[ANN][YAC] YACoin ongoing development

[Joe_Bauers]

I updated the testing code, so anyone that has it checked out will want to pull in change.

[1713908543]

1713908543

[1713908543]

1713908543

[1713908543]

1713908543

[1713908543]

1713908543

[senj]

Yacoin doesn't share ROI with novacoin, so GetProofOfStakeReward (in main.cpp) will need to be updated in testing version.

[Joe_Bauers]

Yacoin doesn't share ROI with novacoin, so GetProofOfStakeReward (in main.cpp) will need to be updated in testing version.

Unless/until we implement STAKE_SWITCH_TIME, the code steps through to :1155
I just left the rest of the NVC code to make it easier to switch in the future and to maintain the overall rebase.

[caston]

I think I set a bounty for an OSX wallet at some point. I can't remember how much it was though. 30k perhaps?

[platinum4]

I'm very interested in renting any scrypt-chacha hashpower that people have to offer, please contact me ASAP in PM.

Looking for days at a time, I have no problems pre-paying or getting you set up.

I don't mess around with time or payment and that benefits all people involved, PM me if you are interested in earning more than you are now.

[TrackCoin1]

YAC Fantastic......! much will grow YAC.. however i have to get YAC...

[senj]

When priced at 100$, 1$ would get destroyed with each transaction due hardcoded 0.01 yac transaction fee. Who would transact in amounts smaller than 10$ if one tenth would get destroyed with each transaction? I believe this rule in a way serves as limitation for maximum future price. My guess is that it could hardly get above 25$ per yac (25 cents destroyed with each transaction) and more reasonable target value could be between 0.1 and 10$.
I am aware people were paying high transaction fees when btc was at it's high, but that amount did not get destroyed.

Priced at 0.1$ YACoin would now have 5$ million market capitalization. Compare that to current Litecoin market cap (62$M) you can see how small "the push" must be to get us there.

And all that presuming dollar and other fiat money would preserve it's value:)

[Beave162]

When priced at 100$, 1$ would get destroyed with each transaction due hardcoded 0.01 yac transaction fee. Who would transact in amounts smaller than 10$ if one tenth would get destroyed with each transaction? I believe this rule in a way serves as limitation for maximum future price. My guess is that it could hardly get above 25$ per yac (25 cents destroyed with each transaction) and more reasonable target value could be between 0.1 and 10$.
I am aware people were paying high transaction fees when btc was at it's high, but that amount did not get destroyed.

Priced at 0.1$ YACoin would now have 5$ million market capitalization. Compare that to current Litecoin market cap (62$M) you can see how small "the push" must be to get us there.

And all that presuming dollar and other fiat money would preserve it's value:)

Is this true? I agree, it needs to be addressed and fixed.

[senj]

...
Is this true? I agree, it needs to be addressed and fixed.

This is by design and it is intended to prevent blockchain bloat/spam attacks.
Removing that would cause far more harm than good. It is just something to keep in mind when projecting future value because it serves as a powerfull weight from above. I mentioned it because it is related to what I will write later.


Next:
In order for all willing participants to generate interest there has to be enough space in blockchain to accomodate their PoS blocks. Yacoin with it's one minute block target (~1440 blocks per day) leaves enough "slots" for 720 PoS blocks considering current "no two consecutive PoS blocks" rule. That is - if miners allow it and they don't refuse to mine on top of PoS blocks in order to maximize their profits with up to 720 additional PoW blocks per day.
Leaving that aside, we get to 262800 (=720x365) honest stakeholders with one wallet each, generating interest once per year . If each stakeholder opens his/hers wallet once per month, than we get to 21900 (=262800/12)  - let's call them individuals who were able to generate interest every month this year.

