Jumbley
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1003
|
 |
July 23, 2015, 10:15:27 PM |
|
Lots of reasonable arguments regarding the 144 year production life.
I'm on the fence for now. It's a tough call.
Certainly is! Possibly haven't had as much fun since 1992 when Britain pulled out of the EMU.  It's a rock and a hard place. I'm pretty sure DigiByte would probably lose a lot of dedicated friendly mining as a consequence and we desperately need that but at the same time, it is something that the DigiByte developers could do because they can't force people to buy,mine, hold and support DigiByte. I've been staying out of the conversation because I will support whatever decision Jared makes. Still, I obviously have my opinions. I was opposed (prior to the video). But, the more I thought about it, the less I worried one way or the other. Mostly I believe this is a question about if DGB should conform to the current altcoin "aura popularis." We can't influence the real supply and demand. We can only adjust the supply schedule (or I suppose the demand schedule if we are active buyers). I'm not sure that we would lose dedicated, friendly miners. Maybe some. But, I hope that people who are serious supporters of DGB would continue to support the coin. It might even help work against the non-committed miners who just mine whatever coin is the most profitable. I think, in theory, reducing supply might benefit ASIC miners more than others. ASICs are far more power efficient per GH than GPU mining. So, it could lead to greater centralization of mining power. Reducing the mining rewards (even slightly) would increase the cost of production per DGB. In other words, my electricity bill is not going to go down, so if I receive fewer coins per day, it costs more for me to mine each individual DGB. From a practical standpoint this could have numerous effects (both positive and negative) on the price. I guess, in theory, it would create a new price equilibrium between the supply schedule and demand schedule. But, there's no reason that the actual exchange price would adjust to that new equilibrium point (unless we're talking about in the indefinite long term). It could lower the number of people mining DGB in multipools (the non-dedicated group who just autosell), because it could make DGB less profitable than other coins in the pool; but if it triggers a rise in price to match the new cost of production, then the same people would just jump back in and mine DGB when it's profitable again. But, all this assumes that people who mine are the predominate suppliers. If we include traders, we have a different set of supply and demand curves based on significantly different objectives (often different slopes as far as I can tell). Honestly, there's no reason to attempt to guess what effects it would have. It's just guessing. Even if it's educated guessing. The real question should be if it is the right decision to make for the long term benefit of DGB development and deployment. If the answer to that question is "yes" - then I think it would benefit both traders and miners in the long term. One of the issues I have with all this; is that Bitcoin is more profitable to mine, it has been since as far back as I can remember, but the mining stays pretty constant when averaged over time. I guess it could be a liquidity reason as Bitcoin blocks can sometimes take days to find and perhaps by mining DigiByte, smaller but more frequent payments are achieved when immediately exchanged. If somehow mining revenue was awarded on a weekly basis, I'd have my answer. |
|
|
|
|
HR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1011
Transparency & Integrity
|
|
July 23, 2015, 10:31:48 PM |
|
From a practical standpoint this could have numerous effects (both positive and negative) on the price. I guess, in theory, it would create a new price equilibrium between the supply schedule and demand schedule. But, there's no reason that the actual exchange price would adjust to that new equilibrium point (unless we're talking about in the indefinite long term). It could lower the number of people mining DGB in multipools (the non-dedicated group who just autosell), because it could make DGB less profitable than other coins in the pool; but if it triggers a rise in price to match the new cost of production, then the same people would just jump back in and mine DGB when it's profitable again.
Six one, a half dozen the other. It's like flipping a coin. But, all this assumes that people who mine are the predominate suppliers. If we include traders, we have a different set of supply and demand curves based on significantly different objectives (often different slopes as far as I can tell). Honestly, there's no reason to attempt to guess what effects it would have. It's just guessing. Even if it's educated guessing.
And perhaps without rhyme or reason, I agree. The real question should be if it is the right decision to make for the long term benefit of DGB development and deployment. If the answer to that question is "yes" - then I think it would benefit both traders and miners in the long term.
