NXT – Proof of Stake and the New Alternative Altcoin

When the crypto community thinks of altcoin, cryptocurrencies like Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Peercoin are usually first on their mind. We have seen a growing number of altcoin since Bitcoin’s introduction in 2009, simply because of the rapid adoption of cryptocurrencies all over the world. But is it possible to have an alternative altcoin? The new and innovative altcoin NXT and its developers have made it possible.

Less than a month ago, NXT launched their brand new digital currency, and soon after signed BTER as an exchange partner. With no mining on the network, NXT is the most energy efficient cryptocurrency, because the “forging” process requires little processing power. Forging NXT can even be done from a mobile device.

The new Alt-Altcoin?

The way NXT works is completely different from that of Bitcoin as it uses completely different algorithms for mining. In fact, the developers created NXT completely from scratch, in order to create the new alt-altcoin. The different algorithms used allow NXT users to mine with exponentially less computing power. NXT uses Proof of Stake (PoS), a concept initially pioneered by Peercoin, rather than Proof of Work, used by Bitcoin and other coins.

NXT and Proof of Stake

As the first 100% Proof of Stake digital currency written from the ground-up, NXT is creating a new path on which altcoins can be built from. Unlike Proof of Work currencies like Bitcoin, the currency is secured by owners of already existing coins that receive a portion of transaction fees for forging a NXT block. A user is chosen to solve a block depending on their stake in the market, which allows everyone on the network to have the same reward potential.

The idea behind NXT and Proof of Stake is to generate coins without using vast amounts of energy as the Bitcoin network does. This is done through the network, by calculating the amount of coins each user has and randomly selecting who will forge the next block. Everyone knows who will be mining the next block in the blockchain, making it impossible for a user to convince the network that a transaction didn’t occur.

Additionally, the network can detect which accounts do not participate in PoS and also recognize users forging a fraudulent block. A process called Transparent Forging enables the network to decrease the attacker’s mining power to zero and keep the NXT network secure.

Reducing Double Spending and 51% Attacks

NXT eliminates the possibility of double spending and 51% attacks, because each user knows who is responsible for forging the next block of transactions. A fork in the blockchain simply does not exist with the newest alt-altcoin. What Transparent Forging and PoS provides to NXT is something new for cryptocurrencies. Transactions continue to remain anonymous and secure, but unlike Bitcoin, each transaction requires less user confirmation, making digital transactions even more efficient.

NXT is the first cryptocurrency that has been completely rewritten and is 100% Proof of Stake. Other altcoins like Peercoin, only uses PoS for a portion of its coins and uses Proof of Work for the rest. Digital currencies, most namely Bitcoin, along with other altcoins like Peercoin use mining to create new coins, working together to solve each block. This is the main point of difference with NXT – instead of mining new coins, NXT has already produced them. This enables the NXT network to focus on solving blocks and increase transaction efficiency, while decreasing power consumption for users.

What’s Next for NXT?

As with any alternative coin, NXT is very new to the cryptocurrency community. The entire market consists of 1 billion coins, all created by the NXT developers, and are currently worth just under $74,000,000USD. NXT also provides an alias system, arbitrary messaging at Block 40,000, asset exchange and a decentralized domain name system. There is no question that NXT warrants its own category, as the world’s first alt-altcoin entirely based on Proof of Stake. With the growing popularity of cryptocurrency, the future looks very bright for NXT.

Biggs’ Bitcoin Bunk

John Biggs has a writing problem. It’s terrible.

I too know manias. I see them most often among writers who have a mania for writing even when they have nothing to say. Such is the case with John Biggs’ recent Bitcoin’s Image Problem.

First off, Bitcoin’s image problem is evident to anyone watching the mainstream media’s portrayal of BTC as the domain of drug dealers and terrorists, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Bitcoin’s image problem is one fabricated by writers like Mr. Biggs.

But let’s look at his obvious blunders. Writing students, pay attention. He claims “Its followers see themselves as freedom fighters, attacking outsiders with vengeance and talking up their own accomplishments in the language of the already victorious.“ This sentence is an assertion made without evidence, and one that ascribes a universal characteristic (freedom fighters, attacking outsiders with vengeance, etc…) to the whole of the Bitcoin user base without differentiation. Having just attended nearly every workshop and panel of the North American Bitcoin Conference on Miami Beach, I can assure you that freedom fighters, or even those claiming to be freedom fighters were scarcely to be found. And just to establish some kind of credibility here, having worked in South Africa on behalf of the ANC, I know a freedom fighter when I see one.

It is true that among some outliers in the Bitcoin community (and I do not mean any pejorative by the word outlier), one may find the overheated rhetoric of anarchists and radical libertarians. What else is new? One can hear them at any time of day on almost any subject across the radio airwaves and in the comments section of every local newspaper. No one mistakes the tin foil hats for the majority’s sensible headgear.

Biggs really goes off the rails with statements like “These incremental hoots make it seem like bitcoin is growing. It isn’t, at least not in a global sense.” To say that Bitcoin adoption is not growing on a global scale ignores the facts of what we see all around us. Ask them at Tiger Direct. Perhaps Biggs would like to say that climate change is not happening either.

And let’s look at this one: “There is no impetus for the average user to dump money into an unregulated system that appears as volatile as the currency of some banana republic run by a capricious dictator.” Funny, Latin America is where we find enormous demand for the services that Bitcoin can provide. And I would suggest Mr. Biggs drop his ever-so-gringo caricatures of our neighbors to the south.

Finally, bitcoin users are seen as misogynistic and sexist.” That’s a handy slur. The presentation by Elizabeth Ploshay on the subject of Bitcoin and its potential for the empowerment of women at the Miami conference was one of the best attended and most lively. Not one sexist remark from the audience. Not a hoot or a whistle or a wolf-call. Should conventions such as these adopt non-harassment policies? Of course. So should every business conference in the world. (“TechCrunch learned far too late”)  It wasn’t Bitcoin conferences that prompted the formulation of those guidelines, they were prompted by a historically discriminatory business environment. To suggest that Bitcoin users are any more misogynistic and sexist than any other group is transparently misleading, especially as no evidence is offered.

Unlike the Internet, there is no clear way forward, no use case that the average user will accept as valid.” Really, Mr. Biggs. You must not have been around in the early days of the internet, as I was. There was no clear way forward then either.

But perhaps you haven’t read in the history books about that time that the driving economy of the early internet, as it was with the VCR, was pornography. This inconvenient little truth kind of puts your moralistic little tome in perspective. It’s just silly, the product of yet another immature writer with a mania for writing. Here’s a suggestion from Creative Writing 101. Write What You Know.

Is Bitcoin like love?

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, and always perseveres. Love never fails.

-1 Cor 13

It has been said that the love of money is the root of all evil.  Greed can easily top the list of the deadly sins for its impact on the world, but money, at least some types of money, might also be able to teach us something about love.  Consider the generous love that has gone into Bitcoin in its creation, distribution, and implementation.  Consider also the protocol’s reliance on the greed of people to defeat greed itself.  The motivation of greed is met with curiosity and even benevolence within the mining community.  The protocol itself uses the natural greed to engender sufficient mining growth along a continuum and weans us from this greed through the progressive halving of the block rewards predictably every few years.  Let’s see how good of a match they make on each of those?

Bitcoin is patient.

Although it sometimes seems like there is this rush of change in Bitcoin Land, and we just can’t get things done fast enough, this is our impatience, not any impatience of Bitcoin.  Bitcoin is patient; it will still be here even if any of our projects fail.  The protocol was crafted and designed and released and will await our capacity to make sense of it.

Bitcoin is kind.

The boundless benevolence of Bitcoin is characterized by the notion of “random acts of kindness”.  There is nowhere this is made more manifest as in the Bitcoin protocol.  The random distribution of block rewards to those that are engaging in Bitcoin is deeply kind.  This extends out into the Bitcoin community.  Bitcoin in its early days was and is a sort of gift economy.  It enabled the “random act of kindness” in a wonderful new way.  A great proportion of the early transactions were gifts, and it with Bitcoin that a simple anonymous donation can be very easily made, an anonymous gift is a profound kindness as there is no possibility for any return favor, or even acknowledgement.  A simple gift transaction to someone you never met just because you like some code they wrote or something they are doing is so very easily enabled by this wonderful innovation that it has spread love and joy through its kindness worldwide.  This kindness is built into the basic elements of the protocol.  Every transaction has the option of including within it a gift to those that calculate the hashes to secure the block chain, the miners.

Bitcoin does not envy.

The excellent are not prone to envy. Bitcoin is content with what it is.  It does not covet the attentions of anyone from individuals to central banking.  It is self-sufficient in that it does not beg for someone to come along and attend to it.

Bitcoin does not seek what it does not have.  Bitcoin does not look to become Legal Tender, and does not want to force you by rule of law to accept it, or even to abandon any other means of transaction.  Bitcoin is assuredly content to be what it is.

Bitcoin does not boast

Much of what is said about Bitcoin sounds boastful.  “Best investment of the year”, “greatest innovation in financial instruments”, “Largest challenge to central banking in a century”.  We would do well to make less grand claims as our experiment grows up and meets the world.  These however are not Bitcoin’s own boasts.  Bitcoin is in beta, it is what it is.

Bitcoin is not proud.

It stands naked with its code exposed.  One of the foundational principles of Bitcoin is that it is open source.  It has always been open source.  The Bitcoin code is exposed and laid bare for any criticism and this is its strength.  These criticisms are welcomed and when they are on point they are cherished not answered with pride.  Though Bitcoin Land is inhabited by folks who are smarter and more attractive than average, its greatest gift is given anonymously.  The protocol itself.

Bitcoin does not dishonor others

Bitcoin is honorable; it is at its essence, mathematics.  What can be more honorable than math?  Its calculations are known and open and exposed.  There is no encryption in Bitcoin.  The transactions are in the public, they are shared and open and above all honorable. As the transactions are confirmed by the proof of work securing each block they become increasingly honorable such that everyone will honor transactions even the block reward after 100 blocks have been stacked on top.

Bitcoin is not self-seeking

Bitcoin does not seek its own.  Once a public address is used, it would be proper to not reuse the address.  The protocol is not built to create great stores of wealth on any address.  The more bitcoins are transacted to an address the more exposed that address becomes and therefore the least safe.

Bitcoin is not easily angered

It is difficult to imagine the emotion of anger applying to Bitcoin.  It is a gentle protocol, even the competitive activity of the mining of fresh Bitcoin by creating new blocks in the block chain creates cooperation and pooling in the same way that friends can join a lottery pool and share the rewards of winning.

Bitcoin keeps no record of wrongs

Bitcoin keeps every record, and keeps it in the open.  The wrongs of Bitcoin would be those blocks that are orphaned and not propagated.  Those blocks are lost to posterity.  Unless they have blocks stacked upon them in order and with properly calculated hashes they are not kept in the block chain record.  The Bitcoin block chain keeps no record of these lost chains gone wrong.

Bitcoin does not delight in evil.

Bitcoin relies on the sanctity of mathematics.  There are many examples of evil.  The evil that sought out the loving embrace of Bitcoin in attempts to hide ultimately become exposed and there is no delight in the evil.  The greatest evils are those for which Bitcoin was designed to protect us all:  The insidious theft of the product of our labors of the world through the non-consensual devaluation of our wealth by national money issuers.

Bitcoin rejoices with the truth.

When the mathematical truth of the proof of work calculation is reached, when a sufficiently difficult hash is randomly accomplished upon a block to proclaim its truth the world it is met with a joyful reward.  This reward is met with rejoicing and swiftly followed by more and more blocks and more and more rewards.

Bitcoin protects

The security of each and every key that protects the wealth of the smallest measure of Bitcoin, a satoshi, is protected by just the same cryptographic security as the largest.   Even the poorest among us receives this same benefit of mathematics.  All of us are protected without monetary discrimination from the alpaca sock merchant to the exchange traded fund.  There are no classes of people or special privileges.

Bitcoin trusts

Bitcoin is designed to not require trusting anyone other than the folks involved in the transaction.  This is new.  Bitcoin is a novel solution to a problem that has perplexed some of the smartest minds of a generation and handily solves the Byzantine General’s Problem. You do not have to trust that my bank will honor a check, or that your bank will cash it.  You do not have to trust that I am the true owner of a credit card, the transaction provides all the trust that you will need.  When the Bitcoin transaction is recognized in the block chain, the block chain can trust you to do as you will with them when you present to it a transaction for them signed by your private key.  Holding the key is all the trust that is required.

Bitcoin hopes

The Bitcoin protocol was designed with hoped for liberation from artificial and arbitrary constraints.  We no longer have to wait for banks and payment institutions to generate new monetary innovations.  We hope for freedom from the onerous consumer protection structures and fee structures.  We hope to be liberated from an unpredictable inflation arbitrarily decided behind closed doors pulling the value out of our savings.  We instead empower ourselves with the ability to program our money to behave according to clear and open rules which only change when all those who are impacted are in agreement.

Bitcoin preserves

The ability of Bitcoin to preserve in permanent open record is unsurpassed by any other endeavor attempted by humans.  The propagation of the block chain into every full client insures the persistent and continuous record of preserving the transactional history of every exchange since its inception.  It has created an open book preserved for posterity of what we each do with each other.

Bitcoin never fails.

This remains to be seen, but so far so good.  Love wins.  Happy Valentine’s Day.

 

In mining, we trust.

In mining we trust.

On the side of the US $1 bill it says “In God, we trust”. Because money is all about trust. Trust that it’s real, trust that it will remain at a similar value for the duration of the transaction at least, trust that the products are represented honestly. In the past trust that the paper was redeemable in gold, and more recently trust that our dollar will be backed by the “full faith and credit of the US Government”.

And when that trust is lacking society shuts down. To some extent, the crisis of 2008, in the same manner as the one in 1929 was about the lack of trust. They called it “counter party risk”, but it basically means: “Do I trust that the other side of the contract will be honored when the time comes?” When there is not trust, markets freeze.

And let’s be honest, our trust in government, in markets, in society in general has been shaken over the last few years.

It is precisely TRUST that makes Bitcoin, and specifically mining in Bitcoin, so world changing. Remember, Bitcoin is not just a virtual currency. It is a “public, trusted, distributed transaction ledger”.

Public because we can all see the transactions. The block chain is open for anyone to inspect. Every transaction is recorded and available for public view. We ALL know what was sold and for how much, even if not necessarily to whom.

Trusted because it is mathematically very difficult, almost impossible, to fake the data. That is very, very important because it means the ledger can be relied on. We can trust it.

Distributed, because no one single entity can modify the ledger data. No-one can cheat. Again, trust.

That means that the data in the ledger can’t be faked. It is in other words “TRUSTED”. Mathematically TRUSTED. Cryptographically TRUSTED. And so, socially trusted.

And remember, it’s a “ledger”. A “TRUSTED ledger”. A ledger we, as a society, can all agree on.

Now think about how MANY ledgers are out there. You run into them every day, many times a day. The checkout counter for your coffee? A ledger. Taxes you will pay later in the year? Ledger. Election results? Ledger. Company balance sheet? Ledger. Stock market? Big ledger… And so on…

Right now we don’t really trust these ledgers. That’s why we have audits, and spot checks, and back office settlement. How much money does the NYSE spend on “back room clearing”, the matching process that allocates buyers and sellers to each transaction at the end of the day? Billions.  And at the end not really “TRUSTED”. How much do we all spend every year on tax filings? And our taxes are often wrong and take a lot of work to figure out.

Bitcoin, and alts, solve this problem. By creating and maintaining these “public transaction ledgers”, we can increase trust in government and in our society, and drastically reduce transaction costs. More importantly we can, for the first time, have total transparency of our institutions and REALLY know what they’re doing.

Imagine: the 2000 election result battle? Solved. Just tally up the electronic register. It’s TRUSTED. MERS, the Mortgage Electronic Registry System, the culprit behind so many bad foreclosures? Follow the transactions. TRUSTED. NYSE back office settlement? Yep, that too. How about annual company audits? How about tax filing? Yep. A TRUSTED register allows for all of these issues to be resolved. But the trick is TRUSTED.

So how do we know that it’s “TRUSTED”. I mean, can we REALLY know?

Well, that actually is the reason that Bitcoin works. Because we can. While the details of the process are a bit too technical for this article, the details are available. Bitcoin is after all an “open source” protocol.

And as you dig into those details, as I, and many others, have, you find that we can really TRUST the ledger. The ledger allows for the kind of verification that Ronald Reagan talked about when he said “we trust, but verify”. (As a side note, it’s interesting that Ronald Reagan got that from a Russian Proverb.)

It is mining that provides that trust. Mining, as an activity allows for many different miners and mining machines to cryptographically coordinate, verify and agree upon the transaction ledger. This, under most conditions, protects the ledger from external modification.

“Under most conditions”. Pretty good legalese, huh? The process fails when any one entity (or combination of entities) can control 51% of the hashing power. This is called the 51% attack. If you control most of the hashing power, you can change the ledger and force the rest of the system to agree with you. You can compromise the TRUST of the ledger.

The solution to THIS problem is the “distributed” component of the mining process. A company or government that maintains its own ledger cannot be trusted. But if it is maintained by many other entities, ones not associated with the user of the ledger, it can. The trick of course, as outlined above, is that no ONE entity, or collusion of entities can own more than 51% of the hashing power.

So under the right conditions, where mining is done by the public, and where mining is distributed into small pools with many different players, the Bitcoin “public transaction ledger” really CAN be TRUSTED, but only if they are “mined”.

In MINING we TRUST.

 

Bitcoin Mining with HashPlex

TLDR

We at HashPlex are building a new kind of datacenter designed from the ground up for bitcoin miners. Our prices have already set a market low at $99/kw-month, and our services and automation will set a new industry standard (we provide space, power, cooling, internet, and automated miner management). We’re on track to have our first HashCenter in Q2 of 2014, and we will be opening limited availability in our interim space in a few weeks. We’re accepting reservations for space in our HashCenters at https://hashplex.com. We pledge to forever remain a positive force in a vibrant, decentralized bitcoin mining community. Come check us out!

Our Genesis

HashPlex was a glimmer in my eye (some might say a tear) while setting up various bitcoin miners (mostly BFL and KNC) as they arrived.

“Couldn’t this be easier?” I asked myself, exhaling mumbled expletives through acidic, cold-press-infused spittle. I had quickly exhausted all the power in my apartment and my sister’s garage, and I was looking for more. I had what I thought was a great setup: several raspberry pi’s running ArchLinux with a simple cron for cgminer. Gradually I learned just how far from automated this setup was. CGMiner would segfault, my raspberry pi’s would crash, my GFIs would trip from bad power supplies. With my girlfriend’s various pained expressions weighing on my mind as our electrical panel buzzed like a pack of Asian hornets, I remembered the old adage, “some find opportunity in adversity.”

I went looking for larger venues to put my miners. “You want how many amps!?” was a common response from leasing agents. Even those that did have the electrical capacity had nothing near my required thermal capacity.

I went looking at datacenter space. Certainly they must have solved this problem. Oh, they had solved it (in the most inelegant, massively brute-force way possible), and boy would I pay for it out the nose. At the end of the day, even if I paid their exorbitant rates, I still didn’t receive any automated miner management.

I went to my friends and described our opportunity to build HashPlex. They were excited (a rarity for my ideas).

The Pitch

We’re offering full-service miner hosting at a 2-3x discount of what’s on the market, and we provide all the services not typically provided by the other guys. Our entry-level plan is $99/kw-month, and we drop to $89/kw-month if you can bring us 30kw or more of mining power. How many gigahashes is that? Here’s a handy lookup table:

Butterfly Labs Mini-Rig: 0.5TH/s, ~2.2kw → $297 / month
KNC Miner Jupiter: 0.55TH/s, ~600w → $99 / month
Coincraft Rig: 2.8TH/s, ~3kw → $297 / month
Cointerra TerraMiner IV: 2TH/s, ~1.5kw → $198 / month
HashFast Sierra: 1.2TH/s, ~800w → $99 / month
BlackArrow Prospero X-3 (@1.56GHz): 2TH/s, ~1kw → $99 / month

Our $99/kw-month rate comes out to a price of ~$0.1375 / kw-hour (and that includes power, internet, space, cooling, security, and automated management). Many miners pay more than that for power alone while mining at home. Do you have a solution for security at home? Will you have enough cooling when the summer months come? Are you tired of worrying about miners crashing while you’re on a trip? We at HashPlex pledge to be a ship-it-and-forget-it solution for the rest of the life of your miner.

How do we do it? We could never offer you this service and pricing while leasing existing spaces. Our custom HashCenters will enable new, unrivaled levels of productivity per dollar.

Who We Are

I’m Bernie, the founder and CEO of HashPlex. I studied Electrical Engineering at Stanford through 2009. I’ve worked at Better Place, Apple Computer, and Microsoft (where I spent my last 4 years).

Bernie Rihn, Founder, CEO at hashplex.com
Bernie Rihn, Founder, CEO at hashplex.com

While at Microsoft I helped with the video-input-processor and ambient light cancellation algorithm in Sensor-In-Pixel based Samsung LCDs which went into Micosoft PixelSense. I later tinkered on a few small inventions and worked on bringing an accessory for Microsoft Surface (the tablet) out of the labs while in the Microsoft Applied Sciences group.

I met Jason Prado (Advisor, SW Chief) at Stanford in the LaIR, a space for entry-level CS students to work and get help. Though not on duty, he volunteered answers to my questions all while his hands furiously thwacked the keyboard of a 12” PowerBook G4 in their own self-governed other-world of LateX.

cmd-tab … thwack-click-click-click … cmd-tab, compile … cmd-tab

“So you see” … “when you reach” … “the end” … “of a linked-list”

Jason Prado
Jason Prado

Jason would go on to work at Meebo, Apture, Microsoft, Plannr (acquired by Google), Google, and Facebook.

John Stockdale (Advisor, HW Chief) and I met during Stanford’s prospective freshman weekend. We both ran our own FTP servers and drooled over cars and computers. That weekend John took me to a (then mystical) burger place called “In-N-Out” in a Mitsubishi Evolution tuned to run on race gas. Both have had remarkable staying power in my still boyish subconscious.

John Stockdale
John Stockdale

After graduating, John went on to VW Research, Videosurf (acquired by Microsoft), and Facebook to work on their Open Compute Project. John is now an active angel investor, skydiver, and hacker of all kinds.

