Author Topic: PowerBall, DAC - Lottery Based Mining Experiment  (Read 9712 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Troglodactyl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
    • View Profile
In addition to Bytemaster's point, adding fees to transactions does not encourage transactions.  Also, such a transaction jackpot (if it encouraged any sort of transactions) would encourage spam transactions between addresses controlled by the same entity, which could load the network so as to impede legitimate transactions.

If the only way to get anyone to use a DAC is to pay them to use it, you're doing it wrong...

Offline bytemaster


Add a 1%-3% fee per transaction.

Half of all the fees collected in the entire pot go to paying out a surprise jackpot, which is awarded to random transaction pairs.

So if Bob sends Jane 100.00 coins, and they are lucky either Bob or Jane or both will get a surprise jackpot donation as a reward for using the currency, i.e. 100100.00 coins.

This will boost incentives to spend rather than just hoard it.

Protoshare:   Pfd7yVHojcWvcLeDCSmKPo77QD3EgZ3r8F
Btc:   19ZEhBMWtsntY4Kc8wPAkYfekYgCvJVh4Q
Doge:    D9XzmPpHSAcfWn4VdBF93HC6pq4k7df1iT

Hoarding is more desirable than spending... darn Keynesian economics teaching that hoarding is bad.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline cloudcoiner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile

Add a 1%-3% fee per transaction.

Half of all the fees collected in the entire pot go to paying out a surprise jackpot, which is awarded to random transaction pairs.

So if Bob sends Jane 100.00 coins, and they are lucky either Bob or Jane or both will get a surprise jackpot donation as a reward for using the currency, i.e. 100100.00 coins.

This will boost incentives to spend rather than just hoard it.

Protoshare:   Pfd7yVHojcWvcLeDCSmKPo77QD3EgZ3r8F
Btc:   19ZEhBMWtsntY4Kc8wPAkYfekYgCvJVh4Q
Doge:    D9XzmPpHSAcfWn4VdBF93HC6pq4k7df1iT 

Offline barwizi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 764
  • Noirbits, NoirShares, NoirEx.....lol, noir anyone?
    • View Profile
    • Noirbitstalk.org
I would like to take lead on this, since every attempt at CPU mining only has fallen flat i'd like to take this experiment and add a few ideas then deploy.

I noticed this part

Code: [Select]
#define PSUEDORANDOM_DATA_SIZE 30 //2^30 = 1GB
#define PSUEDORANDOM_DATA_CHUNK_SIZE 6 //2^6 = 64 bytes
#define L2CACHE_TARGET 16 // 2^16 = 64 K
#define AES_ITERATIONS 50

In momentum.cpp and would like to try changing it to

Code: [Select]
#define PSUEDORANDOM_DATA_SIZE 31 //2^31 = 2GB
#define PSUEDORANDOM_DATA_CHUNK_SIZE 6 //2^6 = 64 bytes
#define L2CACHE_TARGET 17 // 2^17 = 128K
#define AES_ITERATIONS 50

or

Code: [Select]
#define PSUEDORANDOM_DATA_SIZE 32 //2^32 = 4GB
#define PSUEDORANDOM_DATA_CHUNK_SIZE 6 //2^6 = 64 bytes
#define L2CACHE_TARGET 18 // 2^18 = 256K
#define AES_ITERATIONS 25


To see if it can escape GPU implementation. Even if it became famous and widespread enough to warrant an ASIC, it would be a long time from now, by then we would have other new innovations.

The increases in required memory would render GPU mining either useless or equivalent to CPU mining. Some would ask why not 8 GB or 16 GB, my response is 4 GB machines are becoming the norm as most people use windows & nowadays.

While the Social Consensus License is not yet in place i'd like to release this experiment into the wild. (Also....i have a vague idea how to import PTS into the chain but everyone who can is mum about it so i don't think i will).

If you however know how to import the balance, perhaps we can work together on this.


