|
Thanks for clearing this issue up Jared, much appreciated. I hope we can lay this issue to rest now and get on with more interesting developments/suggestions.
|
|
|
|
HR as far as I understand it 20% of the blocks are ASIC, 20% are Scrypt, 60% are GPU (I do not know if these are equally distributed).
That's not the issue. The block find distribution is 20/20/20/20/20. About that there is no doubt. The question is how does MultiShield adjust each algo's diff and as a function of exactly what? We know that before the most recent hardfork, global network hashrate (that is the combined total of the 5 algos) was key, and that all the algos diffs adjusted in response to changes in aggregate hashrate. The question is how much did that change? To what precise degree are the algos currently independent, and to what degree are they still inter-dependent? I'm not very good at C++ but I suspect the answer to your question lies here: https://github.com/digibyte/digibyte/blob/master/src/miner.cpp#L155 |
|
|
|
|
HR as far as I understand it 20% of the blocks are ASIC, 20% are Scrypt, 60% are GPU (I do not know if these are equally distributed).
|
|
|
|
I was looking at the DGB trade history and saw this:  What does that bot do? Just create volume? Why would you sell and buy back, or are those 2 different accounts? This is most probably an arbitrage bot. I can't imagine someone is buying and selling DGB at the same price! |
|
|
|
|
I don't have time atm to actually plug in some real numbers, my argument is more based on the fact that you will have a huge variability in electricity costs so any one standard that we would implement (such as the US average, lol at expected US exceptionalism btw) would likely disadvantage other people somewhere else potentially using another algo. As you've said it goes from "free" electricity to very expensive electricity in parts of the EU. I just don't think we would a) find a reasonable electricity price standard and b) be able to implement this on a codebase level without adding unnecessary complications (or hard forks every month). If I'm free later I will dig into the numbers but I think the argument about viability of implementation and finding a correct price standard stands on its own and doesn't really have to be backed up by data right here and now (if you like program some code to calculate the standard deviation in electricity costs around the world and we can discuss if its a significant factor).
|
|
|
|
Oh, I know I'm the bad guy, but bear with me. I'd just like to officially go on the public record with a prediction I made in private.
. . . mark my words, the difference between becoming the cryptographic currency used worldwide to which it aspires, and a slow certain death, will be whether or not the proportionate payout per unit of electricity invested in variable costs is made equal among algos. It’s as simple as that: success or failure will depend on making GPU mining equally profitable with specialized ASIC mining on a per unit of electricity cost basis. It's the difference between thousands of active nodes that slowly diminish to a handful of people whose only common bond is their virtual “friendship”, and hundreds of thousands that grows to millions based on a common use of a serious and stable, extremely safe cryptographic digitalized money and means of exchange.
Just as important as previous innovations have been in getting DigiByte where it is, the complete leveling of real economically rational participatory opportunity is the cornerstone for whether DigiByte will be taken to the next level or not, and without it, a truly worldwide distributed network is impossible. Mark my words.
And, for anyone who might be wondering, that's not THE issue. It's the OTHER issue that's much much more important.
I'm sorry but this is incorrect. The point behind having 5 different hashing algorithms with variable electricity costs is to decentralise the system further, not make it more centralised. Take this example; Alice lives in the US and is a pro-gamer, she loves gaming and has come across digibyte gaming, learnt a little about blockchains and would like to mine some digibyte. She already has an awesome gaming rig and she's been told by awesome members of this community that she can mine some digibytes using her gaming rig, she thinks awesome, hooks up here gaming rig to the digibyte network and voila shes mining. Alice has cost of electricity x per hash. Now Bob comes a long and he's a big chinese crypto geek who owns an ASIC mining farm. He finds digibytes and thinks, what an awesome coin! Im going to start mining some of that. Bob has cost of electricity y per hash. Now Alice and Bob being in the US and China obviously have different variable electricity costs (for sake of argument lets assume that the US is more expensive). Lets put some numbers in the game. Let x=10 cents per hash (these are imaginary numbers) and y=5 per hash. Now if ASIC and GPU mining would have the same electricity cost per hash (as I believe your suggesting) it is obvious that Bob would be able to mine more digibytes per unit electricity cost. On the other hand if we leave digibyte the way it is (also taking into account the wisdom of Jared on this one) Assuming Alice gets twice the amount of digibytes per unit electricity cost than Bob (for sake of argument) so they will actually be mining the same amount of digibytes per unit electricity cost! My point being this; your not taking into the account the variability (both in geography and time) of electricity costs around the world. I think the intention of having the 5 mining algorithms as they are is precisely to get a better distributed/decentralised network (especially geographically). Also implementing your suggestion on a programming level would be quite hard because you would somehow have to take into account the time variations of electricity costs around the whole world and constantly keep updating this as one of your parameters. Not only that but you would immediately create unequalness due to the geographical variation of electricity costs. I hope this puts the issue to rest and we can get on with some more interesting ideas/suggestions/projects  |
|
|
|
Good vibes ^^^ that's what we need here.
