[ANN] ** NEW SITE bitgem.pw ** BTG BitGem 0.4.9.ALPHA1 | COLORED COINS | FAUCET

[mnx]

I thought the reward for mining a block was 3 gems?

I just mined one and got 0.296151.  ...

[1713532581]

1713532581

[1713532581]

1713532581

[1713532581]

1713532581

[1713532581]

1713532581

[1713532581]

1713532581

[mineral]

I thought the reward for mining a block was 3 gems?

I just mined one and got 0.296151.  ...

reward is adjusted according to PPCOIN basis, behalving each x4 dificulty.

[sva_h4cky0]

any plan for gemwallet Linux ?? 

[Amph]

Hey, I have realeased a minor security update for bitgem. I are going to continue the support and development of bitgem, so you can continue trading bitgem with fully confidence.


LAST UPDATE 0.4.1.7 DEC 05 2013

   - Windows qt GemWallet installer : https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx7Ov5xsrbgcZGt3WDFXc1NERlU/edit?usp=sharing  MD5SUM: ba7d00c9090e6b6cfa6c21e017d5b285


The same link in www.bitgem.info

can you release a zip version?

If you dont want to install the app and simply run the wallet in your desktop, you can roughly open the setup file with your favourite archiver and extract it by yourself.

winrar can't do it

[snaidervp]

winrar can't do it

use 7zip

[Oreganobag]

Daily bumps for Bitgem! One of my favorite alts!

[mineral]

DISCUSSION: BITGEM NEW PATHS

BitGem https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=207008.msg2166865 is an real scarce crypto, just near of 23,900 BTGs are out there. For future development and providing add-value, I am planing 3 mainlines, not mutually exclusives, emboding gem properties into transaction scope: granularity, tagging and colored.

- transaction granularity: because gems are trading in "brut", "sticky" transactions would let trading whole gems, rather ammounts of BitGems. This "packing" of gems could be rewarded with an aditional stake reward, fostering the stake of big gems too.

- tagged coins: related to granularity, it would let to tag the gem with all 4Cs properties and conform the gem in blockchain. Here the exchange would be fixed.

- colored coins: provide true colored coins (diamond, ruby, sapphire and emerald), with independent or fix exchange, so it could be automatically self-arbitred or exchanged in a secundary stock market.


It would be nice, guys, if you are a btg holder or enthusiat take active part in this debate.

I am planning an update implying sending bitgems by means of BitGem Wallet.

You can take advantage of future development for making contributions supporting this project to this BTC address:

https://blockchain.info/address/1BTGghTiiqz2mQCYP2AiSv5ec5kcvkaJXu


BTC: 1BTGghTiiqz2mQCYP2AiSv5ec5kcvkaJXu
LTC: LfgarrrLJgkZMSUCeScgHatxyfQtiggN9Z
BTG: gTpTt8d9rSejXDm4QX5vrLtPkrXkpwbrDL

[snaidervp]

interesting ideas, in fact i was thinking almost the same things back when you introduced the new gemwallet with the different types of gemstones.

some random thoughts,

how easy the exchanges eg. cryptsy could implement a new sub-market only for gems?

The current bitgem balance could be considered as raw gem material.
If i want to "create" a diamond, maybe, i could send the amount of the raw material needed as a single transaction to a second "wallet"(gem bag), so i could earn a fixed higher stake for this diamond but it could only be used in the future as a whole (idk if this is actually possible).

something is bugging me, there are diamonds and emerarlds out there.
I know BTG is older than those 2 but still, something need to be done in order to not be confusing for the new gem holders.

[drummerjdb666]

interesting ideas, in fact i was thinking almost the same things back when you introduced the new gemwallet with the different types of gemstones.

some random thoughts,

how easy the exchanges eg. cryptsy could implement a new sub-market only for gems?

