[ANN][YAC] yacoin: yet another altcoin. START is now.

[bitdwarf]

NovaCoin 0.4.1 has dynamic PoS. See here in main.cpp:

https://github.com/CryptoManiac/novacoin/commit/6145f2d5e9f380a11bce933fe343d48fd8936a33

Thoughts on bringing it to YAC?

[fishboy]

what's up guys ?

[bitdwarf]

One project suggestion here: http://yacointalk.com/index.php/topic,32.msg95.html#msg95

[phorensic]

what's up guys ?

Hai guys.  What's going on in this thread?

[sairon]

Get free YAC!
http://yac-faucet.tk/

[jdebunt]

Get free YAC!
http://yac-faucet.tk/

faucet works great, got my free 0.10 YAC instantly

[xibeijan]

Congratulations to all the community for bringing this nice project all the way to this point.

But remember, the objective is to allow people to use YAC as a fast and secure cryptocurrency for trading goods and services. Let's keep working on that.

+1 for that.

All should focus efforts on getting YaCoin used to buy and sell goods and services.  Has anyone setup of bounty for this?

[xibeijan]

Nice tweet by coinmovers about YaCoin.

"Yacoin is one of the few coins with character and a purpose for existing. Mining is preferable to buying at this time. It is CPU only."

https://twitter.com/CoinMover/status/333614995629830144

[Aggrophobia]

Incrementing N will lead to immediate hashing speed decrease. Difficulty will reflect these speed changes (i.e. difficulty will decrease after N++) with lags. As soon as block reward depends on difficulty the reward will increase also and more miners will be motivated to join after N++.  It's not easy to predict now but we can be sure that some waves will happen on each N++ event.

when will this event be?

[xibeijan]

Incrementing N will lead to immediate hashing speed decrease. Difficulty will reflect these speed changes (i.e. difficulty will decrease after N++) with lags. As soon as block reward depends on difficulty the reward will increase also and more miners will be motivated to join after N++.  It's not easy to predict now but we can be sure that some waves will happen on each N++ event.

when will this event be?

Read official website http://www.yacoin.org/about.html

Says first one is on May 14th.  Bookmark that date!


May 14, N=64, 8Kb
May 17, N=128, 16Kb
May 20, N=256, 32Kb
May 29, N=512, 64Kb

[Puycheval]

Incrementing N will lead to immediate hashing speed decrease. Difficulty will reflect these speed changes (i.e. difficulty will decrease after N++) with lags. As soon as block reward depends on difficulty the reward will increase also and more miners will be motivated to join after N++.  It's not easy to predict now but we can be sure that some waves will happen on each N++ event.

when will this event be?

Read official website http://www.yacoin.org/about.html

Says first one is on May 14th.  Bookmark that date!


May 14, N=64, 8Kb
May 17, N=128, 16Kb
May 20, N=256, 32Kb
May 29, N=512, 64Kb

I've already asked for this but it's lost in this very very long thread :

Do you know the precise time (with time zone of course) it'll happen ?

[eja]

Incrementing N will lead to immediate hashing speed decrease. Difficulty will reflect these speed changes (i.e. difficulty will decrease after N++) with lags. As soon as block reward depends on difficulty the reward will increase also and more miners will be motivated to join after N++.  It's not easy to predict now but we can be sure that some waves will happen on each N++ event.

when will this event be?

Read official website http://www.yacoin.org/about.html

Says first one is on May 14th.  Bookmark that date!


May 14, N=64, 8Kb
May 17, N=128, 16Kb
May 20, N=256, 32Kb
May 29, N=512, 64Kb

I've already asked for this but it's lost in this very very long thread :

Do you know the precise time (with time zone of course) it'll happen ?

Using the nfactor calculating code from the client I get for the coming year (timestamps in UTC):

Wed May  8 05:33:20 2013, factor: 4
Tue May 14 07:11:28 2013, factor: 5
Fri May 17 08:00:32 2013, factor: 6
Mon May 20 08:49:36 2013, factor: 7
Wed May 29 11:16:48 2013, factor: 8
Sat Jun  1 12:05:52 2013, factor: 9
Tue Jun 25 18:38:24 2013, factor: 10
Sun Jul  7 21:54:40 2013, factor: 11
Tue Aug 13 07:43:28 2013, factor: 12
Mon Sep 30 20:48:32 2013, factor: 13
Mon Nov 18 09:53:36 2013, factor: 14

[relm9]

Using the nfactor calculating code from the client I get for the coming year (timestamps in UTC):

Wed May  8 05:33:20 2013, factor: 4
Tue May 14 07:11:28 2013, factor: 5
Fri May 17 08:00:32 2013, factor: 6
Mon May 20 08:49:36 2013, factor: 7
Wed May 29 11:16:48 2013, factor: 8
Sat Jun  1 12:05:52 2013, factor: 9
Tue Jun 25 18:38:24 2013, factor: 10
Sun Jul  7 21:54:40 2013, factor: 11
Tue Aug 13 07:43:28 2013, factor: 12
Mon Sep 30 20:48:32 2013, factor: 13
Mon Nov 18 09:53:36 2013, factor: 14

Apparently the N factor allocation is broken...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=200170.msg2117745#msg2117745

[WindMaster]

A post and my reply from a different thread is below.  Probably it's more relevant in this thread than over there:

Such a niave little boy...Both FTC and CNC are doing poorly, but this one will do better, because it can only be mined by CPU, which costs considerably more them GPU mining. Why would anyone want to make more profit, mining a real, already tested coin, like LTC. That's just silly

I think what's going to happen is that when GPU mining of Yacoin no longer appears economical, multiple people are going to post their modified cgminer source.  Exactly like what happened when Amazon EC2 become uneconomical, we all started sharing lots of details about our Amazon-hosted Yacoin mining server farms and Vycid even posted a detailed howto showing one of several methods (perhaps not the most efficient or expedient method) to do it.

