how yu verif BBs solde for the next distribute ? should we send BBs on bytes adresse and submit a micro pay like btc ?

Important announcement.

1.  I've significantly underestimated the amount of time and work required to build a large enough community around Byteball.  Also, there is development work to be done that's unlikely to be completed and properly tested before the originally planned launch date in early November.  That's why I'm pushing back the launch date to Christmas.  The snapshot will be taken on the first Bitcoin block timestamped on or after December 25, 2016 00:00:00 UTC (Christmas block).  I’ll begin to send out bytes in the afternoon of Dec 25, unless there are major reorgs on the Bitcoin network.

2.  I stay true to my original intention to distribute 98% for free, but find it useful to split the distribution into several pieces.  On December 25, we’ll distribute only 10%.  A month later, we’ll make a new snapshot and distribute another 20%.  Two months later, the next 30%.  Three months later, the remaining 38%.  The exact numbers may me adjusted depending on the results of previous rounds and the progress of the address linking campaign.

The reason I chose to split the distribution into several rounds is that it gives more people an opportunity to participate.  It is impossible to reach every Bitcoin holder before livenet is launched.  We’ll make news by distributing the first 10%, the network will become fully functional, hopefully we’ll get listed on exchanges, all that will help many more people notice Byteball.  Each subsequent distribution round will have similar effect.

In each distribution round, we take a new snapshot.  Exactly as previously advertised, the amount of bytes you receive in the 1st round will be proportional to the BTC balances that you show on the linked Bitcoin addresses in the Christmas block.

The 2nd and subsequent rounds are slightly different.  You show both your BTC balances (as before) and your balance in bytes.  You have a sort of basket that consists of a mixture of BTC and bytes.  To determine the weight of the basket, every 62.5 MB are counted as 1 BTC.  For example, if you have 125 MB and 3 BTC, the weight is 2+3=5 BTC.  The distribution of new bytes on the 2nd and subsequent stages is proportional to the weight of your basket.

The ratio 62.5 MB per 1 BTC is chosen so that the total money supply of bytes (10¹⁵) and the total number of BTC in circulation (16,000,000) are equivalent.

Earlier adopters have the opportunity to participate in greater number of distribution rounds and receive new bytes in each round by using the same BTC balance and bytes received in previous rounds.  You are effectively doubling your stake in each additional round you take part in.

3.  The linking phase (when you link your Byteball and Bitcoin addresses) of the 1st round will start in early December or late November.

4.  We’ll run more active marketing in the coming months to grow our community before the 1st distribution round.

5.  We doubled our development team: my colleague https://github.com/kakysha (not a real photo) is already helping me improve the wallet.

6.  We’ll run a test flight of the distribution in November.  You will be able to link your Bitcoin testnet address to your Byteball testnet address, and the distribution will be proportional to your BTC testnet balance.

https://twitter.com/ByteballOrg/status/787248332469112836

So you offer to choose between Trump and  Clinton - who will accept our coins authority?  


This is huge responsibility - trust them to proove your coins are "honest". This is what actually banks do. This is a power of authority. They may just reject your chain and you will stay naked.

What if major Witnesses are honest for some time and then - boom and they are now bad guys? (analogue of 51% attack).

Yes, but PoW doesn't allow to concentrate majority of voters in federal reserve, Washington DC. Because Washington and USA at all - doesn't produce enough electricity to gain majority of network power.

Your PoW (Proof of Witness hehe) allows it without any significant expenses for Big Brother. As he easily manages thousands of IRL puppets. There will be no problem to create and inject thousands virtual "good guys" into community. Photos, IDs, facebook pages - not a problem. Even creation of real life person not a problem.

Quick question: did you read the white paper?

1. Introduction
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as
trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for
most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model.
Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot
avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the
minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions,
and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for nonreversible
services. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads. Merchants must
be wary of their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need.
A certain percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable. These costs and payment uncertainties
can be avoided in person by using physical currency, but no mechanism exists to make payments
over a communications channel without a trusted party.
What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust,
allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted
third party. Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers
from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers. In
this paper, we propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer distributed
timestamp server to generate computational proof of the chronological order of transactions. The
system is secure as long as honest nodes collectively control more CPU power than any
cooperating group of attacker nodes.

6. Incentive
The incentive may help encourage nodes to stay honest. If a greedy attacker is able to
assemble more CPU power than all the honest nodes, he would have to choose between using it
to defraud people by stealing back his payments, or using it to generate new coins. He ought to
find it more profitable to play by the rules, such rules that favour him with more new coins than
everyone else combined, than to undermine the system and the validity of his own wealth.

I posted after reading your paper. And there explicitly defined that group of Witnesses may orphan the part of chain. You returned to model of trust. It is not innovation.

Did you read Satoshi white paper?

And what encourages your Witnesses to stay honest? Politik debates in facebook? Primaries? We see this shit in politiks. Nobody is honest there. Public face trading doesn't work as honesty enforcement IRL.

i can put adres btc from reach list