The world of tech is full of buzzwords and jargon that seems to change faster than many can keep up with. Never fear. DevSpeak is here! Today, we’re learning all about virtual machines!
Imagine you have a powerful computer at home, capable of handling many tasks simultaneously. Now, picture this computer being able to run not just one, but several different “mini-computers” inside it. Each of these mini-computers can run its own software, operate independently, and even have its own operating system. Sounds like science fiction? It’s actually a reality, thanks to something called a Virtual Machine (VM). If you’ve ever wondered how a single computer can do so many things at once, or how developers test software in different environments without needing multiple physical computers, you’re about to find out!
Virtual Machine, Defined
A virtual machine is basically a computer within a computer. Imagine your computer is a big, fancy hotel with several rooms. Each room can be rented out separately and has its own furniture, decor, and amenities. The hotel is your physical computer, and each room represents a virtual machine.
Just like rooms within a hotel can be used for different purposes, each virtual machine can run different types of software and operate under different operating systems (like Windows, Linux, or macOS) and perform different tasks. For example, a software developer might use one VM to test a new app on Windows, while another VM runs a different app on Linux.
Virtual Machines are incredibly useful in various situations:
Testing and Development: Developers often need to test their applications in different environments to ensure compatibility. Instead of buying and setting up multiple computers, they use VMs to simulate those environments.
Simulation of Different Environments: If you need to use software that only runs on a specific operating system, you can create a VM that runs that OS without affecting your main computer.
Security: By isolating potentially risky software or browsing activities within a VM, you can protect your main operating system from malware and other threats.
Better Development Through VMs
Let’s walk back to your hypothetical hotel. Regardless of how many rooms it has, those rooms are what they are and can’t be changed without sinking some remodeling money into it. Not the case with virtual machines. You can easily adjust your environments to do what you need them to when you need them to do it.
There are lots of ways that a VM could be leveraged for more effective use of digital tools, beyond just making yourself a fresh computer environment.
Cloud Computing: Many cloud services use VMs to provide resources on-demand. If you run a website, your traffic demands aren’t exactly consistent all the time. Cloud providers can use VMs to handle high traffic by creating more VMs to accommodate more visitors. When traffic decreases, they can easily reduce the number of VMs to optimize cost and resources.
Resource Efficiency: Virtual Machines maximize your use of physical hardware. Instead of having one physical server for each task, you can run multiple VMs on a single server. This not only saves space but also reduces energy consumption and hardware costs.
Disaster Recovery: VMs play a crucial role in backup and disaster recovery plans. If a VM crashes or gets corrupted, you can quickly restore it from a backup without affecting the entire system. This is akin to having those multiple hotel rooms in the above example. Say one room floods… you’ve got other rooms to move guests to that provide the exact same quality night’s stay.
Sandboxing: Developers and security professionals often use VMs as “sandboxes” where they can experiment with new software or analyze potential threats without risking their main operating system. This also can be referred to as “staging”. You copy your main environment to the stage or sandbox, then implement your changes there first. That way, if you bork your whole site or app, the part you need to stay working stays working undisturbed.
You’re Virtually an Expert Now!
In essence, Virtual Machines transform a single physical computer into a versatile, multi-functional tool.. They provide immense flexibility, efficiency and safety in computing. Whether it’s for running multiple operating systems, testing new software, or managing resources efficiently in the cloud, VMs are a cornerstone of modern technology.
Next time you use a cloud service or hear about tech-savvy developers working on different systems, you’ll be a little wiser about what this all means.
We’ll be back with another DevSpeak before too long… there’s so much jargon out there and so little time! Have a topic you want us to cover? Let us know on Discord!
Proof-of-Work (PoW) is a consensus mechanism used in blockchain networks to validate transactions and secure the network.
Proof-of-Work (PoW) was the pioneering consensus mechanism that laid the groundwork for blockchain technology. It has since been joined by several other alternatives, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. Several of these alternatives will be explored below.
It is the method by which network participants, known as miners, solve complex mathematical problems to add new blocks of transactions to the blockchain. Think of it as a competitive puzzle-solving race where the first participant to solve the puzzle gets to add the next block to the blockchain and is rewarded for their effort.
