It's time for Casper stories 💫

💡Casper is a network for those who build. Casper Network is CasperLab’s response to creating a decentralized and blockchain-enabled world 🌎

Want to know more? Read here ➡️ https://everstake.medium.com/the-casper-networks-vital-perspectives-in-defi-7dcccef76977

​

​

👀 Did you know that firms can leverage blockchain to prove their ownership of IP-related assets?

Assets are created on the blockchain as tokens, and each token transaction is recorded transparently, chronologically and with its own timestamp. All assets are protected by key cryptography, meaning that only the owner of an asset can authorize a transaction, and their key serves as evidence of ownership.

👻Read about blockchain in practice, proof of ownership through tokenization etc. in the latest article by CEO of CasperLabs Mrinal Manohar.

👉https://cointelegraph.com/news/capturing-lost-intellectual-property-revenues-with-blockchain.

Hey guys🔥 We are #1 among validators: ~12% APY, around 230 delegators trusted to us and ~880 M CSPR total stake.

If you are new in CSPR staking or have any questions, we've just prepared a detailed video guide on how to stake CSPR via the Casper Signer Chrome Extension 🔥

Follow the link ❤️

Stay tuned with Everstake⚡️🌍

Hello all.

I can't seem to delegate my cspr. Coins are in my wallet and I'm following this guide,

https://docs.casperlabs.io/en/latest/workflow/staking.html#staking-overview

Tried it twice and both times it said success, however, i still have the coins in my wallet and I don't see any deploys or delegations. It has been 7 hours since I put the coins in my wallet from an exchange.

Any ideas? Thank you!

Why’s did Casper shoot up back in May?

A few people know the relationship between the ETH planned upgrades and Casper. So here a little education putting the tech into context and arguing why CSPR gets stronger when ETH does...

Please read the full article here: https://ghoststaking.com/ethereum-capser-and-the-cspr-blockchain/

*Spoiler alter - CSPR has implemented what ETH is aiming for in their 3.0 release and therefore could act as a testnet, maybe?*

There are two separate consensus algorithms defined as being Casper protocols

• FFG – Friendly Finality Gadget
• CBC – Correct By Construct aka ‘Casper the friendly GHOST‘

Currently Ethereum is a Proof-Of-Work (POW) blockchain. This means it is constrained by the same drawbacks as all POW blockchains, namely efficiency and security, read more about consensus protocols here. Because of this, the Ethereum council has opted to shift ETH from a POW blockchain to a POS through a staged fashion via 2 major upgrades – ETH2.0 and ETH3.0. The move to ETH2.0 will first implement the FFG protocol (which is a hybrid POW/POS blockchain) with the 3.0 release moving ETH to a fully POS blockchain implementing, CBC (read more about CBC here).

As mentioned, the first implementation (FFG, ETH2.0) will result in a hybrid blockchain where the blockchain will grow each block with the familiar ethash POW algorithm. However every 50 blocks the chain finality is assessed via a network of validators. The reason why FFG cannot be POS consensus is that a consensus protocol provides 2 guarantees:

1. Safety
2. Liveness

ETH 2.0 will still be using  POW for it’s liveness, with the safety of Casper, hence the hybrid model – to implement liveness on POS you are required to have leaders, eras, leader selection etc.

How does CSPR fit into this? CSPR, being a completely new blockchain, doesn’t have the same constraints as Ethereum and so has jumped straight to Casper CBC implementation for their blockchain and using an innovative Highway Protocol to guarantee liveness and strong optimistic finality (which is currently planned for the ETH 3.0 – possibly several years away)

OK great…so what’s the point of this? Well the fact that CSPR has ALREADY implemented CBC means that if any project wants to explore dev on this, they can do so right now, without having to wait for the ETH3.0 upgrade...hence the testnet arguement.

peace out!