--Bar--  PiNEJGUv4AZVZkLuF6hV4xwbYTRp5etWWJ

The magical land of crypto, no freebies people.

Offline arcke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
    • View Profile
    • Diaspora
Powerball, DAC sounds cool, and allot faster to develop than BitShares.
What is the status on this one?
Have we found some people to develop it?

It is on our roadmap, to be undertaken when we are able to raise enough funds to pay for its development.

But if some other developer were to start credible work on it, we would be happy to cheer them on. 

It doesn't matter to us who develops these DACs, we will invest in them on their merits like everyone else.

This generates decentralization in developers just like the DACs themselves.

Once we have multiple credible developers, hopefully on different continents, the whole industry will be much safer.

Stan,

I honestly think one of the first and most important tasks of Invictus Innovations should be to develop and release an exquisite DAC development kit. If this were any other industry, say the gaming industry for example and you're building a platform for construction of games then you release an easy to use development kit to facilitate the process. If it were mobile technology like Android then you'd release a kit which any programmer can make use of using whatever language they know.

The reason most developers (myself included) don't know where or how to get started right now is because there isn't a development kit. This would mean a lot of documentation, reference protocols and a high level interface. If there are enough programmers opening up the development so that other programmers can write reference implementations, or templates, that could help too.

I've taken a look at Keyhotee and I can figure out what it's doing, and I've looked at Protoshares as well. Protoshares is based mostly on Bitcoin and Bitcoin is very daunting for anybody to mess around with, as a result not a lot of people are able to make anything more than small changes. When I tried to compile Protoshares I could not get it to compile in Linux due to the various dependencies.

Bitshares in my opinion is where it really gets interesting. I hope the API for it is high level enough that I can build on top of it and that development can take place in many programming languages at once. I could easily see a scenario where we are building DACs on top of DACs.
+1. A development kit would be very very helpful. Can a separate thread be started for the resources / tools / skills requirements - this will help us to plan ahead.

I agree. The prototypical nature of the bitcoin software has exploded into many forks. Cryptocurrency is still in a gold-rush era and instead of focusing on user-friendlyness  or even developer-friendlyness there has been a rapid succession of new coins and ideas based on coins. I think the first to develop a good SDK for DAC-creation can pull an enormous developer-audience towards his project.

I have been following bitshares and related projects for some time now and have not been able to help much. I have some skills and some experience, but like luckybit delving into bitcoin-code is still tough. When a there is a new documented layer on top of protoshares enabling high-level DAC implementation I would be able to do more. I might be willing to contribute to such a project.
OpenPGP: 0x22d7e9cc35375665
PTS - PawnbhoiXhmkrKJEPAsCiwkpP81nRXJGTD
Diaspora profile - https://pod.orkz.net/u/arcke

Offline pgbit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Powerball, DAC sounds cool, and allot faster to develop than BitShares.
What is the status on this one?
Have we found some people to develop it?

It is on our roadmap, to be undertaken when we are able to raise enough funds to pay for its development.

But if some other developer were to start credible work on it, we would be happy to cheer them on. 

It doesn't matter to us who develops these DACs, we will invest in them on their merits like everyone else.

This generates decentralization in developers just like the DACs themselves.

Once we have multiple credible developers, hopefully on different continents, the whole industry will be much safer.

Stan,

I honestly think one of the first and most important tasks of Invictus Innovations should be to develop and release an exquisite DAC development kit. If this were any other industry, say the gaming industry for example and you're building a platform for construction of games then you release an easy to use development kit to facilitate the process. If it were mobile technology like Android then you'd release a kit which any programmer can make use of using whatever language they know.

The reason most developers (myself included) don't know where or how to get started right now is because there isn't a development kit. This would mean a lot of documentation, reference protocols and a high level interface. If there are enough programmers opening up the development so that other programmers can write reference implementations, or templates, that could help too.

