarded with Block reward + transaction fees.
[Proof of Elapsed Time (POET)]
[22] Hyperledger Sawtooth - Goal - to solve BFT Validating Nodes limitation. Works only with intel’s SGX. PoET uses a random leader election model or a lottery based election model based on SGX, where the protocol randomly selects the next leader to finalize the block. Every validator requests a wait time from an enclave (a trusted function). -> The validator with the shortest wait time for a particular transaction block is elected the leader. -> The BlockPublisher is responsible for creating candidate blocks to extend the current chain. He takes direction from the consensus algorithm for when to create a block and when to publish a block. He creates, Finalizes, Signs Block and broadcast it -> Block Validators check block -> Block is created on top of blockchain.
[23] Byteball (Delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerance) - only verified nodes are allowed to be Validation nodes (list of requirements https://github.com/byteball/byteball-witness). Users choose in transaction set of 12 Validating nodes. Validating nodes(Witnesses) receive transaction fees.
[24] Nano - uses DAG, PoW (HashCash). Nano uses a block-lattice structure. Each account has its own blockchain (account-chain) equivalent to the account’s transaction/balance history. To add transaction user should make some HashCash PoW -> When user creates transaction Send Block appears on his blockchain and Receive block appears on Recipients blockchain. -> Peers in View receive Block -> Peers verify block (Double spending and check if already in the ledger) -> Peers achieve consensus and add block. In case of Fork (when 2 or more signed blocks reference the same previous block): Nano network resolves forks via a balance-weighted voting system where representative nodes vote for the block they observe, as >50% of weighted votes received, consensus achieved and block is retained in the Node’s ledger (block that lose the vote is discarded).
[25] Holochain - uses distributed hash table (DHT). Instead of trying to manage global consensus for every change to a huge blockchain ledger, every participant has their own signed hash chain. In case of multi-party transaction, it is signed to each party's chain. Each party signs the exact same transaction with links to each of their previous chain entries. After data is signed to local chains, it is shared to a DHT where every neighbor node validate it. Any consensus algorithms can be built on top of Holochain.
[26] Komodo ('Delegated' Delayed Proof of Work (dPoW)) - end-to-end blockchain solutions. DPoW consensus mechanism does not recognize The Longest Chain Rule to resolve a conflict in the network, instead the dPoW looks to backups it inserted previously into the chosen PoW blockchain. The process of inserting backups of Komodo transactions into a secure PoW is “notarization.” Notarisation is performed by the elected Notary nodes. Roughly every ten minutes, the Notary nodes perform a special block hash mined on the Komodo blockchain and take note of the overall Komodo blockchain “height”. The notary nodes process this specifc block so that their signatures are cryptographically included within the content of the notarized data. There are sixty-four “Notary nodes” elected by a stake-weighted vote, where ownership of KMD represents stake in the election. They are a special type of blockchain miner, having certain features in their underlying code that enable them to maintain an effective and cost-efcient blockchain and they periodically receives the privilege to mine a block on “easy difculty.”
Source: https://www.reddit.com/CryptoTechnology/comments/7znnq8/my_brief_observation_of_most_common_consensus/
Whitepapers Worth Looking Into:
IOTA -http://iotatoken.com/IOTA_Whitepaper.pdf
NANO -https://nano.org/en/whitepaper
Bitcoin -https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Ethereum: https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper
Ethereum Plasma (Omise-GO) -https://plasma.io/plasma.pdf
Cardano - https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/889.pdf
submitted by heart_mind_body to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

I think its time we have a discussion about pseudonymity, reputation networks, astroturfing, sock puppets, meritocracy and how we judge each others content here.

Lately I have been running into an significant amount of new accounts making outlandish claims, stretching the truth, straining logic and outright false assertions. I have a pretty common card I play, which is usually mockery and dismissal due to account age and I use it more as a light comedic defense than a real objective engagement tactic. Yet, I am constantly rebutted by these individuals and others here that account age does not matter, that we should judge the words for their merit.
They are correct of course. We absolutely should judge the content of the post based on merit and not on account age.
But theres this other side thats missing. An extremely important side that these people dont want you to see when they are astroturfing from rbtc.
Reputation serves a valid purpose on reddit. Without reputation you have no accountability. Without accountability you are unwilling to challenge your views or change your views based on new information, or at the very least you are extremely less likely to change your view.
There is a excellent podcast on this subject on the youarenotsosmart podcast series, which focuses quite a lot on psychology and sociological issues. In this particular podcast it discusses the subreddit /changemyview and he interviews reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian. Im going to put some relevant quotes from the interview here for discussion - (this is around the 13 min mark)
We obviously have a policy that we enforce strictly but we also want to allow for people to get uncomfortable sometimes because that's where we feel like the growth and the perspective happens like it and it goes both ways […] it is more important for us to be a platform where people can be their true selves and also still feel like they can express themselves and you know we have uncomfortable conversations - at least we Americans often have uncomfortable conversations every Thanksgiving, there’s always some uncle, there’s always someone, were not strangers to it.
I just think that as a whole it's that it's that opportunity for us to get perspective and if we can do it well - and that's not easy and that's something we're we're all working on but if we can do it while that's where we actually start to get we get that empathy and understanding and find our common ground and it is very new territory and we're not perfect but always improving it. I would love to see more people embracing that idea and I think change my view to go back to the sum of the whole thing is such an amazing illustration of exactly that.
That part is just general discussion of the platform, and how we should use it to challenge ourselves in uncomfortable situations. But I think where it gets really interesting, and important is around the 58 minute mark -
Also the key here is pseudonymity[….]and thats really meaningful because it is anonymity with accountability. Real anonymity that is where there is no accountability where you are just are non and you dont have a identity even if its a made up one because there is no accountability. We benefit from all the benefits of anonymity - that is the freedom of the ability for you to be all of yourself and your open and honest self because that ultimately makes for the best content and best experiences you know we as people really want to connect on this deep level and to date all of these drivers license id driven networks facebook and like allows us only to connect in a superficial way.
What he says above is crucial to reddit, crucial to sociology and crucial to the way that we all communicate and understand ourselves here on this platform. Its important to create the best possible experience here and to connect on deep levels.
But none of that applies if you are a coward that constantly switches identities because you cannot stand being wrong or being challenged on your views.
All of these astroturfers and sock puppets that come over here and post with no history yet talk about incidents that happen with familiarity 3-4 years ago are great examples of this. These are the cowards who have been shitposting the same lies for years and instead of being unwilling to face the facts they come here to attempt to change the narrative, to change the way we come to consensus because they are too cowardly to stand by their own words. Even though I might fight and bicker with a few notable people here constantly (you know who you are) I at least respect them that they dont change their identity and they are willing to stand up for their reputation. Those people are likely to shift overtime. A great example is the user Terminal-Psychosis here. I used to see strict nonsense coming out of that person, but over the last year I have seen enormous growth from him a individual in this community, similar to the same growth I experienced here a few years ago.
Look at my account. Look at its age. Most of you will know me as a Bitcoin Core supporter, someone who defends people like Adam Back, Blockstream, etc. Yet how many of you know that I used to be a big blocker? How many of you know that I used to constantly defend Gavin, Garzik? How many of you knew that I was a BitcoinXT supporter?
Go through my history. You will see me posting about it years ago.
I changed my views when new information and education came into my consciousness, and so should you.
To all of you cowards who hide behind new accounts -
You defy the purpose of this experiment. You defy the process of reaching consensus through good faith practices. You try to use disillusionment to create narratives preaching about open and transparent ledgers that will save the world all while you use cloak and shadows to hide your deceit. You are hypocrites. You are not bitcoiners, you are buttcoiners.
This system only works if you are willing to stand behind your pseudonymous reputation. If you are unwilling to be judged and to retain that judgement then how can you grow? How can you progress as a human if everytime the kid on the playground you dont like says something you dont like and you run behind your mommy's skirts?
You are all intellectual cowards and I wish that you would stop trolling our forums trying to poison the narrative with your politics and ideological entrenchments.
I want to be challenged. I have shown enormous change over the years by being challenged. But if you are unwilling to stand behind your pseudo anonymous identity and build your reputation based on the meritocracy of your words then you can never add to the quality of the communication here or the difficult slow consensus building process.
You will only poison the well and I will continue to call you out for it and most importantly so should everyone else. This behavior should not be tolerated and we should stand strong in the face of this astroturfing and narrative poisoning.
And since I know this subject will come up -
No, censorship is not a valid excuse. You may have gotten banned by theymos 2+ years ago and are still crying about it to this day, but you could have just switched identities back then, kept on participating and if you actually cared enough you would have continued to fight the fight but with less abrasive techniques that would have gotten you banned. You didn't have to scream from the top of your lungs like a rabbid religious fanatic, you could have tried to intellectually engage on the philosophy.
I am the example of that. I was extremely vocal against theymos during that phase and had it out with members here all the time. Yet here I am, still on my same account posting here. I may have toed the line a few times but I stayed strong in the face of pressure because it was important that I continue to fight the fight. So could have you, so please spare me the whiney excuses.
submitted by Cryptolution to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

PGA: No Frills DFS Data - Honda Classic Recap & Discussion of Golf Metrics

https://rotogrinders.com/blog-posts/pga-no-frills-dfs-data-honda-classic-recap-discussion-of-golf-metrics-2945909
So, this slate was fantastic.

