Ixcoin TODO

[ahmed_bodi]

incorrect. transaction fees would be the new block reward on the network

[dadingsda]

for transaction fees, transactions need to happen (not really the case with ixc), or fees are very high.

And if ixcoin beacame the new bitcoin? 

[Vlad2Vlad]

incorrect. transaction fees would be the new block reward on the network

They would be the new block reward [technically] but don't transactions get automatically routed to the lowest Tx fees on the network?

That was my understanding.  Any pool or miner can charge their respective fees, even zero fees so if what you're saying is right then that doesn't matter, the biggest pool would solve the most blocks and so they can charge the biggest fees and it wouldn't matter.

There is no logic in that and no efficiency so unless there will be one single set of static fees then this is not possible.  I'm pretty sure the system was coded for a more democratic and dynamic fees schedule [for the beginning, anyway].

Well, until those with massive hash power and deep pockets put the rest of the miners out of business by offering ZERO fees.  

Then we'll get the exact same ridiculously high, monopoly type fees we have in banking today.  But I'm sure Satoshi saw this, given it's obvious and common sense.  lol.

[dadingsda]

What´s up with premine? I thought it was a bitcoinclone, too?  I heard it was a test what will happen with bitcoin after distribution.
btw:
What´s satoshi´s plan with bitcoin to solve this problem ?

[ahmed_bodi]

incorrect. transaction fees would be the new block reward on the network

They would be the new block reward [technically] but don't transactions get automatically routed to the lowest Tx fees on the network?

That was my understanding.  Any pool or miner can charge their respective fees, even zero fees so if what you're saying is right then that doesn't matter, the biggest pool would solve the most blocks and so they can charge the biggest fees and it wouldn't matter.

There is no logic in that and no efficiency so unless there will be one single set of static fees then this is not possible.  I'm pretty sure the system was coded for a more democratic and dynamic fees schedule [for the beginning, anyway].

Well, until those with massive hash power and deep pockets put the rest of the miners out of business by offering ZERO fees.  

Then we'll get the exact same ridiculously high, monopoly type fees we have in banking today.  But I'm sure Satoshi saw this, given it's obvious and common sense.  lol.

Nope. Transaction fees means the fee you pay at pools, exchanges and other places and also from the standard coin QT's when sending transactions. a miner increasing or decreasing their transaction fee only matters when that person is a miner. it means its more likely to get inro a block.

[markm]

Fees are only collected by solving blocks. Basically the black reward in total is not just the plain reward but also all the fees for that block.

So variance is exactly the same for fees as for blocks, if you mean variance in how long getween the times when you get lucky and actually get something.

So as someone wrote above. fees are the block reward once the "subsidy" part of the reward falls to zero.

Merging a coin s damn near free, you merely have to run the coin's daemon along with the other daemons, so it is dirt cheap, just basically costs a little bit of RAM and a little bit of disk space and a tiny amount of processing power. Each time you solve a block of any chain though, your miners need to be told to start work on a new block, so some miners didn't like the ten second or fifteen second or twelve second or whatever fast blocks of GeistGeld because that meant every few seconds al their mining rigs needed to be told to start fresh on a new block, whereas with ten minute block time chains such interuptions were only needed each ten minutes or so. Thus basically the faster the blocks the more of a tiny little fractional dent a chain makes in your overall mining efficiency.

Hardly anyone merges GeistGeld, probably mostly for that reason, but the next-fastest is I0Coin at one point five minutes per block, which is way less impact than GeistGeld and such tiny impact there is really no reason NOT to mine them unless you are some puny amateur at home with a tiny machine that does not have enough RAM and disk to run 6 or 7 or whatever coin daemons along with p2pool (the easiest mining pool system to do your home merge with).

So for professional pools, it really makes little sense NOT to mine at least 7 of the 8 merged coins, even if they decide not to bother with the 8th, GeistGeld, due to its speed.

But consider also how many many many crapcoins go on about how important it is to have fast blocks. If they are right, that fast blocks are a great feature, then it probably also makes no sense not to include GeistGeld in your merge, due to fast blocks being such a great feature and the cost of merged mining being basically trivial.

-MarkM-

[Vlad2Vlad]

What´s up with premine? I thought it was a bitcoinclone, too?  I heard it was a test what will happen with bitcoin after distribution.
btw:
What´s satoshi´s plan with bitcoin to solve this problem ?

