[ANN] Ħ [HODL] No Staking, 1% Standard Interest per Day, 750% APR For HOdlers

[liquidfunds]

Getting hodl on polo and bittrex might help too. Many people will just not trade on yobit

Agree,no big exchange,no pump.

[GermanSailor]

We need a high performance GPU miner.

No, we do not need a GPU miner. The nice Hodl was that could mines at the beginning really EVERYONE without exorbitantly expensive hardware.
CPU mining is good. To modify the algorithm so that much RAM is rewarded would be perfect.

[FreeTrade]

We need a high performance GPU miner.

No, we do not need a GPU miner. The nice Hodl was that could mines at the beginning really EVERYONE without exorbitantly expensive hardware.
CPU mining is good. To modify the algorithm so that much RAM is rewarded would be perfect.

That's an interesting idea - an increase to 2GB or 4GB would be quite an easy change to make to the PoW - it might make botnet mining tougher.

[GermanSailor]

I think minimum 4GB to achieve in an effective.

FreeTrade, Thank you for your great work.

[FreeTrade]

Lol guys..

Yeah, block all public pools so only private pools will be available.

Pools,  public or private,  cannot be blocked. Wherever are miners,  are pools,  pools are not the problem,  you earn more coins by hodling and staking than mining

Spreadcoin had an interesting innovation related to preventing pools -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=715435.0

I think what we observed when the first pools came online was that we saw a large increase in the hashrate, but without an increase in users or activity. We provided a bounty for the first pool because it was such a heavily requested feature, but it may have been a mistake . . . maybe we would do better if we make pooling impossible a la Spreadcoin.

Anyway I think we have a few credible options following some good suggestions -

1. Reduce block reward
2. Increase memory required
3. Try to block pools

[ocminer]

Lol guys..

Yeah, block all public pools so only private pools will be available.

Pools,  public or private,  cannot be blocked. Wherever are miners,  are pools,  pools are not the problem,  you earn more coins by hodling and staking than mining

Spreadcoin had an interesting innovation related to preventing pools -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=715435.0

I think what we observed when the first pools came online was that we saw a large increase in the hashrate, but without an increase in users or activity. We provided a bounty for the first pool because it was such a heavily requested feature, but it may have been a mistake . . . maybe we would do better if we make pooling impossible a la Spreadcoin.

Anyway I think we have a few credible options following some good suggestions -

1. Reduce block reward
2. Increase memory required
3. Try to block pools

Spreads try to block pools did not work :

https://spr.suprnova.cc

Blocking pools in general just make coins more interesting to botnet owners as they can easily build own pools and then focus all the bots there. So one person gets a lot while the others fight to find a block

[joblo]

Lol guys..

Yeah, block all public pools so only private pools will be available.

Pools,  public or private,  cannot be blocked. Wherever are miners,  are pools,  pools are not the problem,  you earn more coins by hodling and staking than mining

Spreadcoin had an interesting innovation related to preventing pools -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=715435.0

I think what we observed when the first pools came online was that we saw a large increase in the hashrate, but without an increase in users or activity. We provided a bounty for the first pool because it was such a heavily requested feature, but it may have been a mistake . . . maybe we would do better if we make pooling impossible a la Spreadcoin.

Anyway I think we have a few credible options following some good suggestions -

1. Reduce block reward
2. Increase memory required
3. Try to block pools

Yet more "solutions" for an undefined problem. What problem is trying to be solved and how do these proposals solve it?

The only effect I see in reducing the block reward is a marginal decrease in supply growth over the next year. There is no case
to demonstrate that the current block reward is causing problems and, even it it is, how will reducing the contribution from
mining make a difference when the large majority of new supply will come from  maturing TDs?

And you mentioned the botnet bogeyman again. What evidence is there of a HOdl botnet?

[joehoebot]

It might be too late. The mistake was the ridiculously high interest rates to begin with. They should have been an order of magnitude smaller to begin with and slowly converge to the long term levels predicted by the current system

Interest and TDs on blockchain was a good idea but the actual rates made the current situation easy to see in retrospect.

Now its just a matter of who gets to cash out first.

Pity

Not if someone comes up with another original idea . . . Success is never easy . . . I am sure that a cooperative effort to seek a solution can yield a positive outcome . . . too soon to give up is isn't it?

yes. and we should all sell you our coins. yawn

[wisebc]

I'm listening carefully, but what I'm hearing is that HOdlers want the block reward reduced -

https://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-the-block-reward-should-be-reduced

If you HOdlers feel so strongly - you'll need to show it on Nutocracy, or I remain skeptical that your views represent HOdlers rather than miners.

