Wow, thank you so very much Rav3nPL. If you, the god-father of altcoin p2pool, set the parameters: there is no doubt they are divine. Kindest regards and thanks. |
|
|
|
We figure the more exchanges we can get DigiByte on the better. We have made a small donation to most exchanges so far.
Not suggesting your vote is a bad thing at all. It is a relatively small donation and a reasonable investment. Just wondering about the way the whole deal of this happening has been developing  |
|
|
|
Awesome! Let's get the votes rolling in ! I got it up over 50 but it seems we're up against it. Microcoin has more than 10,000votes? something gotta be wrong there Payment votes..... the next crypto scam...? |
|
|
|
ok i found something interesting guys! when you type in google's search bar: 'digibyte ann' it finds you only the spanish thread! when the words are the other way around: 'ann digibyte' it finds you only the english thread! weird? it doesnt help us when people search it and always find the spanish thread, like i did. altho you have a link on the first page of the thread to here. which is what i did EVERYTIME  cheers, dgb is l337 ;] Over thinking things? Just type "DigiByte" this thread is like the second result for me, right behind the homepage  |
|
|
|
to be honest I could do w/out all the pool spam. Or they could do it in a much less obtrusive manner in 5 lines or less.
I do my best not to spam my pool, and certainly not with images and such. although I have mentioned it from time to time >.< |
|
|
|
Also the quoting has gotten a little ridiculous there... Anyways, I'll be watching and waiting for some more people's opinion on the matter DGB does have a pretty vocal community, afterall. In fact, I remember someone posting about Kimoto a long while back in this thread. Like page 120 or so? Becomes a big topic for DGB now, huh Honestly, the re-target time isn't bad at all on DigiByte. We haven't experienced anything even remotely as serious from the multi-pools as some of the other coins. Not even close. There are coins that have literally faced the die or change re-target time wall. |
|
|
|
Ok here is what Goldcoin did when they lowered their block reward from 500 to 50. A couple weeks later instant surge to the moon. Of course it dropped back down aftwards but the new baseline was still 10-30x higher. Mind you, this was with a coin most of the community hated. Everyone LOVES Digibyte.  I'm up for a decrease in block rewards. Maybe 2000 or less a block? Increasing the difficulty of obtaining DGB would certainly increase it's value. I think it would be better that way. Also, everyone seems to want Kimoto Gravity Well, so I don't see why not. I need to look up on what exactly it does, but it seems like it makes it easier to recover from multipool attacks somehow. Decreasing the block reward will make DGB more scarce and price will adjust to this. How will this help against multipools? Or am I missing somehting  The thought had nothing to do with increasing resistance from Multipool attacks I just think more people would be interested in a coin with a little bit more immediate value, and decreasing the amount you gain from mining is one of the ways to make it more valuable at a quicker pace. Also, thanks for the response on these thoughts Digibyte. We should probably have another forum poll about all of this, let the community decide and all of that. We are still young enough for changes like this. It's good to get these things worked out sooner than later, afterall. I understand why it is suggested, and in fact it would likely increase the value of DGB in the short term, but reducing the block reward flys in the face of what this coin is meant to represent. Reducing the block reward in isolation, and thus reducing the total coins to be created, will turn DigiByte into yet another commodity coin. I do not speak for the Dev team, or the community, in anyway; but it was my understanding that DigiByte was created in order to provide a transactional currency that could function as a general medium of exchange. Reducing the block reward would cripple that endeavor in the interest of increasing profits for a few early-adopters. It is bad form, bad business, and self-serving. I hold a great deal of DigiBytes, and would benefit greatly from this choice, yet I believe that it is the wrong choice for the future of DGB. The desire you are expressing is understandable, and even reasonable. You are going about it in the wrong way, however. As a coin progresses through it's life cycle the block reward is naturally reduced by reward halving. It is built into the design of crypto-currency. The desire you are expressing is not that the reward be reduced, but that the coin progresses through the stages of maturity sooner. A 'mature' coin is through the initial inflationary period of rapid minting and therefore begins to deflate and value increases. To change the reward without changing other fundamental specifications of the coin, would be irresponsible and essentially convert the coin into another coin entirely. Your suggestion is not a bad suggestion, you are simply going about it in the wrong way. The only way to achieve what you desire in a responsible manner is to speed up the rate of halving while at the same time changing other specifications such that the ultimate total coins minted does not change. Framed in that manner, the idea becomes responsible, prudent, wise, and a great idea. Very well articulated, as all your