The improbability of users with these degrees of holdings being online at this precise moment, and paying attention to those coins, if not refreshing the pages to see the announcements, seems to be extremely high.
That's why you're wrong, people tend to closely keep track of their holdings. And the delistings were announced on 18 April: https://twitter.com/Poloniex/status/854486851238932481I only promptly looked at the post and graphs so I might be missing something but at first glace everything seems to be fine. One thing I hate though is that they just give you delisting dates instead of warnings about low volume so the community of each coin can't chip in to trade to keep the volume and keep the coin on the exchange. Same goes for Bittrex and C-cex. They are single handedly killing (and giving birth in case of a random listing) to coins which means too much - centralized - power over small-ish coins. |
|
|
|
It seems that there is about 1 new ICO (mainly ERC20's on Ethereum) every week. How is it possible that each of these tech's needs its own coin and blockchain? Why don't they just develop on Ethereum?
Is it solely to get the venture capital?
Because it's an easy way to scam people; a couple of nice graphs and some promises and that seems to be enough for some people to send money to an anon dude without any guarantees... If a coin is great, the dev should invest in it himself or gather the funds/backers outside of the coin's supply imo. |
|
|
|
Hey, guys, where do you keep your PIVX coins. When posessing a number of altcoins, it seems a big job to download all the wallets no? And constantly update them...
you dont hold altcoins like pivx, you trade them with the pump and dump cycle, otherwise you can hold bitcoin, litecoin, ethereum, with probably more profit That's a good way of missing great opportunities and only earn scraps. |
|
|
|
maybe it could help to have the possibility to solo mine here, there is a version that still work of woodcoin which is based on another client that is not bitcore like the old version that allow solo mining?
I still use v1.0.0.0-unk-geo without issues. I always only solomine coins and I strongly think that removing solomining (while it makes sense for bitcoin's wallet) is awful for decentralization and node count. |
|
|
|
Am I the only one who thinks that PIVX is a good name?
It actually stands for something, and doesn't sound like some nerdy chit like "ethereum" or "mysterium". Can you imagine a regular non-computer nerd considering paying with "Golem". It sounds like some sketchy nerdy sub-culture crap.
For example, you could actually imagine an advertisement on TV about PIVX with a voice saying "PIVX - Private Instant Verified Transaction". It sounds legit and like it could appeal to clueless people.
I'm quite clueless but maybe that makes me a good person to judge this.
Anyone agree?
Initially I hated the new name but it grew on me and now I like it. |
|
|
|
Hey thanks bathrobehero  I am going to read the code on the coins you mention and do some more research. I don't think having multi-algos eliminates the threat of a 51% attack or double spend, but it could make it more difficult in some circumstances. If there is a liquid market of hashpower, see e.g. nicehash, then one can always buy the hashpower one needs to make an attack. Anyway I am going to take a closer look at the consensus mechanism. If we were to shift to a multi-algo system, what other hash functions do you think would be appropriate, other than double-skein? Being a GPU miner I'm partial to GPU friendly algos. But at the end of the day it doesn't matter much I think. Come to think of it, with multiple algos we could essentially chop different types of wood.  |
|
|
|
[...]
This is why having multiple algorithms in parallel is beneficial (if done well); optimally, when an algo is stuck at high difficulty, the retarget can reduce that algo's difficulty every time a block is found on another algo for a much smoother retarget. With one algo, the difficulty retarget can only ever change the difficulty once a block is found. Which is where there are constant overshoots both ways.
