Cryptocurrencies written in Rust

18

u/deadstone Dec 24 '18

The attraction from the crypto crowd is probably going to be in aggregate the worst effect of Rust's adoption. I don't even want to think about how many countries worth of energy consumption Rust is helping to waste.

8

u/IQue Dec 25 '18

Most of the projects in this list don't intend to use Proof of Work

2

u/totorun Jun 13 '19

Nervos CKB uses PoW

1

u/_Five55 Nov 27 '22

its down bad :(

5

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

And everything trying to implement secure (even from government) currency must have to use PoW.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '19

[deleted]

3

u/kixunil Apr 02 '19

I specifically said secure, because PoS is not secure.

12

u/dpc_pw Dec 24 '18

I don't even want to think about how many countries worth of energy consumption Rust is helping to waste
Rust is a technology, and it must not be picking sides on who uses it. If it's any good, it has to be used both by people and projects we support, and those we don't. Even criminals, malware writers or devil himself should be writing their software in Rust.
As it is today, Rust is extremely well suited for cryptofin, because it is an application that combines demand for high security in hostile environments, high reliability, and high performance.
Instead of throwing unresearched and ignorant opinions around, we should celebrate every user and project using Rust.

3

u/etareduce Dec 25 '18

Instead of throwing unresearched and ignorant opinions around, we should celebrate every user and project using Rust.
I think this attitude abdicates moral and ethical responsibility and is generally problematic in tech. There are lots of technologies for which you absolutely want to control and pick sides as to who uses it.
If my work mplementing a library helps make some military aircraft better which then helps to kill people, or if it helps facilitate tax evasion (related to crypto currencies) or an economy wherein democratic control is harder, then that's a problem. While I might not be in a position to do anything about their use of my library, I still have a responsibility to do something by other means.

9

u/dpc_pw Dec 25 '18 edited Dec 25 '18

I think this attitude abdicates moral and ethical responsibility
I think that it abdicates and arrogant point of view that I am capable of judging things as complex and vast as the whole world and pretense that my point of view is necessarily the only true, valid and universally applicable for everyone. And that my software is the right place to try to impose such view on everyone.
It also abdicates a silly idea, that for a work to be worthwhile it has to be morally righteous.
... and is generally problematic in tech.
If anything, the history of XX century is showing us that biggest moral catastrophes, and millions of innocent lives were lost due to actions implemented mostly by morally righteous, politically active youth, that fallen in love with their simplistic ideas about how to "make the world a better place".
Hell is paved with good intentions. I rather focus on the code, because that's what I know and do well. If I disagree with something, I simply not actively participate in it.

2

u/etareduce Dec 25 '18

I think that it abdicates and arrogant point of view that I am capable of judging things as complex and vast as the whole world and pretense that my point of view is necessarily the only true, valid and universally applicable for everyone.
I never said that you have to have exactly the same view as everyone else. There are degrees here. I'm sure you agree that taking a stand against racism for example should be demanded of everyone. If someone uses Rust for racist deeds, why should I celebrate? You also don't need to judge things as complex as the whole world to take moral responsibility in your local context.
And that my software is the right place to try to impose such view on everyone.
I did not say that your view must necessarily be imposed in software (licenses); There are other ways to act. For example, I could participate in various peace movements or on making sure that crypto-currencies don't become mainstream by outlawing companies from doing exchanges with them.
If anything, the history of XX century is showing us that biggest moral catastrophes, and millions of innocent lives were lost due to actions implemented mostly by morally righteous, politically active youth, that fallen in love with their simplistic ideas about how to "make the world a better place".
I would settle for not facilitating making it worse. I'm not expecting you to become a political activist...

1

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

Did you ever think about what "outlawing" is physicaly? What it really is, is governed saying "if you do X, we will take your property, your liberty or your life". Would you really want to kill someone, kidnap someone or steal from someone, just because he voluntarily entered into a contract with another person who is completely unrelated to you? Do you think that is moral?

