|
Using something from the block you are making as well as from the previous block means you can mine harder to try for a winning block.
Just keep changing something to get a different merkle root until you get one that makes your block a winning block. Spend enough computing power on it and maybe all blocks will be winning blocks!
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
I was trying to come up with new ideas and I came up with another as well: a F2P MMORPG where everything is paid for using DevCoins. Much like the games that are already out, but instead of using cash to buy tokens for the cash shop, you would use DevCoins to buy the tokens (or just flat out use DevCoins altogether).
This would boost the value of them by a TON. It's also a pretty big undertaking though.
Go read the game development forum sites to get background on the idea of creating a MMPRPG. Every idiot who knows nothing suggests it, go read/study though like none of them bother to do. What does F2P mean, by the way? While you are on insanely impractical notions, maybe build an entire new operating system from scratch? It doesn't need all the music and images and crap that an MMORPG does so you can probably do that much much easier, and you can build coins right into the operating-system. Maybe reading the thread would have been polite too, so you would have known that actually despite how inansely impractical it is to try to build an MMPRPG nonetheless people are already hard at work on many many many littie pieces that such a thing would need, so that in however many years it takes to get all those pieces done the idea of creating an MMORPG won't seem so insane because we will actually have all the pieces already by then. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
so it's Fibonacci... and do the 'super' blocks work?
Of course not, you sinners don't deserve them so God in His mysterious wisdom caused them not to work. Pray mightily in true humility and who knows, maybe a miracle will occur and cause them to work. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
I don't want to be picky but as the genesis block is block 0, technically the 666th (God be praised) block is block 665, not 666
But God was not created, so God is the zero-eth created thing not the first created thing! Similarly the sacred genesis block is the zero-eth block, not the first block! -MarkM- |
|
|
|
But every dev here will keep giving away crumbs and people will flock to the crumbs not realizing they can make their own coin and empower a coin that gives back to them in a way that's meaningful, a way you can feel and actually enjoy and greatly benefit.
I don't think people fail to realise they can make their own coin, if by make their own coin you mean pay someone else to make one. Possibly they don't realise they can empower such a coin though or aren't convinced enough that it would give back to them in a way that is any more meaningful, feel-able enjoyable and beneficial than jumping on each new scamcoin then dumping it when it gets on an exchange. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
People keeping their optimisations to themselves maybe derives from turning people into not only interchangeable components but even into un-necessary components. If a business can be massively expanded without taking on additional staff/operators then there is maybe not a lot of incentive to provide people with the tools to perform the functions of staff/operators, such as software enabling the operators to run the thing more efficiently. A typical capitalist response seems to be that they are actually employing plenty of people, from the people who etch chips through the people who assemble machines and datacentres and the people who run the cloud computing services, so that anyone who wants some pay/gain/income from the capitalist's growing mining business need only go work in a chip factory or cloud service datacentre, they don't need the capitalist's secret sauce recipe to profit from the success of the secret sauce. Partly people lead themselves into these situations too by not wanting to work. They want to just tell their computer or butler or servant or slave or whatever "provide me with with income" then go bask on a beach or whatever with income automagically coming in for hopefully a nice long time. They want people to be obsolete, even to obsolete themselves really in such a scenario. being obsolete living in a paradise sipping fancy drinks is the life of Riley, who wouldn't want to be obsolete? To resist the botnets and massive purchasers of cloud services maybe what is needed is "the human element". keep things changing so code constantly needs to adapt, leading eventually to the code itself needing to be adapted so it can adapt to a wider range of situations than an earlier version was able to adapt to. A kind of Turing Test maybe in a way, if humans are able by observing the actions of code/scripts to predict their behavior well enough to come up with new changes of the environment that are specifically intended to trip up the code. This already happens of course with cases such as switching to scrypt so chips etched with SHA256 cannot adapt. But what about putting that kind of conflict/development into one coin, instead of more and more chains each with different gotchas intended to trip up a previous generation of automation do something like http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=cpu_mining in which the problem of initial distribution of the coins is separate from the problem of securing the currency system whose coins are being distributed. If one person just isn't going to able to handle each and every individual task of a massively parallel collection of tasks maybe they will have an incentive to recruit people to handle a lot of threads, and in order to rake in the most profit from the work of those people equipping them with the best tools might actually make business-sense? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
So I do not think starting difficulty too low is reasonably counteracted by pools at all.