I've taken a look at Keyhotee and I can figure out what it's doing, and I've looked at Protoshares as well. Protoshares is based mostly on Bitcoin and Bitcoin is very daunting for anybody to mess around with, as a result not a lot of people are able to make anything more than small changes. When I tried to compile Protoshares I could not get it to compile in Linux due to the various dependencies.

Bitshares in my opinion is where it really gets interesting. I hope the API for it is high level enough that I can build on top of it and that development can take place in many programming languages at once. I could easily see a scenario where we are building DACs on top of DACs.
+1. A development kit would be very very helpful. Can a separate thread be started for the resources / tools / skills requirements - this will help us to plan ahead.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Wouldn't it be better if the people who were in the lottery were the ones who owned the actual coins? For example, anyone with a Lotterycoin could send a transaction into the blockchain to be added to the next block. Once the next block is mined, a transaction is chosen as the winner and gets the sum of all the coins from the transactions in that block, minus a reward for the miners. Maybe your odds of winning could be increased depending on the size of your transaction. This would give the coin serious utility as a DAC and also give miners an incentive to mine.

When you enter most casinos, you must exchange your fiat for "chips" and cash them out at the end of the night.  Think crypto-chips!
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline kyletorpey

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Wouldn't it be better if the people who were in the lottery were the ones who owned the actual coins? For example, anyone with a Lotterycoin could send a transaction into the blockchain to be added to the next block. Once the next block is mined, a transaction is chosen as the winner and gets the sum of all the coins from the transactions in that block, minus a reward for the miners. Maybe your odds of winning could be increased depending on the size of your transaction. This would give the coin serious utility as a DAC and also give miners an incentive to mine.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Powerball, DAC sounds cool, and allot faster to develop than BitShares.
What is the status on this one?
Have we found some people to develop it?

It is on our roadmap, to be undertaken when we are able to raise enough funds to pay for its development.

But if some other developer were to start credible work on it, we would be happy to cheer them on. 

It doesn't matter to us who develops these DACs, we will invest in them on their merits like everyone else.

This generates decentralization in developers just like the DACs themselves.

Once we have multiple credible developers, hopefully on different continents, the whole industry will be much safer.

Stan,

I honestly think one of the first and most important tasks of Invictus Innovations should be to develop and release an exquisite DAC development kit. If this were any other industry, say the gaming industry for example and you're building a platform for construction of games then you release an easy to use development kit to facilitate the process. If it were mobile technology like Android then you'd release a kit which any programmer can make use of using whatever language they know.

The reason most developers (myself included) don't know where or how to get started right now is because there isn't a development kit. This would mean a lot of documentation, reference protocols and a high level interface. If there are enough programmers opening up the development so that other programmers can write reference implementations, or templates, that could help too.

I've taken a look at Keyhotee and I can figure out what it's doing, and I've looked at Protoshares as well. Protoshares is based mostly on Bitcoin and Bitcoin is very daunting for anybody to mess around with, as a result not a lot of people are able to make anything more than small changes. When I tried to compile Protoshares I could not get it to compile in Linux due to the various dependencies.

Bitshares in my opinion is where it really gets interesting. I hope the API for it is high level enough that I can build on top of it and that development can take place in many programming languages at once. I could easily see a scenario where we are building DACs on top of DACs.

I completely agree.  These are the kinds of reasons why developers need to raise funds.  So we can provide a complete full-service ecosystem as soon as possible.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline luckybit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: Luckybit
Powerball, DAC sounds cool, and allot faster to develop than BitShares.
What is the status on this one?
Have we found some people to develop it?

It is on our roadmap, to be undertaken when we are able to raise enough funds to pay for its development.

But if some other developer were to start credible work on it, we would be happy to cheer them on. 

It doesn't matter to us who develops these DACs, we will invest in them on their merits like everyone else.

This generates decentralization in developers just like the DACs themselves.

Once we have multiple credible developers, hopefully on different continents, the whole industry will be much safer.

