Ok sounds good.

I would want to compile the coind from source though so it's easier to set up a node or two.

Marketcap is 50k, so cheap to pick up a couple %

I am having trouble compiling the Daemon in Linux

The errors I am getting is

serialize.h:837:8 error: 'void CDataStream::insert(CDataStream::iterator, CDataStream::const_iterator)' cannot be overloaded

serialize.h:824:11 error: with 'void CDataStream::insert(CDataStream::iterator, CDataStream::const_iterator, CDataStream::const_iterator)'

The windows wallet works so either I am missing some dependencies or need to comment something out.

Funny, thought you two didn't like each other.

If you ever leave Spoetnik, we will hunt you down and force you to post.

If I felt confident I could do it on my own I would just do it, post the sourcecode and let you guys work out the final values. I haven't created a hardfork before so I don't want to do it and see you guys suffer and hurt my own reputation. Ahmed said he's about halfway done a patch of HoboNickels so what I can do to help would be some bug testing, hosting nodes and seednodes. A seednode cost about $90 USD a year and regular nodes start from $5 a month depending on the size of the VPS, I would host as many as you guys want as long as I can be paid upfront each month the cost of maintaining the nodes, $30-$40 a month isn't too much but it's still an extra expense I wouldn't want to incur each month.

When it comes to the Blockchain, the main factor that needs to be taken into account is it's growth rate over time. Every transaction whether it is POW, POS or sending transactions adds to the size of the Blockchain. If you have a 30 second Block time it is great for speed of transactions but over a long period it can cause a significant amount of bloat to the point where it is both time and resource heavy to sync and maintain full nodes. Transactions themselves also play a major role in the size of the Blockchain over time, if a person has a large amount of small inputs they are combining into a transaction it adds a significant amount of extra data into the Blockchain, far more than just what is accrued through Blocktime. If you have a balance of 100,000 consisting of 1000 small inputs or more, it can add several MB of extra bloat into the Blockchain in one transaction.

Fees play a large role in limiting the Blockchain size and IMO are more important than the amount of inflation per year because it both limits size and pays holders through POS. Fractalcoin experimented with 0.5% fees on transactions which should not be confused with most Blockchains that have a fee of 5 * CENT which would equal 0.05 coins per transaction. The problem with every transaction having a minimum fee or percentage of the transaction being sent is that the entire amount will go directly into the next block so for example if the transaction were 100k with 0.5% of that transaction being collected as a fee (500 coins), if the network difficulty is low and someone staked 1000 coins they would receive the amount of inflation for their coinage, plus the 500 coins collected as a fee and any other fees collected in the previous Block. A more practical approach in regards to percentage fees would be to have every fee collected, split up and paid out over the minimum staking period and the maximum staking period equal to twice the minimum (5/10, 7/14, 10/20, 15/30). In this way it would create a base minimum that would always be received through Stake depending on volume and would create competition in order to Stake as frequently as possible throughout the period but also having enough coinage in each transaction so you are staking sooner rather than later. This method hasn't been implemented on any coin (because you have to go by the previous Block only) but it should because arbitraging exchanges for trading profits would generate a significant amount of revenue for long-term holders on top of the inflation per year.

Virtually every Cryptocurrency try to set out to be a currency and it's this approach that has seen constant declines over time. It should be treated as a company where a portion of Stake is retained in order to pay for services. Let's face it, donations do not work because if price drops lower than the point at which a person purchased their coins, no one wants to donate funds in order to help pay for essential services when already at a loss. I proposed this to Zack some months ago but he was very against the idea and we didn't talk much after that. I still think Proof of Stake only, percentage fees and a percentage of Stake to a Development Fund is the way to go for any coin. If you were to decide to go that route, the best way would be to start with what would be the minimum fixed fee, then work on developing percentage fees distributed over time for anything higher than the fixed fee and then once that complete to work on a shared Development Fund. A percentage of Stake going to a Development Fund would equal the same amount of transactions as Blocks per year so something like that would need to be implemented in a share system similar to Devcoin so you aren't going to have a 500 MB wallet (525k transactions at roughly 1 kb per transaction) after one year and would also need to make use of multi-signature transactions so that it is not reliant on one trusted person but a group of trusted people in order to be used.

Most of this is mainly theory but is definitely possible, it's all about how new ideas are implemented and what effects they will have from trade to user experience over time.

My 2 Satoshis

It has defiantly caused a huge stir in the markets, the blowoff went for the most part went back into BTC, the volitility is wild.

What an epic crash for ppc, 385 down to 230 in a matter of 5 hours, more than 1 million USD in ppc sold on the market. I'm not sure it was such a good move to go with such secrecy and the countdown considering nubits has little to do with the ppc price and may cause a fair bit of downward pressure.

exciting times! can't wait to see what the peercoin has released, they've been talking about it for months.

When the internet began there wasn't the same amount of freely distributed information available and people wrote letters to each other in pen and mailed them, read newspapers for stock quotes and no sms, youtube, facebook or reddit. I will always say that the Cryptocurrency ecosystem is more akin to massive multiplayer online games crossed with the seriousness of future finance. The way forums are setup and the amount of newbies and trolling are all the same, just at a more exaggerated level since digital finance is not a game.