Gold Fever
Bitcoin has often been referred to as “digital gold” for several reasons: First, it has a finite total supply, just like gold buried within the rocks of the earth. Next, it acts as a store of value in the same way as gold, providing an alternative way to hold wealth to the world’s Fiat* currencies.
* “Fiat currency” is derived from the Latin “fiat,” which means a determination by an authority, or an arbitrary order. Basically, Fiat currencies are those decided upon and approved by governmental authorities… they have value because an authority told us they do.
Finally, Bitcoin resembles gold because it must be mined, converting time and energy into the retrieval of BTC for miners. In the same way, gold miners must commit financial resources, time and energy into their operations. A miner who only expects to find a few specks of gold can probably do so in a wise location with only simple panning equipment, but a large company with employees and equipment expenses needs to mine a great deal more gold to prove a profitable venture.
How Does Proof-of-Work Work?
Transaction Bundling: When users initiate transactions, these are grouped together into a block by miners.
Puzzle Solving: Miners compete to solve a cryptographic puzzle, which involves finding a hash (a fixed-length string of characters) that meets specific criteria. This process is computationally intensive and requires significant processing power. Most of these computations are executed by GPUs (Graphics Processing Unit) because of their ability to quickly perform extremely complex calculations.
Block Validation: The first miner to solve the puzzle broadcasts their solution to the network, which is then verified by other miners. If the solution is correct, the block is added to the blockchain.
Reward: The miner who successfully adds the block is rewarded with newly created cryptocurrency and any transaction fees from the transactions included in the block.
Security: PoW secures the blockchain by making it computationally expensive to alter any part of the blockchain. To change a block, an attacker would need to redo the PoW for that block and all subsequent blocks, requiring immense computational power.
Decentralization: PoW allows a decentralized network of miners to compete to validate transactions, reducing the risk of central control.
Integrity: It ensures that all transactions are processed in a trustless manner, meaning participants do not need to trust a central authority but can trust the network’s consensus rules.
“Consensus” in web3 – An agreement between all participants in a blockchain network on the order and content of blockchain blocks.
Proof-of-Work Simplified
Imagine a large-scale Sudoku competition where participants race to solve the puzzle. The first one to complete it correctly gets a prize and publishes their solution, which others can quickly verify as correct or incorrect.
Think of the PoW puzzle as a lock and the solution as the key. Each miner tries different keys (hash values) until one fits (meets the criteria). The first one to unlock the lock (solve the puzzle) can add a new block to the blockchain and collect its associated rewards.
Energy Consumption: PoW requires significant computational power, which translates to high energy consumption, raising a plethora of environmental concerns. This concern has been the primary driver of development of alternative consensus mechanisms in web3.
Centralization Risks: Despite being a decentralized mechanism, PoW can lead to centralization of mining power in regions with cheap electricity or in the hands of entities that can afford specialized hardware. Some people worry that mining operations will become overly centralized with this approach, especially if reward value continues to increase at a level that will justify large scale operations and great expense.
Scalability Issues: PoW networks, like Bitcoin, face scalability challenges due to the time and resources required to solve the cryptographic puzzles and add new blocks.
Alternatives to Proof-of-Work
In response to these challenges, alternative consensus mechanisms have been developed, such as Proof-of-Stake (PoS), which relies on validators who stake their cryptocurrency to propose and validate blocks, requiring less computational power.
Proof-of-Stake (PoS)
The main alternative to Proo-of-Work is Proof-of-Stake, in which Validators stake their cryptocurrency to participate in the network. They are selected to create new blocks based on the amount of staked cryptocurrency.
Strengths
Energy-efficient: Significantly less energy consumption compared to PoW.
Faster transaction times: Can process transactions more quickly.
Weaknesses
Potential for centralization: Wealthier validators can have greater influence.
Security risks: Vulnerable to attacks like the “nothing-at-stake” problem (when the cost to create blocks becomes too low).
With this mechanism, token holders vote for delegates who validate blocks. With fast transaction times, this method closely resembles PoS but with increased scalability. However, decentralization is reduced because more staking power can be concentrated in the hands of fewer delegates. Plus, if delegates are compromised for any reason, things can go awry for the chain.
Other Consensus Mechanisms
Proof-of-Authority (PoA): Relies on a pre-selected group of validators to validate transactions.
Proof-of-Burn (PoB): Requires users to destroy cryptocurrency to become a validator.
