Ravencoin Review and Rating
Occasionally, I’m tempted to review a paper which is not “work-of-art” or, even, doesn’t have an originality behind it, but, nonetheless, has some other qualities, which are able to attract potential readers / users. This time I’m talking about Ravencoin “A Peer to Peer Electronic System for the Creation and Transfer of Assets” whitepaper (dated 3rd April 2018).
This piece is neither technical nor business and, IMHO, only “Vision”: Singularity-Volume-Empathy-Timeline sub-rating might be applied to it.
Ravencoin is, basically, a public, ASIC resistant fork of Bitcoin.
Citing: “The Ravencoin project was launched based on the (Bitcoin) hard fork and continuous effort of over 430 Bitcoin developers who made over 14,000 commits by the date of the Ravencoin code fork.”
RVN appeals to the majority of users by its decentralized character and that it aims at solving one of the most contentious issues in DLT space — the growing wealth, power and influence of few mining corporations and pools. Result: “a” for “Empathy”.
For that it intends to use X16r chained hashing algorithm, which main difference from the classical X11 (to which many ASIC manufactures have been able to quickly adapt) is that it changes / randomize the order of its 16 hashing functions based on the final 8 bytes of the previous block hash.
In fact, of course, X16r reordering isn’t the effective form of preventing ASIC mining. It just renders more difficult to construct new ASICs (a manufacture can’t simply extend the existing design) and makes it a bit easier to mine with CPU or GPU. Still it’s a move in the right direction and because of that I slightly adjust “Singularity” up to “c+”.
Also, Ravencoin introduces the second protocol layer (analogue to Mastercoins) on top of the forked Bitcoin protocol, which is intended for users to build their own currency. That further extends the RVN usability, but, still, doesn’t make it easier to compete on already overcrowded market of similar coins. Result: “b” for “Volume”
Although, project’s “TimeLine” is addressed (kinda) in “Ravencoin Launch and Algorithm” section of the paper it can only be described by the words of Edgar Poe from his “The Raven” poem (citing): “Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there wondering, fearing …” Result: “c”.
Overall, however, this short (11-pages) piece is mildly recommended for your attention as an example of a relatively low-quality paper, which, nonetheless, does its job.
If our crypto-community will not support independent ratings, who else will?Please, visit my Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/svetsedov
“Singularity-Volume-Empathy-Timeline” sub-rating: c+bac