Actually, I'm Satoshi. I just pretend to be a graphic designer of *cough* limited *cough* coding talent from Belarus because that's a fun thing to do

Japanese humor, go figure.

You do reallize that the fact that the "laundry buffer" is shrinking while no "turnover" buffer of similar size is being formed somewhere in the chain is trivial to detect ?
 

Also, as to speculate scenario specifically:

To speculate for 20 years with millions of coins I would need to 1) learn to speculate 2) ensure long term viability of the project (If something bad happens in 10 years, so long ze profitz), so that at least signifies a dedication to the project viability and by far would not be the worst thing to happen.

However, I cannot into speculation and find it too easy to "break", given very explicit nature of my fun-d's existence.


Thus, the most reasonable way appears to ensure long-term viability of project by paying bounties for project-beneficial contributions, and binding the rest in some laundry or perhaps another scheme that generates profit without selling those premined units off.

Basically, I need my humble alt-coins to live long and prosper so that my laundries could spin on full auto, bringing me stable and effortless (if not outrageously huge) anonymous(ish) income.

Ensuring price stagnation along the way and having to bother with speculating the market in a manner that doesn't spook it too much with my mighty coinage (and boy wouldn't it be easy to spook it given public nature of blockchains)

meh. Too much mess.


Because it keeps on trucking with very little effort, after set up, and since coins bound in it are not in the market proper ensuring that I don't "accidentally the price".

Technically, the only difference between "unmoving bitcoins" and "little fun-d" is that it's concentrated under the control of one person you actually sorta can talk to me, unlike unknown number of mysterious people who may or may not be willing to use the coins in a manner you may or may not agree with.



To do that, I would actually have to  speculate for 20 or whatever years.

To implement the laundry, I only need to pay coders and security auditors once, and receive fairly stable proceeds semi-anonymously with little effort down the line.

Not so much a mentor as a kind of "negative reference". Much in the "I may be mean-spirited, but at least I don't eat babies" way

Seriously though, do you really thing I would try to sell of, ahem, millions ? That's a fairly silly thing to do with millions of coins (for reasons I already elaborated upon in the previous thread )

If premining, you can at least seek to achieve maximum project utility by premining enough to start a unique service that does not involve selling coins and enough to pay some bounties.

Of course I could have premined a few hundreds or thousands, but that would just mean that I would have gotten all the same ire for far less potential utility (mind you, most of this utility for me is not derived from selling the premined brixage  )

EDIT:

Pardon, but I have to ask...

Why are your quotes below your posts ? It seems verily unusual

That should be a fairly trivial affair.

However, at this point premining is the norm (Explicit protecshun racket in the blockchain is the new black in atrocities of coinmaking   ). And if I premine, I may as well premine meself a good laundry buffer that could keep spinnin' as long as coin exists (without affecting the market negatively) and some decent bounty safety net (which I'd really rather spend people for code and cool stuff then paying twitspam, something I am contemplating but am very reluctant to engage in)

If anything, such a large size is indicative of lack of intent to selloff
seriously, if I wanted to sell-off I would have privately mined a few hundred thousands using a subtler trick that I could actually expect to be "hidden until too late".
Selling off several millions is just plain unpossible


Oh, do go forwards with your devious plans, Tenebrix wellcomes all the plans

Actually, the argument was between 6 and 9 mils.

I could have picked 6, but hey, like I already said in the GG thread, utility of such premined constructs is binding them into some project, because selling them off is untenable even theoretically

People take Sovereign Coin with taxes "seriously", my little "fun-d" with its explicit intent of funding bounties and serving as a laundry buffer is a small and meek fish compared to the glory of taking a chunk' o coins from every miner "FOR PROTECSHUN!" 

Did you check out that article about how much bitcoins "never moved" ?

Or for that matter do people mind trading diamonds which are pretty explicitly cartelized ? Or USD of which USA not only sits a fuckton on, but can spawn more at a whim (Unlike poor old me ?

Besides, I intend to bind the majority of those "moneysez"  into the buffer of my laundry project, thus ensuring myself a steady income that does not involve "spending" the premined coins proper and thus does not negatively affect the market even in most theoretical sense.

Same way as with Geist. Subsidy code trick.


given that in fact, the existence of the fund was both explicitly stated in first post and in the config,  I am somewhat surprised that you have missed something that was never concealed in the first place.

At least unlike some people, I don't have taxes and am reluctant to pay people for twitspamming (maybe I should ? After all, that facilitates adoption. Hmmmm...), and didn't clutter the blockchain with a ton of blocks (all my fund sits neatly in 1 block lol )

As to the question of whether large-scale premining constitutes an affront to the spirit of alt-currencies comparable to taxes (affront everyone except maybe Namecoin engaged in), arguments pro et contra were fleshed out when discussing my Geist fund. Let me find a link EDIT link


P.S.:

The problem with ix wasn't that he had a premined fukton, the problem was that he tried to "bribe" Gavin with them IIRC. That was not nice.

