cryptonewbie


February 23, 2014, 04:12:40 PM Last edit: February 23, 2014, 05:21:39 PM by cryptonewbie 

Some joker is trying to manipulate the price by sitting atop the buy wall with 7btc. No way I'm buying above 8 at this point.

Please donate to our promotional fund: XqJHdojbecRgQb26LjPEpR4c4YqcAdJ6ih





Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.




remistevens


February 23, 2014, 06:32:27 PM 

Some joker is trying to manipulate the price by sitting atop the buy wall with 7btc. No way I'm buying above 8 at this point.
RIC has been sold in large batches over the last week. Sellers fulfilling buy orders for 5000, 10000RIC all at once this is what drove the price down. A buy 'wall' of 7btc would be insufficient. If they've placed the order, and they've been paying attention, they're prepared to buy what they've ordered.




Vilepickle
Member
Offline
Activity: 76
Merit: 10


February 23, 2014, 08:23:08 PM 

This coin seems to have some good advantages compared to Primecoin. I was also able to get the mining up with xptminer and ypool much easier than other CPU coins (looking at you Maxcoin launch).
Just seems like it needs some marketing help.

BTC: 14PzAZCW1k8aA4FFFZ55LxizQqwBR969ee



northranger79510
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


February 23, 2014, 09:23:25 PM 

This coin seems to have some good advantages compared to Primecoin. I was also able to get the mining up with xptminer and ypool much easier than other CPU coins (looking at you Maxcoin launch).
Just seems like it needs some marketing help.
It does. A good coin without marketing will be overlooked. Example: Datacoin right now.




coomme


February 23, 2014, 10:12:08 PM 





BChydro


February 23, 2014, 10:34:03 PM 

Yeah this coin hasn't made a splash yet, which is sad because it's a great idea




dga


February 24, 2014, 02:44:36 AM 

Thinking about the pooling issue a bit more, I have a suggestion for how to refine it: A key danger already identified by the Riecoin creators in using 4chains as the PoW for pooled mining is the possibility of creating a miner tailored to finding 4 chains. This isn't theoretical  I've played with a proofofconcept, and it's both easy and gives a share advantage over a "correct" miner. I've also run into it on the other side, where by tooaggressively screening out all six candidates, I created mining code that almost never generated a pool share unless it also found a block. I don't think it's possible to avoid all bias in this, but a few possibilities make it easier to make a morecorrect pooled miner. The first suggestion also has the advantage of providing a form of variabledifficulty pooled mining that is independently controllable from the Riecoin difficulty itself: (a) Minimum divisor requirement for *all* numbers: Accept PoW only if: (a) The first four numbers are (MR) prime; and (b) None of the six numbers has a divisor <= N for N=some reasonable size prime. As an example, the optimized miner jh00 released sieves all six possibilities up to 50,000 ( https://github.com/jh000/xptMiner/blob/master/xptMiner/riecoinMiner.cpp ). A minimum PoW of 50,000 would then exclude any share that has more of a bias towards fourchains than the default ypool miner. (b) Generator polynomial matches only The pattern of primes chosen for Riecoin (p, p+4, p+6, p+10, p+12, p+16) can only occur at certain values. The simplest polynomial for these is n*210 + 7 and n*210 + 97. Any miner searching at locations *other* than these is clearly doing something weird, because no valid 6chain can occur at other locations. Any nonmatching share should be rejected. Dave




maxsolnc


February 24, 2014, 05:04:57 PM 

Yeah this coin hasn't made a splash yet, which is sad because it's a great idea
That's really sad. I've invested several bitcoins into it and lose 2 btc at the moment  price is dropping more and more. Idea is brilliant, but I see no marketing at all.

