RavenCoin – et friskt pust.

In the fictional world of Westeros, ravens are used as the messengers who carry statements of truth. Ravencoin is a use case specific blockchain designed to carry statements of truth about who owns what asset.

 

Hva er RavenCoin?

RavenCoin er et open-source prosjekt som vil ta oss tilbake til røttene.
Kryptovaluta startet som open source prosjekter, Bitcoin er den første og største av disse prosjektene. Nå i senere tid ser vi flere prosjekter bevege seg innenfor “closed source” og alt pushes ut via crowd funding aka ICO’s.
RavenCoin ble lansert 3rd Jan 2018 klokken 15:42 og første block ble da produsert.
Algerytmen dem bruker er X16r som er en modifisert versjon av eksisterende algoritmer, X16r er såkalt ASIC resistent.
Resistent er som vi vet ikke det samme som immun, men dem var tidlig ute å bekreftet at om noen utvikler ASIC’s til denne algoritmen ville dem endre på den slik at den igjen ble resistent.

Hovedgrunnen til dette er at det skal være mulig for alle å utvinne og bli belønnet for å styrke nettverket.

X16r består av 16 algoritmer.

Hvilken algoritme neste block blir utvunnet med bestemmes av de siste 8 byte av forrige block.

0=blake                A=echo
1=bmw                 B=hamsi
2=groestl             C=fugue
3=jh                      D=shabal
4=keccak             E=whirlpool
5=skein                F=sha512
6=luffa                 8=shavite
7=cubehash        9=simd

Har minet de siste ukene med noen GeForce 1070, foreløpig er det ikke sluppet noen AMD miner.

Problemet med closed source er at brukerne ikke har noen mulighet til å verifisere koden som driver blockchain eller plattformen.
Muligheten til å kjøre egne noder for å faktisk verifisere transaksjoner er også begrenset.
Du må altså ta utviklerne på ordet uten at du har mulighet til å verifisere selv i mange tilfeller.

RavenCoin er en fork av Bitcoin hvor dem har endret supply og gjort redusert tiden mellom hver block.
Andre implementeringer jobbes med og veien videre vil bli annonsert om ikke lenge gjennom et roadmap.
Som nevnt er dette et open source prosjekt og alle har muligheten til å legge til fornuftige egenskaper.

Det var ingen ICO, ingen Pre-mine og prosjektet ble annonsert offentlig før start.

Patrick Byrne som er CEO hos Overstock var tidlig ute og investerte i teamet bak prosjektet.
Overstock startet allerede i 2014 med å godta Bitcoin som betalings metode for varer. I 2017 integrerte dem shapeshift slik at man kunne betale med flere forskjellige typer kryptovaluta.

Hovedgrunnen til at jeg er interessert i prosjektet er at jeg liker fremgangsmåten dem har valgt. Det skal være rettferdig, kildekoden skal være tilgjengelig og man skal kunne verifisere selv. Dem forholder seg til “A Cypherpunk’s manifesto” et dokument skrevet av Eric Hughes i 1993 som også påvirket Satoshi Nakamoto i stor grad.
Jeg ser ikke på dette som en stor mulighet for å tjene penger, jeg ser på dette som et prosjekt hvor jeg vil ta et dypdykk. Hvor jeg vil involvere meg og være med på den fremtidige utformingen og utviklingen.

Om du fortsatt henger med vil jeg anbefale å sjekke ut videoen fra deres første meet-up.

 

Nettside: https://ravencoin.org/
Block explorer: http://threeeyed.info/
Nettverk og statistikk: https://rvnstats.info
ANN: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2752467.0
Discord: https://discordapp.com/invite/pst8GrG
Github: https://github.com/RavenProject/Ravencoin
Medium: https://medium.com/@ravencoin
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ravencoin

 

                   A Cypherpunk's Manifesto

                        by Eric Hughes

Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age.
Privacy is not secrecy.  A private matter is something one doesn't
want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one
doesn't want anybody to know. Privacy is the power to selectively
reveal oneself to the world.  

If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of
their interaction.  Each party can speak about their own memory of
this; how could anyone prevent it?  One could pass laws against it,
but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to
an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all.  If many
parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the
others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other
parties.  The power of electronic communications has enabled such
group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it
to.

Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a
transaction have knowledge only of that which is directly necessary
for that transaction.  Since any information can be spoken of, we
must ensure that we reveal as little as possible.  In most cases
personal identity is not salient. When I purchase a magazine at a
store and hand cash to the clerk, there is no need to know who I am. 
When I ask my electronic mail provider to send and receive messages,
my provider need not know to whom I am speaking or what I am saying
or what others are saying to me;  my provider only need know how to
get the message there and how much I owe them in fees.  When my
identity is revealed by the underlying mechanism of the transaction,
I have no privacy.  I cannot here selectively reveal myself; I must
_always_ reveal myself.

Therefore, privacy in an open society requires anonymous transaction
systems.  Until now, cash has been the primary such system.  An
anonymous transaction system is not a secret transaction system.  An
anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when
desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy.

Privacy in an open society also requires cryptography.  If I say
something, I want it heard only by those for whom I intend it.  If 
the content of my speech is available to the world, I have no
privacy.  To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy, and to
encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for
privacy.  Furthermore, to reveal one's identity with assurance when
the default is anonymity requires the cryptographic signature.

We cannot expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless
organizations to grant us privacy out of their beneficence.  It is to
their advantage to speak of us, and  we should expect that they will
speak.  To try to prevent their speech is to fight against the
realities of information. Information does not just want to be free,
it longs to be free.  Information expands to fill the available
storage space.  Information is Rumor's younger, stronger cousin;
Information is fleeter of foot, has more eyes, knows more, and
understands less than Rumor.

We must defend our own privacy if we expect to have any.  We must
come together and create systems which allow anonymous transactions
to take place.  People have been defending their own privacy for
centuries with whispers, darkness, envelopes, closed doors, secret
handshakes, and couriers.  The technologies of the past did not allow
for strong privacy, but electronic technologies do.

We the Cypherpunks are dedicated to building anonymous systems.  We
are defending our privacy with cryptography, with anonymous mail
forwarding systems, with digital signatures, and with electronic
money.

Cypherpunks write code.  We know that someone has to write software
to defend privacy, and since we can't get privacy unless we all do,
we're going to write it. We publish our code so that our fellow
Cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Our code is free for all
to use, worldwide.  We don't much care if you don't approve of the
software we write.  We know that software can't be destroyed and that
a widely dispersed system can't be shut down. 

Cypherpunks deplore regulations on cryptography, for encryption is
fundamentally a private act.  The act of encryption, in fact, removes
information from the public realm.  Even laws against cryptography
reach only so far as a nation's border and the arm of its violence.
Cryptography will ineluctably spread over the whole globe, and with
it the anonymous transactions systems that it makes possible. 

For privacy to be widespread it must be part of a social contract.
People must come and together deploy these systems for the common
good.  Privacy only extends so far as the cooperation of one's
fellows in society.  We the Cypherpunks seek your questions and your
concerns and hope we may engage you so that we do not deceive
ourselves.  We will not, however, be moved out of our course because
some may disagree with our goals.

The Cypherpunks are actively engaged in making the networks safer for
privacy.  Let us proceed together apace.

Onward.

Eric Hughes
<hughes@soda.berkeley.edu>

9 March 1993

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *