Actually, the people here have been talking about adoption. I just mentioned it. Hell the dev even said that the reason that they wanted the halving was that there was too many coins and not enough use for them. I think people have considered adoption as the weak link in the chain for this coin for a long time.
I think its fair to say that adoption is the weak link for every crypto currency, bitcoin included. Its not so simple just to say that we need adoption. At this point we can all waste time arguing the supply and demand of the coin but ultimately it comes back to what you have been alluding to: A solid business plan and publicity. Most people who would actually consider using Potcoin probably don't even know it exists. Right now we are a niche market inside of a niche market. Potheads who like crypto currency. We all want adoption for the coin. It starts by first letting people know it exists. Participation in events, handing materials out, etc. You alluded to a number of these things and I think you've hit on the head. Now back to the original point regarding the foundation address...IMO the legitimacy of this code depends entirely on what they intend to use it for. If they are using those coins to fund something that benefits the coin then great. Consider it an expenditure in their business model, which we have all bought stock in. But the question is what benefit? Not all are equal. Funding a legalization effort is great but lets be honest legalization is going to happen anyway. Potcoin funding will make no difference. There are better ways to use those coins. Use them to pay for ad space, leaflets,coin handouts at dispensaries, etc. Are there plans for signs at this new office? It was announced and very little was said about it afterward. It seems like an excellent place to try and slap a Potcoin sign or something on the outside of the building. Use the 2% in coins to help pay for it. Handouts and working with dispensaries is nice but ultimately you need Potcoin to be seen by as many eyes as possible. Even if it doesn't stick with most of them. People should know what Potcoin is before they walk into a dispensary. That way they can ask about it inside, instead of being told about it inside for the first time. It puts pressure on dispensaries to consider the coin more seriously if people already know about it. |
|
|
|
Who will be located there? |
|
|
|
Where did you buy that open air frame? can you link it please?
I found some blue prints online and basically built two of the same thing by hand using 1/2" angled aluminum. Fuck me was it a pain in the ass. Would much rather have spent the extra few bucks to get what you've got.
thanks,
vr
I have two frames I can sell you if you don't want to pay over $100 each. The exact one in the picture and a second one that is just like it (they are stackable) I bought them from here: http://www.hashratesolutions.com/collections/allPm me if you're interested. |
|
|
|
1000% per day  zimbabywe style  Should we cross off Dollars and pencil in Sync? |
|
|
|
The current "moneysupply" is 1,011.47 Sync. I have read over and over in this thread that the final coin count will be and is limited to 10,000 Sync. Since the POW phase is over, the only way to get the supply up to 10,000 is through staking. If that is truly the goal, there are numerous ways to get there, but nothing has been presented by the dev team to date that will come even close to 10,000. MsCollec previously liked the idea of having a stake that halves every so often, the same way that block-solving rewards half for many coins. Her initial post about leaving it at 100% for 2 weeks then halving it every month would only get the final supply to around 1,183 coins. These are the 2 scenarios for a halving system that would get the supply to 10,000: - 100% annual interest halving every 1.15 years - 10,000 Sync would be reached some time in the year 2034
- 1,381% annual interest halving every month - 10,000 sync would be reached in roughly 15 months
To sum up, either the staking periods must be much longer or the interest rate much higher for the money supply to eventually reach 10,000. This is why I asked the question if the 10k coin limit was changing. But also I think we are limiting ourselves a little bit by saying the interest rate needs to halve itself. Why not something more gradual, like a small reduction (1-10%) every X number of blocks? X can be chosen depending on how long we want new coins being produced. |
|
|
|
Good news development on Anon/mixer similar to XC starts tomorrow  I dont have to tell you the core dev  Not sure what to think about this mixer. Will that make us dependent from a central server that will have to validate each transaction, or will the coin still survive a targeted DDOS attack? There won't be a central server for verifying anything. The way features like Darksend work is by using nodes that essentially put up collateral to run. For darkcoin they're called Masternodes and the requirement is 1000 darkcoin. Long story short, any transaction relayed through a master node automatically have its coins "mixed" with coins from other transactions and from the 1000 dark held by the master node operator. I'm leaving some details out but that's basically how it works So the more master nodes you have, the stronger the network and the mixing function will be. As compensation for hosting a master node and putting up the required collateral, a small portion of newly minted coins is paid out directly to the master node operators. Think of it like a network transaction fee, but its enforced every time a block is found and the payout is only to master node operators. But I'm curious to see how they will implement this for Sync. A master node will not be able to stake any coins simply because once they stake they can't move. Makes mixing a little hard. So if a large holder wants to run a master node they will lose potential stake. There will have to be some form of transaction fee or block solving fee paid out to the master nodes. Otherwise nobody will run one. Also, if the largest holders are all running master nodes then they aren't staking. If they aren't staking they aren't helping the network... |
|
|
|
Just an FYI - If my calculations are correct, leaving the 100% annual POS in place for 2 weeks and then halving it monthly would result in a maximum coin supply of around 1131 Sync.