DTC: DMcKNp47fNtgM7sritK9GfJEQ1DzME5nwk BTC: 1FgUGra685ZwkrX5VnRvfaYp4bHJhC7x4H



gatra


February 24, 2014, 05:15:41 PM 

Thinking about the pooling issue a bit more, I have a suggestion for how to refine it: A key danger already identified by the Riecoin creators in using 4chains as the PoW for pooled mining is the possibility of creating a miner tailored to finding 4 chains. This isn't theoretical  I've played with a proofofconcept, and it's both easy and gives a share advantage over a "correct" miner. I've also run into it on the other side, where by tooaggressively screening out all six candidates, I created mining code that almost never generated a pool share unless it also found a block. I don't think it's possible to avoid all bias in this, but a few possibilities make it easier to make a morecorrect pooled miner. The first suggestion also has the advantage of providing a form of variabledifficulty pooled mining that is independently controllable from the Riecoin difficulty itself: (a) Minimum divisor requirement for *all* numbers: Accept PoW only if: (a) The first four numbers are (MR) prime; and (b) None of the six numbers has a divisor <= N for N=some reasonable size prime. As an example, the optimized miner jh00 released sieves all six possibilities up to 50,000 ( https://github.com/jh000/xptMiner/blob/master/xptMiner/riecoinMiner.cpp ). A minimum PoW of 50,000 would then exclude any share that has more of a bias towards fourchains than the default ypool miner. (b) Generator polynomial matches only The pattern of primes chosen for Riecoin (p, p+4, p+6, p+10, p+12, p+16) can only occur at certain values. The simplest polynomial for these is n*210 + 7 and n*210 + 97. Any miner searching at locations *other* than these is clearly doing something weird, because no valid 6chain can occur at other locations. Any nonmatching share should be rejected. Dave I think ypool implements option (a), checking server side for divisors of the last 2 prime candidates. Regarding (b), actually the only possibility is n*210 + 97 (because n*210 + 7 would be divisible by 7). The RIC client does this check as quick validation to discard bogus blocks before performing RM. But this is already covered by option (a), since 97 mod 210 is the result of doing a minisieve with primes 2,3,5 and 7, hence 210, it's 2*3*5*7 = 210 If you want to add 11 then you have 6 possibilities, not only one anymore. If you test for divisors up to 50000 then the advantage for having a bias towards 4tuples instead of 6tuples should be negligible.




northranger79510
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 308
Merit: 250
Riecoin and Huntercoin to rule all!


February 24, 2014, 08:44:47 PM 

Hey guys...check out a great introduction video to Riecoin one of Riecoin's community member made! https://vimeo.com/87464754




remistevens


February 24, 2014, 09:05:49 PM 

Hey awesome thanks, glad to have made it for a great coin! Feel free to use wherever, for whatever. I was just coming here to post the vid myself. Go Riecoin! _{RIC RGJAyKFQAS7eKvmhU66hm3ApA6jTyFRvEu BTC 1BCi9rWMXXgtQh1doYH6LtWcwt1QG647xL}




Mathiau
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0


February 25, 2014, 03:20:03 AM 

Another vote here for RIC / riecoin..
the fact that your not only mining for money but also doing something for mathematics... makes it that much more enjoyable.




trny
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 48
Merit: 0


February 25, 2014, 03:44:49 AM 

Hey awesome thanks, glad to have made it for a great coin! Feel free to use wherever, for whatever. I was just coming here to post the vid myself. Go Riecoin! Excellent video remi! The script really came out nicely. Let's try to get it onto Facebook, Twitter, and the official site next.




cryptonewbie


February 25, 2014, 03:52:15 AM 

A matter of time before this coin goes through the roof!

Please donate to our promotional fund: XqJHdojbecRgQb26LjPEpR4c4YqcAdJ6ih



mitsarasss


February 25, 2014, 07:20:38 AM 

You did a great job with that video! You should reupload it on youtube so more people see it.




trny
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 48
Merit: 0


February 25, 2014, 09:07:51 AM 

You did a great job with that video! You should reupload it on youtube so more people see it. Agreed, YouTube format would allow easier website embedding, and might just get some hits from people browsing related videos




remistevens


February 25, 2014, 03:03:14 PM 

You did a great job with that video! You should reupload it on youtube so more people see it. Agreed, YouTube format would allow easier website embedding, and might just get some hits from people browsing related videos Makes sense, I'll get it up there today and give it a nice set of tags and CC keywords.