George Schnurle
George Schnurle

George Schnurle (VP Engineering) and I met through Jason in 2010. Shocked that somehow we had not crossed paths during school, we immediately hit it off, discussing our various clever mechanical inventions and apparati (both real and serial-day-dreamt). We’ve been burner & engineering buds ever since. George has done mechanical engineering for SLAC, WhereNet, and Paramit.

Why We’re A Great, Positive Force For The Network

We at HashPlex want to re-empower entry-level miners and help maintain healthy decentralization in the network. Sure, the era of GPU mining (for bitcoin) is forever gone, but the era of ASIC mining is actually still very young. Companies like CEX.IO have massive, centralized hashing power that is mining for a single pool. At HashPlex, customers will always have a choice for what pool they use, and they will always be given all available facilities to participate in the network in the manner that they would like.

Interested in hosting / partnering / working with us? Drop us a line.

The Greater Promise of a Blockchain

Bitcoin is dead! It must be true, Reuters told me. Charlie Stross will be pleased. The party’s over. Everyone go home. It’s time for some quiet reflection.

Wait a minute. Bitcoin’s not dead. Hold on. How does a computer protocol die anyway?

The viability of Bitcoin: it’s a debate that seems to go on forever. It may be difficult to comprehend, but out there in cyberspace are places where Bitcoin is still a curiosity. There, this technology is superficially considered and routinely dismissed. What is being overlooked?

Detractors will often tell you that money needs government. They’ll remind you of tulips and speculative manias. They seek to distract. Long-winded diatribes on the history of money are commonplace. Readers are taken on pointless journeys through antiquity. The most obscure historical references are routinely cited.

Ignore the arguments for a moment. Instead, observe the humans making them.

You will necessarily find the most near-sighted of creatures: the economic analyst. The technology communities of the world are already committing. For them Bitcoin is a no-brainer. It’s their job to spot disruptive technology.

This is key. Bitcoin is a technological innovation: purely disruptive in form and function. Arguments by economists that ignore the technology are worthless.

Those with the loudest digital voices continue to produce the most noise: failing to engage the technical. Perhaps this can be forgiven. With only a casual glance Bitcoin could seem full of bizarre phenomenon.

But really, what does it take to think? Shouldn’t complete analysis precede grandstanding? Maybe then we could all be spared the mind-numbing horror of another diatribe about tulips.

Bitcoin is an idea expressed in the language of mathematics. Its time has come. To analyse it as only a monetary phenomenon will lead you down the garden path.

Fundamentally Bitcoin is a solution to a long-standing computing network problem.

The Problem of Byzantine Generals

Bitcoin is, first and foremost, a ledger. The units of account are earned onto the ledger. The ledger is the blockchain.

The computing problem is that, given a large group of users, each will want to create a false ledger entry, assigning themselves more units. Before Bitcoin a central party was the only solution. However a central point of failure is best avoided.

The Byzantine generals problem uses an allegory to explain. Some generals and their respective armies are outside a city. They want to invade. They know that if at least half of them attack at the same time they’ll win. But they must attack at the same time. If not, they’ll lose. They can only co-ordinate via messages.

Treachery is possible and some generals may send fake messages. How to know if a message is true? Faced with potential dishonesty, how can such a large and disparate group co-ordinate the time for attack?

The solution: attach a cost to sending the message and ensure, through the network, that only one general can send a message at a time. The cost is a proof-of-work scheme. And eureka, we‘ve finally found it. A message cannot be faked: it will not contain the math solution needed to authenticate it.

A dishonest general can only succeed if the majority of the generals collude with him. This is unlikely. The system rewards generals for their resource intensive math work in maintaining the system.

Voila, a time-stamped, cryptographic-ledger, distributed over a decentralised peer-to-peer network: a technological marvel that can’t go away. To dismiss it is foolhardy. The implications are too far-reaching.

The Future Applications of a Blockchain.

Economic analysts are obviously preoccupied: tulips or Beanie Babies for this article guys? It’s heady work. Nevertheless innovation continues in earnest. Behind the scenes we’re really starting to hit hyper-drive.

Those with vision and understanding are taking this technology and building things, amazing things: tools and protocol layers.

Our future is clear. In this strange world of decentralized networks, agents will interact with each other intimately and directly, from afar, for everything. At the core of all these networks will be a blockchain.

All internet-based trusted third parties are now redundant. The corporate dead walk among us. The network is its own autonomous entity for achieving consensus.

For an economic analyst like Mr Edward Hadas, for example, perhaps the ultimate proof of just how unsettling a blockchain will be are ‘coloured coins’. Here the units of account on a given blockchain are tied directly to the shares issued in a company (as an asset example).

Take a given quantity of Bitcoin, tie them to a given quantity of shares in a company and let them move around the ledger.

If the blockchain agrees on asset ownership through time and transferring that ownership is trivial then there is no need for expensive stock exchanges. Assets like company shares become so liquid that they could be used in any transaction, person-to-person.

Bitcoin enthusiasts are conservative revolutionaries. But the possibilities are truly endless and the mind often boggles.

One further example for the economically minded: Decentralised Autonomous Corporations (DACs).  For a full analysis of a DAC see Vitalik Buterin’s article on bootstrapping a DAC. Essentially this is a network of economic agents interacting with each other according to rules allowed for by a common protocol. It is a decentralised company.

Bitcoin is often described as the world’s first DAC. A common protocol (business rules) underpins a network of users who contribute their land, labour, capital and enterprise (factors of production) to providing value (the network and ancillary services).

The DAC rewards economic agents by assigning them units of account on the ledger. The network is its own ecosystem and actors can be thought of as bootstrapping an economy. DACs can take a variety of forms but the blockchain is always at the core. In every case the community self-organizes and hierarchy becomes redundant.

Societal Implications: A Greater Vision.

The blockchain is the heartbeat of a new decentralised organism. This creature will completely reshape society in its own image.

This should be embraced. Our society is too complex to manage centrally. But even if this is ignored, it will not matter. This change is inevitable. The industrial age necessitated hierarchy: monolithic centres of power exercising inordinate amounts of control. Our information age does not.

Hierarchy limits freedom and causes irrational economic behaviour. It stifles the human spirit and distorts natural market mechanisms.

With Bitcoin’s blockchain all manner of mutually agreed, decentralised relations are possible, at distance.

This new flattened society will be based on mutual contracts made possible by a blockchain. Deposit, escrow, dispute mediation, insurance, trading and micro-transactions are all possible with this technology and the costs are negligible. Property can be both registered and transferred through the blockchain.

Let’s see a tulip or a Beanie Baby do that.

(Inspired in no small part by the vision of Andreas Antonopoulos and the ignorance of Edward Hadas). 

New West Technologies Introduces Bitcoin Integration for Microsoft Dynamics RMS

ATLANTA — January 28, 2014New West Technologies, Inc. has released the first Bitcoin integration for Microsoft Dynamics Retail Management Systems (RMS). In partnership with BitPay, the world leader in business solutions for virtual currencies, New West will deliver a streamlined approach to allow businesses to process Bitcoin payments.

Bitcoin provides a progressive extension to RMS, allowing Microsoft RMS to receive and process Bitcoin payments for goods and services. Bitcoin eliminates opportunity for fraud and identity theft by using cryptography to control the creation and transfer of money. For business, the Bitcoin network does not allow payment cancellations, making chargebacks impossible. New West’s introduction of RMS Bitcoin extends the powerful POS software package and increases automation of POS processes.

“New West makes accepting Bitcoin payments easier than ever and through our implementation of RMS Bitcoin, merchants will see tremendous value in accepting this additional payment method,” states Dale Fowleri, New West Technologies Marketing Director. “Our integration is the most powerful, reliable, and scalable tools for businesses to accept Bitcoin.”

Users send payments by broadcasting digitally signed messages to the network; however the process of completing the transaction does not change. The merchant tenders the Bitcoin, the consumer scans the QR code and approves the payment. Upon approval, the exchange rate is established through BitPay, the transaction is made, and receipt is printed. All action is accomplished through RMS and the internet, making the process effortless for consumers and retailers.

Microsoft Dynamics Retail Management System (RMS) offers small and midsize retailers a complete point of sale (POS) solution that is fast and easy, adaptable to meet unique system requirements. With RMS Bitcoin, retailers can expand their customers’ payment options and establish a foothold using the most secure payment network.

About New West

Founded in 1992 in Portland, Oregon, New West Technologies is a leading integrator of retail POS and customized software solutions. As a full­-service technology provider with extensive experience in small business computer networking and retail software development and installation, we deliver easy ­to ­use, practical solutions that dramatically improve your profitability and workflow management. www.newestech.com

About BitPay

BitPay is a Payment Service Provider (PSP) specializing in eCommerce and B2B solutions for virtual currencies. Visit https://bitpay.com.

 

Smart Property’s Promise for the Poor

Renting an apartment or buying a car requires an income and good credit. Getting a legal job generally requires a permanent residence and a vehicle. Millions of Americans are caught up in this chicken/egg dilemma. But what if it were much easier for folks with bad credit to gain access to the bare necessities to work toward entry to the middle-class? And what if it could actually be done with less risk or burden to lenders and rental agencies than under the current system? Enter Smart Property.

Risk is what makes it difficult for people with blemished credit records to rent apartments or buy cars. Renting or lending to someone who’s shown a propensity to not make payments on time is a risk. Even worse, various consumer protection regulations make recouping losses more difficult than necessary. For this reason, leasing offices and car salespeople are forced to either decline high-risk individuals, or charge them extraordinary rents or interest rates. The same is true for lending money. A bad credit score generally means you either don’t get the chance to prove you’ve changed, or you do, but pay dearly for it.

Imperfect credit (scores)

And while credit scores are the best way lenders and their ilk have to determine someone’s risk level, they are far from perfect.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center has a great report on some of the limitations of credit scores. They point to an extensive study conducted by the National Credit Reporting Agency and the Consumer Federal of America, which revealed that 29% of individuals had significant errors in their credit report that translated into a 50-point or more error in their credit score.

In fact, according to a study the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, one out of five consumers will see a meaningfully different score on their purchased credit report than their lender sees. This is in part due to things like banks withholding positive information about their customers so that competitor banks would not offer them better credit terms. It’s also not helped by the fact that, according to EPIC, “Credit scoring models have long been shrouded in secrecy. Individuals and consumer advocates have found it difficult to ascertain information regarding what factors the models consider, and to what degree.”

Unfortunately as well, correcting those errors is a long and tedious process. Credit reporting agencies do not devote the resources necessary to properly address complaints.

Lastly, there’s evidence that the outright discrimination on the basis of sex and race of the past has simply been replaced with a more subtle form of discrimination. Somehow the way in programmers have chosen which factors to consider, and the amount of weight assigned to these factors, has resulted in little change in who is discriminated against.

Protecting consumers (from opportunities)

Well-meaning consumer protection regulations further increase risk for landlords and lenders. It’s extraordinarily difficult to evict a renter, even for obvious lease violations such as not paying rent. Failing to follow all steps and in the correct order will likely mean your case is thrown out and you will get sued by your renter. Even repossessing a car, already a costly endeavor, is made more difficult through consumer protection laws. The result of all this of course is that it further disincentivizes landlords and lenders renting and lending to “risky” propositions.

Promise of smart property

Now, imagine if we could take someone’s, better yet, anyone’s, risk level down to near-zero? That’s the promise of Smart Property.

Both credit scores and consumer protections exist due to historic and ongoing power imbalances, both real and perceived. A shortage of housing relative to demand, especially in cities, required laws which helped shield renters from racist, abusive and mercurial landlords. Credit scores are how lenders discriminate when using race, sex and other factors is illegal.

But Smart Property obviates the need for trust, and its proxy, discrimination.

Smart Property makes it possible for locks to change automatically the moment a renter violates their lease agreement. And makes it possible for a car to refuse to start the moment a payment is late. Most importantly, it does so on a trustless basis. Because the Bitcoin protocol distributes transactions across the web, it offers transactions in which it’s nearly impossible to falsify who owns what and why.

With smart contracts, the consequences for violating the agreement are implemented automatically, with no need for human judgment. Essentially, it doesn’t matter that the landlord can’t trust a renter to pay. And it doesn’t matter that a renter can’t trust a landlord not to kick her out without good reason. Both parties are fully aware of both the terms of the contract and the immediate consequences of violation. The promise of this innovation should be clear to anyone, but it will impact people who have traditionally suffered from a paucity of trust the most.

Barriers to entry

Computer Scientist Philihp Busby describes some of the obstacles Smart Property will need to overcome for mass adoption. “There are two big barriers in the way of this going mainstream,” Busby said.

He describes a social barrier. Like with most things, the Americans with the most sway, the early adopters, aren’t particularly plagued by the limitations of the current system. Even though “It’s hard to find a notary on a weekend, handwritten signatures can be forged, lawyers are needed to draw up contracts and even better lawyers can be paid to find holes within contracts to circumvent them,” Busby explains, these aren’t exactly issues clearly dying for innovation.

Busby goes on, “This is somewhat a marketing problem too, since most people have been promoting Bitcoin as either a Ponzi scheme or as electronic gold. Instead of what it really is, which is a decentralized payments and contracts network whose unit of currency happens to be a bitcoin.”

He also refers to the shrinking technological barrier. “There aren’t any “Smart” cars that talk to your smartphone to ask it if you’re the owner,” Busby said. “We have RFID key fobs that do this, but what if my key fob is lost or stolen? The dealership would be happy to mint a new set of keys for a few hundred dollars. With a “Smart” car, I could just transfer ownership to a new Bitcoin address. For free. While sitting at home in my underpants.”

When imagining what Smart Property could do for a generation of Americans currently shut out of the rental, job and car market, it’s difficult to not get excited. This could represent waves of people finally offered the opportunity to succeed. Indeed, separating the ability to obtain property from one’s birth or social station is the very foundation of the American Dream. Smart Property may just make that Dream more possible for more people than ever before.

What is Bitcoin and why should you care?

What is Bitcoin, and why do you care?

Bitcoin is freedom for money.

Let me explain: Bitcoin is third “democratization” that I’ve had the privilege of living through.

The first was the Internet of course, the democratization of communication. No longer did you need a printing press, runners, trucks, call boys in order to make your voice heard. Now all you needed is WordPress and a good story. Look at Matt Drudge. He has singlehandedly revolutionized political reporting. His influence is at times stronger than the New York Times. And it’s just him and an assistant and a very, very simple website.

The second democratization is 3d printing, or “additive manufacturing”. It is the democratization of manufacturing and its in full swing. You no longer need a factory to make a product. You can already manufacture in plastic from your desk. In less than 10 years you’ll be able to do it in metal, in color with moving parts.

Bitcoin is the third democratization, the democratization of money. Right now, your money, the money you worked for, saved and earned isn’t really yours. The banks charge you fees for holding it (and sometimes lose it). Governments have confiscated it at times (remember Cyprus?). If you want to move it, there are restrictions as to how much and when, and if you want to spend large amounts of it, you must account for how you got it.

Bitcoin, and crypto currencies in general solve this problem. They are in essence a “trusted distributed public transaction ledger”. Imagine a hotel register. Guests sign in, date, room, etc … That is a transaction ledger. Distributed means that the machines that process that ledger, the “book” if you will, are spread throughout the world with many different ownership hands so that it is very, very difficult for them to collaborate to cheat. Public, because it is open for anyone to inspect.

And trusted, because that is the most important thing of all. Do I trust that you really have the money? That you haven’t spent it already, maybe even a second ago? Ensuring all of that is what the “mining” machines really do. The miners are the unseen heroes of Bitcoin. Without miners there is no coin.

The adoption of Bitcoin will drastically reduce the amount of financial control anyone can exert over your money. And without that control they can’t tax you and if they can’t tax you they can’t control you. They know this, they are scared and they should be.

With Bitcoin there are no borders to money. It flows as easily as water from a spilled cup upsetting the plans of the bankers to monitor, control, restrict, tax and otherwise devalue YOUR money.

Bitcoin is freedom for money. Switch to Bitcoin, free your money.

Ethereum: A Next-Generation Cryptocurrency and Decentralized Application Platform

The author of this article, Vitalik Buterin, is also the founder of Ethereum, and this article is intended as an expository piece and not a review.

Over the past year, there has been an increasingly large amount of discussion around so-called “Bitcoin 2.0” protocols – alternative cryptographic networks that are inspired by Bitcoin, but which intend to make the underlying technology usable for far more than just currency. The earliest implementation of this idea was Namecoin, a Bitcoin-like currency created in 2010 which would be used for decentralized domain name registration. More recently, we have seen the emergence of colored coins, allowing users to create their own currencies on the Bitcoin network, and more advanced protocols like Mastercoin, Bitshares and Counterparty which intend to provide features such as financial derivatives, savings wallets and decentralized exchange. However, up until these point all of the protocols that have been invented have been specialized, attempting to offer specific and rich feature sets targeted toward specific industries or applications usually financial in nature. Now, a group of developers including myself have come up with a project that takes the opposite track: a cryptocurrency network that intends to be as generalized as possible, allowing anyone to create specialized applications on top for almost any purpose imaginable. The project: Ethereum.

Cryptocurrency Protocols Are Like Onions…

One common design philosophy among many cryptocurrency 2.0 protocols is the idea that, just like the internet, cryptocurrency design would work best if protocols split off into different layers. Under this strain of thought, Bitcoin is to be thought of as a sort of TCP/IP of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, and other next-generation protocols can be built on top of Bitcoin much like we have SMTP for email, HTTP for webpages and XMPP for chat all on top of TCP as a common underlying data layer.

So far, the three main protocols that have followed this model are colored coins, Mastercoin and Counterparty. The way the colored coins protocol works is simple. First, in order to create colored coins, a user tags specific bitcoins as having a special meaning; for example, if Bob is a gold issuer, he may wish to tag some set of bitcoins and say that each satoshi represents 0.1 grams of gold redeemable from him. The protocol then tracks those bitcoins through the blockchain, and in that way it is possible to calculate who owns them at any time.

Mastercoin and Counterparty are somewhat more abstract; they use the Bitcoin blockchain to store data, so a Mastercoin or Counterparty transaction is a Bitcoin transaction, but the protocols interpret the transactions in a completely different way. One can have two Mastercoin transactions, one sending 1 MSC and the other 100000 MSC, but from the point of view of a Bitcoin user that does not know how that Mastercoin protocol works they both look like small transactions sending 0.0006 BTC each; the Mastercoin-specific metadata is encoded in the transaction outputs. A Mastercoin client then needs to search the Bitcoin blockchain for Mastercoin transactions in order to determine the current Mastercoin balance sheet.

I personally have had the privilege of talking directly to many of the originators of the colored coins and Mastercoin protocol, and have participated considerably in the development of both projects. However, over about two months of research and particpation, what I eventually came to realize is that, while the underlying idea of having such high-level protocols on top of low-level protocols is laudable, there are fundamental flaws in the implementations, as they stand today, that may well prevent the projects from ever gaining anything more than a small amount of traction.

The reason is not that the ideas behind the protocols themselves are bad; the ideas are excellent, and the response of the community alone is proof that they are trying to do something that is very much needed. Rather, the reason is that the low-level protocol that they are trying to build their high-level protocols on top of, Bitcoin, is simply not cut out for the task. This is not to say that Bitcoin is bad, or is not a revolutionary invention; as a protocol for storing and transferring value, Bitcoin is excellent. However, as far as being an effective low-level protocol is concerned, Bitcoin is less effective; rather than being like a TCP on top of which one can build HTTP, Bitcoin is like SMTP: a protocol that is good at its intended task (in SMTP’s case email, in Bitcoin’s case money), but not particularly good as a foundation for anything else.

The specific failure of Bitcoin is particularly concentrated in one place: scalability. Bitcoin itself is as scalable as a cryptocurrency can be; even if the blockchain balloons to over a terabyte, there is a protocol called “simplified payment verification”, described in the Bitcoin whitepaper that allows “light clients” with only a few megabytes of bandwidth and storage to securely determine whether or not they have received transactions. With colored coins and Mastercoin, however, this possibility disappears. The reason is this. In order to determine what color a colored coin is, you need to not just use Bitcoin simplified payment verification to prove that it exists; you also need to trace it all the way back to its genesis, and do an SPV check each step of the way. Sometimes, the backward scan is exponential; and with metacoin protocols there is no way to know anything at all without verifying every single transaction.

And this is what Ethereum intends to fix. Ethereum does not intend to be a Swiss Army knife protocol with hundreds of features to suit every need; instead, Ethereum aims to be a superior foundational protocol, and allow other decentralized applications to build on top of it instead of Bitcoin, giving them more tools to work with and allowing them to gain the full benefits of Ethereum’s scalability and efficiency.

Contacts, Not Just For Difference

At the time that Ethereum was being developed, there was a large amount of interest in allowing financial contracts on top of cryptocurrencies; the basic type of contract being a “contract for difference”. In a contract for difference, two parties agree to put in some amount of money, and then get money out in a proportion that depends on the value of some underlying asset. For example, a CFD might have Alice put in $1000, Bob put in $1000, and then after 30 days the blockchain would automatically return to Alice $1000 plus $100 for every dollar that the LTC/USD price went up during that time period and send Bob the rest. These contracts allow people to speculate on assets at high leverage, or alternatively protect themselves from cryptocurrency volatility by canceling out their exposure, without any centralized exchange.

At this point, however, it is clear that contracts for difference are really only one special case of a much more general concept: contracts for formula. Instead of having the contract take in $x for Alice, $y from Bob, and return to Alice $x plus an additional $z for every dollar that some given ticker went up, a contract should be able to return to A an amount of funds based on any mathematical formula, allowing contracts of arbitrary complexity. If the formula allows random data as inputs, these generalized CFDs can even be used to implement a sort of peer-to-peer gambling.

Ethereum takes this idea and pushes it one step further. Instead of contracts being agreements between two parties that start and end, contracts in Ethereum are like a sort of autonomous agent simulated by the blockchain. Each Ethereum contract has its own internal scripting code, and the scripting code is activated every time a transaction is sent to it. The scripting language has access to the transaction’s value, sender and optional data fields, as well some block data and its own internal memory, as inputs, and can send transactions. To make a CFD, Alice would create a contract and seed it with $1000 worth of cryptocurrency, and then wait for Bob to accept the contract by sending a transction containing $1000 as well. The contract would then be programmed to start a timer, and after 30 days Alice or Bob would be able to send a small transaction to the contract to activate it again and release the funds.

