Bitcoin Forum
June 14, 2024, 06:03:23 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: How to design a CoinChoose-resistant coin?  (Read 1589 times)
sterob
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 175
Merit: 100

★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice


View Profile
June 09, 2013, 07:48:33 PM
 #21

an unskilled worker blames his tools.  not sure what you mean by "coinchoose resistant"  seems like you don't understand economics or programming.  another nonsense thread on bitcointalk.

Do you understand cryptocurrency?
Since when is it normal to have the network hashpower increase by 500x in a few minutes?
i concur.
Having the network hash jump 500x increase diff substantially while definitely the owners of those hash rate will dump those coins. leaving the network with high diff and low price coin which pretty much kill the coin.

Balthazar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3108
Merit: 1359



View Profile
June 09, 2013, 08:10:19 PM
 #22

Topic should be renamed to "How to design a user-resistant coin?". Roll Eyes
mebezac
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10



View Profile
June 09, 2013, 08:11:05 PM
 #23

Topic should be renamed to "How to design a user-resistant coin?". Roll Eyes
+1  Wink

BTC: 168d57nW72Y6DidPgE88iL7vYmpQD45dYK|LTC: LLPttXuFF2uTo2CWeEwXU5CwcUcgQ4NGd3
nonameo
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10



View Profile
June 09, 2013, 09:45:41 PM
 #24

Also, we can do whatever we'd like, and I dont see how a coin that doesnt manage to allow itself to be gamed by huge hashpower waves is a detriment to the community. Explain how that works out.

I don't think that's what anyone's saying. A coin that manages to solve this problem certainly brings something new to the table, and PPCoin's proof-of-stake system, if it takes over from proof-of-work eventually as planned, probably gets there.

I am glad that this conversation is happening, however, as instigating it was part of my goal of releasing CryptoSwitcher rather than keeping it for personal use.

There is nothing wrong with proof of stake, it just doesn't supply coins fast enough for growing adoption(at least not at 1% and probably not at 3%)

I still think you need proof of work, and not just because it supplies coins faster. There is also the added security from hashing. However, hashrate needs to stay up and preferably should steadily increase.

gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1000



View Profile
June 09, 2013, 11:39:46 PM
 #25

Maybe if coins attracted users by their inherent value instead of attracting speculation large hashrate swings wouldn't matter so much as the price would rise by itself and drive mining instead of relying on pure speculation.

Most coins are simple clones of Bitcoin with only simple changes that bring only superficial advantages and often large disadvantages (switching to more botnet friendly hash algorithms that make attacks more affordable or reducing interval to a point where orphans are the norm).

Let's face it, the problem isn't that existing alt-coins aren't resistant to hashrate fluctuations caused by profitability changes, the problem is that most of them don't have any advantage unless you want to profit from speculation. Once the speculation dies down the coin dies with it.

The only coins resisting are the ones which brought new features on release :
  • Litecoin with scrypt and shorter intervals
  • PPCoin with proof-of-stake
  • Novacoin with proof-of-stake and scrypt
  • Freicoin with demurrage
  • Terracoin with fast retargeting

I'm not even convinced Freicoin and Terracoin will make it. Terracoin is just a dream come true for coin-hopping: it only addresses the hashrate fluctuation (making a coin merge-minable would probably have the same result long-term if the coin was worth it). Unless you are the foundation (which gets most of the mined coins) Freicoin mining isn't worth it most of the time and really who wants to get coins that slowly disappear (I understand wanting to spend it, but being paid with it?).

All the others I know of only have short times of profitability with large periods where most miners leave. This is when they didn't simply fail on release...

I coin-hopp as I consider mining to be a business (I'll certainly pay taxes this year on my mining income so you bet I don't consider it an hobby anymore) but don't rely on coinchoose (my setup predates it by more than a year and is far more robust to the various profitability mirages: it didn't mine Feathercoin for long the last 24h for example).
For me mining, making a coin viable should not rely on the behavior of the miners but on the behavior of users. Resisting hashrate fluctuations - although a desirable property - should not be their primary concern: they should design their coins so that people want to buy them, not mine them.

P2pool tuning guide
Trade BTC for €/$ at bitcoin.de (referral), it's cheaper and faster (acts as escrow and lets the buyers do bank transfers).
Tip: 17bdPfKXXvr7zETKRkPG14dEjfgBt5k2dd
nonameo
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10



View Profile
June 10, 2013, 12:13:33 AM
 #26

Quote
Maybe if coins attracted users by their inherent value instead of attracting speculation large hashrate swings wouldn't matter so much as the price would rise by itself and drive mining instead of relying on pure speculation.