41.67 sync generated by 100%/year for 2 weeks (1000 * (1 + 1/24))
43.403 by 50% for 1 mo (1041.67 * (1 + 0.5/12))
22.606 by 25% for 1 mo (1085.07 * (1 + 0.25/12))
11.538 by 12.5% for 1 mo
5.829 by 6.25% for 1 mo,
...
Adding up all of the diminishing stake amounts has an upper limit of about 131 coins generated from stake total, so we would get nowhere close to 10000. Even if the rate was monthly instead of annual, the limit would still be less than 3600 total
thats the reason why the discussion about maxcoin is worthless and just a hint that someone either has no clue about that Thing OR DONT WANT TO SHOW THAT BEACUSE HE´S just trolling good work Its always relevant if its active in the code. Right now stake is 100% annually and we will reach the maximum supply of coins in a couple of years. If we reduce the interest it draws that timeframe out. If we reduce the interest so fast we never reach the max amount of coins there is little hope for new investment. In 6 months POS will basically be over under your halving schedule. Very little incentive for future investors looking to buy coins. My point is that instead of arguing over interest rates, we should be arguing over the total number of coins. Then we can decide how long new minting will take place and figure out a way to reduce POS interest rates |
|
|
|
|
What is the word on max coin supply? I'm more interested in that then whatever the interest rate is. Is the 10,000 coin limit going to stay?
|
|
|
|
to be honest, I don't think that last fork went very well. It was supposed to make everything more stable, but I see the exact opposite happening; wallets on all my computers/nodes are constantly falling off and it doesn't help with a reboot, but a full chaindownload including 15-20 Syncd restarts every time. Conf or no Conf, really doesn't matter or so it seems.
Every wallet recompiled up to 1.0.2.0, seemed to help in the beginning, but then I was back to being forktrapped again.
I see that the block explorer follows, this makes me a bit suspicious.. am I being poisoned by some notoriously bad nodes?
How about you guys, do you have any/different problems today or is it only me?
Yes I have similar problems. Took me awhile to get the wallet synced and staking again after the fork. And your right conf or no conf, it makes no difference. |
|
|
|
Thank you! but but but, I don't want orphans  hehe Any idea when they are changing the interest from 100% to 1% again ? 1-2 weeks or next few days. There seems to be a lot of opinions on should we get back to 1% or not. 100% is nice, but in theory (don't know if it really applies) every time the coin amount has doubled, the price has halved, so (in theory) owners would eventually not win the 100% profit. But I'm really not sure if this applies to cryptocurrencies. And 100% interest would mean there is no limit on the coin amount, which is not good for the coin price.I have a wild idea; it might be bad or good, but think about it: How about reducing the stake just like PoW is usually reduced. Ie this year 100%, next year 50%, after that 25, 12.5 etc.. Or maybe this month, next month.. or reduce week by week? We would get the benefits of the hig stake but the coin supply would not be limitless (limitless coin supply = BAD). Isn't the supply capped by a value called MAX_MONEY? So the percentage of stake (100%, 1%, etc) only changes how fast the coins are produced. Once the value MAX_MONEY is reached, new minting ceases regardless of what the interest rate is. There is currently a hard cap of 10,000 coins: static const int64_t MAX_MONEY = 10000 * COIN; This value is found in main.h if anybody wants to look at the source code https://github.com/MsCollec/sync/blob/master/src/main.h |
|
|
|
WE HAVE ARRIVED AT BLOCK 280 001 AND WE ARE OKAY!!!
<smokemon> "addr" : "105.227.70.157:61566", "services" : "00000003", "lastsend" : 1401642936, "lastrecv" : 1401642936, "bytessent" : 152, "bytesrecv" : 128, "blocksrequested" : 0, "conntime" : 1401642936, "version" : 70002, "subver" : "/Hashtoshi:0.8.6.4/", "inbound" : true, "startingheight" : 280000, "banscore" : 0
We have been banning lots of clients
Someone has been trying to exploit the timewarp attack right before block 280k
but the DIGISHIELD kicked in and bang... it worked.
we found out what happened! SOMEONE had setup a side chain and hashing power that was running block times of 36 seconds and not 40.
SOMEONE WAS TRYING TO JACK US>>>>> glad we implemented the digishield.
Taking it to the next level now.!!!
THANKS EVERYONE FOR ALL THE SUPPORT!