Proof-of-Capacity (PoC): Uses hard drive space as a measure of stake.
Proof of Storage (PoS): Validators prove they are storing data to secure the network and earn rewards.
GalaChain is a highly advanced blockchain, first built by our web3 experts to accommodate the rapidly expanding and evolving needs of gaming and entertainment.
It uses a special hybrid model of pluggable blockchain consensus. GalaChain was built on the Hyperledger Fabric protocol, which allows consensus to be highly customizable on individual channels. An Ordering Service works with predesignated peers on the network to sign transactions in a multi-step, asynchronous system.
Despite its criticisms, PoW remains a foundational technology in the blockchain space, particularly for major cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Innovations and improvements in mining technology and energy efficiency are being explored to mitigate its environmental impact. Even as other consensus mechanisms are introduced, Proof-of-Work elements will still be used in a growing variety of hybrid consensus models.
Even if Proof-of-Work is gradually phased out of prominence as a consensus mechanism, it will continue to work well as an educational basis to help anyone understand the decentralized nature of blockchains and cryptocurrencies.
Proof-of-Work is a vital component of many blockchain networks, providing security, decentralization and integrity. Understanding PoW is essential for grasping how blockchain technology works and its implications for the future of digital transactions and decentralized systems.
Today we’re announcing a new partnership with Coinflow, our newest credit card payment processor. This collaboration aims to provide our users with a seamless credit card payment experience, ensuring flexibility and reliability in transactions across our platform.
Expanding Payment Options
In our ongoing commitment to enhance user experience, we are finalizing the implementation of Coinflow as an additional payment processor. This strategic move will offer our users another option for credit card payments, complementing our existing service. By doing so, we ensure that our community has robust and flexible payment solutions, reducing potential disruptions and enhancing overall transaction reliability.
Our integration rollout plan with Coinflow has commenced with a wide variety of eligible purchases in the Gala Games store. All items that had Stripe credit card purchases as a payment option should now show the CoinFlow option.
This initial phase will allow us to test and optimize the new payment processor before extending its use to our broader range of products in Music and Film, and add support for Google and Apple Pay.
For the first days of the new Coinflow payment option, Coinflow purchasers will receive a special 5% rebate for a limited time delivered as $GALA at the time of fulfillment (rebate amounts may fluctuate). Enjoy this exclusive rebate as we celebrate this new integration!
Start of Coinflow Rebate: 1pm PT, July 30th
We are enthusiastic about this partnership with Coinflow and the added convenience it brings to our users. Stay tuned for more updates as we roll out this feature and continue to innovate within the GalaChain ecosystem.
Thank you for being a part of our journey. Together, we are reshaping the future of decentralized entertainment and beyond.
This proposal addresses the need for a more refined emission mechanism in light of factors impacting burn rates. Currently, the halving schedule can result in abrupt changes in token distribution, especially if burn rates cause the supply to decrease beyond what is currently considered a current “tier”. This can lead to an inelegant doubling of token emissions as halving tiers oscillate between emissions tiers. This could disrupt the economic stability of our ecosystem.
A smoother emission curve is proposed to ensure a stable and predictable token issuance, promoting long-term growth and stability.
Proposal Overview
I propose replacing the current halving schedule with a daily emission model. This model would emit 0.25% of the remaining gap between the total supply and the max supply each day. This change aims to create a more predictable and stable emission curve, aligning with the evolving needs of our ecosystem. This is based on a proposal submitted by Lukabylie, the creator of the WEN token.
Proposal Details
Background and Rationale
Factors affecting burn rates can cause the token emission to fluctuate, making the current halving tiers inefficient and unpredictable, especially if a source of significant burns enters the ecosystem. A situation where the emission is oscillating between two “tiers” would be severely suboptimal.
A daily emission model at 0.25% of the remaining gap between the total supply and the max supply offers a gradual and consistent token release, better suiting the current economic realities of the whole ecosystem.
Implementation Plan
Terminate the current halving schedule immediately.
Implement the daily emission model. The emission will be calculated as 0.25% of the remaining gap between the total supply and the max supply.
Following implementation, all documentation will be updated to reflect this change.
Expected Outcomes
Stability: Reducing the market shocks associated with halving events will promote a more stable economic environment.
Predictability: A smoother emission curve provides clearer expectations for node operators and potential investors, aiding in long-term planning and investment strategies.