Aside from this narrow contract-for-difference model, however, the whitepaper outlines many other transaction types that will become possible with Ethereum scripting, of which a few include:


Code example of an Ethereum currency contract, written in a high-level language.

if tx.value < 100 * block.basefee:
    stop
if contract.memory[1000]:
    from = tx.sender
    to = tx.data[0]
    value = tx.data[1]
    if to <= 1000:
        stop
    if contract.memory[from] < value:
        stop
    contract.memory[from] 
        = contract.memory[from] - value
    contract.memory[to] 
        = contract.memory[to] + value
else:
    contract.memory[mycreator] 
        = 10000000000000000
    contract.memory[1000] = 1

  • Multisignature escrows, of a similar spirit to the Bitcoin arbitration service Bitrated, but with more complex rules than Bitcoin. For example, there will be no need for the signers to pass around partially signed transactions manually; people can authorize a withdrawal asynchronously over the blockchain one at a time and then have the transaction finalized automatically once enough people make their authorizations.
  • Savings accounts - one interesting setup works as follows. Suppose that Alice wants to store a large amount of money, but does not want to risk losing everything if her private key is lose or stolen. She makes a contract with Bob, a semi-trustworthy bank, with the following rules: Alice is allowed to withdraw up to 1% per day, Alice with Bob approval can withdrawn any amount, and Bob alone can withdraw up to 0.05% per day. Normally, Alice will only need small amounts at a time, and if Alice wants more she can prove her identity to Bob and make the withdrawal. If Alice's private key gets stolen, she can run to Bob and move the funds into another contract before the thief gets away with more than 1% of the funds. If Alice loses her private key, Bob will eventually be able to recover her funds. And if Bob turns out to be evil, Alice can withdraw her own funds twenty times faster than he can. In short, all of the security of traditional banking, but with almost none of the trust.
  • Peer-to-peer gambling - any kind of peer-to-peer gambling protocol can be implemented on top of Ethereum. A very basic protocol would simply be a contract for difference on random data such as a block hash.
  • Creating your own currency - using Ethereum's internal memory store, you can create an entire new currency inside of Ethereum. These new currencies can be constructed to interact with each other, have a decentralized exchange, or any other kind of advanced features.

This is the advantage of Ethereum code: because the scripting language is designed to have no restrictions except for a fee system, essentially any kind of rules can be encoded inside of it. One can even have an entire company manage its savings on the blockchain, with a contract saying that, for example, 60% of the current shareholders of a company are needed to agree to move any funds (and perhapps 30% can move a maximum of 1% per day). Other, less traditionally capitalistic, structures are also possible; one idea is for a democratic organization with the only rule being that two thirds of the existing members of a group must agree to invite another member.

Beyond the Financial

The financial applications, however, only scratch the surface of what Ethereum, and cryptographic protocols on top of Ethereum, can do. While Ethereum's financial applications may be what initially excites many people in the cryptocurrency community, the long-term promise is arguably in the ways that Ethereum can work together with other, non-financial, peer-to-peer protocols. One of the main problems that non-financial peer-to-peer protocols have faced so far is the lack of incentive - that is to say, unlike centralized for-profit platforms, there is no financial reason to participate. In some cases, participation is in some sense its own reward; it is for this reason that people continue to write open source software, contribute to Wikipedia, and make comments on forums and write blog posts. In the context of peer-to-peer protocols, however, participation is often not a "fun" activity in any meaningful sense; rather, it consists of putting in a large quantity of resources, letting a daemon run in the background potentially hogging CPU and battery power, and forgetting about it.

For example, there have already for a long time been data protocols such as Freenet that essentially provide everyone with decentralized uncensorable static content hosting; in practice, however, Freenet is very slow, and few people contribute resources. File sharing protocols all suffer from the same problem: although altruism is good enough for spreading popular commercial blockbusters around, it becomes markedly less effective for those with less mainstream preferences. Thus, perversely, the peer-to-peer nature of file sharing may actually be helping the centralization of entertainment and media production, not hindering it. All of these problems, however, can potentially be solved if we add incentivization - empowering people to build not just nonprofit side projects, but also businesses and livelihoods, around participating in the network.

  • Incentivized data storage - essentially, a decentralized Dropbox. The idea works as follows: if a user wants to have a 1GB file backed up by the network, they would construct a data structure known as a Merkle tree out of the data. They would then put the root of the tree, along with 10 ether, into a contract and upload the file onto another specialized network that nodes wishing to rent out their hard drive space would listen for messages on. Every day, the contract would automatically pick a random branch of the tree (eg. "left -> right -> left -> left -> left -> right -> left"), ending at a block of the file, and give 0.01 ether to the first node to provide that branch. Nodes would store the entire file to maximize their chance of getting the reward.
  • BitMessage and Tor - Bitmessage is a next-generation email protocol that is both fully decentralized and encrypted, allowing anyone to send messages to any other Bitmessage user securely without relying on any third parties except for the network. However, Bitmessage has one large usability flaw: instead of sending messages to human-friendly email addresses, like "[email protected]", you need to send to garbled 34-character Bitmessage addresses (eg. "BM-BcbRqcFFSQUUmXFKsPJgVQPSiFA3Xash"). Ethereum contracts offer a solution: people can register their names on a special Ethereum contract, and Bitmessage clients can query the Ethereum blockchain to get the 34-character Bitmessage address associated with any name behind the scenes. The online anonymizing network Tor suffers from the same problems, and thus can also benefit from this solution.
  • Identity and Reputation Systems - once you can register your name on the blockchain, the logical next step is obvious: have a web of trust on the blockchain. Webs of trust are a key part of an effective peer to peer communication infrastructure: you don't just want to know that a given public key refers to a given person; you also want to know that the person is trustworthy in the first place. The solution is to use social networks: if you trust A, A trusts B, and B trusts C, then there is a pretty good chance that you can trust C, at least to some extent. Ethereum can serve as the data layer for a fully decentralized reputation system - and potentially ultimately a fully decentralized marketplace.

Many of the above applications consist of actual peer-to-peer protocols and projects that are already well under development; in those cases, we intend to establish partnerships with as many of these projects as we can, and help fund them in exchange for bringing their value into the Ethereum ecosystem. We want to help not just the cryptocurrency community, but also the peer to peer community as a whole, including file sharing, torrents, data storage and mesh networking. We believe that there are many projects, especially in the non-financial area, that can potentially bring great value to the community, but for which development is underfunded precisely because they lack an opportunity to effectively introduce a financial component; perhaps Ethereum may be what ultimately pushes dozens of these projects to the next stage.

Why are all of these applications possible on top of Ethereum? The answer lies in the currency's internal programming language. An analogy here may be made with the internet. Back in 1996, the web was nothing but HTML, and all people could do with it was serve static web pages on sites like Geocities. Then, people decided that there was a great need for people to submit forms in HTML, so HTML added a forms feature. This was like a "colored coins" of web protocols: try to solve a specific problem, but do it on top of a weak protocol without looking at the larger picture. Soon, however, we came up with Javascript, a programming language inside the web browser. And it was Javascript that solved the problem: because Javascript is a universal, Turing-complete programming language, it can be used to build apps of arbitrary complexity; Gmail, Facebook and even Bitcoin wallets have all been made with the language. And this was not because the Javascript developers decided that they wanted people to build Gmail, Facebook, and Bitcoin wallets; they just wanted a programming language. What we can do with the language is up to our own imaginations. And that is the spirit that we want to bring to Ethereum. Ethereum does not intend to be the end of all cryptocurrency innovation; it intends to be the beginning.

Further Innovations

Along with its main feature of a Turing-complete, universal scripting language, Ethereum will also have a number of other improvements over existing cryptocurrency:

  • Fees - Ethereum contracts will regulate its Turing-complete functionality and prevent abusive transactions such as memory hogs and infinite loop scripts by instituting a transaction fee for each computational step of script execution. More expensive operations, such as storage accesses and cryptographic operations, will have higher fees, and there will also be a fee for every item of storage that a contract fills up. To encourage contracts to clean up after themselves, if a contract reduces the amount of storage that it uses a negative fee will be charged; in fact, there is a special SUICIDE opcode to clear a contract and send all funds and the hefty negative fee back to its creator.
  • Mining algorithms - there has been a lot of interest into making cryptocurrencies whose mining is resistant against specialized hardware, allowing ordinary users with commodity hardware to participate without any capital investment and helping to avoid centralization. So far, the main antidote has been Scrypt, a mining algorithm that requires a large amount of both computational power and memory to compute; however, Scrypt is not memory-hard enough, and there are companies building specialized devices for it. We have come up with Dagger, a prototype proof of work that is even more memory-hard than Scrypt, as well as prototype proof-of-stake algorithms such as Slasher that get around the issue of mining entirely. Ultimately, however, we intend to host a contest, similar to the contests that determined the standards for AES and SHA3, where we invite research groups from universities around the world to devise the best possible commodity-hardware-friendly possible mining algorithm.
  • GHOST - GHOST is a new block propagation protocol pioneered by Aviv Zohar and Yonatan Sompolinsky that allows blockchains to have much faster block confirmation times, ideally in the range of 3-30 seconds, without running into the issues of centralization and high stale rate that fast block confirmations normally bring. Ethereum is the first major currency to integrate a simplified single-level version of GHOST as part of its protocol.

The Plan

Ethereum is potentially a massive and wide-reaching undertaking, and will take months to develop. With that in mind, the currency will be released in multiple stages. The first stage, the release of the whitepaper, has already happened. Forums, a wiki and a blog have been set up, and anyone is free to visit them and set up an account and comment on the forums. On January 25, a 60-day fundraiser will launch at the confrence in Miami, during which anyone will be able to purchase ether, Ethereum's internal currency, for BTC much like the Mastercoin fundraiser; the price will be 1000 ether for 1 BTC, although early investors will get roughly a 2x benefit to compensate for the increased risk that they're taking for participating in the project earlier. The fundraiser participants will not just get ether; there will also be a number of additional rewards, likely including free tickets to conferences, a spot to put 32 bytes into the genesis block, and for the top donors even the ability to name three sub-units of the currency (eg. the equivalent of the "microbitcoin" in BTC).

The issuance of Ethereum will not be any single mechanism; instead, a compromise approach combining the benefits of multiple approaches will be used. The issuance model will work as follows:

  • Ether will be released in a fundraiser at the price of 1000-2000 ether per BTC, with earlier funders getting a better price to compensate for the increased uncertainty of participating at an earlier stage. The minimum funding amount will be 0.01 BTC. Suppose that X ether gets released in this way
  • 0.225X ether will be allocated to the fiduciary members and early contributors who substantially participated in the project before the start of the fundraiser. This share will be stored in a time-lock contract; about 40% of it will be spendable after one year, 70% after two years and 100% after 3 years.
  • 0.05X ether will be allocated to a fund to use to pay expenses and rewards in ether between the start of the fundraiser and the launch of the currency
  • 0.225X ether will be allocated as a long-term reserve pool to pay expenses, salaries and rewards in ether after the launch of the currency
  • 0.4X ether will be mined per year forever after that point

There is an important distinction compared to Bitcoin and most other cryptocurrencies: here, the eventual supply is unlimited. The "permanent linear inflation" model is designed to make ether neither inflationary nor deflationary; the lack of a supply cap is intended to dampen some of the speculative and wealth inequality effects of existing currencies, but at the same time the linear, rather than traditionally exponential, inflation model will mean that the effective inflation rate tends to zero over time. Additionally, because the initial currency supply will not start from zero, the currency supply growth in the first eight years will actually be slower than Bitcoin, giving fundraiser participants and early adopters a chance to benefit substantially in the medium term.

At some point in February, we will release a centralized testnet - a server which anyone can use to send transactions and create contracts. Soon after that, the decentralized testnet will come, which we will use to test different mining algorithms and make sure that the peer to peer daemon works and is secure, and take measurements to look for optimizations to the scripting language. Finally, once we are sure that the protocol and the client is secure, we will release the genesis block, and allow mining to begin.

Looking Forward

Since Ethereum includes a Turing-complete scripting language, it can be mathematically proven that it can do essentially anything that a Bitcoin-like blockchain-based cryptocurrency potentially can do. But there are still problems that the protocol, as it stands today, leaves unresolved. For example, Ethereum offers no solution for the fundamental scalability problem in all blockchain-based cryptocurrencies - namely, the fact that every full node must store the entire balance sheet and verify every transaction. Ethereum's concept of a separate "state tree" and "transaction list", borrowed from Ripple, mitigates this to some extent, but nevertheless no fundamental breakthrough is mine. For that, technology like Eli ben Sasson's Secure Computational Integrity and Privacy (SCIP), now under development, will be required.

Additionally, Ethereum offers no improvements on traditional proof-of-work mining with all its flaws, and proof of excellence and Ripple-style consensus are left unexplored. If it turns out that proof of stake or some other proof of work algorithm is a better solution, then future cryptocurrencies may use proof of stake algorithms like MC2 and Slasher instead. If there is room for an Ethereum 2.0, it is in these areas that it the improvements will lie. And ultimately, Ethereum is an open-ended project; if the project gets enough funding, we may even be the ones to release Ethereum 2.0 ourselves, carrying over the original account balances onto an even further improved network. Ultimately, just as is our slogan for the currency itself, the only limit is our imaginaion.

TigerDirect: First Major Internet Retailer to Accept Bitcoin Via BitPay

Today, TigerDirect announced its embrace of Bitcoin through BitPay, Inc. TigerDirect has met the needs of customers for over 25 years and is known for high quality, discount electronics. TigerDirect is a subsidiary of Systemax Inc. (NYSE: SYX), a Fortune 1000 company. There was no lack of excitement from the Tiger Direct Team as the front end of the website clearly displays their embrace of bitcoin with a backdrop of physical bitcoins. Who will the next high profile merchant be!

BitPay and Tiger Direct Issued the following press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TIGERDIRECT IS THE FIRST MAJOR INTERNET RETAILER TO ACCEPT BITCOIN VIA BITPAY

Online superstore to be largest retailer to accept new form of digital currency as payment

Miami, FL (Monday, January 20, 2014) – TigerDirect.com has announced today that they will be accepting Bitcoin– a peer-to-peer digital currency- as a method of payment on over 200,000 products. TigerDirect is the first major US electronics retailer and largest company to date to accept the digital currency Bitcoin via BitPay.

Bitcoin has become a modern-day sensation, boasting a payment technology that competes with traditional payment methods. By cutting out the middleman, buyers and sellers of Bitcoins can deal with one another using direct deposits into electronic wallets.

“TigerDirect has always been on the forefront of alternative online payment methods and delivering the most convenient ways for our customers to shop,” says Steven Leeds, Director of Corporate Marketing at TigerDirect. “With individuals building their own high-powered PCs with parts offered on our site to mine Bitcoins, it’s a logical fit.”

After several months of reviewing the options for processing Bitcoin, TigerDirect has chosen BitPay to provide its customers the most reliable means of transacting Bitcoin payments on their website.   TigerDirect will not only accept the digital currency as payment, but will also sell the computer components used to mine the currency as well.  “We’ve partnered with AMD to build the largest assortment of mining graphic cards from Sapphire, MSI, VisionTek, Diamond and XFX in the industry.” Customers will be able to utilize Bitcoin as payment on both the desktop and mobile websites.

This non-traditional move should come as no surprise for those familiar with TigerDirect as a trusted name for computers and consumer electronics. In 2013, TigerDirect made waves with their presentation of the Second Annual Tech Bash, showcasing the latest in electronics to over 12,000 consumers at Miami Marlins’ Park; enjoyed over seven million views on the “Epic Rap Battle:  Nerd vs Geek” viral video written and directed by Rhett & Link; expanded their product offerings to new categories; and offered select customers free shipping through ShopRunner.

Staying ahead of the competition as the go-to spot for all things tech, TigerDirect’s BitPay acceptance is another example of the online superstore’s dedication to customer satisfaction, and using innovative technologies for the best shopping experience, in-store and on-line. TigerDirect will start accepting Bitcoin on Thursday, January 23rd.

Details regarding the acceptance of Bitcoin at TigerDirect can be found at http://www.tigerdirect.com/bitcoin.  Bitcoin will not be accepted for payment at TigerDirect physical retail locations, only online.

About TigerDirect: For over 25 years, TigerDirect. (http://www.tigerdirect.com) has served the needs of both personal and business computer users, selling consumer electronics, computers, digital media technology and peripherals via eCommerce, business to business, and retail channels. TigerDirect is a subsidiary of Systemax Inc. (NYSE: SYX).

About Systemax Inc.: Systemax Inc. a Fortune 1000 company, sells personal computers, computer components and supplies, consumer electronics and industrial products through a system of branded e-Commerce websites, retail stores, relationship marketers and direct mail catalogs in North America and Europe. The primary brands are TigerDirect, MISCO, WStore and Global Industrial.

Media Contact:

Megan Pope

The Workshop

323.397.5667

[email protected]

 

Bitcoin’s YouTube Missionaries

Thanks to Bitcoin’s YouTube Missionaries

Beacons of light welcoming the huddled masses of tired and poor yearning for financial freedom.

bitcoin missionaries

My road to discovering the new world of economic redemption started one evening last March. An article linked from BuzzFeed’s website entitled “Is it Time to Take Bitcoin Seriously?“ written by Alec Liu was revealed to me. As I investigated further I found my heart inexplicitly racing; some deep-rooted primitive part of my brain connected with this article. I had discovered an obvious truth that just clicked. Alec Liu, without knowing it, was the messenger that lit the spark that started my personal obsession to this revolutionary technology. Rarely can we predict the power of our words and ideas. I doubt he could have predicted when he wrote that article for the on-line magazine Motherboard Vice who he might inspire or even that he had the power to do so. Could he have prophesied the course of life he would someday change?

My “a-ha” moment arrived. Yet I had to convince my skeptical side so I did what millions of others do when they want to know more about something – I consulted the “experts” on YouTube.  There were quite a bit to choose from both pro and against the idea of digital currency. I reasoned out their best arguments as I’m sure our readers have done. Slowly and diligently I found reasonable answers to each of their arguments against the technology. It mostly boiled down to “it’s never been done before”. I’ve yet to see any great new invention or technology built, designed or conceived by skeptics. Think about any of the great inventors in history and you won’t find a skeptic among them. My expedition through the YouTube passageways was led in part by the  following bitcoin technology “missionaries”.

 

World Bitcoin Network 

Subscribers:        7,500 s

Channel views: 190,000

James D’Angelo hosts this informative show which gives an especially persuasive ‘Bitcoin 101” teaching guide. In his own unique style using a digital chalkboard he illustrates visuals to help illustrate complex ideas. He comes across like the big brother or eager little league coach you never had. The channel’s biggest video views dealt with the subject of why Bitcoin is not in a bubble. This video alone has received over 45,000 views. It should be 450,000 views. In this link he explains brilliantly why the growth in bitcoin price should actually be considered normal.

Stefan Molyneux (Freedom Radio)

Subscribers:      130,000

Channel Views:  25 million

Stefan holds the distinction of having the most subscribers and most hits for his channel of the YouTube channels profiled here. He purposely takes on controversial topics which make for compelling viewing. Bitcoin is a common thread on his channels and he appears to me to be one of the earliest proponents to speak of the subject as of June 2011. He presents a reasonable and calm demeanor and has included guests both pro and con regarding Bitcoin.  He’s put together a couple of dedicated videos on the subject that make a great reference point for beginners.

Let’s talk Bitcoin!

Subscribers:          3,200

Channel Views:    103,000

 The show is in a podcast format and was originally hosted by Adam Levine, Andreas M. Antonopoulos and Stephanie Murphy. I discovered it last summer and found it reminded me of the NPR (National Public Radio) with its low key segments and slow jazz intros. It started out with the three main hosts mentioned above. Of the three, Andreas appears to me as the most passionate, energized, and engaging in my own opinion. Much of his forward thinking predictions and explanations brought clarity and focus to my understanding. He’s now a sought after public speaker who does a fine job representing the bitcoin community ideals.

 

The Bitcoin Channel

Subscribers:    12,000

Views:            397,000

This channel has been around for a few years as well beginning in June 2011.  The channel specializes charting the Bitcoin price with an effort to make short term predictions using formulas common to that specialty. The narrator’s commentary is the interesting portion to me. If charting is your thing, you might find it interesting, but for me – I’m more interested in the back story and theory added to give more meaning to price movements. One particularly interesting episode was from June 19, 2011 captured the “flash crash” of Bitcoin from $30 to almost zero in real-time as the Mt.Gox exchange was hacked. This event had a longer term effect of causing many people to lose faith in the currency and brought about many greatly exaggerated reports of bitcoin’s death.  It turned out to be an important moment of bitcoin history was captured while it was happening. It’s important to see that at the time it was happening it was scary and confusing to those invested in the new technology. Put in perspective, it’s fascinating.

These channels of course are not alone on YouTube. In this short article it would be impossible to name them all. My journey led me to other helpful beacons of knowledge and discovery. I did, however, find myself returning to these sources repeatedly and eventually subscribed to their channels. To put things in perspective, others around the world are only now hearing about Bitcoin for the first time or only now reading or hearing something that spiked their interest. To much of the world, their first source of knowledge will be to turn to YouTube for influence. Their path will likely lead them to the many of the same places and to the same channels I found. We do well to recognize these efforts and thank them for introducing the newly curious population just now experiencing their “a-ha” moment.

 

Highlight of the Week: North American Bitcoin Conference!

On Friday through Sunday of this week, many Bitcoiners will gather in Miami, Florida for the North American Bitcoin Conference. Following the successful organization of the European Bitcoin Conference in Amsterdam this Fall, conference organizer, Moe Levin, concentrated his efforts on a winter international Bitcoin conference in the heart of Miami Beach, FL. With attendees and speakers from around the world, once again, the global message of Bitcoin is clearly demonstrated in this premier conference and setting. It is NOT too late to sign up. You can even purchase your conference pass with bitcoin here.

On Friday evening, to kick off the conference, all attendees are welcome to a pre-conference reception at the iconic Clevelander Hotel to network and get ready for two. Additionally, the Clevelander Hotel recently signed up as a BitPay Merchant to accept payment in BitPay. From planes, to cars, to now hotels, one can travel fairly easily with Bitcoin. As the price of Bitcoin goes up more and more are looking to utilize this unique currency for daily expenses.