Ineteresting, yes I like the myriadcoin approach. I think the difficulties of each algo there retarget independently from each other. It's interesting that 30 blocks to retarget (at 1 block per 2 minutes) appears slow; compared to LTC or BTC this difficulty adjust is lightning fast. At various points over the last couple years we've talked about changing the difficulty adjust and/or POW algorithm of LOG. Anything is possible if this is too annoying to deal with. A change to a myriad-like network is attractive, what do you think? Another possibility offering even more stability is moving to a merge-mined system. However it seems that our fluctuating difficulty is not really such a headache. Hop miners are still adding their hashpower to secure the network. As we grow in size these effects will be relatively smaller. The speed of the retarget (slow or fast) really only depends on the network's hashrate compared to lone miners joining and leaving the coin. And the reason I called it slow was due to - as I said - any small miners can affect the difficulty. This was heavily increased if there were ASICs. I personally dislike merge mining. It's a great idea on paper but most of the time the only thing that it achieves is more multipools; people mining multiple coins due to increased profits (which translates into lower coin prices) without even knowing the names of the coins they mine. But then again, I don't know any other coins using this variant of skein. Coins like Joincoin, Digibyte, Myriad, Auroracoin are great, even considering not all of them have a "dynamic" dificulty retarget that changes the diff of stuck algos (only changes them on an individual pow basis) but it still allows for a fluid blockchain. And - as far as I know at least - it almost completely eliminates 51% attacks (as you would need to either flashmine blocks on a single algo or dominate multiple algos, but you could make it so that a single algo can only be solved consecutively X times before a block with another algo have to be found (e.g. myriad)). Unfortunately I don't know any disadvantages of having multiple algos but I'm sure there are some. |
|
|
|
|
Block # date difficulty
503759 2017-04-29 16:05:15 77.014
503760 2017-04-29 16:08:58 275.054
...
503789 2017-04-29 19:33:11 275.054
503790 2017-04-29 19:35:02 79.368
...
503819 2017-04-29 19:48:27 79.368
503820 2017-04-29 19:48:29 311.931
and so on.
I said this before, the difficulty retarget is not just too slow but since the network's hashrate is small, virtually every small miner can make a dent in the difficulty.
Every single multipool (nicehash, yiimp, etc) will cause this effect. It just simply means the difficulty retargeting algorithm is just utterly inefficient. I wouldn't call that an attack though. Block withholding or 51% exploits are both real attacks though as they both can leave users with lost funds (unlike whatever difficulty is set by the retarget mechanism).
This is why having multiple algorithms in parallel is beneficial (if done well); optimally, when an algo is stuck at high difficulty, the retarget can reduce that algo's difficulty every time a block is found on another algo for a much smoother retarget. With one algo, the difficulty retarget can only ever change the difficulty once a block is found. Which is where there are constant overshoots both ways.
Regarding 51% attacks, I don't know much about them but as far as I remember, the blockchain accepts the double spend and so you can see in the blockchain (block explorer) if it were to happen. I'm not 100% sure though.
|
|
|
|
Bittrex delisting sucks. At least they could have just warned that IF the trading volume not exceeds X then they'll delist it.
I don't think they are basing their decision on volume, but if they delist joincoin they are losing at least one good customer. I think they do. The wallet is not problematic at all, so there's literally no other reason to delist coins other than if it's not worth it for them. This is from 10 months ago from a reddit thread: "Bittrex is looking for .2 btc worth of daily trade volume. X from IRC talked with the Bittrex team and it will not be delisted." |
|
|
|
|
Bittrex delisting sucks. At least they could have just warned that IF the trading volume not exceeds X then they'll delist it.
|
|
|
|
successful for who? i can think of quite a few that were very successful for the people offering them,
Right on, brother. Those are the only people who profit from shit like this--the developers. Everyone else is a sheep being led to slaughter. And dollars in the devs' pockets is the only metric by which to measure "success". This is like asking what were the most successful penny stock scams. How about Dash? That made money for the devs and a lot of other people. DOGE? All of the smaller ones are total garbage. Couldn't agree more. Sheeps and gambling addicts vs. scammers. |
|
|
|
|
Realistically, I don't think anyone is going to read through that list, let alone tell you what happened to a coin they remembered.
You should probably start with looking them up on coinmarketcap or here on the forum (via google).
|
|
|
|
Baikal seems to be the only player in town and while they have solid equipment, their customer support and ordering sucks.
Demand is through the roof so this market seems ripe for the taking.
Why has no one else developed a solution? All you would need to do is have a legit site with basic cart/ordering functionality and you would be in serious business.
...and truckloads of money for chip R&D and so on. Besides, why would anyone sell their golden egg laying goose? Even if some people would make a more efficient miner for X11m they'd likely sell them once they're done mining with them. |
|
|
|
for now the problem should not happen, but are you aware you are asking me to whitelist claymore (in a ccminer thread) :p
im currently working on a way to reduce abuses of workers per address, i had users with 700 workers on VTC. I dont think its a "normal" use of yiimp pool
Why wouldn't they use a proxy to connect to the pool as one? Or even their own private pool? |
|
|
|
We all knew that bitcoin broke the ATH of $1200 and its now $1300
Based on some philosophy people mentioned that when Btc raise, most of the alts drop
But look at the top 20 coins in cmc
Dash
Eth
Ripple
Monero
And even Doge
DOGE GROW 18%
Any particular reason?