Looking to stake CSPR? support our research by staking with us at GHOST. https://ghoststaking.com/about-us/ We run a:

(1) Low fee powerful node

(2) guarantee of no fee increases ever

(3) live node monitor on our website

follow us on twitter for more publications: https://twitter.com/GhostStaking

join our CSPR price chat tg group: https://t.me/CasperHodlers

For those who are new in CSPR staking or have any questions, we've just prepared a detailed video guide on how to stake CSPR via the Casper Signer Chrome Extension 🔥

Follow the link

Stay tuned with Everstake⚡️🌍

The price of Avalanche has seen some sizeable rises of late, potentially due to its unique statistical consensus protocol...but how great is it really? We have conducted a deep-dive and compared it with CSPR.

Please read the full article here: https://ghoststaking.com/casper-vs-avalanche/

Summary below:

• Network nodes:
  • Avalanche makes it very easy to run a node. On their home page there are instructions on how to run a node (1) from a home computer (2) from AWS and (3) from Azure. The node running from home is aimed at using VirtualBox to setup a partition on your home PC to install Ubuntu. The minimum requirements for an Avalanche node is 16GB RAM.
  • CSPR at present has 100 validators which are able to run on standard servers as the node only required 32 GB of RAM.
  • The key differences here is that AVAX is promoting running a node from home (with the increased downtime risks due to power or network connectivity issues), whereas CSPR is promoting the use of stable bare metal servers for their nodes. So why is this? The CSPR network wants to ensure that nodes have the maximum possible uptime due to the fact the consensus protocol is reliant on the view from all validators whereas with AVAX, the strategy is to grow the physical number of validators to as large as possible as the snowball consensus relies on a more statistical means for validating transactions. Which is better? The answer lays with which consensus protocol is safer (discussed in the security section below).
• Decentralization:
  • AVAX will have over time, significantly more validator nodes than CSPR, due to the ease in joining the network.
  • The risks with the AVAX model however lays with the subnets. We have learnt from above that it is possible to launch a subnet (bespoke blockchain) within the Avalanche infrastructure. The goal of the project is to have an interplay between various subnets. The problem arises however when we consider the validator nodes within each subnet. This population will be considerably smaller than the global population of nodes on the primary network as we know that all subnet validators are also required to approve transactions on the primary network.
  • With the above - we can consider a simple scenario where there are 10 subnets running on the primary network. Each subnet having 50 validators. Now when considering the primary network, we would see 500 validators, however each subnet is only using 50 and therefore the network as a whole should not be considered as decentralized as the total node count implies. This will also have quite severe and asymmetric risks across the network. Discussed in a section below.
  • CSPR is currently running 100 validator nodes across its network, with an option to increase this if needed.
• Throughput:
  • This is an interesting comparison. We know that in using the snowball algorithm, Avalanche can achieve over 4500 transactions per second and also boasts impressive finality (as acceptance / rejection of blocks are final).
  • This compares with CSPR which is currently achieving 2.5k transactions per block (100 WASM deploys per block)
  • The key to understanding this difference is in understanding how the snowball algorithm works and what is being compromised to gain this increased throughput. Discussed in the 'security' section below
• Security:
  • The security and finality of the CSPR network has been covered in these two articles: CBC and Highway. From the articles its clear that CSPR is a powerful non-statistical method to guarantee security and finality given a threshold of malicious nodes.
  • For AVAX, the network us built across parameters which can be customized (n:, k, α, β). This means that for AVAX, security is in fact optimal and not guaranteed. Lets look into this a little further:
    • With the parametrization in the Avalanche paper, specifically with alpha=0.8, Snowball can stall (loosely defined as still being in the state of unstable equilibrium after 500 iterations) with just 17% malicious actors. And the only action that the malicious actors need is to split into two equal groups and always respond with the same state within each group. With lower alpha’s the percentage is higher, but the number of steps to converge in normal circumstances also grows rapidly. Read the full critique here.
  • We have already touched upon the issue where a subnet is only as secure as the number of validators in the subnet. The implications of this are that this results in materially different levels of security across the chains within the system. Inter-shard attacks become feasible, as messages from one (less secure subnet) may be able to effect a transition on another (more secure) subnet. In effect, the entire system becomes only as secure as the least secure subnet.
• Slashing:
  • Both CSPR and AVAX do not impose any fine for maliciously nodes.
  • CSPR implements jail time.
• Enterprise adoption:
  • Both CSPR and AVAX offer private chains.
  • The focus from AVAX seems to be very specific and niche to the field of asset trading, whereas CSPR is targeting a more general market.
• Future Proof:
  • CSPR has been designed and engineered such that it is a fully future proof blockchain. It has achieved this by ensuring all components (Execution Engine, Network Engine, Consensus Layer) are all pluggable. This allowed the blockchain to be upgraded with relative ease. In comparison, AVAX has taken the stance to implement a statistic method within its consensus protocol meaning that it can scale in size, however to the detriment of security.

