As far as I know a large amount of blocks staking contributes to the safety of the network. Isn't that why they split up in the first place? In the HBN-wiki it says the following:
It is recommended that users find the optimal block size composition for their wallet and goals. Although the state of the HoboNickels network is always evolving and user computer equipment varies, the current state of the HoboNickels network comfortably accommodates the following block conditions:
Up to 500 blocks, no real need to combine anything, maybe check for really small blocks (dust transactions, below 1 HBN) and combine those.
Between 500 and 1000 block, start analyzing your blocks and combine the youngest blocks into fewer blocks.
Over 1000 blocks, you might actually see your computer or the wallets performance affected by the PoS process, there is a lot of block trying to stake. Definitely try to combine into fewer blocks.
This was a while back. But 500 seems pretty ok to me for not needing to recombine manually all the time.
OK.. I will let the numbers build up a bit. |
|
|
|
should i update wallet or no need? im on windows
No need yet. I will be releasing a final beta version here soon, you can try it out then if you like. It will have everything except for the hard forks. You can also just wait for 1.5 officially, which should be the same as the beta 1.5s , minus any bugs found. I am looking forward to testing it! As for the VIP idea, being within top 20 range, I would still favor the same wallet for everyone. Feels better that way to me. You made me wondering though, maybe the same thing could be achieved in an other way without the need for a special wallet. Would it be possible to make the combine/threshold limit dependent on the size of the address staking? At this moment number 20 is about 50K, so if the threshold would be 0,05% of this amount, it would be 25. So you would end up being able to select between 5 to 20 or the percentage which only makes sense if you are a large stakeholder. I have no clue though if such thing is programmable. I am only being enthusiastic! Not a bad idea, I did think of this as well. I think it could only be done via a RPC command once the wallet(s) have been loaded. May not make it for 1.5, but will keep it in mind. I did some thinking and came to the conclusion that if this option becomes available, using a percentage of 0,05% will eventually result in wallet containing at least 2000 blocks (probably some more, because not all blocks can combine and hover exactly beneath the splitting threshold all the time). I'd say that's maybe a little too much? what's your idea/community in this matter? I do not understand why so many blocks can be acceptable. I try to keep my wallets (in all PoS coins) below 50 blocks. |
|
|
|
Buy as more as viacoin you can, a rally will be coming soon.
BTC and Via huge rise is incoming.
Any particular reason ? The trend is still downwards on price, and I see no indication to the contrary. |
|
|
|
I just see a blank page, can u see anything? Mintpal is down. They are still working out issues with migrating to their new site. |
|
|
|
1) Satoshi got hacked, the email adress popped up recently, his Bitcoins get dumped. Since all Altcoins reference their trade value on that, going down in flames too. Should be visible inside Blockchain analysis.
Pretty unlikely this is happening. People would notice it I think and be shouting it from the rooftops if those coins moved at all. Actually no. If anyone had reasonable proof that had happened, they would keep it to themselves, and sell any BTC they held , carefully.. |
|
|
|
This is news to me as well. They have never stated they will force verification. But I also have a feeling it might happen.
Regarding getting HBN on another exchange. I think this is a good idea. We have tried, we have succeed, and then once we get added there is no volume and eventually the coin is delisted.
I would like to see it on polo. Perhaps we can start a campaign for that.
+1 I agree. I'd like to see CAP and HBN on Poloniex. Maybe it can become high PoS Mecca  The catch is that low volume exchanges will add, but there will be low publicity and exposure. Higher vol exchanges may delist coins that dont generate enough relative revenue. Mintpal, Bittrex, Poloniex are the 3 top ones for volume + large numbers of trading pairs, (in addition to Cryptsy),and BTER is on the rise : worth a shot... They seem open to new proposals. |
|
|
|
I am surprised that is the first pitchfork post so far...
Your post is troubling too.
Because of some trolls you advocate screwing over supporters and investors?
The situation is, the developer stopped communicating a month ago, he has logged in but ignored all questions. Meanwhile, the project is not finished.
A single update or post saying 'I am on vacation' would have saved the price and project. No one is asking 24/7 anything...
By abandoning the project, he is not just screwing the "self-entitled, self-indulgent brats who deserve the life lesson" as you spouted. (did you shake your fist when you said that?)
He is also screwing the cool people that helped and supported the project, the people that advertised and tweeted, and the people that invested time and money for the last few months.
