#B90X - DAY 1 - Let's Begin



I’m new here and committed to starting the B90X and moving through it over the next 90 days. I’m as green it gets and really grateful I found this community! Thank you so much. Looking forward to this journey to the moon!


Awesome! Welcome! It’s a long haul. Take it day by day. I hope to see you on the moon! :rocket:


Dude, you just showed me how the blockchain technology translates to other areas of life. All of a sudden I am aware of how BIG this is. I mean I knew blockchain tech was big, but you my friend just tied it all together and gave me a “Holy F*#K!!!” moment! The concept of the blockchain isn’t new at all, humans have been using it forever. It just took Satoshi Nakamoto to define it mathematically and apply it to the monetary system for it to become more obvious. I’m now looking for where this concept is already in play in my life, and where it is not so that I can enact it. Blockchain Technology is Integrity in action!


Blockchain is human networks fully realized. Welcome to the new world!


I’m in! Can’t tell if my seat is shaking from my anticipation of lift-off, or the engines firing up.

The blockchain is going to rock the world. I have some background in the event ticketing world and have ties to a company utilising blockchain tech for this market. Goodbye scalpers, second market schemers and over-inflated after-market prices. That alone is a revolutionary change that will see huge ramifications across the globe.

:rocket: me to the :crescent_moon: and let me play among the :star::star::star:


Glad you’re here bro. Take your time going through it all. No need to rush. We’re in it for the long haul! Take it day by day! The GAINZ are all there!


Cheers for your help, insight and community @peter. I’m in no rush. I am treating this as a long game. Just like they say in poker, you don’t play many games of poker, you only ever play one, and it never ends.


Just innovative i sorta understand where he wanted his idea to go and its vision of the future.

But currently i’m a bit overwhelmed at everything i wanna buy every cheap coin and HODL! but i’m still figuring out which are safe wallets, which exchanges are the best and how to work around the fees.


@Mr.Bit In my limited time here I’ve learned one very important lesson. Be patient. If you rush in, you’ll get crushed. I’ve set myself 5 financial goals, each with a different timeframe; 1yr, 3yr, 5 yr, 7yr and 10yr. I fully intend to learn what I’m doing before I make any moves.


Welcome @Siggy to the CryptoNation. This place has so much info and great colleagues to share with! To Da Moon! :rocket::rocket:


Today 24/10/17 is the first time i’ve read the whitepaper for bitcoin by Satoshi Nakamoto.

Bitcoin gold has formed today & i also watched banking on bitcoin.

What has resonates with me from the paper is in the conclusion “The network is robust in its unstructured simplicity”



It begins. Let us walk forward with eyes wide open


Thank you cryptofriend! I’m so glad to be here on this journey to the moon!


Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System

Abstract: An explanation of how Bitcoin works, and why it works.

"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending."

The goal is peer-to-peer electronic cash. The reason why is because we could cut the middle man entirely and create extreme efficiency. The issue is; How can two or more remote entities send messages between eachother, while also knowing that those messages are authentic and not munipulated in some way? Essentially; how can we confirm that everyone in a network is working towards the right goal?

"We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network.
The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of
hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing
the proof-of-work. "

The main threat to a system like this is that people will lie. They will double spend transactions (traitors). This can and will cause the network to become corrupt extremely quickly and worthless. Therefore it’s proposed that the networks timestamps and logs transactions by hashing them into an on-going “ledger” which is a hash based proof-of-work ledger, which cannot be changed without redoing that proof-of-work. What does this mean? Hash functions are used to generate fixed length bits of data; it’s a short-hand note that corresponds to the original input. This can be used as a way to store and retrieve data associatively, but in our case we are more interested in it’s cryptographic benefits. In cryptography hashing is used to validate the integrity of data. With hashing identical input will always produce an identical hash.

What’s a hash? Hashes have equal length despite their contents. The order/sequence of the input matters, a minute difference will result in a vastly different output of hash. ( 9:33-15:28) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UieiMU-ImvI
The point: The rules of a hash are that truly identical input always gives identical output. Slightly different input will give drastically different output. Even if you have the same singular input, it’s still a vastly different output hash.

Proof of Work
This is where the magic happens. Where we marry the idea of hash and proof of work. Initially, a proof of work system is a way to deter DDOS attacks and spam. But can also be used for network protection. Trying over and over again to break something becomes very costly. A DDoS attack is (Denial of Service) by overloading a network with simultaneous requestions. The idea of a proof of work system is that actual computational work is required to make a request on the network. For example; let’s assume that the request that we are talking about is indeed visiting a webpage in your browser. Since in this case you requested data from the web server that data is sent to you in your browser and then displayed for you. So if this web page uses a proof-of-work system to deter, let’s say DDoS attacks then each time you visit this website your computer is going to need to solve a calculation in order to validate its request, so before the webserver actually serves it some data—it’s going to request that you do something for it first to essentially legitimize yourself. The idea here is to make the cost of a brute force or DDoS attacks or spam quite high in terms of CPU power since both brute force and DDoS attacks are usually in like the thousands of requests a minute, per second, or even more. Therefore without proof-of-work then it’s relatively cheap initially to perform a DDoS attack. Without proof-of-work any average computer can attack a network and at least request a few thousand attacks a second. So if you begin to require a proof-of-work per request, then the legitimate user will likely notice no performance difference—they won’t even know that you’ve done this, but the abuser will incur astronomically higher costs and thus makes spam DDoS, brute-forcing, etc, all economically less feasible. The challenge here however is making this proof-of-work system asymmetrical, so where it’s arbitrary and very simple for the main server (the website) to confirm that you got the answer right much simpler than it is for you to actually solve it, otherwise we are getting nowhere.

