⚒[CGA] Cryptographic Anomaly - The Elusive Coin⚒

[gbomb944]

I'm something of an anomaly myself so it will be good to have company.

[s4w3d0ff]

OP updated. New logo, Bonuses, Difficulty refreshes every 3 blocks (instead of 2), Max Coins 10 Billion (hopefully that will cover until the end of time )

[Fiku]

I like the idea but I think ten billion coins is way too many... Give it a max approx 160 million and the price will naturally be higher; This doesn't correlate to every coin, but less "anomalies", the higher perceived cost of per anomaly, higher the perceived rarity, more the miners, more the exposure and then that turns into an endless loop.

[alquinte]

I don't understand at all how this deters larger hashing power. All it is doing is adding one more level to the lottery that cryptocurrency already is. Traditional mining is about hashing numbers until you create a valid hash. This is called solving the block. All you are doing now is making it so that you have to solve multiple blocks. The more hashpower you have -> the more blocks you solve -> the more anomalies you get on average. Your rewards are still directly proportional to the hashing power you put in. The only thing this coin seems to be doing is discouraging solo mining completely because it becomes even more unreliable (not only do you have to solve the block, you have to solve the correct block) while pool mining would be the only reliable way to mine. This will just serve to centralize the mining of the currency even more which is a bad thing.

I wonder if it is possible to include particular computer hashing rate (not total network hashing rate only) into the calculations of rewards?

If that is possible, that would make real chaos in mining

To be honest I have no idea how to implement this in the code.    Would be interesting tho...

You can't get that kind of information without drastically changing the fundamentals of how bitcoin works. Why? Because hashrate is how bitcoin measures the contributions of an individual. From bitcoin's perspective the only difference between a pool of thousands of gpus and a guy mining on his cpu is their hashrates. This is crucial to bitcoin because that is how it secures the transactions. If you tried to come up with some scheme to identify and individual in another form, it would be susceptible to something called a sybil attack: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybil_attack. If you could solve that problem and make a secure currency system, then you probably will have a true next generate coin.

[Nullu]

Is there a way to make the difficulty of solving the next block harder if you throw more or less than x hash, and make x randomly move each block based on increases or decreases in net hashrate?

So there is basically a moving ideal target hash range. So more is not always better?

[s4w3d0ff]

I like the idea but I think ten billion coins is way too many... Give it a max approx 160 million and the price will naturally be higher; This doesn't correlate to every coin, but less "anomalies", the higher perceived cost of per anomaly, higher the perceived rarity, more the miners, more the exposure and then that turns into an endless loop.

If you understand the math behind the coin you would realize that it may take eternity a long time to find 1000 coins let alone 10 billion coins...

We also made this coin for fun... We are not really trying to make it worth anything (tho I believe it will have some sort of worth, but the worth won't reflect the max coins because it is impossible to project how many will be in circulation at any given time).

[tabjohn]

Code is almost finished!   Generated first test anomaly yesterday. Don't have a release date yet so I'll keep you all posted!

If your curious how the math will play out here is some ruff examples:

So the formula is nHeight % diff.
And the remainder needs to fall between 1 and 0.1 or equal exactly 0:

In the example with block number 3 and difficulty 0.01, the remainder is 0 (not 0.01) so there is an anomaly

Also a question to the devs: maybe it is a good idea to create a coin similar to Primecoin (Primecoin generates Cunningham chains of prime numbers and already has a few new records). Maybe it is possible an algorithm that, for example, generates zeros of Riemann zeta-function?

[Xtar]

Launch countdown plz?..

[aelpop]

Launch countdown plz?..

+1 launch time plz , this will be fun 

[samcornwell]

I'm fairly new to crypto and still learning, so please can someone explain if I'm right by assuming:

The slower your hashrate, the more likely you are to find a coin?

Thanks guys.

[alphateam]

Good idea
Looks really fair

[BitcoinStacker]

I like the idea but I think ten billion coins is way too many... Give it a max approx 160 million and the price will naturally be higher; This doesn't correlate to every coin, but less "anomalies", the higher perceived cost of per anomaly, higher the perceived rarity, more the miners, more the exposure and then that turns into an endless loop.

+1

[BitcoinStacker]

Launch countdown plz?..

+1 launch time plz , this will be fun 

launch date please

[Burninj]

Hey guys contact Maxcoin developpers asap!!! This is the best coin idea ever!

[Fastpow]

Definitely going to watch this one!

[s4w3d0ff]

Sorry folks for the delay! I've been testing the code non stop trying to make sure it is flawless. I want to release the coin very soon, but more testing need to be done!  

The source code is on github:

Code:

https://github.com/s4w3d0ff/cryptographicanomaly/

I've been test mining with a wider range ( < 1 and > 0.000001) so I can make sure the code I put in actually works (how horrible would it be if I released the coin and it really was impossible to get a coin ), but for some reason the code isn't generating anomalies when I expected it to (figures  ).

Here is the code I'm using:

Code:

int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{        
    double diff = GetDifficulty();
    int64 nSubsidy = 0 * COIN;
    if(nHeight <= 10 )
        {
        if(fmod(nHeight, diff) < 1 && fmod(nHeight, diff) > 0.0000001)
        	{
            nSubsidy = 1 * COIN;
            }
        }
    else
        {
        if(fmod(nHeight, diff) < 1 && fmod(nHeight, diff) > 0.1)
        	{
            nSubsidy = 1 * COIN;
            }
    	}

    return nSubsidy + nFees;
}

And here is my results from the test:



According to my math blocks 1 - 3 should generate an anomaly but they don't. Doesn't make much sense to me.

Any help in figuring this out would be much appreciated. I would need this done along with a Windows wallet compiled before I can release the coin (Bounties maybe? but that would involve pre-mining a few anomalies because I don't own a mining rig).


I want to release this coin before Feb 5th (2014) and at the earliest Feb 1st (2014) at noon PST.

[tabjohn]

Hey! I'm a mathematician, what do you need to figure out?

[s4w3d0ff]

Hey! I'm a mathematician, what do you need to figure out?

Pretty much why my current code tells me that 1 % 0.00024414 and 2 % 0.00024414 and 3 % 0.00024414 doesn't fall between 1 and 0.0000001?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modulo_operation
http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/cmath/fmod/

Code:

if(nHeight <= 10 )
        {
        if(fmod(nHeight, diff) < 1 && fmod(nHeight, diff) > 0.0000001)
        	{
            nSubsidy = 1 * COIN;
            }
        }

Blocks 1 - 3 doesn't render an anomaly for some reason when they clearly should.

[tabjohn]

Try to check manualy the value fmod(1,0.00024414) ? Maybe function fmod returns 0 if the true reminder is less than 0.00001. Sorry for multiply edits

[miramare]

Please remind ppl before launching.

The concept of this coin is interesting.  There is some difference.

It's neither Proof-of-Work, nor Proof-of-stake.  It's Proof-of-Luck ??