I agree 100%. |
|
|
|
|
|
DigiByte (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1051
Official DigiByte Account
|
|
July 24, 2015, 03:15:27 AM |
|
We are working on getting DigiExplorer back online. Stay tuned. |
|
|
|
wildduck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 966
Merit: 1001
|
|
July 24, 2015, 05:46:46 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24hralttrade
|
|
July 24, 2015, 06:32:59 AM |
|
We are working on getting DigiExplorer back online. Stay tuned. Digistats.info |
|
|
|
HR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1011
Transparency & Integrity
|
|
July 24, 2015, 07:35:30 AM |
|
Only a 1.3% "Failed Delivery / Undeliverable" rate on the last round!  |
|
|
|
Bluestreet
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 988
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 24, 2015, 07:49:04 AM |
|
Lots of reasonable arguments regarding the 144 year production life.
I'm on the fence for now. It's a tough call.
Certainly is! Possibly haven't had as much fun since 1992 when Britain pulled out of the EMU. It's a rock and a hard place. I'm pretty sure DigiByte would probably lose a lot of dedicated friendly mining as a consequence and we desperately need that but at the same time, it is something that the DigiByte developers could do because they can't force people to buy,mine, hold and support DigiByte. I've been staying out of the conversation because I will support whatever decision Jared makes. Still, I obviously have my opinions. I was opposed (prior to the video). But, the more I thought about it, the less I worried one way or the other. Mostly I believe this is a question about if DGB should conform to the current altcoin "aura popularis." We can't influence the real supply and demand. We can only adjust the supply schedule (or I suppose the demand schedule if we are active buyers). I'm not sure that we would lose dedicated, friendly miners. Maybe some. But, I hope that people who are serious supporters of DGB would continue to support the coin. It might even help work against the non-committed miners who just mine whatever coin is the most profitable. I think, in theory, reducing supply might benefit ASIC miners more than others. ASICs are far more power efficient per GH than GPU mining. So, it could lead to greater centralization of mining power. Reducing the mining rewards (even slightly) would increase the cost of production per DGB. In other words, my electricity bill is not going to go down, so if I receive fewer coins per day, it costs more for me to mine each individual DGB. From a practical standpoint this could have numerous effects (both positive and negative) on the price. I guess, in theory, it would create a new price equilibrium between the supply schedule and demand schedule. But, there's no reason that the actual exchange price would adjust to that new equilibrium point (unless we're talking about in the indefinite long term). It could lower the number of people mining DGB in multipools (the non-dedicated group who just autosell), because it could make DGB less profitable than other coins in the pool; but if it triggers a rise in price to match the new cost of production, then the same people would just jump back in and mine DGB when it's profitable again. But, all this assumes that people who mine are the predominate suppliers. If we include traders, we have a different set of supply and demand curves based on significantly different objectives (often different slopes as far as I can tell). Honestly, there's no reason to attempt to guess what effects it would have. It's just guessing. Even if it's educated guessing. The real question should be if it is the right decision to make for the long term benefit of DGB development and deployment. If the answer to that question is "yes" - then I think it would benefit both traders and miners in the long term. I would suggest waiting to see how the change affects guldencoin and myraid coin. My personal view because guldencoin has no dedicated mining it will work for them, it actually might be better for dedicated miners after the change because it won't be profitable for multi pools. myraid coin it will be a bad move because most of their support is mining and the trade volume will most likely dry up as a result and lead to removal from exchanges after the initial pump and dump. Digibyte has both miners and investors so the decision needs to be a lot more thought out. |
|
|
|
|
Jumbley
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1003
|
|
July 24, 2015, 08:14:39 AM |
|
We are working on getting DigiExplorer back online. Stay tuned. Digistats.info A brilliant community site, bitkapp needs some big tips! http://www.digistats.info/#/charts |
|
|
|
|
Jumbley
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1003
|
|
July 24, 2015, 08:19:37 AM |
|
Lots of reasonable arguments regarding the 144 year production life.
I'm on the fence for now. It's a tough call.