"We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network.
The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of
hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing
the proof-of-work. The longest chain not only serves as proof of the sequence of
events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power"

When you add hashing and proof-of-work you have hash-based proof-of-work. As the chain gets longer it gets harder and harder to replicate, and even identical bits of information in different succession or if you’re missing a succession are totally different. Therefore over time the network only gets stronger and stronger. Even though it started off very strong, as time goes on it’s only getting harder and harder to fake transactions. This is where things get brilliant. In order to fake or change a current block, one would first need to compute every single previous block and redo all of the work contained. That’s an insanely high amount of work already, and it’s just getting bigger everyday.

"As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to
attack the network, they’ll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers."

It takes CPU power to generate these hashes. it’s mathematical certainty that whoever has the most CPU power (51%) will have the quickest generation of these hashes. Therefore as long as the amount of people working with the network are not cooperating together–you could have multiple people coordinate or trying to attack the network on their own, but as long as they weren’t cooperating and exceeding or becoming the majority of the CPU power then the good people would generate the longest chain."

Here’s where we have the 51% attack threat. This basically means that as long as there are more legit people than illegitimate people, then the legit people will always outpace the illegit people. However in this case it’s not measured in legit vs non-legit people, but rather it’s measured in CPU power. This is why someone controlling 51% of the computing power of the network can be problematic because they can figuratively “run away” from the legit people—they are able to compute faster than them. Even if someone does reach this 51% they actually still don’t have that many options because the reward for attacking the network is going to be less and very messy compared to the reward for actually working with the network. Therefore if the motive is financial then the attack really is not economically feasible—if you have that power you’d be more profitable by siphoning the power of the network and not letting anybody know about it. It wouldn’t be to attack the network because with those networks attacks you can only continue that attack so long as you have 51%. For example with double spending, you could only continue to double spend so long as you maintained 51% of the network and it’s computational ability, so because of this you would have to continue that and continue your double spending and every double spending that you need to do you would have to maintain your 51% throughout all the confirmation that you actually had that money to spend. So within the case of Ghash.io if they ever did reach 51% people would just have to leave them and the reason Ghash.io continue hitting 50% or close to 51% is because they offer no fees to their mining pool. The idea of a mining pool; it’s really rare that you as one individual will be able to mine Bitcoin and actually get some Bitcoin yourself, so the idea of a mining pool is that you pull together with people and you get more of a steady stream of Bitcoin instead, so everyone shares the Bitcoin and this is why siphoning the Bitcoin would make sense for a mining pool, and the reason why Ghash.io is so popular is because they charge no fee. Essentially even if someone does reach 51%, the reward for attacking the network is less than the reward for either siphoning or working with the network. Lets say for instance that the 51% isn’t Ghash.io but rather some billionaire; he can’t do it either because if you have that computational power it doesn’t make fiscal sense to attack the network, it makes more sense to work for the network and make more money. Let’s say for instance the motive is malicious towards the network itself and the government wants to take it out, well this is extremely costly so you could stop the network from working basically if you controlled 51% by saying, “No, we don’t validate these chains.” But this is extremely costly and would be pretty much impossible to maintain over a lengthy period of time. Therefore in both examples of these 51% attacks we see that the protocol is incredible because the attack itself can’t last. It doesn’t make sense if your motive is financial, and it doesn’t make sense if your motive is to destroy the network.

"The network itself requires minimal structure. Messages are broadcast on a best effort
basis, and nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the longest
proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone."

This is a reiteration that this is a simple structure and that messages are broadcasted on a best-effort basis. What does that mean? A good example of best effort in play is going to be your internet service provider, so your plan is usually a best-effort plan, meaning you have a 50 megabytes per second plan—you would ideally get the 50MB/sec however you’re not guaranteed to get 50 megabytes per second. So in networking the best-effort system means there’s an attempt to deliver everything but there’s no attempt to retry and there’s no guarantee. Another comparison here is like the Postal Service’s most basic Parcel Post; a sender can send some mail but there’s no guarantee that it’s going to arrive, and if it doesn’t arrive then there’s no attempt to retry by the system, nor does the sender know through the postal services system that the mail has arrived.


@peter Thanks. I’m posting the youtube video and this page on my FB pages. People in my community come to me as they know me as the one who knows about Bitcoin. Bought my first portion in Dec 2013. Set up a weekly buy at $15/week of BTC in Jan 2014. That is how I began my learning. Slow and steady.


@beduk I am on the same journey trying to get my people to buy, For family that I am really close I told them I would give them $100 of BTC if they put in $100 (and planned on keeping it for 6-12 months). It slowly is working. Still some hold outs. Arghhh!


Show them by giving. It softens the heart.


In May 2014 I gave a friend $10 for his wedding gift (among other things). That gift mutiplied 16 times.


Feels good man. Feels good.


I have to be honest. Reading Satoshi’s whitepaper for the first time is confusing. I had to read couple times, but what I got out of it the fact we are indeed to move to a decentralized network in the distant future. Since the financial crash and the past security breaches of corporations, we as a society are beginning to evolve and seeking better solutions on how we exchange.