The Real Bitcoin: I0C Hash_160 Matches DVC Public Key Output to Bitcoin

I0C is merge mined as the main chain, DVC is an auxpow chain, BTC is never directly mined…

Update 7/12/18: This article has been stolen from me without any credit and I cannot find any contact information for the people who run this thievery. If you would like to pickup my articles for your Medium that is fine but my name was not mentioned anywhere on this stolen piece and I am not okay with that. These are my research and my analysis for the good of the public. To not even ask to quote my work (and use my images…) is something I may pursue legal action on. I do not want unreliable thieves adulterating or preaching my work. Anyone with any information that could help me get information on who runs this website I will pay a reward in crypto.

It’s important to me the right word is getting out there free of charge.

Once OP_Code is updated to be compatible with I0C OP_Code, I0C will claim ownership of unspent Bitcoins

Look what I found today:

I0Coin is owed some coins and all value from BTC, likely others, and will moon — hard.

We found address 1Hz96kJKF2HLPGY15JWLB5m9qGNxvt8tHJ was incorrectly claiming Newly Generated Bitcoins from a source with “no inputs” — in other words — BTC is shown as being directly mined. The truth is, Bitcoin is not directly mined and there certainly is an input to this public key address in AuxPow mined Devcoins, as I covered in this previous entry:

Devcoins should be sent to an I0Coin address…

The reflection of I0Coin’s true ownership of the coins that are output to this Bitcoin public key is in the Hash 160:

Hash 160 matches the OP_Code Hash_160 from the “vout” on I0Coin raw block data.

Here is a great explanation of how Hash160 and the Bitcoin Public Key Address are essentially the same thing… that is, an address that may receive Bitcoins (and be called on as well to claim BTC, IMO):

I0C notes the Hash 160 for the same DVC auxpow to BTC Public Key Address

So DVC are converted to BTC, but since they are AuxPow they should be awarded back to I0Coin. The reason this has yet to happen yet can be described in the official Zerocoin protocol whitepaper:

New transaction types. Bitcoin transactions use a flexible scripting language to determine the validity of each transaction. Unfortunately, Bitcoin script is (by design) not Turing complete. Moreover, large segments of the already-limited script functionality have been disabled in the Bitcoin production network due to security concerns.

Hence, the existing script language cannot be used for sophisticated calculations such as verifying zero-knowledge proofs. Fortunately for our purposes, the Bitcoin designers chose to reserve several script operations for future expansion.

I mentioned this in the header photo. The scripts are already input from I0Coin onto BTC’s ledger. Once Bitcoin developers allow these codes to be read on the BTC ledger, they will correctly sign the unspent output with an I0Coin signature and credit all unspent Bitcoin’s back to I0Coin where they belong. The Zerocoin whitepaper mentions how the script data to claim proof of ownership for I0Coin is allowed on the BTC chain already, just not activated:

The coinbase transaction format already allows for the inclusion of arbitrary data, so this requires no fundamental changes to the Bitcoin protocol.

I have said many times the source of newly generated Bitcoin’s is I0Coin, making I0Coin the real coinbase, making I0Coin owed immense dollar value, and we now have full circle proof.

I0Coin will be rightly credited whenever Bitcoin developers allow the op_codes to be read by Bitcoin correctly. I0Coin includes this OP_Return code which has its proof-of-ownership to these unspent Bitcoins via Devcoin Auxpow:

"OP_RETURN aa21a9ed1cb281f948723a9c0409a97f7d92accca5cf0c72ce17a12c443b8fcaa1a2e508",

OP_Return is described by Bitcoin Wiki as a “provably prunable output” and we know that I0Coin utilizes a pruned blockchain. This saves space and also is an accepted signature script for proof-of-ownership at a later date… whenever Bitcoin developers allow this Op_code to be read correctly. I0Coin is getting shafted.

