[ANNOUNCE] Ixcoin - a new Bitcoin fork

[hashcoin]

i dont fully understand how some text in the genesis block proves a date. but i do see your point.

The point is that genesis block could not have been created before that date (unless Satoshi could predict a Times headline to the date and letter).  

Just to be clear, if I had to guess, I think this error is due to stupidity, not malice (based on his posts in this thread and the total lack of adding anything original, it strikes me as more likely that he simply did not understand the purpose of the genesis timestamp than he deliberately arranged things this way to double spend later).

Anyway, the point is this shows the person who made this chain is EITHER a complete moron OR malicious. Why continue a chain started by such a person?

Also this was the first thing that came to mind he might have done wrong that I checked.  There may be some other places he introduced bugs...

[todu]

So basically, this new cryptocurrency comes with no new features, so basically it is just profiteering gluttons piggybacking on the bitcoin community?

It doesn't necessarily need new features (a la namecoin) to be meaningful. This is part of the coolness of open source, if you think something else will work better you're free to modify and distribute those changes. In this case we have someone who's decided that a brief introductory period of crazy steep inflation would be better since we get to the much-touted deflationary part of the curve sooner. I've considered creating the opposite: a variant where inflation occurred so slowly and over such a long span of time that it would be highly unlikely for the increase in supply to ever outpace the increase in demand. Someone who believes inflation is the way to go might create a fork in which nSubsidy never halves and there is no enforced ceiling on the number of coins.

Just because it wasn't a massive feature-packed fork doesn't mean it's not worthwhile. If you don't think a steep but brief inflationary period would be a beneficial change, then don't use ixcoin. If you think bitcon's curve has the wrong shape, duration, etc. then it's an easy matter to change a few key numbers and reshape the graph to your design. Saying this fork is worthless, profiteering, gluttonous, etc because the changes made aren't substantial enough is like arguing that bitcoin wasn't a substantial change because it's deflationary. Sometimes changing a single thing is a big deal.

Also, assuming any of the bounties on the wiki site are real and will actually be paid, it seems to add up that the original 580k that were mined before release are being used as rewards to help move ixcoin's infrastructure forward. Since ixcoin and bitcoin use identical RPC, any products developed for one should work for the other with little to no modification. If an ixcoin bounty leads to the development of something that can be useful to bitcoin then it has helped the bitcoin cause (and vice versa).

No one is stealing anything from anyone. Not any more than beertokens, weeds or any of the other miscellaneous feature-identical branches of bitcoin have anyway.

Edit: Oh, and since such forks tend to be lower difficulty (even lower than namecoin usually) they also make mining more accessible. BTC and NMC both have difficulties so high that CPU mining is more than unprofitable, it's flat out impossible. Let the casuals mine the forks and those of us with dedicated rigs will still mine BTC. There's nothing wrong with forks, we just need a good exchange to support them all.

I think it would be interesting if someone tried a fork of bitcoin with the same speed-of-generating-new-bitcoins-graph, but with no cap at 21 million btc. Instead, when the 21 million is reached, there will be an inflation of 0.7 % per year. That would mean that the money supply would double once every 100 years. That is an acceptable loss from a currency user's perspective, and would add any benefit(s) an inflationary currency arguably has. I could totally live with my savings halving in value once every 100 years, if that sacrifice boosts the usage of the currency, prevents hoarding etc.

Perhaps a fork wouldn't be necessary? Maybe if most clients accept this change to the original bitcoin protocol, there would be no need to fork? Is making bitcoin inflate like this after the ~21 million cap is reached a good idea? Maybe mining in that case would only be made by huge corporations / nation states with huge mhash capabilities, in effect "stealing" savings from individual users, in perpetuity. Just as GPU-miners today get all the new bitcoins and CPU-miners get zero even if they'd mine for years on end.

This leads me to a question. Let's say a miner with 1000 mhash capabilities generates 50 btc per day. Would a miner with 100 mhash capabilities generate 50 btc exactly once per 10 days? Or would he get constantly beaten in the race so he would generate even slower, say 50 btc per 20 days?

[markm]

Insecure much?

I guess we shouldn't let kids play with monopoly money either in the current economic climate, the real fiat has enough problems without some people wasting time trading monopoly money and monopoly houses and monopoly land instead of getting out in the real world trying to prop up the value of real fiat, real houses and real land...

