3 ms·

Yeah, that is basically a science themed chucky cheese token - not an independent currency.

by tal8d 6y ago

Apocryphon 6y ago
Why makes it not an independent currency?
- tal8d 6y ago
  Step one, don't do this: "BOINC superblocks fetch a participant’s BOINC recent average credit, also called researcher RAC. RAC is based on a participant’s earned BOINC credits. !!!>>>*Credits and RAC are defined by BOINC*<<<!!!"
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    BOINC's unit of credit, the Cobblestone (named after Jeff Cobb of SETI@home), is 1/200 day of CPU time on a reference computer that does 1,000 MFLOPS based on the Whetstone benchmark Eventually, credit may reflect network transfer and disk storage as well as computation. Credit has no monetary or other value; it's just a measure of how much work your computers have done. Total credit: The total number of Cobblestones performed and granted. Recent average credit: The average number of Cobblestones per day granted recently. This average decreases by a factor of two every week. https://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Computation_credit https://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Computation_credit
    - tal8d 6y ago
      Lets just take the shortcut: Who assigns the the proofing unit? The metric doesn't even matter, it is a question of who. Now, who controls that? Once you figure that out you'll realize that you are trusting parties that you either didn't know you were trusting, or you kinda knew but didn't want to think too hard about because nobody really cares about chucky cheese coin. You can't be rewarded for performing useful compute without some degree of implicit trust, which makes you dependent on the other party. You can dress it up with quorum algorithms, etc - but it only further obscures the underlying vulnerability. That is fine for a token system, but not for a cryptocurrency.
      - Apocryphon 6y ago
        Okay, thank you for deigning to explain your objections in detail. That is actually quite helpful, as it has decreased my interest in GRC. I appreciate your time in reading the whitepaper and pointing out the deficiencies in the design.
        tal8d 6y ago
        Full disclosure: I didn't read the entire paper, I just know where the landmines are in these "Better than POW with no downside!1!!" altcoin papers - as they've been around for a long time. After the 5th or 6th time scrutinizing a self-styled bitcoin killer, it gets pretty familiar. But I certainly encourage everyone to read the whitepaper (and genuinely understand) for whatever cryptocurrency they're looking at, and then examine the source. That is the way it was done in the beginning, and those that did were always better off for having done it. Also, final bit of unsolicited advice: if somebody tells you to diversify your crypto portfolio, they're either dumb or they think you are.

Yeah, that is basically a science themed chucky cheese token - not an independent currency.

by tal8d 6y ago

Yeah, that is basically a science themed chucky cheese token - not an independent currency.

Apocryphon 6y ago

Why makes it not an independent currency?

tal8d 6y ago
Step one, don't do this: "BOINC superblocks fetch a participant’s BOINC recent average credit, also called researcher RAC. RAC is based on a participant’s earned BOINC credits. !!!>>>*Credits and RAC are defined by BOINC*<<<!!!"
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  BOINC's unit of credit, the Cobblestone (named after Jeff Cobb of SETI@home), is 1/200 day of CPU time on a reference computer that does 1,000 MFLOPS based on the Whetstone benchmark Eventually, credit may reflect network transfer and disk storage as well as computation. Credit has no monetary or other value; it's just a measure of how much work your computers have done. Total credit: The total number of Cobblestones performed and granted. Recent average credit: The average number of Cobblestones per day granted recently. This average decreases by a factor of two every week. https://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Computation_credit https://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Computation_credit
  - tal8d 6y ago
    Lets just take the shortcut: Who assigns the the proofing unit? The metric doesn't even matter, it is a question of who. Now, who controls that? Once you figure that out you'll realize that you are trusting parties that you either didn't know you were trusting, or you kinda knew but didn't want to think too hard about because nobody really cares about chucky cheese coin. You can't be rewarded for performing useful compute without some degree of implicit trust, which makes you dependent on the other party. You can dress it up with quorum algorithms, etc - but it only further obscures the underlying vulnerability. That is fine for a token system, but not for a cryptocurrency.
    - Apocryphon 6y ago
      Okay, thank you for deigning to explain your objections in detail. That is actually quite helpful, as it has decreased my interest in GRC. I appreciate your time in reading the whitepaper and pointing out the deficiencies in the design.
      - tal8d 6y ago
        Full disclosure: I didn't read the entire paper, I just know where the landmines are in these "Better than POW with no downside!1!!" altcoin papers - as they've been around for a long time. After the 5th or 6th time scrutinizing a self-styled bitcoin killer, it gets pretty familiar. But I certainly encourage everyone to read the whitepaper (and genuinely understand) for whatever cryptocurrency they're looking at, and then examine the source. That is the way it was done in the beginning, and those that did were always better off for having done it. Also, final bit of unsolicited advice: if somebody tells you to diversify your crypto portfolio, they're either dumb or they think you are.