If you are to make a fork, then increasing the block reward proportional with difficulty will solve your problems.
Right now it's impossible to get hashpower, unless the price somehow went to the moon. Otherwise as soon as difficulty raises it is totally unprofitable to mine this coin.

Or increase the block reward, make it proportional to difficulty. Then the community can afford to mine this coin.

Guess what!

Bitcoin chain fork. I was just talking about the possibility a few days ago
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1108304.0

Seems like my increasing rewards idea just got a lot better.

to begin with, how is yac not a pump and dump? no usefulness whatsoever.
I did give you the solution to your problem, you don't want to hear it.
case closed

dude if the hashrate increases, that already gives lower rewards for each miner. add on top of that the block reward decrease, and you can see this coin makes it impossible to have any serious hashpower, at least at it's current price.

it's only profitable if the hashrate is very low, which is self defeating. not only in theory, but apparently in practice too

It could be secure, as it designed, but this requires the price to keep rocketing to the moon. And by the looks of it it's an overly optimistic assumption. Point being that the coin holders are not doing their job. This coin requires heavy pumps to work, to cover the mining costs at higher hashrates.  If you just hold a coin, and don't pump it, it's gonna be just luck that can give you return on investment. And as a result of this design, and no strong pumps going on, the coin now has the orphan problem. Once again 2 ways to solve this. Pump! Don't just hold. Or increase block rewards. Or just cope with the orphan problem, I guess. There's no other way.

does this situation not prove it? you're not insane, you just assume the distribution is right, because everyone does it like this. it may have been right for bitcoin, however the rewards there diminished a lot more slowly. and it was the first coin, so it's a completely different setting. however i believe at the moment this can happen to bitcoin at any time. cex.io must have close to 50% if not more, and if so they probably are mining to other addresses as well. they wouldn't advertise if they had it because it would create panic, and they don't want that.


As I proposed, the rewards would only increase IF the miners come on board. And if they leave, the rewards will decrease back.

You are square you don't want to listen to anything that's not mainstream. Even when there's a problem.
I would debate with you my view on the market mechanics, but you're not even listening so why bother.

heh, yes. I never said it wans't
Or that you totally must follow me or anything. I'm just saying this would work and it makes sense. Take it or leave it.

PS:
I said you are insane for expecting miners to mine on a loss. That's what I said. You do see my point, I hope.

The solution is viable.  Whatever YAC will adopt it or not is another question.



More miners, will need better rewards. Hence my solution.
You do need miners for security, as this situation illustrates.
Yes, more coins would seem to hurt somewhat the coin value, but on the other hand, you're not giving them for free, but you are buying security with it. Security has value. I think most altcoins suffer from this problem, and we might see it more and more happening, so a coin that fixes it would then become of interest. We could see this even in bitcoin at some point. Do remember cex.io has most of the hashpower, they could selfish mine themselves.

Beave162 is insane, he thinks somehow people would invest now in mining, and wait 1000 years hoping that the coin value would go up. Or mine just for "fun". Aren't coins about money, not "just fun". Let's be serious here.

That would mean hard forking yacoin. Would people support it?

It is not infinite. At some point all the possible hash power will be mining and then the reward will no longer increase. And then you would be buying something very secure. There has to be value in that.

It's just a different kind of distribution, it doesn't reward mining there first.


Then again why would you mine if it's more cost effective to buy?
And then if nobody mines, then it's an insecure coin. Why buy at all?

It's more of a chicken and the egg kind of problem here.
And you did provide the answer yourself, you would buy if you need more coin than you can mine within a specific time frame. Why would you need yac? For some P&D, not much interest there, I agree.
Why would you need a secure coin? Because it's better than bitcoin.

I'll definitely make an increasing reward YAC clone. Why not? I was just looking for some support, I guess.
All coins seem to fail. Perhaps this is the reason.
And perhaps that's the solution.

I guess nobody would really buy now, but what if bitcoin fails, because of this? A coin that fixes it would be most interesting at that point.

how is that a worst case scenario? it just happens to be illegal. otherwise it's a miner like every other miners. botnet costs too, they don't grow in trees. being a cpu coin, botnets are to be expected.
in fact its actually good that its illegal, as in against the government. we all are more or less against the government, right?

lol, you might be of more concern than a botnet. does your hashpower grow on trees?

Yes, increase, I don't think there should be a limit. It would limit itself once the hashrate is saturated. Can't have infinite hash, right? And then you get tons of security. Price might as well go up.
You suggested a fork, that's why I suggested this. Give money to the miners, soon our entity would be overrun.
The goal of a cpu coin is to get millions of home users mining it. Then it's something completely undefeatable. But it obviously needs the right rewards.

been looking on coinmarketcap really, so that adds everything up.

bottom line the way I see it, the security problem is not that somebody has over 51% of the hash. that's only the manifestation.
the problem is that the rewards don't attract miners. as soon as diff goes up, it's totally unprofitable. block reward increase, proportional to difficulty, should certainly take care of that.
or if you are too concerned about coin value. pump i guess. if you mine and hold, you might as well buy. get the price up and it will bring bigger profits and therefore more miners.

Edit: Good idea actually. Why don't we make a clone with increasing rewards instead of decreasing?

Lets see 20KWh x 24 hour is what?  $40-70 a day  depending where you live
With 100KH you would only get half the blocks say 50,000 YAC a day. that's .25 btc= $65
Barely covers the electricity costs. Not to mention other costs.
The mysterious entity would still get half the blocks, if not more. Why are you certain it's a botnet? Could be anything. Anyone has the interest to keep difficulty as low as possible, to maximize profits. Due to difficulty, and on top of that reward decrease with difficulty. So when mining you always want to keep costs low, otherwise you end up on a minus.

I believe miners mine and sell rather quickly. They have costs to cover, they don't see it as an investment.
So yes, without changing the reward (to raise along with difficulty), you can still do something about it today. PUMP. buy buy buy, if the price rises, more miners will join in.
Like what happened when it reached 0.000005, people were suddenly interested, but faced this situation.

And yes, it's interesting, since the orphaning started taking place, the price is rising. Somehow this is turning out to be something good for the coin. Whoever is doing it knows what he's doing.
BTW, volume is always above 1BTC a day, sometimes even 5-7, so I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that the miner isn't dumping. 100k YAC is only 0.5. Everyday we have more volume.

The block reward should be increasing along with hashrate.  I assume the orphaning takes place to limit the reward decrease.
With block reward increasing, this will become an interesting coin for many miners, and the 51% situation should disappear.

... my 2 bits!