-MarkM-

[server]

I think it's nice that "normal" people with simple computers can generate some digital coins and get used to the idea of a digital currency.

Unfortunately this is not possible anymore with bitcoins because you need a dozen expensive gpu's to get 1 coin a day orso.

Why not value Bitcoin as gold and Itchycoin uuh sorry Ixcoin as silver/bronze/iron..

There will be other digital currencies in the future and this one is based on the same technique's as Bitcoin but will, as I understand it, "accelerate" faster and is a bit less secure and therefor cheaper.

Maybe accidents with this coin can prevent accidents with Bitcoin. Who knows ?

[Shinobi]

The lesson here is someone is that the time will come (and it is not a question of if) when we will see the release a clone of Bitcoin with a more attractive feature set (wallet encryption, user-friendly client and the like), and it *will* pose a threat to Bitcoin. And the exact same reasons - i.e. get-rich-quick, early adoption - underlying Bitcoin will be behind the new currency's adoption. It's easy to knock Ixcoin because there isn't much improvement to draw anyone to it. But what if something more polished came along? Would you ignore it, convinced of its failure, or would you begin to mine... just in case... it took off? This is the inflation that Bitcoin zealots don't want you to see - and why people are pissing so hard on Ixcoin in this thread. The threat of devaluation doesn't come from an unlimited coinage within Bitcoin, but rather the potential of clones alongside it.

[RandyFolds]

Someone should just pay Vladamir for one day to overtake and split their chain. Their network's gotta be pretty paltry. I wonder what the cost would be.

[gusti]

The lesson here is someone is that the time will come (and it is not a question of if) when we will see the release a clone of Bitcoin with a more attractive feature set (wallet encryption, user-friendly client and the like), and it *will* pose a threat to Bitcoin. And the exact same reasons - i.e. get-rich-quick, early adoption - underlying Bitcoin will be behind the new currency's adoption. It's easy to knock Ixcoin because there isn't much improvement to draw anyone to it. But what if something more polished came along? Would you ignore it, convinced of its failure, or would you begin to mine... just in case... it took off? This is the inflation that Bitcoin zealots don't want you to see - and why people are pissing so hard on Ixcoin in this thread. The threat of devaluation doesn't come from an unlimited coinage within Bitcoin, but rather the potential of clones alongside it.

what inflation ? if zimbabwe prints more money, that not inflates the swiss franc

[Rodyland]

The lesson here is someone is that the time will come (and it is not a question of if) when we will see the release a clone of Bitcoin with a more attractive feature set (wallet encryption, user-friendly client and the like), and it *will* pose a threat to Bitcoin. And the exact same reasons - i.e. get-rich-quick, early adoption - underlying Bitcoin will be behind the new currency's adoption. It's easy to knock Ixcoin because there isn't much improvement to draw anyone to it. But what if something more polished came along? Would you ignore it, convinced of its failure, or would you begin to mine... just in case... it took off? This is the inflation that Bitcoin zealots don't want you to see - and why people are pissing so hard on Ixcoin in this thread. The threat of devaluation doesn't come from an unlimited coinage within Bitcoin, but rather the potential of clones alongside it.

You're conflating changes to the client software with changes to the protocol/blockchain.  Any changes you want - "better" client, wallet encryption, more "polish", whatever you want, you can have it right now... all you need to do is code it.  

Changes to the blockchain are changes to the "rules" of the system, which make ixcoin incompatible with bitcoin.

With the momentum behind bitcoin, any "competitor" would need to offer significantly more than just "polish" on the GUI to be a true competitor.  Polish can be copied, it's the rules behind the system that make any particular instantiation unique and more/less desireable than any other.

[aq]

Someone's desperately trying to become an early adopter here.
Lame.

+1

[ffuentes]

New digital currencies spring up everywhere, I don't like that. Detracts bitcoins and is not a benefit for Internet and the people. Although, the creator's name is suspicious.

[gusti]

New digital currencies spring up everywhere, I don't like that. Detracts bitcoins and is not a benefit for Internet and the people. Although, the creator's name is suspicious.

