You offend my feelings

Geist is notably more innovative than i0 (not a high standard to live up to, but still) and also the "old" solidcoin (also, more secure than old solidcoin )

Do you think that banning the people you find disagreeable will reduce the number of attacks or increase the speed at which fixes are delivered ?

 

 ArtForz suggested that since local connection doesn't have LP and some other stuff, s1 Q0 should work out neatly.


 seems to be working out really well.

I'm toying around with other values but it -seems- that 1 is working out better in solo mining.

My quite sincere word of advice is - not by taking away from miners. Srsly.

If the guy is trusted to manage fund "harvested from miners", he can also be trusted to manage a fund he makes with his own electricity (and perhaps some mild coyness with the code)

If the guy can not be trusted to manage a fund he himself premined, why would he treat a fund generated with other people's electricity instead of his own any differently ?


The extra coin is still technically generated with the miner's power and GPU lifetime (limited to 12 mnth, I'm told), no?

IMHO that would be a very minor kind of extortion, petty even, but still extortion (or "taxation by a non government entity" if one feels like being extra politically correct   )

If the guy needs extra mathemagical monetary units to do stuff, I don't mind that. Not at all. I can relate to that

I do know for a fact, however, that you do not need to get involved with mathemagical monetary units generated on other people's hardware to achieve that end.

You forgot to bash Geist :-P

Technically, as long as you can't "game" the system to "force" the client into your laundry (which mobsters usually could), no, not a proper racket.


I edited those in just before you posted.



Like I said, my only objections so far are:

1) taking away a part of coinage that was generated by other people's electricity (and GPUs which don't last forever under mining stress)

2) extremely obnoxious article which I decided to lampoon a bit in my sig.

If he premined a ton of coinage for a fund with his own electricity and a bit of tricky code, I would not see much problem.

Taking away stuff others mined   is somewhere in the extortion territory (Or maybe taxes, with the notable difference being that SC2.0 is hardly capable of being a Monarchy unto itself)

Well, all can I say is "cool" and "Can I use your description on Geist frontpage when it goes up, please?"

Depends on how large the "buffer" is compared to typical and "maximum" laundering transaction. There is a fairly obvious way to maintain a laundry with a static buffer arrangement, but that assumes that the buffer is pretty damn large (whether my buffer is large enough or tiny is still open to debate, but if it's not large enough then well, my laundry dies due to 4 mil of buffer being to little a sum and a drop in a bucket, with nobody except me noticing )

As to oversight, technology so far simply does not exists to arrange for such system, but do notice that I have no beef with SolidCoin2.0 apparently unsupervised "compensation fund" (the method seems viable in principle, I admitted that much), only with taking away a portion of coins that miners mined with their own goddamn electricity


It's a viable service, the demand for which is only bound to rise.

I can't force people to launder their mathemagical monies (or their "vanilla" money), can I ? So who exactly gets, um, racketed ?

Oh, "coin regeneration", that's how you marketing-speak it.

Thanks, I was struggling to convey "7 coins are minted with each Geist block forever, with no upper limit" in three English words or less 

Urgently, BTCEx should rewrite old SC chain to give himself a billionteen coins, then claim "compensation", lol

Geist is easy to mine, too. Or it was untill diff shot through 170+


You do know what is in the Geist genesis block, don't you ?

Oky, looking forward to it.

Will you publish some, I dunno, reasonably concise description of the new protocol, especially improvements introduced ?

I did not understand the part where he is supposed to tunnel a fist over TCP/IP to "convince" me to pay "protection" lol.

Protection racket on the internet seems tricky because fist over TCP/IP was never properly implemented   

Also, I am generally not very fond of rackets

Personally, I have nothing against Solidcoin (and nothing against the reset except the "protecshun fund" which sounds  as close to a honest to Cthulhu racket as a digital currency can get)

I do have something against that "ready for Bitcoin collapse" article, though.

P.S.:

I also have something against fork-hate

Ya know, at least Namecoin is a very useful and innovative fork (I do  hope for  Geist to get as useful as innovative as it can, after all, it has already taught the knowledgeable folks around here some interesting things, and I hope it will go on doing so...that, and fuel my UniLaundry   )

Oh my...

As far as I know, you can't "have" infinite coins in  a blockchain with current code (you can have about 130-something billions  however).

Also, if subsidy is allowed to fall below some (very small, for the purpose of this discussion) fraction of a coin, it's functionally as attractive as no coins to the miner even if the miner does see it (unless the price in USD soars absurdly high  )

So either SC 2.0 will be quasi-inflationary, as Geist (Quasi because you know, growth of amount of money is not equivalent to inflation proper, and, as a matter of fact, throughout history the amount of gold physically available to mankind has only grown and will continue to grow for quite some time, despite apparent presence of a hard theoretical limit to physical gold extraction on a given planet) or it will be quasi-deflationary as Bitcoin (bitcoin, due to theoretically infinite divisibility of a coin, and above considerations as to what inflation "really" is, isn't properly deflationary in the "vanilla" sense)

It would be nice if you added Geist - I'm very curious if anything other than mining and me helping some folks to get a grasp of how Escrow works is taking place, lol

I don't mind the restart that much per se (and the compensation proposal is technically plausible, one has to admit), but taking a % of newly mined stuff into some fund (even assuming it will be used to do useful stuff) rubs me very wrong way (after all, it was the miner's time and electricity, no? )

I too am running cgminer today, to test stuff and see how it goes (-s 1 -Q 0 --no-longpoll ) and it's doing remarkably well on mere 250 mhashes so far (despite the notably raised diff)