Changing the hashing algorithm
-
Not confused, just asking a simple question. I was just asking how long to implement a more robust algo like DRK without the bad guy invisible persona… Understand pool hoppers “manipulation” , while leaving us all to work down the difficulty. I am someone who decided to get on the “FTC” boat to help row and not willing to jump over board just yet. Thank you for taking the time to answer my question in great detail.
Darkcoin hasn’t got a “more robust algo”. What they’ve got is a more complicated one. It’s just a more weird version of Sifcoin/Quark. Their only interesting feature is DarkSend which should allow anonymous coin transfers like Zerocoin, but in a different way. DarkSend is based itself on CoinJoin by Greg Maxwell, a BTC core developer. If we can make a service like this implemented, it’s a big thing. Anoncoin and Fedoracoin use hosted centralised mixing services which ain’t truly anonymous and can be exploited.
-
Hi everyone ,
We really need POS, The reason is simple, we need money. ::)
First, I give an example. My power cost per month is 2000CNY,about 322USD. If power costs can be reduced by half, I can put in another 1000 to exchange, buy 1000 FTC. This will support the market price.
Second, look bitcoin. 40Phash/s power cost per day is 75 million USD. The entire BTC network is a huge burden. Power cost want a vampire. The investor’s money is being dispersed. This is a tragedy.
Finally, look at yourself FTC Network. We just need 3Ghash /s, it was enough. 30Ghash /s would be a huge waste. Hardware cost and power cost ,Investors will consume a lot of money. But the market price did not get upgrade. ::)
So , We really need 50%POW + 50%POS. For God points, please seriously consider this proposal. We need to invest most of the money exchange, instead of buying cards or Scrypt ASICs.
-
Hi everyone ,
We really need POS, The reason is simple, we need money. ::)
First, I give an example. My power cost per month is 2000CNY,about 322USD. If power costs can be reduced by half, I can put in another 1000 to exchange, buy 1000 FTC. This will support the market price.Second, look bitcoin. 40Phash/s power cost per day is 75 million USD. The entire BTC network is a huge burden. Power cost want a vampire. The investor’s money is being dispersed. This is a tragedy.
Finally, look at yourself FTC Network. We just need 3Ghash /s, it was enough. 30Ghash /s would be a huge waste. Hardware cost and power cost ,Investors will consume a lot of money. But the market price did not get upgrade. ::)
So , We really need 50%POW + 50%POS. For God points, please seriously consider this proposal. We need to invest most of the money exchange, instead of buying cards or [background=#ffffff]Scrypt ASICs.[/background]
Lizhi, I agree with you that PoS is a very good thing to have. 50% PoW + 50% PoS is also a good choice. It’s not only about the money. PoS secures the network. It also motivates users to keep coins in local wallets for a small interest rather than using them for pumps & dumps at exchanges which may fail like Mt. Gox recently.
On the other hand, no single coin to this moment has upgraded from pure PoW to PoW + PoS. The original implementation of PoS from PPC doesn’t fit into FTC. It gives PoS blocks a huge trust advantage over PoW blocks (like 1 million trust for a PoW block and 1 trust for a PoW block). PPC also uses a different (modified) block structure. It also follows an infinite (unlimited) coin generation model. FTC has declared 336 million total coin supply and this number has to stay with PoS or not. So, you cannot pull PoS out of PPC and put it into FTC. You need a whole different PoS concept. I have one, but it needs coding work. It can be implemented into PXC and when matures, it can be exported to FTC. Tell me if you’re interested in the PoS development. It isn’t a quick ride. A lot of effort needed.
-
Good timing on this discussion. I just got done talking with some of my mining friends about this very thing. My biggest concern with the idea of algo switching is whether or not it will ever end. If I understood correctly, the hope is to have Feathercoin be to Algo X, as Litecoin is to Scrypt. I’m just wondering if this cat/mouse game will end there or if several more switches will have to be made along the way. I would assume that the answer is no (unless FTC has a successful algo pairing), as long as it’s profitable to create mining specific chips. Is it possible to have a coin that is truly ASIC proof that can still be mined by the masses?
