I love I/O Coin  I hope I/OCoin back to 4000sat . . . I hope I/OCoin back to 10K sat again. |
|
|
|
|
Anyone knows when wallet ready?
|
|
|
|
V2 is actually not a wallet version. That means that Solarcoin will have transition to PoS version V2. (POSV from RDD coin). The current wallet version is V1.5. |
|
|
|
We've successfully forked Reddcoin POSV for Cannacoin and Solarcoin. Transactions have been tested... next up is testing Proof-of-Stake...
Keep ya'll posted. After this we'll need a few days to compile wallets for OSX and Windows
Exciting times, thanks for the patience.
Can you tell us what the main differences are between Reddcoin and Blackcoin? Is there any material difference between the two that we should know about? This is the most concise explanation of Reddcoin information that I've found: http://agroff.github.io/posv/Reddcoin has a 5% stake multiplier. For Cannacoin we reduced this down to 1%. I am assuming that Solarcoin also uses a 1% staking interest as well, but it is a parameter in the code that can be set. Both Reddcoin and Blackcoin Proof-of-Stake protocols are second generation PoS implementation (V2). Both teams wanted to have more people staking coins and thereby acting as nodes on the network. However they also wanted to discourage hoarding. Proof-of-stake uses your "network weight" to determine how you will be rewarded coins for staking. BC and RDD differ here a bit. They measure this weight differently in the sense of coins vs. coin-age. In addition Reddcoin gives a bonus to newer coins through creating incentive for a person to stake coins while also encouraging people to transact with them through "velocity" or trading/moving coins. They accomplish this by rewarding newly received coins with a higher initial interest than older staked coins. Blackcoin does away with "coin-age" in the multiplier for staking, so you don't have to hold the coins for a certain amount of time before they are "stakeable". Instead, you just have to wait 8 hours after the coin is in your wallet and it will begin staking as "weight". I also recommend you read this, particularly starting at section 2.3 and down: https://www.reddcoin.com/papers/PoSV.pdfBlack coin initially forked from Peercoin and had a proof-of-work period. The difference in some block timestamping differences between Bitcoin and Peercoin are what caused the forking issue. Reddcoin was a fork of Litecoin originally and was scrypt mined. That's why we were able to get the merkel root to synchronize with Cannacoin finally using Reddcoin. The biggest concern I have in terms of the math/interest calculations is related to the coins sitting in the Generator/Genesis pools. Will this massive pile of coins waiting to be given out affect the calculations in the code to a great degree? And, if so, should the SolarCoin algo be tweaked in order to make sure that the calculations only involve coins in circulation? It appears that the PoSV option will be better for generators who receive their coins for the first time as they will be small holders with "new coins" in their wallet (sent from the generator pool) and that's a good thing. We need to be sure those people are rewarded well, as they are the future of this coin. I just want to be sure you guys take those pools of coins that have already been mined and are sitting on the blockchain into account in the formulas, if necessary. +1, The coins in Generator/Genesis pools should be excluded for staking. The PoS staking will divide coins into very small amount and make it hard to trace transaction. |
|
|
|
Hi all, Thanks Corather and Mazzaneo for mentions.  A short update on my project called the #solarcoinalphaproject. I promised that the first version would be out by late October so I thought I had better inform about the schedules. I am running behind schedule. The goal of the project is more of a running proof of concept to show that an encrypted signal can be sent from a stand-alone PV system's API to any required receivers to accurately and securely prove the number of solarcoin's being generated by the system during daylight hours of operation. 0) Design completed. Electrical design and then some tests of the gateway and its communication to the software teams API. Completed. I had some initial road blocks here. 1) Components procured and delivered. So far it also includes a global pyranometer enabling the system to have a prediction mechanism inbuilt based on historical weather data for the location. 2) Weather proofing tested for battery box. 3) Power system DC Wiring half completed. 4) Meeting with software team completed. Understand tasks. Remaining: 5) Communication box wiring 6) Dry test and link to API. 7) Stability and running for 1-2 weeks.  Writing the white paper (in parallel) to explain the prediction technology, the link to the API and possible further work ( I hope others can pick up from where I stop) i.e. secure blockchain calls and receives because my area of expertise is solar yield prediction technology, solar PV systems and PV monitoring systems, not networking security. Please note, the system is only a proof of concept intended to show what could be done theoretically. It would not interfere with anything. Thank you, -lfloorwalker Is this Solarcoin miner?  |
|
|
|
I'm off to a conference all weekend. My 50 MHs is mining away, hopefully the next few days aren't too interesting, I'd hate to miss all the fun! To the Sun! To the Sun! +++1 |
|
|
|
How about setting threshold value for PoS staking?