Doubly agreed, value fluctuations are bad for a currency because it impairs service to its users, who would like to be able to have some confidence that what's worth N one day is not worth 1/2 N the next. A lot of people say the cyprus event was the cause of the uptick in value in BTC. I say it was more the halving of the block reward. BTC started its incline fairly before cyprus.

Quote
The only coins resisting are the ones which brought new features on release :
  • Litecoin with scrypt and shorter intervals
  • PPCoin with proof-of-stake
  • Novacoin with proof-of-stake and scrypt
  • Freicoin with demurrage
  • Terracoin with fast retargeting

You can't really have novacoin on that list unless you have yacoin too. Yacoin also has proof of stake and uses a totally different(unlike novacoin's scrypt) hashing algorithm.

Quote
I'm not even convinced Freicoin and Terracoin will make it. Terracoin is just a dream come true for coin-hopping: it only addresses the hashrate fluctuation (making a coin merge-minable would probably have the same result long-term if the coin was worth it). Unless you are the foundation (which gets most of the mined coins) Freicoin mining isn't worth it most of the time and really who wants to get coins that slowly disappear (I understand wanting to spend it, but being paid with it?).

I'm not convinced either. A cryptocoin is a service. Who are the customers? Those are the people that need to be served and should be considered. Miners serve the cryptocoin and are paid in block reward.

Quote
Resisting hashrate fluctuations - although a desirable property - should not be their primary concern: they should design their coins so that people want to buy them, not mine them.

For the most part, I think you're right. However, highly fluctuating hash rates affect quality of service for the users in terms of block times and security. This is a major reason for the concern. If you can manage fluctuating hash rates without affecting service then it is not a problem.  IMO this is a good reason for having proof of stake, it helps service and security(in a way?) although I'm not really totally sure on how proof of stake secures the block chain. You'd think a large balance with lots of coin days could easily be spoofed. You can't do that so easily with hashing...

Also, rather than buy I'd say use. I mean, it's fine if people want to invest/make money on currency and exchange. There shouldn't be lots of room for it in a good currency though.

zackclark70
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1000

ADT developer


View Profile
June 10, 2013, 01:00:32 AM
 #27

take a look at my idea https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226582.0

mebezac
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10



View Profile
June 10, 2013, 01:03:08 AM
 #28


I like some of your ideas, but I'm failing to see which part of it would mitigate the coinchoose effect?

BTC: 168d57nW72Y6DidPgE88iL7vYmpQD45dYK|LTC: LLPttXuFF2uTo2CWeEwXU5CwcUcgQ4NGd3
mat5x (OP)
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 181
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 10, 2013, 01:05:21 AM
 #29

Topic should be renamed to "How to design a user-resistant coin?". Roll Eyes

really, you think it unfair to design a coin that wont support and overavaluation notion of running thru 100BTC of hashes generated, based on the value of a 0.5BTC-deep buy market.

That's entirely unfair to users, yes?

Ridiculous.

Proper valuation to all users of a coin that doesnt allow gaming through the artificial side effects of a gaming a coin with an unattented client miner that measures ONLY THE NEXT BLOCK of a coin based on ONLY THE FIRST 0.5BTC DEPTH OF A BID MARKET is unfair.

Please explain harder, cuz im really not convinced. Sal002 is counting on you.

Elacoin/ELC - block reward proportional-to-difficulty coin! http://elacoin.com
rbdrbd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462
Merit: 250



View Profile
June 10, 2013, 01:12:00 AM
 #30

FYI - YaCoin is CoinChoose resilient.  Guess why?

I think I remember seeing it listed once very shortly and the profitability was like 300% but maybe I was just seeing things.

Yep.  Can't mine it with a GPU so it was delisted

sal, I think it would be very useful to have a column in CC showing the total volume (expressed in BTC or dollars) across all exchanges combined for each coin in the list. It doesn't do much against the automining issue (unless that tool is enhanced to factor it in), but if you are just blindly mining whateven coin at the top, you could find yourself in a situation where you have a bunch of coins to unload but no market depth to unload it in, thus leading to a price crash situation if you were to just go ahead with it (as many miners would do).

Market depth is so very crucial in my choice about what coin to mine, personally.
mat5x (OP)
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 181
Merit: 100


View Profile
June 10, 2013, 01:23:21 AM
 #31

    (switching to more botnet friendly hash algorithms that make attacks more affordable or reducing interval to a point where orphans are the norm).

    that is a very specific purpose. Making a coin that is erase-from-internet-resistant has a use to all of us once the DoHS gets thru with people being clever with computers about philosophical notions of fiat symbolics (ie, money.) It's really heady stuff to get angry at people at blowing smoke in the air theorizing about the meaning of a few symbols. Free speech is dead, yo.