posts are Creative. Basically what you are saying is that the halving rate should be increased? I don't have an extremely good grasp of the inner workings of cryptocurrencies, so I can't say for sure what is possible or what isn't possible: But what I was suggesting is that the rewards be cut in fourths while adding 4x the amount of blocks to mine. Doing it this way should keep the exact same amount of coins that will ultimately be minted, right? If that's done, then less coins will circulate in the beginning as the diff goes up. Because of increasing difficulty, and less coins being in circulation, the coin will be worth more in the immediate future: However, the same amount of coins will be minted. The question with this is whether it's good in the short or long term at all, and whether that would attract miners. I personally think that DigiByte would do better if every DGB was worth a little bit more than now, or even it's projected value. People don't want to think of 1000 DGB as a dollar, they'd rather think of 100 DGB as one. It could most likely easily be argued that over time, this will happen naturally. I can see that. The problem after that is making everyone upgrade they're clients. This is something that will have to happen if Kimoto Gravity Well is implemented anyways, so if a change like this is to be done it should be done with that. At the very least it's an interesting idea to talk about. Once again, I don't have a great grasp of how the blockchain works. So it might not be possible to make 4x the blocks while cutting the rewards into a fourth. I really should learn up on this stuff Anyone have any good suggestions on where I can learn about how cryptos work under the hood? Oh yeah, and how's the pool going? Lots of meticulous work reading through logs, I'd guess. But keep up the good work  Seems you get the essence of the concept I was talking about - however increasing the number of blocks means that we all die right around the time DGB finally matures into a stable end-of-life crypto |
|
|
|
Ok here is what Goldcoin did when they lowered their block reward from 500 to 50. A couple weeks later instant surge to the moon. Of course it dropped back down aftwards but the new baseline was still 10-30x higher. Mind you, this was with a coin most of the community hated. Everyone LOVES Digibyte. I'm up for a decrease in block rewards. Maybe 2000 or less a block? Increasing the difficulty of obtaining DGB would certainly increase it's value. I think it would be better that way. Also, everyone seems to want Kimoto Gravity Well, so I don't see why not. I need to look up on what exactly it does, but it seems like it makes it easier to recover from multipool attacks somehow. Decreasing the block reward will make DGB more scarce and price will adjust to this. How will this help against multipools? Or am I missing somehting The thought had nothing to do with increasing resistance from Multipool attacks I just think more people would be interested in a coin with a little bit more immediate value, and decreasing the amount you gain from mining is one of the ways to make it more valuable at a quicker pace. Also, thanks for the response on these thoughts Digibyte. We should probably have another forum poll about all of this, let the community decide and all of that. We are still young enough for changes like this. It's good to get these things worked out sooner than later, afterall. I understand why it is suggested, and in fact it would likely increase the value of DGB in the short term, but reducing the block reward flys in the face of what this coin is meant to represent. Reducing the block reward in isolation, and thus reducing the total coins to be created, will turn DigiByte into yet another commodity coin. I do not speak for the Dev team, or the community, in anyway; but it was my understanding that DigiByte was created in order to provide a transactional currency that could function as a general medium of exchange. Reducing the block reward would cripple that endeavor in the interest of increasing profits for a few early-adopters. It is bad form, bad business, and self-serving. I hold a great deal of DigiBytes, and would benefit greatly from this choice, yet I believe that it is the wrong choice for the future of DGB. The desire you are expressing is understandable, and even reasonable. You are going about it in the wrong way, however. As a coin progresses through it's life cycle the block reward is naturally reduced by reward halving. It is built into the design of crypto-currency. The desire you are expressing is not that the reward be reduced, but that the coin progresses through the stages of maturity sooner. A 'mature' coin is through the initial inflationary period of rapid minting and therefore begins to deflate and value increases. To change the reward without changing other fundamental specifications of the coin, would be irresponsible and essentially convert the coin into another coin entirely. Your suggestion is not a bad suggestion, you are simply going about it in the wrong way. The only way to achieve what you desire in a responsible manner is to speed up the rate of halving while at the same time changing other specifications such that the ultimate total coins minted does not change. Framed in that manner, the idea becomes responsible, prudent, wise, and a great idea. |
|
|
|
Nobody feels, that changeing the coin supply specifications is way unfair, and not an acceptable method?
