Maybe each little dump like that suppresses the price for long enough to allow picking up several hundreds of thousands dirt cheap?

It has amazed me for a long long time now how many coins can be bought up little by little over time without causing a bubble or pump or whatever. Maybe these less than a hundred grand dumps are the secret to keeping the long term acquisition of dirt cheap coins going?

-MarkM-

Since you know the name of the constant you presumably have the source code, so you can easily just look for yourself.

In coins whose source code I have worked with, mostly SHA256 coins, it is a general limit on totals and such, tending to limit not only individual transactions but also, I think, the grand total any one wallet can have and still be able to display the total.

DeVCoin (DVC) in particular highlights the fact that it does NOT limit the grand total number of coins in existence, just the number the code can work with at one time when adding up totals putting together wallet displays and transactions and stuff like that.

Eventually there will be more than MAX_MONEY DeVCoins in existence.

So to own it all you'd need to split it into more than one wallet, unless the code is changed by then to work around this.

(All this assumes I am not confusing MAX_MONEY with some other similar constant in the code, of course, as I am not actually looking at code right now.)

-MarkM-

If Thomas was Hal, how is he still around after Hal died?

Someone inherited or hacked the forum account?

-MarkM-

The noise about holders not offering bounties etc is mostly just noise, partly because there is a huge kitty already set aside for that from the start and partly because the coins are so ridiculously cheap that (a) it would take a ridiculous number of them to make a dollar-amount bounty interesting to not-actually-inherently-interested coders etc and (b) anyone actually interested can buy up vast quantities dirt cheap.

Basically anyone who wants to can buy a massive number then improve the coin or its ecosystem to increase the value of their holdings.

Meanwhile others have a hard enough time just eating all the dumped coins cheap to try to keep the price going too far down, giving them away to not actually interested coders etc would most likely just end up seeing the coins re-dumped by those uninterested coders etc thus undermining the buyers' attempts at keeping the buy-side orderbook upheld.

-MarkM-

Huntercoin made that claim, however actually merging it resulted in no blocks found, which I reported at the time (long ago) and have not even seen them acknowledge the problem let alone announce they fixed it.

So as of last I checked their purported SHA256 merging does not apparently work.

Maybe their scrypt merging works though, I do not know.

-MarkM-

The three other traditional/ancient merged mined coins in the family are GRouPcoin (GRP), CoiLedCoin (CLC) and GeistGeld (XGG).

GeistGeld is still an interesting experiment, for example once I started trying to use Jupiter and Neptune mining rigs with p2pool I ran into a problem with GeistGeld blocks being found so fast that timeouts would occur then file handles would be exhausted.

With the Jupiter I found that if I gradually drove up the total hashing power that GeistGeld as a whole (across its whole network, not just on p2pool or my instance of p2pool) slowly to bring the difficulty up, the out of file handles errors would go away. I have not managed that yet since deploying Neptunes as I do not have enough electricity to allow me the luxury of running a few old Butterfly Labs rigs like I did in the Jupiter era. But I expect that once I get full power to my country-house I should be able to solve it the same way as before.

In theory one would imagine that setting the priority of pools sharing the mining power of a Neptune would let you gradually ramp up the amount hitting the p2pool, or the amount hitting a standalone GeistGeld, or whatever; but in practice not only does the Neptune's panel only offer priorities of 0 through 9 but also it is not even clear whether priority nine gets nine times as much hash power as priority one.

Basically the root of the problem seems to be not merely the speed of the blocks but also the dearth of miners. With very few miners running very few Neptunes, and before the Neptunes arrived only very few miners running very few Jupiters, each Neptune that starts mining it makes a big difference. The problem should thus go away once many miners using many Neptunes and the like have added it into their merge.

p2pool itself though seems to have problems dealing with Neptunes. When my first Neptune arrived I could only see one terahash from it, instead of the expected three point four terahashes, even qwhen only merging the slow-block coins. (That is, it was p2pool giving trouble not e.g. GeistGeld or other fast block coins in the merge.)

What other merged mining software is available as free open source, in particular, something fast enough to deal with Neptune mining rigs?

-MarkM-

I didn't even know there was a forum subdomain at devcoin.org.

One of the DeVCoin projects is coinzen.org, I thought most DeVCoin discussion has been there for a long time now.

You can still argue that it isn't a highly active forum I suppose but it isn't dead.