Stan,

I honestly think one of the first and most important tasks of Invictus Innovations should be to develop and release an exquisite DAC development kit. If this were any other industry, say the gaming industry for example and you're building a platform for construction of games then you release an easy to use development kit to facilitate the process. If it were mobile technology like Android then you'd release a kit which any programmer can make use of using whatever language they know.

The reason most developers (myself included) don't know where or how to get started right now is because there isn't a development kit. This would mean a lot of documentation, reference protocols and a high level interface. If there are enough programmers opening up the development so that other programmers can write reference implementations, or templates, that could help too.

I've taken a look at Keyhotee and I can figure out what it's doing, and I've looked at Protoshares as well. Protoshares is based mostly on Bitcoin and Bitcoin is very daunting for anybody to mess around with, as a result not a lot of people are able to make anything more than small changes. When I tried to compile Protoshares I could not get it to compile in Linux due to the various dependencies.

Bitshares in my opinion is where it really gets interesting. I hope the API for it is high level enough that I can build on top of it and that development can take place in many programming languages at once. I could easily see a scenario where we are building DACs on top of DACs.

« Last Edit: December 20, 2013, 09:29:14 am by luckybit »
https://metaexchange.info | Bitcoin<->Altcoin exchange | Instant | Safe | Low spreads

Offline MrJeans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: mrjeans
Powerball, DAC sounds cool, and allot faster to develop than BitShares.
What is the status on this one?
Have we found some people to develop it?

It is on our roadmap, to be undertaken when we are able to raise enough funds to pay for its development.

But if some other developer were to start credible work on it, we would be happy to cheer them on. 

It doesn't matter to us who develops these DACs, we will invest in them on their merits like everyone else.

This generates decentralization in developers just like the DACs themselves.

Once we have multiple credible developers, hopefully on different continents, the whole industry will be much safer.
I was more hoping the launch of Powerball, DAC would be able to raise funding for Invictus (because Invictus would have allot of shares in this if it honors PTS). Then this added funding could be used for BitShares development.

But I guess we have a bit of a chicken-egg situation here.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Powerball, DAC sounds cool, and allot faster to develop than BitShares.
What is the status on this one?
Have we found some people to develop it?

It is on our roadmap, to be undertaken when we are able to raise enough funds to pay for its development.

But if some other developer were to start credible work on it, we would be happy to cheer them on. 

It doesn't matter to us who develops these DACs, we will invest in them on their merits like everyone else.

This generates decentralization in developers just like the DACs themselves.

Once we have multiple credible developers, hopefully on different continents, the whole industry will be much safer.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline MrJeans

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: mrjeans
Powerball, DAC sounds cool, and allot faster to develop than BitShares.
What is the status on this one?
Have we found some people to develop it?

Offline bytemaster

Second question...which is more about the nature of ProtoShares: If I import my PTS privkey into the PowerBall DAC wallet have I "spent" by PTS or just gained access to a clone of them in the form of Powerball DAC shares leaving me free to also import my PTS privkey into the next DAC and the next one and the next one and....?


The great thing about PTS is that you get shares in every DAC that honors the PTS contract! You don't lose them, you just get shares in the new DACs that are released, and then you keep your PTS!

My question is: why do people who decide to develop DAC want to honor PTS, or why even Invictus Innovation want to honor PTS at all (besides marketing PTS at early stage)?

Because PTS helps raise capital for the development of these DACs and if you didn't honor it then someone could fork your code and honor it anyway. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline dacer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Second question...which is more about the nature of ProtoShares: If I import my PTS privkey into the PowerBall DAC wallet have I "spent" by PTS or just gained access to a clone of them in the form of Powerball DAC shares leaving me free to also import my PTS privkey into the next DAC and the next one and the next one and....?


The great thing about PTS is that you get shares in every DAC that honors the PTS contract! You don't lose them, you just get shares in the new DACs that are released, and then you keep your PTS!

My question is: why do people who decide to develop DAC want to honor PTS, or why even Invictus Innovation want to honor PTS at all (besides marketing PTS at early stage)?