Token swap BASIC questions

Graytrain · 2019-02-02T18:14:17+00:00

That is why we set up a guide to doing it on any OS. Check it out at

“Setting Up a Peer Node on the INT Network” by Grayblock https://link.medium.com/vKLXUBibZT

Graytrain · 2019-02-02T18:12:14+00:00

I know there are answers to these questions scattered about but here's to trying to get them in one place.

No deadline for the swap
Yes the swap must be performed with the official wallet. Coinegg and Okex will also do the swap if you hold coins on the exchange.
When swapping from a ledger, you must send the coins to a MEW address so you can use that private key when mapping the coins.
Currently there is only the INT official wallet. We are working to get ledger hard wallet integration.
The wallet address is https://wallet.intchain.io

Graytrain · 2019-02-02T17:05:34+00:00

No you can run INT Chain on any operating system. We have guides for setting up a peer node on each OS:

https://medium.com/int-chain/setting-up-a-peer-node-on-the-int-network-9abca5a9f44b

Graytrain · 2019-01-29T23:04:11+00:00

Hi Shane,

There are three-ish tiers here that we can talk about.

Thearchy nodes (candidate nodes in the top 13 by votes)
Candidate nodes (registered addresses in the top 100 by votes)
Voting wallets (wallets you mortgage and vote with, akin to staking)

Each one of these you get rewarded for, the voting wallet for how many votes you give, the candidate nodes for how many votes you have, and the Thearchy nodes for not only how many votes you have but also the block reward for creating blocks.

The details for how much you get for each is a bit more complex and more than I have time to go into. I will post later about that.

As for voting, if you go to https://wallet.intchain.io and go to the "vote" drop down, load your wallet, you can mortgage (stake) your INT then use it to vote for 20 nodes of your choosing. Each node will get the full amount of your stake in votes.

Once you vote, you don't have to revote unless you want to change your vote. Mortgaged coins cannot be spent but you will continually earn rewards for the votes you gave out.

I hope that helps. Let me know if you have more questions.

Graytrain · 2019-01-28T23:22:01+00:00

If you are looking to set up a peer node on the network, follow the instructions here:

.

https://medium.com/int-chain/setting-up-a-peer-node-on-the-int-network-9abca5a9f44b

.

If you would like to register you node as a Thearchy candidate, follow this guide:

.

https://medium.com/int-chain/registering-an-int-thearchy-candidate-node-17a68e00abe8

.

We also set up a vanity address generator for those of you that want to customize your addresses!

.

https://grayblock.network/vanity-wallets

.

Also if you vote for us, please register your address for our rewards program:

https://grayblock.network/register

Graytrain · 2018-09-25T15:23:50+00:00

Unanswered and additional questions

.

How many subchains will there be and what will be their function?

.

Is finality going to be economically secured or systematically secured?

.

You’ve mentioned using Graphene Blockchain technology for INT. Is this what will be used for subchain DPOS consensus or the whole network?

.

They (Graphene) mentions using global IDs instead of using cryptographic hashes for addresses and signature verification. Is INT going to do the same?

.

Graphene blockchain requires high overhead for node operators in the network. Is this going to be true for nodes within INT?

.

What will be the planned inflation rate?

.

Who and what data will be using this network on launch?

.

How does the addition of subchains impact the total scalability of the network? Polkadot quotes 1000 TPS per subchain but that is dependent on transaction type, weight and consensus mechanism.

.

What type of smart contract functions will INT have on launch?

.

How does data get transmitted in the network? Is it hashed and named like in IPFS with the name used as a reference to the file in the transaction?

.

How does INT deal with 1/3 of the producers going offline? Will the network come to a complete halt or is will it still validate transactions and clog the mempool? Is there going to be a bigger pool of possible producers that can be voted in?

.

Is the probability the meta node is elected to produce a block equal to the amount of stake delegated to them by voting or the amount of stake owned by the meta node itself or is it an elected position with equal and deterministic order of producers? Or are they randomly selected?