Yes, I don't suggest pools as a way to counteract birthing shenanigans - that stuff is important, but it is inside baseball. I'm thinking of the medium term distribution of a coin . . . and I mean after 2 or 3 months . . . a pool with CPU coin allows wide participation. I'm focused on a use case - there's a guy who wants to register a domain name for $10 - he doesn't have a bank account or a credit card, but he's got a CPU or access to a bunch of them - i want him to be able to use crypto currency to be able to register that domain name. What, to you, is the important difference - if there is one - between buying coins from your electricity provider (having the cost added to your electricity bill) and buying them from your phone provider (having the cost added to your phone bill) ? Also presumably they have internet, would being able to have the cost added to your internet bill also be fine/appropriate? How about maybe they don't even have internet, they go to an internet cafe for that, would adding the cost of coins to their coffee bill also be fine? Or putting it on their tab if the important feature is paying later rather than right away? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
So are there any plans to fix the code or if not the code then the original post, so that they do not contradict one-another?
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
There's the potential for mining pools too - that would allow ordinary users to get coin. That would allow for some wide distribution.
Pools seem to suffer as much as anyone else from instamining. all the small miners together in a pool or individually an orphanfest is still an orphanfest it seems. The launchers set up the initial nodes people are to download blockchains from, and presumably their own mining nodes well connected, so maybe the people launching get a lot of blocks assuming they set up the latencies correctly in their own favour. So I do not think starting difficulty too low is reasonably counteracted by pools at all. On the contrary, I think pools more likely to be useful in making a reasonable starting difficulty (which seems to probably mean at least a difficulty of fire for scrypt coins that are not insanely unpopular at launch like nuggets was; two seemed fine for nuggests since it had so very few miners) less unpalatable to small miners than it would be if they were expected to solo mine. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Now up to 419400.16171871 difficulty!
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
We are at DIFF 9 !
PPS -30%
The rate of block seems to have lower drastically too
We are at 2block/min now.
EDIT : still ~2-3block/min like before it seem
Hopefully the difficulty will go down as miners switch off. I have finally given up after getting nothing for 5 days. Inefficient miners switching off should, if markets are efficient, lead to efficient miners taking up the slack, shouldn't it? Not to opening up opportunities for more inefficient miners to inhabit? -MarkM- |
|
|
|
Naw. He's partially correct. When the average user can't mine any more it's dead.
At least until a decent difficulty change down.
That simply highlights a deeper problem, for example it seems to be based on an idea that coins are pyramid/ponzi schemes that exist only so that miners can scam people out of wealth/valuables. You consider a pyramid/ponzi dead when normal people cannot participate in keeping it running on a technical level, it seems. Thus basically you seem to be speaking of already dead from the outset, by design and intent, scams not really about currency directly at all, coins are merely a prop the particular scam happens to be using. Average users have supposedly already have been finding bitcoin impractical or uneconomic to mine but that does not mean bitcoin is dead, it merely seems to have caused GPU miners to embark upon a huge and possibly "endless'" binge of scams as an alternative to facing the basic economic fact of mining which is that profits tend toward zero and should do so if markets are efficient. One might as well say "inefficient miner" instead of "average user". But when inefficient miners cannot mine anymore that only means this kind of scam might hopefully start toward death it really isn't an issue with bitcoin only with the constantly spawning scams. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Yeah a starting difficulty of 2 might work for an extremely unpopular coin most people are determined not to mine, but for the usual launches around here it looked like maybe starting at 5 might be needed to hope to maybe not zoom through blocks many times faster than the target time.