Expect the same type of information sharing to occur when GPU mining of Yacoin becomes uneconomical, since it's likely everyone thinks there isn't going to be additional scrypt+chacha/kekkac based alt-coins released so there won't be any advantage in keeping the modified cgminer source secret.  At that point everyone will be after bragging rights, saying, "Hey, I was one of the first to get cgminer going on Yacoin just X hours after the coin launched, here's my modified source!"

At that point it's going to be interesting to examine the different various approaches each person took to porting scrypt+chacha/kekkac to cgminer.  I'll find it most interesting to see and compare everyone's approaches indeed.

[relm9]

Any guide on compiling minerd (scrypt-jane) for Ubuntu 64 bit and CPU Athlon64 x2 ? I installed Ubuntu 12.04 few hours ago so surely missing a lot of dependencies there.

Apparently the N factor allocation is broken...

Haven't you dumped all your YAC? I think you did so how about moving to some other altcoin now and leaving those still interested in YAC alone?

Already did, yep. Just warning people. I've moved on since.

[WindMaster]

Now that we're crossing the threshold where difficulty is high enough to warrant shutting down Xeon-based servers, even at very low power prices ($0.065/kWh over here), I believe the cat is probably out of the bag regarding whether GPU mining of Yacoin is occurring.  Just examine the current difficulty and block rates, and work out what the hash rate is even after power prices start swamping even high-power-efficiency Xeon servers.  Sure, there's going to be some small amount of people who have free power (as in, "free to them"), but I doubt it accounts for anywhere close to the apparent network hash rate at the present time.

After GPU mining becomes economic, I'd like to call for everyone that experimented with scrypt+chacha/kekkac modifications to cgminer to post their modified source.  I doubt it'll be useful for any more alt-coin copypasta launches in the future.  Just like what happened when Amazon become uneconomic to mine with and everyone started posting details in this thread about their Amazon-hosted server farms, it would be even far more interesting (at least to me) to see what everyone's approaches to implementing scrypt+chacha/kekkac in OpenCL was.  As has been pointed out, it's not a trivial copy'n'paste.  But it's also not catastrophically difficult for anyone with decent amounts of OpenCL experience.

Anyone willing to post GPU hash rates for Yacoin at least, prior to it becoming uneconomic?  That should at least dispell the myth that N=32 somehow made CPU's faster than GPU's for mining YAC.  N=64 in another couple days isn't going to change the GPU vs. CPU performance ratio all that much, and as Taco pointed out earlier, GPU's are still going to have the edge at N>1024.

[bitdwarf]

Any guide on compiling minerd (scrypt-jane) for Ubuntu 64 bit and CPU Athlon64 x2 ? I installed Ubuntu 12.04 few hours ago so surely missing a lot of dependencies there.

Crude tip, but it tends to work: whenever it says whatever.h is missing, do "apt-file search whatever.h", then look for a package named libwhatever-dev

[kooke]

Now that we're crossing the threshold where difficulty is high enough to warrant shutting down Xeon-based servers, even at very low power prices ($0.065/kWh over here), I believe the cat is probably out of the bag regarding whether GPU mining of Yacoin is occurring.  Just examine the current difficulty and block rates, and work out what the hash rate is even after power prices start swamping even high-power-efficiency Xeon servers.  Sure, there's going to be some small amount of people who have free power (as in, "free to them"), but I doubt it accounts for anywhere close to the apparent network hash rate at the present time.

After GPU mining becomes economic, I'd like to call for everyone that experimented with scrypt+chacha/kekkac modifications to cgminer to post their modified source.  I doubt it'll be useful for any more alt-coin copypasta launches in the future.  Just like what happened when Amazon become uneconomic to mine with and everyone started posting details in this thread about their Amazon-hosted server farms, it would be even far more interesting (at least to me) to see what everyone's approaches to implementing scrypt+chacha/kekkac in OpenCL was.  As has been pointed out, it's not a trivial copy'n'paste.  But it's also not catastrophically difficult for anyone with decent amounts of OpenCL experience.

Anyone willing to post GPU hash rates for Yacoin at least, prior to it becoming uneconomic?  That should at least dispell the myth that N=32 somehow made CPU's faster than GPU's for mining YAC.  N=64 in another couple days isn't going to change the GPU vs. CPU performance ratio all that much, and as Taco pointed out earlier, GPU's are still going to have the edge at N>1024.

Botnet operators don't care about electricity costs.

[WindMaster]

Botnet operators don't care about electricity costs.

At current difficulty, it would take a botnet of ridiculous proportions to make much YAC at this point.

[monokaskade]

Using the nfactor calculating code from the client I get for the coming year (timestamps in UTC):

Wed May  8 05:33:20 2013, factor: 4
Tue May 14 07:11:28 2013, factor: 5
Fri May 17 08:00:32 2013, factor: 6
Mon May 20 08:49:36 2013, factor: 7
Wed May 29 11:16:48 2013, factor: 8
Sat Jun  1 12:05:52 2013, factor: 9
Tue Jun 25 18:38:24 2013, factor: 10
Sun Jul  7 21:54:40 2013, factor: 11
Tue Aug 13 07:43:28 2013, factor: 12
Mon Sep 30 20:48:32 2013, factor: 13
Mon Nov 18 09:53:36 2013, factor: 14

Apparently the N factor allocation is broken...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=200170.msg2117745#msg2117745

The N assignment + dynmic hashing looks good to me