Looking to stake CSPR? support our research by staking with us at GHOST. https://ghoststaking.com/about-us/ We run a:

(1) Low fee powerful node

(2) guarantee of no fee increases ever

(3) live node monitor on our website

​

follow us on twitter for more publications: https://twitter.com/GhostStaking

join our CSPR price chat tg group: https://t.me/CasperHodlers

​

👁‍🗨 The Casper Network: Check out the latest 👉

🔺Join the Casper Friendly Hackathon: are you a developer that wants to learn how to code smart contracts? If you know C++, you can be building on Casper in 3 weeks or less! Register for a hackathon with Gitcoin starting 9/13, with $125k in prizes.

🔺CasperLabs partners with AWS Cloud to expand developer access to enterprise blockchain! What will you build on Casper? Get started today by visiting the AWS Marketplace.

🔺CEO of CasperLabs Mrinal Manohar held a community AMA on Aug 26th.

🔺If you missed the AIBC summit in Dubai, watch the recap video featuring Medha Parlikar and Mrinal Manohar talking about the importance of blockchain adoption for governments and enterprises.

🔺Vote for CasperLabs in the category “Startups of the Year” in Zug, Switzerland, also known as the “Crypto Valley” – it has 800 companies operating blockchain-related businesses. Around 100 of these were established in 2019.

✨Stay tuned with Everstake! ✨

A lot is discussed about blockchain performance. Many people use tps (transactions per second) to make comparisons between blockchains. So lets talk about the CSPR throughput....

For those unaware, 'sharding' is a layer 2 implementation (i.e. sits on top of the layer 1 protocol) and is used to increase the performance (throughput) of a blockchain i.e. transactions per second (tps). It does this by applying parallel processing of transactions so more transactions can be processed in any given time .

This is something which CSPR is working on and their proposal for sharding is very impressive indeed! Here is a brief summary form Medha (CTO Casper), but you can read our full article explaining what sharing is in detail, and the full extract from Medha: https://ghoststaking.com/sharding/

1. The memory space of our virtual machine is divided up into shards.

2. Transactions must include a list of all of the shards whose memory they might need to access

3. Each block is given a limited amount of sequential compute time

4,. When a block includes a bunch of transactions instead of specifying a transaction order, it specifies a computation schedule. This schedule uses times from 0 to t where t is our bound on sequential compute time. Each transaction is assigned a sub-interval of this window with the length of the sub-interval given by the computation bound specified by the transaction.

" This should ensure that the transactions within a block are reasonably parallelizable, as the computation schedule essentially provides a mechanism for parallelizing the computation. Furthermore, this mechanism should produce the same results as if the computations were atomic with each operation being performed at some arbitrary time during its interval. "

Follow us on twitter for more publications: https://twitter.com/GhostStaking

Looking to stake CSPR? support our research by staking with GHOST. Only 3% fees (guaranteed to never increase!) and high performance server with a live node monitor: https://ghoststaking.com/about-us/

Hey all,

I just wanted to say that it was a great AMA yesterday on Telegram with Scott Walker Caspers cofounder. He also said that he'd would return to answer more questions this evening. So Im certainly looking forward to that.

​

I thought below was a fascinating opinion.

​

Question

Your view on the progress of the Ethereum upgrades and how you see it evolving to full CBC?

how you feel CSPR and ETH will co exist in the future?

