|
Bug? I already wagered some bitcoins but I still get this message:
Maximum amount that you can withdraw is 1.0140. You have a pending bonus of 1.0000. In order to get this reward, you need to wager 10.0000 more.
Went down a bit, but it doesn't go down anymore when I bet.
|
|
|
|
Changing the encryption algorithm gives people incentive to start using C3 because it would be "ASIC-proof" for a short while
What about scrypt with different parameters, or triple step SHA256 that would break existing ASICs but still be simple to implement miners for? I edited my original post. Check it out. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any way to "use" the computational power for something without introducing centralization to the process. Interesting idea through, I'll try to think of something. |
|
|
|
Changing the encryption algorithm gives people incentive to start using C3 because it would be "ASIC-proof" for a short while
What about scrypt with different parameters, or triple step SHA256 that would break existing ASICs but still be simple to implement miners for? |
|
|
|
The Minimal
1.Transactions must be atleast fast as Lite coin.
2.It must be limited in how many coins there are created.
3.It needs to have power saving capabilities of PPC for long term growth.
4. It must be ASIC proof.
The Priority/ies
1.It takes forever for new users to sync with the network when it comes to bit coin. How can we resolve that?
pipe dream/s
1. We need non government organizations to be able to some how tap the computing power of the coin's community.
200 TH/S is fucking crazy, how can we allow organizations who use super computers to cure cancer to tap that power?
1. I'd like that too, but we need to balance long term blockchain size too. 2 & 3: Could we do proof of stake based on transaction fees instead of inflating the monetary base? What proof of work focused on IO? 4. Why? Like what Vuxil said, the current situation with ASICs is like early GPUs or FPGAs. Soon most who want to mine will buy an ASIC. 1. This is what I'm trying to address through protocol changes, block header size reduction, etc. Keep in mind that block headers take up a set amount of space, so faster blocks wouldn't be too good. |
|
|
|
Why doesn't this foundation just work on an existing coin? Just interested to hear why you think another coin is better than working to improve one right now
Because the changes would involve hard forks  |
|
|
|
Coding? Bit of PHP here and there.
I'm quite advanced with servers if you need anything there, aswell as anti-ddos protection(the thing that makes a lot of shit go bad).
Thanks! Would you be able to set up dns seed servers for the coin? |
|
|
|
|
What about the mining subsidy / coinbase running out after 3 years? The distribution rates could be 30 coins for first year, 20 coins for 2nd, 10 coins for 3rd, and that's the end.
Would be interesting to see the network hashrate, difficulty and security in a post-coinbase environment.
And of course.. what hashing algorithm? I like SHA256, for greater compatibility. There's a point to be made regarding favouring CPUs but that can bring botnets.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I want to focus on more lightweight - allow everyone to download the blockchain. Less dust and unspendable outputs.
Such as:
Reduce the divisibility to 0.0001 units instead of 0.00000001. This reduces the size of transactions by a small amount, as it is stored as an integer in each transaction, but also makes creating dust and unspendable outputs impossible
Trimming prevBlockHash and merkleRootHash to the first 192 bits. This should still provide adequate security, while reducing the size of block headers.
Full ECC public key-recovery, and Ed25519.
Should we keep the base58 encoding system? Addresses are hardly said out loud. I think we should still remove characters which look the same or similar (eg I and l), but perhaps symbols like !, #, &, *, <, >, . , . can be added.
How fast should blocks be, while balancing storage space with less variance?
|
|
|
|
This thread is for open discussion of the Community Cryptocurrency Foundation's coin. Ideas and proposals that are improvements or localized changes can be more easily implemented and tested, versus complete overhauls. Please keep this in mind when suggesting & discussing changes. Everyone is welcome, this coin would be decided upon by community consensus. Also, this is not just about proposing your ideas, but also discussing others. Feel free to +1 those you like, point out flaws that you can see, or stuff you don't want. LinksFoundation topic |
|
|
|
My background is business analysis, so I help with translating the real world into code, and back again.
Would it be too early for me to get involved at this time?