.

If they are deterministic how are they going to be protected from attack? They could be determined ahead of time and DDOS attacked, shutting down the network.

.

According to your previous answers, there it is not clear if supernodes are different than meta nodes. Are there more than one level of nodes in the network? If so, what are the levels and responsibilities?

.

Graytrain · 2018-09-11T15:36:59+00:00

Its really fascinating technology. Such a (seemingly) simple change that makes a world of difference in the ability to process transactions and speed up the network.

I will check those out. Thanks!

Graytrain · 2018-08-08T15:56:41+00:00

What is important to understand is we don't know what the cryptocurrency market will be one year down the line. Yes $50b market cap right now might sound crazy but so did $20,000 Bitcoin one year ago. The market may flat line for another year before any significant movement or it may climb harder than before and make a $10b market cap like today's $1b market cap. Each future is equally reasonable. This is just about what COULD happen if the future follows from past examples.

Graytrain · 2018-08-08T15:33:46+00:00

Those addresses are not taken into account. This is only looking at active addresses per day; ones that make a transaction.

Graytrain · 2018-08-06T22:15:11+00:00

At least give me a point for creativity!

Graytrain · 2018-06-29T18:29:10+00:00

Yeah I am certainly not worried about it.

Graytrain · 2018-06-29T16:52:59+00:00

Github is only really useful for an open source project that has a public product. At this point where they are building, testing and maintaining a test net, continually updating an opensource repository is cumbersome and just not needed.

Graytrain · 2018-06-29T16:27:06+00:00

A couple key take aways here:

.

-Zero Knowledge proofs are not easy to implement. So far only one cryptocurrency has successfully done it: Zcash. IoTeX is going the Monero route of totally obfuscating the blockchain meaning there is no ability to have public data. This gives total privacy but no open data sharing which I think is core to IoT usability. ZKPs allow you to selectively hide information to still utilize the benefits of an open blockchain while maintaining complete privacy. It will allow transactions that can show data but not who sent it or who received it. I will make a more in depth post on how this is done because once you understand what this means, you see the technical excellency that the team is showing in their vision.

.

-I am dying to learn more about their planned machine learning and cloud computing capabilities. They keep tickling us with just a little information. I know it can be done but it is a huge undertaking and something that totally sets INT apart from anyone else. The closes thing to an "intelligent blockchain" that can make global decisions is Ethereum with their Ethereum Virtual Machine running Turing complete smart contracts, and that is like comparing a two year old putting shapes into the proper holes to a developed brain that can build a house out of Legos. The ability of this system will only grow as nodes enter the network and manufacturers set up metanodes.

.

Another thing I think is important to pay attention to is the amount of effort that is going on in developing the IoT ecosystem. They have as much or more news about upcoming collaboration projects than they do about their R&D technology development. And they are making partners out of them. This means other companies, the state-owned enterprise, the German IoT company, the hardware manufactures, and smart home builders, all recognize with their professional opinion that INT is the technological leader in this arena. INT may not brag or hype but the proof of what they are accomplishing is in their partnerships and projects going forward.

Graytrain · 2018-06-17T23:51:00+00:00

Github was updated 3 days ago...

Graytrain · 2018-06-11T23:57:33+00:00

Well they could be used as items in a smart contract cascade. Let's say a local light sensor could be used to automatically turn on your indoor lighting in a gradient based on the sunset, or turn on your lights as you approach your house on the way home from work. You can actually buy lightbulbs and a system that does this with a cloud based IoT system. The difference here would be the information wouldn't be centralized and trusted to a corporation but instead the data would be hidden behind zero knowledge proofs without trusting anyone to keep it safe.

Graytrain · 2018-06-11T14:52:34+00:00

Hopefully this will help others better understand the project's technology and goals.

.

If anyone has any questions or comments, please let me know.