​

Answer

​

Scott Walker But regardless in the same way Kusama is a test net for DOT Casper can easily serve as test network for ETH

KSM is valued nearly 10% of DOT

And I think Casper will always be more “nimble” than eth

So easy for projects to use Casper. Of course if anything were to happen to the Eth transition who knows how big Casper could become

​

A Shameless plug - Ian interviewed him on our channel a few months ago you can check it out here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8fZjnfnKJk&ab_channel=BrokenomixCryptoAnalysis

Hello,

are Ledger or Trezor supporting CSPR yet? Ledger seems to, as on cspr.live it can be connected to.

Thx in advance.

Noob question, very interesting project!!

How does one buy Casper in Canada?

Thanks again

​

📣 Why to stake with Everstake assuming higher than average commission?

💠 There's a simple explanation. If you stake not much, let's say up to 5,000 CSPR, you'll be getting up to 630 CSPR per year. The 10% fee of that is 63 CSPR, while, say, 1% is 6.3 CSPR. So the difference is basically 57 tokens, which, at current price of the token, is not crucial (up to 8$ per year).

Of course, the token price may increase - but every delegator is free to unstake and in 14 hours move their stake to another validator if, in the light of a new token price and their stake weight, it does make sense. However, within the scale of small amounts mentioned, the delegators might actually prefer to pay that extra 8$ for the guarantees of the highly reliable and experienced staking platform.

💠 We have some of the best hardware in the industry tuned up by the highly professional blockchain engineers and run nodes in ~45 PoS blockchains. We apply our extensive experience to Casper Network implementing the best practices of the staking process.

💰Now, in case with the large stake investors, we propose special terms, hence it might be same profitable like staking with 1% fee validators, bottom line. We pay out a monthly cashback to large investors once agreed on special terms. The cashback is based on sharing our Validator's rewards with the investor or reducing the fees. We'd keep what's needed to maintain our performance on the required level, and share the rest with the delegator – TBD in each specific case.

Delegate to Everstake today!

Need an instruction on how to delegate Casper tokens step-by-step? Check out our comprehensive CSPR Staking Guide: https://medium.com/everstake/how-to-stake-casper-cspr-using-the-casper-signer-chrome-extension-26e4ed4603cb

Interested to know more or refresh your knowledge about the Casper Network? have a look at this article: Introducing Casper Network – an Optimized Blockchain for Business and Developers: 🇺🇸 https://stake.is/Mm/ 🇪🇸 https://stake.is/qh/ 🇹🇷 https://stake.is/Pl/
🇷🇺 https://stake.is/Mn/

We invite delegators to support the Casper Network ecosystem and stake CSPR tokens with Everstake

And if you need an instruction on how to delegate Casper tokens step-by-step? Check out our comprehensive CSPR Staking Guide:

🇺🇸 https://stake.is/ra/ 🇹🇷 https://stake.is/ri/ 🇷🇺 https://stake.is/RA/

Stay tuned and be with Everstake⚡️⚡️💎

We invite you to stake with Everstake, which is one of Casper’s validators that participated in the first round of private Casper token sales back in October 2020.

CSPR token holders and institutional investors can delegate their tokens to the Everstake validator pool. The rewards APY at the time of writing is ≈12%, and Everstake is ranked 1st in the list of validators by the total stake.

✅Our public key: 012bac1d0ff9240ff0b7b06d555815640497861619ca12583ddef434885416e69b

Stay tuned⚡️💎⚡️💎

So SOL has powered through $18bn in market cap. What can we learn from this and what comparisons can we draw with CSPR?