iwandhdumas2003
Member
Offline
Activity: 100
Merit: 10


February 25, 2014, 03:36:31 PM 

Some test made me feel very dangerous, I like the sense of adventure, also like to challenge new things




gatra


February 25, 2014, 07:50:01 PM 

Thinking about the pooling issue a bit more, I have a suggestion for how to refine it: A key danger already identified by the Riecoin creators in using 4chains as the PoW for pooled mining is the possibility of creating a miner tailored to finding 4 chains. This isn't theoretical  I've played with a proofofconcept, and it's both easy and gives a share advantage over a "correct" miner. I've also run into it on the other side, where by tooaggressively screening out all six candidates, I created mining code that almost never generated a pool share unless it also found a block. I don't think it's possible to avoid all bias in this, but a few possibilities make it easier to make a morecorrect pooled miner. The first suggestion also has the advantage of providing a form of variabledifficulty pooled mining that is independently controllable from the Riecoin difficulty itself: (a) Minimum divisor requirement for *all* numbers: Accept PoW only if: (a) The first four numbers are (MR) prime; and (b) None of the six numbers has a divisor <= N for N=some reasonable size prime. As an example, the optimized miner jh00 released sieves all six possibilities up to 50,000 ( https://github.com/jh000/xptMiner/blob/master/xptMiner/riecoinMiner.cpp ). A minimum PoW of 50,000 would then exclude any share that has more of a bias towards fourchains than the default ypool miner. (b) Generator polynomial matches only The pattern of primes chosen for Riecoin (p, p+4, p+6, p+10, p+12, p+16) can only occur at certain values. The simplest polynomial for these is n*210 + 7 and n*210 + 97. Any miner searching at locations *other* than these is clearly doing something weird, because no valid 6chain can occur at other locations. Any nonmatching share should be rejected. Dave Another way around the bias towards 4tuples, is that the pool should accept any sextuplet of the required form as long as at least ANY 4 of the numbers are prime (instead of the first 4). This way, if you bias towards the first 4 you loose the other combinations. If you bias towards all the combinations, you are at the same time biasing towards the full sextuplets. This would discourage searching for shares instead of actually searching for blocks. In order to optimize both the miner and the server side checking, I would require only the first p to be prime, as long as at least 3 of the other 5 numbers (p+4, p+6, p+10, p+12, p+16) are prime too.




Supercomputing


February 25, 2014, 08:13:00 PM 

Thinking about the pooling issue a bit more, I have a suggestion for how to refine it: A key danger already identified by the Riecoin creators in using 4chains as the PoW for pooled mining is the possibility of creating a miner tailored to finding 4 chains. This isn't theoretical  I've played with a proofofconcept, and it's both easy and gives a share advantage over a "correct" miner. I've also run into it on the other side, where by tooaggressively screening out all six candidates, I created mining code that almost never generated a pool share unless it also found a block. I don't think it's possible to avoid all bias in this, but a few possibilities make it easier to make a morecorrect pooled miner. The first suggestion also has the advantage of providing a form of variabledifficulty pooled mining that is independently controllable from the Riecoin difficulty itself: (a) Minimum divisor requirement for *all* numbers: Accept PoW only if: (a) The first four numbers are (MR) prime; and (b) None of the six numbers has a divisor <= N for N=some reasonable size prime. As an example, the optimized miner jh00 released sieves all six possibilities up to 50,000 ( https://github.com/jh000/xptMiner/blob/master/xptMiner/riecoinMiner.cpp ). A minimum PoW of 50,000 would then exclude any share that has more of a bias towards fourchains than the default ypool miner. (b) Generator polynomial matches only The pattern of primes chosen for Riecoin (p, p+4, p+6, p+10, p+12, p+16) can only occur at certain values. The simplest polynomial for these is n*210 + 7 and n*210 + 97. Any miner searching at locations *other* than these is clearly doing something weird, because no valid 6chain can occur at other locations. Any nonmatching share should be rejected. Dave Another way around the bias towards 4tuples, is that the pool should accept any sextuplet of the required form as long as at least ANY 4 of the numbers are prime (instead of the first 4). This way, if you bias towards the first 4 you loose the other combinations. If you bias towards all the combinations, you are at the same time biasing towards the full sextuplets. This would discourage searching for shares instead of actually searching for blocks. In order to optimize both the miner and the server side checking, I would require only the first p to be prime, as long as at least 3 of the other 5 numbers (p+4, p+6, p+10, p+12, p+16) are prime too. But you will then pay a hefty penalty in mining performance for checking all six candidates instead of an early abort strategy when checking a chain of four candidates. Modular exponentiation is a very expensive operation for the size of numbers that we are dealing with.