I don't think coin supply specifications are immutable -> however, I think any changes that are made should primarily affect velocity, and not the resulting total coin supply when all is said and done. And in this respect, which is surely counter-intuitive for short-term speculators, increasing velocity and the rate of minting is preferable to reducing velocity. The quicker we get to the ultimate total coin supply, and thereby past the inflationary period, the better. All coins have to go through this period, and it lasts quite some time, which is hard for many to wrap their heads around. While coins are being minted at a rapid pace, inflation and thus market price decrease are a fact of life for ALL coins. Mid-term trends seem to bear out this classical fact of economics even in the crypto-currency markets. Speeding that process along, even at the cost of short-term market value (which will be impacted the same regardless, only over a longer period of time) is a wise choice, and could even be used to bring in new faces and interest in the endeavor. I know it seems to be backwards, but that is how the economic principles apply to all crypto-currencies because of how they mint coins. Remember, a lower market price is not a loss of value. As long as you continue to mine the same proportion of new coins that are minted, your increase in coins will exactly match the loss of value due to inflation. |
|
|
|
I say we lessen the block reward.
IMO 4.000 block reward and that gravity thing to retarget the difficulty, we should get our opinions and do some vote! call the dev's!!!! This coin is dead and the dev's are gone too.
Stealcoin, go somewhere else and troll please. The Dev's are alive and working on some major projects -> as they should be. Concerning block reward and 1 block re-target: Kimoto Gravity well is not a bad idea. The re-target time is already quite reasonable, however, and I am not convinced that such a drastic change in order to appease the current miners makes sense. But what do I know? I am against a change to the block reward. I think there is a slight disconnect in how this all works. In the beginning of a coins life, measured in months and years, the coin goes through a period of inflation. This is necessary, as the total money supply that the entire user base will ultimately use is minted during this period. At this stage of the life-cycle, there were no exchanges and you couldn't buy a toothpick with Bitcoins. This is the time period when real wealth is created in a crypto; the problem is that this wealth isn't measured by the current exchange rate. The coin doesn't enter the period of deflation, and large-scale adoption, until much later in the coin's life-cycle. Long after the speculators have left for what seems like a greener pasture, minting will naturally slow and the coin will begin appreciating in value. It is then that the dedication of those who have mined the coin since the beginning profit. This is an investment that lasts years, not days. |
|
|
|
Hello digibyters this is my friend's pool. Fast and stable. It's already over 430.081 Mhs, join us http://digi.coinium.org/The fact that the pool is over 430 Mhs is a great argument for why people shouldn't join that pool....... |
|
|
|
What a dilemma, I sent 10,000 Digibyte coins to an exchange, I generated a deposit address and sent the the coins only to realise that I sent them to a different coin wallet, in my haste I made the mistake of mistaking Digital coin For Digibyte coin as the shortened letters for both coins are very similar and could be mistaken for each other, I was lead to believe that you can't actually send coins to a different coin wallet the client doesn't let you, in this case it did.  Obviously these coins never arrived at the exchange and now they are floating around lost in space and time, maybe in a hundred thousand years someone will download a Digibyte client and it will randomly generate the address and the recipient will be a billionaire in a split second. oh well some you win and some you lose. You can contact the exchange. They might be be able to help you out. There were 2 other who had the same issue with coins they send to coinmarket. They wouldn't release private keys to the addresses(understandable) but they can import the private key into their digibyte client and redeem them for you. I can't say if they will or won't as thats really up to the exchange, but it is possible to retrieve them. @Digibyte It seems that a few people now have done this. There was a discussion a while ago about changing "DGB" to "DIGI". I personally was in favour of DIGI at the time & still am. Is this discussion now dead or could we arrange a vote on it before Digibyte becomes even more widely adopted? It would be a shame if someone ever loses a large holding because of this avoidable issue. I've been considering this and I haven't come up with a way to do this without invalidating every current DGB address, which is not a good plan. You can change the name to DIGI from DGB but the root of the problem will still exist. Any coin based off the bitcoin source and having address's starting with 'D' will have addresses that are valid on each others network. I don't believe theres any way around it at this point. If someone has a solution I'm all ear! xploited is suddenly x2 on the cool scale; as they have only one ear and are obviously a pirate. |
|
|
|
MPOS (The standard open source pool front-end) has a set of triggers that automatically locks accounts in certain situations. The most common is after a certain number of failed log in attempts, but there can be a host of custom reasons that the front-end could have triggered a lock. I won't speak to that pool specifically but to say they have been around a while and there have been some complaints, most of which seem to always be resolved in one form or another. I wouldn't expect there to be any scam a-foot. I would send a support email and ask that your account be unlocked. It is a simple matter of clicking a check box in the back-end of the GUI.
