10k $ for 100 Mhas ? did they miss 2 zero ?
This is for scrypt mining, not sha256. |
|
|
|
49miner - why will not Boxxa and the Pirate adjust the fork? http://cryptominers.freeforums.org/a-statement-by-the-master-coin-maker-of-mazacoin-t58.htmlA Statement By The Master Coin Maker Of MazaCoin
Tuesday - March 18, 2014
The Master Coin Formula, as enumerated on the Official MazaCoin website and detailed in the MazaCoin White Paper - taken together with the blockchain parameters form something known as a coin's Core Protocol. While it is much in vogue lately among the plethora of "meme" coins to be constantly hard forking their blockchains and altering their coin's Core Protocol, this is both futile from a technical stand point and wrong from an ethical one.
Unless a particular coin is substantially flawed in it's original design, any change in that coin's Core Protocol will inevitably result in undesired consequences. In the case of MazaCoin, which is functioning flawlessly in every way it would be a clear case of trying to fix something that is not broken - and would almost certainly doom the coin. I can not allow this to happen.
As for the ethical consequences of altering the Core Protocol of a Crypto Currency, there are a few. For one it flies in the face of the ideal of decentralization, essentially placing the development team in the position of a central reserve chairman; deciding on the money supply and other core aspects of a financial system. The whole point of Crypto Currency is defied by this act. With true Crypto Currency the Core Protocol, immutable - decides the behavior of the coin. And it is trust in that immutable Core Protocol that drive people to want to adopt and invest in said Crypto Currency over the long term.
There will be no hard fork of the MazaCoin blockchain for the foreseeable future. The Core Protocol of MazaCoin will not be altered.
SINCERELY -- AnonymousPirate
Master Coin Maker - MazaCoin |
|
|
|
The expert claims that in some cases banks have lent out TEN TIMES as much money as they actually have.
Yes. Is that meant to be a surprise to anyone? |
|
|
|
Funny how mostly newbies complaining about this coin. Did you read the first 50 pages auf aurora? Looks the same. Yes, because this is just yet another copy of AuroraCoin, so it will get the same responses. Only here the 'dev' is clearly clueless, and it is even less believable that AUR. |
|
|
|
Next stop, the red tops. Then the fireworks really begin.
You think The Sun is going to run a headline economic theory article? |
|
|
|
And how could 0.001% out of 100 mio be 1000?
0.001% from 100 million dollar are 1.000 dollar.  I'm just going to quote this so you can't go back and edit it later when you hit 5th grade and they teach you how to multiply decimals. 1% of 100 million dollars is 1 million dollars. 0.001% is 1/1000th of a percent, which is 1000 dollars. In most of Europe, the decimal is the thousands separator, and the comma is used to mark what we would call the decimal point. So 1.000 dollar above means 1,000 dollars in English usage. |
|
|
|
You miss the point.
This coin is not a shit coin, it's a scam coin!
The scammer presents the image that this is a genuine attempt for financial freedom for UK citizens and 50 million will get coins. But, the reality, is that the premine will be dumped as soon as it is profitable.
I think the point is that noone is surprised by that, because it is true of almost all altcoin releases. They are all just scams by devs hoping to make a quick buck with either a pre-mine, an insta-mine, or both. At this point, new alt-coin and new scam alt-coin mean the same thing. |
|
|
|
|
Looks like they were all transferred to 1HfhEoJNfzDFff91wU2q2gUpu7zc3yF8mB except for 999900 which went to 19WS9xbEQoriYam2A6ziAJHgx1HSZCJwJK.
Looks like that might have been a typo, transferring 100 rather than 1000000, with the remainder going to a change address.
|
|
|
|
Maza is coded to stay between $.25-$1.00 for its first year. No it isn't. What does that even mean? Do you have any idea how silly it sounds? People dont do there fucking research.
Indeed. MazaCoin was designed to be real, usable money - not a pump and dump scrypt coin. Anyone who gets involved in MazaCoin looking to make a fast buck is in for a serious disappointment. The one year target for MazaCoin is between 0.25 and 1.00 USD per MazaCoin. The five year target is between 2.00 and 3.00 USD per MazaCoin. This is the sort of slow gentle deflation curve that I spoke of in the MazaCoin White Paper, and this slow curve is what ultimately will make MazaCoin a premier global Crypto Currency and a truly usable National coinage for the Oglala Lakota Nation. http://cryptominers.freeforums.org/post-launch-statement-from-the-creator-of-mazacoin-t27.htmlGo fuck yourself and have a nice day.  What you said: Maza is coded to stay between $.25-$1.00 for its first year What they said: The one year target for MazaCoin is between 0.25 and 1.00 USD per MazaCoin Those two things are not the same. The idea of a coin being 'coded' for a fixed fiat conversion is simply nonsensical. |
|
|
|
|
Not yet another country shitcoin!
|
|
|
|
We really need add to coinmarketcap.com  Yes. And the Dev do and say nothing anymore? I cant belive it. The price can be now 10 times higher and we had a lot of more mining power when it was on coinmarketcap Already posted on twitter. We are active as much as possible. Please help us to promote this coin. If you know anybody who can do a block explorer please ask them. I think at this point it is pretty clear that you don't count as being a 'Dev', as you seem to have just paid someone to create a clone coin for you, and have no idea how it actually works. |
|
|
|
Maza is coded to stay between $.25-$1.00 for its first year. No it isn't. What does that even mean? Do you have any idea how silly it sounds? People dont do there fucking research.