Governance and Voting
This proposal should be subjected to a governance vote, requiring a majority approval from Founder’s Node operators.
The voting period should last for at least one week, ensuring ample time for all operators to participate and voice their opinions.
Vote Details
Voting Period: Voting will be open for a period of 1 week, starting with the announcement of this proposal.
Eligibility: All Founder’s Node operators (1 vote per Founder’s Node)
Majority Requirement: a simple majority of 51% will be required to pass this proposal.
Vote Question
Should the $GALA dynamic halving schedule transition to a system in which 0.25% of the difference between Total Supply and Max Supply is emitted daily?
Yes: I am in favor of this emission update for more stable and predictable token emissions.
No: I am not in favor of this update and have voted that emissions should remain with the dynamic halving tier-based system.
Conclusion
Transitioning to a daily emission model at 0.25% of the remaining gap between the total supply and the max supply represents the strategic adaptation and evolution of our ecosystem.
I encourage all stakeholders to consider this proposal carefully and ask Gala to put it forward as a vote in favor of a more stable and predictable emission strategy.
The world of poker has been in full riot the past week. The game of poker isn’t a stranger to controversy, and any game as old as poker is going to have some growing pains along the way.
The final table of the World Series of Poker this year was… divisive, to say the least. What happened on the felt wasn’t necessarily the big issue though. If you haven’t been paying attention to this controversy, let’s take a few minutes to dive into it together.
This is a very important moment in the greater world of gaming. How we use digital tools in games will be a topic that comes up over and over throughout the entire industry.
Spoilers: We’ll be discussing the final table of this year’s World Series of Poker Main Event. If you don’t want to be spoiled on the final table until you get around to watching it, don’t read further!
Solvers on the Rail
On Wednesday, July 17th, Jonathan Tamayo won the 55th annual World Series of Poker Main Event. He outlasted 10,111 other players and won the grand prize – a championship bracelet and a cool $10 million. He defeated amateur Jordan Griff in heads-up play to take home the championship.
Jonathan Tamayo is the 2024 World Champion!
Tamayo takes home the $10,000,000 top prize in the largest WSOP Main Event in history!
— WSOP – World Series of Poker (@WSOP) July 18, 2024
Tamayo is a great player. That’s not where this controversy lies. In his decade plus career, he’s proven time and again that he can sit with and beat the best.
Also, the main event of the World Series of Poker isn’t exactly the exclusive club it used to be with a few dozen tables featuring a few hundred of the greats. Nowadays five figures of players are getting in on the action. The main event has become a mental endurance test… a test that Tamayo passed with flying colors.
The real controversy was behind the table though, at the rail. Sitting on the sidelines, Tamayo’s friends rooted him on. Also fellow pro poker players, Tamayo would be crazy to not occasionally ask for their advice on a tough call within the game. This is pretty normal practice. Coaching is allowed.
The real trouble started when everyone watching at home could see what was going on at his friends’ spectator table. A laptop sat there facing away from the playing area. Clearly visible on the laptop screen was a popular poker simulation platform. As Tamayo told his friends about the hand pre-flop, they’d punch in the cards and determine his exact odds on certain calls.
I have to be honest here…if this really is the future of tournament poker I'm not interested at all. @PatMoorePoker 📸 This railbird team coaching stuff has to be curtailed it isn't going to grow the game we love it will only stunt the growth. Regardless of the stakes. pic.twitter.com/mkvqa5NxZ5
Tamayo claimed that he had no idea what his friends were doing at the rail… but in this picture captured by a spectator, you can clearly see both the stream and the solver pulled up and ready to go just as easily as Tamayo can…
For a seasoned pro, this isn’t a huge advantage. Most people who make their living playing poker can tell you exactly what the odds are for any hand pre-flop against random hands to two decimals… this is elementary stuff for competitive poker. Using AI and algorithmic analysis to verify and simulate this information against different hand sizes and differing chip stack sizes does give someone an advantage over just using their more fallible head math.
These poker problem solvers have been used more frequently both online and in person, with numerous pros having been caught sneaking analysis on their phones in recent years. Still, poker governance authorities are really yet to define the hard line on what constitutes cheating.
After this main event, they may have their hand forced.
How Far Is Unfair?
