Melvin Carvalho [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2013-06-15 📝 Original message:On 19 May 2013 15:23, Adam ...
📅 Original date posted:2013-06-15
📝 Original message:On 19 May 2013 15:23, Adam Back <adam at cypherspace.org> wrote:
> Is there a way to experiment with new features - eg committed coins - that
> doesnt involve an altcoin in the conventional sense, and also doesnt impose
> a big testing burden on bitcoin main which is a security and testing risk?
>
> eg lets say some form of merged mine where an alt-coin lets call it
> bitcoin-staging? where the coins are the same coins as on bitcoin, the
> mining power goes to bitcoin main, so some aspect of merged mining, but no
> native mining. and ability to use bitcoins by locking them on bitcoin to
> move them to bitcoin-staging and vice versa (ie exchange them 1:1
> cryptographically, no exchange).
>
> Did anyone figure anything like that out? Seems vaguely doable and
> maybe productive. The only people with coins at risk of defects in a new
> feature, or insufficiently well tested novel feature are people with coins
> on bitcoin-staging.
>
> Yes I know about bitcoin-test this is not it. I mean a real live system,
> with live value, but that is intentionally wanting to avoid forking
> bitcoins
> parameters, nor value, nor mindshare dillution. In this way something
> potentially interesting could move forward faster, and be les risky to the
> main bitcoin network. eg particularly defenses against
>
> It might also be a more real world test test (after bitcoin-test) because
> some parameters are different on test, and some issues may not manifest
> without more real activity.
>
> Then also bitcoin could cherry pick interesting patches and merge them
> after
> extensive real-world validation with real-money at stake (by early
> adopters).
>
Interesting idea. I wonder if ripple could be used to set up a transfer
system between the 'main' and 'staging' systems ...
>
> Adam
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130615/ded41a25/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:On 19 May 2013 15:23, Adam Back <adam at cypherspace.org> wrote:
> Is there a way to experiment with new features - eg committed coins - that
> doesnt involve an altcoin in the conventional sense, and also doesnt impose
> a big testing burden on bitcoin main which is a security and testing risk?
>
> eg lets say some form of merged mine where an alt-coin lets call it
> bitcoin-staging? where the coins are the same coins as on bitcoin, the
> mining power goes to bitcoin main, so some aspect of merged mining, but no
> native mining. and ability to use bitcoins by locking them on bitcoin to
> move them to bitcoin-staging and vice versa (ie exchange them 1:1
> cryptographically, no exchange).
>
> Did anyone figure anything like that out? Seems vaguely doable and
> maybe productive. The only people with coins at risk of defects in a new
> feature, or insufficiently well tested novel feature are people with coins
> on bitcoin-staging.
>
> Yes I know about bitcoin-test this is not it. I mean a real live system,
> with live value, but that is intentionally wanting to avoid forking
> bitcoins
> parameters, nor value, nor mindshare dillution. In this way something
> potentially interesting could move forward faster, and be les risky to the
> main bitcoin network. eg particularly defenses against
>
> It might also be a more real world test test (after bitcoin-test) because
> some parameters are different on test, and some issues may not manifest
> without more real activity.
>
> Then also bitcoin could cherry pick interesting patches and merge them
> after
> extensive real-world validation with real-money at stake (by early
> adopters).
>
Interesting idea. I wonder if ripple could be used to set up a transfer
system between the 'main' and 'staging' systems ...
>
> Adam
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
> security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
> efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
> from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130615/ded41a25/attachment.html>;