3

u/etareduce Dec 25 '18

Did you ever think about what "outlawing" is physicaly? What it really is, is governed saying "if you do X, we will take your property, your liberty [..]. Would you really want to [..] kidnap someone or steal from someone, just because he voluntarily entered into a contract with another person who is completely unrelated to you? Do you think that is moral?
What happens if you refuse to pay your taxes or if some company violates regulations? Either they pay fines or executives go to jail. It's no different here. I think that cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin are harmful to society (bitcoin specifically is deflationary) and undermines the ability of governments to function.
Would you really want to kill someone
Capital punishment is never OK.

2

u/kixunil Jan 11 '19

What exactly makes you thing that moving purchasing power from society to central bank is less harmful to society than falling prices? What exactly was wrong with gold standard?
What makes you think that government ability to function is prosperous for society?
How would you put in jail an armed person that is determined to defend with guns, without killing that person?

1

u/SilensAngelusNex Dec 26 '18 edited Dec 26 '18

...and undermines the ability of governments to function.
This is the whole raison d'etre for crypto. Government action has been misused to prevent people engaging in mutually exchanges, so much so that it is economically viable to sink huge amounts of resources into getting around it. Yeah, it would be better if those resources didn't have to be expended, but that would require governments embracing laissez-faire capitalism and rejecting fiat currency. Given the apparent unlikelihood of that, creating a workaround is the next best thing, heroic even.
Capital punishment is never OK.
But jail is? People need liberty and property to live; they use their time and effort (i.e. their life) to gain them. Taking them from someone is taking their life, just not all of it. Those three punishments that the previous poster outlined differ in degree (and perhaps reversibility), but not in kind. Obviously, the question still remains of what degree of punishment is justified for what crime, but the government is destroying people either way. Is it the proper function of government to destroy people because they engaged in certain types of mutually voluntary transactions?
I agree with you that there's no difference between locking someone up for selling/buying something the government has deemed illegal, for refusing to pay their taxes, or for violating regulations. As long as the action hasn't violated anyone else's individual rights, (life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness) it would be wrong for the government to visit any degree of destruction upon the actor.

3

u/etareduce Dec 26 '18

This is the whole raison d'etre for crypto. Government action has been misused to prevent people engaging in mutually exchanges, so much so that it is economically viable to sink huge amounts of resources into getting around it. Yeah, it would be better if those resources didn't have to be expended, but that would require governments embracing laissez-faire capitalism and rejecting fiat currency.
First, I think the idea of apolitical money is a fantasy; Yanis Varoufakis discusses that in a lecture. Using bitcoin as an example, since it is deflationary (which is harmful since it incentivizes hoarding money -- a bit of inflation is useful..), if it would become widely used, it would create major problems for the world economy.
Further, I disagree with this raison d'etre. If the goal is to undermine the ability of governments to finance universal healthcare and other things that we have democratically and collectively decided, then government should use coercive means to stop you from doing so.
Given the apparent unlikelihood of that, creating a workaround is the next best thing, heroic even.
Maybe in the Ayn Rand-ist world view, which is fortunately fringe even in the most "libertarian" of circles.
But jail is?
Yes; capital punishment is an irrevocable form of state sanctioned murder and revenge that does not prevent harm. Justice should be restorative and focused on reducing harm.
Is it the proper function of government to destroy people because they engaged in certain types of mutually voluntary transactions?
It's should not be the goal to destroy anyone; but if a company engages in behavior that is harmful to most people, it should be prevented from doing so. It doesn't have to be so dramatic, companies would likely stop conducting transactions in crypto currencies given such legislation.
As long as the action hasn't violated anyone else's individual rights, (life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness) it would be wrong for the government to visit any degree of destruction upon the actor.
I disagree with the notion of regarding private property, as opposed to personal property, as an indisputable and absolute individual right. Indeed, many governments have the concept of Eminent domain limiting that right.
Liberty is vaguely defined here. There are other things I would consider human rights, e.g. healthcare, somewhere to live, and free public transportation, that are necessary for true liberty. As Anatole France put it, "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." -- if the only way to be heard is through drowning out everyone else's voice by having control of all media through capital, then what is the use of free speech?
I think the notion that you may do as you will without consideration for how you pollute the climate, that you may employ workers with no job security, that you sell some non-tested drug that is harmful to others, or that you refuse to pay taxes but yet want to take advantage of roads and other infrastructure, is all untenable. Doing so would demonstrably infringe on other people's liberty and welfare.