Well, I just got bored of arguing with a bunch of dudes in PM about how much should I premine and decided to use same number (as a matter of fact, same string) I used for Geist

Poolops banned botnets ?

My oh my, that's both not very wise and technologically hardly sustainable.


By involving a miner rig in a DDoS strike you increase the probability of being detected / getting owner in hot water, so the benefit of doing "other stuff" must outweigh risks of miner loss.

That means that some high risk / not so high income activities will be less popular.



Depends on specific economics involved. Where I live, DDoS rent is about  45$/hour for a bot net that is enough to take down a Belorussian governmental site.

If Tenebrix mining gives you  > 45$ / hour with such net, involving it in a DDoS op makes far less sense.

Well, on the other hand botnets connected to a diverse set of pools will contribute to Tenebrix's security

As for CPU-ming btc, it makes sense only when you have lots and lots of CPUs and don't pay electricity, and even then it is likely kinda meh due to all the super-duper GPUs


Well, now they will mine both BTC and TBX, on same box, lol

What bugs me is that the miner works teh ossom on Ubuntu and, it seems, on Fedora

It seems to be a distro-specific quirk.

Linux client works, just... at some distros much better than others.

Daemon for linux in progress (needed for pool and for exchange)

Charts will happen.

Pool and exchange - negotiating nao.

Occasional windows "transparent and unresponsive" appear to be a glitch (strongly related to processor load tho). Click on the icon in the tray to un-freeze the thing.

I wonder how EC would do, lol


A little bit from colon A, a little bit from B

While partially my response is in jest, you are thirty first person who bothered to inform me that Geist and / or Tenebrix have an "inflation" issue and that it's bad, and that cutting miner subsidy is teh ossom.

At first it leads to interesting discussion about what inflation and deflation are, and whether it is likely that there will be a miner freak-out at first or second "subsidy kink".

At thirty-first it starts getting mildly weird. I do think about writing a large entry for the FAQ i can link people to, because honestly, there's only so many times I can run through same arguments, I'm not an argument-based PoW cruncher

And now that I think of it, I do have a distinct idea as to how to implement an additional "quasi deflationary" influence without cutting subsidies or implementing demurrage.


Good, good


As far as physical commodities (and to a lesser extent, physical money) go, divisibility does affect the behavior of a system strongly dependent upon said physical construct as a form of money for transaction.

While gold is pretty divisible (compared to diamonds it indeed is ), I think you would agree that paying people in little pieces of gold  0.00001 grams each would be troublesome and incur additional cost of precision equipment needed.

Also, you should bear in mind that so far, we are conflating (woefully so) growth of money mass (monetary inflation) and inflation proper (which only deals with prices, not amount of money in a system).

Inflation / deflation as typically described in the context of Keynesian and Austrian arguments typically assume artifacts that can't just move a decimal point in arbitrary direction at a drop of a hat, which x-coins  are capable of without much trouble (not to mention both assume a nation-state economy of some sort, which is a whole can o' worms that is completely inapplicable to coin...until USA embraces Tenebrix as legal tender, that is )

Well, that's a question of definitions

It's not deflationary in the sense that is usually peddled in x-coin talks, but it *can* be deflationary for some very specific economic context

No, especially since in a system with a static monetary output of x units per y of time spent, losses and currency introduction scale differently (losses will scale with userbase and to a lesser extent overall monetary mass, the output remains nominally static while, quite obviously, shrinking relatively)


Tenebrix would suffer less due to faster blocks and faster retargets (two weeks of retarget time is well, pretty damn slooow)

Also, by not having the "must have a card this ossom to really mine" effect it has different adoption dynamics

Actually, that's pretty nifty on the top of it, that I have to agree with.

Do tell more.


Dunno, but your suggestion that someone (ArtForz or anyone else) will throw FPGAs to become a prominent Tenebrix mining suggests either peculiar opinion of costs involved or very large optimism as to Tenebrix price in the immediate future.


Probably.

Point is, you need something like LX130T to make a decent scrypt-cruncher, and it isn't particularly cheap and it is still questionable whether it will be that much better than 2-4 cpu-cetnric boxen you could get for that money (and mind you we're not counting R&D needed to get FPGA rolling)

If someone even bothers to try jumping through those hoops, that means that Tenebrix has got pretty damn expensive



That depends on whole bunch of stuff,  on how CPU/FPGA performances will compare "in field", how many CPUs are available (obviously, CPUs will massively outnumber FPGAs), how far one can upgrade Tenebrix PoW without some huge radical effort and so on.

