Looking for thought on Zerocoin
-
Lot’s of people were not happy, including myself. It is not where I expected us to be going but now that we have it I am glad as I do not feel the weight of potential 51% attacks any more. We responded to the pressures we faced at the time and can lead the way for other coins who face such hostile attacks. Those attacks put clouds over us and it seemed like really dark times.
They are behind us now and we are finally down to 10 confirms on BTC-e after I spoke to the dev and explained our ACP. What we can do now is earnestly focus on the future and the things that we all really want to see.
-
I too think if Kevlar and Bush met offline they would get on really well. Part of the problem here seems to be the style of communication rather than getting at the underlying issues.
But that asside I think we have gone off topic because this was a conversation about Zerocoin. Since we cannot change history, anyone’s version of it, perhaps we should start a new thread about how we plan to go forward after ACP. Since Bush himself said, in response to Kevlar’s initial concern:
[quote name=“Bushstar” post=“15639” timestamp=“1371377824”]
I share this concern. Firstly I want to get this checkpointing in so we can protect against malicious users trying to control the network.I have some ideas going forward to remove the centralisation of this solution.
[/quote]ACP was brought in to protect agains the immediate threat. Since we do not believe in centralisation as an end point I say we have a constructive debate in a separate thread with an accountable voting mechanism. I would also like to add that when you mine, buy and spend Feathercoins you are also casting a vote of sorts.
-
[quote name=“chrisj” post=“28785” timestamp=“1379799083”]
…I say we have a constructive debate in a separate thread with an accountable voting mechanism.
[/quote]Agreed.
-
Is zerodrama still working on a zerocoin implementation?
-
[quote name=“Tuck Fheman” post=“28794” timestamp=“1379806868”]
Is zerodrama still working on a zerocoin implementation?
[/quote]I dont know, but his nick is so predetermining ;D
-
[quote name=“svennand” post=“28774” timestamp=“1379796181”]
@Kevlar
if your this unhappy with feathercoin, why do you stick around? theres alot of other options out there…
[/quote]I’ve been asked this question more than once, and answered it each time. I’m not repeating myself again here.
[quote]
Im getting sick and tired of hearing you going on and on about how crazy the “centralization” is. Enough, the majority wanted to get protected against attacks,
ACP was choosen by the majority. Now please stop.
[/quote]I’m really glad I don’t have to defend against pointless attacks and revisionist history like this any more. The community has done a great job of pointing out A) That you’re dead wrong on all accounts here, except maybe the whole sick and tired part, and B) That such comments are actually very much a part of a healthy eco-system.
[quote]
and it makes me sad to see you constantly attack me
[/quote]I’m sure Bushstar is really sweet, obviously dedicated guy who wants nothing but to be successful. That doesn’t change the fact that the community and the coin has been damaged repeatedly by his decision making process. You fuck up in business, people go, “Hey, you fucked this up.” and silencing them just makes things worse for you and everyone else.
Let me give you a piece of advice that’s long overdue Bushstar: Don’t hate your critics, embrace them. Recognize that they are being critical for a reason, and address the reason. Your critics are the ones telling you they still love you and care. Worry when you do something badly and nobody bothers to tell you. I understand people don’t like being criticized, and we positively hate being not good enough for someone who matters to us, but the truth is criticism can make us better at what we do, and bring out passion for our work that we didn’t know we had. We just need to approach criticism with the right understanding: The basis is that we matter to each other, and the point is to improve each other.
Critics have very high expectations of you otherwise they would never criticize you. They are the ones who will encourage you to do greater work instead of just praising you for your existing accomplishments. So next time you’re getting criticism in business, stop for a second and remember what’s really going on. It’s only partly about the work itself. If we make each other better, the work will inevitably reflect it.
-
I know what you are saying Kevlar, have no doubt about that.
But I am really unsure what you want me to do?
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“28850” timestamp=“1379859911”]
[quote author=svennand link=topic=3136.msg28774#msg28774 date=1379796181]
@Kevlar
if your this unhappy with feathercoin, why do you stick around? theres alot of other options out there…
[/quote]I’ve been asked this question more than once, and answered it each time. I’m not repeating myself again here.