Certainly is! Possibly haven't had as much fun since 1992 when Britain pulled out of the EMU. It's a rock and a hard place. I'm pretty sure DigiByte would probably lose a lot of dedicated friendly mining as a consequence and we desperately need that but at the same time, it is something that the DigiByte developers could do because they can't force people to buy,mine, hold and support DigiByte. I've been staying out of the conversation because I will support whatever decision Jared makes. Still, I obviously have my opinions. I was opposed (prior to the video). But, the more I thought about it, the less I worried one way or the other. Mostly I believe this is a question about if DGB should conform to the current altcoin "aura popularis." We can't influence the real supply and demand. We can only adjust the supply schedule (or I suppose the demand schedule if we are active buyers). I'm not sure that we would lose dedicated, friendly miners. Maybe some. But, I hope that people who are serious supporters of DGB would continue to support the coin. It might even help work against the non-committed miners who just mine whatever coin is the most profitable. I think, in theory, reducing supply might benefit ASIC miners more than others. ASICs are far more power efficient per GH than GPU mining. So, it could lead to greater centralization of mining power. Reducing the mining rewards (even slightly) would increase the cost of production per DGB. In other words, my electricity bill is not going to go down, so if I receive fewer coins per day, it costs more for me to mine each individual DGB. From a practical standpoint this could have numerous effects (both positive and negative) on the price. I guess, in theory, it would create a new price equilibrium between the supply schedule and demand schedule. But, there's no reason that the actual exchange price would adjust to that new equilibrium point (unless we're talking about in the indefinite long term). It could lower the number of people mining DGB in multipools (the non-dedicated group who just autosell), because it could make DGB less profitable than other coins in the pool; but if it triggers a rise in price to match the new cost of production, then the same people would just jump back in and mine DGB when it's profitable again. But, all this assumes that people who mine are the predominate suppliers. If we include traders, we have a different set of supply and demand curves based on significantly different objectives (often different slopes as far as I can tell). Honestly, there's no reason to attempt to guess what effects it would have. It's just guessing. Even if it's educated guessing. The real question should be if it is the right decision to make for the long term benefit of DGB development and deployment. If the answer to that question is "yes" - then I think it would benefit both traders and miners in the long term. I would suggest waiting to see how the change affects guldencoin and myraid coin. My personal view because guldencoin has no dedicated mining it will work for them, it actually might be better for dedicated miners after the change because it won't be profitable for multi pools. myraid coin it will be a bad move because most of their support is mining and the trade volume will most likely dry up as a result and lead to removal from exchanges after the initial pump and dump. Digibyte has both miners and investors so the decision needs to be a lot more thought out. If you are correct, dedicated Myriad miners should switch to DigiByte now. Personally, I just don't buy this ' pools mining for best profit'. I think these guys are being duped, while their power is set against us to support Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
|
24hralttrade
|
|
July 24, 2015, 08:38:51 AM |
|
Only a 1.3% "Failed Delivery / Undeliverable" rate on the last round! Awesome work HR! Thats a good list of emails you have over there with only 1.3% failed delivery. I'm curious what email you are sending to them? ( Maybe you posted it before and i missed it because if whas afk for some weeks) Thanks for the dedicated work as always! |
|
|
|
|
TamiLee
|
|
July 24, 2015, 08:41:05 AM |
|
Lots of reasonable arguments regarding the 144 year production life.
I'm on the fence for now. It's a tough call.
Certainly is! Possibly haven't had as much fun since 1992 when Britain pulled out of the EMU. It's a rock and a hard place. I'm pretty sure DigiByte would probably lose a lot of dedicated friendly mining as a consequence and we desperately need that but at the same time, it is something that the DigiByte developers could do because they can't force people to buy,mine, hold and support DigiByte. I've been staying out of the conversation because I will support whatever decision Jared makes. Still, I obviously have my opinions. I was opposed (prior to the video). But, the more I thought about it, the less I worried one way or the other. Mostly I believe this is a question about if DGB should conform to the current altcoin "aura popularis." We can't influence the real supply and demand. We can only adjust the supply schedule (or I suppose the demand schedule if we are active buyers). I'm not sure that we would lose dedicated, friendly miners. Maybe some. But, I hope that people who are serious supporters of DGB would continue to support the coin. It might even help work against the non-committed miners who just mine whatever coin is the most profitable. I think, in theory, reducing supply might benefit ASIC miners more than others. ASICs are far more power efficient per GH than GPU mining. So, it could lead to greater centralization of mining power. Reducing