Hmm.. Just tried to send them an email and I am getting "There was a problem sending your message" Well, time to go back to dgb.getby. I think that is a wonderful choice, lol |
|
|
|
Well, I don't know if they really banned it but I cannot login either now... Also tried the manual payout request since the automatic one was not working.
There usually a pretty solid pool, I cannot login either, I think they are trying to fix the manual and automatic payment process. MPOS (The standard open source pool front-end) has a set of triggers that automatically locks accounts in certain situations. The most common is after a certain number of failed log in attempts, but there can be a host of custom reasons that the front-end could have triggered a lock. I won't speak to that pool specifically but to say they have been around a while and there have been some complaints, most of which seem to always be resolved in one form or another. I wouldn't expect there to be any scam a-foot. I would send a support email and ask that your account be unlocked. It is a simple matter of clicking a check box in the back-end of the GUI. |
|
|
|
Guys, what's happening to the price of DGB?
DGB got listed on Coinmarketcap, nothing happend. (other coins profit from a listing)
DGB got in the top position at coinwarz, nothing happend.
New listing at coinedup.com, nothing happens (okay, was up for a very short while)
The lack of an epic pump and dump after listing at a given exchange/service != failure. The value of the coin is up, in a way that might be sustainable == epic win. I don't mean P&D, but when a coin is listed on a new exchange or on coinmarketcap, it has a boost through new people buying DGB. This hasn't happend. Why? You could say that the value of the coin is up, but where? I've been looking at coinmarket.io for days but the price there has been hovering around 150-170. Volume is up 3 fold on coinmarket.io. I don't have the API link handy, but I would bet that with the coinedup volume added to that the volume is up closer to 5-10 fold. That alone is value, without a price increase. Watching the markets and complaining about a price that isn't doing what you expect is an age old mistake counseled against in nearly every investment text ever written. I think the confusion is in our definition of value. I don't base my valuation of the coin on the coinedup/coinmarket ticker price. Especially not this early in the coin's life. Prices don't exist in a vacuum; in a perfect market they are simply a reflection of perceived value. This is by no means even an translucent market - it is nearly opaque. That means prices veer far and wide from actual value. DGB was up over 300 a couple weeks ago, and was up again for a very short period after being listed of coinedup. That is the effect of the market clearing up a bit and at least some people perceiving value. Honestly, the longer it takes folks to see the value, the longer the difficulty and price stays lower. From a selfish perspective, that is opportunity. Eventually, there is either value or there is not, and the market responds (at least in part) accordingly. So, if your question is why did DigiByte not go "To The Moon!!!!" when it was listed on CoinWarz and CoinedUp: I would suggest it likely has to do with a sentiment of fear that had developed over the period in which it took a while to be listed. That resulted in a certain amount of "dump" by people who had been afraid for a period of time that it was never going to happen, and this counter-balanced some of the buy orders that entered the books in the new market. That would explain the large increase in volume but the relatively conservative change in price. So, when I say there has been an increase in value, I am not suggesting that you can trade your DGB for more BTC in the market at the moment. I am suggesting that by inclusion in some of these community staple 3rd party services the real 'value' of the coin has increased. Whether that is reflected in the current market place is independent of whether or not the value has increased. |
|
|
|
Guys, what's happening to the price of DGB?
DGB got listed on Coinmarketcap, nothing happend. (other coins profit from a listing)
DGB got in the top position at coinwarz, nothing happend.
New listing at coinedup.com, nothing happens (okay, was up for a very short while)
The lack of an epic pump and dump after listing at a given exchange/service != failure. The value of the coin is up, in a way that might be sustainable == epic win. |
|
|
|
dgb.luckyminers.com fuck u cant payout a shit pool dont mining in dgb.luckyminers.com  Don't quote me, but I think they have a problem with their cron or something. Other users have had issues with payout from time to time, and it appears to straighten itself out later that day or in a few hours or something along those lines. That said, we are always taking sign-ups at our pool. You can find the link in my signature. |
|
|
|
Indeed difficulty up by large double digit percentages in last 2 hours.
What is the reason? I am seeing a lot of hype in the community, not bad in page posts! We are weeks after launch and the Dev is still hard at work doing... wait for it..... wait for it..... development. Lmfao. The cute robot doesn't hurt either |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
