[TEK] TEKcoin Hi-PoS hybrid pos/pow no premine/ipo/ico

[presstab]

Did some quick calculations concerning PoS difficulty and when it will rise.

The way the source code is written (at least how it is supposed to be) is that every time the PoS difficulty multiplies by 64 times, then the stake rate will cut in half.

The client shows that the genesis block had PoS difficulty at 0.00024414 and the current PoS diff is 0.00390625.  So right now the diff has multiplied by 16x.  So we are still a ways off. If more people being staking regularly I am guess the diff will rise. According to my calcs (which could be wrong) the threshold will be at PoS diff of 0.0156.

Any thoughts??

[1695331023]

1695331023

[1695331023]

1695331023

[David Latapie]

the explorer is up and running with the rich list (updated every 10 minutes).

I can't believe it! I am on the rich list

And like MarketNeutral, I'm surprised to be that high.

[MarketNeutral]

Did some quick calculations concerning PoS difficulty and when it will rise.

The way the source code is written (at least how it is supposed to be) is that every time the PoS difficulty multiplies by 64 times, then the stake rate will cut in half.

The client shows that the genesis block had PoS difficulty at 0.00024414 and the current PoS diff is 0.00390625.  So right now the diff has multiplied by 16x.  So we are still a ways off. If more people being staking regularly I am guess the diff will rise. According to my calcs (which could be wrong) the threshold will be at PoS diff of 0.0156.

Any thoughts??

The rich list offers a clue as regards future PoS difficulty, but not much. Assuming all those wallets stake, assuming only some stake, etc. But as far as meaningful metrics are concerned, this coin is stubborn and doesn't give up much information. People who are mathematically inclined will see the power of compound staking and thus move funds into TEK, but just how many people will actually do so remains beyond my guess. It may be as simple as marketing and adoption.

Having so many seasoned cyrpto-users bodes well.

We may not know how many multiple wallets on the rich list are owned by single individuals, but the distribution of TEK so far appears to contain no alarming outliers. The depth of TEK seems a little shallow, but that may merely be a function of TEK still maturing.


I wouldn't be surprised to see TEK and HBN evolve a quasi-mutually contingent dichotomy similar to the Aussie Dollar and the New Zealand Dollar.

[David Latapie]

I wouldn't be surprised to see TEK and HBN evolve a quasi-mutually contingent dichotomy similar to the Aussie Dollar and the New Zealand Dollar.

Can you extrapolate? I don't know this dichotomy between the two dollars.

[David Latapie]

Something I'd like to see for every cryptocurrencies is a Gini index by crypto.

Since a richlist allows to know the exact content of every wallet, it should be possible to get a Gini index out of it. I'd say it is not difficult to do (although beyond my coding skill).
It would not be good for a coin in particular, but for the ecosystem in general and should be global effort - but, hey, I'm here, so I propose it here since the richlist has just been created. Of course, it would not account for people with multiple wallets but that would be quite representative still (especially if we consider that the percentage of user with multiple wallets is similar among cryptos).

The end result would hopefully be a better distribution of coins, since the coins with the best (read: lowest) Gini index would top the chart. We know from experiences in real life (energy labels in Europe for fridges and washing machines but also graphic card benchmarking like 3Dmark starting from around the turn of the millenium) that an easy-to-read notation encourages competitors to get better (the energy efficiency of fridges and washing machines is much better since the introduction of energy tag. A race for egalitarianism itself causing in increase in price and thus market cap (price being the trojan horse for egalitarianism).

Thoughts? How difficult would it be to implement an Gini index scoring for various crypto? We could start by TEK and HBN, for instance, then continue with less cooperative cryptos.

[thundertoe]

im going to bet the top slot is cryptsy?  i am curious if it is not cryptsy then how much is on the market there.

[presstab]

im going to bet the top slot is cryptsy?

If I am not mistaken, cryptsy doesn't stake their coins, they leave them cold.

[MarketNeutral]

I wouldn't be surprised to see TEK and HBN evolve a quasi-mutually contingent dichotomy similar to the Aussie Dollar and the New Zealand Dollar.

Can you extrapolate? I don't know this dichotomy between the two dollars.

I'm over-simplifying somewhat and avoiding the technical aspects of the pair, but in summary, the Aussie and the Kiwi both share similar properties—such as being 'commodity currencies', being the currencies of two nations that share geopolitical and financial interests, being the currencies of two nations that function as a monetary counterpoint to more traditional fiat reserve currencies such as the Swiss Franc and British Pound Sterling, etc.—while still maintaining enough distinction between them such that price differentials may be profitable when traded against one another.

[MarketNeutral]

im going to bet the top slot is cryptsy?

If I am not mistaken, cryptsy doesn't stake their coins, they leave them cold.

This is correct, as far as I know.

[presstab]

Something I'd like to see for every cryptocurrencies is a Gini index by crypto.

Since a richlist allows to know the exact content of every wallet, it should be possible to get a Gini index out of it. I'd say it is not difficult to do (although beyond my coding skill).
It would not be good for a coin in particular, but for the ecosystem in general and should be global effort - but, hey, I'm here, so I propose it here since the richlist has just been created. Of course, it would not account for people with multiple wallets but that would be quite representative still (especially if we consider that the percentage of user with multiple wallets is similar among cryptos).

The end result would hopefully be a better distribution of coins, since the coins with the best (read: lowest) Gini index would top the chart. We know from experiences in real life (energy labels in Europe for fridges and washing machines but also graphic card benchmarking like 3Dmark starting from around the turn of the millenium) that an easy-to-read notation encourages competitors to get better (the energy efficiency of fridges and washing machines is much better since the introduction of energy tag. A race for egalitarianism itself causing in increase in price and thus market cap (price being the trojan horse for egalitarianism).

Thoughts? How difficult would it be to implement an Gini index scoring for various crypto? We could start by TEK and HBN, for instance, then continue with less cooperative cryptos.

The rich list has a similar statistic, although not as complex as the Gini coefficient. The cummulative market share. So for TEK the top 10 wallets own 53% of the coins.  For HBN the top ten wallets own 36.5% of the coins.

I think it is mostly about how many real coin holders there are.

[sunny67]

im going to bet the top slot is cryptsy?

That sounds right. Bitstamp recently had their funds audited and created the biggest bitcoin wallet in history to do it. I'm sure the big exchanges must hold the biggest wallets for most coins.

[David Latapie]

If I am not mistaken, cryptsy doesn't stake their coins, they leave them cold.

And so does Mintpal (they announced it on the MINT thread some months ago). If I remember correctly, Tranz said somewhere staking is a bad idea anyways for exchange, for security reasons, but I did not read his post.

[MarketNeutral]

Something I'd like to see for every cryptocurrencies is a Gini index by crypto.

Since a richlist allows to know the exact content of every wallet, it should be possible to get a Gini index out of it. I'd say it is not difficult to do (although beyond my coding skill).
It would not be good for a coin in particular, but for the ecosystem in general and should be global effort - but, hey, I'm here, so I propose it here since the richlist has just been created. Of course, it would not account for people with multiple wallets but that would be quite representative still (especially if we consider that the percentage of user with multiple wallets is similar among cryptos).

The end result would hopefully be a better distribution of coins, since the coins with the best (read: lowest) Gini index would top the chart. We know from experiences in real life (energy labels in Europe for fridges and washing machines but also graphic card benchmarking like 3Dmark starting from around the turn of the millenium) that an easy-to-read notation encourages competitors to get better (the energy efficiency of fridges and washing machines is much better since the introduction of energy tag. A race for egalitarianism itself causing in increase in price and thus market cap (price being the trojan horse for egalitarianism).

Thoughts? How difficult would it be to implement an Gini index scoring for various crypto? We could start by TEK and HBN, for instance, then continue with less cooperative cryptos.

I would also like to see the Gini coefficient.

Eventually, I may input TEK, HBN, and other altcoin data into a spreadsheet to find the beta coefficient, Sharpe, Treynor, Sortino, or Modigliani ratios, or other risk metrics using bitcoin as the benchmark. The output may yield some interesting results, but the data may not be relevant yet, because these markets are still somewhat immature.

One step at a time though. The rich list data is a fantastic start!

[David Latapie]

The rich list has a similar statistic, although not as complex as the Gini coefficient. The cummulative market share. So for TEK the top 10 wallets own 53% of the coins.  For HBN the top ten wallets own 36.5% of the coins.

Great, it confirms a Gini index would be easy to implement, then. Just have to find someone to do it. That would fall in the scope of NOBLE's noble ideas, I'd say.

I would also like to see the Gini coefficient.

Eventually, I may input TEK, HBN, and other altcoin data into a spreadsheet to find the beta coefficient, Sharpe, Treynor, Sortino, or Modigliani ratios, or other risk metrics using bitcoin as the benchmark. The output may yield some interesting results, but the data may not be relevant yet, because these markets are still somewhat immature.