the mining rewards (even slightly) would increase the cost of production per DGB. In other words, my electricity bill is not going to go down, so if I receive fewer coins per day, it costs more for me to mine each individual DGB. From a practical standpoint this could have numerous effects (both positive and negative) on the price. I guess, in theory, it would create a new price equilibrium between the supply schedule and demand schedule. But, there's no reason that the actual exchange price would adjust to that new equilibrium point (unless we're talking about in the indefinite long term). It could lower the number of people mining DGB in multipools (the non-dedicated group who just autosell), because it could make DGB less profitable than other coins in the pool; but if it triggers a rise in price to match the new cost of production, then the same people would just jump back in and mine DGB when it's profitable again. But, all this assumes that people who mine are the predominate suppliers. If we include traders, we have a different set of supply and demand curves based on significantly different objectives (often different slopes as far as I can tell). Honestly, there's no reason to attempt to guess what effects it would have. It's just guessing. Even if it's educated guessing. The real question should be if it is the right decision to make for the long term benefit of DGB development and deployment. If the answer to that question is "yes" - then I think it would benefit both traders and miners in the long term. I would suggest waiting to see how the change affects guldencoin and myraid coin. My personal view because guldencoin has no dedicated mining it will work for them, it actually might be better for dedicated miners after the change because it won't be profitable for multi pools. myraid coin it will be a bad move because most of their support is mining and the trade volume will most likely dry up as a result and lead to removal from exchanges after the initial pump and dump. Digibyte has both miners and investors so the decision needs to be a lot more thought out. If you are correct, dedicated Myriad miners should switch to DigiByte now. Personally, I just don't buy this ' pools mining for best profit'. I think these guys are being duped, while their power is set against us to support Bitcoin. For certain algorithms you will get more miners coming from myraidcoin. I don't think SHA and Scrypt mining will increase because multipools dominate those 2 algorithms so just no way to compete. You are correct that most sha and scrypt miners only care about getting btc out of digibyte, which is why it will be hard for major price increases in the near term. Even if big investor comes and pumps coin to 50 multi pools will dump that 50 down back under 30 unless many big investors keep buying up coins every day. It is also a spiral effect because many people buying now will also dump out at a price of 50 as it's almost 100% increase in ROI, so it's not just the miners, but if digibyte start getting a 1000 news users every month then the price will go above 100 even with all the dumps. |
|
|
|
|
|
24hralttrade
|
|
July 24, 2015, 09:12:05 AM |
|
We need more believers/holders/miners, Push out the multipools with the dedicated community mining power and give the Digibytes back to them!
I think this will come in time when Digibyte is more evolved and more merchants accepting Digibyte -> more reasons to hold Digibyte and not sell them straight away!
For now i think we need to stand our ground and fight against the suckers.
|
|
|
|
HR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1011
Transparency & Integrity
|
|
July 24, 2015, 09:29:18 AM |
|
Only a 1.3% "Failed Delivery / Undeliverable" rate on the last round! Awesome work HR! Thats a good list of emails you have over there with only 1.3% failed delivery. I'm curious what email you are sending to them? ( Maybe you posted it before and i missed it because if whas afk for some weeks) Thanks for the dedicated work as always! Thanks for the support. It's much appreciated. Here's the link to the final copy for the email that I've sent. http://asistec-ti.com/tba/midyearreport2015.htm Cheers |
|
|
|
|
hardcoreprime
|
|
July 24, 2015, 11:34:50 AM |
|
We are working on getting DigiExplorer back online. Stay tuned. Digistats.info Great work on Digistats.info!!! |
|
|
|
|
Chyton
|
|
July 24, 2015, 11:45:08 AM |
|
We need more believers/holders/miners, Push out the multipools with the dedicated community mining power and give the Digibytes back to them!
I think this will come in time when Digibyte is more evolved and more merchants accepting Digibyte -> more reasons to hold Digibyte and not sell them straight away!
For now i think we need to stand our ground and fight against the suckers.
I agree completely , since last 2 months i'm DGB believers and holders. I tried to buy DGB everyday and hold em  |
|
|
|
|
Hegemon
|
|
July 24, 2015, 12:13:01 PM |
|
Digireport needs more views, since we have some contents we all have to diffuse it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
24hralttrade
|
|
July 24, 2015, 01:13:41 PM |
|
Digireport needs more views, since we have some contents we all have to diffuse it.
I can do a payd ad on Digibyte FB. How do we set the viewers target? BTC,??,?? |
|
|
|
|
Hegemon
|
|
July 24, 2015, 02:35:14 PM |
|
Was you the ad last time ? How did you set it ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
24hralttrade
|
|
July 24, 2015, 02:42:24 PM |
|
Was you the ad last time ? How did you set it ?
BTC,crypto currency,Gamers,Games etc. But thats for the gaming wallet. This needs other targets i think. |
|
|
|
|