A) The premine is being used to pay for bounties, albeit, very slowly.

B) iXcoin is an exact Bitcoin clone, meaning it's Identical Twin.

C) iXcoin is a test to see what happens when Bitcoin runs out of coins to mine.

D) Satoshi doesn't have a plan cause Satoshi is not real, but I am, and I say iXcoin is the  F U T U R E.


So the logical questions is, if iXcoin can do anything Bitcoin can do [right now] then why would anyone wait decades more to finally use a fully mature Bitcoin, when a fully mature Bitcoin is here now and it is called iXcoin.

 

[Vlad2Vlad]

Thanks for chiming in Mark.

Well, if getting tx fees is the same as coin subsidies then there is no advantage for a coin with all the coins mined.

Unless of course you change the protocol to allow for an algorithm which automatically queues all the transactions in order of cheapest fees to highest fees.

This would eliminate the need of working in a pool and then consumers would also ALWAYS get the cheapest transaction fees for their orders every-time.

I really can't believe something like this hasn't been done already - it's as democratic and free markets as you can get, although, in the long run the powerful rich miners would win once again.  There's just no way to stop that outside of confiscation and over-regulation which would lead to too many other severe problems.

On a different note, I totally agree about merge mining all the coins.  I'm really shocked that no major pool offers to merge mine all 8 coins.  Like you said, the additional cost is next to nothing.

[schnötzel]

"premine" is also a coin:

 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=427519.0

"...Will Bitcoin be able to survive once the minting of new coins has ended? Nobody knows. ...."



I think that´s what dadingsda meant with:

"What´s up with premine? I thought it was a bitcoinclone, too?  I heard it was a test what will happen with bitcoin after distribution.
btw:"


ps: And it looks really interesting now. I just read some of the last posts and don´t get it at all. But it looks like a similar problem:

Quote from: kbroadfoot on June 05, 2014, 04:07:19 PM
PMC stops existing as soon as Maardien stops mining the empty blocks...  we need this new coin NOW...

[FrictionlessCoin]

CEX.IO now has the majority of trading volume for IXC.  We've got good volume for the past couple of weeks.

This is a *very* good sign.  Don't look at the price... look at the fundamentals of the coin improving.

[KenChanYu]

It seems like IXcoin will never get onto Mintpal, for just .5 btc using the below service we will finally get on imo, aren't you tired of just watching other coins overtake us all the time. The OP even mentions IXcoin, if we can't beat them lets join them.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=639308.0

[mobile]

Amidst this market low  , Im steady holding my "stash".  Cheers...

[Vlad2Vlad]

Anybody notice the hashrate on iXcoin right now?  68 PETA to devcoin's 50 and Namecoin's 65.

Killing Devcoin and even ahead of Namecoin which I have NEVER seen happen before.


Could iXcoin become the most secure alt coin in the world very soon?


Well, that would be a nice selling point, eh?

[From Above]

given its 2nd/third gen fatures iXCoin is a serious threat to Litecoin.  i wouldnt be bathing in shock if it were to exceed Litecoin marketcap within 3-6 months.

~CfA~

[Vlad2Vlad]

given its 2nd/third gen fatures iXCoin is a serious threat to Litecoin.  i wouldnt be bathing in shock if it were to exceed Litecoin marketcap within 3-6 months.

~CfA~

Correct. If we can execute on the proper updates while also getting the right partners [abd raising awareness] then Litecoin will look like cheap left-overs in a very short timespan.

[FrictionlessCoin]

given its 2nd/third gen fatures iXCoin is a serious threat to Litecoin.  i wouldnt be bathing in shock if it were to exceed Litecoin marketcap within 3-6 months.

~CfA~

Correct. If we can execute on the proper updates while also getting the right partners [abd raising awareness] then Litecoin will look like cheap left-overs in a very short timespan.

Litecoin right now is a problematic investment in that its main feature, 'democratic mining' is gone with the advent of ASIC based technology. 

iXcoin continues to be a viable due to its high hash rate.  That hash rate is secured by the participation of GHash.IO in the IXC foundation.   So there is a high level of assurance that iXcoin can't be compromised. 

Look GHash.IO already has 51% of BTC mining but we trust them to secure BTC.  GHash.IO has like maybe 90% of IXC mining.  So trusting GHash.IO is a given for not only IXC but also BTC.

