 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
Sounds nice so far for me.
As a solution for the staying online problem I would simply propose an Android Client with PoS Mining feature. I mean smartphones are running all day and are connected to the Internet most of the time, and modern smartphone hardware can handle PoS mining without problems and without quick battery drainage.
|
|
|
|
WTFWTFWTF!!! They were trading PPC at 0.06 while I was asleep? I would have been rich If I sold at these prices, and my coins are not even stuck in Vircurex. Damn, this was the most expensive sleep in my life  |
|
|
|
Just like PoW mining there is some luck involved. It is based off of how long they haven't been used for and also how much you have. If you send it to another address it is reset. But this doesn't exactly discourage spending cause its just 1% ppcoin per year. And this method is quite secure also because it is hard to get 51%+ stake. So instead of power protecting the network we have the coins protecting the network.
Oh! That's interesting. So you'd need to somehow get 51% of all the PPcoins available to have control over network. That's a lot harder to accomplish, since, in BTC's case, you can coerce a group of miners into one pool and thus take over the network in this way, but you'll never coerce someone into sending all their coins. However, if this managed to happen, it would be difficult to reverse the effect, wouldn't it? Aside from that. It would seem to me that you'd be better off putting some PPcoins in cold storage, and having a separate wallet in which you spend. The cold storage coins slowly build up, and if you gotta break into it to get more funds, you have a few more than you had before. 1% really isn't a lot tho  It's almost pointless, lest you have quite a nice sum. The other major problem is that for people with small sums, the amounts generated will eventually cost more in fees to spend than the stake outputs themselves, though SK states he also isn't concerned about this. Also, stake isn't generated w/o being connected to the network, so cold wallets per say for stake generation are impossible. So it only counts while online? Would it have to be online 100% of the time to ever hit the time required to gain the 1% a year? This is not completely true. You can't mine PoS blocks if you're online, thats true, but you can still charge your stake while being offline. Then you might create some coins if you come online. Dublec, the owner of the bitparking exchange, found more than hundred PoS blocks in a row after bringing up the exchange's cold wallet. The new Version should fix this vulnerability, however it is not clear yet if it really can. Just one of several reasons why PPCoin still has central checkpointing. |
|
|
|
|
While it is true that PPCoin offers some unique and new features compared to most of the other coins I can only recommend you to invest carefully at these prices.
At the moment it has only 2 exchanges, 3 pools, 2 faucets and you can gamble with it. Thats it. The rally during the last 2 days very much reminds of the first bitcoin bubble in 2011 where there was a great future ahead, but actually no practical use.
|
|
|
|
Seriously guys, today the altcoins section has finally turned into a casino This massive upward trend in all altcoins...and then these people already trading this shit bytecoin  Not that I dislike this, I hold a nice amount of coins as well and my wealth more than quadrupled during the day, but this is hilarious, just cant stop laughing looking at the exchange rates, which go up everytime I refresh. But remember, most of the altcoins, even litecoin, are not backed by any substantial business. If you look on dustcoin.com the profitability is just out of competition, why should anyone buy ltc when he can buy a mining rig which pays itself off in 2 weeks  When you look at the ytd chart of ltc: http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/period-charts.php?period=ytd&resolution=day&pair=ltc-btc&market=btc-e you will realize that this is a massive bubble, very much the same like the first massive bitcoin bubble. Nevermind the crash, I hold my coins as I have longterm confidence in some altcoins, but this is just hilarious, enjoy yourself today and know what you do with your hardearned money. I will just get myself some popcorn. |
|
|
|
|
I think a fact some people are forgetting in this discussion is that capitalism and free market are different things which don't have to necessarily coexist. A market based economy can exist without capitalism, for example in Yugoslavia before 1990, and capitalism can exist without a free market(some people would say it was like this in the Soviet Union).
Capitalism is not only an economic system as some people here claim it to be, it is also a social order where money can be translated into power, thus making it incompatible with the anarchist view of no human having power over other humans.
In an anarchist society a free market, where trades are based on mutual agreement however is not contrary to Anarchism.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a proposal to fix the blocksize limit in PPCoin.
I think we should integrate a new value x in the block header. This value x must be higher or equal than one, and is a multiplier to the minimum maximal blocksize limit of 1mb. If over the last y-amount of blocks, the amount of txs with the minimum transaction fees (current 0,001 PPC I think) is less than z% (i think 50% could be a proper value), x gets raised and so the maximum blocksize limit, if the amount of txs with the minimum transaction fee over the last y-amount of blocks is higher than z% of total transactions, it gets lowered, but never below 1.