I think the opposite, this new competing currencies will only make bitcoin stronger

[RandyFolds]

New digital currencies spring up everywhere, I don't like that. Detracts bitcoins and is not a benefit for Internet and the people. Although, the creator's game is suspicious.

ftfy

[ffuentes]

New digital currencies spring up everywhere, I don't like that. Detracts bitcoins and is not a benefit for Internet and the people. Although, the creator's name is suspicious.

I think the opposite, this new competing currencies will only make bitcoin stronger

Why? Really. I need to read why, without bias.

[Shinobi]

I don't think I am. Unlike the distinctions of geography and sovereignty posed by, and which gave rise to nation-issued currency (a distinction which dwindles by the day), Bitcoin has no defining feature that can't be completely duplicated and or improved upon. There is no unique face, nation, personality or - despite the constant overstatement of it - real economy behind Bitcoin. A separate fork, which is incompatible with Bitcoin is indeed a "separate" currency, but the means by which people are drawn to it, are identical. The momentum behind Bitcoin even is really momentum behind the digital medium. If a well-crafted alternative came about, the ease of switching over - in both mining and general familiarity - could very easily have people jumping ship. There is nothing more to be done to do so than to boot up the alternative currency's client to mine and/or cash out of BTC and cash in to the new one.

The lesson here is someone is that the time will come (and it is not a question of if) when we will see the release a clone of Bitcoin with a more attractive feature set (wallet encryption, user-friendly client and the like), and it *will* pose a threat to Bitcoin. And the exact same reasons - i.e. get-rich-quick, early adoption - underlying Bitcoin will be behind the new currency's adoption. It's easy to knock Ixcoin because there isn't much improvement to draw anyone to it. But what if something more polished came along? Would you ignore it, convinced of its failure, or would you begin to mine... just in case... it took off? This is the inflation that Bitcoin zealots don't want you to see - and why people are pissing so hard on Ixcoin in this thread. The threat of devaluation doesn't come from an unlimited coinage within Bitcoin, but rather the potential of clones alongside it.

You're conflating changes to the client software with changes to the protocol/blockchain.  Any changes you want - "better" client, wallet encryption, more "polish", whatever you want, you can have it right now... all you need to do is code it.  

Changes to the blockchain are changes to the "rules" of the system, which make ixcoin incompatible with bitcoin.

With the momentum behind bitcoin, any "competitor" would need to offer significantly more than just "polish" on the GUI to be a true competitor.  Polish can be copied, it's the rules behind the system that make any particular instantiation unique and more/less desireable than any other.

[markm]

Someone should just pay Vladamir for one day to overtake and split their chain. Their network's gotta be pretty paltry. I wonder what the cost would be.

Someone should pay some goons to kick over kids sandcastles at the beach, and rip up their monopoly boards and burn their monopoly money.

-MarkM- (Oh and lemonade stands are right out...)

[gusti]

New digital currencies spring up everywhere, I don't like that. Detracts bitcoins and is not a benefit for Internet and the people. Although, the creator's name is suspicious.

I think the opposite, this new competing currencies will only make bitcoin stronger

Why? Really. I need to read why, without bias.

in brief, by killing the "bitcoin is hard to make, but easy to copy" argument
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=36218.msg446402#msg446402

[afro25]

Has anyone got a calculation of the GH/s in Ixcoin now?

I'm pointing just under 1Gh/s at it for a while until i get my 2.4Gh/s rig up and running, then i'll probably go 80% Bitcoin and 20% Ixcoin if this seems to be doing well

[Shinobi]

Point made.

Has anyone got a calculation of the GH/s in Ixcoin now?

I'm pointing just under 1Gh/s at it for a while until i get my 2.4Gh/s rig up and running, then i'll probably go 80% Bitcoin and 20% Ixcoin if this seems to be doing well

[ffuentes]

New digital currencies spring up everywhere, I don't like that. Detracts bitcoins and is not a benefit for Internet and the people. Although, the creator's name is suspicious.

I think the opposite, this new competing currencies will only make bitcoin stronger

Why? Really. I need to read why, without bias.

in brief, by killing the "bitcoin is hard to make, but easy to copy" argument
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=36218.msg446402#msg446402

But I don't see advantages it's easy to copy but... (unless you mean that bitcoin it's hard to destroy but it's all)

[gw4tt]

I have 2.7Ghash/s running on it. will probably switch back to bitcoin in a day or 2.