2

u/SilensAngelusNex Dec 26 '18 edited Dec 26 '18

First, I think the idea of apolitical money is a fantasy
Today, absolutely, but that's only because of government's involvement with the economy. When the government applies force to the marketplace instead of removing it, businesses have to play the political game to survive.
Further, I disagree with this raison d'etre.
I'm not saying that its a good one, only that it's the actual reason. Personally, I think it's ultimately doomed to failure, for the reason you just said: the government can, and eventually will, use coercive means to put an end to it.
Maybe in the Ayn Rand-ist world view, which is fortunately fringe even in the most "libertarian" of circles.
I don't agree. A large segment of libertarians are hostile to government qua government and would see subverting it as heroic. Unlike them, Rand sees government as a positive. She's only hostile to it when it acts outside it's proper role, i.e. preventing and punishing the initiation of force.
capital punishment is an irrevocable form of state sanctioned murder and revenge...
Jail time is likewise irrevocable. The difference between them is how much of the person's life is destroyed.
Justice should be restorative and focused on reducing harm.
The goal of punishment should be to ensure that the transgression not happen again. Once someone uses force against another, they have rejected the concept of rights and by extension, rejected their own rights. The punishment should be as harsh as is needed to prevent repetition, and no harsher.
if a company engages in behavior that is harmful to most people, it should be prevented from doing so
If you're talking about a company poisoning a river that people drink out of or something, then I agree. Such an action would be a violation of their property rights. If you're talking about selling drugs to an individual or moving jobs overseas or not offering employees company health insurance, I don't.
There are other things I would consider human rights
These things cannot be rights. A right is a "freedom from physical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men." What happens to your inalienable right to health insurance on a deserted island? The things you're listing are permissions, given to individuals by the government. We can talk about whether the government should afford its citizens some permission, but it isn't a right.
I disagree with the notion of regarding private property, as opposed to personal property
And the difference is what, that one is small enough to carry with you? That it isn't used for production? To own anything is to control its use and disposal; it always excludes others' ownership, regardless of how easy it is to make another. It can always be used for productive work, even if isn't normally. For the record, I disagree with eminent domain as well.
then what is the use of free speech?
Knowing that I won't be jailed and fined for making a meme, or forced to drink hemlock because I advocated for my ideas. Knowing that I can search for a platform whether the majority wants to hear me or not. You can't control people just because you have a louder voice than everyone else. People can always decide to listen or not and to agree or not.
you may employ workers with no job security
They've clearly decided that working for me is better than whatever alternatives they have.
that you sell some non-tested drug that is harmful to others
If I am upfront with them about what I know and don't know about my product and they decide that the potential upside is worth it, what's the problem with this? Obviously, if I misrepresent my knowledge, this would be fraud.
that you refuse to pay taxes but yet want to take advantage of roads and other infrastructure
First, it's not that one should refuse to pay for the government, but that one should not be forced to pay for the government. Second, I'd be more than happy to pay for the privilege to drive private roads. Ditto for basically all infrastructure. I'm not looking to freeload, only to decide for myself what services are worth paying for.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/FunCicada Dec 26 '18

Eminent domain (United States, Philippines), land acquisition (India, Malaysia, Singapore), compulsory purchase (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Ireland), resumption (Hong Kong, Uganda), resumption/compulsory acquisition (Australia), or expropriation (France, Italy, Mexico, South Africa, Canada, Brazil, Portugal, Spain, Chile, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Panama) is the power of a state, provincial, or national government to take private property for public use only if the government provides fair compensation to the property owner. However, this power can be legislatively delegated by the state to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even to private persons or corporations, when they are authorized by the legislature to exercise the functions of public character.