For example, the wallet with minimum 1K SLR will be allowed staking.
This will encourage people to keep their coin at least 1K to stake.
Having less than 1K, people have to buy more to stake.
What do you think about this?
I like the idea but make it 10,000 10k minimum seems more realistic with the current prices; however, if we assume the price is going to over $1, then 1k is more realistic. Maybe the minimum stake can start high with the expectation that it will be lowered sometime in the future? +1 Yes, exactly. That's the beauty of cryptocurrency for me. If we see down the road when things normalize that it's time for such a change be made to the algorithm, we can all choose to agree on what that change may be and the blockchain technology takes care of the implementation in a fair and impartial way for us. It's an ever evolving thing that grows based on participation. It's this concept that got me really excited about bitcoin in the first place! When we first were trying to figure out PoS, I posted that spreadsheet, if anyone remembers. In my mind, I thought we needed to plan the PoS algorithm for years in the future, with decreasing interest rates and all kinds of complicated capping formulas. But then I realized I was making it TOO complicated. Start with the basics, see how that pans out and then tweak as needed after that. Allow other points of view into the conversation, every voice contributes. We're doing it right now! It really is a natural process we are all taking part in. The important thing is to take the first step within the means available to us. That meant choosing the Blackcoin model straight up as a way to start down the path. I have every confidence that the interest calculation will evolve over time based on circumstances on the ground, just as the discussion here is starting to happen. Obviously we don't want to be having a new wallet every month, but if the framework is broad enough then having a new wallet once or twice a year is not out of the question nor should it be frowned upon. That's the nature of this game, isn't it? +1 |
|
|
|
How about setting threshold value for PoS staking?
For example, the wallet with minimum 1K SLR will be allowed staking.
This will encourage people to keep their coin at least 1K to stake.
Having less than 1K, people have to buy more to stake.
What do you think about this?
I think it's a good idea but with so many people holding coins I'm generally worried about the liquidity. I don't think many people here will be selling their solarcoin cheap. To become more popular coin, we have to think about new comers not just among us. If someone is quite new to SLR, who wants to stake, then have to purchase at least 1K (It's depends on) In addition, people have to keep their coin at least 1K to maintain staking. To become 1$ currency, we have to control liquidity as well. |
|
|
|
|
How about setting threshold value for PoS staking?
For example, the wallet with minimum 1K SLR will be allowed staking.
This will encourage people to keep their coin at least 1K to stake.
Having less than 1K, people have to buy more to stake.
What do you think about this?
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you.
People want to connect Crypto to real money. Like Cannabis Coin, Uro Coin...
The just want to calculate like 'Crypto : Fiat or Crypto : Something valuable'.
To form strong background for Solarcoin-eco system. I suggests followings.
* PV vendor adoption.
To become green-money, first vendor should be Photovoltaic company. Almost every company spend money in discount, promotion, and rebate.
For example, a company sells roof-top PV system with 90% fiat, 10% SLR. (like discount coupon)
At first, company receive 90% of price and 10% of SLR. This stage, SLR portion is less than price, because of low SLR price.
However, this promotion will add real world value to SLR.
Eventually, A company will recover value from SLR portion.