[publicjud]

given its 2nd/third gen fatures iXCoin is a serious threat to Litecoin.  i wouldnt be bathing in shock if it were to exceed Litecoin marketcap within 3-6 months.

~CfA~

Correct. If we can execute on the proper updates while also getting the right partners [abd raising awareness] then Litecoin will look like cheap left-overs in a very short timespan.

Litecoin right now is a problematic investment in that its main feature, 'democratic mining' is gone with the advent of ASIC based technology. 

iXcoin continues to be a viable due to its high hash rate.  That hash rate is secured by the participation of GHash.IO in the IXC foundation.   So there is a high level of assurance that iXcoin can't be compromised. 

Look GHash.IO already has 51% of BTC mining but we trust them to secure BTC.  GHash.IO has like maybe 90% of IXC mining.  So trusting GHash.IO is a given for not only IXC but also BTC.

So Ixcoin has over 90% of it's hash from one miner?  How is that secure?

[FrictionlessCoin]

given its 2nd/third gen fatures iXCoin is a serious threat to Litecoin.  i wouldnt be bathing in shock if it were to exceed Litecoin marketcap within 3-6 months.

~CfA~

Correct. If we can execute on the proper updates while also getting the right partners [abd raising awareness] then Litecoin will look like cheap left-overs in a very short timespan.

Litecoin right now is a problematic investment in that its main feature, 'democratic mining' is gone with the advent of ASIC based technology. 

iXcoin continues to be a viable due to its high hash rate.  That hash rate is secured by the participation of GHash.IO in the IXC foundation.   So there is a high level of assurance that iXcoin can't be compromised. 

Look GHash.IO already has 51% of BTC mining but we trust them to secure BTC.  GHash.IO has like maybe 90% of IXC mining.  So trusting GHash.IO is a given for not only IXC but also BTC.

So Ixcoin has over 90% of it's hash from one miner?  How is that secure?

Is Bitcoin secure if GHash.IO has 51% of the mining?  If your answer is yes to this, then IXC is equally secure.

[publicjud]

given its 2nd/third gen fatures iXCoin is a serious threat to Litecoin.  i wouldnt be bathing in shock if it were to exceed Litecoin marketcap within 3-6 months.

~CfA~

Correct. If we can execute on the proper updates while also getting the right partners [abd raising awareness] then Litecoin will look like cheap left-overs in a very short timespan.

Litecoin right now is a problematic investment in that its main feature, 'democratic mining' is gone with the advent of ASIC based technology. 

iXcoin continues to be a viable due to its high hash rate.  That hash rate is secured by the participation of GHash.IO in the IXC foundation.   So there is a high level of assurance that iXcoin can't be compromised. 

Look GHash.IO already has 51% of BTC mining but we trust them to secure BTC.  GHash.IO has like maybe 90% of IXC mining.  So trusting GHash.IO is a given for not only IXC but also BTC.

So Ixcoin has over 90% of it's hash from one miner?  How is that secure?

Is Bitcoin secure if GHash.IO has 51% of the mining?  If your answer is yes to this, then IXC is equally secure.

BTC with GHash.IO at 51% is not secure as BTC with GHash.IO at 44%!  BTC with GHash.IO at 90% would be less secure than even 51%.  Security is always a matter of degrees.  Why did miners move away from GHash.IO to make hash rate less than 51%?

[Vivisector999]

Litecoin's original "Main feature" might be gone, but the new main feature is it's one of only 2 coins that are really traded as a currency (IE there are many merchants starting to accept LTC as currency).  Until IXC actually has volume and is actually used somewhere, all the hashrate in the world won't help IXC overtake LTC.  Also one could argue that LTC is far more secure than IXC and even BTC atm, as the entire security of either coin is in the hands of a single pool owner.  Sure GHash.IO are trusted, but putting the security of an entire currency in the hands of 1 group really defeats the purpose.

Also, even though GHash.IO is a trusted company, the security of both coins (BTC and IXC) are also in the fate that GHash.IO can withstand any attacks, or possibly someone working from within that might have a different agenda (IE stealing the coins or possibly to destroy the credibility of cryptocurrency as a whole).  When BTC Guild had all the power they purposely cut their profits (Pushed people out), in order to restore balance to BTC.  It's funny the company that people "Trust" isn't doing the same. 

Just to let you know I have BTC, LTC and IXC.  I'm not someone pushing for "My" coin.  I want a bunch of coins to make it.  Just telling it how I see it.