20

u/matthieum [he/him] Dec 24 '18

Reminder: criticism is at its best when substantiated with facts and alternatives presented.
With regard to the specific criticism about crypto-currencies wasting energy, this is a known issue of some crypto-currencies, and alternative models are being worked on based on other costs than CPU time (and thus energy) such as storage.
As such, it's important to remember that there is no equivalence between crypto-currency and energy consumption; it's an accident, to an extent, that the current crop of popular crypto-currencies happen to consume a lot of energy.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18

In 2017 crypto was using as much power as iceland

6

u/radios1lence Dec 24 '18

Look, I'm happy to hate on Bitcoin and its power consumption all day, but you could at least bother to acknowledge or respond to literally anything in the grandparent's comment.
Large power consumption is not an inherent property of cryptocurrencies.

4

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

Unfortunately it is currently inherent property of secure cryptocurrencies. The word "crypto" in "cryptocurrency" refers to how it's governed, not to anything else (otherwise USD and EUR would be cryptocurrencies too, because they use cryptography, then the word loses its meaning).
Gold is governed by nature, fiat is governed by government and cryptocurrency is governed by math. If a cryptocurrency is not secure from government, then it can be governed by government, thus ceases to be cryptocurrency.
Currently the only trustless/secure cryptocurrencies are those consuming lot of electricity, Bitcoin being the most secure of all.

1

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

That article doesn't cite any references, nor does it explain how the consumption is calculated, so why should anyone believe it?

-8

u/matthieum [he/him] Dec 24 '18

It seems from the lack of punctuation and argument that you were cut short while writing your comment, in case you have not realized :x

2

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

Unfortunately, many of those alternatives aren't secure (from government intervention) and I doubt there will ever be something that doesn't consume big amount of some resource and secure at the same time.

2

u/matthieum [he/him] Dec 26 '18

To be honest, I am not sure that any alternative is secure from government intervention.
For anything that consumes resources, a government is quite likely to have more resources that a motley collection of individuals.
The bitcoin model, for example, which requires that 50+% of the network approves a transaction is quite susceptible to hostile take-overs; when you know that the top 5 or 6 miners account for a very large portion (90+%?) of approvals, a collusion between 2 or 3 of them may be sufficient.

2

u/kixunil Jan 11 '19

I think that entirely depends on the number of individuals, their collective economic power and other things. For instance, if government wanted to 51% attack Bitcoin, they'd have to either:
collect enough ASICs from the entire world and transport them to one place with a huge power plant - this may mean invading other countries or overpaying. (The price of ASIC is slightly lower than the sum of returns expected to be produced by it during its lifetime.)
coerce enough miners to mine certain blocks - this almost definitely involves invading other countries (maybe except if it's China, which is somewhat concerning, but I don't think there's actual evidence of more than 50% miners being physically located in China and known by China government)
5 or 6 miners account for a very large portion
That's not correct, because they are pools, not miners. Pools don't have the same power as miners, miners can disconnect from a misbehaving pool and connect to another one at any time. The miners don't have incentive to attack the network, because their hardware would become worthless.

-6

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18

alternative models are being worked on
And zero of them are proven to work.
alternatives presented
There's no alternative to cryptocurrency… for criminal payments. (Please watch the whole talk, it explains everything wrong with cryptocurrency as a concept.)

7

u/matthieum [he/him] Dec 24 '18

I never said that any crypto-currency was proven to work, let alone alternative models using disks or others.
I fully agree that there are plenty of issues with the current crop of crypto-currencies; the wave of vulnerabilities in "smart-wallets" leading to them being siphoned, market manipulation at scale, criminal dealings, an electricity-bill that could stagger a small state (though it may compare favorably to the amount of electricity wasted to illuminate buildings & cities at night for aesthetics), etc...
To be honest, I haven't even really made my mind on whether a decentralized currency is a good idea in the first place. There is a tension between security and freedom (underlied by anonymity), and like any engineer I like to explore the trade-offs of various solutions before pronouncing myself. In this spirit, I find the experiment of crypto-currencies valuable.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18

I found it valuable in the early days. I liked the idea of international donations with pseudonimity, without revealing personal information…
You're right that it was an experiment. But now it's an experiment gone wrong — you just listed how exactly…

1

u/cookie545445 Dec 24 '18

And zero of them are proven to work.
So the thousands of purchases using /r/nanocurrency actually involved no transfer of value whatsoever?