Starting on Saturday, the conference will be broken into two tracks. On Saturday the conference will feature a free workshop for merchants to learn about accepting bitcoin. Leaders in the industry such as BitPay, New West Technologies and 3dcart will be demonstrating how one can easily incorporate bitcoin into their businesses. Alongside the Bitcoin merchant workshops, individuals can attend sessions featuring speakers including Ken Metral of Coingig, Chris Odom, Venture Capitalists, Jeffrey Tucker, Tony Gallippi, and a VC Panel and Startups Panel. The evening will conclude with another party at the Clevelander hosted by Triple Zero Media.

Some of the highlights of Sunday’s lineup include presentations from investors, a regulations panel, a Latin American panel and even a Mystery Speaker! The North American Bitcoin Conference will serve as the kickoff conference for 2014 and hopefully as a catalyst to further increase the size of the Bitcoin community in the US and abroad.

Remember, it is still not too late to sign up! Do not miss out and sign up here. Also, feel free to stop by the Bitcoin Magazine table while you are at the conference.

Junior Achievement of New York to Accept Bitcoin Donations

Just today, the Junior Achievement of New York began accepting donations in Bitcoin. Bitcoin is by far the most expedient way to accept donations and has proven to be a tool to empower individuals around the world. Junior Achievement of New York (JA New York) serves as a non-profit organization to empower students in grades K-12 by connecting students with volunteers. Volunteers then work with students in afterschool programs, workplace experiences, in the classroom and also help students develop academic, life and career plans.

Jacqueline Dolly, Senior Director of Marketing and Communications of Junior Achievement New York stated, “We are asking the Bitcoin community to support our fundraising efforts. We are the ONLY Junior Achievement affiliate in the country – and perhaps the world – that has diversified its donor cultivation to include members of the new Bitcoin economy. As part of the world’s largest and oldest economic K-12 education organization, we believe our success will have a huge ripple effect in the philanthropy community.”

Junior Achievement of New York Issued the following release:

NEWS RELEASE

For Immediate Release

January 22, 2014

JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF NEW YORK ACCEPTS BITCOIN DONATIONS

[NEW YORK: NY] – Today, the NYC economic education charity, Junior Achievement of New York, announced it is now accepting Bitcoin donations. JA New York believes expanding its giving options to include Bitcoin acknowledges the changes and innovations shaping an emerging new economy. It also helps to keep Junior Achievement at the forefront of the shifting financial environment of the global economy.

Joseph Peri, president of Junior Achievement of New York said, “By accepting Bitcoin, we are talking in the language of the 21st century global economy. We are also connecting the students we serve to professional role models and career opportunities in the digital economy. We welcome the Bitcoin community to invest in our mission to inspire and prepare young people to succeed in a global economy.”

As of today, JA New York’s website is ready to accept Bitcoin donations. We will automatically convert any Bitcoin donations received into U.S. currency. JA New York joins a handful of NY-based charities, like the Foundation for Economic Education, that accept Bitcoin donations.

On January 27, 7:00 PM-8:00 PM, JA New York will host a live Facebook Chat and Q&A with Peter Vessenes, Chairman of the Bitcoin Foundation. The live Bitcoin chat will focus on the emergence of digital currencies and their growing influence on the way we do business and live our lives in the 21st Century. To participate in Junior Achievement of New York’s Bitcoin conversation, click here to RSVP. (https://www.facebook.com/events/1440513736164827/) and Like the JA New York community page (http://www.facebook.com/JuniorAchievementofNewYork) #BitcoinConvo.

###

About Junior Achievement of New York

Junior Achievement of New York (JA New York) is the local affiliate of Junior Achievement USA® (JA), the world’s largest organization dedicated to giving young people the knowledge and skills they need to own their economic success, plan for their future, and make smart academic and economic choices. Our volunteer-delivered, K-12th grade programs foster college and career-readiness, entrepreneurship and financial literacy skills, and uses experiential learning to inspire students to dream big and reach their potential. With the help of more than 5,000 business and community volunteers, more than 67,000 NYC and Long Island students develop the skills they need to experience the realities and opportunities of work and entrepreneurship in the 21st-century global marketplace. Visit www.jany.org to share our story of impact and inspiration.

Jacqueline Dolly

Senior Director, Marketing and Communications

Junior Achievement of New York

420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 205

New York, NY 10170

Contact: 212-907-0046 I [email protected] I www.jany.org

Twitter:@JANewYork

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JuniorAchievementofNewYork

Junior Achievement:Empowering young people to own their economic success

Bitcoin in Africa – On The Ground – Resources Program

It’s not that Bitcoin has a bad image in Africa. It has no image at all. In that way it is a clean slate.

The potential of Bitcoin in Africa is often cited. But the issues to overcome are real and routinely glossed over. The first step is clearly good PR. A solid image will form the groundwork.

It’s only by supporting local organisations and fostering good causes that Bitcoin will reach its full potential in Africa. There are no preconceptions about Bitcoin. When people see the technology making a positive change they will embrace it.

ice3x.com is one of only two operational exchanges on the African continent. Intimately acquainted with the intricacies of doing business locally, we made a choice to actively grow the community: the initiative “Resources” is operational.

African community organisations, doing good work but struggling to survive, come to us. They are vaguely familiar with Bitcoin. They are then introduced to the potential of the technology for their operations. They become intimate with Bitcoin and its promise.

ice3x.com is an exchange. Here it acts simply as a facilitator: a platform. It is the right approach – Corporate Philanthropy.

Organisations are given a wallet, zero fee account and a blogging voice to inform the world of their activities, collecting donations directly. They have complete control of their accounts and direct access to global funding, at no cost: a world of possibility presents itself. It is magic.

Mother of four and “animal warrior” Suzette Kotze is a local animal inspector and SPCA head. Aware of our exchange we received this email and we were moved:

“Today I want to ask you on my knees, beg you actually…we are in urgent need of funds, otherwise we might close down, PLEASE !!!! What will happen to our animals if we are not here anymore…I am the only hope our animals have.”

Kotze’s SPCA is the first local community group to sign-up. There are five more in progress, to be verified.

In Kotze’s small town there are at least twenty-one extreme animal abuse cases each month. The images received with her plea were truly horrific. We were compelled to act.

ice3x.com goes to great lengths to check the credibility of each applicant. Accountants are employed to conduct vigorous checks, which ensure the integrity of the program. Supporting not-for-profit documentation is a must.

Transparency is key. Total donations are reported regularly.

 ice3x.com is proud to support SPCA in this first program. This is a niche offering. But it represents a real opportunity to showcase the potential of Bitcoin to do good in Africa.

Suzette is new to Bitcoin. She is genuinely excited by the opportunity to take donations directly from all over the world at zero cost. By adapting her outlook to the digital age ice3x.com is helping her increase her reach.

These are the seeds in the fertile soil from which one thousand flowers will bloom.

The SPCA’s blog spot is here: https://ice3x.co.za/stilfontein-spca/

Your support is most appreciated.

(Tristan Winters is an active member of the ice3x.com exchange team, proudly offering a quality exchange service in Africa and platform for corporate philanthropy).

My Overstock.com First Day Buying Experience

An AntiClimactic Ending to a New Beginning – And Why That’s a Good Thing.

I bought stuff from Overstock.com using bitcoin on the first and opening day of this new currency option. And boy, it felt good. I did something in celebration of the event that I don’t normally do because it seems so geeky… I chose the option to share it with my personal friends on Facebook. Ok, I geeked out for a moment. What was my overall reaction? Well, it seemed so….normal.

I read the headlines all over financial news networks. I saw pieces of interviews with Overstock’s CEO Patrick M. Byrne. When I went to their website I expected a huge banner across the front page declaring something about the Big News! I expected on-screen balloons and digital confetti being blown across my monitor. Yet, I was met with patio furniture and bedding links for purchase; cue the crickets. It wasn’t any different than the last time I had shopped at Overstock. I wanted to make a specific effort to shop at Overstock and buy something I truly needed. I wanted to do my part to “thank” the company for showing true initiative and the American Spirit.

It didn’t take long to think of something I needed. My wife bought me a smoker barbeque device for Christmas and I experienced my first effort being a “Smoker”. After reading up on it to make sure I was doing it right – I found an essential ingredient to the experience (other than the type of wood chips you “cook” into the food), was a meat thermometer. So last week I bought a version of the thermometer that was suggested in the on-line article… let’s just say that the smoker, thermometer and I had a little “misunderstanding”.

I plunged the little digital unit into my intended dinner and wondered how the scientific geniuses at the thermometer company were able to make plastic electronics with a battery inside so heat resistant that it could withstand the heat of a barbeque smoker. Half way through my planned two hour smokefest, it was time to check the temperature of the meat. I learned an important cooking lesson and the limits of plastic technology. I pulled what was left of my digital thermometer out of my pork roast and watched it stretch like melted cheese. The wires came dangling out of the melted digital head and I knew at once I had overestimated the thermometer geniuses’ abilities. The apple-wood smoked roast was wonderful, but if you concentrated just right – you could detect the faint flavor of burnt plastic.

So this brings me to my Overstock experience. It was time for a new thermometer before I attempted a new siege inside the smoker the following weekend involving salmon. I searched  the Overstock website and found immediately my new thermometer for my upcoming battle plan I like to call: “heat meat and retreat”.

What struck me was that there was no mention of bitcoin anywhere. The prices were all in dollars which was a little bit of a letdown. Not only was there no greeting welcoming bitcoiners to the Overstock.com world of every-day shopping, but when I added an item to my digital shopping cart it simply plinked the dollar amount onto my tab just like it did a few weeks back on the site.

On the checkout page I saw the section for “billing information” and thought triumphantly “Ha! You won’t need billing information – I’m paying in digital cash today! There’s no more need to give personal information.” Then realized that…um… they were going to need to know what address to send it to. Okay, I can be happy I at least didn’t have to share my banking information.

The total price with shipping and discounts added in displayed were all priced in dollars, and the payment type defaulted to credit card. The page showed the obligatory boxes for credit card number and expiration date. PayPal was also listed as an option but for how much longer? Then… the button I was waiting to see…”Bitcoin Accepted Here”.

I smiled.

I clicked it for the selection type and then clicked the big green “Submit Order Now” button. I found another surprise. Based on my email address, which was a requirement on the billing screen, it must have looked up my account on Coinbase. I saw the big familiar looking “Confirm Payment” that I’ve seen when sending money using the Coinbase website previously. The total was still listed boldly in US dollars. But underneath it – in a much smaller print– almost as an afterthought, was the amount of BTC for my purchase. It included a small QR code next to it. It was kind of….anticlimactic.

Once clicked, a new screen appeared announcing that it was awaiting receipt of the amount of BTC required and the wallet ID appeared that must have been created for the transaction.  There was one hiccup that required me to open a separate tab to the Coinbase website where I needed to be logged in. For some reason the Overstock.com website didn’t redirect me to the site in the same way Ebay sends you to PayPal if you’ve selected that payment option.  I’m sure little glitches like that get worked out soon enough.

So that was it. Normal. You almost wouldn’t realize you are dealing in bitcoin at all – and I think that is how it should be for widespread adoption. People are comfortable looking and pricing everything in dollars. If they keep their Coinbase account with money, the underlying units don’t really matter as everything gets translated into dollars anyway. As Coinbase already has the money available from you to disburse the transaction- it goes quickly -no waiting for the blockchain. It felt…natural – and that’s a good thing.

Follow-up:

My new digital thermometer arrived a few days later and was exactly the item I ordered: one 8 second digital thermometer with a unusually stubby poker end. I grabbed some raw chicken and tried to insert the thermometer but found it just wouldn’t go in very well. I looked closer at the box for some direction and was surprise to see the directions included a diagram of a person putting this thermometer into their ear.  So, I got my second chance to buy something from Overstock with bitcoin much sooner than I had planned. This time my search term included the word “Meat”.

Global Currency, Global Tour!

What excites the Bitcoin community and additionally expands the Bitcoin usership base? Conferences! This year while Bitcoin conferences abound, Mediabistro will be taking a world tour with conferences kicking off in Berlin, Germany; New York City; Hong Kong, China; London, England; and Las Vegas, Nevada. This past year, Mediabistro put on conferences in New York City and Las Vegas and drew crowds from within and outside of the Bitcoin community. Bitcoin Magazine is proud to serve as a media partner for several of the upcoming conferences.

For starters, Berlin serves as one of the lead Bitcoin communities in Europe. With the Bitcoin Exchange Berlin and the Kreuzberg section of Berlin with numerous brick and mortar businesses accepting Bitcoin, Germany has served as an example of a strong and diverse Bitcoin community. Conference speakers include members of the German Bitcoin community.

Mediabistro issued the following press release:

Mediabistro’s Inside Bitcoins Conference is going on a World Tour in 2014

Inside Bitcoins recently took place in Las Vegas on December 10-11, 2013 and drew over 1,500 attendees from all over the world. Mediabistro announced that it will be taking the Inside Bitcoins Conference on a World Tour in 2014. On February 12-13 Inside Bitcoins will make its first stop in Berlin, Germany.

Attendees will hear from industry experts including Aaron Koenig, Managing Director of Bitfilm and Organizer of Bitcoin Exchange Berlin; Malcolm CasSelle, CEO of Timeline Labs; Jaron Lukasiewicz, CEO of Coinsetter; Bobby Lee, CEO and Co-Founder of BTC China; Oliver Flaskamper, Managing Director of Bitcoin Germany; and Steve Beauregard, CEO & Founder of GoCoin.com. View the full speaker list.

Inside Bitcoins brings together developers, entrepreneurs, experts from the financial sector, investors, banks and financial institutions, payment processors and Bitcoin enthusiasts! The program is designed to provide an overview of where the virtual currency industry is today, and a panel of top venture capitalists will discuss what business opportunities are on the horizon. Register here to make sure you reserve your spot at Inside Bitcoins in Berlin!

Mediabistro will soon announce firm dates for additional events taking place in 2014 in New York City; Hong Kong, China; London, England; and Las Vegas, Nevada.

 

Agora Voting Proposes a Bitcoin Based Voting System

We talk with Eduardo Robles, and along with David Ruescas, they are the main proponents of the Agora Voting project.

Ferdinand Reyes: What is Agora Voting?

Eduardo and David: Agora Voting is a free software voting system, born as Agora Ciudadana (Citizen Agora) in 2008 by a group of developers looking for creating a voting system useful for Partido de Internet (Internet Party). Currently fifteen persons work on this project and it has been used in two experiences in Spanish Parliament and pirate parties around the world.

It is a flexible tool which can adapt to several use cases: different privacy and security levels, optional delegation, multiple types of questions, multiple authentication systems and an advanced API.

We look for a reliable system with high security standards to keep the legitimacy of votings. Many people already shop online, but not so many trust the electronic vote. For those more optimistic, we understand they need the most secure voting tool available.

This is why we looked since the beginning for the best security measures, aiming for a robust system with verifiable votes and trust shared among independent actors.

In the last vote in Iniciativa Congreso Transparente (Transparent Congress initiative) we implemented the first version of the security system that took us two years to end, based on cryptographic systems known as mixnets.

But we don’t want to stop here, we want a stronger system and here is where Bitcoin enters. It has very interesting properties. One of them is its trustlesness, which means you don’t have to trust any authority but you trust the network, more distributed and robust. Another one, it is not malleable. Everything written in the blockchain is permanent. It also has DDoS protection, making it extremely difficult to bring down the service of the whole network, unlike a centralized system.

We have talked to bitcoin’s developers about how to get a more efficient system and one of these ways is chronobit. It allows one to associate a piece of data to each block as a hash, with prior agreement in a mining pool.

Using a chronobit based system, votes recount can be done with mixnets and we get an unalterable and distributed register, with votes registered by date in the blockchain. You could download the file with the votes from different mirrors and check their hashes. You trust the blockchain. Bitcoin would be a cybernotary.

This is one of the most basic forms to use the blockchain. We are researching advanced options using Zerocoin due to a very interesting trait: transactions are fully anonymous, unlike Bitcoin. The main idea is to vote using anonymized transactions to accounts associated with an option. In this way, the final count is done by the cryptocurrency: the account associated with an option with more money wins. Now we are talking with Zerocoin team to see how we can work together.

Currently we do not have a definitive way to develop this but we are learning and investigating. There is an important work to do.

Agora voting logo

FR: How can bitcoin help to create a more democratic society?

E&D: With bitcoin, Paypal could not have blocked donations to Wikileaks. Also, “corralito” could not have occurred in Argentina. Why? Because you do not need the middleman: No PayPal, no bank, no government to coerce them and no third party able to force the government… It is an independent system from ground: it is more reliable. This is very good for society.

Bitcoin lays down new rules, that go far beyond being a simple electronic currency. It eliminates intermediaries. It is a system of generation of information under some rules, reliable, immutable, highly distributed and hard to attack. It is based on trust in a network that operates by democratic rules.

Bitcoin based systems can be applied in different areas, taking advantage of these interesting properties above: you can build a Domain Name System (DNS) independent from ICANN, or a SSL certificate issuer system without central authorities. Or, like in our case, you can build a decentralized voting system with no central web server or authorities.

When you remove intermediaries, your system is more robust. In a vital system like money or elections, a robust system allows you to reach a higher democratic quality.

FR: How to apply delegation from liquid democracy to vote by bitcoin?

E&D: This needs further research. We have some ideas about how to make liquid democracy viable in a Zerocoin based system. Nothing definitive yet. This is a new area to explore.

FR: Is this the only project using cryptocoins for this purpose?

E&D: As far as we know, there is no other viable bitcoin based voting system which can be secure, verifiable and anonymous at the same time.
What strengths and weaknesses does it have?
Strengths: the proposed Zerocoin based system is DDoS resistant, anonymous, verifiable count and trustlessness, trust is distributed in the network. It is more decentralized than currently available voting systems.

As weaknesses, a voting can have some cost in bitcoins (although you save costs in web servers and other services). Also, votes are not possibly registered instantly in the blockchain and they can’t be revoked due anonymous transactions, required for liquid democracy. Finally, we need to research the cost and computational efficiency of elections on bitcoin.

FR: What are your plans?

E&D: Our target is to build the most distributed and secure voting system possible.

We plan to keep support for both versions: public votings and votings with mixnets and authorities. We are going to support and improve them.

We want to explore the boundaries of the possible. This requires a constant effort to keep its security and up to date about cryptographic techniques. For this reason we opened a Bitcoin account to receive donations and give a boost to the project: 1EwqtN6GwHmkfYEfxGhuVcjrNBdQwvXMd3.

Our software has been used twice last year in Spain’s Congreso de los Diputados (Congress of Deputies) and we already have a first implementation of ciphered voting with mixnets. All this without funding. We expect to have funding during this year and it will be better. Fasten your seatbelts!

FR: What is your monetary target and where can donations be made?
E&D: In this post where we announced our intention to use bitcoin in Agora we established an initial amount of BTC 100. It may seem a large figure for some, but really a voting system doesn’t write itself. Even less if we want to make secure. This requires a professional job, very specific qualifications and complete dedication. Our goals are ambitious but feasible. If you want to help by donating, you can do it at 1EwqtN6GwHmkfYEfxGhuVcjrNBdQwvXMd3.

You can also collaborate in the free software project by working on the cryptographic part, writing code, translating, testing, writing documentation, helping people on the lists, working on the infrastructure side or otherwise in our mailing list.

First image of Ruben Alexander.

Fed Banker Tries Criticizing Bitcoin, Ends Up Perfectly Describing The Fed

In an article for Fox News, senior economist Francois Velde of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago describes Bitcoin. “Although some of the enthusiasm for Bitcoin is driven by a distrust of state-issued currency, it is hard to imagine a world where the main currency is based on an extremely complex code understood by only a few and controlled by even fewer, without accountability, arbitration or recourse,” Velde wrote.

In his attempt to criticize Bitcoin, Federal Reserve banker Velde actually summed up fairly well everything that’s wrong with his own employer, and in doing so outlines the threat Bitcoin poses to it.

To address Velde’s first criticism, Bitcoin’s underlying code, like all programs, does require some knowledge of programming to understand and manipulate. But the charge that it’s understood by only a few and controlled by even fewer is patently absurd. First, the code underlying Bitcoin is completely open-source. What that means is that every developer has access to the code, and can manipulate it to create new currencies, or entirely new solutions, at will.

In fact, the developers are currently modifying the Bitcoin protocol to create new platforms which do everything from fight censorship through a new TOR-like encrypted internet to rebuilding Twitter to evade the NSA.

As for the claim that Bitcoin is “controlled by even fewer” people, I suppose it’s difficult to get fewer people in control of Bitcoin than zero. No one controls Bitcoin, because it’s a protocol. Its operations are decentralized over thousands of computers, with no one computer or group of computers having any control whatsoever.

It’s true that there’s no central authority users can present with Bitcoin transaction disagreements. It’s certainly possible to get screwed and have to eat the cost. But this is an issue which can easily be solved. For example, online drug marketplace Silk Road holds Bitcoins internally until goods arrive. In this manner, Silk Road replaced the broken kneecaps endemic to the meatspace drug trade with bad user reviews and quick refunds.

But if anyone wants the money they’ve lost through currency inflation back due to the fact that the Fed has in no way, shape or form delivered on the promise of low unemployment or avoiding economic crises, there is literally zero, to quote, “accountability, arbitration or recourse.”

The value, availability and stability of the US dollar is in the hands of unaccountable private bankers, and there’s nothing we can do about it. Of course, “some of the enthusiasm for Bitcoin is driven by a distrust of state-issued currency.”

But in no way is it it “hard to imagine a world where the main currency is based on an extremely complex code understood by only a few and controlled by even fewer, without accountability, arbitration or recourse.” That’s exactly the world we live in under the US dollar. And it’s exactly the world Bitcoin has the potential to improve.

Could Krugman’s Nemesis Friedman Be Bitcoin’s Mysterious Creator?

A Satirical Look at the Eerily Accurate Bitcoin Prediction Video Surfaces to Haunt Paul Krugman

In contrast to the article Paul Krugman wrote, an opinion piece titled Bitcoin is Evil, a video has surfaced on YouTube from Krugman’s one time nemesis: the legendary economist  Milton Friedman.

 miltions library

The 94-year-old Friedman supposedly died in 2006. I explain why I say “supposedly” later. In the video which was filmed for a TV interview in 1999, the then 87-year-old Friedman clearly predicts the rise of bitcoin. You can view the short relevant clip of that video here. For those who don’t know much about Milton: a few notables: He helped put an end to the mandatory military draft in the 70s. He was Ronald Reagan’s economic advisor and long time proponent of free market principles. Importantly for bitcoin lovers, he introduced the idea of k-percent where he stated that an economy only needed a computer to adjust the supply of new money entering into the economy, not policymakers.