[quote]
Im getting sick and tired of hearing you going on and on about how crazy the “centralization” is. Enough, the majority wanted to get protected against attacks,
ACP was choosen by the majority. Now please stop.
[/quote]I’m really glad I don’t have to defend against pointless attacks and revisionist history like this any more. The community has done a great job of pointing out A) That you’re dead wrong on all accounts here, except maybe the whole sick and tired part, and B) That such comments are actually very much a part of a healthy eco-system.
[quote]
and it makes me sad to see you constantly attack me
[/quote]I’m sure Bushstar is really sweet, obviously dedicated guy who wants nothing but to be successful. That doesn’t change the fact that the community and the coin has been damaged repeatedly by his decision making process. You fuck up in business, people go, “Hey, you fucked this up.” and silencing them just makes things worse for you and everyone else.
Let me give you a piece of advice that’s long overdue Bushstar: Don’t hate your critics, embrace them. Recognize that they are being critical for a reason, and address the reason. Your critics are the ones telling you they still love you and care. Worry when you do something badly and nobody bothers to tell you. I understand people don’t like being criticized, and we positively hate being not good enough for someone who matters to us, but the truth is criticism can make us better at what we do, and bring out passion for our work that we didn’t know we had. We just need to approach criticism with the right understanding: The basis is that we matter to each other, and the point is to improve each other.
Critics have very high expectations of you otherwise they would never criticize you. They are the ones who will encourage you to do greater work instead of just praising you for your existing accomplishments. So next time you’re getting criticism in business, stop for a second and remember what’s really going on. It’s only partly about the work itself. If we make each other better, the work will inevitably reflect it.
[/quote]Feathercoin is more that Bushstar and I did embrace you, I have reached out to you on Skype and listened and asked for more feedback from you repeatedly to make sure you are represented. I don’t know if you mean it but the way you come across to some people is rude and destructive, it’s not necessarily the content of what you’re saying that’s the problem.
If the outcome you want is to make Feathercoin stronger then this isn’t necessarily the most constructive way of achieving that outcome. We want to grow from failure but the failures need to be big enough to learn from but not so big they cripple us and hamper our efforts. I have written several posts over the last day or so:
[url=http://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=3749.msg28839#msg28839]http://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=3749.msg28839#msg28839[/url]
[url=http://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=3742.msg28806#msg28806]http://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=3742.msg28806#msg28806[/url]Including the addition of Polls to the forum and in most of my posts I request feedback at the end. Bushstar wants me to do this so that he can focus on code. I would rather keep these discussions at the level of debate that concerns the underlying issues themselves and not the person’s character or assumptions about their intentions (Fundamental Attribution Error etc). We are not ruling over a country, nobody is trapped here, nobody was forced in to Feathercoin from birth. I am working on behalf of the idea and I want to serve the people in this community who believe in that vision.
-
[quote name=“Bushstar” post=“28853” timestamp=“1379860630”]
I know what you are saying Kevlar, have no doubt about that.But I am really unsure what you want me to do?
[/quote]I think he’s calling you out for a battle rap. ;)
No, seriously though I have to agree with most all of what Kevlar says above. He tends to word things a little differently and since it’s not directed at me, I’m able to see past the fbombs and what appear to be personal attacks at times … but the main content of the message is still valid and should not be discarded.
Kevlar, you crack me up; but some times I wonder if you have Asperger’s (lulz). Not that that’s a bad thing. :P
-
[quote name=“Tuck Fheman” post=“28909” timestamp=“1379914812”]
[quote author=Bushstar link=topic=3136.msg28853#msg28853 date=1379860630]
I know what you are saying Kevlar, have no doubt about that.But I am really unsure what you want me to do?
[/quote]I think he’s calling you out for a battle rap. ;)
No, seriously though I have to agree with most all of what Kevlar says above. He tends to word things a little differently and since it’s not directed at me, I’m able to see past the fbombs and what appear to be personal attacks at times … but the main content of the message is still valid and should not be discarded.