(It only took one and a half hours to reach 5, it seemed, despite maybe not doing a retarget per block thus maybe being slower to get to 5 than it could have been had it had extremely fast retargets?)
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
Vlad, post your Spots address and I'll send you some
Where's your thread dude. How do I get a spot wallet? I'll support your coin if I can mine it with my laptop. I spent all my money on ASICS and nine have come. It's been 3 months. I need to build a GPU miner for stuff like this. If you had come to me I could have given you a feature to make your copy coin better. But you didn't. But thanks for the offer, sent me a wallet, (without a Keylog virus) and I'll support your coin. Do you realise this coin is a nearly exact copy of yours? Its his coin with a working code. We can talk about it here but he's gotta keep his crazy out of the real thread Actually its broken code, but even quoting the actual piece of broken code in the thread they describe the quoted code not as doing what it actually does but as doing something quite different. Maybe they are quoting it without actually reading it or something. Or maybe they just think God numbers work differently from mundane/mathematical numbers. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
The inbound ones likely are not able to accept inbound connections themselves, so just clutter up people's lists making them waste time trying to connect to nodes that are not equipped to accept the connection... For addnode, people need nodes accepting incoming commections. how do you know whether one of your incoming ones has the ability to accept incoming itself? i suspect that you do not. Thus you should be giving people a list of your outgoing connections, that is, nodes you have actually found to be able to accept incoming connections themselves. -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Not sure about Merchants. An exchange is all the merchant they need, and the type of merchant likely to lose the least, or even actually make some profit, by tooling up to support yet another coin.
A normal merchant probably should be using a payment processor, so it would probably not be the merchant's decision which coins to accept, as the merchant just accepts his or her own local or favourite currency from the payment processor. But a merchant who actually has to have an information technology department running coin daemons webmasters adding more web code to direct payment buttons to the right daemons and so on is most probably effectively just another little old lady bystander being run down by the pump and dump bus.
The kind of miners who mine this crap do not care whether merchants came aboard and will be left holding the bag in a few hours when the next scamcoin launches, they will be off chasing that scamcoin. The merchant is just another bagholder, the miners need bagholders so I suppose they will be saying oh forget that old piece of crap, that is yesterday's pump, its already dumped, re-tool your shopping cart and sales literature to this new launch we are doing this hour...
Merchants are just victims, won't they wise up eventually? Heck maybe they already wised up, forcing the scamcoins to make up scam-services such as gambling (scam you out of money by fixing the odds against you; gambling is inherently a scam) if they want to pretend they have adoption...
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
See how eager he is already to leave grandma holding the bag yet again.
If she does follow him to spots she'll soon hold that bag too, and the next, and the next, and the next...
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
At any given moment, what is the chance that one of the chains with bonus blocks is on one?
(If it is still low, not to worry, as people keep spewing out such chains that chance should keep climbing, yes?)
if it depends on the last block's hash (or the height or any other known value) and you know it, you don't need probabilities: you know for sure if next block is a big one or not. If you want to know the general pobability without knowing last block's hash, then it's constant and it doesn't climb, because each block has a "random" independant probability. I meant is it unlikely that looping through all such coins checking each to see if its next block will be a high paying one will discover at any given moment at least one such coin, or are there enough now that you will almost certain find, by the tiem you have mined a high paying block of such a chain, that one of the others is already in a "next block is a higher paying one' state so that you already have at least one chain to hop to to find a lucky block? Maybe it will end up more a matter of how much higher paying, due to typically there being more than one chain whose next block is a lucky block... -MarkM- |
|
|
|
|
Well look on the bright side: they aren't just scamming little old ladies out of their savings by selling scamcoins, they are also scamming miners out of hashing power they could be directing at something else, so if nothing else that crap does help lure away competitors, maybe even in proportion to the sleaziness / scamminess of each individual competitor lured, away from the bread and butter mining of serious miners - miners who are serious about securing a blockchain reliably so services other than scamming / gambling can reasonably be built on it.
-MarkM-
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