 In the video, Milton explains with eerie accuracy that the “internet will prove to be one of the many forces for reducing the role of government.” He also accurately predicts that the world would soon develop a new e-cash system that you will be able to transfer funds from point A to Point B: without A or B knowing each other over the internet. He also predicted the negative effects of people engaged in illegal activities will likely use its anonymity for illegal transactions as well.

Krugman and Friedman viewed the idea of money creation and the role of government to tax every transaction clearly differently. Krugman has spent a lot of time trying to discredit Friedman in a rivalry of sorts which was chronicled nicely by Bloomberg’s Caroline Baum. Perhaps Friedman has yet to receive his just rewards and get the final word that may come to haunt Paul Krugman with his “bitcoin is evil” diatribe.

That brings me to my last point: did Friedman really die? You could just as truthfully say “He’s no longer making public appearances”. I don’t want to start a new conspiracy theory…but I ask you. Could Milton Freidman be Satoshi Nakamoto? Satoshi’s white paper describing bitcoin didn’t arrive until 2008. Friedman supposedly died in 2006. You can also admit that the two were never seen together at the same place at the same time. One could imagine the 98-year-old Friedman sitting in his pajamas surfing various underground cryptography websites. He would have had two years unaccounted for which would have given him plenty of time to solve the perplexing challenges of double spending and complex cryptography. It was only a matter of time before he gave the world what he envisioned in the previous decades!

Satoshi ended his involvement officially for bitcoin in 2010 saying he was ‘Moving on to other things”.  Perhaps those “other things” included making his way to the “Great Beyond”? Milton might have been a bit tired after giving the world…bitcoin.

My official recommendation is to recognize Milton Friedman’s effort and genesis of the ideas that propelled bitcoin into existence. Perhaps we should honor him by naming the unit of currency at the seventh decimal point as a “milti”? Imagine the look on Paul Krugman’s face when he must resort to asking for a few “miltis” for tips from those still reading his maligned articles of the future. Surely Milton/Satoshi would not consider paying more than that, if only for the entertainment factor.

Comment if you agree!

Six myths about Bitcoin

Myth: No one knows who started Bitcoin.
Truth: “Satoshi Nakamoto” is a fictional name for a single person, or, potentially, a group of people who wish to remain out of the public eye. Since they’ve managed to do this so far, it’s likely that they have a long history of secrecy keeping. This suggests strong bonds, such as one finds in a governmental context (i.e. ex-NSA employees, like Snowden), or organized crime. In any case, it’s likely that a few people, potentially including governmental security agencies, know who “he” is. Some of these people are undoubtedly becoming extremely rich along with Satoshi.

Myth: Bitcoin only has 21 million possible coins and therefore can’t be used broadly as an exchange mechanism.
Truth: Each Bitcoin can be subdivided, so presumably after there is widespread usage the basic unit of exchange will not be a Bitcoin but something like one millionth of a Bitcoin. This will undoubtedly have some other name, like a Bitdollar.

Myth: Bitcoin is criminal.
Truth: The pseudonymous aspect of Bitcoin led to a lot of early growth from people doing things that their governments didn’t want them to do. However, since Bitcoin transactions are easily tracked, it can actually be a honey pot for the US government. All they need to do is find one “exit node” (i.e. a known criminal), and they can trace back the source of the funds. It’s also a guarantee that as Bitcoin grows governments will regulate it. This is already the case where it is quite difficult to buy Bitcoins without providing your personal identity. So, for better or worse, the ability of people to use Bitcoin to perform transactions their governments wouldn’t want is decreasing over time.

Myth: Bitcoins are not based on inherent value.
Truth: The Bitcoin protocol includes both a payment network and a currency. As basic economics dictates, value is based on scarcity. Since Bitcoin is a currency that can’t be generated at will, this forced scarcity insures value rather than decreases it. Are credit cards valuable? It’s not just the piece of plastic, it’s the network and associated infrastructure that provides the value. In this case, the network and forced scarcity combine to create something that is extremely valuable, a sort of digital gold.

Myth: Bitcoin is inherently volatile and unfit to be a currency.
Truth: If you want decentralized, irrevocable, near fee-free payment, you have to give up something. Some degree of price stability is probably one of those things. There are also ways to solve this problem, like systems that are only partially Bitcoin backed. It is also likely that some of this volatility will disappear as there is greater volume.

Myth: Bitcoin is a bubble.
Truth: This claim essentially states that Bitcoin is overvalued, something that is unlikely. As we’ve stated, there is value in the deflationary aspect, the scarce aspect, the low-to-no fees payment aspect, the irrevocable payment aspect, and as an insurance policy against an unstable government. The rapid growth, which is likely to accelerate, might be compared to the birth of the stock markets. There were both upward and downward movements of epic proportions. Although both are likely here, the fact is that Bitcoin offers a unique value proposition that no one else is providing at this moment. The value is there, it just remains for the world at large to discover it. Many people are understandably excited about the upside potential.

How to Secure a Blockchain with Zero Energy

Proof of Work (PoW) is the only external method of powering the distributed consensus engine known as a blockchain. However, at least two alternatives have been proposed, and both are internal to the network (Proof of Stake (PoS), and Proof of Burn (PoB)). These are important as they use virtual resources obtained within the network as a substitute for PoW, meaning these methods consume virtually no energy; miners’ power usage seems to have been a concern of late. While a worst-case back of the envelope calculation leads to some amazing (and completely unrealistic) conclusions – like Bitcoin mining accounting for 3/4 of the total carbon output if Bitcoin is worth $1,000,000 – there is legitimate cause for concern if Bitcoin grows too fast and future block reward halvings arrive too late. However you look at it, the possibility of a currency using zero energy is tantalising.

Proof of Stake and Proof of Burn

Both PoS and PoB use similar mechanisms. The auditor makes a sacrifice – in the case of PoS it is coindays (which are difficult to acquire; also a good measure of economic activity), and in the case of PoB it is coins themselves (which are also difficult to acquire). Ultimately, any Proof of {something} must require a cost, whether that be electricity, coin days, or coins themselves.

Herein I suggest a fourth method, very similar to how a term deposit works (in that dusty old banking system).

Monetary Velocity and Value of Money

The equation of exchange tells us that as velocity increases the price should decrease, and when prices decrease the value of each unit of currency increase – this is only the case provided the monetary supply remains constant. In a late-stage currency we would expect a relatively low level of monetary inflation / deflation (as opposed to price inflation / deflation – an important distinction), so we’ll discard the concern of constant monetary supply.

In a Proof of Stake fuelled network one is required to hold an amount of currency for some time before it is able to be used to mint a block. Because it cannot be used in a transaction it is essentially removed from the monetary supply as it is unavailable for a period of time (not technically true because one can spend it up until it is used to mint a block, but the economic effect is the same either way in terms of velocity). Because the money supply will effectively (but doesn’t actually) decrease, prices should also fall by a small amount. One can imagine the network saying “Here is a small reward for temporarily removing your coins from the supply and making us all a little more wealthy, in addition to auditing and securing the network.”

Proof of Burn is used in a similar fashion: coins are destroyed in an unspendable transaction which is not immediately obvious to the network (the author suggests using a P2SH address). At some later date this is revealed and used to create a block. The miner is then rewarded with new coins and/or transactions fees (presumably more than the coins they’ve burned, else they’ve made a loss). This is like the network saying “Here’s a small reward for temporarily removing your coins from the supply and making us a little more wealthy, in addition to auditing and securing the network.” Huh, that sounds familiar.

While they may sound very similar, there are a few differences in terms of public knowledge. In both cases it is unknown how many coins have been left waiting in the wings (similar to how it is impossible to tell how many bitcoins have been lost or abandoned over the years), though PoB provides a little more specificity allowing us to determine a narrower range of candidates (unspent P2SH addresses) than PoS (which includes all unspent transactions). The volume of coins in each case is also an indicator, as in both cases there will be some effective minimum required. However, PoB implies the number of coins burnt cannot be set in advance as both the date of redemption and volume of burnt coins are unknown. PoS does not destroy coins and so any extra volume of coindays destroyed is less important. These differences are subtle, but may become important as the systems are explored more deeply.

Economically speaking, the basis of both proofing systems relies on relinquishing the ability to use coins for some time. In PoS this is voluntary and the funds are spendable at any time, whereas PoB uses a rather more permanent operation so the user commits immediately to mining a block in the future, regardless of whether it is profitable or not (provided they meet the difficulty requirement, else the coins may be lost forever; perhaps pooled mining might alleviate this concern, though), but the length of time till that utility will be used is unknown. In this case, as the ability to use coins is relinquished, there is no possibility they will increase monetary velocity and thus should (in theory) increase the value of the each coin in the total supply.

Proof of Deposit

Proof of Deposit (or PoD) fills a medium between the two methods. Simply put, PoD blocks have a difficulty proportional (or equal) to the amount of coins that must be offered for ‘deposit’ and have a known block reward. Deposited coins remain untouchable for some length of time and the block reward is delivered to the miner (either immediately or over a period of time like a dividend or interest payments). As there is one deposit per block there are a limited number of deposits available each year, and if deposits are appearing too fast then the return must be too high, so the difficulty is increased (which implies the return is lowered) and thus demand decreases. Our personified network might once again say “Here’s a small reward for temporarily removing your coins from the supply and making us a little more wealthy, in addition to auditing and securing the network.”

That’s getting awfully familiar…

Why yes, it is. This should come as no surprise, though. What resources are there internal to a currency besides the currency itself? Economically speaking, there’s very little substantive difference between these three methods, and their monetary implications are very similar; the main difference is the physical actions that help it propagate. If, however, humans are psychologically biased to one way over another, then those physical actions are exactly the things that will count in a showdown between these proofing methods.

Does it even work?

This is really the only important question here. If none of these schemes work, do we have a reason to care? A discerning reader like yourself might have noticed something peculiar about these three methods: you need money to make money. Without internal resources existing the network has no fuel.

PPCoin mitigates this concern by using both PoW and PoS in combination to create new blocks. Over time PoW blocks become less frequent and PoS blocks become more frequent, so it should eventually lead to an energy efficient network (or at least more so than the Bitcoin network). Whether this will pan out or not is difficult to say; the reward for attacking PPCoin is far lower than a well executed attack on Bitcoin, and without an increase in PPCoin’s popularity and/or accessibility we might never discover how easy an attack really is.

Where to from here?

The possibility of a zero energy currency is not something that should go without research, but should also be approached with a degree of scepticism. It has been argued that monetary monocultures contribute to financial instability due to the lower resilience of a homogeneous system (compared to one of high diversity). Is it possible that a reliance on internal states causes instability more generally, even in a currency that has no resistance to opt in to or out of? If it is still the case, can we build several different sorts of these systems together to help provide that resilience? Can one network’s security rely on actions in one or several other distinct currencies? These are important economic questions that may have profound consequences for the future of finance; they are novel because systems of this precision have been impossible under legal frameworks, and never before has any person been able to create a truly global currency in their garage. Experimentation is the future of currency, and I am excited to watch it happen.

Grounded Venezuelans May Want to Escape to Bitcoin

Venezuelans are having trouble flying in and out of their country. Spanish discount airline Air Europa has indefinitely stopped taking taking bolivars, the Venezuelan currency, since the Venezuelan government stopped exchanging them for U.S. dollars. ”The reservation people told me that I could buy the ticket in dollars or euros, but not bolivars,” said one stranded passenger. “I’m Venezuelan, and what other money do I have?”

Indeed, around the world, citizens are subject to dictators’ whims by virtue of being forced to use a currency over which leaders have absolute control. Such was the case last year when the government of Cyprus declared an intention to confiscate the contents of Cyprian bank accounts.

What happened next may be instructive for the future. Instead of waiting to be stolen from, people began moving their money to Bitcoin, prompting a boom in prices as demand surged.

Not only does a Bitcoin escape hatch help citizens sidestep oppression, but the knowledge that citizens have that option may be enough to sway some governments away from some of their most onerous schemes. Consider how things might have been different had the citizens of the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe been able to easily transition to BTC.

Venezuela owes international airlines up to $2.6 billion for bolivars they have turned in to Venezuela’s Cadivi foreign exchange agency. Apparently Venezuela tried offering around $8,000 in free jet fuel, which the airlines refused.

The troubles began when Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro tightened control of the foreign exchange system in Venezuela in November. He claims his efforts to keep the bolivar valued above its returns on the black market will prevent speculation by those he refers to as the “parasitic bourgeoisie” and those who are waging what he calls an “economic war” against his government.

Inflation in Venezuela has soared to 49% while the bolivar has plunged on the black market to one-sixth of its official value since Maduro came into office power after the late Hugo Chavez in April.

Because the currency is undervalued, the last attempt to get it in line with the dollar led vendors to increase the number of bolivars they charged for their goods. But Maduro is on that. He’s setting up a joint civilian-military task force to force businesses to charge state-approved prices and not hoard scarce goods such as toilet paper and milk.

It’ll be interesting to see how all this shakes out. Things that could hamper a Venezuelan escape to Bitcoin include the fact that, according to the World Bank, in 2012 only 25% of mobile subscriptions in Venezuela include mobile internet. Venezuelans also might have trouble finding people who want to buy bolivars with Bitcoin. However, those with any internet access could exchange goods and services for BTC directly, once enough are obtained.

Regardless, when it comes to inept, out-of-control governments, more options are always better than fewer. Hopefully Bitcoin can offer one more option to the people of Venezuela.

Markets, Institutions and Currencies – A New Method of Social Incentivization

Up until this point the problem of incentivizing productive activity has essentially been dominated by two major categories of solutions: markets and institutions. Markets, in their pure form, are fully decentralized, made up of a near-infinite number of agents all engaging with each other in one-on-one interactions each of which leave both participants better off than they were before. Institutions, on the other hand, are inherently top-down; an institution has some governance structure that determines what the most useful activities are at any given time, and assigns a reward for people to do them. An institution’s centralization allows it to incentivize production of public goods that benefit thousands or even millions of people, even if the benefit to each person is extremely small; on the other hand, as we all know, centralization has risks of its own. And for the last ten thousand years, these two options were was essentially all that we had. With the rise of Bitcoin and its derivatives, however, that may all be about to change, and we may in fact now be seeing the dawn of a third form of incentivization: currencies.

The Other Side of the Coin

In the standard account, a currency has three fundamental functions to society. It serves as a medium of exchange, allowing people to buy and sell goods for currency rather than having to find someone who simultaneously has exactly what you want and wants exactly what you have and barter with them, as a store of value, allowing people to produce and consume at different times, and as a medium of account, or a measuring stick which people can use to measure a constant “quantity of production”. What many people do not realize, however, is that there is also a fourth role that currencies play, and one whose significance has been hidden throughout most of history: seigniorage.

Seigniorage can be formally defined as the difference between the market value of a currency and its intrinsic value – that is, the value that the currency would have if no one used it as currency. For ancient currencies like grain, the seigniorage was essentially zero; however, as economies and currencies got more and more complex, this “phantom value” generated by money seemingly out of nowhere would grow bigger and bigger, eventually reaching the point where, in the case of modern currencies like the dollar and the bitcoin, the seignorage represents the entire value of the currency.

But where does the seigniorage go? In the case of currencies based on natural resources, like gold, much of the value is simply lost. Every single gram of gold comes into existence through a miner producing it; at first, some miners do earn a profit, but in an efficient market all of the easy opportunities rapidly get taken up and the cost of production approaches the return. There are of course clever ways that seignorage can still be extracted from gold; in ancient societies, for example, kings would mint gold coins which would be worth more than ordinary gold because the coins contain an implicit promise from the king that they are not fake. In general, however, the value would not go to anyone in particular. In the case of the US dollar, we saw a slight improvement: some of the seignorage would go to the US government. This was in many ways a large step forward, but in other ways it is also a revolution incomplete – currency, having gained the benefits of centralized seignorage, also gained its risks by embedding itself into the heart of one of the largest centralized institutions in human history.

Bitcoin Came Along

Five years ago, a new kind of money, Bitcoin, came along. In the case of Bitcoin, just like the dollar, the currency’s value is 100% seigniorage; a bitcoin has no intrinsic value. But where does the seignorage go? The answer is, some goes into the hands of the miners as profit, and the rest goes to fund the miners’ expenses – the expenses of securing the Bitcoin network. Thus, in this case, we have a currency whose seignorage goes directly into funding a public good, namely the security of the Bitcoin network itself. The importance of this is massively understated; here, we have an incentivization process that is simultaneously decentralized, requiring no authority or control, and produces a public good, all out of the ethereal “phantom value” that is somehow produced from people using Bitcoin between each other as a medium of exchange and store of value.

From there, we saw the emergence of Primecoin, the first currency that attempted to use its seigniorage for a purpose that is useful outside of itself: rather than having miners compute ultimately useless SHA256 hashes, Primecoin requires miners to find Cunningham chains of prime numbers, both supporting a very narrow category of scientific computation and providing an incentive for computer manufacturers to figure out how to better optimize circuits for arithmetic computations. And its value rapidly rose and the currency still remains the eleventh most popular today – even though its main practical benefit for each individual user, the 60-second block time, is shared by many other currencies far more obscure than it.

A few months later, in December, we saw the rise of a currency that is even more eccentric and surprising in its success: Dogecoin. Dogecoin, currency symbol DOGE, is a currency which, on a technical level, is almost completely identical to Litecoin; the only difference is that the maximum supply will be 100 billion instead of 84 million. But even still, the currency hit a peak market cap over over $14 million, making it the sixth largest in the world, and was even mentioned on Business Insider and Vice. So what is so special about DOGE? Essentially, the internet meme. “Doge”, a slang term for “dog” that first appeared in Homestar Runner’s puppet show in 2005, has since caught on as a worldwide phenomenon with the accompanying practice of putting phrases such as “wow”, “so style” and “such awesome” in colorful Comic Sans font with the background of a Shiba Inu dog. This meme represents the entirety of Dogecoin’s branding; all of its community websites and forums, including the official Dogecoin website, the obligatory Bitcointalk launch thread and the r/dogecoin and r/dogecoinmarkets subreddits are all splattered with Doge iconography. And that’s all it took to get a Litecoin clone to 14 million dollars.

Finally, a third example comes from outside the cryptocurrency space in the form of Ven), a more traditional centralized currency which is backed by a basket of goods including commodities, currencies and futures. Recently, Ven added carbon futures to its basket, making Ven the first currency that is in some fashion “linked to the environment”. The reason this was done is a clever economic hack: the carbon futures are actually included in Ven negatively, so the value of the currency goes up as society moves away from high-CO2 methods of production and CO2 emissions permits become less lucrative. Thus, each individual Ven holder is now, albeit slightly, economically incentivized to support environmentally friendly living, and people are interested in Ven at least partially because of this feature.

On the whole, what these example show is that alternative currencies are pretty much entirely dependent on grassroots marketing in order to achieve adoption; nobody takes Bitcoin or Primecoin or Dogecoin or Ven by people need to go door to door and convince merchants to accept them, and it is not just the technical superiority of a currency that determines its traction – ideals matter just as much. It was Bitcoin’s ideals that convinced WordPress, Mega and now Overstock accept Bitcoin, and it is arguably for the same reason that Ripple as a payment method, despite its technical superiority to Bitcoin for merchants (specifically, five-second confirmation times), has so far failed to gain much traction – its nature as a semi-centralized protocol backed by a corporation that issued 100% of the currency supply for itself makes it unattractive to many cryptocurrency enthusiasts who are interested in fairness and decentralization. And now, it is the ideals of Primecoin and Dogecoin – those of supporting science and supporting fun, respectively, that keep both of those currencies alive.

Cryptocoins as Economic Democracy

These four examples, together with this idea of phantom seigniorage value, form what is potentially a blueprint for a new kind of “economic democracy”: it is possible to set up currencies whose seignorage, or issuance, goes to support certain causes, and people can vote for those causes by accepting certain currencies at their businesses. If one does not have a business one can participate in the marketing effort and lobby other businesses to accept the currency instead. Someone can create SocialCoin, the currency which gives 1000 units per month to every person in the world, and if enough people like the idea and start accepting it, the world now has a citizen’s dividend program, with no centralized funding required. We can also create currencies to incentivize medical research, space exploration, and even art; in fact, there are artists, podcasts and musicians thinking about creating their own currencies for this exact purpose today.

In the case of one particular public good, computational research, we can actually go even further and make the distribution process happen automatically. Computational research can be incentivized by a mechanism that has not yet seen any substantial applications in the real world, but has been theorized by Peercoin and Primecoin inventor Sunny King: “proof of excellence”. The idea behind proof of excellence is that the size of one’s stake in the currency’s decentralized voting pool and one’s reward is based not on the computational power that one has or the number of coins one already owns, but on one’s ability to solve complex mathematical or algorithmic challenges whose solutions would benefit all of humanity. For example, if one wants to incentivize research in number theory, one can insert the RSA integer factoring challenges into the currency, and have the currency offer 50000 units, plus perhaps the ability to vote on valid blocks in the mining process, automatically to the first person to provide a solution to the problem. Theoretically, this can even become a standard component in any currency’s issuance model.

Of course, the idea behind using currencies in this way is not new; “social currencies” operating within local communities have existed for over a century. In recent decades, however, the social currencies movement has declined somewhat from its early 20-th century peak, primarily because social currencies simply failed to achieve anything more than a very local reach, and because they did not benefit from the efficiencies of the banking system that more established currencies like the US dollar could attract. With cryptocurrencies, however, these objections are suddenly removed – cryptocurrencies are inherently global, and benefit from an incredibly powerful digital banking system baked right into their source code. Thus, now may be the perfect time for the social currencies movement to not only make a powerful, technologically enabled, comeback, and perhpas even shoot far beyond their role in the 19th and 20th centuries to become a powerful, mainstream force in the world economy.

So where will we go from here? Dogecoin has already shown the public how easy it is to create your own currency; indeed, very recently Bitcoin developer Matt Corrallo has created a site, coingen.io, whose sole purpose is to allow users to quickly create their own Bitcoin or Litecoin clones with some parameter tweaks. Even with the limited array of options that it curerntly has, the site has proven quite popular, with hundreds of coins created using the service despite the 0.05 BTC fee. Once Coingen allows users to add proof of excellence mining, an option for a portion of the issuance to go to a specific organization or fund, and more options for customized branding, we may well see thousands of cryptocurrencies being actively circulated around the internet. Will currencies fulfill their promise as a more decentralized, and democratic, way to pool together our money and support public projects and activities that help create the society we want to see? Maybe, maybe not. But with a new cryptocurrency being released almost every day, we are tantalizingly close to finding out.