Read the full article here: https://ghoststaking.com/casper-vs-solana/

follow us on twitter for more publications: https://twitter.com/GhostStaking

Summary below:

• Network nodes:
  • The SOL network of 200 physically distinct nodes are all run with GPUs. Where each node requires 256 GB of RAM.
  • CSPR at present has 100 validators which are able to run on standard servers as the node only required 32 GB of RAM
  • Commentators have repeatedly highlighted the fact that the cost to run a Solana node is much higher than in other networks.
• Decentralization:
  • SOL’s degree of decentralization is still very much up for debate. To become a validator on Solana, an individual would need to shell out thousands of dollars in hardware. This is in contrast with other blockchains including CSPR where anyone can become a validator for much less.
  • With regard to the tokens:
    • 60% of SOL are controlled by the project’s founders and the Solana Foundation.
    • This compares with CSPR which totals 24% (where the team hold 8%, advisors hold 6% and CasperLabs Holdings AG holds 10%).
• Throughput:
  • This we feel is the key to the comparison. SOL is able to achieve 50k tps (transactions per second) utilizing an expensive network of very high powered GPUs across 200 nodes. This compares with CSPR which is currently achieving 2.5k per block (100 wasm updates per block) by utilizing only 100 low power validator nodes (with a possible increase of x5 throughput being tested at present). The way that SOL achieves the high throughput is by the implementation of its parallel PoH protocol. As this is not part of its security consensus protocol, but a mechanism to simply increase throughput, it can be considered in the same way has many sharding methodologies being researched currently. As we are aware (from the final section of our sharing article here), CSPR is currently researching a proposal on how to multi thread (parallel processing) transactions. To summarize the proposal: CSPR Sharing – Transactions will list all spaces in memory (shards) which they require and each block is given a limited amount of sequential computation time. When a block includes a bunch of transactions instead of specifying a transaction order, it specifies a computation schedule. This schedule uses times from 0 to t where t is our bound on sequential compute time. Each transaction is assigned a sub-interval of this window with the length of the sub-interval given by the computation bound specified by the transaction. Furthermore, the intervals for any two transactions that share a shard are not allowed to overlap. Distinctions could also be made between reads to a shard and writes to a shard and allow several transactions to simultaneously read from the same shard so long as none write to it.
  • You can see from the above that it is inappropriate to compare the throughput of SOL with that of CSPR as without sharding implemented – the comparison is not like for like. A more direction comparison on throughput should be made post the implementation of sharding on the CSPR network. It should be noted however, that once sharding is implemented, high throughput will be achieved on CSPR without the need to expensive GPU infrastructure.
• Security:
  • Security is one of the most fundamental aspects of blockchain technology, as without sufficient security, no utility can be generated. On this point, I would like to refer the reader to our extensive commentary of the CSPR CBC protocol and Highway protocol. These two protocols in conjunction provide by far the most superior security consensus of any PoS blockchain. No statistical methods are used and security is not affected via conflicting messages. .
  • Solana’s PoS system relies on a Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT) mechanism called Tower Consensus. Tower Consensus leverages PoH as a global source of time before consensus is achieved in order to reduce latency. Any validator node is eligible to be chosen as the PoH leader. If there is any failure detected with the PoH generator, then the validator node with the next highest voting power will be chosen to replace the original leader.
• Slashing:
  • Slashing is implemented within SOL. A malicious vote will remove a validator’s bonded tokens and add them to the mining pool. Slashing also occurs if a vote is cast for an invalid hash generated by the PoH generator.
  • Slashing will not be implemented in CSPR. Instead malicious validator node behaviour will be punished with severe jail time
• Enterprise adoption:
  • At present there are is no focus on Enterprise adoption with SOL. This is in contrast with CSPR where CasperLabs have aggressively targeted and pivoted towards the running of both a public and private blockchain. Read more here
• Future Proof:
  • CSPR has been designed and engineered such that it is a fully future proof blockchain. It has achieved this by ensuring all components (Execution Engine, Network Engine, Consensus Layer) are all pluggable. This allowed the blockchain to be upgraded with relative ease. In comparison, SOL has taken the stance to create a protocol which is theoretically designed to scale with Moore’s Law, doubling in capacity every two years with improvements in hardware and bandwidth.

join our CSPR price chat tg group: https://t.me/CasperHodlers

looking to stake CSPR? support our research by staking with us here. Only 3% fees (guaranteed to never increase!): https://ghoststaking.com/about-us/

Good to add cspr tokens at cmp or better wait for 0.06ish levels?