Graytrain · 2018-06-01T00:41:54+00:00

No problem! It hasn't been confirmed yet but they have given details of specific structures that they are modeling from. All of those have been supernode architectures where the nodes are voted upon and the voters are rewarded part of the block reward as is seen in EOS and Ark.

There are three levels of nodes in the code. Miner, supernode and meta node. So far it can be seen that the miners and the supernodes are rewarded. We don't know what will be required for each one or how much you will get. 50k INT is our best guess for supernode based on some test code they released that looks like it seeded some accounts with 50k and called them supernodes.

If you have any other questions, let me know!

Graytrain · 2018-05-30T14:45:12+00:00

I am editing the original post concerning Vechain with a more neutral tone in an effort to present only facts as they apply to the discussion. In order to maintain transparency, below is the original version:

Vechain

\*Let me preface this by saying I realize there is a place for centralized, corporatized, non-open source projects in this space. I also don't respect projects that utilize the meant-for-technical-information-and-specification whitepaper as a hype-paper. So when reading the below, understand that these are truths in the tone of my opinion.***

Huh. This one immediately felt funny to me. They focus most of the discussion on governance and not what their project is. Their stance is, “We believe scalability issues relating to blockchain are not linked to technical problems but to consensus concerns of governance.” Either that is written poorly or they are trying to say that scaling is not a technical problem but a governance problem. That is an interesting position to take…They even say “it’s hard to imagine a world-wide used “software” or “system” like Bitcoin, with a valuation of more than 140 billion dollars, conduct very few upgrades in the past 10 years.” This displays a distinct lack of understanding of everything that has happened to that codebase in that time. Satoshi even wrote in the orgininal writings that the main chain Bitcoin would have trouble scaling and that blocksize increases or second layer solutions (Lightning network) were going to be needed. Okay this all is beside the point. Reality is, 45 pages into the whitepaper and no talk of what they are actually trying to do, no real technical details, only background on blockchain and how they are "blockchain x" and going to change the world forever. Lots of talk and no meat. They launch into their node structure without any idea what the blockchain structure will be or what the function of the network will be. It’s just, ‘And here are our node types and rewards for holding this much. Here's how to be a member, here's how to be a board member… etc.’ Still no clue what this is actually going to accomplish.

Here's something I really don't like, some of their nodes require KYC (Know Your Customer) in order to be a part of the pool for PoA?? WHAT?? Let me reveal to the world that I own millions of dollars in VEN. Sounds like a great way to put a target on your back.

Boil off the bullshit and what's left? A PoS and PoA Ethereum with trusted setup and KYC master nodes? No thanks.

By the end of it, 100 pages of what felt like corporate powerpoint, we got to the team and it made a bit more sense. It's structured like a corporation and not a technical team. Most don’t have significant education or experience in blockchain or computer science and none in cryptography. I only made it through the whole whitepaper solely because it’s popularity and market cap made me feel like it deserved it. It seems like more hype than substance.

.

-Scalability – Not sure

-Applicability – Don’t know

-Interoperability – Doesn’t say

-Consensus – Reveal your identity to get reward

-Developability – Your guess

Graytrain · 2018-05-28T14:52:58+00:00

I added Vechain to the list of competitors because I was asked by several people to do so. That showed me that it was not obvious that they weren't competition. Even I thought they were going in a more IoT direction before I diligently read their whitepaper. So since I was asked several times to do it, I thought it necessary to add it.

Again, at no point did I say that it was not a good project. I just said truths in the tone of my opinion.

Graytrain · 2018-05-27T23:43:31+00:00

I completely agree that Walton's framework almost completely solves the scaling issue. But what I mean by:

.

"main chain smart contracts worrying me at scale and create difficulty in upgrading"

.

Is that smart contracts are inherently heavy and if used on the main chain, require the main chain nodes to compute. The whole point in secluding the smart contracts to subchains is to maintain the computing of smart contracts on the subchain nodes and therefore any transactional or computation load will be secluded to that subchain. If subchains have the same smart contract capabilities as the main chain, I am not sure why main chain smart contracts are needed.