Now what happens, if there are more participants or we all divide/split wallets so thay generate PoS blocks with higher frequency (as we all do now)?
Eventually those 720 "slots" per day will get used and from then on PoS blocks with higher consumed coin age will replace those PoS blocks with lower values at the tip of the chain.
This will lead to high amount of orphans, and it will also cause some small stakeholders not being able to generate interest in reasonable time, because even if they find PoS block, there's a chance it will get kicked of the tip of the chain by richer stake miner with higher coin age.

Someone with bad intentions and big wallet could split his funds and create many many PoS blocks so he would occupy most of those "slots".
And it would cost him nothing to do that (except being online and leaving wallet open).

Here I am only exposing one side of bigger issue with current implementation, because it's crucial to be aware of it in order to understand my proposition.

Other PoS cryptocurrencies with higher block spacing (less blocks per day generated) will have this issue manifested even more, and soon enough only richer portion of stakeholders will manage to generate interest simply due their higher coin age and lack of enough free "slots" in blockchain.

This is PoS issue in general and it was designed that way for security purpose ...


EDIT: ...
My previous post wasn't ment as a speculative investment hint, but I am using it here as input. Considering it's content, I would contend we should raise minimum stake amount, so that no less than 1YAC is generated with each PoS block. That means someone with 20 coins ( = ~2...200$ according to my presumptions from previous post ) could generate 1 PoS block after 1 year. Currently coin age growth is capped at 3 months. This cap would have to be raised then, but another security feature should be added.
We could make PoS hash function result dependent not only on coin age, but we could also amplify N factor when dealing with blocks holding smaller coin ages thereby increasing resource requirements.
In addition to that, consecutive PoS blocks could be made possible again, if subsequent PoS block would fit much stricter criteria, for example exponentially larger coin age plus higher N factor.

I am talking about refactoring of PoS system, so that it becomes more resource demanding. Then we need to give PoS blocks back trust value that is higher than PoW block value. This value could be somewhere in the range of 2-1000x ( = f(coinAge,Nfactor) ) of average PoW block value. It should be high enough so that miners wouldn't ignore PoS blocks and build their PoW-only chains for maximum profit.
In addition to that, PoW difficulty should step up incrementally when there are no PoS blocks near last n blocks. Every PoS block would bring next PoW difficulty back to lowest allowable level. That would discourage PoW miners from ignoring PoS blocks.

Theoretically YACoin is already less vulnerable to PoS issues than other hybrids, because each hash consumes 16MB of memory now (and soon 32MB). It is not so simple to just create thousands of wallets and than build a PoS only chain, because it takes some time (and memory) to hash 1000 scrypt-jane hashes.


This is just an outline of my idea. It is in no way perfect, but I had to get it out

[caston]

Many other coins have been shown that a high PoS rate contributes to their success and attractiveness as an investment for example Maieuticoin gives 2014% PoS and holders of this coin make a nice little income just from PoS minting.

Will Yacoin developers ever consider increasing the PoS% (say as N factor rises) or is it forever going to be 5%?

[Joe_Bauers]

Many other coins have been shown that a high PoS rate contributes to their success and attractiveness as an investment for example Maieuticoin gives 2014% PoS and holders of this coin make a nice little income just from PoS minting.

Will Yacoin developers ever consider increasing the PoS% (say as N factor rises) or is it forever going to be 5%?

Senj is a Yacoin developer... and is considering it above your post

I would say anything < 20% is certainly feasible

[caston]

Although the other mentioned coin is PoS only. Yacoin has both PoS and PoW inflation to consider.

Would increasing the PoS to 6% at the next N factor jump be something to consider?

[Beave162]

Many other coins have been shown that a high PoS rate contributes to their success and attractiveness as an investment for example Maieuticoin gives 2014% PoS and holders of this coin make a nice little income just from PoS minting.

Will Yacoin developers ever consider increasing the PoS% (say as N factor rises) or is it forever going to be 5%?