Kevlar, you crack me up; but some times I wonder if you have Asperger’s (lulz). Not that that’s a bad thing. :P
[/quote]You sound perfect for this job: [url=http://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=3742.0]http://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=3742.0[/url]
-
[quote name=“Tuck Fheman” post=“28909” timestamp=“1379914812”]
[quote author=Bushstar link=topic=3136.msg28853#msg28853 date=1379860630]
I know what you are saying Kevlar, have no doubt about that.But I am really unsure what you want me to do?
[/quote]I think he’s calling you out for a battle rap. ;)
No, seriously though I have to agree with most all of what Kevlar says above. He tends to word things a little differently and since it’s not directed at me, I’m able to see past the fbombs and what appear to be personal attacks at times … but the main content of the message is still valid and should not be discarded.
Kevlar, you crack me up; but some times I wonder if you have Asperger’s (lulz). Not that that’s a bad thing. :P
[/quote]You wouldn’t be the first person to suggest it, although I’ve not been formally diagnosed.
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“28947” timestamp=“1379955854”]
You wouldn’t be the first person to suggest it, although I’ve not been formally diagnosed.
[/quote]Me either, but I flunk the online test every time I take it. There’s a guy who runs the PostSatire blog on Tumblr and he cracks me up too. Turns out, he has Asperger’s. You can almost see it in the thought process online. ;)
Anywho, zerocoin protocol. I wish I could do more than spell it and bring it up on occasion to help get it implemented in Feather. I’m relying on you smart guys to come up with a solution. I’m more than willing to test any builds.
-
[quote name=“Tuck Fheman” post=“28970” timestamp=“1379971982”]
[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3136.msg28947#msg28947 date=1379955854]
You wouldn’t be the first person to suggest it, although I’ve not been formally diagnosed.
[/quote]Me either, but I flunk the online test every time I take it. There’s a guy who runs the PostSatire blog on Tumblr and he cracks me up too. Turns out, he has Asperger’s. You can almost see it in the thought process online. ;)
Anywho, zerocoin protocol. I wish I could do more than spell it and bring it up on occasion to help get it implemented in Feather. I’m relying on you smart guys to come up with a solution. I’m more than willing to test any builds.
[/quote]Well I’ve tried to outline the initial set of problems that need resolving:
1. To hard fork, or to centralize.
2. To implement as compulsory, or as an optional feature.I’d like to see those addressed, and a consensus reached, since those two items will entirely inform the technical implementation.
-
[quote name=“erk” post=“28975” timestamp=“1379976399”]
Just read the zero coin paper, it sounds like a useful feature. I think it would be worth including.
[/quote]I’ve not actually heard a good reason NOT to implement it, besides “There’s other priorities”.
The question being asked is HOW to implement it.
-
[quote name=“erk” post=“28981” timestamp=“1379981695”]
[quote author=Bushstar link=topic=3136.msg28784#msg28784 date=1379798985]
Lot’s of people were not happy, including myself. It is not where I expected us to be going but now that we have it I am glad as I do not feel the weight of potential 51% attacks any more. We responded to the pressures we faced at the time and can lead the way for other coins who face such hostile attacks. Those attacks put clouds over us and it seemed like really dark times.They are behind us now and we are finally down to 10 confirms on BTC-e after I spoke to the dev and explained our ACP. What we can do now is earnestly focus on the future and the things that we all really want to see.
[/quote] Just a small note on ACP, (sorry just started reading this thread today) I don’t see ACP as any different to the dev doing an update to the source with fresh checkpoints, a process which is entirely centralized for all coins that support checkpoints! All ACP does is eliminate the task of compiling the modified source or downloading an updated binary. What would be nice to see is a check box or feathercoin.conf setting to disable ACP, this is purely for psychological and debug reasons, as most people would choose to leave ACP enabled.
[/quote]There’s a huge difference.
#1, a human makes the decision at (mostly) random intervals, not every block.
#2, humans have to accept and download the updated client.