I had a player pool of 22 guys and only 3 missed the cut with another as an MDF. While I only had 1 guy in the top 5 this time, it was one of my most exposed players in Lucas Glover. I had 3 more at T9 so 4 of the top 11 guys and a bunch more T20 or better. I didn't have any lineups packed with the top 5 so didn't have any huge individual scores but when most lineups went 6/6 or 5/6 with a bunch of T20 or better players, it's always going to be a very good week despite not hitting yahtzee.

Again, to recap, here was my player pool in order of exposure.

T30 Justin Thomas
T4 Lucas Glover
MDF Graeme McDowell
T9 Sergio Garcia
T59 Zach Johnson
T36 Daniel Berger
T16 Michael Thompson
T59 Vaughn Taylor
T36 Gary Woodland
T51 Russell Knox
CUT Adam Scott
T20 Chesson Hadley
CUT Luke List
T16 Billy Horschel
T20 Brian Stuard
T36 Byeong Hun An
CUT Cameron Smith
T36 J.T. Poston
T9 Jason Kokrak
T9 Jim Furyk
T20 Matt Wallace
T20 Talor Gooch

My model once again pushed Furyk (it tends to really like him, Chez Reavie and Phil Michelson) but this time it wasn't overboard about it. At the end I didn't use him in any of the purely model driven lines but ended up trusting the model when I created the "homer line" where I choose 1-2 guys I really want added in and exclude a few I'm already heavy on so I could jam in Adam Scott again and the lineup said fill it out with Furyk. Was pleasantly surprised with a T9 from the guy and it will give me a little bit more faith when the model recommends him.

Now back to Adam Scott, this is why I limit my ability to directly construct a lineup to only 1 dart. The only things in Scott's favor were course history, tout coverage and Vegas odds. Everything else said he's a fine golfer but way too overpriced and since my model works rather holistically, all those things were already accounted for so I already had a smittering of him out there. Yet I bought into the narrative and jammed him in there. I don't regret the decision, I'd do it again. But this is exactly why I build a model, because if I built my 10x gpp lineups by hand, I'd likely have gone with him in a lot more lineups because his narrative was very compelling. The other guys to miss the cut in Smith and List, well, I stand by those choices as well. Half the field needs to be cut, so even if everyone golfed the game of their lives you'd still get half the field get cut despite hitting peak form. Kind of like if everyone went to an Ivy League then we'd have Yale PhDs flipping burgers kind of scenario. In short, don't worry about it. Even the best golfers will miss the cut.

You may also recall the model was suggesting Ortiz and Blayne and I vetoed them because I didn't feel the data was reliable. They both missed the cut. I would have been about 1/3 exposed to each had I not manually sifted through and error checked my lineups, something I sometimes don't get a chance to do because I didn't start running the model until near lock. It would have been disastrous had I not seen those unfamiliar names and decided to take a closer look.

My cash games went exceedingly well as I chose one of my lineups that did fairly well to use in cash. I cashed in every 50/50 and double up (sometimes outright winning them) and won all but 2 of my h2hs. There's a good story here about why, despite that I play most of my volume in cash, that I go with only 1 lineup. There's one specific player I've been matching up with quite a bit. It started out in lower stakes and I believe he's now tilted and trying to recover because he keeps upping the stakes but I keep taking em. This past slate he posted a $100 h2h and I took it. He then matched up with me in another one for $5. He decided to go with 2 lineups, one of them performed pretty poorly, another would have done very well in a GPP. Given how pleased I am writing about this, I bet you can imagine which one of those I lost and which I won. This is why I just create one cash lineup and stick with it because I've been on his side of things in the past. If he wins both then it wouldn't matter, if he loses both then it wouldn't matter. If he loses the $5 wins the $100 it doesn't matter... but if he loses the $100 but wins the $5 then he goes on crazy monkey tilt.

It doesn't matter at all that mathematically speaking it doesn't make a difference (so long as both lineups had equal assumed expectations), emotions still run high in this and unless you're doing very high volume at leveled stakes (not 2 matchups of 20x difference in size) and not going to track the individual results but look at the big picture then it's fine. But nobody does this, we aren't androids, when you win you win, when you lose you lose. This is why although I put way more in cash than gpp and bad cash lineup can sink me, I'm still taking a binary approach with cash games. I'm not taking a 75% indifference with a 25% chance of losing my god damn mind because the h2h that mattered was the one that failed. Fail like a stoic with a single cash lineup that gives 100% indifference.

Now then, some people have been asking me to go into more detail about about the data that use to create the lineups. I'll just reiterate again that I'm never going to explain how the sausage is made. But I will be serving plenty of sausage and give you a general idea what animal it came from.


Today I'm going to talk about specifically how most of my research really demonstrates just how stupid most golf stats are. I really want to be 100% sure and am in the process of scraping an absurdly large database containing several decades. And since I'm doing this on my free time, it'll take some time before I parse and analyze everything. I don't want to make the very bold claims I already believe to true without further studying the matter and really ensuring my thoughts are real and it's not the product of bad calculations or insufficient sample size. But, what I've discovered thus far, is that all those stats are just window dressing. Saying someone led the field shots gained x is fundamentally no different than saying "they did well and had a good tournament." Things like shots gained track results not process. So it's much like tracking wins and rbis. Yes, the best hitters and the best pitchers in baseball often lead the league in those metrics, but we all know why they aren't good predictive tools.

For example, when my beloved Red Sox signed Dante Bichette in 2001, there was all this talk about him having led the major leagues in RBIs the past few seasons. He just had his epic year, two years ago driving in 133 runs and the year before got 90. While he was aging and slowing down, I distinctly remember a lot confusion over why we signed this elite hitter but then used him in a platoon. I'd be at Fenway and as the Red Sox lost, people would openly question the wisdom of having one of the best hitters in the game ride it out on the bench. This was 2 years before Moneyball was published and while front offices knew the reality of the situation (third team in 2 years and out of the league after that season), the average hard core Red Sox fan would just scratch their head wondering why we didn't give Dante a little more of a chance to show he still had it.

I feel this is the situation today with golf and golf statistics while what we have today is an improvement of the past - we take it for granted that it comes with the same authority as so wOBA or usage. We know that the winners won, but we don't know much else and shots gained is basically more or less a fancy way to say someone did a better job. If someone gets a birdie on a par 4, their SG will improve by about... drumroll please... 1. So you could just simply compare scores - IE look at end of tournament standings. Yes, there is definitely some nuance and they do factor in the relative difficulty of that specific par 4 and if I didn't feel like there was some actionable data out there I wouldn't bother with any of this. But I believe that way too much weight is put into this, whether I'm right or wrong, I will follow up on this in much more detail once it's no longer a hunch but rather indisputable. The reason why gathering this data is difficult is that it's restricted - which itself should be a bit of a red flag.

I'll also be reading "Every Shot Counts" soon, which is a book written by the creator of the Shots Gained metric. I really don't want to make any further and sweeping judgements until I read the author's long and detailed explanation of the metric.

But really, we can all see the smoking gun https://registrations.pgatourhq.com/forms/shotlinkintel/ for ourselves to see that the process by which they used to record shots gained is kept a secret and they don't disclose the data. Even prior to them ghosting us, access to the statistics themselves was restricted - you need to apply for access. The twitter account still exists and it's like everyone vanished into thin air, the last tweet https://twitter.com/ShotLink/status/893531791297978368 was well over a year ago and simply a picture of a golf course as if nothing was about the change.

Also, the PGA still insists "All strokes gained statistics are calculated using ShotLink, the PGA TOUR's real-time scoring system powered by CDW. https://www.pgatour.com/news/2016/05/31/strokes-gained-defined.html But since it's so secretive, we really don't know much about it. I'm not talking conspiracies or anything, they could have a very good data collection system that's phenomenal, but the very notion that the PGA doesn't even bother telling anyone how the data is collected and yet nobody is asking any questions should tell you this isn't exactly the most objective market.

So basically, I'm very confused by Shots Gained as a metric, can find very little information on it and what I can find is out of date and contradictory and seems to imply it's more or less no different than a nuanced version of looking at the final standings. I want to say it's bullshit, but I'm just reserving final judgement and simply labeling as sketchy for now.

So then we should look at results yeah? Yes, but this is largely what pricing is based upon, so not much of an edge there. So shall we look at ranking? Yes, let's take a look at OWGR.