The idea of a decentralized currency pretty much dies if the person with the most money can just purchase enough equipment to recentralize it. I don’t think Bitcoin will ever go away, I just think that it’s on its way to being just like everything else â€" controlled by the people with the most money. Take this video for instance. Bitcoin is already well on its way to being far out of the masses reach.
A LOOK INSIDE AMERICA’S LARGEST BITCOIN MINING OPERATION http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5CjldZLXiAU
I’ve invested a considerable amount of time, energy, and money into GPU mining. It’s fun, it’s been heating my house in Alaska all winter (yes, seriously), and best of all, it makes some spare cash to pay on utility bills â€" which are spendy at almost $0.2USD/kWh where I live. I have no problem with buying ASIC’s to mine feathercoin with *if they are available to the masses*. My big question for everyone is this: what are we trying to do? We seemingly face adversity at every corner.
Are we trying to preserve the GPU/CPU mining culture due to readily available off-the-shelf equipment? Are we trying to find an algo where ASIC’s can be easily created and purchased by anyone who wants to invest? Are we just trying to secure our own foothold on an algo like LTC has with Scrypt? It seems to me that no matter which path we choose, at some point, deep pockets can and will recentralize if it’s profitable. Somebody finds a way to produce cheap ASIC’s that are easily available to everyone, so the deep pockets buy ten billion of them.
The fact that GPU mining is so wasteful makes it incredibly unprofitable for people wanting to build a warehouse full of them. This is a good thing and a bad thing of course. My closing comment is this: Algo-switching every time that an ASIC threat hits will eventually get old and turn people off in my opinion. If we can just change the rules at every half-time when things aren’t looking good for our team, people will stop showing up at our games.
-
Love to jump into this topic, I think crypto culture really shows our strengths and weaknesses.
Here’s my 2 cents after getting caught up.
1.) This new switch needs to be announced well ahead of time. 2 Weeks min. If the FTC community needs to help with the transition, thats what we do. I’ll set my GPU’s to do whatever is needed to support the transition.
2.) This opportunity must be synergized. The release of the miner, new wallet, and some PR, all need to be geared towards all GPU miners that hit not too long ago. Making a great GUI for the miner, simple settings on the front end, advanced use on the back end. I think this could double the market cap in a week!
I agree that switching and switching Algo would kill a coin. But, I also think of it this way, GPU owners are the customer, and feathercoin is the supplier. What do our customers want and how can we leverage that to bring more widespread FTC adoption.
-
Hi , ghostlander. I think we have no choice. PoS development. Let’s go.
-
I have been working for months to prove Advanced Averaging, the more I look at this, changing the hashing algorythm is fraught with difficulties and no one has any proof it would work.
Lets get the Anti-multipool fix OUT NOW. That’s what Lizhi and I needs. The multipools are taking the piss and this is discusion is a total irrelevant diversion.
-
Wrapper, this conversation can happen. We have our values and they just need to be set in stone. This is my task. Changing algo is not not going to happen for some time yet.
PoS is something that we should have had in the beginning not now. People have bought into Feathercoin on its current inflation model and putting PoS will break it, unless you want to do 0% PoS which long term would simply be avoided. When you generate a PoS block you loose your coins for 520 blocks while it is confirmed. To do this for nothing would just be avoided.
-
I have been working for months to prove Advanced Averaging, the more I look at this, changing the hashing algorythm is fraught with difficulties and no one has any proof it would work.
Lets get the Anti-multipool fix OUT NOW. That’s what Lizhi and I needs. The multipools are taking the piss and this is discusion is a total irrelevant diversion.
Let’s not mix two problems here.
We have the current problem of multipools messing with hashrates and difficulty to their advantage.
This can be mitigated by implementing advanced averaging and we should implement that as fast as possible.The other problem is, that the upcoming ASICS will lead to a centralization of hashing power to those miners able to afford the high invest for the ASICS.
The second problem is discussed here and for me it is independent to the first one.
So let’s discuss changing the hashing algorithm while implementing advanced averaging.
That way it’s not a diversion, but part of the evolution of feathercoin.