Ok, that makes sense, I haven't done as much testing in that area. I was going by Blackcoin and Diamondcoin making those changes to the past and future drift and updating the version so everyone needs to be on the highest version. That is not really a bad thing if older clients who are submitting blocks with more than a 10 minute drift get banned, timeoffset anywhere in the world shouldn't be more than a 10 minute difference anyways so then the node would be banned and need to update to the newest version which the majority is on. I think tightening up the offset would be a good thing for the network but needs to be the conditions where there are more nodes and the network is growing.

If I can help in some way, I can be of service. I can run some nodes for you guys at cost and manage them but I would want to be paid upfront each month the cost of running however many nodes you want. VPS nodes are cheap, maybe you could do 5-10 nodes at $5-10 each a month. I also have access to a reliable seed node service for $92 a year if you would like and can put you in touch, maybe he can give you better rates.

I don't really want to be the person pushing out the commit to ADT because I am having enough trouble as it is with my own project. Take a look at HoboNickels, Blackcoin, Asiacoin, Skynet, if you cross all code against each other, there is a base structure to every coin and the differences aren't that big. I really think the main problem is that the wallet needs a locktime and a check to stop it from Staking before downloading all the Blocks. The bulk of what you would need to change is only in about 10 files in the src folder and mainly just the main.cpp, main.h, and all the mining files.

To my knowledge, you don't need a hardfork if you want to change the time difference for the timeoffset, Blackcoin has 10 minutes to the past and future, other coins have 2 hours. If you have a 2 hour offset, you create orphan blocks as you stake and then have them ripped away when you finish downloading the final blocks.

Check out Github for Windows, great for cross referencing sourcecode.

What is it that you want for the prefrences? like min/max Stake age, reward per year, did you still want to change the reward payouts? Are we still waiting on Mullick?

you can use multibit to load your wallet and reset it to an earlier point and respend the transaction with a higher fee in which case either it will be accepted with the higher fee or rejected if the first transaction is already too deep in the chain and gets a confirmation.

Ok so then maybe it is a case that the POW is too low compared to CGB, there may have been bugs in the code that you were not aware of when you made the copy.

Did you also change the retarget times? CGB Blockchain favors POW over POS so a Block is always chosen for POW first, however ADT has very low POW reward.

Edit: Oh yeah, here is a test coin I am using https://github.com/Crestington/test3

I thought you helped Tranz with HoboNickels earlier on?

Look at HoboNickels for what you need for changes if you want to keep POW, Blackcoin if you want POS only, check both and cross reference them accross each other, Diamondcoin is also a decent example you can use. If you are changing Staking times, I believe Feathercoin changed their Stake time and difficulty a few months ago as well. Blackcoin has some of the best code to use but HoboNickels has the best wallet layout and functions (except that Blackcoin has "Addredeemscript" which is a big piece in Multi-Signature and HoboNickels does not.

For Proof of Stake you should have multiple wallet control so you can load different wallets, otherwise you have to close your wallet in order to load a different wallet and it makes for easier partitioning of your funds. Coin Control is needed so you can manage your blocks of coins for Staking, if you have a massive amount of transactions in your Wallet, it will slow down the GUI from all the small inputs trying to hash a new block and reduces your overall Stake reward since many coins will never Stake. Without Coin Control, you cannot effectively combine all your small coin inputs into larger ones without sending all your coins to a new wallet or addresses in large chunks and unless you really understand where your inputs are combining, you may be taking from the same inputs you are trying to combine.

I suggest talking to "old c coder" if you would like pay him for some coding tips, I've asked him on a number of occasions to review code for me and he's spot on every time but I guess 30 years experience in coding helps somewhat. He doesn't work much with Proof of Stake but he has alof of knowledge of c/c++ coding and building in Windows.

If you want, I have some relatively decent POW/POS sourcecode to for you to work with and currently working on putting an implementation of HoboNickels features into it, it's much harder to create a successful hardfork than to create a new Blockchain. I'm not suggesting creating a new coin in such a respect, just that it's easier to test in a closed atmosphere and be sure it isn't going to affect the Main Chain and works. The soucecode I am using is incomplete though and it's based on communitycoin and doesn't have proper coin control. It does have the address ban feature in it which is more useful in that you could modify it as a further security check.

All good, I'll just stick to suggestions then.

If going with KGW for the Proof of Work, you need to make sure it's implemented properly and if I were you I would give BitcoinXpress a bounty for him to stress test your Proof of Work for you. All these altcoins are afraid of BCX, Why? They should be paying him for his technical experience.

Looks like you are heading towards a Proof of Stake only state at some point? Rat4 from Blackcoin posted a security analysis of Proof of Stake with a low POW reward a little while back https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=551861.0

For Proof of Stake you need at a minimum, coin control, multiple wallet support and provide the situation where everyone will keep their wallets open 24/7 and if you do not balance the Stake % along with a proper coin weight, you are creating a situation in which exchanges (which can hold up to 30-50% of the coins) can sell all Stake on their own market. Take a look how Blocks are split up during transactions and at what point should transactions pull your largest, oldest blocks.