When I first started with golf, I knew nothing and had nothing to base anything on other than seeing their pricing and recent point accumulations. Since Tiger Woods wasn't playing in that event, it was all entirely new names, just names I'd hear in passing while switching off ESPN as they were starting their golf coverage. So naturally, when I saw each golfer had a world ranking, I viewed that as a cheat sheet. From the very beginning, one of the formulas I've used to develop lineups was as simple as putting together the golfers within budget that collectively had the lowest aggregate world ranking number. Why am I suddenly speaking in such specifics you ask? Because it's a horrible DFS metric and nobody else is doing it (I track gpps lineups to see what others are doing, there are a few of these more simple formulas that pop up periodically, this is not one of them) so it's not exactly as if disclosing this information will make my opponents that much stronger.

My OWGR lineup has in fact been the single worst performing in cash and the 2nd to worst performing in gpps of the dozens of lineup models I have. Thankfully, I don't play it because it's so bad but I keep tracking it and recording how it would have performed just for fun these days. The only lineup that performed worse than the OWGR lineup in GPPS, well that one heavily factors in OWGR as well :). OWGR is just a terrible, terrible metric for DFS. Yes, it will give you the cream of the crop like the Dustin Johnsons, but you can never afford a lineup of Dustin Johnsons, you'll have to start digging deeper and pulling up min priced guys like Satoshi Kodaira - mr bitcoin himself. Someone who if you've been reading my stuff, is the entire reason I stopped playing any lineup that had OWGR as a primary indicator.

Now Satoshi, despite being a pretty horrible DFS play most of the time, is a great example of everything wrong with OWGR. His Fedex Cup rank is currently 160 and has never been better than 93, but his world rank is perplexingly 59. In 2018, he played 18 tournaments and finished under par only twice. He missed more cuts than he made as well. I could be mistaken, but it seems that he got into some majors via a sponsor in 2017 and 2018 and managed to do alright in them. He also ended up winning one of the tournaments he played in last year.

When researching OWGR to figure out how it came about and how it is calculated, I learned a lot. Basically, it's nothing more than party planning. A golf course in Scotland wanted to figure out whom to invite to compete in their tournament and invented the system. It weighs the strength of the field very heavily in rewarding points- and the strength of the field is - yup - you guessed it - determined by people already ranked by the system. So if Dustin Johnson cloned himself and kept playing tournaments exclusive to him and his equally ranked clones, they'd forever hold onto the top rankings. If OWGR was an excel sheet, the creator would get an error popup upon loading it up each day due to circular references. So, Satoshi I'm sure is a great golfer, anyone there should be, but his ranking is very artificially skewered up because he managed to make the cut and finish around 50th in some really packed majors that had a lot of heavy hitters. In fact, the ranking system is so completely absurd, that any millionaire can get themselves world ranked pretty easily. They just need to do something like sponsor a Pro-Am at some odd but counted tour like the Alps Tour and then invite the guys ranked 1st, 2nd and 3rd to compete and filling out the rest of the field with toddlers and yourself. You would be assured a 4th place finish. Yet you didn't beat any of the top 3 golfers in the world. You just beat 100 toddlers. Yet you still get the high ranking because they get 45, 37 and 32 respective points for strength of field, which is greater than if you had a tournament of the golfers ranked 93rd through 200 playing. Finishing 4th behind the only 3 adults and beating 100 toddlers has the same impact as finishing 4th in a field of 107 of the greatest golfers in the world. http://www.owgr.com/about

Finishing 4th and beating 100 toddlers will grant you the same amount of points as finishing 20th at a major. That's how utterly stupid this rating system is. Obviously I'm using some extreme edge cases, it's very likely they would see through that scheme and not count it, but you get the idea of how inconsistent the system is. If you simply altered the PGA tour to the top 3 golfers and then a bunch of amateurs, those amateurs would soon arbitrarily be some of the highest rated in the world themselves, thus feeding itself.

This is why I call my OWGR model Ouroboros https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros

Dustin Johnson doesn't play defense. He isn't jumping out of the sand trap and blocking your approach shot. Him finishing in front of you has zero impact on how well you performed compared to him. Yet if you simply show up and play in enough events where he easily beats you, you'll end up with a solid world ranking. This is an absurd system. When I researched OWGR, I was simply shocked it was how some random guy created an invitation list for a tournament and because golf feels the need to be so full of tradition they just made that the official world rankings.

Don't get me wrong, the top OWGR guys are all very good DFS plays because they are winners. However, after a certain point you're not dealing with anything at all reliable. I'm not sure at which point it gets diluted, but after a certain point, that metric becomes just as unstable as Bitcoin. I find it very amusing that the indicator that showed me the flaws with OWGR after a certain stage is named Satoshi. I'm also fully aware of how difficult it is to quantify something so intangible as golf. However, there's no doubt in my mind that there must be a significantly better manner than what is currently used.

But, whether or not my hunch is right or wrong, we still have a system where the data is all secretly gathered and stored by the PGA. That's something everyone should be aware of as they set their lineups.

Good luck everyone. Will dive deeper into the shots gained after I get around to buying and reading the book and finally finish analyzing that data. I could very well come back here in two weeks apologizing for my ignorance that gave me the gall to question such genius. In the meantime, good luck grinding out there and I'll post again in a few days with my player pool for the next event.
submitted by DFSx42 to dfsports [link] [comments]

Clearing up some misconceptions (including my own) [WARNING: LONG, MATH]

I've been reviewing NAV's code for the past couple months in my spare time and have seen a few things pass for granted which I had assumed were edicts from the NAV team, but as it turns out, they were not. I'll just cover them in sections below. This is going to get long, and hopefully you like math. I'm sorry, in advance.

Coins do not gain weight with age

tldr; section title
This is the big one, and the reason I wanted to review NAV's code in the first place. I had been treating this unofficial medium article like it was the bible, and it mentions that coins are weighted with age and size. No other documentation I could find indicated any differently (honestly, there's not really other documentation, in the first place) and so, having not finished looking into the code, I presumed that was simply true.
It is not, however. I'm not even sure where this idea came from, besides that article, because no NAV team announcements I've seen have said this, but maybe I'm just not looking back far enough.

So how DOES it work?

tldr; values are hashed together and compared against a target. That target is adjusted based only on how many NAV are staking
For those who haven't looked into how NAV picks the next group of staking coins (like I hadn't), the way it works is that a bunch of publicly available values (such as the time of the block you want to make, the time and hash of the transaction that represents your coinstake, and a few others) are hashed twice through SHA256 to create a random number. The actual values input are less important, what is important for NAV's purposes is that they are available to everyone, reasonably unique, and can be verified by other nodes on the blockchain. The output is, mathematically speaking, reproducible, but also completely random.
This value is then checked against a target value that changes based on how fast the network is making blocks. If the network is making blocks around once every three seconds? The target value gets harder (smaller). If the network is making blocks around once every minute? The target value gets easier (larger). The target value just gets adjusted until the network is sitting comfortably at 30 second blocks. So far this is the same way Bitcoin keeps their block time consistent.
However, PoS currencies then usually make an adjustment to that target value to increase your chances to win. In NAV's case, they multiply the target value by the number of coins you are staking. This means that a group of 1000 coins is 1000 times more likely to stake than a group of 1 coin.
To use more accessible numbers, since the values NAV is using are huge, this would be like saying the base odds are that you have to roll a 2 or below on a 100-sided die to win the coinstake. For one roll, you have a 2% chance. For two rolls, you have a 3.95% chance, for three rolls you have a 5.88% chance, for ten you have a 18.29% chance. For n rolls, a 1 - (98^n)/(100^n) chance. To simplify this somewhat, and encourage larger groups, NAV simply says that if you have 10 coins, your chances are 10 * 2%, or 20%. It's a bit more, but it's close.
It's worth noting that, using this system, if you have 50 coins, you have a 100% chance to win every roll, whereas pure single-roll odds only give you a 63.58% chance. The reason this isn't really a problem is that, in this example, there would only be 50 coins in existence, and you probably don't even have access to half of them. Additionally, if you are winning too quickly, NAV will start handing you a 200 sided die, then a 400 sided die, until you are only winning one in 30 -- and this is assuming you're the only one playing. With a table of people, you will get a larger die until only one of you is winning one roll in 30.

Majority Attacks

tldr; if coins gained weight with age it might be an actual security concern. This way is not
The problem with Proof of Stake Age (PoSA) is that, if implemented poorly, it can create opportunities for very cheap attacks. You may have heard of a 51% attack (or majority attack) before. This is where any single entity in the Bitcoin network gains more than 50% of the hashing power. At 51% the chances of them mounting a successful network control attack are now greater than half, which presents a potential danger to the network.