So the formula for the size of blocks not to be rejected would be blocksizelimit=x*1mb.
The formula how to determine x in the next block would be x=if(amount of blocks with minimum transaction fee within the last y blocks/total transactions within the last y blocks) is less than z, raise by t, if not lower by t. I think something way more flexibel like the current difficult adjustment would be better, but I'm not a coder, so I don't know which logic would fit the best.
By that we can keep the blocksize flexibel to allow the network scale, prevent the creation of far too large blocks, and can keep the transaction fees low. As miners are motivated to include the highest fee txs in their blocks first, it is secure that bad-minded miners don't include only low fee txs in order to harm the scalability of the network. Boosting the maximum blocksize limit by spamming txs with high fees is also not very economical.
The only flaw in this design I can see at the moment is that it might be more economical to include more low fee txs to increase the blocksize limit, so you can include more txs per block in the future and that way the miners benefit more than if they would only include high fee transactions, but I believe if the values of y and z, so as the formula how x gets raised/lowered (e.g the value if t) is choosen carefully this can be prevented.
Please post any thoughts and comments you have about this. Best regards, hamlet.
|
|
|
|
I think we need a PPCoin Wiki so anyone can find this kind of information faster. Yes you do get coins for the existing you have, but you need to hold them for at least 30 days, and you wont get rich by this. By design you will get ~1% interest per year. Read this for more detailed information: http://new.ppcointalk.org/index.php?topic=8.0 |
|
|
|
|
PPCoin and NVC will have the lowest transaction fees in the long term, as they don't need the fees for network security.
|
|
|
|
Did you do this with 0.3 or pre-0.3? If you did it with 0.3 we propably can assume that the pos problem has not been fixed, or?
0.3 doesn't switch on until after March 20 I think. Would you mind bringing the cold wallet online once again, now after the protocoll switch, to see how many blocks in a row you can create on your own after the fix? |
|
|
|
Why is terracoin difficulty jumping around 3x back and forth? Anyone else see a pattern here? Looks like some big miners are exploiting the fast difficulty adjustment. I guess so much for the supposed feature 'miner jump resonance free' Someone please make a chart to trace back when this all started height difficulty
96000 5001
96030 8254
96060 2671
96090 10580
96120 3830
96150 9622
96180 3270
96210 8391
96240 3029
96270 9203
96300 2330
96330 8029
I thought about this when I saw the TRC profitability on dustcoin steadily bouncing between 60% and 140%now even more than 300%, propably somebody is jumping on and off with an ASIC. But as far as i can see this does not cause any major problems, only slightly above average profitability for the jumper and sometimes delayed transactions. |
|
|
|
I've shown before that I can generate large consecutive chains of blocks
Did you do this with 0.3 or pre-0.3? If you did it with 0.3 we propably can assume that the pos problem has not been fixed, or? see my response. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=152809.msg1627960#msg1627960for the POS scheme to work, block generation needs to be competitive. Also at any time the differential of stake dS added to the network must not be greater than the existing stake S. Assuming proportionality between stake and stake generation power. In fact what you want is the added stake generation power d(SGP) to be less than the stake generation power (SGP) being online at any given moment. Assuming that the POS difficulty is equilibrated, one could assume that the stake generation power of the network is proportional to the current difficulty. It should thus be easy to estimate the stake generation power required to overcome the network at any given time. I have some experience with physics, so I may try to express this in terms of mathematical equations. What happens when you move stake offline for a while is that your stake matures and gets charged in terms of stake generation power. There is a cap of 90 days to prevent supercharging stake. I understand that the block generation needs to be competitive, but I think you can call the current network environment competitive. I mean the wallet of the exchange doesn't have a majority of coins for sure but dublec is still able to create long chains on his own. I think the main problem is charging your stake offline. If that wouldn't be possible, the situation could be compared to POW, where you can keep your mining devices offline to wait for lower difficulty in order to spam the blockchain later, but nobody is doing this as you can't mine coins while your offline/not running mining devices. With the current POS scheme however you are able to keep difficulty low while charging your stake, which can be turned into coins later, so it is economically in two ways:You can keep your stake offline for some time to wait for lower difficulty and "mine" the coins later AND you can try to attack the network when difficulty is low. Another point which is interesting to consider are the lost coins. In Bitcoins those coins don't matter but with POS lost coins can weaken the security as those coins cant generate stake anymore, thus making 51% POS attacks cheaper. |
|
|
|
A perpetual tournament is proposed, in which stake holders try to compete against each other for generating the longest consecutive fork. This will provide an empirical means to investigate the security of the ppcoin network and show strengths and weaknesses of the current scheme.