#3, if the developer goes awol, anyone can compile it themselves and take over the checkpointing process.With ACP, EVERY block at a height of top - 1 gets checkpointed. This ELIMINATES the consensus of the miners, and makes it a consensus of 1: Bushstar. No one can run the code Bushstar is running, because it’s not been released. No one can audit it, no one can verify it, no one can be the new consensus, because it’s proprietary. Miners can’t overrule the blockchain with a longer one any more, the clients listening to Bushstar will ignore it in favor of the shorter, checkpointed chain. This means that the protocol, which in Bitcoin states:
“Whatever chain is the longest is the most valid”
should just be changed to
“Whatever chain I saw first is the most valid”
If you know anything about how crypto-currencies are supposed to work, you would know that this completely eliminates their strongest point: Decentralization through protocol enforcement, and consensus via mining, AKA one cpu-cycle = one vote, as described in the original whitepaper.
So I ask you, which is better: Liberty Reserve, or Bitcoin? Because with ACP, Feathercoin is now a hybrid model of a public transaction log, but a private arbitrager of the consensus of that public transaction log… Kinda a LR crossed with BTC.
The frustrating part is you can (and other coins have) achieved the same level of protection as ACP promises WITHOUT ACP, WITHOUT centralization, WITHOUT a private arbitrager. But who cares about that, ACP FTW!!! It’s the same as manual checkpointing, only better!!! ???
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“28971” timestamp=“1379972461”]
Well I’ve tried to outline the initial set of problems that need resolving:
1. To hard fork, [s]or to centralize.[/s]
2. To implement [s]as compulsory, or[/s] as an optional feature.I’d like to see those addressed, and a consensus reached, since those two items will entirely inform the technical implementation.
[/quote] -
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“28982” timestamp=“1379982591”]
With ACP, EVERY block at a height of top - 1 gets checkpointed.[/quote]It is at a top height - 3 blocks currently.
[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3136.msg28982#msg28982 date=1379982591]
This ELIMINATES the consensus of the miners, and makes it a consensus of 1: Bushstar. No one can run the code Bushstar is running, because it’s not been released. No one can audit it, no one can verify it, no one can be the new consensus, because it’s proprietary. Miners can’t overrule the blockchain with a longer one any more, the clients listening to Bushstar will ignore it in favor of the shorter, checkpointed chain.[/quote]This is nonsense. All the code needed to set up a master node to checkpoint blocks and send alerts is built into the client and available at GitHub. There is no special proprietary version of the client for that purpose. You can set up a master node of your own and release a client with your public keys compiled in. That’s a good question who will download it and subscribe to your checkpoints though.
By the way, the tool Coblee uses for sending network alerts seems proprietary. I don’t see you very upset about that.
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“28982” timestamp=“1379982591”]
There’s a huge difference.#1, a human makes the decision at (mostly) random intervals, not every block.
#2, humans have to accept and download the updated client.
#3, if the developer goes awol, anyone can compile it themselves and take over the checkpointing process.With ACP, EVERY block at a height of top - 1 gets checkpointed. This ELIMINATES the consensus of the miners, and makes it a consensus of 1: Bushstar. No one can run the code Bushstar is running, because it’s not been released. No one can audit it, no one can verify it, no one can be the new consensus, because it’s proprietary. Miners can’t overrule the blockchain with a longer one any more, the clients listening to Bushstar will ignore it in favor of the shorter, checkpointed chain. This means that the protocol, which in Bitcoin states:
“Whatever chain is the longest is the most valid”
should just be changed to
“Whatever chain I saw first is the most valid”
If you know anything about how crypto-currencies are supposed to work, you would know that this completely eliminates their strongest point: Decentralization through protocol enforcement, and consensus via mining, AKA one cpu-cycle = one vote, as described in the original whitepaper.
So I ask you, which is better: Liberty Reserve, or Bitcoin? Because with ACP, Feathercoin is now a hybrid model of a public transaction log, but a private arbitrager of the consensus of that public transaction log… Kinda a LR crossed with BTC.