We're going to have a brainstorming topic very soon where everyone can propose and discuss changes. Please don't be discouraged, everyone can be involved regardless if they are a foundation member or not, (and we will accept non-coders too). It's just that we need developers to bring the ideas into reality, and this part is where a semi organized group helps. |
|
|
|
Want to discuss ideas for the coin? See here!About the Community Cryptocoin FoundationThe Community Cryptocoin Foundation (C3) is a virtual entity that will develop and maintain a open source alternate cryptocurrency. The goals of the foundation are to solicit feedback from the community and create a coin that is designed based on consensus and in an open way - with changes that would not be compatible with the normal network. Foundation members are not directly compensated, but they and everyone benefit from contributing to a new alternate cryptocurrency. The Alt Coin CreatedThe goal of this alt coin isn't to be a quick clone and benefit the early adapters who mine at a difficulty of 1. It's have changes and improvements that are not compatible with the bitcoin network. The goal is something that improves upon (not completely changing) bitcoin via changes that would require a hard fork on the bitcoin network. Stages1. Brainstorming and Draft (current stage) 2. Implementation 3. Substantial testing on testnet 4. Launch 5. Continued development and support Joining the foundationThe foundation is currently looking for experienced C++ developers who have experience with the bitcoin codebase, as well as a limited number of community members. The development of this won't be closed - even if you are not a foundation member, you can contribute, but we'd need some organization to prevent chaos. To apply, please reply here with software projects you have worked on (+ github) and your skills, particularly cryptography. This thread is for discussion of the foundation itself. It is not a place to discuss this cryptocurrency.
|
|
|
|
I'm a software developer as well, but haven't worked directly with the nitty gritty of cryptocoins.
I've thought about ways that you could distribute coins fairly to users at the beginning, and I don't think a X coins per person plan is feasible at all. My best guess now is that a POW system that favors average consumer computers is the best way to distribute coins, with rewards that decrease slowly and steadily over time.
Is there anyway to choose an unspent input in the blockchain randomly and transparently? I've wondered if it would be possible to do this and weight unspent inputs by coin-age and choose one randomly using a previously agreed upon value as a seed. If an unspent input gets chosen, the owner of that input has the ability to create a new block and sign it with the private key that received the chosen input (but only if the owner is online and connected to the network) and receive a reward. If the owner of the input is not online, a new unspent input is chosen.
This system (or something like it) would be a proof-of-stake system where no user can unilaterally increase their chances of creating a POS block or could burn up a lot of coin age in a short period of time to make several blocks in a row. The chance for an online user to make the next block would always be equal to [user's total coin-age] / [total coin-age that is online].
I haven't gotten the time yet to really look through the bitcoin or ppcoin code to see how nodes verify that a blockchain satisfies the protocol or how easily they can read from unspent inputs. The above might not be possible at all but it was something that came to mind, if this makes sense to anyone please share your thoughts.
Yes, a PRNG would work, however this encourages people to have unspent outputs which will bloat the blockchain. Also, should ideally allow it to generate a block in the next 24 hrs - so people who have normal computers instead of a 24x7 box would not be at an disadvantage. |
|
|
|
Yes, but do we have any actually new ideas or goals in mind?
I'm most likely in anyways.
Much needed improvements to Bitcoin + unique change. |
|
|
|
When Bitcoin mining becomes only for those rich few that can afford an ASIC, the GPU miners will turn to Litecoin.
Litecoin will have a wider base of miner enthusiasts and its popularity will grow and surpass Bitcoin.
ASICs will kill Bitcoin, the future currency has to be for the masses to be involved with not a new central bank of ASIC elite!
Go ahead. There will be a Litecoin Asic. And it will be more expensive and more Elite. Except if you want a speed boost there is no way to efficiently parallel compute the Scrypt algorithm without throwing loads of money at it to the point it becomes prohibitively expensive. This is proven mathematically in the Scrypt paper - http://www.tarsnap.com/scrypt/scrypt.pdf (Litecoin uses Scrypt for this reason) People will bring out ASICs and FGPAs but unless there is a computer science breakthrough the performance increase won't be dramatic on a per dollar basis. Simply not possible. So only the rich can afford it? That sure sounds like a better plan than making it affordable and available to the masses. No you misunderstand and didn't read the link. If someone spends 10k on a Scrypt Asic it won't give them a 100 times performance boost over someone rigging together 10k's worth of top graphics cards. Some performance boost will be gained but the algorithm was specifically designed so a government entity for example couldn't crack a Scrypt hashed password by simply throwing more money at the hardware because it will become exponentially more expensive. Again, read the paper it's all in there. You don't spend 10k on a ASIC, R&D are FAR MORE THAN that for bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
LOL, why would anyone want to use it exactly.
No.
|
|
|
|
|
looks like litecoinpool problem
try solomining to see if it'd work.
|
|
|
|
|
I will also sell ~120 BTC of debt for 10% (12 BTC).
|
|
|
|
If you have decent knowledge of the bitcoind codebase and would be interested in working on a alt coin that has some interesting changes, send me a PM.
Hello What have you got in mind...? I have been looking for an excuse to fork a coin, lol... PM'd. |
|
|
|
Sure, go work on it Building a successful business or service starts with actually doing it, not talking about it and asking for "group buys" when all you have is a measly forum post. |
|
|
|
|
What did you expect trading on a borderline scam exchange that bans users willy nilly?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
