Bitcoin Forum

UPD: Please explain your opinion in comments ;)

Hello!

Here is another proposal about BitMonero change influenced by a group of miners. In case community will decide we need to change this we will do this. I'm ok with any of these curves in case miners agree to send excess coins to donations. The bigger change will be adopted the more excess coins needs to be sent.

Emission curve variants

https://i.imgur.com/jSu2EQU.png

Changing procedure

First of all we need to decide here what kind of curve is best and how many coins we agree to send to donations in case change will happen. This is the purpose of this voting post.

In case most of people here will choose not to change - we will stay with current curve.
In case most of people will choose to change - we will implement curve switch to the most wanted one.

A necessary condition to actually do a curve switch is to collect excess coins from miners (see below).

Curve switch will happen gradually during 1-2 weeks and will be started as soon as 75% daemons will be updated. This is the place where miners can say "yes" or "no" to emission curve change.

Excess coins

In case of switch there will be a number "excess" of coins emitted that we have to send back to community: for donations, promotions and other activities that helps BitMonero to become better. Sending "excess" coins to community is voluntary: each miner decides himself how many coins he agrees to send. Table below provides average number of "excess" coins we have to collect. In case we fail to collect them - emission curve change will be unfair.

Here are rougth calculations of "excess" coins amount on height 20K (now we are on 12K):

Switch to curve 21: 172K coins
Switch to curve 22: 260K coins
Switch to curve 23: 324K coins

Please say in comments to this post how many coins do you (personally) agree to send back to community. This will help to calculate if we are able to do chain switch fairly.

I'm against of forced discount of already emitted coins because this destroys trust to development team. Voluntary donations is the only fair way to do this.

Comkort voting

Don't forget to vote for BitMonero on comkort exchange: https://comkort.com/vote ;)

I proposed the discount/exchange but I have revised my position and I'm now against it as well, because it is too confusing and some people feel like their coins are being taken away. Whatever other merits there might be, that's too high a price to pay.

Another solution is to temporarily reduce emissions until the new curve is reached. This can probably be done gradually over a period of a month or two. Maybe it isn't quite as "fair" (tough word to define) as everyone giving back their coins, but from the point of view of anyone mining after the new curve is reached, it is pretty much the same (no "extra" coins will have been given out before they joined). I am in favor of either this or the crowdfunding approach.

I'm in favor of the 21 curve. I suggest this be done by leaving the formula alone and changing the block target back to two minutes. The original premise for one minute was to help solo mining. Solo mining is already difficult and new miners are complaining that they often don't get anything, and the coin is only a week old! The increased orphans created by one minute blocks are not a worthwhile trade off.

Failing that I would adjust the formula to the 21 curve.

I will submit my vote to the poll as well as this comment.

I will donate half my coins if the switch is made. It is also conditional on merged mining not being implemented because in that case I will likely sell all my coins and focus my attention elsewhere. Right now that would be about 10k coins. That might be different later.

Probably the first purpose of collected "excess" coins would be pool development?

GUI wallet or pool would be the first priority I would say, but we should probably have some kind of voting process for bounties?

I agree on voting on bounties.

I would prefer the switch to 21, but I'm not sure miners will really give their coins up.  So I think in the real world we will be stuck with 21.

In any case, we should start pooling large bounties in order to get a pool up and a GUI.

Are  the BitMoneros supposed to be send back to community if those BitMoneros were bought from miner?

Good question!

+1 for 21K curve.
I doubt we need more than this height

Yes they are. It doesn't matter where you got them, we are still asking everyone to donate half their coins, and if that is done, the total number of coins being created will also be cut in half.

Please understand that you are not losing value by doing this. You are reducing the number of your coins, but the total number of everyone's coins and newly mined coins is also being correspondingly reduced, so each coin should be worth about twice as much.

If double the intended number of coins weren't being given out, you wouldn't have been able to buy those coins at that price. They would have been more expensive (roughly twice as expensive, most likely).