    Back to (h)altcoins, aka "ALT".

    Let's face it, the problem isn't that existing alt-coins aren't resistant to hashrate fluctuations caused by profitability changes, the problem is that most of them don't have any advantage unless you want to profit from speculation. Once the speculation dies down the coin dies with it.

    Right, so removing speculation would show a coin's true value. I don't see why that's not what we should all be striving for at all times.

    • Freicoin with demurrage
    • Terracoin with fast retargeting

    AS pointed out earlier by NOMEANSwhat, Frei is useless low value, and TRC is experiencing a continued 'attack' that is now more a 'characteristic' of the coin, the yoyo difficulty. Very curious effect, continuing for 6 months+!

    (making a coin merge-minable would probably have the same result long-term if the coin was worth it).

    Merged coins are worth nothing cuz they're mined for free. If they had a function to them, like DECREDITS or CREDIT or whatever the idea is (bad name!) (private message coin), then that'd be great to merge them like NMC. But they'd have no real value.

    I coin-hopp as I consider mining to be a business (I'll certainly pay taxes this year on my mining income so you bet I don't consider it an hobby anymore) but don't rely on coinchoose (my setup predates it by more than a year and is far more robust to the various profitability mirages: it didn't mine Feathercoin for long the last 24h for example).
    For me mining, making a coin viable should not rely on the behavior of the miners but on the behavior of users. Resisting hashrate fluctuations - although a desirable property - should not be their primary concern: they should design their coins so that people want to buy them, not mine them.

    I dont think most coin creators have the resources to make such a coin. Tho i've been involved with startups and know the people to talk to, quitting my job to take on a risky launch of yet another alt coin by pouring serious cash into a real coin that people would use is not happening. And being so official about it tends to getyou labelled a 'terrorist' and arrested in the US or Peru. So this piddling around as a hobby seems ok to me, but putting serious cash into an official business doing this is left to the KIM DOTCOM random-jurisdiction-claims-DoHS/FBI-baiters of the world. Im just not that interested in all this stuff to be my freedom on it, or even my job.

    Guess im failtown. But ill still fuck around with coin ideas.


    Elacoin/ELC - block reward proportional-to-difficulty coin! http://elacoin.com
    zackclark70
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 868
    Merit: 1000

    ADT developer


    View Profile
    June 10, 2013, 09:27:59 AM
     #32


    I like some of your ideas, but I'm failing to see which part of it would mitigate the coinchoose effect?

    the diff changes every 30m ( 60 blocks )  even if the diff jumps up 50x or the hashrate drops 50x  the diff would corect itself in less than 24h
    there is very little other than that you can do

    zack
     

    e521
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 196
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    June 10, 2013, 09:34:42 AM
     #33

    the problem is not coinchoose, it is all the shitcoins that are being released

    no, the problem is people buying shitcoins, competition is never bad

    Lhunephel
    Member
    **
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 90
    Merit: 10


    View Profile
    June 10, 2013, 11:06:45 AM
     #34

    I think that QTC (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226918.0) is really fair and resistant to CC. The block value depends on the difficulty and the retarget interval and timespan depends on the network hash rate of the last 8 blocks. This results in a fair reward, regardless if you have 1000Kh/s or 10Mh/s. The problem simply is that nobody wants to mine the coin, because there are no periods of a very low difficulty and a higher price on the exchanges.
    digitalindustry
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 798
    Merit: 1000


    ‘Try to be nice’


    View Profile WWW
    June 10, 2013, 12:27:17 PM
     #35

    Topic should be renamed to "How to design a user-resistant coin?". Roll Eyes

    + 1

    - Twitter @Kolin_Quark
    mat5x (OP)
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 181
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    June 10, 2013, 04:06:20 PM
     #36

    I think that QTC (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226918.0) is really fair and resistant to CC. The block value depends on the difficulty and the retarget interval and timespan depends on the network hash rate of the last 8 blocks. This results in a fair reward, regardless if you have 1000Kh/s or 10Mh/s. The problem simply is that nobody wants to mine the coin, because there are no periods of a very low difficulty and a higher price on the exchanges.

    ridiculous eh, coin is resistant to pump dump waves so no one wants to mine it.

    sad state of affairs.

    as for QTC retargging every  block average 8 block sliding window, how would they not have TRC pumpdump yoyo?

    Elacoin/ELC - block reward proportional-to-difficulty coin! http://elacoin.com
    Pages: « 1 [2]  All
      Print  
     
    Jump to:  

    Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!