The frustrating part is you can (and other coins have) achieved the same level of protection as ACP promises WITHOUT ACP, WITHOUT centralization, WITHOUT a private arbitrager. But who cares about that, ACP FTW!!! It’s the same as manual checkpointing, only better!!! ???
[/quote]The checkpointing depth is set to 3 currently which may still be to low for some natural reorgs. As long as services require a few more than that then reversing transaction becomes difficult.
I was going to set the checkpoint depth to 1 but after getting CONSTRUCTIVE feedback from several people it was increased to 3.
How have these other coins got the same level of protection without just having a larger hashrate than attackers?
I can think of PoS which would break our inflation model, that is going to upset all those that have already heavily invested into Feathercoin. A 0% PoS has been suggested but I think that there needs to be some incentive for people to produce PoS blocks. The only concession I can think of is to give the transaction fees to the generator of the block and perhaps give a different coin as a reward. Is that completely nutty?
-
[quote name=“Bushstar” post=“29017” timestamp=“1380018762”]
The only concession I can think of is to give the transaction fees to the generator of the block and perhaps give a different coin as a reward. Is that completely nutty?
[/quote]Nope. Layered coins are all the rage.
-
[quote name=“Bushstar” post=“29017” timestamp=“1380018762”]
[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3136.msg28982#msg28982 date=1379982591]
There’s a huge difference.#1, a human makes the decision at (mostly) random intervals, not every block.
#2, humans have to accept and download the updated client.
#3, if the developer goes awol, anyone can compile it themselves and take over the checkpointing process.With ACP, EVERY block at a height of top - 1 gets checkpointed. This ELIMINATES the consensus of the miners, and makes it a consensus of 1: Bushstar. No one can run the code Bushstar is running, because it’s not been released. No one can audit it, no one can verify it, no one can be the new consensus, because it’s proprietary. Miners can’t overrule the blockchain with a longer one any more, the clients listening to Bushstar will ignore it in favor of the shorter, checkpointed chain. This means that the protocol, which in Bitcoin states:
“Whatever chain is the longest is the most valid”
should just be changed to
“Whatever chain I saw first is the most valid”
If you know anything about how crypto-currencies are supposed to work, you would know that this completely eliminates their strongest point: Decentralization through protocol enforcement, and consensus via mining, AKA one cpu-cycle = one vote, as described in the original whitepaper.
So I ask you, which is better: Liberty Reserve, or Bitcoin? Because with ACP, Feathercoin is now a hybrid model of a public transaction log, but a private arbitrager of the consensus of that public transaction log… Kinda a LR crossed with BTC.
The frustrating part is you can (and other coins have) achieved the same level of protection as ACP promises WITHOUT ACP, WITHOUT centralization, WITHOUT a private arbitrager. But who cares about that, ACP FTW!!! It’s the same as manual checkpointing, only better!!! ???
[/quote]The checkpointing depth is set to 3 currently which may still be to low for some natural reorgs. As long as services require a few more than that then reversing transaction becomes difficult.
I was going to set the checkpoint depth to 1 but after getting CONSTRUCTIVE feedback from several people it was increased to 3.
How have these other coins got the same level of protection without just having a larger hashrate than attackers?
I can think of PoS which would break our inflation model, that is going to upset all those that have already heavily invested into Feathercoin. A 0% PoS has been suggested but I think that there needs to be some incentive for people to produce PoS blocks. The only concession I can think of is to give the transaction fees to the generator of the block and perhaps give a different coin as a reward. Is that completely nutty?
[/quote]So it looks like no one will weigh in on the Zerocoin solution because you’re all too busy nitpicking over details of ACP. It’s by far and away the most up-voted solution in the suggestion list with 90 votes compared to the next most popular one, merged mining with 26, but evidently protocol handlers are more important since those seem to be getting worked on.
The boat is in the process of leaving the dock as other coins rush to implement it. Will FTC be left behind? It’s starting to look that way, since it’s been months of discussion regarding this and zero visible progress has been made.
I am a disappoint.