In PoW

tldr; you need lots of fancy computers that you get to keep after
You need a lot of hashing power, which means a lot of computers, which means a lot of financial capital. Or, you need to combine with another organization or pool to combine your hashing power. This was actually a concern once in Bitcoin, but fortunately was resolved to no ill-effect, and ghash.io agreed to cut down their processing. In a PoW system, however, after you have executed your attack, you still have all of your computers, and can use them for something else. The financial capital you have invested is kept, and you never had to invest a single penny into the coin.

In PoS

tldr; you need lots of coins that you probably spent a lot of money on, which are probably worth very little after
In PoS currencies, a 51% attack is still possible, but in this case you would need to have more than half of the staking coins. As of a few days ago, the network weight was hovering around ~18-22 million NAV, so for NAV, you would need ~10-12 million coins to have the requisite 51% of coins. The base assumption for a PoS currency, however, is that, once you have that many coins, you're pretty invested in the network, and it is directly detrimental to you to attempt to attack it. When you execute your attack, you will likely greatly damage trust in the coin, and lose a large portion of your investment. At least, this is the theory.

In PoSA

tldr; you need a little bit of money and a lot of time
You just need to wait. The most simplistic form of PoSA is in the form: adjusted_target = coins * time * base_target. If left uncapped, the time adjustment can allow a single coin stake to outweigh the entire network. Even with a cap of three months (for a total of 7776000 age-weight), you could use a mere 797 individual 0.01 NAV stakes (7.97 NAV total) to outweigh the combined base weight of all 62 million NAV in existence. You want good actors to have the most weight on the network, but in a PoSA currency, good actors are constantly losing their weight when their time resets, whereas bad actors can get more weight for doing nothing.

In PoST

tldr; you need a little bit of money and to somehow create a bunch of coins with the same hashing window
There are some currencies, such as VeriCoin, which have attempted to address this in novel ways, using what they call Proof of Stake Time. They create an ideal window during which your coins gain weight, but after which they return to base levels. This should theoretically encourage people to keep a server running, so they can always catch that window when it happens, which is partially randomized (to prevent someone from simply making a bunch of 0.01 coinstakes at the same time and just waiting for the window). I'm not sure how battle-tested this is, and I can think of a few potential vectors for attack that might exist, depending on implementation, but it does present an interesting and promising approach to the problem of how to encourage everyone on the network to participate, instead of just large stake holders with good odds.

So how likely is it for me to actually get a stake with ___ NAV

tldr; at current network weights it's likely that 1000 NAV will stake around once a week, and 1 NAV will stake once every 17 years.
Since NAV is neither PoSA nor PoST (which I would stress isn't a bad thing, because pure PoS is comparatively simple and has known -- and addressed -- vectors of attack. It's also not necessarily a good thing; it's mostly just a thing), you're basically just as likely to stake today as you are tomorrow. Theoretically, every second should present a new opportunity to win a stake, but in practice this ends up not quite working out because there are other people on the network. Every time you accept a new block, you cut off all of the seconds before it forever. In practice, it's probably easiest to just look at the total weight of the network, and your weight, and extrapolate from there. We'll take for granted that NAV will have 30 second block times for this calculation. If you've got Python you can follow along:
>>> # 2 blocks/min * 60 min/hr * 24 hday * 365 days/year ... TOTAL_STAKES_IN_YEAR = 1051200 >>> # 60 sec/min * 60 min/hr * 24 hday * 365 day/yr ... SECONDS_IN_YEAR = 31536000 >>> # the number of coins you are staking ... stake = 1.0 >>> # The total number of coins on the network ... network_weight = 18701284.96584108 >>> my_stakes_per_year = (stake / network_weight) * TOTAL_STAKES_IN_YEAR 0.05621004128433283 >>> seconds_between_stakes = SECONDS_IN_YEAR / my_stakes_per_year 561038548.9752324 
For those keeping track, this means that a 1 NAV stake is expected to take approximately 17.79 years to see a return in the current network (and, even then, only if you happen to be online at exactly the right time and nobody else stakes it first). Coincidentally, this is where that "expected time to stake" number comes from, which I've seen people asking about. I didn't actually look that one up in the code, so I'm not sure how their exact equation differs from mine, but I arrived at the exact same numbers they did, so it's likely similar (and probably more concise, because I am both a verbose writer and programmer, if you hadn't noticed). A 1000 NAV stake, using what I am calling network math for ease of reference, is expected to take around 6.49 days. My suspicion is that the reason this is sometimes more sporadic is that going by the target alone, and testing every second, a 1000 NAV stake should be getting a hit around once every 8 hours. I generated a file of 31536000 hashes (one for each second in the year), using the rules NAV uses to create hashes, and came up with the following table.:
*Assumes a target of 0x1a183258. I forget which block I pulled this from, but it's still around there. This unpacks to a value of: 0x0000000000001832580000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Calc wins : Mathematical calculation for how many hashes you should win, given the target Hash wins : This was pulled from the file with a year's worth of random hashes. N-M Wins : The number of wins network math says you should get Hash time : The average time between wins in the randomized file for the given NAV amount N-M time : The amount of time network math says you should wait between wins NAV : Calc wins : Hash wins : N-M wins : Hash time : N-M time 1 : 1.05 : 1 : 0.05 : ~1 year : 17.79 years 5 : 5.29 : 7 : 0.28 : 41.66 days : 3.56 years 10 : 10.59 : 10 : 0.56 : 34.27 days : 1.78 years 50 : 52.95 : 44 : 2.81 : 7.49 days : 129.87 days 100 : 105.89 : 107 : 5.62 : 3.42 days : 64.94 days 200 : 211.79 : 212 : 11.24 : 41.24 hours : 32.47 days 500 : 529.48 : 532 : 28.11 : 16.39 hours : 12.99 days 1000 : 1058.97 : 1050 : 56.21 : 8.33 hours : 6.49 days 2000 : 2117.93 : 2109 : 112.42 : 4.15 hours : 3.25 days 5000 : 5294.83 : 5326 : 281.05 : 98.62 minutes : 1.30 days 1000000 : 1058966.42 : 1058455 : 56210.04 : 29.79 seconds : 9.35 minutes 
So obviously, a bit of disparity between the target-based times and the network calculated times. I would guess this has to do with other people on the network cutting you off from time values, and orphaned transactions where you did get the right value, but somebody else made a weightier one, but this is where my ability to really verify exactly what is happening starts dwindling. The disparity in N-M wins and Calc wins indicates that the target is currently too easy, and should adjust upwards, because right now coins on the network are 18.84 times weightier (calc wins column / n-m wins column) in hashing power than they should be based on the total network weight. But this is also where the whole "50 groups of 1 coin has a 63.58% chance to hit 2/100 whereas 1 group of 50 coins has a 100% chance to hit 100/100" thing comes into play.
Since the network is largely broken up into groups of, on average, 1500 coins, we're actually looking at ~12467.52 groups of 1500 coins vying to win any given block. Given the target, a group of 1500 coins should have a 0.0050369...% chance to win any given coinstake ((target * 150000000000) / maximum_hash_value). This means that the chance that at least one of the 12467.52 staking groups will match for a given second is 1 - (1 - 0.000050369...)^12467.52 = 0.4663, or 46.63%. This places the actual amount that coins are overweight a bit closer to 13.989 times. (network should have ~1/30 chance (3.33...%) to win any given second, 46.63 / 3.33...% = 13.989).
However, as mentioned, the software itself can get in the way of that, so this might just be due to a quirk of how the NAV software searches for matches, since it will abandon any seconds prior to the most recently accepted block. If you were cut off from 13 seconds in every 100, that would account for the weight disparity. In any case, I would probably trust the network math times over the pure math ones, if you're just trying to get a feel for how long you'll likely wait between stakes. What this really translates to is that, although a 1 NAV stake will probably have one second out of the year that will hash in it's favour, even running 24/7 you're likely to miss 17 of those before you actually have all the right conditions to win.
Interestingly, I did manage to find one 9.99 NAV stake that won after only 5 days; so it can happen. But it's all still random.