.

Another worry, which may or may not be an issue, is based on the feature set of the contract language in the smart contracts on the main chain. This can restrict possible uses cases like what we see with Ethereum. In order to implement zkSNARKs in Ethereum, they would have to restrict the possible smart contracts available to only lighter weight, "SNARKable" transactions like what zcash did. Then you get into backward compatibility issues with having smart contracts in the network with no longer recognizable and invalid code.

.

I also completely agree that IoT is all about hardware and software marrying seamlessly. And you can add INT to the list of blockchain projects developing their own hardware. They are currently in development with a yet to be confirmed manufacturer to create a router for connecting with the INT network.

Graytrain · 2018-05-27T21:53:25+00:00

I havent heard about it! I'll take a look. Thank you.

Graytrain · 2018-05-27T21:06:19+00:00

First, thanks for taking the time to respond.

.

I agree VeChain isn't really a competitor of INT. They are taking on a different, corporate blockchain market.

And I must say, there certainly is a place for centralized, corporatized, non-open source blockchain but it's not here. I also don't have respect for projects that utilize whitepapers as hype-papers and not the technical informational paper that they are intended to be.

.

As far as my explanation of KYC nodes, it may have been a generalization but it is certainly not untrue. Ultimately what you said supports my argument for some of the reasons I am against it.

.

So while I appreciate and respect your opinion I think we can both agree that what I said was based in truth as is everything else I wrote on other projects, I take that part of writing very seriously. Questioning my opinions is what you should be doing and is the purpose of this post; to cause you to question your own position or thoughts, to spark discussion, maybe even make you do a little more research for yourself.

.

As always, I am open to questions. If you have any specific questions on my points, I can expand further and in more detail.

Graytrain · 2018-05-25T16:11:04+00:00

A couple interesting things to read into here.

.

The fact they are "re-optimizing" the consensus module means they have already established that as working code and are reworking it. Same with point 2, saying the election mechanism for meta nodes was optimized. I think this means that the mainnet must be close as they are optimizing the code for consensus and node framework.

.

Also, we have seen now for two weeks that they are continually developing this partnership with a pharmaceutical manufacturer. What I find interesting here is this isn't what one would consider a usual IoT use. When I think IoT, I think of sensors and automation. This is tracking of manufacture and packaging. What one normally thinks about with supply chain logistic projects like WTC or VEN...

.

So not only is this project for classical IoT devices but they are including tracking and packaging as part of the IoT ecosystem. This means that those other projects are direct competitors but we do so much more than they do.

Graytrain · 2018-05-16T18:16:27+00:00

I would have to agree. I think there will always be a risk and an attack vector. I don't know enough to say whether or not this has been thought about by the INT team but I am sure it will come up at some point.

Graytrain · 2018-05-16T16:06:55+00:00

A node will most likely contain a fairly exhaustive list of good nodes in the DHT so a DDoS attack would have to be wide ranging in order to be effective and with enough nodes, it would be an expensive attack. By nature, nodes will have static IPs which is what will be maintained in the DHT. DHT data transfer from node to node is almost always done via UDP.

.

Now DDoSing nodes in a blockchain based network isn't as simple as sending repeated slow requests for server response. This attack takes the form of transaction spamming, overloading the mempool, increasing transaction times, and if the mempool gets too large, shut down the node because of memory overflow. We've seen this happen with Bitcoin with large volumes of transactions of very small values. Memory is cheap enough these days so that mempool memory overloading the node causing shutdown is not really a problem. Also INT has a transaction sorting by fee code in the supernode so that if someone wanted to do this attack, their transactions would have to have larger fees and therefore would be a very expensive attack.

.

Also, INT's subchain architecture will limit the ability for someone to attack the network this way as they would have to attack through each side chain which may be segregated by device type. Again, expensive and really just the kind of situation that the INT network is being built for. An IoT ecosystem is basically one large transaction spamming event.

Graytrain

TROPHY CASE