Bitcoin Forum

im looking for someone with some experience to help me with a project that im starting. coin will have a fair launch.  cannot be premined. you will need to be able to adjust the difficulty and block reward. (I am looking to start the coin at extremely high difficulty with a high block reward, and adjust the block reward and difficulty down as the network hash rate goes up) I will be launching a full website, app, pool, and store where the coins could be used to buy merchandise at actually reasonable prices, and coins can be traded in for BTC. please pm me if interested with previous projects that you have been involved with.  

If the hash rate goes up and the difficulty goes down, the rate at which blocks are discovered goes through the roof. How will servers agree on which chain is the right chain? Imagine you have 15 chains all extending at the same time at a rate of several blocks a second -- how do you make sense of that? The vast majority of mining effort will be completely wasted because it was built on a losing chain. This design makes no sense.

not possible then? what about adjusting the block reward to go up as difficulty does? any better ideas? id just like to try something that would keep the payout of coins the same depending on how much computing hardware you have. and not how much you have compared to everyone else

Seems like op is trying to level the playing field maybe and try to make somewhat stable payouts. The amount of coins you get now goes down as difficulty goes up, unless you increase your hashing power. I think op is looking for a way to combat that. So basically xxxx hash will always get you xxxx coins, only the value of the coins can go up or down. I have no clue how one would implement this or if it's even what op is wanting to accomplish.

Interesting and waiting for it.

I must say that i like that concept, even if thats not what the op wants.

thats exactly what im trying to work out. any other ideas?

Then you want to adjust the difficulty normally to keep block generate stable but adjust the block reward based on the difficulty, I think. The problem is that the rate of coin creation will increase exponentially through all time, making the coins most likely a lousy store a value.

Do you think more = lower value simply because as of now, the value of a coin is strictly based on exchange activity? I mean if op really has the plan/means to release a store with the coin wouldn't that affect value more? Say you can buy an item that's worth $10 for 10 coins, but the going exchange rate is only 50 cents, wouldn't there be the incentive for someone to buy the item and resell it versus trading the coin? Wouldn't this have an affect on exchange rates as well? It seems we are limiting our progress on altcoins because we are only focusing on current market conditions, which is strictly tied to how many btc you can get for your coins.

Edit: question
 
Is there any way to limit hashing power per ip?

bump

i've been exploring this, and so far, the answer is no. perhaps a more experienced coder, or dare i say a real bonafide programmer could accomplish it easily, but for the rest of us its a pipe dream

What about a way to make the coin pool only and limit hashrate  with the pool?

Waiting and interesting for it.

Orphancoin.

I like it.

what do you think of a block reward that increases as the difficulty rises. thus continuing to pay workers for the work that they are doing at a simular rate. it would look something like this.

diff.      reward
.0-.5 = 5
.5-1  =7.5
1-1.5=10
1.5-2=12.5

at this rate the revenue would be consistant right? I fully understand that increasing block rewards can possibly devalue the coin. what do you guys think?

You will eventually end up with a block reward that looks like this
http://bitcoindifficulty.com/

The coin eventually be worth $0.

There are lots of really cool ideas in the original implementation of bitcoin. Not all of them need to be "improved upon".

This won't help miners -- creating more coins doesn't create more value. All you've done is ensured that people who hold the currency get screwed by increasing difficulty as well.

total coins created could be the same. with bitcoin the block reward started out high when less hardware and workers were present. flipping the reward system and starting out small and increasing the reward as more hardware is thrown at it. the total coins created could be the same. instead of cutting the reward in half every four years it would increase slightly every month or so

It is possible, and yes, you may have some inflation for some time, which may be a good or a bad thing, I can't foretell. Reminds me of elacoin.
The easier would be to have difficulty adjust to have blocks each n seconds, and then reward = K * difficulty.
This should make a reward tied to your hashrate. You may want to adjust K for Moore's Law, for example start with 1 and halve every 2 years, under the assumption that 1GHps today should be worth more than 1GHps from 2 years in the future where hardware is faster/cheaper.
So mining power increases reward, passing time decreases reward, the balance between these will decide the amount of coins to be ever created, which may be infinite or may converge to a fixed sum, depending on coin adoption and the ability of hardware to keep up with Moore's Law.
If you are serious about paying for having this developed, PM me.

cheers!
gatra

^^This guy right here should make a damn coin. i'd mine it

Seems like you would get a lot of rejects through a proxy. Most I've used are unstable as hell. Then there would be of course vpns and such. I think it wouldn't happen very often though. Idk about others but anytime I've ran through a proxy/vpn I wished I didn't have to.