How does this affect my staking rewards?

tldr; it doesn't
Fortunately, NAV pays out the amount you should receive down to the second. Let's take this block at random. 1119.84133642 NAV coinstake, generated 3.82575342 NAV. The time of the previous transaction that created that coinstake was 1514741456 (see the "Raw Transaction" tab). The time of the current transaction is 1514741456. that's all we need to go on.
>>> SECONDS_IN_DAY = 86400 >>> DAYS_IN_YEAR = 365 >>> CENT = 1000000 # .01 NAV >>> COIN = 100000000 # 1.0 NAV >>> REWARD_PERCENT = 5 * CENT # will be 4 * CENT with community fund >>> # All NAV amounts in satoshi (navtoshi? natoshi?) ... stake = 111984133642 >>> # time of this stake ... stake_time = 1516896224 >>> # time of the transaction that made this stake >>> stake_prev_time = 1514741456 >>> # I'm not 100% positive why it converts to cent/seconds first, ... # but this is what the code does, so we need to as well if we ... # want to be accurate ... cent_seconds = (stake * (stake_time - stake_prev_time)) // CENT 241299827679 >>> # Now they undo the cent_seconds for some reason? I'm not sure. ... # This does, however, create a minimum coin stake for any given time. ... # 1 NAV, for instance, will not generate anything if it stakes until ... # it is exactly one day old (with a whopping 0.00013698 NAV). ... # The minimum NAV stake you can get a reward from if you get lucky ... # and stake at the end of two hours is 11 NAV. ... coin_day = ((cent_seconds * CENT) // COIN) // SECONDS_IN_DAY 27928 >>> stake_reward = (coin_day * REWARD_PERCENT) // DAYS_IN_YEAR 382575342 
note: // is a floor division. For example, 3 / 2 = 1.5, 3 // 2 = 1
And we come out the other end with exactly 3.82575342 NAV. Those are the only variables that affect your payout for staking. You then also get whatever the fees happen to be. There's not any magic to it, and so far as I can tell there's also not a limit. If you legitimately wait those 17 years for your 1 NAV to stake, your eventual payout will be on the order of 0.84 NAV. Anyways, that's pretty much all there is to your payout; it's very direct.

So is it worth it for me to stake?

tldr; personal preference
Honestly, this is entirely up to you. If you're in the "month or more" camp of coinstakers, it's probably not worth your while to be running 24/7 unless you're just really into securing the network (which, to be fair, I am all about that, so feel free). But with the blockchain at the small size it is right now, and if you're going to be using your computer anyways, it probably doesn't hurt to just run it in the background and see if you get lucky. Like pointed out, the actual amount you get is not affected by any of this. All that this means is that it is harder to predict exactly when you will get a stake. If you're concerned about financially supporting the staking, then NavTechServers has created this handy calculator to help out. From a mathematical standpoint, it's ironically much more likely for small coinstakers to get stakes if they are running 24/7, but from a financial standpoint, you're probably not getting enough to care to, so it's up to your preferences.

Cold Staking is not staking while offline

tldr; there is no magic that will allow blocks to be created without nodes on the network
I've also seen a bit of confusion over what cold staking is likely to bring, and want to ensure people aren't upset when it does get rolled out. Specifically the misconception that staking with offline coins is the same thing as staking while offline. It is physically impossible to generate a block without something connected to the network, and you only get staking rewards once you have generated a block, because the blockchain doesn't really have the tools to tell who is online and participating beyond "who made this block."
All that cold staking means is that the private keys to use your NAV to buy things or move their address are not on the server doing the staking. In general, this is accomplished via a smart contract and a secondary set of keys that is given permission to use your coins, but only for staking. If those keys are used for moving the a coin from one account to another, then the smart contract will flag it as an incorrect usage. This means that if someone hacks into your server, the only thing they could steal are the keys that permit them to stake your blocks. This is much easier to correct than someone stealing your private keys and moving your NAV to a separate address. Particl's overview of their cold staking system is a good read to get some baseline expectations.
Most implementations of cold staking do open up the possibility to sign your coins over to someone else to stake, which opens up the entirely new 51% attack vector of asking people to just GIVE you their network weight. But given that I have just recently explained to you all why one person owning a majority of the coin staking weight on the network is dangerous, I shouldn't have to tell you why this would be a bad idea, right?
RIGHT??

Summary

In any case, that's about it. Chances are the answer to the question "am I staking" is "yes", so long as the wallet tells you that it's staking. Unfortunately (but also fortunately), waiting longer only increases your chances insofar as you are trying more, but when you do eventually stake, you will be paid out based on how long you have waited, so there's not much lost.
I could go into much more depth about all this but this was about as concise as I could get it while still showing most of my work. I'd also be happy to address any other questions that arise from this, and obviously if somebody who knows better finds anything wrong with any of the details here let me know. If you wanted to get into this more in-depth, I've created a Python script which explains some of the technical aspects more thoroughly (including how to unpack the compact target number into the full value being checked in the code), and allows you to get hands-on with real block values. You can download it here. Happy hodling, everybody.
submitted by i_adore_you to NavCoin [link] [comments]

Rights, Ownership, Property, Money, etc. ++

meaning of ++
When claims of rights disagree A right is a moral construct, a sort of axiom upon which a sense of justice developed, such as Ken Schoolland has done in the previous post. There are bound to be dissenters from his idea of justice, so who is right about rights? On the R, we believe the individual is sovereign, while the state, if it is privileged to exist at all, is duty bound to provide security for the people (not itself). On the L, they believe the State is sovereign, and the individual, if he is privileged to exist at all, is duty bound to serve the State (the persons who are operatives of the State). Obviously, R and L cannot coexist in harmony.
The only JUST way to resolve moral disputes is SEGREGATION. Split the people who disagree into "camps" or "campuses" of agreement so that "birds of a feather can flock together". As campuses evolve over time, some may grow and visa versa, as long as citizens have the privilege to migrate out. I call this a privilege because the destination a migrant may choose has the right to deny entry. A migrant must have the default privilege of going wherever he/she is accepted. Anything less is involuntary confinement (prison). How is the split achieved? Issue a constitution that defines the qualities of a citizen, and forcibly eject everyone who fails the definition. This is an act of (group) self-defense, so force is justified.
Just a speculation, but if Reech and Leech were separated into their own segregated societies as just suggested, the Reech would prosper but the Leech would quickly run out of Reech people to plunder, as the Reech would have naturally migrated to where they are appreciated and allowed to keep their property. Since Leeches suck, they would starve.
We were talking about money, and about 3 basic types: Aristotle's classic commodity money, modern token money, and fiat currency. The first 2 real, the 3rd a fraud that exists because of laws and threats.
Store of Value ++ Recalling Aristotle's attribute of money, Portability, let's introduce the concept of value density to measure it, and compare, shall we? Let's compare two commodities, gold and water. Depending on circumstances, water can be far more intrinsically valuable than gold, but it is much less value dense. Our planet has oceans of it. Increased supply means diminished price. Gold is $788.86 / cm3. Water is extremely variable in price, but let's take bottled drinking water, (most likely at the top end of the price range) for example. At Sam's Club you can get 40 bottles at 16.9 oz per bottle for $3.98, and water has mass density 1 gm/cm3, which converts to $0.000207678 / cm3. Gold is 3,798,491 times more value dense than Sam's Club bottled water.
Recalling Aristotle's attribute of Durability, water is very durable, but easily spoiled with impurities (a sort of corrosion). This idea of spoiling brings us to the concept of isolation, or containment. Traditionally, money is stored with at least two tools: a vault and accounting. Both need to have high integrity to safely store money. Classic money did not rely on accounting. Gold is its own accountant, its amount fixed, and whoever has it, owns it. Self-accountability is an intrinsic feature of precious commodity. However, external accounts CAN be made of gold. The accounts can represent the gold, so the accounts themselves can be used as money. These accounts are social constructs which rely on trust. Next, let us move on to modern money storage.
Modern money is token, or representational, like poker chips. Since this is a social construct which relies on the trustworthiness of the ability to redeem tokens for something real, we are now in the realm of casino managements, and governments with their freakin' laws and special interests. Gov'ts are already pushing to end printed money, and force everyone to use digital fiat currency units within the existing financial services sector (privileged accountant banksta middlemen).
Accounting practice keeps track of de jure ownership. Once you have that, de facto ownership loses nearly all its importance, because the tokens are not intrinsically valuable, and redemptions are made only if the de jure relationship can be established. This is where crypto-currencies, with their intrinsic (built-in) fraud-proof accountability/ provenance really start to shine.
Cryptos are a classic form of money. WTF? you are thinking. Bitcoin (BTC), for example (the pioneer) is not "backed" by anything. That's assuming it's a token money. Au contraire, it's a classic type, with intrinsic value, which is its accountability. BTC provenance is recorded on a distributed ledger, called the blockchain. Now, this intrinsic value is not like the value of a precious metal. Bitcoin is privacy-secure, fraud proof, and in total control of its owner, needing no intermediate party (bank or credit card) to confirm and transfer funds. Bitcoin is self contained (on the blockchain and in your wallet) just as a gold coin is self contained. But to carry several tons of gold, you need a heavy truck. The equivalent value in Bitcoin, indeed ANY amount of Bitcoin, can be stored on a memory chip smaller than a dime. To ship a ton of gold around the world, you need a series of reliable carriers, guards, and security agents. To send any amount of Bitcoin around the world, you just do it on the Internet, takes a few seconds, perfectly secure, receipt confirmed in seconds or less; cost nearly zero. People are already familiar with credit cards and smart phone apps that make payments quick and easy. BTC is currently a little more of a technical challenge, but with all these new features, no wonder it is so popular!
Cryptos are new. Bitcoin's specification was published 2009. Already, newer cryptos are being created with features similar to BTC. Now I'm going to offer you, dear reader, some ideas about future money that follow logically from BTC's example.
Here we do a fast forward. Imagine the Globalist/ secret-society project for world domination is crushed. Nation states have won their independence from the Globalist unions. Continuing the trend, states have been split by a plethora of secession movements into a multitude of small territories, somewhat as it was in middle age Europe. Fiat currencies are defunct. Big banks have been broken into small banks, and most of those have gone out of business. Manipulation of commodities markets has been squelched. Inflation is no longer an official goal set by the bankstas. (Inflation is a clandestine tax which erodes value of money by increasing the supply.) A stable store of value is now the goal. The Internet has taken over many past industries and the people have come to power.
Money is not issued by government, nor by international banking cartel, but there is now a large diverse competitive market of money types offered by various businesses. They are all digital crypto-currencies. They have taken on a similarity to credit cards/ smart phone/ smart watch apps. However, they have various features that serve the interests of their owners. A new feature many of these currencies have, is they pay a yield for holding them. Gold does not do that, it just sits, corrosion-free. Digital money has morphed into income-producing securities. If cryptos can be used as tokens as well as a reliable means of accounting that cuts out the middleman bankstas, whooee, money opens up a new world of opportunity for entrepreneurs to help people develop income opportunities. Bless the Internet, as the Internet blesses us!
19 Industries The Blockchain Will Disrupt 10 min.
Liberty and Equality are not compatible As you can read in The Protocols of Zion (Basic Doctrine) the secret societies employ their mind control slogan "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity!" to sell the gullible masses on their class warfare agenda. Trouble is, if citizen's innate talents and efforts are able to put into storage the products of their life and liberty (Property), there are bound to be huge differences between citizens. The Zionists want to grab the stored wealth by gov't force. That is why they want a Tyranny of Democracy. They do mind control on the masses, which then mimic the tyranny wanted by the controllers.
Equality "It's not dispossession - it's an expansion of equality!" ABCNews/ Uncomfortable interview w/ Jared Taylor 14 min.
The conventional ideas of equality were non-existence of privileged classes (no nobility, as intended in Declaration of Independence), no special laws, justice is blind, and equality of opportunity.
But nowadays, we have two more kinds of "equality," elite persons who are above the law, (like Jon Corzine (note portrait of Paul Warbrug behind him), the Clintons, and Bill Cosby) and equality of achievement (social justice) because some minority groups were mistreated in the past by our ancestors, so now we have to give them special privileges and affirmative actions. In other words, rob from the "haves" and spread the wealth to the "have nots." This government intervention displaces results from actions, ie. promotes irresponsibility; and punishes achievement, which is a bad idea regarding personnel management. This robbing of the Reech is a Leech axiom.
Intro to Bitcoin Vinny Lingham 12 min.
What the #?!* is Bitcoin? Jeremy Rubin 16 min.
Lauren Southern speaks about Crypto-Currency 9 min.
rising food prices, cooler weather, and Cryptocoins 2. min.
ETHEREUM JUST EXPLODED TO $350 SGT rept. 8 min.
Ethereum will pass bitcoins for #1 cryptocurrency 6 min.
Is China Gaming Bitcoin? | China Uncensored 9 min.
ALL Crypto Currencies HUGE DROP After Bitcoin Exchange Cyberattack 06/15/2017 10 min.
Understanding the Boom in Cryptos (now in the speculation phase); Chas. H. Smith
China Becomes First Country in the World to Test a National Cryptocurrency (Future Society)
cryptocurrency news headlines
Ever wonder how Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) actually work? 26min.
Cryptocurrency innovations 12 min.
StackExchange, Cryptos
submitted by acloudrift to C_S_T [link] [comments]

