Bitcoin Forum
October 18, 2017, 01:51:19 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 [894] 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 ... 1013 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] [MINT] Mintcoin (POS / 5%) [NO ICO] [Fair distro, community maintained]  (Read 1293542 times)
deepcreek
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 12:30:05 AM
 #17861

Maybe the fact that Mintcoin has no developer is actually a good thing because nobody can f-#k with it!

LMAO! I mean seriously, only half joking.

 Look around at all the chaos developers are bringing to Bitcoin right now. Maybe there is some wisdom in just letting a coin be.
Newsflash! Read all about it!
Mintcoin skyrockets because ...it has no developer that can f-#k it up!  Hip hip horaaay! Lol.

Can you keep hyping this? I like the price moving like this.
1508334679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508334679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508334679
Reply with quote  #2

1508334679
Report to moderator
1508334679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508334679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508334679
Reply with quote  #2

1508334679
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508334679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508334679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508334679
Reply with quote  #2

1508334679
Report to moderator
1508334679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508334679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508334679
Reply with quote  #2

1508334679
Report to moderator
DougB62
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


Banned: For Your Protection


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 12:32:32 AM
 #17862

Maybe the fact that Mintcoin has no developer is actually a good thing because nobody can f-#k with it!

LMAO! I mean seriously, only half joking.

 Look around at all the chaos developers are bringing to Bitcoin right now. Maybe there is some wisdom in just letting a coin be.
Newsflash! Read all about it!
Mintcoin skyrockets because ...it has no developer that can f-#k it up!  Hip hip horaaay! Lol.

Can you keep hyping this? I like the price moving like this.

Yes - That was great! Now I need the price to drop, so I can buy back in!  Wink
Flyskyhigh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292


Ezekiel 34:11, John 10:25-30


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 01:03:33 AM
 #17863

Maybe the fact that Mintcoin has no developer is actually a good thing because nobody can f-#k with it!

LMAO! I mean seriously, only half joking.

 Look around at all the chaos developers are bringing to Bitcoin right now. Maybe there is some wisdom in just letting a coin be.
Newsflash! Read all about it!
Mintcoin skyrockets because ...it has no developer that can f-#k it up!  Hip hip horaaay! Lol.

Can you keep hyping this? I like the price moving like this.

Yes - That was great! Now I need the price to drop, so I can buy back in!  Wink
Lol!  It could go up a lot.  Cheesy Developer or not, MINT definitely deserves to be in the 10, at least, IMO.

Regarding security, Mintcoin is similar to Peercoin (which has done fine security wise) with the additional benefit that MINT is 100% full PoS now. The greater security risk is in PoW because the mining game is already so saturated. Mining a new coin nowadays is never going to have a fair distribution because of mining monopolies. Mintcoin was mineable with Scrypt back when things were "fairer" and made the switch before the ASICs hit the market..Now, with the full PoS, it requires you to directly invest in the coin in order to have that kind of weight. Staking weight is unique weight, vs mining gear that can be used on any other coin. That is the brilliance of PoS. The stake you have is what helps ensure security. If you don't trust it, don't invest in it. Obviously some people really trust this method. Roll Eyes

Sick of mining?  Start minting!  5% per year!  Mintcoin "MINT"
Testing Crypto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 497


X__________________________________


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 01:59:41 AM
 #17864

A wallet audit & new UI update would be a +, can we update the OP with the Mint Linux donation address (making sure to put not affiliated, but supports?). As that is one great way to show support, without having to send big amounts & being able to send even 1 sat worth might be a great help to the Linux team in the future  Wink

The OP is still in major need of updates as well (all old donation links), the updates I have made are amateur at best (though most say that graphics are over rated, though many over a year have well build designs) & could be updated?

X_________________   X_________________ Everywhere a X_________________
kiklo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
June 10, 2015, 03:41:30 AM
 #17865

I think it is a simple yes/no question. We can just do a poll on this thread (Like here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1019681.0). Just copy paste this as a question.

Should we move to POS 2.0. It fixes some flaws & network vulnerabilities with current staking. With new version you have to remain online all the time to stake your coins. For more info please read this very simple 2 page whitepaper on POS 2.0

http://blackcoin.co/blackcoin-pos-protocol-v2-whitepaper.pdf

  • Yes
  • No

FYI ,
Issues to be aware of currently it is 20 days before a stake can occur,
switching to PoS 2 means that time interval needs to be dramatically lower , as some people ISP may not be reliable and able to keep them on for that amount of time.
Blackcoin Minimum stake age: 8 hours
So a new Minimum stake age will also need to be decided for mint.
2 hours or 4 hours or 8 hours


 Cool
No

Reducing minimum stake age is a clever way to make it so only the top addresses do all the staking... Blackcoin has always been a scam and they are making it even more "scammy".

Mintcoin was released first, a few weeks before it, and they always try to take all the credit of being the first coin of it's kind. Fact is they were originally a mintcoin clone.

Anyway, the whole issue is a non-issue. No attack like is being theorized has ever happened to Mint, and this sounds like scaremongering a problem that has not been proven to exist except in theory. No one has been able to pull it off... The fact is Mintcoin works. It is fair. Not scammy. Trying to create theoretical problem that doesn't exist as an excuse to change the coin.

Unless someone is successful against attacking Mintcoin, there is no need for a fix. IMO
 
Don't make decisions on emotion... Out of fear, etc.

It looks to me like SamBioHazard was just voicing concerns , he sees as a security issue for Mint.
And someone has pulled off that type of attack against Apexcoin , that Sam warns against.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=897493.0

But whether you change or not , is up to the Mint Community,
considering Sam's recent help with your new block explorer and postings,
the question is do you recognize the fact he is a contributing part of the mint community?