One step at a time though. The rich list data is a fantastic start!

Thanks MarketNeutral, I bookmark this post for later use. You are right, the richlist is a great start.

[presstab]

Everyone, the new block explorer looks great and the rich list makes TEK even funner!  We raised 1225 TEK for Unick, and the goal was 1500.  If you have anymore to give or can spare a few send them now BVHMuf41bXasvkVYXRv3MkRK6YwX62Ko1S

I am sending the coins in a few hours.

Also SpiryGolden, the website and all the social media looks great.  I will send some TEK your way to this address BbzLWRLGeQy7q28YsTVFJp7qZjdoBYFaRJ when my first stakes come in in about ten days. I won't forget 

[tokyoghetto]

Man, if i wasn't dumping thousands of TEK at 10000 satoshi a few months ago, I would be top 5.

Ohh well, time to compound this coin!

[scryptographer]

Something I'd like to see for every cryptocurrencies is a Gini index by crypto.

Since a richlist allows to know the exact content of every wallet, it should be possible to get a Gini index out of it. I'd say it is not difficult to do (although beyond my coding skill).
It would not be good for a coin in particular, but for the ecosystem in general and should be global effort - but, hey, I'm here, so I propose it here since the richlist has just been created. Of course, it would not account for people with multiple wallets but that would be quite representative still (especially if we consider that the percentage of user with multiple wallets is similar among cryptos).

Without having done any calculations I will offer a guess at the gini-index for every single crypto: 0.9-1.0 (1.0 is perfect inequality, as in one person owns all the coins).
As you mention yourself, it does not account for multiple wallets, but just as important, the numbers we can get from the blockchain is not wallets, but addresses.
Many addresses will be empty (coins go in, and leave again, meaning it will be empty when looked at in the block chain), leading us to see 50% (guestimate) of addresses empty, thus lop-siding the gini-calculations.

Further, exchanges are accounted for in the calculations as there is no way to leave them out, which will muddy the results even more. I.e. my TEK holdings on Cryptsy should count towards my holdings, not towards Cryptsy's address.

Also, the gini-index is meant to measure income equality, not equity equality.

So, while I am a big supporter of numbers and statistics, calculating numbers that will tell us absolutely nothing seems like wasted effort.

[David Latapie]

Without having done any calculations I will offer a guess at the gini-index for every single crypto: 0.9-1.0 (1.0 is perfect inequality, as in one person owns all the coins).

Noted sci-fi author Charles Stross pointed out BTC scores a bit better than that. I think other altcoin score even better (although not by a long shot)
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/why-i-want-bitcoin-to-die-in-a.html

As you mention yourself, it does not account for multiple wallets, but just as important, the numbers we can get from the blockchain is not wallets, but addresses.
Many addresses will be empty (coins go in, and leave again, meaning it will be empty when looked at in the block chain), leading us to see 50% (guestimate) of addresses empty, thus lop-siding the gini-calculations.

Further, exchanges are accounted for in the calculations as there is no way to leave them out, which will muddy the results even more. I.e. my TEK holdings on Cryptsy should count towards my holdings, not towards Cryptsy's address.

If we assume that the "noise" of empty wallets and exchange is similar (a wild assumption, I grant you that), we can still compare them. Plus, there is no other way to compare them (except marketcap), so it is not like if we were trading something from something else.

Also, the gini-index is meant to measure income equality, not equity equality.

Please extrapolate.

[scryptographer]

Also, the gini-index is meant to measure income equality, not equity equality.

Please extrapolate.

If I have $1 million in the bank, but my income this year is $0, the $0 is what is used in the gini-calculations, effectively pooling me with the "poor" people.

I guess the gini-coefficient could be applied to POS coins, by looking purely at addresses that has staked over a given time frame, and use those numbers for calculations.

[Tranz]

Did some quick calculations concerning PoS difficulty and when it will rise.

The way the source code is written (at least how it is supposed to be) is that every time the PoS difficulty multiplies by 64 times, then the stake rate will cut in half.

The client shows that the genesis block had PoS difficulty at 0.00024414 and the current PoS diff is 0.00390625.  So right now the diff has multiplied by 16x.  So we are still a ways off. If more people being staking regularly I am guess the diff will rise. According to my calcs (which could be wrong) the threshold will be at PoS diff of 0.0156.

Any thoughts??

You can't use the starting difficulty as the starting point. It was hard forked in original PPC code.  The min diff is .00390625, so it hasn't budged, much like HBN.