Transcript from Ravencoin Open Developer Meeting - Nov. 16, 2018

Tron at 2:03 PM

Topics: Messaging (next phase) UI 2.2 - Build from develop - still working out a few kinks Mobile - Send/Rcv/View Assets - In progress Raven Dev Kit -Status

RavencoinDev at 2:04 PM

Hey Everybody! Let's get started!Thanks Tron for posting the topics.Tron is going talk about Messaging Plans.Let's start there.

Chatturga at 2:06 PM

It looks like this channel is not connected to the IRC. One moment

RavencoinDev at 2:07 PM

Well, we going to move forward as the tech guys fix the IRC connections.

Tron at 2:07 PM

I wanted to have a doc describing the messaging, but it isn't quite ready.I understand this isn't going to IRC yet, but I'm starting anyway.

RavencoinDev at 2:08 PM

Look for it soon on a Medium near you.

Tron at 2:08 PM

Summary version: Every transaction can have an IPFS hash attached.

Vincent at 2:09 PM

any plans for a 'create IPFS' button?

RavencoinDev at 2:09 PM

Yes

Vincent at 2:09 PM

on asset creatin window also?

RavencoinDev at 2:09 PM

Yes

Vincent at 2:09 PM

sweet

Tron at 2:09 PM

IPFS attachments for transactions that send ownership token or channel token back to the same address will be considered broadcast messages for that token.The client will show the message.Some anti-spam measures will be introduced.If a token is in a new address, then messages will be on by default.The second token in an address, the channel will be available, but muted by default.

RavencoinDev at 2:11 PM

That way I can't spam out 21b tokens and then start sending messages to everybody.

Tron at 2:11 PM

We'd like to have messaging in a reference client on all six platforms.

corby at 2:11 PM

Hi!

Tron at 2:11 PM

Photos will not be shown. Messages will be "linkified"

RavencoinDev at 2:12 PM

and plain text.We'll start with the QT wallet support

Tron at 2:12 PM

Any other client is free to show any IPFS message they choose.The messaging is fully transparent.

Rikki RATTOE at 2:13 PM

ok, so messaging isn't private

Tron at 2:13 PM

Anyone could read the chain and see the messages.

RavencoinDev at 2:13 PM

No, never was planned to be private

MSFTserver-mine more @ MinerMore at 2:13 PM

irc link should be fixed

Tron at 2:13 PM

It is possible to put encrypted content in the IPFS, but then you'd have to distribute the key somehow.

RavencoinDev at 2:13 PM

Thanks MSFT!

Chatturga at 2:13 PM

Negative

Tron at 2:14 PM

Core protocol changes Extend the OP_RVN_ASSET to include for any transfer: RVNT <0xHH><0x12><0x20><32 bytes encoding 256 bit IPFS hash> 0xHH - File type 0x00 - NO data, 0x01 - IPFS hash, 0x02 through 0xFF RESERVED 0x12 - IPFS Spec - Using SHA256 hash 0x20 - IPFS Spec - 0x20 in hex specifying a 32 byte hash. …. (32 byte hash in binary)

corby at 2:14 PM

By it's nature nothing on chain is private per se. Just like with wallets you'd need to use crypto to secure messaging between parties.

Tron at 2:14 PM

Advantages: This messaging protocol has the advantage of not filling up the blockchain. The message information is public so IPFS works as a great distributed store. If the messages are important enough, then the message sender can run nodes that "PIN" the message to keep a more durable version. The message system cannot be spoofed because any change in the message will result in a different hash, and therefore the message location will be different. Only the unique token holder can sign the transaction that adds the message. This prevents spam. Message clients (wallets), can opt-in or opt-out of messages by channel. Meta-message websites can allow viewing of all messages, or all messages for a token. A simple single channel system is supported by the protocol, but a channel could be sub-divided by a client to have as many sub-channels as desired. There are no limits on the number of channels per token, but each channel requires the 5 RVN fee to create the channel.

RavencoinDev at 2:14 PM

So, somebody could create their own client and encrypt the data on the blockchain if they wished.

corby at 2:15 PM

Wow Tron types fast

Rikki RATTOE at 2:15 PM

yeah there was some confusion in the community whether messaging would be private and off chain

Tron at 2:15 PM

Anti-Spam Strategy One difficulty we have is that tokens can be sent to any Ravencoin asset holder unsolicited. This happens on other asset platforms like Counterparty. In many cases, this is good, and is a way for asset issuers to get their token known. It is essentially an airdrop. However, combined with the messaging capabilities of Ravencoin, this can, and likely will become a spam strategy. Someone who wants to send messages (probably scams) to Ravencoin asset holders, which they know are crypto-savvy people, will create a token with billions of units, send it to every address, and then message with the talking stick for that token. Unless we preemptively address this problem, Ravencoin messaging will become a useless spam channel. Anyone can stop the messages for an asset by burning the asset, or by turning off the channel. A simple solution is to automatically mute the channel (by default) for the 2nd asset sent to an address. The reason this works is because the assets that you acquire through your actions will be to a newly generated address. The normal workflow would be to purchase an asset on an exchange, or through a ICO/STO sale. For an exchange, you'll provide a withdrawal address, and best practice says you request a new address from the client with File->'Receiving addresses…'->New. To provide an address to the ICO/STO issuer, you would do the same. It is only the case where someone is sending assets unsolicited to you where an address would be re-used for asset tokens. This is not 100% the case, and there may be rare edge-cases, but would allow us to set the channels to listen or silent by default. Assets sent to addresses that were already 'on-chain' can be quarantined. The user can burn them or take them out of quarantine.