A possible solution to inflation is strict minimum on fees and precentage fees, Fractalcoin implemented % fees somewhat but the way they did it is incomplete because for them, the 0.5% fee goes directly into the next Block so you would receive that fee as long as you Staked, whether it's 100 coins or 100K coins. % Fees if paid out over a larger number of Blocks would be great for Proof of Stake because you wouldn't need to have such high % of Stake per year and would encourage people to want to Stake as many Blocks as possible in order to receive the most amount of fees. Fees over a large amount of Blocks in Proof of Stake has not been implemented in any coin as far as I can tell but would be beneficial because you could then set your minimum stake period to about 7-10 days and fees to pay out over the minimum stake period. For example, you could have 0.5% fee to pay out over 4k blocks (1 week at 2.5 minutes) so a transaction of 100k coins would add 0.125 coins to the next 4k blocks. Successful coins such as Doge has 10k transactions a day, Reddcoin and Blackcoin about 3-4k transactions. Something like this would be beneficial because during very high volume times and if people are dumping their coins, it would be far more beneficial to be Staking and holding your coins.

@ squall1066

Would you be interested in helping me revamp Colossuscoin? At my disposal I have access to forums with resources and guides, test forums, marketing strategies, links to exchanges, compiling in Linux and Windows, transaction tools, nodes and seednodes, a working test coin, virtual GUI desktops in the cloud and can use Github.

I need help in putting the Blockchain and Wallet together as well as other people to help manage funds for development, contact me if you are interested I have some pretty cool stuff I can show you.

Sort of, someone sent Bitcoinxpress a message about Monero and he found an exploit, sandbox tested and confirmed it. I think it's about 10 pages back, the guys from Monero responded as well.

If you want something like that you should look at Reddcoin with Kimoto gravity well for the POW distribution. Stay away from Super Blocks, no reason to have something people can game and if doing a shorter or medium POW phase then start out with a low reward and move up. I'm not sure how you would deal with people farming it though, and what would your plan be in order to pay for services and development?

Too few coins are not good because they seem so expensive that they are sold down to nothing, too many coins (500 Billion+) and your coin can only ever trade at a minimum on the exchanges. I've had this discussion in great detail and I think people in general like dealing in whole coins and many coins over pieces of a coin so for something like you want for a store of value, I'd suggest 1-50 million.

If you are going POW/POS with a fast distribution, I hope you really understand how Proof of Stake works because Coins = Hash Power and you have to make it so people want to always keep their wallet online to Stake.

Still so much to be done yet before it is ready.

In the last week I have been working on testing of different extremes of reward changes, very minor wallet changes, setting up nodes, helping a friend learn how to compile wallets and daemons in linux, wrote a couple guides on compiling.

The wallet needs alot of work yet, it's nowhere near ready, it still needs changes in resizing, coin control, multiple wallet support.

Here is a picture of the Wallet as it looks with a couple minor changes.




My goal is to create our own self-sustaining Decentralized Corporation. Through pooling of Stake Generation and Fees into a community managed fund, donations for services are not needed as all activity generates income.

A challenge here will be creating a shared address that requires a majority of external keys for verification to send, without one person having access to all the keys at once.

No, I mean that the minimum Stake is 15 days so people forget about it and keep their Wallets closed and so with a minimum amount of reward is so small that there is no incentive in order to have your coins in your wallet and Staking so network security becomes low and localized into clusters of coins Staking all at once and with POW mining also with small incentive and Staking before being synced, there are a number of issues here at work. A fork could be created by shunting POS Blocks until it becomes POW only and then have a majority of the hashrate.

(total_balance - smallest_unspent_output) wouldn't really work unless you were over the maximum stake period and alot of coins are often so small that they will never Stake, your smallest unspent output in this case could be dust. It would probably be better something along the lines of (total_balance - (smallest_unspent_output > 1000 * COIN))

Would it continually produce just one POS? I think it would just unlock one block unless scripted to do so, you should try this and tell us how you go with it.

I was only interested in what spots has been up to. I don't really see the issue here other than Cryptsy willfully engaging in insider trading but hey, this is Crypto full of wild rampant speculation so I guess that's ok  I have a picture somewhere of Bitjohn saying he can 51% coins as well so I guess this was the story of Cryptsy backdoor dealings and TIX that MF was referring to. The disturbing truth is that this is how so many companies become successful, skirting the laws where they can take advantage of loopholes.

Am I just so desensitized to all the shifty dealings that go on that it just doesn't phase me anymore? I don't really care about the TIX thing because most everyone here has skeletons in their closet and yet can be brave enough to hide things cause lets face it, this is experimental and shit goes wrong the majority of the time.

Spoetnik, didn't you just say you wanted an attack pool and then accuse iGotspots of attacking coins? Besides, I've never heard of Gil or anything remotely close to it which leads me to the conclusion that it probably was the same guy releasing the same coin over and over. This is more of you two not liking each other than than who did what, but you guys battling it out is pretty entertaining.



I nominate Spoetnik as "Popcorn Poster of the Year" by account of the most entertaining replies.