Bitcoin Forum

Preliminary HazardCoin features:

Retarget every 6 hours
5 minute block target time

^ Both largely irrelevant because... Block reward will be based on the amount of time passed since last block found. This unique mechanism will set it apart from all other altcoins, and also accomplishes the following:

* Make premining and instamining impossible
* Keep a steady and predictable coin generation rate
* DDOSing pools to decrease difficulty will accomplish absolutely nothing
* Discourage pool/coin hopping
* Provide incentive to continue mining even when network hash rate goes down (i.e. feathercoin)

The biggest place other altcoins have failed is in how they have been released. To ensure the smoothest launch possible:

* Release date will be announced at least 24 hours in advance.
* Password protected zip files containing the binaries will be posted 30 mins before release.
* By design, the coin will be impossible to premine or instamine

I will be creating the first pool for this server @ http://hzc.hackshardgaming.net As soon as it is ready.

oh ......

so ....

Third!

Don't call it hazard coins please. xP

Rename it to HackShardCoin. whatchall think?

put me on dev team, i am sure i can contribute something totally useless to this project.

Oh dear sweet moses. Let this be a joke. . .

Bad name. Peaple want saftey in their currency. Please don't name it this.

So... just how big is the reward for the first block? .. the number of seconds since Jan 1 1970? :>

I personally like the name Hazardcoin... sort of a sick irony behind it.

Timecoin, do it.

I'll just be over here thinking of Daisy Duke ... heck, 'Duke Coin' or 'Daisy Coin' would be better ..

WHYcoin?

Block reward for the first 5 blocks (including the genesis block) will be set to zero.

Hmm, how about WTFcoin

HackShardCoin or bust.

I like the idea, put some thought into it, anounce it a week early and your coin may be a player

How many total coins and over what period of time, since this will affect what the block rewards are.

Stop it

Well, here's my thoughts. People, myself included, have started arguing a lot about deflationary vs inflationary coins, aka hard cap with set block reward drop at given intervals vs not dropping the reward or possibly increasing it. There's a whiny little tiff amongst us about which would be most successful both long and short term.

Obviously, all you need to release a new coin is code and a genesis block, so.

Who wants to do a socioeconomic experiment? :D

I like the concept, I like the announcement and that you give it some time to launch. I say to all the naysayers: if you're not interested, then don't clog and bump up the thread each time you post nonsense.

Keep up the good work Hazard, I'm a believer.

Name idea: TimeCoin

What is the function for the decreased payout, most importantly for anything below the target time of 5 minutes?

Total number of this coin will be ... ?

fali!!!!!!!

Approximately 42 trillion.

Scammer dont trust he ruined elacoim

FAILED SCAMMER NOW TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A JOKE, AFTER BEING CAUGHT SABOTAGING ELACOIN AND PRE-MINING 1300 BLOCKS! SCAMMER TAG PLEASE!

Gotto love how you NOW try to make it seem like it was a joke the whole time, AFTER you are caught pre-mining and sabotaging another coin launch. Ha ha, pathetic scammer.

You don't seem to understand what that word means. I suggest you don't use it.

And the 42 trillion is a serious number. Count on it.

Hazard,

what happened witht he prerelease of elacoin, where you were given the source to create a winbin, but then a block chain premine of ~1.5k coins appeared?

Explain that as Im sure anyone using your coin will want to know exactly what occurred.

Timecoin already exists noobs.
He can use another name for "Time" though ... like the ancient Greek word khronos

So Chronocoin

You're welcome.

Most of the names suck... Even "Bitcoin"..

I know that I'll catch flak for saying it, it might be fine amongst geeks and cryptocurrency enthusists,but your average person on the street just doesn't like the sound of the name.. It doesn't sound official, It doesn't sound like something you'd discuss on wall street, It doesn't sound right in a bank ( I know I had a conversation with my bank manager about cryptocurrencies ) and it sure as hell doesn't sound right coming out of the presenter on the finnacial news show... and wide spread adoption is the aim after all...

So why not call it something that does sound a little more professional... like "Global Trading Credit(s)"

I love how we just get this good idea about how to deal with premines and stuff and everyones like "BUT HE SABOTAGED ELACOIN OH GOD HES A SCAMMER!", like srsly ppl just replaced "premine" with whatever accusations they have. Whatever happened it's in between shake and him, so go and put your 2 cents on some other part of the internet. xD

oh the name.. oh..

Some good ideas in here. Timecoin sounds good too.  :D
The coin art could contain this latin sentence too: tempus fugit
 8)

I was given the source of elacoin to compile, which I did, fired up the client, and found that a 1360 blockchain (see: premine) existed. I posted on the forums about it and dumped the source. See page 22 of the original thread.

Not much else to see there, really.

I like the part where the global trading credits were used to pump and dump trillions in mortgages, no one went to jail, and even the foreclosure process is kicking the wrong people out of their houses, and even the govt gave up trying to clean up the mess.

Yes banks are entirely trustable.

Like that time in Cyprus when they froze all the accounts then took a %age of everyone's savings to save the banks and the economy from their mismanagement...

examples abound.

I also was sent the source.  Saw the PM 5 minutes before launch.  By the time I got it running, it was around 5000 blocks.  People were pounding that thing like it owed them money.  Then I got accused of being the preminer.

I punted due to what Hazard aptly described as "Drama Llama" in another thread.