What do you think about this?
|
|
|
|
I have been looking around this forum and been reading up on all of the false information people are being presented with. Just to clarify: - http://prntscr.com/4ugy99 --> Shadowncoin uses the QT wallet and has a HTML5 front-end. FACT - I/O did create the FIRST HTML5 standalone wallet. FACT As to why they did this and what advantages this brings. Well consider that this is a market currently mostly involved with members who have a technical background and are developers who do not understand marketing or design. When you see that and realize the only way out to the public and gaining more support to this community is through creating wallets that are user friendly and have been designed to create simplicity. Not stuffed with a ton of features which have no support for its overall market adaptability. I believe I/O deserve some credit for doing this and allowing it to be open source. Look how this market is shaping, the coins that have the real features and real goals are being pushed into the dark so that the glorified marketed and useless coins are traded instead. +1 to the I/O team for their great efforts despite the great deal of pressure that has been placed against them. Keep it up mates Article http://www.coinssource.com/io-coin-design-meets-function-html5-wallet-pos-3-0/+++1  |
|
|
|
People, please remember, IOC is not some PnD coin. This coin will not die, we will not let it.
There is big promotions just happening with this coin, outside of crypto. We are introducing this coin to millions of new people who, due to the promotions being done, will be buying this coin.
We are doing everything we can to make a solid product with solid innovations.
This is where i want to ask the community here for a little help.
What will make a big difference to the price, is that we need to make this coin available to purchase directly with USD.
When we make that happen, there will be no more worries about the price, i can assure you. So if anyone here, has any suggestions on how we can make that happen, please comment. We are working on this also, but suggestions welcome.
Please hang in there, with us... this is a big storm we find ourself in, but we will push though onto much brighter days.
I'm Bitdaddy on twitter, and Max-io on IONS. AFAIK, pure PoS coins usually have very little buy support. People just turn their wallet on and just wait staking. If you guy really want to make huge progress in price, then try to find the best way to let people buy more coin and store in wallet. The master nodes of Darkcoin is good example. I don't agree to ANON concept at all, but the way they make people purchase 1K coin and keep it for master node. First time I heard about 100K give away to 5K holder, I was really impressed. However, just waiting 500 hundred more people following is very passive thinking. I believe IOCoin because of strong dev team. Please find the way like master node to promote people purchase more coin and staking. For example, grant some more benefit to whom hold over 5K from new service integrated in wallet. (D-IONS, contents exchanges.. etc) |
|
|
|
Very NICE looking wallpaper there! Thank you Wiz! Is there 1920 X 1080 size? Link plz. I changed my wall paper on my hackintosh PC. |
|
|
|
Finally, Solarcoin successfully hard-forked. |
|
|
|
New logo seems to be cursed. After new logo, something bad happened and happened. Things are getting worse.  |
|
|
|
Block chain up and running again. |
|
|
|
Is this on time wrap attack? Screnn shot: http://prntscr.com/4pgp6zAt this time, the difficulty was over 60K.  So weird. http://www.coinssource.com/kimoto-gravity-well-exploit-exposed/Time Warp Exploit, basically takes advantage of KGW’s method for difficulty retargeting, allowing an attacker with sufficient hashing power to mine at a much lower difficulty level. If such an attack occurred, the attacker would be able to mine all of the blocks at an artificially low difficulty while the blockchain would appear frozen or stuck to the rest of the miners. Then once the attacker released the block chain it would take a long time for the miners to re-synchronize with the blockchain and to validate the attacker’s blocks.Please change re-target algorithm. KGW is not enough.The blockchain seems to be stuck again at #639064.  In cgminer screen, the difficulty is 4.67M. |
|
|
|
Is this on time wrap attack? Screnn shot: http://prntscr.com/4pgp6zAt this time, the difficulty was over 60K. So weird. http://www.coinssource.com/kimoto-gravity-well-exploit-exposed/Time Warp Exploit, basically takes advantage of KGW’s method for difficulty retargeting, allowing an attacker with sufficient hashing power to mine at a much lower difficulty level. If such an attack occurred, the attacker would be able to mine all of the blocks at an artificially low difficulty while the blockchain would appear frozen or stuck to the rest of the miners. Then once the attacker released the block chain it would take a long time for the miners to re-synchronize with the blockchain and to validate the attacker’s blocks.Please change re-target algorithm. KGW is not enough. |
|
|
|
|
Finally found block. whew.
However, the re-targeting algorithm should be changed immediately.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