Historically when BTC went up then alts took a dive and vice versa. But it seems to me when BTC increases a lot in value, it breaks out of this relationship and takes all the alts with it. Probably when BTC only goes up a bit, people sell their alts, turning them into BTC and/or FIAT. But when BTC goes up a lot, new people are getting lured into the crypto scene and start buying all kinds of coins hoping they would increase the same as bitcoin. That's my theory at least. |
|
|
|
Me, more or less. The irony is that I lost out on making a profit because I spent bitcoin. And if you ever needed proof that bitcoin is doomed as a form of money, there you go. When people want to hold onto something instead of spending it, that's a lousy currency.
That's just a dumb oversimplification and polarization. Currencies doesn't have to be always instantly spent by people. There's nothing wrong with holding as long as long as there's a healthy mix of spending as well - which there is. Lousy currency worth $1340 a piece. You have to learn to ignore past values. If I was the guy who bought a pizza for 10k BTC years ago, I wouldn't give a fuck about it now. It would be absolutely pointless to do so. Me, more or less. The irony is that I lost out on making a profit because I spent bitcoin. And if you ever needed proof that bitcoin is doomed as a form of money, there you go. When people want to hold onto something instead of spending it, that's a lousy currency.
Can confirm. Most of the time I want to make a purchase but I'm held back by the fact that the price could shoot up and I could be out of a couple bucks that I could've gained if I had just held. The way I see it, Bitcoin is more of a storage device than a currency, considering most people in the speculation section of the forum seem to like holding, as do I. That's just you. I'm happy to spend BTC instead of cash. I'd even spend it if it was worth half as much as it does. Bitcoin is already on the moon, it has already made it. Just because it was slow and we got used to it in the process (something something boiling a frog) doesn't make it untrue. You might as well just use it instead of hoping for an X times increase. And then what would you do, if it would reach $2k, $3k or even $5k? You'd still probably hold at least some of it hoping that it goes higher which you tell yourself you can't possibly miss. That's just greed. Of course, I'm also hoping that it would go higher and it will likely do that imo, but it's not exactly worthless as it is. Spend some of it and enjoy. I know my two comments seem contradictory, but you guys seem polarized which you shouldn't be; holding some, sure but spend it as well. BTC could very well be worth $340 right now and you'd say the same but it's worth $1340! at the moment. |
|
|
|
HODL. Cryptocurrencies are so useful, that only $30 bln part of global financial market is a joke
This. Sure, we will have issues, drama, politics, manipulation but eventually none of the should matter. |
|
|
|
|
Because of the limitations of the difficulty retarget. The limitation being that it can only adjust the difficulty based on how long the previous blocks were found. No blocks found, no difficulty adjustment because the difficulty of the next block can't be changed once it's set in the previous block. So if a block is not found for lack of miners or just due to bad luck, the difficulty retarget will overcompensates and reduces the difficulty so much so that the next few blocks will be mined faster then the difficutly retarget overshoots again but this time it increases the difficulty too much. And so on and on.
The super fast speed of ASIC miners augment this problem.
This is why a few coins added multiple parallel algos (Joincoin, Digibyte, Myriad, etc) which allows the difficulty retarget to change the difficulty of an algo without having to find a block doing that algo.
|
|
|
|
I'm not a mathematician but I'd guess there are several isues and possible exploits with the system presented. Hopefully others who are familiar can comment. Also, what is the initial distribution method? Premined and sold on exchange, aka ICO? . ccex allowed the investors to fork to recover their coins and this project rose out of the ashes. im learned about this myself so dont expect me to have all the answers. sorry typing on phone on work break. None of that sounds like unique, in fact, quite the opposite. But good luck I guess. |
|
|
|
I'm not a mathematician but I'd guess there are several isues and possible exploits with the system presented. Hopefully others who are familiar can comment. Also, what is the initial distribution method? Premined and sold on exchange, aka ICO? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