I like how when I fill up my car, shop for groceries or pay my utilities I keep getting asked "can we have that in bitcoin"....... I mean seriously just get rid of MTGOX and watch the value soar...

Hazard, are you still planning on releasing this?

Yeah

i think he wont since the FC2 has just been released,
but keep it till FC2 to the end, we will have another alt-coin  ;D

lol, 42 trillion coins  ;D.

I believe bitcoin is said to continue to produce coins for mining until 2140, so about 132 years after it was introduce.

So if we used that number in our calculation and figure that each block will take exactly 5 mins to mine.  We'll get the reward for each block to be 3,026,843 coins or about 10,089 coins for each second it takes to mine a block.

coiioioins ruleleuleueul

Development update:

From the outset, the main problem with this concept was figuring out how to combat the timestamp manipulation vector of attack. As it is decentralized, there is no centrally agreed upon time in the bitcoin network. There exists a network mean time, and the bitcoin client will accept a block as a valid if the timestamp of a new block is within 2 hours of the network mean time. This is obviously an unacceptable window. It would be possible to decrease the window from 2 hours to something more reasonable, say, 30 seconds, but this would require every client on the network to synchronize their system clocks. Not exactly an elegant solution.

Development may shift towards a difficulty oriented method of deciding how many coins are minted if the community deems synchronizing times as an unacceptable solution.

Thoughts?

Looks very interesting, watching this one. :)

Food for thought http://www.cs.vu.nl/~spyros/papers/Gossip-Based%20Clock%20Synchronization%20for%20Large%20Decentralized%20Systems.pdf

5 minute block target time

^ Both largely irrelevant because... Block reward will be based on the amount of time passed since last block found.

So if target is 5 min, it takes 5 constantly. Then block rewards based on amount of time between 2 blocks is constant. Instamine well make diff 1 at the start yet then still some people get more :D

beautiful idea, but very hard to implement.
don't wait for it, not gonna happen....

it completely eliminates main security and synchronisation mechanism of all cryptos - blockchain height comparison.

you would have to make more work than all altcoins combined.

-distributed decentralised clock synchronisation
-new base for choosing the main tree branch, lets say the "power of chain" not height.
-PoC would have to be last n blocks mooving average difficulty.
-completely new protocol, choosing highest block in the time between blocks, not based on pre defined difficulty.
-temporary keeping of the highest block up to new_block_event

just my 30 sec idea, propably flaved

Looks cool to me  ;)

How is development coming?

Would this coin address the inevitable dump that comes after a coin reaches a exchange?

I'm currently considering either a time or difficulty based solution

Time based: X coins generated per hour. Coins are effectively distributed by the percentage of hash power you contribute to the network. Subsidy reduction not necessary.

Difficulty based: Amount of coins generated scales relative to difficulty. Amount of coins generated per MHash remains flat, no matter how many miners are on the network. Subsidy reduction would be in accordance with Moore's Law.

I believe both of these address a lot of the problems recent altcoins have had with their launches, although the difficulty based solution is far more easier to implement that the time based one.

There's nothing to prevent what people choose to do with their coin. But, by design, there won't be the "early miners with a ton of coins" scenario that we've seen play out multiple times, so people won't have tons of easily acquired coins that they could just dump.

42 trillion :D

well, this are 2 completely different concepcts, and none of them is even slightly close to the original

1. time based reward

this is fail by design. super unfair distibution. you cannot distribute by time based on global difficulty and current protocol.

2. difficulty based reward

nothing is changed, just another altcoin.

Can't you use existing time services to sync the clients something like this maybe: http://www.ntp.org/ ?

False, this is exactly what the original concept hoped to be. If there is 1 coin generated per second, coins are effectively distributed by hashing power percentage.

False, this solution also addresses all the issues I laid out in the OP.

I also thought about time-based reward, with the motivation to: a) remove the need for difficulty recalculation and b) limit the expansion of hashrate of the network. What about the following idea: blocks are defined by time. All transactions are timestamped by the issuers and block is formed from all transactions which fall within a specified time window since the last block. That way it's useless to start mining before the block 'matures'. Blocks which are broadcasted too early and do not contain all the transactions within the time window will be rejected.

Would it be possible to track the number of non-mining transactions, and factor that into some kind of algorithm that would lower the block reward when transactions were high, and raise it when transactions were low? Within certain parameters, of course. Unbounded reward limits could lead to undesirable concentrations due to perfectly normal fluctuations in the amount of transactions that have occurred since the last adjustment.

So that the almost empty blocks will get most rewards? This will again benefit early miners.

you should let the first thousand blocks no rewards

Good point, I hadn't considered that.

Hope2907 partially addressed that:


Also, you would keep the reward between an upper and lower amount, so that even when transactions are very very low, you still aren't getting a billion coins per block.

Another thing to add to it would be to make the number that you apply to your block reward calculations be a ratio of transaction amounts to mined coins, and then in the beginning, all someone would have to do would be to pass a small amount of coins between two wallets to prevent the block reward from going up. And it should be a % change to the block reward rather than an amount of coins

How about using an algorithm that cannot be done on a GPU? Something that needs single threaded performance. RSA comes to mind, as I think the CPU performance is much higher than when you run it on a GPU.  There is probably something better out there.  This will put the currency in the hands of the users that want to use the coin, instead of miner that buy the most GPUs.  Also, there are tons of scrypt based altcoins already.