I wonder who set up the one at devcoin.org and when? I don't recall what was going on back before coinzen was set up.

-MarkM-

3 to 4 k ? When the heck was that? I thought about 300 or so satoshis was their peak, maybe 320 or something like that.

-MarkM-

Yeah it takes time to buy LOTS this cheap. Lurking on 3 tends to mean quite a lot of idle time while people play around at 4 and above, but periodically it has hit 3 and at Vircurex the bitcoins lurking on 3 meanwhile make a little income on the side simply for being on the exchange. I can see where you might not want to leave bitcoins sitting idle on other exchanges waiting to be first in line to pick up Devcoins for 3 or less though.

Basically if you want to lurk on the low end of the buy side of an order-book ensuring you will be first in line for cheap coins at each price, Vircurex seems to be the place to do it.

Another way of saying that is if you want to build a DEEP, strong buy-side for a coin Vircurex seems to be the place to do it.

As long as they are accepting bitcoin deposits, that is. The big problem at Vircurex lately for me has been the last time I put in bitcoins they still have not shown up in my account so I have not been able to replenish the buy-side order-books so merged mined SHA256 coins have been dropping everywhere. Last time that happened they fixed the deposit daemon or whatever the problem was eventually - after several days - but this time it is stretching into weeks and the bitcoins still have not arrived.

On the bright side this means I have been picking up coins at lower than expected prices due to inability to continue replenishing higher priced buy offers.

-MarkM-

What did they change about Ripple that makes this one provably safe but Ripple not provably safe?

That is, what is the added safety feature that makes it safer than Ripple?

Or are they really saying that Ripple's protocol is provably safe so theirs also is?

-MarkM-

Namecoin introduced the database-in-the-blockchain setup, with use as a kind of DNS as its example application for such data; and it also introduced Merged Mining.

I0Coin, one of the SHA256 merged mined coins, introduced fixes for the massive-RAM-use problem that family of merged mined coins were all eventually going to notice; the others, maybe including namecoin maybe not I am not sure, adopted those RAM-usage fixes from I0Coin. (Not sure if namecoin addressed that problem yet or not.)

Oh and also, of course, DeVCoin (DVC) introduced a whole new way of distributing minted coins. (Initially to authors of free open-source software, later also to authors of free open source writings (see Devtome), eventually intended to branch out to free open source 3D printers and print-specifications, free open source spacecraft, free open source music, graphics, images and so on and so on...)

-MarkM-

Vircurex was the main site for up-holding the price of coins, because their cut of the fees that they give to people who have bitcoins on deposit makes them the best place to deploy bitcoins that are most likely just going to sit on the buy side of orderbooks for long spans of time.

Some time ago I sent some bitcoin to Vircurex and it did not arrive, I notified them by email and after several days finally the bitcoin arrived and I was able to continue stengthening the buy sides of the merged mined coins.

Maybe about three weeks or so ago now though again bitcoin deposited there failed to arrive, once in a while I re-send to them my email notifaction of the fact but I dunno, maybe they have gone on vacation or something, so far the bitcoin has failed to arrive so the merged mined SHA256 coins have been biting farther and farther down into the buy sides I had already built. The fact I cannot replenish the buy sides means I pick up those coins cheaper and cheaper and cheaper, which is great for me, but by failing to get my deposited bitcoins into my account they have basically screwed the merged mined coins, especially I0Coin and IXCoin, by preventing the constant influx of bitcoin that had been constantly not only replenishing the buy sides but also growing them.

They broke the momentum of increase in price that had been building long term, now in effect causing artificially an extended dropping of prices.

Manipulation? Admin on vaction? My emails going into their spam folder? (Unlikely as in past they always got my emails.)

Whatever, despite my thus picking up massive amounts of coins dirt cheap it is very annoying that they broke the long term momentum of price-increase that had hitherto been happening...

Heck I even sent some bitcoin to Cryptsy now, the scamcoin exchange I had never wanted to join.

I joined it to cash in the "clams" scam since "clams" gave me free "clams" by their choice of how to airdrop, so I figured heck I joined Cryptsy anyway so I might as well try to use it for something now I am there. They do not pay me to keep bitcoins on their exchange though, which Vircurex does. So I have no plan to build buyside order-books there, I am simply snapping up dirt cheap IXCoins there while they are cheap.