The current bitgem balance could be considered as raw gem material.
If i want to "create" a diamond, maybe, i could send the amount of the raw material needed as a single transaction to a second "wallet"(gem bag), so i could earn a fixed higher stake for this diamond but it could only be used in the future as a whole (idk if this is actually possible).

something is bugging me, there are diamonds and emerarlds out there.
I know BTG is older than those 2 but still, something need to be done in order to not be confusing for the new gem holders.

You are correct!
BTG IS older than diamonds or emerald and undeniably more innovative!   Still holding.

Out of curiosity @Mineral what country are you from.. I can tell from the way you word things english isn't native..didn't you say Greece before?

[mineral]

interesting ideas, in fact i was thinking almost the same things back when you introduced the new gemwallet with the different types of gemstones.

some random thoughts,

how easy the exchanges eg. cryptsy could implement a new sub-market only for gems?

The current bitgem balance could be considered as raw gem material.
If i want to "create" a diamond, maybe, i could send the amount of the raw material needed as a single transaction to a second "wallet"(gem bag), so i could earn a fixed higher stake for this diamond but it could only be used in the future as a whole (idk if this is actually possible).

something is bugging me, there are diamonds and emerarlds out there.
I know BTG is older than those 2 but still, something need to be done in order to not be confusing for the new gem holders.

Agree 100% about your reflection; I have thought the same things about what you are pointing out.

- Granularity / Stick transactions rewarded with high stake : Forging a big gem, like a high amount of carats, hgh purity, clarity, nice cut and shape diamond, it could be rewarded with a geometrial o exponential stake basis. So, for example, if a 1000 BTG diamond is forged, it could to rent 5-10% interest instead current 1-3 %. I think infation would not be too much beacuse  only 27 big diamons coud be forged !


Handling granularity, exchanges should to implement sticky-transactions, not too difficult, but it would require thrid-part coding efforts. Otherwise, the stick transaction feature could be ignored fairly. Sticky transacions of big gems would give too much fun to trading ... 1,000 BTGs diamond sell order at first place  and it need be sold fully LOL ...

- Colored : about collision with names, it is not problem. Blockchain is the definitive indentifier of a coin, so there can to be several forks of a same coin ... If there is a coin with "string" "Diamond" or "Emerald", and gem properties have not been imeplemented it is rather a misleading "string" choice than a Colored Bitgem  problem... definitely it is not a Bitgem problem. About exchanges, it would be so easy as a title "BTG-Diamond" or so.

BTG gDF24b...5yfGFGHghgg addreses would be maintained in colored gems, so it could to given special promotions of sapphires, rubies etc to current BitGem holders.

All this stuff are theorical paths for futher development. It must be noted the most of them would imply coding changes in third-part software, like exchages.

[mineral]

interesting ideas, in fact i was thinking almost the same things back when you introduced the new gemwallet with the different types of gemstones.

some random thoughts,

how easy the exchanges eg. cryptsy could implement a new sub-market only for gems?

The current bitgem balance could be considered as raw gem material.
If i want to "create" a diamond, maybe, i could send the amount of the raw material needed as a single transaction to a second "wallet"(gem bag), so i could earn a fixed higher stake for this diamond but it could only be used in the future as a whole (idk if this is actually possible).

something is bugging me, there are diamonds and emerarlds out there.
I know BTG is older than those 2 but still, something need to be done in order to not be confusing for the new gem holders.

You are correct!
BTG IS older than diamonds or emerald and undeniably more innovative!   Still holding.

Out of curiosity @Mineral what country are you from.. I can tell from the way you word things english isn't native..didn't you say Greece before?

yes, collision of "string" is not clearly a problem of BitGem

hehe drummerjdb666 I am not native english  not greece, but not far wrong there

[snaidervp]

maybe if you could contact your old friend mulick and discuss some parameters with him + vern before you start this kind of development?

could you consider removing the btg hard cap and change it to something like ppc's approach, like endless with minimal reward, according to the diff/network hashpower of course. just like the real gems exist.