RavencoinDev at 2:18 PM

Okay, let me know when/if you guys read through all that. 📷📷2

corby at 2:18 PM

To be clear this is a client-side issue -- anyone will be able to send anything (including messages) to any address on chain..

RavencoinDev at 2:18 PM

It'll be in the Medium post later.

Tron at 2:19 PM

@corby The reference client will only show messages signed by the issuer or designated channels.Who is ready for another wall of text? 📷

corby at 2:19 PM

I hear that's the plan 📷 just pointing out that it is on the client in these cases..

Tron at 2:20 PM

Yes, any client can show anything gleaned from the chain.Goal: A simple message format without photos. URL links are allowed and most clients will automatically "linkify" the message for valid URLs. For display, message file must be a valid json file. { "subject":"This is the optional subject", "message": "This is required.", "expires": 1578034800 } Only "message" is required {"message":"Hello world"}

bhorn at 2:21 PM

expires?

Vincent at 2:21 PM

discount coupon?

Tron at 2:21 PM

If you have a message that worthless (say after a vote), just don't show the message.

bhorn at 2:21 PM

i see - more client side operation

corby at 2:21 PM

/expires

Tron at 2:22 PM

Yep. And the expiration could be used by IPFS pinners to stop worrying about the message. Optional

RavencoinDev at 2:22 PM

If the client sees a message that is expired it just won't display it.

Vincent at 2:23 PM

will that me messaged otherwise may cause confusion?"expired'

RavencoinDev at 2:23 PM

YesWe'll do our best to make it intuitive.

Tron at 2:24 PM

Client handling of messages Pop-up messages or notifications when running live. Show messages for any assets sent to a new address - by default Mute messages for assets sent to an address that was already on-network. Have a setting to not show messages older than X IPFSHash (or 8 bytes of it) =

Rikki RATTOE at 2:25 PM

will there be a file size limit for IPFS creation in the wallet?

RavencoinDev at 2:25 PM

We'll also provide updated documentation.

Tron at 2:26 PM

Excellent question Rikki. Here are some guidelinesGuidelines: Clients are free to show or not show poorly formed messages. Reference clients will limit message display to properly formed messages. If subject is missing, the first line of the message will be used (up to 80 chars). Standard JSON encoding for newlines, tabs, etc. https://www.freeformatter.com/json-escape.html Expiration is optional, but desired. Will stop showing the message after X date, where X is specified as Unix Epoch. Good for invites, voting requests, and other time sensitive messages that have no value after a specific date. By default clients will not show a message after X blocks (default 1 year) Amount of subject shown will be client dependent - Reference client may cut off at 80 chars. Messages longer than 15,000 (about 8 pages) will not be pinned to IPFS by some scanners. Messages longer than 15,000 characters may be rejected altogether by the client. Images will not be shown in reference clients. Other clients may show any IPFS content at their discretion. IPFSHash is only a "published" message if the Admin/Owner or Channel token is sent from/to the same address. This allows for standard transfers with metadata that don't "publish".Free Online JSON Escape / Unescape Tool - FreeFormatter.comA free online tool to escape or unescape JSON strings

RavencoinDev at 2:26 PM

We're hoping to add preferences that will allow the user to customize their messaging experience.

Tron at 2:27 PM

Also, happy to receive feedback from everyone.

corby at 2:27 PM

In theory though if you maintain your own IPFS nodes you should be able to reference files of whatever size right?

Steelers at 2:27 PM

How about a simple Stop light approach - Green (ball) New Message, Yellow (Ball) Expiring Messages, Red (Ball) Expired Messages

RavencoinDev at 2:27 PM

Yes please! That's the point of sharing it here

Chatturga at 2:27 PM

Fixt

push | ravenland.org at 2:28 PM

Thanks @Tron can you provide any details of the coming 'tooling' at the end of november, and what that might enable (apologies as I am a bit late to meeting if this has been asked already)

VeronicaBOT at 2:28 PM

sup guys

Tron at 2:28 PM

Sure, that's coming.

RavencoinDev at 2:28 PM

That's the Raven WebDev Kit topic coming up in a few mins.

push | ravenland.org at 2:29 PM

oki 📷 cheers

RavencoinDev at 2:29 PM

Questions on messaging?

Jeroz at 2:30 PM

Not sure if I missed it, but how fast could you send multiple messages in succession?

BruceFenton at 2:30 PM

Some kind of sweep feature or block feature for both tokens and messages could be useful Certain messages will be illegal to possess in certain jurisdictions If someone sends a picture of Tiennneman tank man in China or a message calling for the overthrow of a ruler it could be illegal for someone to have There’s no way for that jurisdiction to censor the chain So some users might want the option to purge messages or not receive them client side / on the wallet

Tron at 2:30 PM

Messages are a transaction.

RavencoinDev at 2:30 PM

So it'll cost you to spam messages.They can only send a hash to that picture and the client won't display anything not JSON

corby at 2:31 PM

purge/block is the age old email spam

Tron at 2:31 PM

The Reference client - other clients / web sites, etc can show anything they wish.

RavencoinDev at 2:31 PM

You can also burn a token if you never want to receive messages from that token owner.

UserJonPizza|MinePool.com|Mom at 2:32 PM

Can't they just resend the token?

Tron at 2:33 PM

Yes, but it would default to mute.📷2

RavencoinDev at 2:33 PM

meaning it would show up in a spam foldetab

bhorn at 2:33 PM

is muting available for the initial asset as well?

RavencoinDev at 2:33 PM

Something easy to ignore if muted.

Tron at 2:33 PM

@bhorn Yes

BruceFenton at 2:33 PM

Can users nite some assets and not others?

Tron at 2:33 PM

@bhorn It just isn't the default.

BruceFenton at 2:33 PM

Mute

RavencoinDev at 2:33 PM

YesYou can mute per token.

BruceFenton at 2:34 PM

Great

Tron at 2:34 PM

And per token per channel.

Jeroz at 2:34 PM

channels are the subtokens?

BruceFenton at 2:34 PM

What’s per token per channel mean ?

Tron at 2:34 PM

The issuer sends to the "Primary" channel.Token owner can create channels like "Alert", "Emergency", etc.These "talking sticks" are similar to unique assets.📷1ASSET~Channel

RavencoinDev at 2:37 PM

Okay, we have a few more topics to cover today.Tron will post more details on Medium and we can continue discussions there.

Jeroz at 2:38 PM

Ah, I missed channel creation bit for each token with the 5 RVN / channel cost. It makes more sense to me now.

RavencoinDev at 2:38 PM

The developers are working towards posting a new version 2.2 that has the updated UI shown on twitter.

Vincent at 2:39 PM

twit link?

RavencoinDev at 2:39 PM

The consuming of large birds (not ravens) might slow the release a bit.So likely the week after Thanksgiving.

[Dev] Blondfrogs at 2:39 PM

The new UI will contain: - New menu layout - New icons - Dark mode - Added RVN colors

Dan1666 at 2:39 PM

+1 Dark mode

RavencoinDev at 2:39 PM

DARK MODE!

Dan1666 at 2:40 PM

so pleased about that

RavencoinDev at 2:40 PM

I can honestly say it'll be the nicest crypto wallet out there.

[Dev] Blondfrogs at 2:40 PM

A little sneak peak, but this is not the final project📷📷6📷3

!S1LVA | MINEPOOL at 2:40 PM

Outstanding

Dan1666 at 2:41 PM

reminds me of Sub7 ui for those that might remember

UserJonPizza|MinePool.com|Mom at 2:41 PM

Can we have an asset count at the top?

[Dev] Blondfrogs at 2:41 PM

Icons will be changing

Vincent at 2:41 PM

does the 'transfer assets' have a this for that component?

Tron at 2:41 PM

Build from develop to see the sneak preview in action.There may be small glitches depending on OS. These are being worked on.

Rikki RATTOE at 2:41 PM

No plans for the mobile wallet to show an IPFS image I'm assuming? Would be a nice feature if say a retail store could send a QR coupon code to their token holders and they could scan the coupon using their wallet in store

[Dev] Blondfrogs at 2:42 PM

@Vincent That will probably be a different section added later📷1

RavencoinDev at 2:42 PM

Yes, Rikki we do want to support messaging.Looking into how that would work with Apple and Google push.

push | ravenland.org at 2:42 PM

sub7📷1hahaoldschoolit so is similar aswell

[Master] Roshii at 2:43 PM

Messages are transactions no need for any push

Tron at 2:43 PM

@Rikki RATTOE There's a danger in showing graphics where anyone can post anything without accountability for their actions. A client that only shows tokens for a specific asset could do this📷1

RavencoinDev at 2:43 PM

True, unless you want to see the messages even if you haven't opened your wallet in a week.