Senj is a Yacoin developer... and is considering it above your post

I would say anything < 20% is certainly feasible

I wouldn't point to ANY coin now, and say "Look at its success." A lot of coins are pumped up in the beginning, and then they start a slow, downward fizzle. Besides, the market caps of all the other alt coins are not at all indicative of some kind of mainstream adoption soon.

In terms of the economics of money, anything above 5% would be a mistake in my opinion. Besides, what would be the point? I subscribe to the idea that you want inflation to match economic growth. However, you should always consider the velocity of money. And with PoS, that 5% PoS inflation is not increasing the velocity because people like me who are earning PoS are incentivized to not spend or sell those coins. Still, I think 5% is high enough. And I only say that because the destruction of fees and the fact that not everyone is staking all the time pushes that number lower.

Additionally, I'll point out the overall inflation (PoS + PoW) is currently hovering at 80%. http://explore.grokonet.com/?inflation=1

[caston]

Some new Yacoin services would certainly be nice.

[alenevaa]

We have reached block number 1 Million!

[senj]

Here is the winning block:

Code:

Hash: 00000173fff346c1f83138ee23c15debb96eea78b63c8dea5e02da5e1a775a54
Previous Block: f3744f932ab6320fa6ce35ba654198ff2c95aa1ef9d690ba24f58455af4a6463
Next Block: 4758dfd44e76a89d437953ef187b684e45f9e058e3a559dc6cdbe584179e1fa6
Height: 1000000
Version: 3
Transaction Merkle Root: 9bb3b6cd154865c2de6ed9eed5e2c2a80c70875d16168cfd943103dc9dc9a6ab
Time: 1428428793 (2015-04-07 17:46:33)
Difficulty: 0.000 (Bits: 1e03ec8a)
Cumulative Difficulty: 239 759.604
Nonce: 70
Transactions: 1
Value out: 79.12
Average Coin Age: 186.742 days
Coin-days Destroyed: 0
Cumulative Coin-days Destroyed: 39.6314%

Raw transaction:
{
  "hash": "9bb3b6cd154865c2de6ed9eed5e2c2a80c70875d16168cfd943103dc9dc9a6ab", 
  "in": [
    {
      "prev_out": {
        "hash": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000", 
        "n": 4294967295
      }, 
      "raw_scriptSig": "0340420f062f503253482f04fd1724550837ff21a2000000000d2f6e6f64655374726174756d2f", 
      "sequence": 0
    }
  ], 
  "lock_time": 0, 
  "out": [
    {
      "raw_scriptPubKey": "21021155cf11a9e494391e3bda52a0cd95629d2e3466ce8cd3e6fcd37c2ce0fcee3bac", 
      "value": "79.120000"
    }
  ], 
  "size": 138, 
  "ver": 1, 
  "vin_sz": 1, 
  "vout_sz": 1
}

And we have breached 1G of blockchain+blockindex data (these numbers would be smaller without orphans):

585M    blk0001.dat
540M    blkindex.dat


EDIT: Money supply: 50M+ (50070902)

Now who is going to be user no. 1000000?

[Beave162]

senj, I'll attempt to break down your suggestions:

--Raise minimum stake amount To make minimum stake produced 1 YAC? Over time, will it not be extremely unlikely to occur anyway?
--Raise coin age growth from 3 months, which will require another security feature Could it be raised to 6 months? Is there a way to make this amount of time not so arbitrary?
--Amplifty NFactor for smaller PoS blocks(?), then allow consecutive PoS blocks Someone much smarter than can comment
--Increase PoS trust value (2-1000x (=f(coinage, NFactor))  Someone much smarter than me please comment
--Make PoW difficulty step up until PoS block is found then bring back down to lowest difficulty level Interesting. Smarter person should comment!

My overall questions is: can the points be addressed separately, or do you feel it has to all be part of the same package?

I believe with PoS, there is an inherent concern that the smaller stakeholders are at the mercy of the bigger stakeholders. However, any advantage given to the smaller stakeholders really doesn't address that concern because the bigger stakeholders can easily just create multiple inputs, wallets and play the system that way.