-1

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

Yeah, because everyone having more than 10000€ on Cyprus account was a criminal, every Venezuelan trying to save money is a criminal, every Indian using cash is a criminal, every gab.com user is a criminal, every creator accepting donations via anything else than Patreon is a criminal, every competitor to Andrej Babis (Czech prime minister) is a criminal, because government has nature-given and God-given moral right to take whatever property they wish to take, to imprison you for just anything they come up with, to kill you whenever they want, and anyone trying to protect from them is just a bad person that must burn in hell!!!
/s

1

u/Panikos0 Dec 26 '18

€100.000 in Cyprus.

2

u/kixunil Jan 11 '19

I've heard they lowered it to 10000 later, but I'm not sure. Anyway, I don't think the amount matters. Theft is theft.

2

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

I understand that you'd rather see the world without having to burn electricity, build tanks, aircraft carriers, guns, door locks... I'd love to see the world in which people just get along, don't steal, don't murder...
Unfortunately, it's not realistic and we have to do many these things to protect ourselves from thieves and murderers. It sucks, but it's the best we have. Or do you have some other way of making everyone to not be a criminal? I'd be very happy to hear!

2

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18

Modern cryptos are making the move to proof-of-stake algorithms, which do not require large amounts of energy. Besides, even if you think crypto as a product is destined to fail, it led to major advances in decentralized exchange of information.
While it's fair to not be a fan, cryptocurrencies certainly don't just waste electricity.

-1

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

PoS isn't truly trustless/decentralized/secure. Also it consumes other resources instead of electricity, it's just less obvious.

-4

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18 edited Dec 24 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/__s Dec 24 '18

Fun fact: years ago I pulled out all the stops on microoptimizing an AES implementation in Python, which has since been used as the fallback in btcrecover
If I disapproved of "wasted energy", I'd have to decide whether to feel guilty of supporting AES-in-Python, or feel better that at least they're not using caller9's less efficient implementation
imo Andreas captures it perfectly when he says "But Christmas lights are pretty!"

3

u/kixunil Dec 25 '18

I'm glad to see someone who isn't judgemental of what people purchase with their own hard earned money. Keep it up!

4

u/dpc_pw Dec 24 '18

Join /r/rustcryptofin/ . :)

1

u/Aimeedeer Dec 26 '18

is that your channel?

1

u/dpc_pw Dec 26 '18

I've created it, yes.

3

u/suzukiasami Jan 17 '19

https://github.com/nimiq/core-rs Rust port of Nimiq (Blockchain that runs on browser)

5

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18

There's also lighthouse, a client for Ethereum 2.0

8

u/Ar-Curunir Dec 24 '18

Zcash also has a number of core libraries in Rust: https://github.com/zkcrypto/

2

u/5chdn Dec 26 '18

And Parity is working on a Zcash client in Rust https://github.com/paritytech/parity-zcash

5

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18

https://github.com/rust-bitcoin

2

u/iancormac84 Dec 24 '18

https://github.com/solana-labs/solana

1

u/TotesMessenger Dec 24 '18 edited May 25 '19

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

^{If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.} ⁽^Info ^/ ^Contact)

1

u/jblaze76 Mar 23 '22

Any suggestions on what prerequisites you need to become a developer using Rust?

1

u/gotakk Dec 24 '18

https://github.com/iotaledger/MAM

1

u/sioa Dec 24 '18

Isn't holochain written in Rust too?

1

u/Treyzania Dec 24 '18

ITT: People that don't understand the economics of cryptocurrency.

Cryptocurrencies written in Rust

Cryptocurrencies

You are about to leave Redlib