Rikki RATTOE at 2:44 PM

the only thing I was thinking was if you simply linked the image, somebody could just copy the link and text it off to everyone and the coupon isn't all that exclusive

UserJonPizza|MinePool.com|Mom at 2:44 PM

Maybe a mobile link-up for a easy way to see messages by just importing pubkey(edited)

RavencoinDev at 2:45 PM

Speaking of mobileWe are also getting close to a release of mobile that includes the ability to show assets held, and transfer them.Roshii has been hard at work.📷6📷1

Vincent at 2:46 PM

can be hidden also?

RavencoinDev at 2:47 PM

We're still finalizing the UI design but that is on the list of todos📷1

Under at 2:47 PM

Could we do zerofee mempool messaging that basically gets destroyed after it expires out of the mempool for real-time stealth mode messaging

corby at 2:48 PM

That's interesting!

RavencoinDev at 2:49 PM

There are other solutions available for stealth messaging, that's not what the devs had intended to build. It does sound cool though @Under

Under at 2:50 PM

📷 we’ll keep up the good work. Looking forward to the db upgrades. Will test this weekend

RavencoinDev at 2:50 PM

Thanks!That leaves us with 10 minutes for the Dev Kit!Corby has been working on expanding some of the awesome work that @Under has been doing.

corby at 2:52 PM

Yes -- all of the -addressindex rpc calls are being updated to work with assets

RavencoinDev at 2:52 PM

Hopefully we'll be able to post the source soon once the initial use cases are all working.

corby at 2:52 PM

so assets are being tied into transaction history, utxos, etc

RavencoinDev at 2:52 PM

The devs want to provide a set of API's that make it easy for web developers to build solutions on top of Ravencoin.VinX is investigating the possibility of using Ravencoin to power their solution.

corby at 2:53 PM

will be exposed via insight-api which we've forked from @Under

[Master] Roshii at 2:53 PM

Something worth bringing up is that you will be able to get specific asset daba from full nodes with specific message protocols.

corby at 2:54 PM

also working on js lib for client side construction of asset transactions

Tron at 2:55 PM

Dev Kit will be an ongoing project so others can contribute and extend the APIs and capabilities of the 2nd layer.📷3📷3

RavencoinDev at 2:55 PM

Will be posted soon to the RavenProject GitHub.

corby at 2:55 PM

separate thing but yes Roshii that is worth mentioning -- network layer for getting asset data

RavencoinDev at 2:55 PM

Again want to give thanks to @Under for getting a great start on the project

push | ravenland.org at 2:56 PM

Yes looking forward to seeing more on the extensive api and capabilities, is there a wiki on this anywhere tron?(as to prevent other people replicating eachothers work?)

RavencoinDev at 2:56 PM

The wiki will be in the project on GitHub

push | ravenland.org at 2:56 PM

im guessing when the kit is released, something will appear, okok cool

RavencoinDevat 2:57 PM

Any questions about the Web DevKit?

push | ravenland.orgToday at 2:57 PM

well, what kind of support will it give us, that would be nice, is this written anywhereI'm still relatively new to blockchain<2 yearsso need some hand holding i suppose 📷

bhorn at 2:58 PM

right, what are initial use cases of the devkit?

push | ravenland.org at 2:58 PM

i mean im guessing metamask like capabilitysome kind of smart contract, some automation capabilitiesrpc scriptsstuff like thiseven if proof of concept or examplei guess im wondering if my hopes are realistic 📷

RavencoinDev at 2:59 PM

You can see the awesome work that @Under has already don that we are building on top of.

push | ravenland.org at 2:59 PM

yes @Under is truly a herooki, cool

RavencoinDev at 2:59 PM

https://ravencoin.network/Ravencoin Block ExplorerRavencoin Insight. View detailed information on all ravencoin transactions and blocks.

push | ravenland.org at 2:59 PM

ok, sweet, that is very encouragingthanks @Under for making that code public

corby at 3:00 PM

It will hopefully allow you to write all sorts of clients -- depending on complexity of use case you might just have js lib (wallet functions, ability to post txs to gateway) or a server side project (asset explorer or exchange)..(edited)

Tron at 3:00 PM

Yeah, thanks @Under .

RavencoinDev at 3:00 PM

What's your GitHub URL @Under ?

push | ravenland.org at 3:00 PM

https://github.com/underdarkskies/ i believeGitHub· GitHubunderdarkskies has 31 repositories available. Follow their code on GitHub.📷

RavencoinDev at 3:00 PM

Yup!

push | ravenland.org at 3:00 PM

he is truly a hero(edited)

RavencoinDev at 3:00 PM

LOL

push | ravenland.org at 3:00 PM

damn o'sgo missing everywhere

RavencoinDev at 3:01 PM

teh o's are hard... Just ask @Chatturga

push | ravenland.org at 3:01 PM

📷

Chatturga at 3:01 PM

O's arent the problem...

push | ravenland.org at 3:01 PM

📷📷

RavencoinDev at 3:02 PM

Alright we're at time and the devs are super busy. Thanks everybody for joining us.

push | ravenland.org at 3:02 PM

thanks guys

RavencoinDev at 3:02 PM

Thank you all for supporting the Raven community.📷6

corby at 3:02 PM

thanks all!

push | ravenland.org at 3:02 PM

keep up the awesome work, whilst bitcoin sv and bitcoin abc fight, another bitcoin fork raven, raven thru the night📷5

Vincent at 3:02 PM

piece!!

RavencoinDev at 3:03 PM

We're amazingly blessed to have you on this ride with us.📷5📷9📷5

Dan1666 at 3:03 PM

gg

BruceFenton at 3:03 PM

📷📷12📷4

UserJonPizza|MinePool.com|Mom at 3:55 PM

Good meeting! Excited for the new QT!!
submitted by Chatturga to u/Chatturga [link] [comments]

'Fake Bitcoin' - How this Woman Scammed the World, then ... On a visité le repaire d'un mineur de cryptomonnaies - YouTube Bitcoin fund manager's crypto advice to his mom - YouTube Minage Bitcoin / Ethereum ! #2 J'AI REÇU MA MACHINE DE BITCOIN ! feat. Hasheur - YouTube

Bitcoin Whales are considered market players with significant funds that are able to move the cryptocurrency market. The large players being referred to are institutions such as Hedge Funds and Bitcoin Investment Funds. Some of these funds have announced their presence in the water. The term “whale” is frequently used to describe the big money Bitcoin players that show their hand in the ... Owning bitcoin gives financial independence and allows people to invest their money in a way that is less affected by global crises. Obviously there is so much more to add, and our wiki can give you any additional help you might need in teaching your teenager about bitcoin. Who knows? By age 15, they might already know a lot. It is never too early, or too late, to talk to your children about ... From Bitcoin Wiki. Jump to: navigation, search. Provides mining services with performance specified by contract. For example, a specific level of mining capacity may be rented out for a set price for a specific duration. Mining shares provide Mining as a Service (MaaS). These break large-scale datacenter mining down to easily manageable pieces that are available in the form of shares of ... To use Bitcoin, start by purchasing some Bitcoins online, through a trading exchange, or using a Bitcoin ATM. Then, get a digital wallet on your phone or computer, which is where you'll store your Bitcoins. Once you have some Bitcoins, you can make purchases with them, trade them for other cryptocurrencies, or hold onto them in hopes that their value will increase over time. If the value of ... From Bitcoin Wiki. Jump to: navigation, search. Miner fees are a fee that spenders may include in any Bitcoin on-chain transaction. The fee may be collected by the miner who includes the transaction in a block. Contents. 1 Overview; 2 The market for block space; 3 Feerates; 4 Feerates for dependent transactions (child-pays-for-parent) 5 Reference Implementation. 5.1 Sending; 5.2 Including in ...

[index] [8058] [36277] [23241] [45949] [20491] [20528] [12907] [48443] [209] [11815]

'Fake Bitcoin' - How this Woman Scammed the World, then ...

Onecoin promised the world, but only proved to be a trail of destruction. --- About ColdFusion --- ColdFusion is an Australian based online media company ind... -=Minage de Bitcoin vs Ethereum=- Salut à toi, petite vidéo sur les crypto-monnaies ! J'espère qu'elle t'a aidé ou divertit en tout cas ^^ Je vais bientôt en sortir une avec la config que j ... ABONNE-TOI ! http://bit.ly/2wEZoXo ⬅ (juste ici) Le site Just-Mining : http://bit.ly/2OP8FEE Acheter du Bitcoin : http://bit.ly/2YQs10q Payer des produits H... A bitcoin fund manager talks about the bear market, and says he'd put his mother's money in crypto. With Christopher Matta, Crescent Crypto Asset Management,... Bitcoin has been all over the news. But should you be investing in Bitcoin or buying bitcoin? Well, here are 4 things you need to know before buying or inves...

#