You're basing your entire project on 11 "reduce" votes when 25% of the Hodlers on here can't figure out how to vote and at least another 25% (including what appear to be some of the most knowledgeable and respected users) are concerned enough with the security of Nutocracy voting that they are straight out saying that they are not voting.  In the words of Nutoshi Sakamoto, "This is NUTS!"

[DenisZabar]

I'm listening carefully, but what I'm hearing is that HOdlers want the block reward reduced -

https://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-the-block-reward-should-be-reduced

If you HOdlers feel so strongly - you'll need to show it on Nutocracy, or I remain skeptical that your views represent HOdlers rather than miners.

You're basing your entire project on 11 "reduce" votes when 25% of the Hodlers on here can't figure out how to vote and at least another 25% (including what appear to be some of the most knowledgeable and respected users) are concerned enough with the security of Nutocracy voting that they are straight out saying that they are not voting.  In the words of Nutoshi Sakamoto, "This is NUTS!"

Agreed with you. All i can say that if devs change anything( block reward or POS reward) this coin will die. Trust me i am long in this crypto world
and seen many coins died cause changing rules after coin launch.

And yes i didnt vote cause security issue !

[GermanSailor]

I also agree.
The voting ist bad.
If Dev Change The Rules -> the Coin will die.
if Dev give safety and a strong statement pro unchanged Rules -> the Coin will turn around.
Worthy is trust. Its a little bit like eth. No stable rules -> no trust -> no worth.

[joblo]

Here's an idea that doesn't require changing anything previously cast in stone, allow TD trading.
All that is required is the ability to transact locked in funds. TDs could be traded just like bonds
or commodity futures.

Of course that would have to wait until the TD user interface is significantly improved.

Unfortunately it seems HOdl coin development is stagnant and some people are looking for a magic pill
to make them feel better about the less than impressive price performance.

HOdl needs to develop and grow and I don't see that happening.

[FreeTrade]

This motion has now reached the 5 million HODL threshold, and 'HODL' has more votes than 'Do Not HODL' -

https://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-the-block-reward-should-be-reduced

We HOdl that the block reward should be reduced

However this seems to be a statement of position, intent or recommendation. As it doesn't contain specifics - it is not actionable . . reducing the block reward to 49.999 HODL or to .001 HODL would both be in keeping with the motion, so for now, I don't think it endorses any specific change.
 

[joblo]

This motion has now reached the 5 million HODL threshold, and 'HODL' has more votes than 'Do Not HODL' -

https://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-the-block-reward-should-be-reduced

We HOdl that the block reward should be reduced

However this seems to be a statement of position, intent or recommendation. As it doesn't contain specifics - it is not actionable . . reducing the block reward to 49.999 HODL or to .001 HODL would both be in keeping with the motion, so for now, I don't think it endorses any specific change.
 

I didn't want to make this personal but the root of the problem with HOdl is becoming quite clear. It is lack of leadership.
Where is the experience and "technical chops" you claim to have in your OP? Since inception HOdl development has
stagnated and you are abdicating all responsibility by letting nutocracy rule.

You have failed to add any value to the debate over the proposed block reward reduction or even encouraged debate by
challenging the supporters to justify their position. Instead you have given up all control to a small group of large HOdlers
who are panicking because they don't understand how the coin works.

It's your job to educate them.

[FreeTrade]

Spreads try to block pools did not work :

https://spr.suprnova.cc

Blocking pools in general just make coins more interesting to botnet owners as they can easily build own pools and then focus all the bots there. So one person gets a lot while the others fight to find a block

Thanks OC, can you explain a bit more about why spread's method failed? My understanding was that it used some signing method that ensured that block reward was going to the hasher and so the pool operator couldn't trust poolers not to betray and keep the reward. How did you get around it?

[FreeTrade]

I'm listening carefully, but what I'm hearing is that HOdlers want the block reward reduced -

https://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-the-block-reward-should-be-reduced

If you HOdlers feel so strongly - you'll need to show it on Nutocracy, or I remain skeptical that your views represent HOdlers rather than miners.