It's tongue in cheek, but something to consider.

Undoubtedly I'll be looking for an SHA256 alt for my block erupters at some point.

For sure. That's what I'm getting from this thread, op is looking for a way to make a coin for the people with erupters/blades etc. If he's serious about the store, and can figure out a way to stop 100+ghash rigs from taking over, I think it may work.

one tiny little pptp exploit and his ass would be grass

The problem is, he's focused on how to divide up the value without paying any attention to how to *create* the value that will be divided.

so set a base value, say 10millionths of the total amount

so 1 coin, total supply 10 million

*caution pseudocode ahead*

very crude but this would be the basic concept the OP is after, yes?

the coin value will be set at first by the products that would be available (risers, cables, phone cases, ect) small at first. Possibly allow each account to trade for a small amount of BTC as well. Still brainstorming. Any small items that you would like to see in a store at actually reasonable prices?  

Personally I wouldn't invest in a store, with products for sale, with the chance of a big asic coming over and just raping the coin. Seems like op would just be handing over his cash to the first big rig on the network. So I would definitely want to get that worked out before I invested. I was hoping op would be looking at this as he would make profits off of the store/services and miners would profit from the coin.

hence the reason i didn't bother to reply after that last post he made. this is the Vlad saga all over again

So do you think it would be best to give up sha256 and try for scrypt jane or simply scrypt? I mean if he starts the coin up and has services already setup wouldn't that be just as good/successful?

You're focusing too much energy on pleasing the miners, and not enough energy on making a currency that would be a suitable compliment to the existing currencies on the market already.

One of the biggest issues that people talk about with bitcoin is the idea that when the block rewards end, will there be enough transactions every block to warrent miners to continue spending money on electricity to continue mining.  Bitcoin attempts to combat this issue by having a block reward that goes down over time, while at the same time (hopefully) the rewards from transaction fees go up overtime, and at some point when the block reward goes away completely, there will be a smooth transition for the miners, and they will not just immediately jump ship.

What you are proposing would be the opposite of smooth.  You would have a insanely huge block reward at the very last block before it stopped.  Then suddenly you would go from say a block reward of 250,000 plus 25 for transaction fees, to 25.  What's going to happen when that happens?  Everyone will stop mining immediately and switch to another coin.  Your network hashrate will drop to nearly nothing, and suddenly your coin will be extremely vulnerable to a 51% attack!  It will be a sudden death scenario for your coin.  With this in mind, the coin will never get off the ground in the first place, because everyone will be aware that one day the coin suddenly dies.

The issue of block rewards going away at some point is a more interesting problem to solve.  And Sunny King has made two attempts at solving it now.
1) PPC, with proof of stake rewards
2) Primecoin with a block reward that goes back up as difficulty goes down (exact opposite of what you are proposing)

So, like i said earlier.  If you really want to contribute something meaningful to the crypto currency community.  Start by looking at the real issues with bitcoin, and trying to find solutions for them.  And this doesn't mean focusing on the miners profits.

than is not entirely a correct socioeconomic assumption.

I predict/predicted a lot more of this stuff if/when ASICs are finally prolific and start to gain market traction , with out that simple principal BTC was probably dead in the water.   

so the next iteration of this story is undoubtedly the "SHA-256 alternative evolution"

now to address value:

it would be simplistic to just claim the "rarity" in its self only causes "value" we would be missing a huge and growing market of ASIC owners, creating a huge and growing information environment, there could be "innovations" in here that will duly provide a mechanism that market agrees is "valuable"

or , of course it could all fail miserably .

but the "Alternative SHA-265 evolution" will mean that real ASIC companies are producing and shipping.

Would it be possible to use both sha256 and scrypt in one block chain? Running the algos separate, but requiring both to return true values to solve the block? Just showing my true noob colors and thinking out loud here......

Why not?
Almost anything is possible.