It’s important to note that Tamayo says he had no idea that his friends were going to bring a laptop. He claims he was asking for normal coaching and had little clue what was happening outside the rail.
“I mean, that stuff wasn’t under my control. My job was to play. Joe and Dom were giving me advice. I didn’t tell them to bring anything. You know, whatever was on there was on there. My job was to play. You have to be pretty narrow-minded when you’re playing. All the other external stuff is just wasted energy.”
This looks bad though. We have a professional player playing against an amateur in the biggest poker tournament in the world. The professional is not only getting help from two other professionals (one of whom is a previous main event bracelet winner), but also a dedicated computer program designed to solve poker problems.
The World Series of Poker has been clear about not allowing poker solvers in play. How does that apply to coaches on the rail though? How did it feel for Jordan Griff playing against not only a seasoned professional, but two sideline opinions with more experience than him backed up by AI?
All in all, Griff is handling what could be considered a $4m cheat with surprising grace.
Griff spoke to Doug Polk Poker’s podcast about the issue. He was totally unaware of what was going on at Tamayo’s sideline. He had assumed that if anything going on was nefarious that the WSOP floor team would step in.
“I’m sure in their mind if they knew they were doing something wrong they’re like ‘oh, well they’ll just tell us to put the laptop away’. I don’t think there was any serious repercussions people thought would come out of that.”
-Jordan Griff on Doug Polk Poker
Griff still walked away with $6 million, so not a week of work to whine about. As he discussed on Doug Polk’s podcast above, the most disappointing thing is that everybody is talking about someone trying to scrimp any unfair advantage they can get instead of the uplifting success stories that are always around in such a massive tournament.
Regardless of any double standard, many poker fans think that a solver isn’t an actual advantage for a professional of this caliber.
We don’t know exactly how they were using the solver, but there are ways that it could’ve clearly tipped the balance. Were they referencing the stream to see what cards Griff was holding each hand, then punching that into their sim? If so, they could’ve gotten incredibly insight into his tendencies over hundreds of hands that Tamayo never would’ve been able to glean on his own.
We’ll probably never know how much the solver helped Tamayo. In theory, however, Dominic Nitsche and Joseph McKeehen definitely thought that it would help their buddy. Otherwise, why would they even bother?
“You think you’re getting heads-up, and you’re playing against – you know – robots now,” Griff summed up. “Optically … it’s not what you want to see at final table.”
A Gaming-Wide Problem
What constitutes fair? Especially when we’re using technology to actually engage with a game, what level of human intellect is required to be considered “fair play”?
Far more poker happens online than in person. If they aren’t even hiding that they’re doing it at the biggest in-person table in the world, surely these programs are being used all the time online in big money games. What’s most interesting in this regard is that Jordan Griff is considered one of the biggest online players in the world. Jonathan Tamayo, on the other hand, is traditionally a live tournament player.
There’s a lot of big questions here and not just for poker. Due to poker’s highly mathematical mechanics, it’s typically more straightforward to build a program to simulate it than for more convoluted games… but that doesn’t mean robust tools won’t rise for other competitive games.
Let’s start with the obvious… would a casino put up with this behind a player at a blackjack table? Of course not! Would this be acceptable in competitive chess? Definitely not.
Let’s take it further. Think about strategy games you may have played, where addons and external tools are often ubiquitous. In this day of AI, where is that line between unfair help and fair help? Most ToS on video games specific one player to one account… if you’re using the abilities of tons of programmers in a tool, is that really one human player to one account?
These are big questions… and ones I definitely don’t have the answer to. The entire world of gaming will have eyes on The World Series of Poker and the Nevada Gaming Commission, however, to see what their next steps are. How they react to this controversy will have echoes across the gaming industry for years to come.
The Future of Gaming Aids
It’s important to discuss these things, because culture will decide in these moments what’s acceptable in the future. How we incorporate technology into play and competition will change the trajectory of the human race… for better or for worse.
Where do you think that line is? Do you have a hot take or a path forward from this issue?
Bring your opinions over to #gala-gold or #general-chat-gala so that we can all see multiple perspectives on this really complicated issue. There’s no easy answer, and discussion is the best way to form educated viewpoints and find real solutions.
This is also a great topic for some great table talk!
Hop into Sweep It Poker today to take down some juicy pots while you discuss it with your poker buddies at the tables!
