Devcoin

[jasinlee]

Its all good, I figured you were just busy

[1713895139]

1713895139

[1713895139]

1713895139

[1713895139]

1713895139

[1713895139]

1713895139

[1713895139]

1713895139

[jasinlee]

Did you already reup to that link Killer? I got time to test it out now.

[K1773R]

Did you already reup to that link Killer? I got time to test it out now.

no, il make an announce when its updated.

[jasinlee]

Alrighty, wish I could test out devcoind a bit more thoroughly, would be nice to see if it can handle patches.

[markm]

Unfortunately there are lots of places in the code that should be using a constant that can be set in some header file where you plug in all the stuff that names which coin you are compiling it to be.

We changed pretty much only what obviously needed to be changed, the word bitcoin appears in variable names as well as in data the user gets to see, and with no idea of how the GUI really works I had to basiclly just guess in some places whether changing the word would help the GUI to keep the user aware it was a different coin or prevent the GUI from identifying correctly or working hand in hand with some internal name it might use to tell the operating system which coin type's GUI details it meant or to match it up with some variable all the different coins all use and all still use a name for which still contains the word bitcoin.

I expect somewhere the GUI code is getting confused between different coins' icon sets or something like that, or more than one coin type is telling the system tray the same name for which indicator on that tray to activate or de-activate.

If you start into trying to change every occurence of the word bitcoin you end up with a much harder to patch codebase since each coin type would change similrly (and comparing to some other coins is part of how I tried to check I had changed what needed to change), such as I have even seen a bitcoinrpc.cpp instead of rpc.cpp in some incarnations of the codebase even though it did not seem to be necessary that each coin have its own distinct coinnamerpc.cpp file really if constants differentiating coins were moved to some central plqce where they could all conveniently be changed.

There are new images/icons in the recent upload on sourceforge, as mentioned in a previous post.

-MarkM-

[c4n10]

Unfortunately there are lots of places in the code that should be using a constant that can be set in some header file where you plug in all the stuff that names which coin you are compiling it to be.

We changed pretty much only what obviously needed to be changed, the word bitcoin appears in variable names as well as in data the user gets to see, and with no idea of how the GUI really works I had to basiclly just guess in some places whether changing the word would help the GUI to keep the user aware it was a different coin or prevent the GUI from identifying correctly or working hand in hand with some internal name it might use to tell the operating system which coin type's GUI details it meant or to match it up with some g\variable all the different coins all use and all still use a name for which still contains the word bitcoin.

I expect somewhere the GUI code is getting confused between different coins' icon sets or something like that, or more than one coin type is telling the system tray the same name for which indicator on that tray to activate or de-activate.

If you start into trying to change every occurence of the word bitcoin you end up with a much harder to patch codebase since each coin type would change similrly (and comparing to some other coins is part of how I tried to check I had changed what needed to change), such as I have even seen a bitcoinrpc.cpp instead of rpc.cpp in some incarnations of the codebase even though it did not seem to be necessary that each coin have its own distinct coinnamerpc.cpp file really if constants differentiating coins were moved to some central plqce where they could all conveniently be changed.

There are new images/icons in the recent upload on sourceforge, sa mentioned in a previous post.

-MarkM-

Well, everything seems to be working fine now, I think it may have been related to a java issue that I just corrected.

[K1773R]

Unfortunately there are lots of places in the code that should be using a constant that can be set in some header file where you plug in all the stuff that names which coin you are compiling it to be.

We changed pretty much only what obviously needed to be changed, the word bitcoin appears in variable names as well as in data the user gets to see, and with no idea of how the GUI really works I had to basiclly just guess in some places whether changing the word would help the GUI to keep the user aware it was a different coin or prevent the GUI from identifying correctly or working hand in hand with some internal name it might use to tell the operating system which coin type's GUI details it meant or to match it up with some g\variable all the different coins all use and all still use a name for which still contains the word bitcoin.

I expect somewhere the GUI code is getting confused between different coins' icon sets or something like that, or more than one coin type is telling the system tray the same name for which indicator on that tray to activate or de-activate.

If you start into trying to change every occurence of the word bitcoin you end up with a much harder to patch codebase since each coin type would change similrly (and comparing to some other coins is part of how I tried to check I had changed what needed to change), such as I have even seen a bitcoinrpc.cpp instead of rpc.cpp in some incarnations of the codebase even though it did not seem to be necessary that each coin have its own distinct coinnamerpc.cpp file really if constants differentiating coins were moved to some central plqce where they could all conveniently be changed.

There are new images/icons in the recent upload on sourceforge, sa mentioned in a previous post.

-MarkM-

Well, everything seems to be working fine now, I think it may have been related to a java issue that I just corrected.

devcoin dosnt use java but well its winblows, everything can happen ^^

[c4n10]

but well its winblows, everything can happen ^^

Exactly, lol...

[Unthinkingbit]

Unthinkingbit: do you see any way how to integrate the body coherence development into the dvc receivers list? Since this is cutting edge health technology and development:
..