-
In keeping with the theme what about featherscrypt :D
-
sorry I should of read the whole thread someone has said that lol :D
-
Hi , ghostlander. I think we have no choice. PoS development. Let’s go.
Can you do any coding? There is a lot of work ahead, so any help is appreciated.
PoS is something that we should have had in the beginning not now. People have bought into Feathercoin on its current inflation model and putting PoS will break it, unless you want to do 0% PoS which long term would simply be avoided. When you generate a PoS block you loose your coins for 520 blocks while it is confirmed. To do this for nothing would just be avoided.
520 blocks is the PPC way. They merge coin stake and coins generating a stake into a single transaction of two outputs split nearly evenly. It can be made into two separate transactions. Coin stake takes 120 confirmations like FTC coin base and the rest is a regular transaction.
-
What are our values ? Services for everyone .At least not let them starve to death. I think it should be spread around the world. It should not stay in the museum . It requires vitality.So development and growth is the only way.
What is the spirit of the contract ? It is to ensure that the interests of the holders of each.Ensure that everyone can have a future.This is the meaning of existence contract terms.
Every day is a new beginning.Also the end of each day.We need to be responsible for the future, not the past. In the beginning,This is a mistake that we did not choose POS.Now we can not make a second mistake. If the POS in the interests of the holders of each FTC, why do not we do it? Maybe some details of our thinking again, but the main direction can not be wrong.
New algorithm and New difficulty rules is the same goal. Prevent ASICS, will be able to prevent the huge hashing attack. I agree with the new featherscrypt too in PoW.
-
Can you do any coding? There is a lot of work ahead, so any help is appreciated.
Yes. I can. I am willing to pay the greatest efforts.
-
MaxCoin have adopted SHA-3 algorithm . https://github.com/Max-Coin/MaxCoin
Addresses within MaxCoin are almost identical to those in Bitcoin. A MaxCoin address is a base58-encoded hash of a public key and a network identifier, or version. The address also contains a checksum in the final 4 bytes. The encoding can be outlined as follows:
version = 110
hash = RIPEMD160(SHA256(public key))
versioned_hash = concatenate(version, hash)
checksum = substr(SHA3(versioned_hash), -4)
address = BASE58(concatenate(versioned_hash, checksum))This is essentially the same as with Bitcoin except using a single round of Keccak instead of a double round of SHA256 when calculating the checksum.
SHA-3 algorithm code: sph_keccak.h
https://github.com/Max-Coin/maxcoin/blob/master/src/sph_keccak.h
-
Scrypt-Jane uses Keccak and it is the first solution we are going to look at, but we will was look at Blake2 instead of Keccak as it performs faster :P I am looking forward to getting past the coding for the hard fork and working on the new hashing algo. We absolutely need this move as many other Scrypt coins if the want to survive. There is a great darkness coming.
-
Cheers, BLAKE2b . Now it seems that this is a good choice ::)
-
FeatherScrypt (obviously links it to the currency that it evolved from)
You could hint at feathercoin origins, without actually branding it.
Ideas like
Rachis (In biology it’s the central vain or shaft from a feather or leaf)
Or perhaps one of the many feathered creatures of legends.
-
the benefit of using one of the more popular algorithms is that cudaminer already supports them such as Blake2, Scyrpt-Jane amongst others.
-a, --algo=ALGO specify the algorithm to use (default is scrypt)
scrypt scrypt Salsa20/8(1024, 1, 1), PBKDF2(SHA2)
scrypt:N scrypt Salsa20/8(N, 1, 1), PBKDF2(SHA2)
scrypt-jane scrypt Chacha20/8(N, 1, 1), PBKDF2(Keccak)
scrypt-jane:Coin Coin must be one of the supported coins.
scrypt-jane:Nfactor scrypt-chacha20/8(2*2^Nfactor, 1, 1)
scrypt-jane:StartTime,Nfmin,Nfmax like above nFactor derived from Unix time.
sha256d SHA-256d (don’t use this! No GPU acceleration)
keccak Keccak256 as used in MaxCoin
-
BLAKE2b is a better choice than Keccak.