So far, there is no indication that FPGA and / or APU (which seem, by far, the most interesting Tenebrix hardware candidates) will be as superior in TBX mining as GPUs are compared to  CPUs.

Power costs are of course an issue, but that again depends largely on context  

Besides, it's not like PoW can't be upgraded, lol


A tenebrix swarm is better than a DDoS bot swarm hammering your site, or a swarm that hosts/trades/transfers "materials" that may get the owner of the infected machine arrested, methinks.

Especially since you can steal only so many cycles before the user notices that the box is grinding slower and slower and takes measures.


Thanks.

Exchange is on the way (working on a daemon for them)

@ bigchip (qick add)

If you go custom hardware way and have infinite moneys, you can "just" design one hell of a beefy custom design and "simply" mass-produce it.

But that implies that mining tenebrix would cover the R&D, implementation and operation costs of a huge pile of hardware that can only mine Tenebrix (maybe also brute scrypt-protected passwords, lol)

GPUs can at least run crysis and industrially-useful computations.

Custom-built hardware will likely pretty much crunch scrypt (or whatever PoW is used in TBX at that remote future) real good and...crunch scrypt (or whatever PoW is used in TBX at that remote future) real good


That error only occurs when people fail to place config right.

So, try

cd ~

mkdir .tenebrix

then place the config in .tenebrix and run again.


Try setting daemon=0 in the config.

Please proceed to update your geist stuffs.

Notes on update process and stuff - in the thread.

And here is the usability update, with a few tweaks to time windows and such.

http://www.geistgeld.org/getting-started.html

Expect exchange approximately after 50%+ users update their stuffs.

Now, some generalized notes

1) pretty please back up the wallet.dat before you do anything

2) New folder structure is

 Windows: C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data\geistgeld
Mac: ~/Library/Application Support/geistgeld
Unix: ~/.geistgeld

3) New config name is geist.conf

4) WALLET.DAT (the monies) AND OTHER DATA NOW RESIDES IN FOLDER geistdata INSIDE THE DATADIR

5) Windows users can just download the new Crutches bundle with all the configs in place, then copy the contents of Vital_Data\testnet into the Vital_Data\geistdata.

BAM! new life

(please verify your balance and the network operation before you delete the old portable bundle with its lonely old testnet folder

6) linux users can just make a folder .geistgeld, put their config and their geistdata (with wallet.dat and blockchain) there, and no longer bother passing the -datadir

Given that viable botnets wont be running "thread per every core at 99% cpu load each", I doubt that.

(Those that will will get stamped out quickly due to users going LOLWTF IS THAT? very quick)

There was at least one suspect botnet herder asking me about TBX in the tbx chan, btw

One has to wonder, what does the recent push of "pool friendly" version of Geist to git mean in this context ;-P

Tenebrix is less than 3 days old ffs

Now this inflation argument is incredibly weird.

Not only do terms inflation/deflation mean things that do not directly apply to infinitely divisible (and also infinitely re-nominable) abstract mathematical constructs (thus rendering the entire branch of discussion pretty moot), but you seem to completely ignore the fact that stable output means that relative increase in "amount" of coins will be on a constant decline.

By the way, ironically, that is exactly the way everyone's favorite "deflationary" commodity, gold, behaves in real life (you see, presence of abstract theoretical limit to gold extraction from a planet does not really affect market behavior of gold in real life within the planning scope equal to our expected lifespan, which I hope we can agree is the largest reasonable timeframe to plan for   )

Oh, wait a moment, gold production  per annum has actually grown since 1990s. Holy shit, Tenebrix is more "deflationary" than gold (that is, if you believe abstract constructs spawned by eldritch mathematications can really be "deflationary" in the usual sense  )

Also, you seem to ignore natural losses.

You know what ? I will implement some namecoinish coin-purging trick (without demurrage and/or mining rate decrease, of course, principles are principles) just so that when the next deflation guy pops up, I'll just link him to that line of code on github and be done with it  


Namecoin orphaned ? You must not have been paying attention, mate.

Also, what do ya suggest, crazy skewed retargets, lol ?  


Do you have any shred of an idea just how much a good FPGA (just the raw hardware, not R&D costs and shenanigans) costs ?

If it becomes lucrative to mine Tenebrix with dedicated hardware like that, that means Tenebrix is a success.

Also, it is questionable whether FPGA implementation will actually outperform CPU of comparable price (or perhaps, a private pool of cpu miners, at that kind of price ), and by what margin, in terms of raw performance (not in terms of per watt performance, lol)


Depends on how you define money  :-P

But on the other hand, some people implement things that are most favorably described as "sovereign bonds", for the love of Cthulhu  

Same number as in Geist, since I got quite bored of arguing about which number would be "best"

There seems to be room for optimization arising from how APUs can use memory, but I guess only time (and engineers and programmers) can tell.