I looked over the site and saw a lot of fluff talk meant to sell an extremely an ECG monitor at a far higher price than other sellers. I will not even link to that site.

However, in the future it would be good to make an open source ECG monitor. On the devcoin bounty page, it is in the medical diagnostic equipment section:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin_bounty#project_types

which is something devcoin could pay for if the market capitalization reaches 10,000,000$.

[Unthinkingbit]

xchrix developed the cryptocoincharts site:
www.cryptocoincharts.info

and requested devcoins for the devcoin section:
http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/period-charts.php?period=1-month&resolution=day&pair=dvc-btc&market=vircurex

The charts are colorful and well designed. The devcoins units are in mBTC, which makes them easier to read because there are fewer zeros. The only problem I see is that the chart data only goes back to about Oct 16. Overall, the site gives devcoin exposure, so I suggest an ongoing maintenance payment of 1/5 of a share, as long as he keeps the devcoin part of his site going. Any objections?

[Unthinkingbit]

Is it a secret what % of total DVC developers hold right now?

All payments can be seen by looking at the receiver_X.csv files:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin#receiver_files

The payments come from being on the bitcoinshare list:
https://raw.github.com/Unthinkingbit/charity/master/bitcoinshare.html

where you can see what each developer does, with links to their projects and/or forum threads. The payments also come from the bounties:
https://raw.github.com/Unthinkingbit/charity/master/bounty_X.csv

on the bounty pages, each bounty has a link to where the bounty was awarded or discussed. The payments also come from devtome earnings, which can be seen at:
https://raw.github.com/Unthinkingbit/charity/master/tomecount.csv

At the beginning there was less interest in devcoin, and the generation shares were roughly 7 million devcoins. Today the shares are around 4 million devcoins, the average is around 5.5 million. A developer on the list from the very start would of received about 80 million devcoins by now. An administrator gets an extra share, so another 80 million. The amount earned from devtome can be estimated by multiplying the shares by 5.5 milllion.

I wonder who and how came up with idea that 90% / 10% split is ethical.  

Me. It is not the split that is ethical, it is to whom the 90% is disbursed, open source developers, which makes it ethical. Miners get 10% because I estimated that that would be sufficient for them to mine it. The 90% is simply what remains.

"We get 90% of generated coins from now till eternity"
..

It is until eternity because it is meant to provide money for open source development forever. There is no block halving because that would mean payments for new development would eventually go to zero. There is no need to look for an ulterior motive, the motive is to give open source developers, including myself, as much money as possible.

[Unthinkingbit]

Is it a secret what % of total DVC developers hold right now? I mean, the idea of investing resources into coin where small group is so powerful that they can play with the value of the coin and even null it not just once but almost countless times is not my favourite one.
..

In theory, it doesn't go to a small group of people, instead anybody who is doing open source development can get a share.

In practice, however, you might be right.

According to current rules, ~80% is supposed to go to projects which add value to DVC, and 10% to free form bounties.

I've asked about more concrete rules (like who is eligible) but got no answer.

I waited to answer until devtome was back up so I could give links. The eligibility rules are here:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin#developer

To summarize, if you're working on a well known project, like bitcoin, or
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=open_transactions

then you'll go on the list. If you're working on another project which is useful; if that project is popular you'll go on, if no one else is using it you won't, if a few people are using it, maybe.

In any case, developers only get one ongoing share for development, if someone wants to earn a lot of devcoins, the way to do so is by writing for devtome:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=earn_devcoins_by_writing

[pyra-proxy]

I can't find any crucial difference between Devcoin and Open Society Foundations or similar organisations. That makes you my enemy.

Goodbye!

Crucial difference:
Devcoin != political communist whinging agenda
Unthinkingbit != Soros (At least I'm pretty sure of that because Unthinkingbit doesn't seem retarded, but I guess we can all act differently online....  Unthinkingbit, if you are Soros, please act like you do here in real life lol)

[Icoin]

I looked over the site and saw a lot of fluff talk meant to sell an extremely an ECG monitor at a far higher price than other sellers. I will not even link to that site.

I guess you realy didnt understand what the neurogem/cardiogem is all about. Its not a simple overpriced ECG. Its something total different.

1. Personaly i worked with philips medical devices, so i know ECG and EEG and i know what the price relations and the capabilities of such devices are.
2. The Neurogem/Cardiogem is able to calculate emotional states (no ordinary ecg eeg is able to display that)
3. The Neurogem is EEG based the Cardiogem is ECG based in one device but goes far beond that two basic functions.
4. The Cardiogem displays HRV http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_rate_variability
5. The Neurogem/Cardiogem is a Biofeedback device.
6. The Neurogem/Cardiogem is capable to measure two persons same time

I know its not easy to understand what this all is about, i see it from the lack uf understanding, but that was with ECA the same thing in the first place. I work with the Neuro/Cardiogem for years and i know what it is capable of, its amazing.


