In my mind, for long term, yes. If I'm to worry about the reward scheme, I'd worry more about the reward coming down too fast if this becomes popular.

Apart from being the first N-change coin, YACoin's POW reward scheme is very much a special feature that shouldn't be touched lightly. The reward dependence on hashrate, together with the N-change schedule give the reward plan something like a fat middle period IF mining capital investment remains the same. Obviously, that mining investment depends on popularity which is hard to predict. Still, this is quite an interesting feature since the overwhelming majority of coins have rewards that never increase. Most go way down in just a few years, and in recent months, the fashion is to have the rewards go way down in just a few months, or weeks, or go to 0 from the start. The market is totally flooded with coins that hand a tremendous advantage to people who grab some near the beginning. I doubt joining that very long list of coins will significantly improve YACoin's long term prospect.

1) You mean greatly improved/reduced, right? 
2) I get plenty of connections too.
3) I've always wondered if the transparency is deliberate. 

If trouble awaits with certain kinds of coins, it would be nice to be informed about it. Don't you think serious hackers who perform real attacks are far more likely to already know or be able to figure it out on their own than normal users/investors, and hence giving more information about it here is more likely to benefit normal users than real attackers?

I haven't read the entire thread, but if I understand the OP correctly, then I think this is known by some of the more knowledgeable people. Just not discussed much these days. The main point as I understand it is splitting your stake means minting some POS blocks doesn't significantly reduce your chance of minting the next blocks.

For example, if you look at Balthazar's (Novacoin's developer) formula below, he already implicitly assumed this.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=289946.msg3104704#msg3104704

That post is also very illustrative of the challenges POS systems face.

There is an SVG file here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pb256r5w3e10hh8/YACoin.svg
A PNG file with the name is here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/18lbvjz10y2z9cu/PNG_LOGO%2BTEXT.png

I guess it'd be better if the official website can host a copy.

I certainly prefer seeing coins combined than split. Since it doesn't fork the blockchain, if some unforeseen problems arise, it should be relatively easy to go back.

Just noticed the upcoming improvement in client and POS performance/handling. Thank you for the good work. 

All these things came out in the last week or so? No wonder I've lost my will to keep track of what's going on.

A year on, and the N change approach it started seems to be catching on in face of scrypt ASIC.

For me though, the most interesting thing about YACoin is the reward scheme. With most coins, the block rewards just keep going down. For many coins released in the past few months, their POW reward go way down even in the first year.

For YACoin, the block reward now is actually higher than a year ago when it launched. Instead of starting the reward at its peak and then keep going down, the reward scheme has a bit of a fat middle part because reward increases with lower hashrate and every N change reduces hashrate/hardware. Quite an opposite of the "fastmine" in vogue these days.  

I'm not visiting this forum very often these days. The great flood of whatever-to-get-attention-coins in recent months has worn me out. 

Just want to say the change in OP looks good and a multipool that pays in YAC would be great. If someone makes it happen, I'll use it gratefully. 

I now prefer saying the first N-change coin.

Thank you for keep improving the miner, Thirtybird. I've just updated though haven't really tried to do more tuning.

I'm getting like 1.6-1.7kh/s from a R7 240 2GB (buffer size 1752, lookup gap 3, g 1, w 256, raw intensity 1280, gpu engine 780, gpu memclock 780, gpu powertune -17), which is some way off what others are getting. I'm underclocking the RAM because performance is somehow very similar when I use stock settings.

I think the problem is actually inherited from PPCoin. I seem to remember the code that calculate trust score in YAC was the same as what I saw in PPC (I'm not familiar with programming though  ). The trust score issue just shows itself more clearly in YACoin because of wallet performance problems and having longer POW chains for POS block to orphan.



I've always assumed interest paid is capped at 90 days because that's what I heard about PPCoin. Thank you for going through the code to find out.  Does the probability of finding POS block increase linearly with days between 30 and 90 but is independent of the quantity of coins in the chunk?

On my Windows XP PC with a old duo core CPU and 1GB RAM, I installed an AMD card over the weekend and then moved the card to my main PC. However, I didn't uninstall the Catalyst driver 13.12 that I installed for the test. Afterward, the YACoin qt wallet 0.4.2 couldn't start and gave me an "assertion failed" error. The problem vanished as soon as I removed Catalyst. Everything seems ok for me now. I'm just putting it here in case other people find it relevant.

Longer version of the error message:

Try adding
addnode=112.119.47.32
Hope it helps.

Congratulations on completing the project. 

Sociopathic and NSA-like? Man of no principles?

If Emunie ascends to heaven and carries the founders along with it, I'm sure you'll think everything you've done is worth it. However, have you considered what if it fails to various degrees? How will you look back on what you're doing and the replies you've written a year or two later? Have you also considered what others would think when they see your attacks on some former colleagues and friends?  By that I mean what people actually think of your attacks, not what they say in chat.

Thanks for the latest release. My 650ti can mine YACoin now. 

My 650Ti only has 1 GB DDR5 RAM and is in a Windows XP PC with only 1 GB system RAM. Autotune seems to have chosen k35x3 for it to give about 1.45kh/s at lookup gap 4. I guess that's about the expected range for a card like this.

Thank you for the great work, Thirtybird. My hashrate is improved by 25% or so. The raw intensity is a great setting to have and your tip for using GPUz to tune thread concurrency is a good one. I haven't try other more refined changes though.

What I did was just start with some low intensity, use GPUz to check how far my thread concurrency (TC) can go, and then change raw intensity to TC/32 (I use lookup gap 2, g 1). I guess I can fine tune for further improvement, but haven't done that so far.

debido666, I don't know if this is related to your case, but sometimes, after using some bad miner settings, even though Windows seem to be ok or have recovered, I need to reboot for miner to work correctly with good settings.

I tried using only seednode=70.191.156.43 but still get "no block source". Any other node I can add to help? Thanks.