There is an obviously relationship between the number of coins being given out and their price. Look at coins that pay out a million coins per block, their coins are obviously worth much less than similar coins that pay out 10 or 20 coins per block. it's all relative.

Did you mean stuck with 20 (the current)

I don't believe it is the case. My other proposed alternative is switch to 21, but then temporarily reduce the output for a transition period until the total coins agrees with 21, then use 21 going forward from that point.

If some people donate to the community (crowdfunding), the transition period can be shortened.

I've already pledged ~5% of the total coins in circulation.


How are large bounties ever going to happen if people don't donate?

I voted 22 so the inflation is not to big in the beginning, but remain steady for a long time.

But I don't think donation will work,
I'm more for a smooth change in the reward formula over 1 month.

would it be better to leave this coin alone. It seems it is now Fractured.
If coin continues then so be it. Let miners cont to mine coin as is.
Honey penny for example is building on BCN. There are a a lot of individual that are very Knowledgeable. could this coin be developed to include private messaging, Proof of work, and proof of stake. Perhaps, other mechanism Duration of mining. This to encourage mining in The distant future.add colored coins ability. Just a thought. I realize this maybe stupid.
I don't see necessity to fund project. Developers wold be among Earliest adopters. If it is a great Idea than it will Succeed. If you build it the Miners will Come. And so the more users the greater the Demand-the higher the price of original coins.. Compared to those mining from the very first hour, Knowledge coupled with low difficulty they probably have more coins than I do I started Mining monero 5 days After launch and so far  have accumulated 260 coins. i am speculating but likely tft has more coins than i do and well deserved

It looks like honeypenny is doing 21. Given that this coin is clearly superior to honeypenny on every other basis (first mover advantage, no block rewards going to the developer as free money, far better name, etc.) we should really just do 21 and remove a differentiator has the potential to hurt us. If the emissions curve matters, then honeypenny could outcompete this coin on that basis, and if it doesn't matter there is  no harm in having the same curve.

With the same emissions curve we almost certainly outcompete honeypenny. They have one or two interesting features but we can easily adopt those if they turn out to be useful, since it is open source.

If you and other major holders like noodledoodle etc come forward willing to donate half of your supplies to pools, services, etc, I will be willing to do so as well.

There are more than 200k coins out there now and I doubt we can even recover 50k, but at least it'll show that the core people involved are willing to give up their share for the future of the chain.  Then, we can hardfork to 2 minute blocks and diminish any possible allegation of premine.

I already pledged 10k which is half of my coins. Actually I pledged a bit over half because I figured by the time this conversation even got going I would have more.

I also think just slowing down the rewards a bit until the total drops down to the new curve is fine. Say starting at block 20k, we reduce the block reward by 1/N of difference between the actual curve and the eventual target curve where B is the block number and N is 10000-B. This provides a "sunrise" period of approximately two months during which the block reward is lower by about 2 coins until the new curve is reached. The size of the reduction can be greatly reduced if we got solid participation in the crowdfunding.

This is assuming the block time is retained at 60 seconds. I would increase it to 120 seconds, in which case the numbers needs to be adjusted, but that is a separate question.

@thankful_for_today - what is the name of the coin? is it bitmonero or is it monero? I updated The CPU Coin List (http://cpucoinlist.com/) to what I thought was the new name. Was I wrong?

Community named it monero, TFT named it bitmonero.  Most people prefer monero.

I want to hear TFT's answer on the name.

I already know what you and smooth say.

What's the point to change the height?

The market is mature enough and no need to change anything.

Voted for ''no change'' !!!

Voted for the #20 curve.

I know it's selfish and all but I think that early adopters should earn more since they are taking the huge risk.

When adopting coin early you can't know for sure if you're going to win or lose. You're dedicating your hashpower to something that is not yet valued - you can be screwed big time.

So, the way I see it - curve should be left untouched.

Or we can program the curve to be 20 for the first month, then 21 for the second, 22 for 3rnd and 23 for the rest.

That's going to be portrayed as an instamine. It's not really but that will be the perception.