You're basing your entire project on 11 "reduce" votes when 25% of the Hodlers on here can't figure out how to vote and at least another 25% (including what appear to be some of the most knowledgeable and respected users) are concerned enough with the security of Nutocracy voting that they are straight out saying that they are not voting.  In the words of Nutoshi Sakamoto, "This is NUTS!"

Agreed with you. All i can say that if devs change anything( block reward or POS reward) this coin will die. Trust me i am long in this crypto world
and seen many coins died cause changing rules after coin launch.

And yes i didnt vote cause security issue !

I think there is a theoretical security issue - and one you've exposed yourself if you've ever re-used a crypto address. I think the greater risk is not having your say when the issues being discussed and voted on are critical to the resurrection/survival of the coin.

[in2tactics]

I'm listening carefully, but what I'm hearing is that HOdlers want the block reward reduced -

https://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-the-block-reward-should-be-reduced

If you HOdlers feel so strongly - you'll need to show it on Nutocracy, or I remain skeptical that your views represent HOdlers rather than miners.

You're basing your entire project on 11 "reduce" votes when 25% of the Hodlers on here can't figure out how to vote and at least another 25% (including what appear to be some of the most knowledgeable and respected users) are concerned enough with the security of Nutocracy voting that they are straight out saying that they are not voting.  In the words of Nutoshi Sakamoto, "This is NUTS!"

Agreed with you. All i can say that if devs change anything( block reward or POS reward) this coin will die. Trust me i am long in this crypto world
and seen many coins died cause changing rules after coin launch.

And yes i didnt vote cause security issue !

I think there is a theoretical security issue - and one you've exposed yourself if you've ever re-used a crypto address. I think the greater risk is not having your say when the issues being discussed and voted on are critical to the resurrection/survival of the coin.

Yes, but are you not signing it with an address that has HOdl? The whole issue revolves around the fact that you are signing with a key that has HOdl in it because in Nutocracy votes are weighted by the value of the address. If you are HOdling the HOdl in that address, then the coin will continue to remain exposed to a theoretical security issue for the time remaining before it can be moved.

[BigBoom3599]

I'm listening carefully, but what I'm hearing is that HOdlers want the block reward reduced -

https://nutocracy.herokuapp.com/arguments/that-the-block-reward-should-be-reduced

If you HOdlers feel so strongly - you'll need to show it on Nutocracy, or I remain skeptical that your views represent HOdlers rather than miners.

You're basing your entire project on 11 "reduce" votes when 25% of the Hodlers on here can't figure out how to vote and at least another 25% (including what appear to be some of the most knowledgeable and respected users) are concerned enough with the security of Nutocracy voting that they are straight out saying that they are not voting.  In the words of Nutoshi Sakamoto, "This is NUTS!"

Agreed with you. All i can say that if devs change anything( block reward or POS reward) this coin will die. Trust me i am long in this crypto world
and seen many coins died cause changing rules after coin launch.

And yes i didnt vote cause security issue !

I think there is a theoretical security issue - and one you've exposed yourself if you've ever re-used a crypto address. I think the greater risk is not having your say when the issues being discussed and voted on are critical to the resurrection/survival of the coin.

Yes, but are you not signing it with an address that has HOdl? The whole issue revolves around the fact that you are signing with a key that has HOdl in it because in Nutocracy votes are weighted by the value of the address. If you are HOdling the HOdl in that address, then the coin will continue to remain exposed to a theoretical security issue for the time remaining before it can be moved.

The problem with signing is that it reveals your public keys, which isn't a problem at all. The only way that it would be a problem is if elliptic curve crypto would be broken, if that is the case you will have bigger problems than you HOdls.

[FreeTrade]

The problem with signing is that it reveals your public keys, which isn't a problem at all. The only way that it would be a problem is if elliptic curve crypto would be broken, if that is the case you will have bigger problems than you HOdls.

Yes, we've included the warning that came with Bitcoinocracy for full disclosure, but I think it's a neglible risk for now. If the coin and Nutocracy gains traction, we could invest time in looking at ways to make it safer. For now we could remove the public signatures from the Nutocracy site, that would make it safer, but then it couldn't be audited and you'd need to trust Nutocracy.

[in2tactics]

The problem with signing is that it reveals your public keys, which isn't a problem at all. The only way that it would be a problem is if elliptic curve crypto would be broken, if that is the case you will have bigger problems than you HOdls.

I am not an expert on HOdl, but I am pretty sure that it does not use elliptical curve cryptography.