But, you are correct they are technically not "scamming" anyone, they are just actively SCREWING everyone by abandoning the project.
You can have 1¢ back.
I have seen this happen with many coins (and I have followed over 100 projects so far). Exactly the same, except for the partially closed source. Apart from scammers, there are many devs who work on multiple projects, and they decide to give their best attention to certain ones. The others eventually get ignored because they still want to keep a finger in the pie, and aren't ready to tell the community. There is also a 'Dev syndrome' where the workload and demands (and abuse), over a period of time cause a mental instability to manifest itself in strange ways. |
|
|
|
the min time is not 42 days anymore. your coins will stake. there are 18 billion coins. just be patient.
It would be encouraging to think that there are so many wallets open, that my coin weight is relatively low. Interesting to see the change in the staking parameters, then. I have held 11 different PoS coins, and no others behaved this way: in my book, different is good. |
|
|
|
There is something about the staking that doesn't make sense to me. (Sorry, I cannot read code, so I can't check that way)
As I said before, my coins hadn't staked for 6 days. I have several wallets.
I opened a different wallet just now, and got 10 blocks of stake immediately, all within 120 seconds. These were from coin which had an age of more than 42 days. The younger coins in the same address are not staking.
What would be the reason for that ?
Staking in general works like a kind of lotery, there is no sequence. I have my own wallet opened 24/7 and my last received stake was 26/09/14. This is a normal thing as the stake can be received between 8hrs - 43 days. I remember before we took over it was 43 days before any stake came in. Random factors cannot be the reason. Please read my post carefully. All my older coins staked, all of them in 120 secs. None of my younger ones staked in 6 days (with wallet open many hours) It appears to me as if the min coin age is still 42 days. Can anyone properly check the code to confirm (dev I trust your skills but things can get overlooked, and you didn't write the original code) |
|
|
|
|
There is something about the staking that doesn't make sense to me. (Sorry, I cannot read code, so I can't check that way)
As I said before, my coins hadn't staked for 6 days. I have several wallets.
I opened a different wallet just now, and got 10 blocks of stake immediately, all within 120 seconds. These were from coin which had an age of more than 42 days. The younger coins in the same address are not staking.
What would be the reason for that ?
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a FIBRE paperwallet generator ?
|
|
|
|
any anon implementation in the future? It will help the price.
Anon transactions are not so hot atm. There is a large group of anon coins. Perhaps it would be best if VIA stayed within the standard of auditable coins, for now. A temporary hike in price would not be helpful anyway IMO. |
|
|
|
the variable for the original 42 days is 100% gone. there is no way possible that anything will revert to a 42 age day minimum stake because there is no longer a place for the code to derive that value. the reason your coins are probably staking slower is because i increased the amount blocks other nodes need to produce before your coins are able to stake again. the previous setting was too low and if you had enough coins you would stake too quickly and actually fork yourself off of the block chain.
OK, thanks for the reply. I will keep trying. Of course I realise that every sent transaction will revert to 0 coin age. I believe there was something curious about the sendings in COMM and ECC which caused an entire address to be unable to stake if any coin had been sent from that address within a stipulated period (usually min coin age) before. I will try to find that reference in one of the threads. |
|
|
|
Presumably blocks are still weighted according to size, just not age (excepting 2 hours min)
well yes. of course they are. i was just saying that the age thing is adjusted. size is always the other major factor [/quote "size is a factor" i was refering to when blocks are made. and the age adjusted thing doesnt happen until block 260,000 [/quote] This doesn't make sense to me: I would expect my coins (once mature) to stake within minutes, as they did before....maybe you can clarify: however, I have an idea about another variable ... You may need to check this out: I believe the original dev. included a feature that reset the coin age to nil when there was any sending from the wallet.... I have recently sent some ECC to a paperwallet address, and wondered whether that has the effect of restarting an age count of 42 days (the original min coin age) before maturity of the remaining coins in the wallet . |
|
|
|
My wallet is synched up to date, but has not staked for 5 days, despite being open for many hours at a time.
I have large blocks of coin.
mine too just leave it open and it will happen. assuming u upgraded to 2.0. it says a max of 84 days. so it will stake before then. The block weightings (numbers of coins) are heavy though, and they were staking very rapidly before, so something has changed which detracts from the weightings. Is the min coin age 2 hours : or more ?