Indeed. |
|
|
|
As I said, if you are running a bitcoin node already, the added cost running a p2pool node is minimal. Certainly not everyone does have a bitcoin node.
Yes, I think we can both agree on both parts of that sentence. If someone is already running a full bitcoin node, p2pool is a much easier sell. My guess would be that while the hashrate has risen massively in the last year, the number of full bitcoin nodes has nowhere near kept pace? |
|
|
|
The 'problem' is that almost all of the new mining power joining the Bitcoin network is motivated purely by profit, and has no altruistic interest in securing the Bitcoin network as an end in itself.
P2Pool requires a lot of extra effort and resources, for little, if any, actual additional benefit over using Eligious/GHash.
Please see the FUD-repellant thread ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=153232.0) and stop spreading it. P2pool doesn't require "a lot" of effort or resources. I did so for in a few hours on hardware that cost me a few hundred dollars (a tiny fraction of what I've spent on miners), and it is probably possible to use cheaper hardware or run on existing hardware in many cases. [...] I do agree it isn't suitable for small miners due to the need to run a bitcoin node, although some people do that anyway. The p2pool part itself is minimal. Most of the new ASIC hardware either includes, or can be controlled by, tiny computers like a Raspberry Pi or a BeagleBone. Mining on a standard pool means no need to store the blockchain, almost no CPU or memory requirements, and no network bandwidth required for all of the transactions. Compared to that, runnng a p2pool node does require massively more resources. That's a small price to pay for for the benefits of immunity from the risks of pools being dishonest, getting hacked, or just having screw ups.
In fact it doesn't require any resources at all since you can use an existing public node. Which opens you back up again to your pool being dishonest or incompetent. Daily withdrawals from a 'normal' pool reduces the exposure to loss. The primary reason to use p2pool is to 'protect the network'. Most new miners don't care about that. |
|
|
|
I will be reopening a new recruiting thread, and it will be self moderated. If you have something to add in terms of recruiting miners to p2pool and therefore helping bitcoin, you and IYFTech are welcome to join. "You need to make it much easier to install and understand" is a legitimate bit of advice, and just removing posts won't stop that being true. The 'problem' is that almost all of the new mining power joining the Bitcoin network is motivated purely by profit, and has no altruistic interest in securing the Bitcoin network as an end in itself. P2Pool requires a lot of extra effort and resources, for little, if any, actual additional benefit over using Eligious/GHash. |
|
|
|
So its not supposed to update my "Account balance" every minute or so? Were you using the PPS (pay per share) method before? That has now been removed, so you are using the PPLNS (pay per last N shifts) method. With PPS, you earned a fixed amount each time you submitted a share. With PPLNS you earn a variable amount depending on how many blocks the pool finds over given time periods (shifts), and your account is only credited each time a shift ends (roughly each hour). |
|
|
|
A few days ago Cryptsy posted a message on the Colossuscoin markets stating that "This market is under consideration for deactivation due to volume". Cryptsy holds approximately 40% or more of all Colossuscoin on their exchange so as a direct result of their notice, price has dropped more than 50%
[...]
I am active on the forums daily and have Bit John on Skype as well as several other members of the Development Team. Cryptsy had the means and opportunity to inform us prior to the message they put up but failed to do so.
So, to play devil's advocate, they should have given you private notice of information sure to cause a significant change in the value of the coin? Which would allow you to unload coins at the higher price. That would be insider dealing in any regulated environment. |
|
|
|
I'm looking for less known coins , that haven't yet hit the news , but still have some potential , cons that have stayed below radar for most people or have become more or less abandoned. Are there still things going on with this?
No. The entire concept was idiotic, and almost certainly just created for a joke. |
|
|
|
For example: I know I am making an assumption here, but when the Wall Street Journal made that article about MazaCoin, I bet they did background checks on Payu Harris. Don't you think the media would have already reported it? And by media I do not mean Facebook. I just think Payu is really bad at managing this project; but what do I know? He very well could end up being a con artist.
It was a WSJ blog, not a news article, and it is obvious they didn't do any sort of fact checking, otherwise they wouldn't have said, and then had to retract, that the coin was officially adopted by the tribe. As for background checking Payu Harris, they didn't even get his tribal background right, referring to him as a Lakota Indian. |
|
|
|
If one pool controls more then 50% of the network it can fake transaction because more then the half of the miners would validate the fake transaction. They could create any balance on there account they want. And the real value of the coin would drop to 0.
That is almost completely wrong Miners cannot fake transactions or alter the balances of accounts. What they can do is selectively decide which transactions to process. The main risk of a 51% attack is the ability to reverse transactions by double-spending. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