A few other points I'll simply highlight:
--The largest wallet at the moment is 6.4 million YAC, and it seems to have been in cold storage for over a year. http://explore.grokonet.com/?top1000=1
--Cryptsy is notorious for taking a looooong time to update their wallets with hard forks. We would also have to consider bter (scam site!)
--Any large stakeholders of a coin who try to manipulate do so at their own peril. There are a lot of options out there. Theoretically, if someone had 10% of all YACoin, there is an incentive to help YAC double in price vs trying to gain 20% of all YAC but cause the price to decrease by 80%. Similarly, if someone had enough resources to 50% attack Bitcoin, there is a much great incentive for that person to simply mine and hold or sell the Bitcoin for profit as opposed to attacking the network.
--In a future world where PoS is extremely profitable, there will surely be services where small stakeholders can pool their resources together to compete with large stakeholders, much like the mining pools, much like banks and credit unions actually! Would that necessarily be a bad thing? The network will still be secure; the PoS interest will still be limited to ~5% per year; the large 'staking pools' will definitely have an incentive to keep the price of YAC from crashing.

Those are my thoughts for now...

[senj]

    --Raise minimum stake amount To make minimum stake produced 1 YAC? Over time, will it not be extremely unlikely to occur anyway?

As it stands now, no. When I've written that, I did not know GetBlockTrust function does not give PoS coin with higher stake higher trust value. As it stands now, someone with modern computer could buy 1M YAC, split them to 2 coins and then leave it on. After a while his PoS blocks would flood the chain and the only thing that could be done is PoW miners to start ignoring all small PoS blocks.


    --Raise coin age growth from 3 months, which will require another security feature Could it be raised to 6 months? Is there a way to make this amount of time not so arbitrary?

I am aware this would mitigate but not solve the problem (generating a lot of small PoS blocks for small price). There is be a better way to solve this.


    --Amplifty NFactor for smaller PoS blocks(?), then allow consecutive PoS blocks
    --Increase PoS trust value (2-1000x (=f(coinage, NFactor))

I think raising small stake PoS block N factor can be done in some way.
But allowing consecutive PoS blocks is very delicate decision and this would really have to be seldom allowed. A am not sure we have the right algorithm for this now.


  -- Make PoW difficulty step up until PoS block is found then bring back down to lowest difficulty level

Perhaps this could be combined with allowing higher PoW reward for those who mine on top of PoS block.




As for the rest, I believe we should prepare Yacoin for mass adoption, without addressing critical issues after they occur. Real question is how many hard forks Cryptsy is willing to bear. Other than that there wouldn't probably be many complaints from currently (small) userbase.
I think the only way to gain credibility is to prevent any kind of misuse as soon as possible instead of relying on most people having good intentions.

[thdim]

I am mining for fun at https://www2.coinmine.pl but I don't understand what happened and since yesterday i cannot. The CPU looks like hashing but it doesn't (that was definitely working before) and the GPU (i am testing trying to make it work) is saying <low difficulty share of 0.00>.

any idea of what is going wrong? did something change and makes it impossible to mine at my very low rates?

[senj]

Perhaps you are operating with wrong parameters.

-- CPU corei7 with 4 threads
https://github.com/Thirtybird/cpuminer/releases

Code:

cd C:\minerd-yacoin_stratum_x64_2_4_0
minerd-x64-corei7.exe -a scrypt-jane -t 4 -o stratum+tcp://yac.coinmine.pl:9088 -u myusername.myworker1 -p mypassword

-- GPU Radeon R7 240 4GB
https://github.com/Thirtybird/YACMiner/releases

Code:

cd C:\yacminer-3.5.0-yac2-x86
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
setx GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS 1
yacminer --scrypt-chacha --lookup-gap 6 -R 1280 -B 3560 -o stratum+tcp://yac.coinmine.pl:9088 -u myusername.myworker2 -p mypassword