[markm]

Various players in various aspects of the Galactic Milieu who have been accumulating hoards of various types of gems - diamonds, emeralds, rubies, sapphires, large ones of each, beautiful ones of each and so on - have been inquiring as to how these gem-themed blockchain-based coins fit in to the use/existence of such objects within not just the various subgames of the Milieu but in general to games everywhere that include such minerals.

In particular they are interested in whether these blockchains aim toward providing liquidity and even transferability in much the same way that the "2000 diamonds" vouchers issued by certain banks they are accustomed to using within the game do.

They are used, for example, to being able to "buy" a 2000 diamonds voucher with 2000 actual diamonds, take that voucher to another branch of the bank, drop it on a counter and be issued 2000 actual diamonds. (Gosh knows how the bank hopes/expects to make a profit offering that service; maybe diamonds are dirt cheap to them on some planet somewhere so that the fact people trade them at all is all pure profit to them...)

-MarkM-

[mineral]

maybe if you could contact your old friend mulick and discuss some parameters with him + vern before you start this kind of development?

could you consider removing the btg hard cap and change it to something like ppc's approach, like endless with minimal reward, according to the diff/network hashpower of course. just like the real gems exist.

Implementing sticky transactions would imply wallets to accept or reject this type of transactions. Then, in trading really it would be to show it properly. If some is implemented, it would be transparent to current crypsy trading. Here the question woulbe gem trading vs currency trading, and from crypto viewpoint it seems worthless. I think the more interesting think would be related to some kind of colored gems, implemented the most transparent as possible.

I think it would be a bad idea to change cap. bitgems are scarce, and indeed already virtually endeless, but to a very low rate: about 1,000 BTGs/month, just like phisical gems. In code there is a virtual limit to 500,000 BTGs, what will be reached in 50 years !!. So, it is a realistic approach and near to phisical gems.

[mineral]

Various players in various aspects of the Galactic Milieu who have been accumulating hoards of various types of gems - diamonds, emeralds, rubies, sapphires, large ones of each, beautiful ones of each and so on - have been inquiring as to how these gem-themed blockchain-based coins fit in to the use/existence of such objects within not just the various subgames of the Milieu but in general to games everywhere that include such minerals.

In particular they are interested in whether these blockchains aim toward providing liquidity and even transferability in much the same way that the "2000 diamonds" vouchers issued by certain banks they are accustomed to using within the game do.

They are used, for example, to being able to "buy" a 2000 diamonds voucher with 2000 actual diamonds, take that voucher to another branch of the bank, drop it on a counter and be issued 2000 actual diamonds. (Gosh knows how the bank hopes/expects to make a profit offering that service; maybe diamonds are dirt cheap to them on some planet somewhere so that the fact people trade them at all is all pure profit to them...)

-MarkM-

Interesting that of gems vouchers in Galactic Milieu, I did not know this game. Yes, it is possible another planet graphite to be a gem and diamond a part of a pencil, who knows

In real life trading gems is more face-to-face because it is needed to observer a lot of variables ,from here  the  4Cs simple model. Indeed there are synthetic gems like syntenthic rubies that are differentiated from real rubies by means of light refraction and weakly colored light flashes ... Really crazy for a newbie start to trading with phisical rubies ... LOL But they are very very scarce, so they are object of trading.

[ohiofarmer]

Is there a total number of bitgem that will be mined? Or is it theoretically unlimited?

[snaidervp]

Is there a total number of bitgem that will be mined? Or is it theoretically unlimited?

I think it would be a bad idea to change cap. bitgems are scarce, and indeed already virtually endeless, but to a very low rate: about 1,000 BTGs/month, just like phisical gems. In code there is a virtual limit to 500,000 BTGs, what will be reached in 50 years !!. So, it is a realistic approach and near to phisical gems.

[ohiofarmer]

Thanks, Snaider!

[snaidervp]

I think we could change the BTG into GEM

Any thoughts?

[mohammad123]

please introduce to me  good pool to mine this coin.
thank you