Presumably blocks are still weighted according to size, just not age (excepting 2 hours min)
well yes. of course they are. i was just saying that the age thing is adjusted. size is always the other major factor [/quote |
|
|
|
|
My wallet is synched up to date, but has not staked for 5 days, despite being open for many hours at a time.
I have large blocks of coin.
|
|
|
|
On the POS discussion front, Tekcoin Just dropped to ~ 4 cents, it was over 50 cents about 3 months ago. As the supply increases so quickly, people increase the amount they dump on the market , which lowers the price. Their number of coins will be double in 2 months and they will be lucky if they are still over a penny. Their coin supply will outpace their demand. If the Dev does decide to change the POS on Eccoin , my vote would be to shorten the max time frame from 84 days to 7 or 10 days even if you keep the interest rate the same just faster payouts. It would make people open their wallets more since they know a stake would be coming in sooner. Another thing for the Dev to consider would be making the interest rate variable, the more wallets open the higher the rate and an indicator somewhere on the main screen telling you the current rate. Of Course if the Dev leaves the POS the way it is, I am ok with that too.  Those are good suggestions. Anything that encourages wallets to be open more often can strengthen the network. The really high % PoS coins are in a rising trend over recent months (like HBN, HYP & CAPS ) .People dump their coins if they think the price will fall, or not rise. The % stake makes little difference to that. If it becomes perceived that high stake creates more demand that will reduce sellers (in expectation of future rises), thus creating a positive feedback to price. Demand dictates price so much more than does supply. |
|
|
|
HBN has been on a nice steady climb recently ! Great to see hit .0001 again today. Wish I had grabbed more when it was at 0.00005!
I picked up some more HYP to diversify my own PoS portfolio. Should be interesting to see how fast the coins rolls in from the super-stake.
I am happy to see HBN climb. I think if HBN positions itself correctly, it can be seen as the stable exchange rate PoS coin to park your money and clip off the stake. Hobonickels can attain that position because it is the best distributed of the high PoS coins (having been in a stable staking position for longest). The others are either much younger, of have undergone more major changes . It's worth checking the number of wallet addresses compared with balances in the rich list : That gives an approximate idea of the distribution, and gives pointers to the possible number of unique individual holders. The median and mode balances are more substantial. You will know, if you follow all the prices from week to week, that HBN is the most stable. |
|
|
|
Now THAT is a GOOD post on any day, but a GREAT post to read on a Friday. I am getting into Checkcoin like I did bitcoin- better late than never!
Late ? LOL Plenty of time yet. Anything under 2000 sat will be early (bearing in mind there are no sure things, just the usual risks). I would expect a lot of flippers to sell millions below that level over the next few weeks... We will be able to gauge things by the actual reported progress. Checkcoin is still very young. Indeed, plenty of time left to buy. As you said, around 2k will be the floor in the next days. Although, the devs will release something nice tonight, depending on the implications of this we may see a decent spike. But take it easy, don't chase prices. Just buy an amount you feel comfortable with and hold. First milestone will be reaching the top 100, so again, there is still so much room for growth. I actually meant 1k would be the floor, and 2k will be the ceiliing, until the IPO sellers are out (and there will be a lot of them). I will be watching the actual progress of the project : don't focus on price in the early weeks/months. Ok gotcha, but depending on development and features those ICO buyers might change their minds and hodl. I for one bought ckc at ICO price but I'm not going to sell for anything less than 50k. It will be a long hard road (if ever) but I am patient. That's about right. Hold for a Binary outcome. |
|
|
|
Now THAT is a GOOD post on any day, but a GREAT post to read on a Friday. I am getting into Checkcoin like I did bitcoin- better late than never!
Late ? LOL Plenty of time yet. Anything under 2000 sat will be early (bearing in mind there are no sure things, just the usual risks). I would expect a lot of flippers to sell millions below that level over the next few weeks... We will be able to gauge things by the actual reported progress. Checkcoin is still very young. Indeed, plenty of time left to buy. As you said, around 2k will be the floor in the next days. Although, the devs will release something nice tonight, depending on the implications of this we may see a decent spike. But take it easy, don't chase prices. Just buy an amount you feel comfortable with and hold. First milestone will be reaching the top 100, so again, there is still so much room for growth. I actually meant 1k would be the floor, and 2k will be the ceiliing, until the IPO sellers are out (and there will be a lot of them). I will be watching the actual progress of the project : don't focus on price in the early weeks/months. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