Awesome to see |
|
|
|
I do not understand why this coin is so cheap
Nobody really does  I could not read, the problem with the game wallet, whether it's serious? If not dada will be? Perhaps this is the reason.. An issue with a gaming wallet is hardly the reason for the low price. It is baffling, though. It's been chugging away for 2 years now with stead support from both Dev and community and can't seem to break out and match the other coins that have skyrocketed. Maybe this is just a "blue-collar" coin that people have to see for utility rather than speculation and "romance" like some other coins. The gaming wallet fix is in the works and is going to be released shortly as far as I understand it. |
|
|
|
Let's try to remain civil, please. The price will move as the markets decide. As a reminder, rather than bickering about price, some of the best ways you as a user can bring value to the project include: presenting ideas to be considered for development, presenting your skills and talents to the community, asking questions, and giving answers to those who may need assistance. We, as the developers, are always here to lead the community, but a community is best when we work together to bring value towards a common goal.
Don't let short term gains or losses cloud the sight of a long-term future.
Best regards,
-TM2013
good to see this project and that prices, traders like PnD. keep it that way  This has not been quoted correctly and I do not appreciate it, the correct quote is as follows. If you repeat this I will report you to a moderator. Let's try to remain civil, please. The price will move as the markets decide. As a reminder, rather than bickering about price, some of the best ways you as a user can bring value to the project include: presenting ideas to be considered for development, presenting your skills and talents to the community, asking questions, and giving answers to those who may need assistance. We, as the developers, are always here to lead the community, but a community is best when we work together to bring value towards a common goal.
Don't let short term gains or losses cloud the sight of a long-term future.
Best regards,
-TM2013
Couldn't agree more, well put TM  |
|
|
|
I do not understand why this coin is so cheap
Nobody really does |
|
|
|
I'll be at the event as well. Glad you confirmed. Lol pity I can't go! |
|
|
|
Let's try to remain civil, please. The price will move as the markets decide. As a reminder, rather than bickering about price, some of the best ways you as a user can bring value to the project include: presenting ideas to be considered for development, presenting your skills and talents to the community, asking questions, and giving answers to those who may need assistance. We, as the developers, are always here to lead the community, but a community is best when we work together to bring value towards a common goal.
Don't let short term gains or losses cloud the sight of a long-term future.
Best regards,
-TM2013
Couldn't agree more, well put TM |
|
|
|
Talk about pump and dump. -95% on polo. Yet again, stupid people lose money and a few 'developers' make a few 100 BTC.
Rofl please look at the volumes associated with the trades above 0.01 BTC. This usually happens when a coin gets listed, the price hasn't dropped -95% in fact I believe its increased by about 100% (check out bittrex). |
|
|
|
Is there an IRC channel for Radium?
we have slack with 70 ppl already in it(link is on OP) Lol yeah, cool I'll get involved. |
|
|
|
|
Is there an IRC channel for Radium?
|
|
|
|
so the pow period end?
Yep as far as I understand it. |
|
|
|
Hehehe thanks wana jump on IRC? |
|
|
|
Yes yes! and more events coming   I'm really looking forward to hearing what Jared has to say here. I'm looking forward to this as well! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