The Bitcoin Harvest

This post was released for Issue 16 of Bitcoin Magazine as part of a series of  articles about puzzles and games that started with Issue 12.

 

Packing problems are a class of optimization problems in mathematics that involve attempting to pack objects together into containers. The goal is to either pack a single container as densely as possible or pack all objects using as few containers as possible.

One of my earliest games (Hippos & Crocodiles – 2009) exploits this type of problem. In Hippos & Crocodiles your goal is to place as many animals on an African river as you can and prevent your opponent from doing the same.

Here I present a nice derivative of this game, while introducing a type of puzzle piece that has been around for more than a century: the polyomino, and also the concept of harvesting (picking items already placed on the board).

A polyomino is a plane geometric figure formed by joining one or more equal squares edge to edge. We can create 12 polyominos by joining 5 squares. These shapes are called pentominoes.


Figure 1: the 12 different pentominoes

There are other sizes of polyominoes (4,6,7…), but the pentomino is the one that works better for this game.

THE GAME: BITCOIN HARVEST

Bitcoin Harvest is a paper-and-pencil game for 2 or more players. Some solitary puzzles can be found at the end of this article, too.

Start by drawing a rectangular grid of any size. 10×10 is recommended for beginners, but for more than 2 players you might need a bigger grid.

Figure 2: the game grid

Secondly, and by turn, each player chooses a pentomino shape. This pentomino will be his ‘harvester’, and the only piece he will use during the game.

Example: Ann chooses the ‘L’, Ben chooses the ‘+’, Claire chooses the ‘U’.

Figure 3: the players’ harvesters (we’re using different colours for clarity)

The player that chose a shape in first place draws two coins in any empty cells of the grid.

Figure 4: the first player draws two coins

Then, starting with the second player, players take turns doing the following:

  1. Draw your harvester on the board, so it doesn’t overlap other previously drawn pentominos and no parts of it land outside the board. You can (and should) draw it so it overlaps some coins. Notice that you can draw it rotated or mirrored, as long as it fits with the grid.

  2. Score as many coins as the pentomino has covered.

  3. Draw another 2 coins in any two empty spaces (not occupied by coins or pentominoes).

  4. Pass your turn to the next player.

If you’re not capable of legally drawing a pentomino (no room for it) you must pass your turn. If all players pass in succession the game ends. The player with the highest score wins.

Here are a few examples of turns:

Figure 5: Ben draws his harvester collecting 1 coin, then draws two more coins.

Figure 6: Claire draws her harvester collecting 1 coin, then draws two more coins

Figure 7: Ann cleverly draws her harvester (scoring another coin) and then draws 2 coins next to it, ensuring their capture on her next turn!

 CHALLENGES

Here are a few puzzles for a single player. Use a single pentomino.

Challenge 1 (easy): Which pentomino is not capable of harvesting all these coins?

Figure 8: At least one pentomino is not capable of harvesting all these coins

Challenge 2 (medium): Which pentomino can harvest all the coins in figure 8 in the minimum number of turns? There can be several pentominoes that achieve the same result.

Challenge 3 (medium): Distribute 10 coins in a 8×8 grid so that the ‘L’ pentomino needs the maximum number of turns to harvest all of them (but no coin is left uncollected).

Please post your answers in my forum:

http://nestorgames.freeforums.org/bitcoin-magazine-puzzles-f16.html

… and I will reward the best post with a copy of one of my games. I’m looking forward to discussing your findings. Thank you for reading!

 

You might also enjoy my previous posts:

– Bitcoinstellations

– Rise of the machines

Creativity as problem solving

The Bitcoin Maze

 

New Report Details Bitcoin’s Potential Threat to the Federal Reserve

The Congressional Research Service, aka “Congress’ Think Tank,” recently made public their report on Bitcoin, Bitcoin: Questions, Answers, and Analysis of Legal Issues. The fascinating report details in sparkling prose the history, uses, threats and regulatory implications of the world’s best-known cryptocurrency.

The report’s most interesting part deals with the impact Bitcoin might have on the Federal Reserve. According to these experts, widespread adoption of Bitcoin could severely curtail the effectiveness of the Fed’s monetary policy.

The report describes the Federal Reserve’s mission as aimed at achieving “stable prices, maximum employment, and financial market stability.” It’s impossible to know the counterfactual. But many are entirely unsatisfied with both the nation’s employment rate and the continuing financial crises which led to its most recent rise.

For some of these people, Bitcoin is a personal escape hatch from wealth-destroying inflation. As the report dryly notes, “Some may find the removal of government from a monetary system attractive…Unlike the dollar, a Bitcoin is not legal tender nor is it backed by any government or any other legal entity, nor is its supply determined by a central bank. The supply of Bitcoins does not depend on the monetary policy of a virtual central bank.”

However, as more people choose to escape inflationary monetary policy to cryptocurrency, the Fed becomes less and less able to easily artificially inflate the money supply.

At Bitcoin’s current scale of use, it is likely too small to significantly affect the Fed’s ability to conduct monetary policy. However, if the scale of use were to grow substantially larger, there could be reason for some concern.

The main threats posed to the Fed by widespread Bitcoin use are Bitcoin substantially affecting how much money is in circulation and/or substantially reducing demand for dollars.

Basically, if everyone is exchanging Bitcoins instead of dollars, dollars are just hanging out. The Fed would then need to tighten monetary policy to be able to have any impact on their value.

Also, a substantial decrease in the use of dollars would also tend to reduce the size of the Fed’s balance sheet and introduce another factor into its consideration of how to affect short-term interest rates (the instrument for implementing monetary policy). However, the Fed’s ability to conduct monetary policy rests on its ability to increase or decrease the reserves of the banking system through open market operations. So long as there is a sizable demand by banks for liquid dollar-denominated reserves, the Fed would likely continue to be able to influence interest rates and conduct monetary policy.

There are many impediments to wide-enough adoption of Bitcoin to threaten US monetary policy. The two biggest ones, according to the report, are the fact that it’s not yet widely adopted, and its potential for deflation.

But, if Bitcoin does get big enough to potentially threaten US monetary policy, or the Federal Reserve gets worried enough that it might, we may see a surge in regulation and selective law enforcement for Bitcoin businesses. New regulations and prosecutions will likely continue to be justified under the guise of preventing other crimes and protecting consumers.

Hopefully, however, instead of the federal government checking Bitcoin, the very real possibility that people will leave the dollar en masse for Bitcoin will be an effective check on the federal government. We’ll see.

Quetzal Embraces Bitcoin

Bitcoin Magazine recently learned of Quetzal’s development and decision to start working with the Bitcoin currency. Quetzal issued the following press release on their decision:

Quetzal retail system: Bringing Bitcoin to the Global Village

Doug Stewart and Greg Naçu have been building web-based point of sale for retail since before high-speed internet was widely available. Beginning with consignment textbook operations on Canadian University campuses, then expanding into retail operations, they pioneered the way the web can be harnessed for real-time, multi-location inventory and customer management.

With their recent product, Quetzal, they have taken the pioneering approach one step further.

“By making Quetzal a multi-lingual, multi-currency system from the ground up, the true power of a cloud-based system can be realized and bitcoin plays a huge role in this,” says Stewart from his location in Oaxaca Mexico where adoption is steadily growing in this Spanish speaking part of the world. “The global village is really becoming a reality. We are finding savvy retailers here in Mexico, parts of Africa, south-east Asia interested in the benefits of a cloud-based, iPad retail management system with integrated credit-card systems as well as bitcoin.”

Bitcoin is integrated into the Quetzal payment side of the transaction process. At the time of sale, the retailer selects the Bitcoin payment button and the customer scans the QR code with his bitcoin wallet. “At this stage of the cycle, the ability to accept bitcoin gives our customers the extra bit of notoriety which is a great thing in a competitive retail space. Aside from the pure practicality of bitcoin, there’s a certain caché which speaks of forward-thinking and hipness that the retailer can message to his customer,” says Stewart.

Also in the US, brick and mortar retailers from Orange County, California to downtown New York City can now easily accept bitcoin for all or part of their sales. Through the Quetzal system, the retailer gets funds in his local currency as though it were a credit card sale – but at a fraction of the transaction cost.

“In order for bitcoin to truly emerge as a viable currency it has to be used by real people for real, everyday purchases,” says co-founder Greg Naçu from the Quetzal corporate offices in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. “If I can walk into a store and buy a shirt or a pair of winter boots using my bitcoin wallet it will make my life easier. If the transaction cost is lower for the retailer, the price I pay can be eventually lower too.”

Quetzal is a full-featured iPad/web-based retail point of sale system for retailers helping them to manage their inventory and customer information. It features real-time warehoused reporting, offline and mobile transactions as well as completely integrated payment systems including bitcoin. It comes in eight languages and is available in over thirty countries. There is an attractive, pre-configured hardware bundle which can be shipped anywhere in the world from their hardware partner in Florida making setup a breeze – “just plug it together and it works,” says Naçu.

For more information about this innovative retail bitcoin system, go the Quetzal website at www.quetzalpos.com

 

Mining Pool Centralization At Crisis Levels

One of the key requirements for the Bitcoin network to be secure is that mining, the distributed process in which the network processes and secures transactions, must be decentralized; that is to say, there should be no single individual or entity with more than 50% of the computing power of the entire network. If the condition is not met, then Bitcoin essentially collapses into a less efficient model of a centralized database, where the majority shareholder can unilaterally block and even reverse transactions at will. Most of the time in Bitcoin’s history, this condition has been met; although miners do organize themselves into centralized groups known as pools, there have been a wide array of pools to choose from, and usually no single one has had more than a quarter of the network’s power. Over the past few months, however, a new mining pool has emerged that has come to be a serious threat to this status quo: GHASH.io. The mining pool’s hashpower first increased to 30%, then 40%, and now the situation has hit a peak where the pool controls an impressive 45% of the network – just shy of the 50% needed for Bitcoin to turn into a system of de-facto centralized trust.

What Is Mining?

In order to understand what is going on here, it is important to first understand the concept of mining, and specifically mining pools. The purpose of the Bitcoin network is to maintain a decentralized database of what the balances of all of the accounts in the Bitcoin system are; the way that it does so is by releasing a series of “blocks”, with one new block coming out every ten minutes and containing all of the transactions that have taken place during that time. Each block builds on top of the previous block, and the idea is that once a transaction is deep enough in the “blockchain” it becomes very hard to reverse, since an attacker would need to start from the block before the one containing the transaction and then outpace the rest of the network combined from there. Miners are the ones who release these blocks; every time a miner does a round of the mining computation there is a roughly 1 in 1019 chance that the miner will succeed, create the next block, and get a 25 BTC reward. Anyone with computing power can download a Bitcoin mining software package and become a miner, although in practice specialized hardware is also required. Because of this random mechanism, the chance that a miner will mine a block within a given timeframe is almost exactly proportional to the miner’s computing power.

However, there is one problem with this setup: the 25 BTC reward is extremely rare, and most small miners, if left to mine on their own, would never discover any blocks at all. Mining pools fix this in the following way. Instead of a miner mining for themselves, the miner mines for the mining pool. In exchange, if a miner discovers a block that is almost valid (say, such that 1 in 10000 “almost valid” blocks are actually valid), the mining pool pays the miner 25 BTC divided by 10000, minus a small fee. Because the process is random, miners cannot cheat; they can either mine for themselves, and have a 1 in 1019 chance of getting 25 BTC, or they can try to generate blocks that give the mining pool the reward instead, and then every time they run the computation they have a 1 in 1014 chance of being eligible for, say, a 0.0024 BTC reward from the miner assuming a 4% fee. Like an inverted gambling site, the mining pool uses its large size to absorb the randomness of the mining process and ensure for its users a more even reward.

The Problem

Throughout much of Bitcoin’s history, even with the centralization of mining pools, mining has been fairly decentralized. The picture on the right shows the mining pool distribution in June 2012, with a large array of pools where no single one owns more than about 15% of the total network hashpower. Now, however, a single mining pool, GHASH.io, controls roughly 40% hashpower, and the next largest, BTC Guild, controls about 25%. That is to say, if GHASH.io and BTC Guild merged, they together would have a high degree of control over the Bitcoin network. They would not be able to do everything; they cannot, for example, force a transaction from A to B without A’s signature. However, they can block or reverse transactions at will. Even with only 40%, GHASH.io can reverse transactions with some success; by the simple laws of randomness, a mining pool with 40% hashpower will occasionally seem to have over 50% hashpower for a few hours at a time; in fact, there have been instances where GHASH mined six blocks in a row. And this worry is not just theoretical; there is some evidence that GHASH.io is actually being used to attack gambling sites, which are more vulnerable to this kind of attack than merchants because they have no ability to simply cancel an order if the associated transaction gets reversed.

GHASH.io is also interesting because it is affiliated with CEX.io, a site that sells what is known as “mining contracts”. Right now, nearly all Bitcoin mining is done with specialized hardware, which users buy from Bitcoin mining hardware manufacturers and then run at home. But this setup is not optimal; it is possible to save on shipping costs by never actually shipping the miners, and instead keeping the miners in house and letting the users configure them remotely. From there, one can go a step further: not require users to bother with the concept of “Bitcoin miners” and simply sell them “hashpower”; that is, users can pay 0.04 BTC, put in a Bitcoin address, and receive the revenue from 1 gigahash (ie. 1 billion rounds of mining computation per second) of mining power directly, with no need to think about any of the details of what is actually going on. This is what a mining contract is, and users are increasingly opting to purchase these contracts from CEX instead of bothering to configure their own miners. And as a result GHASH’s market share is rapidly increasing.

The Solutions

Given that this is a threat to the most fundamental security assumption behind the Bitcoin network, the next question is: what do we do about it? Fortunately, there are several solutions. The first, and most obvious, is to support decentralized mining pools. Decentralized mining pools serve the same function as regular mining pools, but use their own blockchain instead of a centralized mining service to reward miners. The most advanced decentralized mining pool is p2pool, and is relatively easy to setup.

The process is as follows:

  1. Install any Bitcoin miner (eg. bfgminer)
  2. Point the miner to P2Pool and start running. In bfgminer’s case, the command line instruction is bfgminer -o http://p2pool.org:9332 -u address -p password, where address should be replaced by your Bitcoin address and password can literally be kept as “password”.

Even if P2Pool hits 51% market share, it will not be able to actually block or reverse transactions, since the mining pool is decentralized and so its power is vested in the network as a whole. However, p2pool has two weaknesses. First of all, because p2pool is its own blockchain, it consumes significant resources, making it difficult to install on many computers. Second, even with the setup guide described above, it may not be easy-to-use enough. What is needed is for someone to make a one-click script that installs bfgminer, configures bfgminer, installs p2pool and installs a command line application and a graphical user interface that simply accepts a Bitcoin address and starts mining.

Given P2Pool’s inefficiencies, another solution is to improve the state of centralized mining pools. This can be done in two ways. First of all, someone can write a software package and release it as open source that essentially allows anyone to run their own top-quality mining pool. In the world of virtual private server hosting, for example, such a software package already exists: HyperVM. As a result, we see hundreds of small VPS providers all competing to provide the best and most high-quality possible service, and costs are coming down fast; Microtronix, for example, is now providing a basic 128 MB server for as little as $11 per year. If a similar, high-quality package existed for mining pools, anyone would be able to set up their own mining pool and we could have a much more diverse mining pool ecosystem even without P2Pool.

Second, there is a protocol knows as getblocktemplate where, instead of miners simply mining whatever the mining pool tells them to mine, miners themselves come up with the next block. When a miner tries to claim a reward for an almost valid block (or “share”), the mining pool checks if the block reward went to the pool and if it did pays the reward to the miner. Note that, once again, miners cannot cheat; the miner needs to decide whether the block will pay to themselves or to the pool before making an attempted mining round, so it’s not possible to simultaneously claim shares from the pool and claim the full reward from blocks that are actually valid. However, the problem here is the same as with p2pool: miners need to have an actual Bitcoin node running, which consumes resources and has its own setup costs.

Finally, there is another solution, which looks at a specific piece of the puzzle: CEX.io. Theoretically, CEX.io, because it by itself has enough hashpower that its block rewards are fairly even, should be solo mining and not cooperating with a pool. In practice, however, this will not happen. The reason, provided in an official post by CEX itself, is this:

In October the development of the “GHash.IO” project was transferred to the CEX.IO development team.
The team worked hard to completely rewrite the whole GHash.IO engine, as well as perform other stability and responsiveness improvements, which you all may have noticed.
We have also removed the 3% fee and released merged-mining alt coins to the miners.

Thus, CEX is working very closely with GHash, and has no reason to abandon it. The solution here is thus the same as the first solution suggested for centralized mining pools: create an open-source software package that lets anyone create their own equivalent of CEX, and thereby quickly outcompete it.

GHASH.io also has the power to solve this problem themselves; all they need to do, right now, is double their fees for all users, and set the fee to automatically adjust upwards again if the pool’s hashpower exceeds 33%. The solution will make the Bitcoin community happy because the pool’s hashpower will decrease to a more reasonable percentage, and it will likely even increase GHASH.io’s revenue at the same time.

Finally, for the average user, there is the more extreme option of switching to another currency. Litecoin, for example, is very similar to Bitcoin, but its developers are working very hard at making it p2pool-friendly. Peercoin and Nxt use an alternative mining mechanism called “proof of stake” where users “mine” with money rather than computing power; although this alternative mechanism is relatively unproven, it is extremely promising because it is essentially impossible to set up a mining pool with it.

However, ultimately for now the simplest solution may be the one that works: simply boycott GHASH.io. The solution worked in 2011, when Deepbit threatened to pass 50% mining power several times and was rapidly struck down by an organized boycott each time, and may well work now. GHASH’s mining power is down to 38% already, and hopefully will decrease further as users move off to other pools such as Slush, Deepbit (now only at 3%) and of course P2Pool. But in the long term, especially as more profit-motivated players that are not themselves heavily invested in the Bitcoin currency and community join the scene, we may need another solution. There have been several efforts to set up bounties for some of the above solutions; if someone contacts us with a well-organized, community-supported and credible effort we will link to it here. Otherwise, the problem we have today will eventually pass, but it will not be the last time that something like this happens.

The birth of the bi•fury 5GH USB ASIC. An interview with the father of the world’s fastest USB Bitcoin Miner.

More and more people are getting involved with Bitcoins. More and more people are becoming interested in how to mine by themselves. Everybody can do Bitcoin mining by running software with specialized hardware. In the early days it was possible to find a new block using your computer’s CPU. As an increasing number of people started mining, the difficulty of finding new blocks increased greatly to the point where the only cost-effective method of mining today is using specialized hardware. There are several people and teams all over the world who are busy with developing the finest mining hardware.

The fastest USB miner in the world at this moment is the bi•fury 5GH USB ASIC Bitcoin Miner. Bitcoin Magazine spoke with network engineer and Bitcoin enthusiast Filip Pawczyński from Poland. He runs IT company FPITM and introduced the bi•fury in November.

Christien Havranek: What exactly are you doing in the world of Bitcoins and with the hardware? And since when?

Filip Pawczyński: I am a part of a Polish group of Bitcoin enthusiasts who decided to take as many challenges as possible into the world of Bitcoins. We call ourselves ‘Cryptopol’ and share the most visions for the future with the currency. The most important thing that we do in the world of Bitcoins now is producing mining hardware. At the moment we are full-time busy with our USB ASIC Bitcoin Miner. We started this project in June this year. Thanks to our electronic projecting partners intron and c-scape we produced the fastest USB ASIC Bitcoin Miner in the world at this moment, acquiring a speed of 5Gh/s. We want to involve as many people with Bitcoin as possible, and to do this in a very transparant and honest way.

Next to this project, we work for Bitcoin in the Polish scene. While Bitcoin is worth spreading, we want to promote it for all kind of users. We are responsible for the Polish Bitcoin Association. This association has a mission to get Polish people closer to Bitcoin. We are a part of many Bitcoin meetings and conferences to promote the currency, especially in Warsaw. In my opinion personal networking is very important at this kind of business. Due to this we meet people who want to help with PBA. Our Polish Bitcoin Association just started working, and unfortunately very slowly. We are going to start a real promotion program in early 2014. We also want to join Bitcoin Foundation for a cooperation in the future.

CH: Are there a lot of people interested into Bitcoin in Poland? And what kind of people are we talking about then?

FP: According to Sourceforge, Poland got a high place in the world with Bitcoin QT wallet downloads and we also have many stable nodes. I also know many Polish miners; all are doing a good job for the future of Bitcoin. There were a couple of meet-ups and conferences already in Poland; they were successful.

The kind of people interested in Bitcoins are in the first place IT-ers and engineers. Students of ITC – and financial studies follow. There is over 60% activity into the world of Bitcoins within this group, which is a lot! The rest of the people that are interested is a mix of people who want to start building something up into this system and also others who don’t. Some of them are just doing Bitcoin stuff for money, while others want to make the old and sick system of nowadays more healthy for everyone.

CH: How did you come into contact with Bitcoins? And since when?

FP: I heard of them for the first time long ago. It was at the beginning of 2011. What I definitely remember is the BTC value of that time, it was lower than 1$. My friend Sebastian showed me a “What Is Bitcoin” video from weusecoins.com (CH: You can find it here:  https://www.weusecoins.com/en/ ). I remember the feeling I had at the part of this video when the ice cubes with coins are melting down and the voice is telling “your account can’t be frozen” like the day of today. I was very interested immediately and full of hope. So here it all started. Nowadays Sebastian is one of my co-operators at Cryptopol.

CH: When did you decide to start working with Bitcoins? And what was the process?

FP: Actually it was at the beginning of this year. I was just watching Bitcoins and their world without doing some concrete things with them much too long. But I was very absorbed with my work and lifestyle at the time before, and it was difficult to drop everything and to start doing something completely from the beginning. Also willpower and resources were scarce at that time. But working together with some other very motivated people made the process more easy. We started just focusing on Bitcoins and its capabilities, made a plan what to do and how, and started implementing.

Minimi vs Varta

CH: And a great result is the fastest USB miner at the moment: Mr. bi•fury. How is he doing in the big world?