Well, this is far from being so... but personally I am for curve being untouched.

The system works better and causes more credibility when it is stable.

+1

Looks like we are going to make everyone equal thats actually contradicts with the market rules.
There is always people who came earlier or know more info and these changes may scare people to join this community. If a few people could change the rules when who can confirm where won't be any changes in future?

I think sometimes even the small change to the "better state" may have the awfullest results.

You know, it's like drawing. You try to create the best picture ever, it's almost ready but you suddenly find that one line isn't so perfect as it has to be. You decide to use an eraser and draw another line (you are sure it will be better than the first one). No, not so perfect! Eraser! New line! Eraser!.. Ooops, paper is teared. Everything is spoiled.

I'm afraid it may became the story about Monero.
Let's leave this coin as it is.

I personally like the yellow curve. It's the closest line to Bitcoin's one, so it seems to be the most familiar and stable.

Regardless of our choice, I have put up a big bounty for the first pool:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.msg6422665#msg6422665

smooth and other big holders, we still need bounties for GUI and exchange. :)

I vote for #20.

BTW, here's a direct link to Comkort vote - https://comkort.com/vote#BMR (https://comkort.com/vote#BMR), it's more user-friendly.

Superbly written ! very clear comparison you've used here.
   Let's leave this coin as it is.

Can only ass "everyone is perfect in their own imperfect ways"

Hi tacotime, I did not follow the discussion strictly so I am a little confused here. What is the benefit of 2-minute block? Reducing network bandwidth/blockchain size or orphans?

Yes that is the reason. There was no valid justification for one minute. The claimed reason was to make solo mining eaiser, but here we are one week into and people are already having trouble solo mining anyway (which was explained by me and others originally). How much more short sighted can you be than that?

One minute means many more orphans and reorgs, and as you point out, chain bloat.

Thanks.

I vote for #21. But please do not destroy coins that are generated before the fork. It is not worth it. Developers and early adopters can keep their coins. However please donate some of them to coin development: pool, bounty, community building, wallet, website, GPU miner ...

PS: I am a GPU miner. Just solved a block after 3 days of mining

There is a GPU miner for this coin?

I am sorry. My writing is so confused. What I want to say is that: I am not a CPU miner. The CPU in my laptop is so weak that it can solve a block after 3 days of mining. Not encouraging result to a miner at all.

That's why I want original developers to keep their coins to fund GPU mining tool and pool mining project

I was more concerned about this prior to the recent success of DRK, which is similar (trustless decentralized mixing) and had an instamine equivalent to 50% of the current supply and 10% of the long run supply. It seems there are some loud people, but overall the market doesn't appear to care as long as the tech delivers.

Since the 2-minute block time is technically superior, it should be implemented with a hard fork. If it's implemented alongside giveaways/bounties for fairness and better PR, then all the better.

One related question: does the orphan problem decrease over time as internet speeds increase globally? What are some rough estimates for this effect?

Somewhat, but latency can't fall that much (speed of light). Also, over time in a successful coin the blocks get bigger, which makes the orphan problem worse, while internet and processor speeds are improving to make it better. So the two effects over time pull in opposite directions. The exact magnitude of each is hard to predict.

I'm not familiar with the situation with DRK so I can't comment on that. But it is clear that the a higher number of orphans leads to greater centralization, and also isn't very user-friendly, because people can't trust confirms if they might get reorged away.

The best solution if you want to mine on a single laptop is some kind of pool (or better pools). Even if a useful GPU miner is possible and gets developed (and hopefully release), everybody else will have a GPU miner too and then the difficulty goes up, so with one laptop you still won't be able to solo mine with consistent results.

Another poll is here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=568166.0
Vote for whatever coin you think will succeed.
I've already voted (that's a secret - but if you ask me I may tell you  :D)

 Vote vote vote! Voting is like my hobby - I really enjoy it!  :)

Voted there too. I wonder what have your chosen ? Bytecoin ? or maybe Bitmonero? Looks like there is two type of members here - people who prefer Bytecoin or BitMonero .