I've shown before that I can generate large consecutive chains of blocks by just bring the exchange cold wallet online. The first time I did this I got 84 consecutive blocks. The second time over 100. Yesterday I brought another wallet online and left it running. When I closed it overnight it had 400 blocks in 'immature' status. That is probably why POS difficulty is currently 30+. The exchange doesn't have that many coins. There are people out there with more coins than the exchange I'm sure. Did you do this with 0.3 or pre-0.3? If you did it with 0.3 we propably can assume that the pos problem has not been fixed, or? |
|
|
|
Hello all together, I have been following PPCoin and this thread for quite some time. Now, with you talking about how to generate a higher adaption of PPCoin I think it is time for me to write something instead of just reading. I think the main point in the slow adaption of PPCoin is that it, as of now, does not provide any benefits to end-users and miners (unlike ltc and nvc) compared to btc. I mean at the moment btc works pretty fine and the problems with deflation spiral and network instability due to lower mining reward will only come to an effect in the coming years.
What needs to be defined is a niche in which PPC can thrive. Something a big cryptocurrency is inherently bad at. Think about it. I haven't.
Actually, there is a thing where a big cryptocurrency is inherently bad at, and this is the blocksize limit. In the last days the soft blocksize limit in btc has been reached and people are slowly starting to freakout, see this two threads of many: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149668.0https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=150493.0This is already delaying transactions in the bitcoin network and the problem will continue to grow. Bitcoin is in a trap by design, from now on transaction fees will continue to grow in order to do a fast transaction. Bitcoin can't just fix this issue as in the future they need the fees to satisfy miners. On the other hand high transaction fees are contrary to the intention of bitcoin. I see this as a huge chance for ppcoin as with pos fees are not needed to prevent >50% attacks in the future. As I understand it fees are only needed so that know one can dos the network for cheap. I dont have much time now, I will outline some thoughts I have on how PPCoin could propose a good solution to this dilemma later or tomorrow. First of all I have a question, what is the current soft and hardcoded blocksize limit in PPCoin? Best regards, hamlet |
|
|
|
What prices are are you offering? I would only sell my PPC well above market prices, for example 3200 PPC for 0,4 btc. Contact me if you want do to that, but I guess not  |
|
|
|
|
Regarding #2 I still think that a special deal with Mt. Gox is possible. In praxis, although I doubt that anyone already did try to exchange 10.000 in a short period, people would propably use different exchanges, different accounts and realworld exchange on the same day.
|
|
|
|
haha with my top notch nvidia m240 gt I can get up to 15 Mhash/s. However it wouldn't even get the electricity back in, so I don't mine |
|
|
|
It was actually Mt Gox that I was talking about. They allow withdrawals of 10,000 USD/day, and 50,000 USD/month.
I'm saying the guy who wants to get out of 10,000 BTC today, if he sells everything on Mt Gox in one trade (call it 450,000 USD), even if he withdraws the maximum he can every month, he'd have a significant balance on Mt Gox for 9 months.
Its not the trading liquidity I was referring to, but the actual liquidity into fiat cash.
Think about the guy who wants to put 450,000 down to buy a house and he has 10,000 BTC laying around. The market into cash just aint liquid enough right now.
First of all if someone could do such a trade and could provide aml he would be able to make a special agreement to bypass the withdrawal limits for sure. But such a trade is simply not possible if you look at the market dept: http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/mtgoxUSD.html You can't sell 10k btc in a single trade with the aim of cashing it out at current market prices. There are simply not enough buyers at this rate so you had to go down in price etc. Furthermore it would probably cause massive disruptions in general, e.g. some sort of a crash. In either way you would never be able to get 450k USD for your coins and thererefore the payout limits are not bothering. In the future with a much higher market dept the withdrawal limits will be higher or nonexistent of course. |
|
|
|
Hello all together, I'm from Berlin and 19. I have been following this forum for a couple of months and now for the first time I think I need to to post something instead of just reading. Originally I planned to post in the altchain's section regarding ppcoin, which I'm more interested in than in Bitcoin. Sadly I'm stuck in the newbie section for now With best regards, h@ml3t |
|
|
|
|