FP: Mr. bi•fury is doing well, thanks! Although I can tell you that Miners are a hard business, especially small ones, we don’t have to complain. We learn very much about the market and we implement improvements to the project all the time. The price of the devices was unstabilized because of many pre-orders. 90% of the hardware companies that make miners used the pre-orders. We have had very negative experiences with preorders in selling hardware. So that is why we decided to have our products in stock. Because we wanted to have them in stock, we had to take the decision to make them a bit more expensive according to the market Gh price. Most of the people are very fine about this because they see the advantage of it. Some are complaining about the price. But when I am looking back to the prices and delivery delay situation on hardware about 6 months ago, I know we made the best decision. The selling is going well now and we are very happy to send our devices all over the world to countries like Malaysia, China, Japan, South Korea, USA, Australia, Russia, Argentina. Most of them are EU customers, especially from Germany.

When we take a look at comments and posts about the service most of our customers are very pleased. One customer even wrote that he received his device within 5 days after ordering it from the West Coast of the USA. I think that is very good. When people order their unit, they will get it as fast as UPS can deliver it. We are giving our best for customers and when we read comments like the one above, it gives us a satisfied feeling.

CH: What do you think the future of Bitcoin will be?

FP: In former times, I was thinking about this a lot. After many thoughts finally I concluded that I just had to start to create a Bitcoin future in my own space. So I stopped thinking about what will and could be with Bitcoins in the future, and started to work on things and to create. According to all I think that Bitcoin has the potential to be a global currency, but we have to work for it to make it happen.

CH: And what do you think will be the impact of Bitcoin on the world?

FP: In many things it will be much better than now. Bitcoin has many useful and logical rules; they can easily improve our financial behaviours and make it more healthy for us users. Decentralization is also a major advantage. In my opinion nobody should have the power to print money. Fiat currencies and neo-economy is the black-end for humanity right now. Nobody should be exposed to fiat bubbles breaking down and have to count on banks who can not pay you back your money, like what happened on Cyprus. Unfortunately we are living in a time where it can happen to most of us. Using Bitcoin is a good way to prevent people from having these problems and so it makes it the right moment to choose it now. Since the beginning of Bitcoin it was impossible to stop it. And we are only at the half of the first phase now.

32 dos minimi

Notes:

If you are interested in the bi•fury you can find some more information and prices here:  www.cryptostore.io/ 

Here an impression of a cosy bi•fury family at work: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c034kbjGNh4

And more information about Bitcoin, PBA works, events and meetings will be available on www.bitcoin.org.pl soon (under construction now).

Target Stores’ Security Nightmare Solved with Bitcoin

Presenting Your First Use-Case for Digital Currency Advantage for Local Merchant Shopping

Hello? Is this Target – the giant retail store chain? Yes, my name is Bitcoin – I come from the future. I bring you good news! In the future your current problems will go away. It was inevitable really, I just wanted you to rest easy knowing that you played an important role for giving the world one of the first real-world use cases for using Bitcoin instead of credit cards for local merchants.

You remember that incident that happened a few months back? Yes, I’m sure you still don’t want to talk about it, but it’s important for the world to understand that your current misery is going to act as a reference point for all other major retailers in a relatively short amount of time.

I’m guessing you usually spend quite a bit of your budget in security related matters. You must protect your servers and networks against hackers and viruses, etc. Your embarrassing security breach was the worst kind which involved the possibility of your customers being “inconvenienced” with having to replace credit cards with new ones and the possible loss of trust. Yes, I’m sure that will sting for a while. You already know those banks that had to work overtime to handle this mess on their end with replacing cards and reaching out to their customers will eventually be coming to collect those costs from you. That’s going to be expensive. Start preparing yourself for the next earning session and take a deep breath before you speak of the figure your stockholders use to gage your performance compared to the previous year…“same store sales”. They will brace for it – but it will still sting. The slim 5% or less net profit margins that are customary in the retail industry aren’t going to be enough this round. One day the panic that is ringing through your company will eventually subside.

You see Bitcoin was barely gaining momentum enough to be on the radar for many large companies in 2013. It certainly wasn’t your fault that you were chosen to be the example. You will eventually come around to the fact that you wished Bitcoin had started a few years earlier while you could have taken advantage of it. Because accepting it meant you had your cash right away and had zero liability for keeping your customer banking data private. Your customers didn’t have to worry about their private banking information being sold on the black market to the highest bidders. It would have saved you all of this embarrassment, loss of sales, security systems revamp and evaluation, court costs and more.

Well enough with the bad news. Now I bring you hope.

In 2013 your customers didn’t yet realize the advantage that paying with digital currency would protect their privacy and stop their risk to identity theft. But fear not – they’ll come around to it. It’s natural law. Water finds the path of least resistance as everything in life does. Having to give out credit card information and cvc codes, even debit PIN numbers that get compromised certainly qualifies as “resistance” doesn’t it? You helped bring in a new era that changed how the world thought about money. In hindsight we can now see how quaint credit cards were.

 

           Keep your chin up Target. You took one for the team and played an important part for the world that got an important wake up call because of what you went through. The Bitcoin network is coming to the rescue. Now don’t get too excited, the future is not set. I am only one of your possible paths. But this much is certain, when people began to ask the important question about the benefits of paying local merchants with bitcoin they will think of you. You’ve given the world a real and important use-case of “identity protection”. For that, bitcoin thanks you.

Author notes:

Target retail stores https://www.google.com/#q=tgt were victims of a security breach during the time period of November 27, and December 15 where an estimated 110 million credit and debit card transaction records were stolen. This was widely reported with world-wide news coverage. Officials from several credit card issuing banks worked feverishly to correct the situation with credit card holders before the holidays.

 

Why Charles Stross Doesn’t Know a Thing about Bitcoin

Science fiction writers excel at predicting the future. Jules Verne imagined rocket ships long before rockets were blasting into space. William Gibson foresaw the rise of the internet in Neuromancer. Arthur C Clark wrote about satellites decades before one ever shuttled a call to a cell phone.

At its core, sci-fi writing is about imagination, about openness to new ideas and change.  To do that, sci-fi authors must transcend internal biases and limitations. If you can only see what’s right in front of you, you can’t see what’s coming. Sci-fi authors not only predict the future, they help create it. Their ideas act as catalysts that spur later innovation. As a young author I read the greats, and they inspired my own fiction. Old sci-fi inspires new.

One of the speculative authors who influenced me was Charles Stross. Accelerando and Glasshouse are two of the best sci-fi books of all time. His mind-bending worlds push the limits of what’s possible in fiction. Unfortunately, when it comes to Bitcoin he seems to have very little imagination. He wrote an article called “Why I want Bitcoin to Die in a Fire” that got picked up by Slashdot and Reddit and other news outlets. Even Paul Krugman got in on it, quoting the article directly for a post in the NY Times blog. The only problem is that the article is poorly researched and based on an incredibly shaky foundation. Like many others Stross is completely missing the point on why Bitcoin is a revolutionary concept and system of commerce, all while repeating wild nonsense as if it is fact. It’s hard to believe that an author who wrote about algorithmically run 2.0 economies and trading exchanges for personal reputations can fail to see the precursors of that tech in the real world.

Stross makes some typical arguments against Bitcoin: it wastes electricity; bad money will push out good because it will be more profitable for botnets than legitimate miners; it’s deflationary; it is semi-anonymous so it enables crime; it’s a conspiracy by Libertarians to take over the world. But do any of them stand up to scrutiny?

The first point he makes is that it has a “carbon footprint from hell.” In other words, it wastes electricity. This is the only argument I partially agree with. Stross’ actual calculations are based on fantasy numbers from blockchain.info, but there is no denying that Bitcoin and other currencies have a large electricity footprint. Yet so do Visa and Amex and all of the big payment processing companies that we rely on to process transactions today. If we are going to do business online then we will use electricity.  Unless we go back to using the Pony Express, that’s a fact of life. Bitcoin simply shifts the electricity used to a distributed cluster of people working together as opposed to a data center at a big company.

It’s also arguable we can’t calculate the impact of miners based simply on electrical usage alone. They serve a dual purpose in the economy. They process transactions and act as a distributed web of trust. They power an entire economic system by preventing people from cheating the system. When you consider how much time and how many resources payment processors currently use to make a complete mess of the same thing, that starts to look like a lot of money saved indeed. Total ROI for their efforts can’t be understood just by counting the amount of kilowatts burned.

In another point Stross argues that Bitcoin violates Gresham’s Law meaning that it would be more profitable to steal electricity with a giant botnet rather than mine legitimately. He cites this paper, that says botnets will come to dominate Bitcoin mining. The math in it is good. There’s just one problem. The paper was written in 2011, before the rise of ASICs (Application Specific Integrated Circuits), chips specially created for mining that are 100s of times more energy efficient and powerful. You can’t mine much with the CPUs or even the GPU’s in people’s computers these days. It’s not profitable with one CPU or a million CPUs. The botnets will fail and sleazy cybercriminals will just go back to trying to get old ladies to cash fake checks.

Actually, the opposite of what the paper theorizes seems to be happening. The competition among miners is already working to reduce that carbon footprint, unlike our current economy where the big payment processors have little to no incentive to get much more efficient. There are only a few of them and they own the market. A little more energy efficiency saves them a chunk on their bottom line, but not by much. By contrast, the Bitcoin economy has already seen a number of incredible increases in efficiency. We went from CPUs to GPUs to ASICs in the five years that the Bitcoin economy has been churning. ASICs are much more energy efficient than giant banks of GPUs running at 99% constantly. ASICs represents real businesses accreting around the crypto economy and delivering more processing power to handle additional load, while reducing energy consumption on a per unit basis. This is an open market driving new efficiencies. When big firms are putting real money into the Bitcoin economy every day, this will only drive more and more efficiencies and reduce the overall carbon footprint, even as the economy grows.

Stross also attacks the currency on the basis of it being “deflationary,” because it mimics a limited money supply that increases in value over time while reducing prices of goods and services. He also notes that the Bitcoin system seems to come with a Libertarian agenda. Algorithmically defined economic systems mirror the real economic systems they model. Bitcoin picked one that is largely deflationary. Nobody has the final say on what economic system is the best. Economists can’t even agree on basic assumptions, which is why they argue endlessly. Economic systems work if they work for the people who use them. Whether Bitcoin works in the long run will be up to the people buying and selling goods and services in that system. There are a huge number of cryptocurrencies already, each with different designs and monetary policies. Nearly every economic system that we have ever come up with is now modeled by one cryptocurrency or another. They are currently battling it out for mind share and utility. Some can verify transactions faster. Some increase the monetary supply quicker or have a larger output of coins. These alternative coins share one thing in common: almost all of them are based on the original Bitcoin open source code. Some of them, like Worldcoin, are built right on top of Bitcoin protocol. In other words, Bitcoin is already enabling different economic systems with different rules. May the best economic system win.

Bitcoin is more of a hybrid system than a true deflationary system. The gold standard is considered deflationary and Bitcoin is often seen as the digital equivalent of gold. Gold has a limited supply, so it is scarce, just like a digital currency. But real gold can only be subdivided so far. It can only be chopped up so far before it’s nothing but dust. Bitcoin has no such limitations. Theoretically, it can be subdivided into fractions of a coin almost indefinitely, growing as needed with people’s demands. Its current limitation is eight decimal places. Even with only 21 million Bitcoins, that’s still 2000 trillion of the smallest unit. The protocol is designed to be upgradeable, so if we ever need to divide it further we can.

It’s shouldn’t be hard to see that cryptocurrencies can actually lead to better economic understanding and better transparency. Imagine a money map that shows all the world’s transactions in real time, similar to Google’s gorgeous wind map. Think of big data analytics running nonstop, studying the impact of money on people’s lives with real data, not estimations and surveys and guesswork. You can easily visualize all of the world’s money as it moves by studying the Bitcoin blockchain, a central transaction ledger of all the transactions in Bitcoin history. Imagine if economists could study the flow of all global commerce in real time?  What would they learn from it?  What would we?

Stross also argues that Bitcoin is only good for criminals and scumbags buying drugs and illegal weapons. This is perhaps the lamest of all arguments against Bitcoin. Can Bitcoin be used to buy illegal drugs?  Of course.  But so can dollars, pounds, or yuan.  These currencies can be and are used for that every single day. Yet nobody talks as if this invalidates the usefulness of these currencies, only Bitcoin. Everything that exists in this world can be used for both good and ill. A humble kitchen knife can still be used to stab someone but few people would argue we should ditch kitchen knives. Just because something can be used for ill purposes doesn’t make it evil. Nothing really changes here. People have been using money to do bad things since the dawn of money.

The second half of the “Bitcoin is only for criminals” argument is that its pseudo-anonymous nature will make it harder for criminals to be hunted down and put in jail. That didn’t work out well for the Silk Road. If the Silk Road saga taught us anything, it’s that if you openly set up a big, in-your-face, stick-it-to-the-man illegal enterprise you will get caught. You’ll get caught the way all criminals get caught: through good old-fashioned police work. The police didn’t need any special tools to get the folks from Silk Road. They needed some digital forensics people – par for the course these days – as well as some detectives willing to follow all the leads. They got their man. People will always try to beat the law, and there will always be police and investigators to track them down, Bitcoin or not.

Lastly, Stross points to a random blog post by a cloud engineer from the UK about how Bitcoin is a nuclear weapon designed to take out the global banking system. This is something that Krugman picks up on in his “Bitcoin is Evil” post. Of course, as good as sci-fi authors are at predicting things, the truth is that none of us can see all the permutations of what’s to come. While sci-fi authors are good at predicting individual technologies, they can’t always see how a future society will really function. Like that blogger, we often imagine a total dystopia or utopia. Life usually ends up somewhere in between. Big banks will adapt and change as cryptocurrencies and the systems that support them evolve. Chris Dixon, one of the venture capitalists behind Coinbase, reminds us that “almost every significant computing movement had early proponents who were ideologically motivated. The developers of the first personal computers were closely aligned with the 60s counterculture movement. Open source software was originally created by people who believed that all software should be available for free…This isn’t coincidental: broad-based technology movements have depended on non-economic participants early on since it often took years for commercial participants to get involved.” If Bitcoin only worked for Libertarians it wouldn’t be much of an economic system at all. Economic systems work because lots of people of differing backgrounds and opinions find them useful. People will vote with their wallets on Bitcoin, and that’s the way it should work.

I don’t know what Bitcoin will become, but whatever it is it looks like a profound technological innovation. It doesn’t “sound” impressive, Mr. Krugman, it is impressive.  Bitcoin challenges some basic assumptions about what’s possible. While Bitcoin specifically might not achieve the gestalt needed to support a mature economy, it seems almost certain that another cryptocurrency will. What exactly that will look like we can’t predict, but you don’t have to wait for the future. Economics 2.0 is online now and you can play with the beta version. For a sci-fi author like Stross that potential should prove intoxicating.

Being a sci-fi author is about being open to possibilities. When a writer loses that ability to see what might be, maybe it’s time for him to step aside and make way for a new generation of authors who still can.

A Word from Jeffrey Tucker: Bitcoin Is Not a Monetary System

Libertarian leader Jeffrey Tucker, CEO of Liberty.me and publisher of Laissez Faire Books, shared with Bitcoin Magazine his views on how Bitcoin is NOT a monetary system.

Bitcoin Is Not a Monetary System

By Jeffrey Tucker

Every since I started writing about cryptocurrency last Spring, my inbox has become a hub for Bitcoin questions. I completely understand – even to me it’s still the most implausible idea ever that some code-slinging, nameless geek somewhere could somehow invent a new currency made from 1s and 0s, throw it out there on an open forum, and (in a mere five years), it would obtain a market capitalization worth nearly $10 billion.

What does it all mean? Well, it took me some serious study to figure out how all the technologies hang together and why. Understanding Bitcoin requires knowledge of monetary theory, open-source programming, distributed networks, cryptography, and process-oriented software development — and that’s quite a big undertaking. This accounts for why people are so confused as to how a protocol could become the basis of a new global monetary order.

However, I actually don’t think that a lack of technical knowledge really accounts for why even some very smart people are having a hard time making sense of the success of Bitcoin. A hint  towards the answer came in an email from a correspondent who asked me a particular question about how contracts and accounting will work once Bitcoin “is implemented as a currency.”

I got stuck on the word “implemented.” That’s the core of the fallacy; and, again, it is completely understandable. Hayek wrote in 1974 that governments have owned and managed monetary systems for many hundreds of years, even back to the ancient world: the coin of the realm has been seen as a government responsibility. In the 19th century, all governments were expected to implement a system that best met the needs of the population.

In the 20th century, government took this idea much further. It would not just print the money, it would not just oversee the system and determine what constituted money, no – it would use ‘science’ to find the optimal money-creation rate and cartelize the banking system to make sure that it was exactly as it should be. Every aspect of the money system — and we are talking about half of every economic transaction — would be overseen by the state in conjunction with private partners in industry.

And so it has been for all these years. No living person remembers a time when money had any existence outside public management. In effect, all governments of the world made money a socialistically owned good. And what happened? It became a tool of politics; it declined in quality, buying less and less in terms of goods and services; in effect, it became the main means of funding the expansion of power over liberty.

The emergence of cryptocurrency smashes that paradigm entirely. “Satoshi Nakamoto” never asked for anyone’s permission to release his code-based model for the ideal currency, he didn’t submit a working paper to the National Bureau of Economic Research, he didn’t meet with Federal Reserve economists, testify to the Senate Banking Committee, or get the ear of the chairman of the Fed. He went straight to the public.

He bypassed the entire structure of power and released it on a distributed network. He invited the world to participate. In other words, he was not proposing a system at all, it is not a top-down plan for monetary reform. We’ve seen scads of those — thousands upon thousands — emerge over the last hundred years. None of them have come to anything. You can talk about monetary rules, policy reforms, audits, and exchange rate fixes all you want, but here is the grim reality: government owns the money and it will use it to serve its ends.

That’s why a totally different approach was necessary: the free market. The free market is not a system, it is not a policy dictated by anyone in particular, it is not something that Washington implements, it does not exist in any legislation, law, bill, regulation, or book. It is what you get when people act on their own, entirely without central direction, and with their own property, and within human associations of their own creation and in their own interest. It is the beauty that emerges in absence of control.

Does that sound like anarchy? It struck Karl Marx that way. What he did not understand was the central insight of the liberal revolution of the 18th century: society can manage itself and create its own beautiful order without any central control. Bitcoin is a paradigmatic example, but only one of a million now emerging all over the world.

Who or what is chronicling these revolutionary developments and plotting to push them further as a means of achieving greater freedom in our own lives, and therefore in society as a whole? Liberty.me. Our purpose is to invite everyone into a close engagement with the wonderful upheavals going on right now.

Krugman’s Three Money Pits

One might cut Paul Krugman a bit of slack for his sorry tale of three money pits, as twice a week he faces the challenge of coming up with an economics column with some manner of hook. Unfortunately, with great prizes (and compensation) comes great responsibility, especially when an academic knowingly exploits fallacies to advance a political agenda.

For its users, money has three classic functions: a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and a store of value. For its government producers, money has three other functions: a source of seignorage, a means of taxation, and a lever of macroeconomic influence. Theses various purposes can sometimes conflict, so tension arises when a monetary innovation appears that better serves some stakeholders than others. As a devout Keynesian, Krugman has the ongoing mission of defending government fiat currencies against all alternatives, whether modern digital or traditional commodity-backed currencies, using any means necessary, not limited to the intellectually honest.

Krugman’s Three Money Pits are 1) the open-pit gold mine in Porgera, Papua New Guinea, 2) the bitcoin mine in Reykjanesbaer, Iceland, and 3) a hypothetical money pit from Keynes’ head. Porgera’s mine is a litany of human-rights horrors, and Krugman implies that gold consumers are somehow to blame. Porgera is really just one example of the resource curse, which applies to numerous countries rich in natural resources but short on democratic institutions. If Krugman drives a car, is he similarly troubled by the provenance of his fuel, the rubber in his tires, or the elements (platinum, palladium, and rhodium) in his catalytic converter? If Krugman laments “burning up resources”, what consumption does he consider to be non-frivolous? Flying to Europe, as he is wont to do, consumes a great deal of resources, not to mention producing a great deal of pollution. If Krugman dislikes commodity-backed currencies and trading with developing nations, one might expect him to enthusiastically support the bitcoin server farms in Iceland: here is a Scandinavian country using renewable resources to produce money out of thin air! Even better, if bitcoin has an intrinsic value, it is as a medium of transferring value globally with almost no transaction costs, an incredible boon to the citizens of developing countries who work in developed nations and currently pay 10% commissions to send home remittances. But no—Krugman reveals his value preferences: a currency not under the control of government and banks is a threat, regardless of its other benefits. A non-arbitrary supply might be the only thing that gold and bitcoin have in common, but for Krugman that is all that matters. His framing of gold and bitcoin as violating human rights and despoiling the environment is designed to arouse emotion and bypass reason.

Bitcoin mining does have a cost, but clearly the total cost is less than that of banks, because in the end bitcoin transactions can be made for commissions that are orders of magnitude lower than the 1–10% that is typically charged by banks, PayPal, the credit cards, and Western Union. Krugman ignores the overhead costs of the current monetary and banking systems, which are clearly non-trivial. The massive computing power devoted to bitcoin is dwarfed by that devoted to recreational uses, from multiplayer games to streaming pornography. Perhaps Krugman has an opinion there also.

When he recruits Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes into the discussion, Krugman makes more appeals to emotion. He describes Adam Smith as a “patron saint” to conservatives, who resist public spending for creating jobs as “anathema”—clearly conservatives are religious and dogmatic about economics. Meanwhile Krugman paints Keynes as a scientist with theories so accepted that resistance to them must be “political”. Last I heard, scholars in the dismal science had by no means reached a consensus about Keynes’ ideas that a national government can spend money, even burying valuables in a pit, and stimulate more value creation than value consumed.

Adam Smith did indeed call for banking regulation, as Krugman points out gleefully while neglecting to mention the context. In the same paragraph of The Wealth of Nations where Smith mentioned the “dead stock” of silver and gold, he described the precariousness of an economy “suspended upon the Daedalian wings of paper money” rather than traveling upon “the solid ground of gold and silver.” Smith promoted not fiat money, but paper money backed by gold and silver. Smith expounded on the dangers and drawbacks of paper money, but bitcoin is not subject to them. To store value bitcoin leaves no “dead stock”, and its value does not depend on the reliability of human beings. Of course, not everyone would agree with the notion of “dead stock”—to a non-Keynesian, storing value is a respectable function, and if money will not do it properly, people will find other value stores, e.g. larger houses than they need for lodging.