It is a Biofeedback device capable of doing realtime spectrum and coherence measurements and record it, it incorporates the functions of HRV and is capable to measure 2 persons in relation to each other. I hardly doubt that a ordinary ECG or HRV is capable to do that.
All the physics and mathematics behind the technology is published and opensource.
And yes you are right the goal is to acchive a opensource device, but it has to start somewhere.

However, in the future it would be good to make an open source ECG monitor. On the devcoin bounty page, it is in the medical diagnostic equipment section:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin_bounty#project_types

I totaly agree and thats why i requested this.

which is something devcoin could pay for if the market capitalization reaches 10,000,000$.

Thats wrong, why should we support technology of the overpriced 20 century, when there is allready technology from the 21. century at our hand. And we realy dont need 10 million market capitalization to reach such goals. It seems to me that you think in the medical terminology of the USA what is totaly overpriced, and unrealistic. We should support developments in the medical sector that makes a more cheap but even higher quality diagnostics possible.

[killerstorm]

I waited to answer until devtome was back up so I could give links.

Thanks. I actually read this stuff on devtome.com before asking question, I just wanted to clarify whether those are current rules.

 The eligibility rules are here:
http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=devcoin#developer

To summarize, if you're working on a well known project, like bitcoin, or then you'll go on the list. If you're working on another project which is useful; if that project is popular you'll go on, if no one else is using it you won't, if a few people are using it, maybe.

Then I guess "colored bitcoins" project qualifies since it is essentially a Bitcoin client with extra features which would allow users to issue their own private currencies/stocks/bonds/whatever and trade them on p2p exchange, all on top of Bitcoin protocol. There are no users yet, however, since software isn't finished yet. However a lot of people are interested.

So... Does it qualify as is, or should we wait until people start using it, or...?

In any case, developers only get one ongoing share for development, if someone wants to earn a lot of devcoins, the way to do so is by writing for devtome:

OK, I understand why you're doing this, but you should note that people might see it as unfair. A trivial app might require at least 40 hours of development time, but one could write like 40 articles in 40 hours, no?

So developers are at huge disadvantage compared to writers.

Also you didn't mention shares people get for DVC-related development, like for DVC software, projects which generate DVC revenue and so on. What's the policy about such projects? Is Devtome the only for-profit project allowed to exist or it's just that there are no other proposals?

[jasinlee]

You do know these are merged mined right? The point is to get developers paid for their work, this is like charity work substrata, and it requires no extra work from miners.

[hahahafr]

Hello, can someone explain what is the point of Devcoin since we already have Bitcoin?

[killerstorm]

Developers are at extreme advantage over those who ARE Devcoin network = miners. No miners, no Devcoin.

Um, hello? Miners do not need to do anything at all, they simply get free coins for tiny amounts of work.

Behold - are we supposed to be satisfied with 10% of coins and thus continue to keep alive network

Not to keep network alive, but to prevent double-spends. I doubt that anybody wants to attack devcoin, so even 10% is probably too much.

Developers create demand for devcoins, they make it valuable, and miners get profit of that.

In other words, without developers DVC would be yet another worthless Bitcoin fork. You can as well mine testnet.

Mathematically, suppose X is value of 50,000 DVC in USD. Miners earn X * 0.1 for each block.

Suppose developer ABC creates something which adds additional demand for devcoins, thus driving exchange rate to X+x. Now miners get (X+x)*0.1 USD, thus they got x*0.1 of ABC's work per each block. Suppose this effect lasts for 10000 blocks, thus it makes sense to give ABC a bounty of at most 10000*x*0.1.

I'm fairly sure you do not understand economics of mining. In theory, miners are strictly profit-motivated, thus giving bigger share to miners would give network better security, and that's all. You get what you pay for, miners are not shafted.

However, merged mining essentially makes it a free ride.

[jasinlee]

No matter how hard you try to hide the truth, it can't be hidden - at least not from me and, obviously, most other miners.

You do know what merged mining is right? Since you are a miner and all.

[killerstorm]

No matter how hard you try to hide the truth, it can't be hidden - at least not from me and, obviously, most other miners.

Your sense of self-entitlement is frightening.

I should note I'm in no way affiliated with devcoin, I'm simply trying to explain obvious facts.

You do not need to have any hashrate specifically for devcoin thanks to merged mining, and network/CPU resources related to transaction verification are tiny.

Any while we are here, miners aren't in any sense noble. At start ordinary users were miners, so network was directly democratic. Then people started mining it for profit... Of course there is nothing wrong with it and it was anticipated, but need to understand that miners simply provide hashrate... You know, like utilities which provide you electricity. Your hashrate secures network, but it removes control from users. So you're like mercenaries, there is nothing nothing noble about it.

You aren't supposed to think about ethical questions, you simply get money for your hashrate and that's all. If certain network pays you less than what you could get elsewhere, then simply switch to highest paying network.

Of course there are miners who do not mine for profit, but those do not care whether they get 10% or 100% of a pie.