changing the block reward scheme is easy.
the hard part is programming the fork, updating the exchanges, notifying everybody and stuff.
Let's think it over for a couple of days and probably reach a preliminary consensus over the weekend. With a great future, I am 100% in support of this coin and luckily enough probably can get enough funding for the purpose. All I need is continuing support. With the final work ......... Lastly, with so much great mining hosting supports, it's no problem to drastically increase block time to say 777 (and this would be the nickname of this coin) and block rewards can start at 16, as long as the network would be able to hand the future needs. This would drastically cut down the blockchain size, which when too big would make wallet client hard to handle its jobs and the wallet functions become extremely sluggish. Some coin(s) with a very short blocktime is facing such problems.  I'm strongly against increasing the blocksize. It would be a step back. I think you are talking about the block time. Oh yes, I wanted to write block time. |
|
|
|
changing the block reward scheme is easy.
the hard part is programming the fork, updating the exchanges, notifying everybody and stuff.
Let's think it over for a couple of days and probably reach a preliminary consensus over the weekend. With a great future, I am 100% in support of this coin and luckily enough probably can get enough funding for the purpose. All I need is continuing support. With the final work based on practicality & feasibility & Critical and essentially fixes. Algo & difficulty adjustment should be considered and made but only if it is possible and easy to make. Not everything can be done exactly what we want but I would rather the team to hand the specifics of that. Consider this as once for all and a long term fix; avoiding constant algo changes like what the Myriad coin does; we cannot afford that; And in the end, it does not really matter,for example such as the difficulty level being not exactly right, because miners come and go based on the difficulty level and adjust to that. Lastly, with so much great mining hosting supports, it's no problem to drastically increase block time to say 777 (and this would be the nickname of this coin) and block rewards can start at 16, as long as the network would be able to hand the future needs. This would drastically cut down the blockchain size, which when too big would make wallet client hard to handle its jobs and the wallet functions become extremely sluggish. Some coin(s) with a very short blocktime is facing such problems. I'm strongly against increasing the blocksize. It would be a step back. |
|
|
|
|
Only the most successful coins have enough money behind them for people to afford designing ASICs because ASICs are very expensive and take a long time to make.
So there are literally dozens of algorithms already used only by CPUs and GPUs and it would probably be best if you would pick one instead of coming up with a new one that might not work out well.
Or, you could pick more than just one algorithms working in parallel so even if one algo will have an ASIC, it's unlikely more algos will also have them. Digibyte, Joincoin, Myriad, Verge, Aurora are all examples of multi algo PoW.
And there are coins which just promised to change the algo with a fork if ASICs were to come out.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, phones are getting better and better in terms of raw computing power but they're still pretty bad in comparison to dedicated GPUs or even a desktop CPUs.
Besides, Litecoin's being mined with powerful ASICs which means the mining performance of phones is utterly irrelevant.
To put it into perspective, phones are like snails and ASICs are like Usain Bolt and mining Litecoin is a race.
If you'd pick an algo that doesn't have ASICs yet it wouldn't be completely useless.
|
|
|
|
Anybody tested it on the 970 yet? 960 is untested. What do you get?
Nice one, thanks! A 5 x 970 rig fluctuates between 357-388 (so 71.4-77.6) after the initial climb (2-3 minutes). Every silentarmy build I tried fluctuates quite a bit. 130W per card. Some notes: - it looks like the -cv parameter doesn't work; it always uses silentarmy (not an issue); - the maximum card/thread number is 8 (for example nothing matters after -cd 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3); - forcing AVX2 (-e 2) even if the CPU doesn't support it (and obviously not CPU mining, -t 0) seems to give a small boost. |
|
|
|
more info coming....
Well then create your thread when there's actual information to present. |
|
|
|
Any one considering taking over, probably restarting with halving starting at 1 Joincoin/block, or perhaps fixed 0.5 Joincoin/block? It should be a lower amount of rewards no matter what, considering the initial supply has officially completely mined. If not, we have to consider outsourcing. Yes, I think it should be forked with an ever decreasing reward (1, 0.5, 0.25, etc). Unfortunately since the coin is barely used, there are no transaction fees so mining is pointless and the total supply is very low anyway. |
|
|
|
We're at block 626825 at the time of writing. The last block with a reward was 626200: int64 nSubsidy = 0;
if (nHeight == 1) nSubsidy = 1400000 * COIN; // IPO block
else
if (nHeight <= 800) nSubsidy = 0.5 * COIN;
else
if (nHeight <= 2000) nSubsidy = 6 * COIN;
else
if (nHeight <= 10000) nSubsidy = 5 * COIN;
else
if (nHeight <= 20000) nSubsidy = 4 * COIN;
else
if (nHeight <= 40000) nSubsidy = 3 * COIN;
else
if (nHeight <= 626200) nSubsidy = 2 * COIN;
return nSubsidy + nFees; |
|
|
|
|
Block reward is now 0 + fees.
So mining is essentially done, which is a shame for such a unique coin.
|
|
|
|
|
Block reward is now 0 + fees.
So mining is essentially done, which is a shame for such a unique coin.
|
|
|
|
|
If you send me the source and if it works as advertised, I'll pay you.
That should help calm others.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it's a bit too fishy.
|
|
|
|
|
Just a heads up, EGC will be removed from c-cex on 30.11.2016 if the volume not exceed 0.2 BTC per day.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey guys, is there a working block explorer?
None of the 3 from OP works.
|
|
|
|
|
- 3 months of mining worth of premine;
- ASIC algo;
- pointlessly slow block times;
- riding the Z**** name;
- nothing even remotely interesting.
|
|
|
|
sp_: didn't i mentioned only GTX10xx ;-D
Where is your colored output.
I compiled only SM61,CM61 you need a SM52 right?
This is great, a 6 x 1070 rig climbs up to ~490 sol/s (so 81.6 per card) in a minute or so then it's slowly decreasing and slowly fluctuating between 462-475. Could you please compile a version with SM50? For 750 Ti support. |
|
|
|
Coin Issued for ICO: 100M ZXT
Coin mineable with PoW: 1M ZXT
Hahaha, good one. |
|
|
|
|
A solution and a hash are essentially the same thing.
Iterations per second is not important.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