Krugman’s funniest statement was his conclusion, disparaging both gold and bitcoin as “a determined march to the days when money meant stuff you could jingle in your purse” and “digging our way back to the 17th century.” This is certainly a novel way to describe a digital currency that is based on 21st-century NSA-approved cryptographic algorithms and that can be transferred instantly and globally via the Internet without bank intermediaries. I fear that Krugman is the one becoming old-fashioned.

Developer’s Introduction to Bitcoin

One of the major advantages of Bitcoin is just how easy it is to work with from a developer’s standpoint. Bitcoin has no third party dependencies, no proprietary APIs, and no rapidly changing interface; all you need is your own favorite programming language, and chances are there is already a simple Bitcoin library that you can use to start sending and receiving bitcoins within a few hours. The purpose of this article will be to introduce a few of these libraries, and show the basics of working with Bitcoin addresses and transactions in any language.

Addresses, Keys, Transactions, Oh My!

The Bitcoin protocol in general can be split into three parts: address and key management, transactions, and blocks and mining. Blocks and mining are not important for you as a beginning Bitcoin developer; in most cases it is easier to simply rely on a third-party transaction-fetching service which abstracts the concept of blocks away, and if you are interested in mining the best approach is to simply buy a standard Bitcoin miner. Addresses, keys and transactions, however, you simply cannot avoid dealing with.

In Bitcoin key management, there are three types of objects that you will need to deal with: private keys, public keys and addresses. You may have heard of the terms “private key” and “public key” in the context of public key cryptography; that is exactly the kind of private and public keys we are talking about here. However, Bitcoin uses a newer kind of cryptography called elliptic curve cryptography, and not the older factoring-based cryptographic algorithms like RSA, so Bitcoin keys look a bit different from, say, PGP keys. A private key looks like this:

9d86361789d13823fd888fa45c9b356b76d41a7e33b2b2c3056632721c4c1255

And its corresponding public key is:

04d8f08938e78447b2b1a629c503d5e17483b0d15751a9e8f83c8460e6ec32fd
68d0b4068e83c012f54df995e52ed8bae38056a8d922f9687200ae83e5a6728d
ff

A private key can be converted into a public key, but a public key cannot be converted into a private key. A Bitcoin address is actually the hash of the public key; the Bitcoin address corresponding to the above public key is:

172YRdGzPqyXm9rm1EWKwPXTRsmcApoPQ6

One thing that you might notice is that the Bitcoin address is not in hexadecimal form like the private and public keys are. This is because, for some of its formats, Bitcoin uses its own representation format, known as base58check. The “base58” part comes from the fact that 58 different letters and numbers are used; O, 0, l and I are omitted because they are too easy to mistake for each other. Base 58 is similar to base 2, or base 3, or base 10. For example, the number 31337 in base 2 is ‘111101001101001’; in base 3 it’s ‘1120222122’, in base 10 it’s ‘31337’, in base 16 it’s ‘7a69’, in base 58 it’s ‘AKJ’ and, finally, in base 256 it’s just ‘zi’. The “check” part of base58check is also important; what it means is that the first four bytes of the hash of a message is added to the end of the message before encoding the result in base58. For example, the process of converting ‘zi’ from base 256 into base 58 works as follows:

  • Step 1: checksum = sha256(sha256(‘\x00’ + ‘zi’)) (note that we add a zero byte at the front)

    ’97fbc63584f26bd0109f99d467c447607dbecff51b903e450207466114672261′

  • Step 2: intermediate = ‘\x00’ + ‘zi’ + checksum[:4] (in binary form)

    ‘\x00zi\x97\xfb\xc6\x35’

  • Step 3: convert to base 58

    ‘123xZAaruJ’

However, you personally will not need to deal with all of these complexities; Bitcoin libraries exist to handle everything for you, and we will talk about a few later in the article. But first, transaction handling.

The first important point to keep in mind is that Bitcoin does not internally have the concept of “accounts” or “balances”; all funds are stored in objects known as “transaction outputs”. A transaction has one or more inputs, each input spending an existing unspent transaction output (“UTXO”), and the transaction can then send up to the same amount of BTC in total outputs that it has in inputs. Here is what a transaction looks like in deserialized form:

{
    "locktime": 0,
    "ins": [
        {
            "script": "",
            "outpoint": {
                "index": 0,
                "hash": "319ba90f1645eed46a8fd48e9754ca979c3371f59099d32634a8b56549ce02aa"
            },
            "sequence": 4294967295
        }
    ],
    "outs": [
        {
            "value": 1000000,
            "script": "76a914a41d15ae657ad3bfd0846771a34d7584c37d54a288ac"
        },
        {
            "value": 344164,
            "script": "76a914c4c5d791fcb4654a1ef5e03fe0ad3d9c598f982788ac"
        }
    ],
    "version": 1
}

And in serialized form:

0100000001aa02ce4965b5a83426d39990f571339c97ca54978ed48f6ad4ee45
160fa99b310000000000ffffffff0230750000000000001976a914a41d15ae65
7ad3bfd0846771a34d7584c37d54a288ac204e0000000000001976a914c4c5d7
91fcb4654a1ef5e03fe0ad3d9c598f982788ac00000000

The “script” parameter is just another way of representing an address; converting the two scripts in the above transaction to addresses we get “1FxkfJQLJTXpW6QmxGT6oF43ZH959ns8Cq” and “1JwSSubhmg6iPtRjtyqhUYYH7bZg3Lfy1T”, respectively. The single input in the transaction is a reference to a previous transaction output; looking it up on the blockchain, we see that it has 1354164 satoshis available to spend (1 satoshi is the smallest unit of a bitcoin, with 100 million satoshi = 1 BTC). The two outputs spend 1344164, leaving 10000 satoshis as a fee.

Note that a transaction can only spend an output in its entirety, and not partially. To get around this, the standard mechanism is the concept of “change” – send one output to the intended destination, and then another output sending the rest back to yourself. The above transaction is an example of that – the first output would be a 0.01 BTC payment, and the second would be the change. Once you create a transaction, you then need to sign each input with the private key that corresponds to each address. The process for doing so is pretty involved, but fortunately libraries handle it for you. Here is what the above transaction looks like once it’s signed:
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Then, finally, you need to push the signed transaction to the blockchain. The best way to do this manually is at http://blockchain.info/pushtx. And that’s basically all there is to Bitcoin – until we get into advanced features like multisignature transactions, that is, but those are best described in more detail in another article.

Bitcoind

Bitcoind is the “reference client” created by the core Bitcoin development team; it is a full Bitcoin node that downloads the entire blockchain and processes transactions. Bitcoind is somewhat limited in functionality; for example, it cannot give you the transaction history of an address unless you had imported that address beforehand. However, it is nevertheless fairly powerful. Once you download bitcoind from its project page and build it, the first step is to create a file in your Bitcoin directory (~/.bitcoin on Linux) with the following contents:

rpcuser=user
rpcpassword=pass
rpcport=8332
txindex=1

Substitute in your own username and password if desired. Once you do this, navigate to the directory containing the executable (/bin if your version came with an executable pre-made, /src if you made it yourself), and run ./bitcoind --daemon on the command line to start up the daemon. At that point, you have two ways of running bitcoind commands.

The first way is simpler: just enter “bitcoind” followed by the name of the command and the arguments on the command line. For example:

> ./bitcoind getblockhash 1
00000000839a8e6886ab5951d76f411475428afc90947ee320161bbf18eb6048

> ./bitcoind getblock 00000000839a8e6886ab5951d76f411475428afc90947ee320161bbf18eb6048

{
    "hash" : "00000000839a8e6886ab5951d76f411475428afc90947ee320161bbf18eb6048",
    "confirmations" : 212362,
    "size" : 215,
    "height" : 1,
    "version" : 1,
    "merkleroot" : "0e3e2357e806b6cdb1f70b54c3a3a17b6714ee1f0e68bebb44a74b1efd512098",
    "tx" : [
        "0e3e2357e806b6cdb1f70b54c3a3a17b6714ee1f0e68bebb44a74b1efd512098"
    ],
    "time" : 1231469665,
    "nonce" : 2573394689,
    "bits" : "1d00ffff",
    "difficulty" : 1.00000000,
    "previousblockhash" : "000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f",
    "nextblockhash" : "000000006a625f06636b8bb6ac7b960a8d03705d1ace08b1a19da3fdcc99ddbd"
}


> bitcoind getrawtransaction 0e3e2357e806b6cdb1f70b54c3a3a17b6714ee1f0e68bebb44a74b1efd512098
01000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ffffffff0704ffff001d0104ffffffff0100f2052a0100000043410496b538e853519c726a2c91e61ec11600ae1390813a627c66fb8be7947be63c52da7589379515d4e0a604f8141781e62294721166bf621e73a82cbf2342c858eeac00000000

The second way is using JSON-RPC. JSON-RPC is a generic interface that allows you to connect to bitcoind and run commands with it from any language – potentially even from another computer. The Bitcoin wiki has a page describing some of the ways to make a JSON-RPC call in different programming languages; for the sake of brevity I will only list two.

In Python:

import httplib, json, base64
def mkrequest(url,user,pass,method,params,hasresponse=True):
    connection = httplib.HTTPConnection(url)                          
    postdata = json.dumps({ "method": method, "params": params })                         
    req = urllib2.Request('http://localhost:8001',postdata,{                              
        'Authorization': b'Basic '+base64.b64encode(user+':'+pass),                        
    })                                                                                    
    if hasresponse: return urllib2.urlopen(req).read().strip()

And on the command line using curl:

curl --user <user> --pass <pass> --data-binary '{"method": <method>,
"params": [<param1>,<param2>...] }' http://localhsot:8332

SX

There are two alternative command line tools for dealing with Bitcoin transactions: pybitcointools and SX. SX was created by libbitcoin developer Amir Taaki, and is now being actively maintained by a small team; pybitcointools was written by myself. The syntax is fairly similar, although there are differences. Installing SX is relatively simple; all that you need to do is download a text file called install-sx.sh, install a few libraries, and run the text file. On Ubuntu, the command line instructions are as follows:

wget http://sx.dyne.org/install-sx.sh
sudo apt-get install git build-essential autoconf libtool libboost-all-dev pkg-config libcurl4-openssl-dev libleveldb-dev libzmq-dev libconfig++-dev libncurses5-dev qrencode
chmod +x install-sx.sh
./install-sx.sh

Then, once SX is installed, here is some of what you can do with it. If you are simply building a payment processing platform, it would be enough to simply fetch address the history of addresses and perhaps fetch transactions:

> sx history 114tTpMrJHJpNvkPZmz8KVcJoQjD5Utosd
Address: 114tTpMrJHJpNvkPZmz8KVcJoQjD5Utosd
  output: eb84dd62287a1d85e3f31b0de869534a8f800fad559e36f779a45470aa4e8976:0
  output_height: 277978
  value:  100000
  spend: 3216bc4b8294532cddab1ae2a95a336ee841be02e6246c1ad9cf1e7db788d10e:0
  spend_height: 277979

Address: 114tTpMrJHJpNvkPZmz8KVcJoQjD5Utosd
  output: 5a45c86c5aff8200db4c7f8a91b9a3e51932510cbeb2dc173fc8611bee5aeaaf:1
  output_height: 278076
  value:  70000
  spend: 4817f863ace4337be7ea95476b2c73723fb83fbe0e1a6236fbf30f2a8aa14dee:0
  spend_height: 278076

> sx fetch-transaction 516f0bfe2ed3703112434f645fdc7d805bba51c94c9d8f88b666f1c832eb423c
010000000142f2e85e078a214d5c61b58276da5cec01311e026355c570b650c2e665585011010000008a47304402203aa40adefd0dc4a3f960b230a9e1b284d78a4b4dec9119368fdeb006af3b6c7b022071165df64ea4502003d8b6e9c46c28b5c5c748226737b4fe1ee8fc4269b50ee5014104a70f7c8b0a835f549f061b725bd3e06744963a07cb2f76097bafe040f939d6e6d23c6cc89e5b50aa944d26b7d1c8a1f3b8b4e6f7c2f54cf35fb46b0e4b9442e1ffffffff02a0860100000000001976a914ba55b9859c7356c5e5549c8a30c463e3db64e84488ac80054800000000001976a9145a35a4558b8a0140f4a73aaac0be891b99e3790e88ac00000000

If you want to calculate the balance of an address, you would need to get the history (perhaps using sx history -j 114tTpMrJHJpNvkPZmz8KVcJoQjD5Utosd for a more computer-friendly format), filter out the items that have already been spent, and add the values of the rest. This will give you the total number of satoshis that the address haas available to spend (100 million satoshis = 1 BTC). If you want to make sense of transactions, you can paste the transaction into a file and then run sx showtx on the file.

You can also work with private keys and addresses:

> sx newkey > priv1
> cat priv1
5JRLqUG1FwSimZwSzNLPG1BKCENCRhDwkVveL59AEqt97bbkCD1
> cat priv1 | sx pubkey
04bfc8181cd833567e078cb03ec44034c226bf23dbb2482db53513e0fcea205c40bd6dc73db0c33296d8fa8e0bd347099e07787e17a2a40293004efdb512ff51e2
> cat priv1 | sx addr
1B772AGqphjSQqqeecdTBmnBdgMBPYDXt7

And make transactions. Here we use the output 819171fa2eaa33fc684c800ae2ce34cff8400d4d966e995c6a2f0e970b6f703d:0 to send 90000 satoshis to 18qk7SqRHuS4Kf3f6dmsvqqv7iw1xy77Z6:

> sx mktx txfile.tx -i 819171fa2eaa33fc684c800ae2ce34cff8400d4d966e995c6a2f0e970b6f703d:0 -o 18qk7SqRHuS4Kf3f6dmsvqqv7iw1xy77Z6:90000
> cat txfile.tx
01000000013d706f0b970e2f6a5c996e964d0d40f8cf34cee20a804c68fc33aa2efa7191810000000000ffffffff01905f0100000000001976a9145600d581a94f65067a09103609e919e3c01141ed88ac00000000
> sx rawscript dup hash160 [ `echo 1B772AGqphjSQqqeecdTBmnBdgMBPYDXt7 | sx decode-addr` ] equalverify checksig > raw.script
> cat raw.script
76a9146ed8c762b24ba024df09cb323ea525b06da3acb788ac
> echo 5JRLqUG1FwSimZwSzNLPG1BKCENCRhDwkVveL59AEqt97bbkCD1 | sx sign-input txfile.tx 0 `cat raw.script` > sig
> cat sig
3044022069f05eacfe93fc6c028bd078228d7807af07c5ed7566491c709b181950d735830220788e089c63512c07239b94740a36de724b54c076192dbd27584b5b729986420d01
> sx rawscript [ `cat sig` ] [ 04bfc8181cd833567e078cb03ec44034c226bf23dbb2482db53513e0fcea205c40bd6dc73db0c33296d8fa8e0bd347099e07787e17a2a40293004efdb512ff51e2 ] | sx set-input txfile.tx 0 > txfile2.tx
> cat txfile2.tx
01000000013d706f0b970e2f6a5c996e964d0d40f8cf34cee20a804c68fc33aa2efa719181000000008a473044022069f05eacfe93fc6c028bd078228d7807af07c5ed7566491c709b181950d735830220788e089c63512c07239b94740a36de724b54c076192dbd27584b5b729986420d014104bfc8181cd833567e078cb03ec44034c226bf23dbb2482db53513e0fcea205c40bd6dc73db0c33296d8fa8e0bd347099e07787e17a2a40293004efdb512ff51e2ffffffff01905f0100000000001976a9145600d581a94f65067a09103609e919e3c01141ed88ac00000000
> sx broadcast-tx txfile2.tx

And you can also validate a transaction:

> sx validtx txfile2.tx
Status: Validation of inputs failed
Unconfirmed: 0

The error makes sense because the outputs I used above were already spent. Altogether, SX allows you to essentially put together a flyweight “Bitcoin client”, selecting transaction outputs and making transactions manually. Just a warning though: this is a very risky thing to do, since if you accidentally leave a zero off a transaction output the system is too low-level to catch your error and you will end up paying a 90% fee.

Pybitcointools

Pybitcointools is really two things in one; it is at the same time a Python library which allows you to manipulate Bitcoin addresses, keys and transactions and an SX-like command line tool. To install both, download pybitcointools here, navigate to the directory, and run sudo python setup.py install. From there, open up a Python console and type from pybitcointools import * to import all of the pybitcointools commands.

First key management:

> priv = sha256('some big long brainwallet password')
> priv
'57c617d9b4e1f7af6ec97ca2ff57e94a28279a7eedd4d12a99fa11170e94f5a4'
> pub = privtopub(priv)
> pub
'0420f34c2786b4bae593e22596631b025f3ff46e200fc1d4b52ef49bbdc2ed00b26c584b7e32523fb01be2294a1f8a5eb0cf71a203cc034ced46ea92a8df16c6e9'
> addr = pubtoaddr(pub)
> addr
'1CQLd3bhw4EzaURHbKCwM5YZbUQfA4ReY6'

But, as mentioned above, pybitcointools also includes pybtctool, an SX-like command line tool. To use pybtctool, run:

> pybtctool sha256 "some big long brainwallet password"
57c617d9b4e1f7af6ec97ca2ff57e94a28279a7eedd4d12a99fa11170e94f5a4

> pybtctool privtopub 57c617d9b4e1f7af6ec97ca2ff57e94a28279a7eedd4d12a99fa11170e94f5a4
0420f34c2786b4bae593e22596631b025f3ff46e200fc1d4b52ef49bbdc2ed00b26c584b7e32523fb01be2294a1f8a5eb0cf71a203cc034ced46ea92a8df16c6e9

> pybtctool pubtoaddr 0420f34c2786b4bae593e22596631b025f3ff46e200fc1d4b52ef49bbdc2ed00b26c584b7e32523fb01be2294a1f8a5eb0cf71a203cc034ced46ea92a8df16c6e9
1CQLd3bhw4EzaURHbKCwM5YZbUQfA4ReY6

Now, on to history and transaction fetching:

> h = history(addr)
> h
[{'output': u'97f7c7d8ac85e40c255f8a763b6cd9a68f3a94d2e93e8bfa08f977b92e55465e:0', 'value': 50000, 'address': u'1CQLd3bhw4EzaURHbKCwM5YZbUQfA4ReY6'}, {'output': u'4cc806bb04f730c445c60b3e0f4f44b54769a1c196ca37d8d4002135e4abd171:1', 'value': 50000, 'address': u'1CQLd3bhw4EzaURHbKCwM5YZbUQfA4ReY6'}]

> fetchtx('97f7c7d8ac85e40c255f8a763b6cd9a68f3a94d2e93e8bfa08f977b92e55465e')
'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'

Note that pybtctool includes a convenient -s switch that you can use to chain some operations together:

> pybtctool sha256 'some big long brainwallet password' | pybtctool -s privtoaddr | pybtctool -s history
[{'output': u'97f7c7d8ac85e40c255f8a763b6cd9a68f3a94d2e93e8bfa08f977b92e55465e:0', 'value': 50000, 'address': u'1CQLd3bhw4EzaURHbKCwM5YZbUQfA4ReY6'}, {'output': u'4cc806bb04f730c445c60b3e0f4f44b54769a1c196ca37d8d4002135e4abd171:1', 'value': 50000, 'address': u'1CQLd3bhw4EzaURHbKCwM5YZbUQfA4ReY6'}]

> pybtctool fetchtx 97f7c7d8ac85e40c255f8a763b6cd9a68f3a94d2e93e8bfa08f977b92e55465e | pybtctool -s deserialize
{"locktime": 0, "outs": [{"value": 50000, "script": "76a9147d13547544ecc1f28eda0c0766ef4eb214de104588ac"}, {"value": 540053, "script": "76a9145fe616df99d43ae8001ca941f381572cd1cb74b388ac"}], "version": 1, "ins": [{"script": "493046022100a49c01bbf7a6200b05c61072f79fbbcbb56182e0082f85734ff501efd8f2180a022100a6d2b19a1023c4197206b1ea0d58165fa4d6170e7823d90d1cdb0f2704ceb5d0014104ba8b7ec1189b046d0f6dc68d2cafa4bfc30ea34b8f52a0f815550ffd5f5dfe12df06f2c9a3c1b206b833fe274601fe19e0afd9c47e251ba247edfa7a0237ab3a", "outpoint": {"index": 1, "hash": "60b587c0230eb5d7e458b8541f794618459fe40a1555efe0d02004255d7b49b8"}, "sequence": 4294967295}, {"script": "493046022100c7309b13e54896533ebb6c369b1f46992ed7f8d96c8eb606cfd66a06bf6a061d022100e1cb8d32b380dac42584a5e1a6ff00c209767471b8bb82a13bf8d36221a39aa9014104a88f9a448cfcf259df1da679a37dd8e4c148cb6f0ba6a9b1e7d7019b09ef1034495f02d4cdf27d2bab41da3bce3f9508b20f6ad265b5940799610b69a12d02a5", "outpoint": {"index": 0, "hash": "4cc806bb04f730c445c60b3e0f4f44b54769a1c196ca37d8d4002135e4abd171"}, "sequence": 4294967295}]}

Note the deserialize command; you can of course use it in the pybitcointools library as well. And, of course, you can make transactions:

> pybtctool mktx 97f7c7d8ac85e40c255f8a763b6cd9a68f3a94d2e93e8bfa08f977b92e55465e:0 4cc806bb04f730c445c60b3e0f4f44b54769a1c196ca37d8d4002135e4abd171:1 16iw1MQ1sy1DtRPYw3ao1bCamoyBJtRB4t:90000 | pybtctool -s sign 0 57c617d9b4e1f7af6ec97ca2ff57e94a28279a7eedd4d12a99fa11170e94f5a4
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

You can then push the transaction using pushtx or eligius_pushtx to push straight to a medium-sized mining pool. eligius_pushtx is useful for so-called “non-standard” transactionsthat ordinary Bitcoin nodes reject; for example, multisignatures transactions between more than three parties can be sent through here.

Libraries

Pybitcointools and SX are not the only tools out there; there are Bitcoin libraries in nearly every language. Here are a few:

Happy coding!