The Teleport is what I am working on now, https://github.com/jl777/btcd has the latest version I am debugging. it is not the official version yet.

Not sure what exactly you mean here. the blockchain grows based on number of tx, currently less than quarter gig

PoS is based on the stake, not sure why you would consider this a problem that needs to be alleviated. Initially the coins were PoW and we had over 3 petahash for a while with hundreds of miners, so the coin got distributed pretty widely.

the amount of coins staking is what gives the security and it is hard to get an exact number on that but I estimate 75%+ of the coins are staking

The OP refers to this post regarding anon.
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/684090.740
That post seems to say it's an implementation of CN tech for anon. But was that dumped for Teleport now?



The BTC blockchain is what, over 8G now? That's really not something regular people would find acceptable.  There are some other coins that have implemented some things to try and deal with that sort of issue and so I was asking if BTCD has done anything or if it suffers from the same problem, that over time it will become something unrealistic for "normal" users.  Is there an alternative? Like with BTC they have SPV right?



I'm far from an expert on this stuff, but it's my understanding that there's a couple problems with PoS. The first being that those that hold the majority of the coins basically control the network. i.e. Like a 51% issue.  The other problem is that when people are staking, there's no economy going on. Sort of a catch 22 thing. You need people actually using the coins for it to gain wide spread acceptance and use, and yet you need people staking to secure the network. I recently read about some coin that was changing it in some way so that actually using the coin would increase your stake in some way.  There was also a paper out in June about Proof of Activity that I think tried to address these issues but it's a bit above my head at this point.  So basically I'm asking if BTCD has done anything like that or if it's the "typical" PoS.



After posting my questions I remembered the site bitinfocharts. If the data on there is correct, then the hashrate for BTCD is pretty low and I think there should be an effort to get more people staking or something.  If it's right, then BTCD has less hash than coins like XST and even LXC which I would think would be concerning.

I am getting close!

https://github.com/jl777/btcd has the latest experimental version. If anybody can get it to compile for Windows or Mac, there is a readme in the libjl777 directory on how to build the libjl777. This needs to be done first then you can build the BitcoinDarkd

I cleaned up the API glue code and also streamlined the message passing to the bare minimum in the daemon code. Of course now the nodes dont know about all the other ones, but tomorrow I will fix this. I didnt want to just assume the daemon code is being efficient about message traffic, so I will manage all that in my code.

This will give the routing code a good workout so after that I think it will be ready for some larger deployment tests, eg. this weekend. If all goes well, I will be debugging the application level code starting early next week

James

This is in the Op in big bold letters

**Anon-tech Development Underway**
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/684090.740 Post#746

These aren't problems. The majority of coin holders controlling the network is the ideal situation, since these are the ones who are most incentivised to maintain the coin's value and worth. It means a 51% attack is extremely difficult since an attacker has to buy a majority of coins, and as he starts buying the price goes out, making it many times more expensive than a PoW attack.

There is no conflict between staking and spending. Not all coins need to be staked for the network to be secure, and there will never need to be a situation where a huge percentage of coins are actively being traded at a single instance in time. When the coins aren't actively moving they can be staked.

Basically PoS has many advantages over PoW, so those who prefer PoW coins will often have to make up reasons why their system is better.

PoS coins have the same problem with blockchain bloat as PoW coins. Because they are newer, their blockchains are much smaller than BTC's so it's not a current issue. Undoubtedly, blockchain pruning will arrive if it becomes too severe.

When people talk about blockchain bloat, they are often talking about cryptonote coins, which bloat the blockchain to a much higher degree than standard blockchains. Teleport anonymity won't have the blockchain bloat problems of cryptonote coins.

Nxt has a similar PoS algorithm to the updated Blackcoin one (http://www.nxtcommunity.org/nxt-whitepaper), and BTCD has talked about implementing that version of PoS. I don't think they are working on that at the moment, but longterm, I believe BTCD are planning on moving away from the coin age version.

I'm not sure that the proof of activity/transaction idea has been shown to work very well, plus I'm not sure it's a big problem. In this regard, PoS coins are similar to bitcoin, why spend when you believe it'll go up. Even if there's an incentive to hoard, you can't take your coins to the grave, people will want to spend them.

Azeh,

https://www.allcoin.com/trade/BTCD_BTC

783K? Never seen that high Network Weight and it is increasing.

{
"Enabled" : true,
"Staking" : true,
"Errors" : "",
"Current Block Size" : 1000,
"Current Block Tx" : 0,
"Pooled Tx" : 0,
"Difficulty" : 0.00804450,
"Search Interval" : 1,
"Weight" : 1182,
"Net Stake Weight" : 783902,
"Expected Time" : 39791
}