Bitcoin’s blockchain is referred to as a “bulletin board” where anyone who sends value from Zerocoins (think I0C) can go back later and claim them (think I0C signature and OP_code being enabled and claiming these unspent Bitcoins). In short, it basically means Bitcoin is not directly mined, but just a digital ledger in the public eye, and it is meant to be reversed to Zercoin (I0C) holders:

Imagine that all users share access to a physical bulletin board. To mint a zerocoin of fixed denomination $1, a user Alice first generates a random coin serial number S, then commits to S using a secure digital commitment scheme. The resulting commitment is a coin, denoted C, which can only be opened by a random number r to reveal the serial number S. Alice pins C to the public bulletin board, along with $1 of physical currency. All users will accept C provided it is correctly structured and carries the correct sum of currency. To redeem her coin C, Alice first scans the bulletin board to obtain the set of valid commitments (C1, . . . , CN ) that have thus far been posted by all users in the system. She next produces a non-interactive zero-knowledge proof π for the following two statements: (1) she knows a C ∈ (C1, . . . , CN ) and (2) she knows a hidden value r such that the commitment C opens to S. In full view of the others, Alice, using a disguise to hide her identity,1 posts a “spend” transaction containing (S, π). The remaining users verify the proof π and check that S has not previously appeared in any other spend transaction. If these conditions are met, the users allow 1 Of course, in the real protocol Alice will emulate this by using an anonymity network such as Tor [9]. Alice to collect $1 from any location on the bulletin board; otherwise they reject her transaction and prevent her from collecting the currency

The proof Bitcoin developers need to allow to be read is called a “Zero Knowledge Proof” and combines with a serial number to reflect proof of ownership via OP_Code that cannot be read on BTC’s ledger:

At the same time, if the commitment and zero-knowledge proof are secure, then Alice cannot double-spend any coin without re-using the serial number S and thus being detected by the network participants.

So that is the reason these Bitcoin’s from I0Coin’s AuxPow reward (via DVC) are not yet spent. I later found 1 instance of a double spend at this particular Bitcoin public key address, which could also trigger chaos!

At this public key address alone, Devcoin has mistakenly awarded 109,175 Bitcoins! At the current Bitcoin price of $6,720 USD, that is equal to $733,656,545.88:

Total (Devcoins, via I0Coin mining) Received…

This isn’t the only address where Bitcoin’s are being created from Devcoins. This has been going on at least since the creation of merge mining in 2011 because it was always thought Bitcoin was the main chain being directly mined. That I have proven is I0Coin and I believe I0Coin to be the one true, original, main chain. A state reorganization and update of the OP_Codes by Bitcoin developers will trigger this. So the truth is out there, why not give the people their due value? Even the one address I have correctly linked to I0Coin is owed $733,656,545.88 USD! Is that not enough of a problem to fix? All that has to be done is for Bitcoin developers to acknowledge the public has the truth, the truth they left to find, and now it is time to move forward.

This article focuses on just one facet of I0Coin and Ixcoin’s true value. If you read my other entries you will understand how Ethereum, Ethereum Classic, Litecoin, and others are also rooted in I0Coin. I0Coin combines with its copy, Ixcoin and the two form a deflationary, 99.99% minted, stable, secure, 42 million coin supply. The root of all crypto.

Donations are appreciated:

I0C: jQW1ZETQEvFJKDekF4DWNKF1N6FT8exDyK

IXC: xYWFvHhN8kDCuAoKytyQupWSawXjnoEKxj

BTX: 13qofNRgFsKr5VL9RKoW1k13sz2vPuYTnp

BTC: 1NCAkNWHwgf9C7irWdcXEGHiabVghNRyYj

B2X (Segwit2x): 1EM9Nrf8s1xfL5fmJwDL87kUQ77VS9EeDx

ETC: 0xace05ed5c296616aab1f35741803e887fb36f7e0

BCH: bitcoincash:qz6jlw7x2wnjfzfrhyglmqrlgdrlpwashcnkd8nul6

LTC: LNLL9GknH56gJF7T7UmGk36z5LBHAuJo8H

--

--

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Daniel R. Treccia

Daniel R. Treccia

Daniel authored two books, one on baseball statistics after a career in pro-baseball and next about how he survived a rare fungal disease + lung removal at 27.