Nicely done, a smooth transition  |
|
|
|
Wait really? Where does it show hes the owner..? Must be an awesome feeling to have.. Theymos was given the privilege. Originally Satoshi hosted the forums on SourceForge, then moved them to bitcoin.org. Shortly after Satoshi disappeared, the forums were moved here and hosted by Sirius. Theymos took over control of the forums after that. If satoshi dissapeard how did he gave theymos acces to servers? He didn't. Satoshi passed the keys to Sirius while it was still hosted on bitcoin.org. After he disappeared, Sirius moved the forum to this site. Some point after that Theymos was chosen to take over. |
|
|
|
Wait really? Where does it show hes the owner..? Must be an awesome feeling to have.. Theymos was given the privilege. Originally Satoshi hosted the forums on SourceForge, then moved them to bitcoin.org. Shortly after Satoshi disappeared, the forums were moved here and hosted by Sirius. Theymos took over control of the forums after that. |
|
|
|
Can anyone explain to me the reasoning for the 100% interest from staking, is it compounded daily ? wouldn't it mean that a potential 1000 coins are minted every day, wouldn't that decrease the value ?  Cheers, Victor It's 100% per year, with 1000 already created by POW. You can view the total number of coins through the Sync wallet. Go to Help -> Debug -> Console and type "getinfo" to display a list of information about the coin. Where it says "moneysupply" is the total number of coins in circulation: "moneysupply" : 1005.55386730, You will see only about 5 coins have been minted through POS so far. |
|
|
|
This is cool. Looks like Russel has been busy |
|
|
|
Apparently it's 0.3 once the hard-fork happens, although I'm not completely sure since the dev never really answered that question...I don't think he has anyway.
P.S. Just wanted to mention to the dev tho, that I do appreciate you guys not releasing wallet V2 until all the annoying FUDers dumped their coins...now we don't have to listen to them complain / be psychotic and they don't have their coins...as the price rises haha! =)
Unless they dumped high and are now buying low... |
|
|
|
so it seems there is 0 SYNC in the genesis block?
Yes it appears so. I didn't expect anything crazy to be there but the 404 error raskul pointed out made me curious. As far as the fix is concerned its great Nite69 commited some time to this. But MsCollec has said this:
Hard Fork time is set at 2.6.2014 18:00 , since it's a mandatory update you have to compile a new wallet.
You guys have to contact FaSan so that he can switch the explorer to the latest source and move it to a new server since im shutting down my server.
There are going to be problems if we are asking people to compile their own wallets. Its good if you know how but I'm betting a lot of people don't just based on the number of people who couldn't get their wallet working. |
|
|
|
21:27:28

getblock 00000aa052f62125efeea66496e52277fbc84d162f9d2243ea53b8cf65c44127
21:27:28

{
"hash" : "00000aa052f62125efeea66496e52277fbc84d162f9d2243ea53b8cf65c44127",
"confirmations" : 8881,
"size" : 160,
"height" : 0,
"version" : 1,
"merkleroot" : "a87d9a593e3e65e96f44be39270e0d0e604e26f1fd567d72306579f3f34c19dd",
"mint" : 0.00000000,
"time" : 1400263615,
"nonce" : 1261301,
"bits" : "1e0fffff",
"difficulty" : 0.00024414,
"blocktrust" : "100001",
"chaintrust" : "100001",
"nextblockhash" : "000005b1dabaff2faedc68817a46667ea8ee97df371348580ee9596c99506da8",
"flags" : "proof-of-work stake-modifier",
"proofhash" : "00000aa052f62125efeea66496e52277fbc84d162f9d2243ea53b8cf65c44127",
"entropybit" : 1,
"modifier" : "0000000000000000",
"modifierchecksum" : "0e00670b",
"tx" : [
"a87d9a593e3e65e96f44be39270e0d0e604e26f1fd567d72306579f3f34c19dd"
]
}
Thanks for running that I'm not at a machine with Sync on it. I bolded the part that everybody wants to know |
|
|
|
Is there NOT ONE coder on this thread that has any interest in looking at the code and either submitting fixes thru pull requests or just forking it and fixing? I think MsCollec would probably happily accept coding help. Especially if it actually works!
I don't need any coding help. I created because i was passionate about it and there are actual future plans. I spent over 7 BTC on sync without asking anybody's help. People complained about was wallet out of sync and not staking The more people that are minting, the faster the blockchain and this also affected the wallet since there's no new block to complete the synchronization. The blockchain is getting faster now because more people are staking and the network is growing. I have read how raskul and other FUDsters said they know competent devs, well this is your chance. Regarding loljosh, I didn't paid him any amount to develop SYNC, he's just helping out based on my reputation. If you are interested in his services you can negotiate with him. Then why do you avoid questions? IMO the wallet is not even the issue here. Yes its got problems but it largely works. I'm more concerned with appears to be a lack of motivation on your part to improve things. People started getting antsy and your response was to shrug them off or ignore them. It means either you don't care about the community or you don't plan on going any further with this. Either way its got people jumping ship. You avoid simple questions like why the .3 sync limit was chosen. Why it wasn't announced earlier and why the POW/POS transition was not tested more thoroughly. These are all basic questions a competent developer should be able to answer and certainly should not be avoiding. And while we are on the subject of things you havn't done...what happened to the anonymizer you promised? Or was that more bs to pump it further? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