And just now read that maybe I won't be able to withdraw them from there? Hmmm, I knew they are an exchange created for the purpose of cashing in on scamcoins but are they also a total scam too? I always figured anyone supporting every scam must be quite the scammer so would not be at all surprised. Maybe I should have just dumped my "clams" and withdrawn the resulting bitcoins instead of being tempted by the cheap IXCoins there...

-MarkM-

Huh?

You have a bunch of coins a developer spawned out of nothing in almost no time, then earns "interest" on thanks to proof of stake.

The only reason you cannot buy them easily is the developer is not parting with them easily.

How can you possibly not see what a total scam it is?

There is nothing innovative about it what-so-ever.

If you are not yourselves just two of the developers, or of the developers sock-puppets, you are two utter idiots looking to throw away money, you might as well go buy a few million Brooklyn Bridges while you are at it, at least Brooklyn Bridges have a real use in crossing a body of water somewhere in New York State.

This whole thread looks to be simply a transparent attempt by scammers to promote their scam-coin, actually.

The information about how many blocks it took them to give themselves all the coins is right in the source code.

You could even calculate how many seconds it would have taken them to spawn those 1000 blocks using a Raspberry Pi if you want to bother to do the math, since the initial difficulty is also in the source code.

-MarkM-

What is unusual or promising about it?

It is simply yet another pre-mine scam, issuing all its coins in the first one thousand blocks so the developers get all the coins, then using Proof of Stake so the developers control the network completely.

Scam upon scam upon scam upon scam.

Then pretend it has something to do with the United Nations, which of course it does not.

Fraud upon scam upon scam upon scam.

What the heck is interesting about that?

Just amazed at how unutterably insanely idiotic the readers here are, maybe?

-MarkM-

All the more reason to get into mining to support pools that do merged mining...

-MarkM-

Nomp doesn't seem to mention merged mining though?

-MarkM-

Solo merged mining is a big reason for wanting to run a pool.

For example even mmpool.org leaves out two of the SHA256 merged mined coins, and I am not aware of any other public pool that even merges just the coins that mmpool does.

I had been using p2pool but it does not seem to like Neptune ASIC miners, I would see only 1 terahash or so from a Neptune that on mmpool would yield 3.4 terahashes.

So I am interested both in pool software one can merged mine at home with with a bunch of Neptune miners and/or fallback pools that merge as many of the merged mined SHA256 coins as possible.

Also of course if I get into scrypt mining again then there too I would want to merged mine...

Heck for any algorithm I'd want to merge chains if possible.

-MarkM-

NaMeCoin came up with merged mining originally.

Maybe even the same guy or team that came up with NaMeCoin in the first place.

Basically I think NaMeCoin was the first alt and it was swiftly realised few miners would want to abandon one coin to mine another, or try to split up their hashing power between coins. Thus merged mining was implemented. The theory of it might maybe have already been out there though, I am not sure about that.

-MarkM-

CoiLedCoin (CLC) was briefly attacked (about two or three days) by LukeJr but survived and has been chugging along ever since, albeit never seeming to get back onto any of the well known public merged mining pools.

I0Coin is not "finally" getting some "new tech", on the contrary it was the first of the merged mined coins to fix the "excessive RAM usage" problem, then the others adopted its fix.

I0Coin has 1.5 minute blocks or maybe 2.5 minute blocks or something like that, so was revealing the RAM problem faster than most of the other merged coins due to generating more blocks. It thus served as an early warning system showing the problem all the merged coins would start running into as the number of blocks they had generated increased over time.

Techically of course GeistGeld showed the problem massively and sooner, but fewer people were actually paying attention, in particular no large public merged mining pool was mining it, so it was not really until mmpool dropped I0Coin due to excessive RAM usage that people really started paying attention.

Even then, for a long time, there was a tendency to simply assume I0Coin and GeistGeld were buggy code, leaking RAM; so it was some number of months (of nice low difficulty mining of I0Coin for those willing to set up their own merged mining) before a programmer figured out what the problem really was and that all the merged coins would run into it as they created more blocks.

So really one can say that I0Coin came up with the important "new technology" and the other merged coins adopted it.

-MarkM-

Because DeVCoins now have a forum of their own, this thread is now being continued at

http://coinzen.org/index.php/topic,2728.0.html

-MarkM-

EDIT: CoinZen seems to have died so I guess we are back to this thread.

-MarkM-