If the mint community does decide to switch to PoS II, then the minimum staking rate has to be lowered, just so everyone would be informed if they decided to switch. (Simple Logic not scare tactics)

If the community decides not to switch , then Sam has at the very least informed you of an issue to watch out for in the future.

But everything is a mute point , until you find a dev.

 Cool

FYI:
The last thing he warned you about is still being ignored,
The OP still has the wrong donation address for your new mintcoin explorer as of this post.
kiklo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
June 10, 2015, 03:51:39 AM
 #17866

Regarding security, Mintcoin is similar to Peercoin (which has done fine security wise) with the additional benefit that MINT is 100% full PoS now. The greater security risk is in PoW because the mining game is already so saturated. Mining a new coin nowadays is never going to have a fair distribution because of mining monopolies. Mintcoin was mineable with Scrypt back when things were "fairer" and made the switch before the ASICs hit the market..Now, with the full PoS, it requires you to directly invest in the coin in order to have that kind of weight. Staking weight is unique weight, vs mining gear that can be used on any other coin. That is the brilliance of PoS. The stake you have is what helps ensure security. If you don't trust it, don't invest in it. Obviously some people really trust this method. Roll Eyes

Peercoin is still a hybrid PoW /PoS coin , so it PoW side helps protect it from the type of attack , mentioned by SamBioHazard. However just to be fair Mint dropped the PoW side because being a hybrid opens a different security issue which is why Mint dropped it.

A little irony, Blackcoin Dev Rat4 is the one who showed the hybrid security issue that cause the PoW side to be dropped.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=551861.0

 Cool
coolbeans94
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 613


Mintcoin: Get some


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 05:25:41 AM
 #17867

ShapeShift.io has released the first-ever cryptocurrency exchange app for iPhone. Buy or sell Mintcoin instantly and on-the-go with the ShapeShift App.

Download the app: http://apple.co/1FU6Njm

Learn about the app in this Forbes article: http://onforb.es/1dtZqVX

NOTE: ShapeShift will be adding their Android app soon. Stay tuned!



Thank you.

This ^ ^

Mintcoin on Forbes?

(1.) Moral happiness depends upon moral order.
(2.) Moral order depends upon the harmonious action of all our powers, as
individuals and as members of society.
Flyskyhigh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292


Ezekiel 34:11, John 10:25-30


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 05:50:15 AM
 #17868

Honestly, you cannot compare Mint to Apex. Apex has bad pos parameters. For example 24 hour min stake time...60 second blocks, that is terrible for security, which is exactly what we are talking about. Mintcoin has less than 30 second confirmations and 20 days min stake time and a max coin weight of 40 days so you cannot save up weight indefinitely to create an attack. It is secure both from too little, and too much staking time. You need a balance and MINT has this balance, for performance, security, and minting fairness, imo.

Sick of mining?  Start minting!  5% per year!  Mintcoin "MINT"
gr8n8
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 141


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 07:09:39 AM
 #17869

Maybe the fact that Mintcoin has no developer is actually a good thing because nobody can f-#k with it!

LMAO! I mean seriously, only half joking.

 Look around at all the chaos developers are bringing to Bitcoin right now. Maybe there is some wisdom in just letting a coin be.
Newsflash! Read all about it!
Mintcoin skyrockets because ...it has no developer that can f-#k it up!  Hip hip horaaay! Lol.

lol I would still like to have a wallet audit and continue to work on a few performance issues with the wallet startup as well as exchange integration eventually but yes I agree the core foundation of mintcoin is rock solid in my opinion. I have head this concern before regarding the security of Mintcoin which is why I am open for a vote on it.


interesting theory - makes me think we could advertise the fact... the angle is that it doesn't need development so the community decided we don't want a developer cause its so solid! And then spend our mint on marketing instead of development
kiklo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
June 10, 2015, 07:12:06 AM
 #17870

Honestly, you cannot compare Mint to Apex. Apex has bad pos parameters. For example 24 hour min stake time...60 second blocks, that is terrible for security, which is exactly what we are talking about. Mintcoin has less than 30 second confirmations and 20 days min stake time and a max coin weight of 40 days so you cannot save up weight indefinitely to create an attack. It is secure both from too little, and too much staking time. You need a balance and MINT has this balance, for performance, security, and minting fairness, imo.

Yes I can compare mint to apex, Different PoS Parameter do affect security, but PoS is still PoS,
your current parameters will only work well with a PoS 1 style coin, as not everyone can keep a system online 20 days straight, that is why min stake age would have to be lowered with a PoS II coin.

The only point I am stating is if there is a switch to PoS II, it will require a change in min stake time, no way around it. When you get a new dev , he will say the same thing, if you want your users to be able to stake a PoS II style coin. If you don't switch to PoS II , then parameters change is not an issue, only if you do switch.

PoS security is determined by the # of coins staking and their weight.
Currently 3% staking at the time of this post, comes out to 635,5557,506 mintcoins.
51% attack
635,557,506*51%= 324,134,328.06
if someone waited until max weight is achieved 20X
324,134,328.06 /20 = 16,206,716.403

Then for only ~16,206,716.403 mintcoins purchased , someone could doublespend on your network after reaching full weight.

FYI:
Your Max weight is 20 days not 40 days, weight does not begin until 20 days and it stops gaining weight at 40 days. So only 20X the amount per block is the max weight, not 40x.

 Cool

kiklo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
June 10, 2015, 07:16:02 AM
 #17871

interesting theory - makes me think we could advertise the fact... the angle is that it doesn't need development so the community decided we don't want a developer cause its so solid! And then spend our mint on marketing instead of development

LOL,  Cheesy

Say that again , after your client starts popping up saying checkpoint is too old.
And no dev to update the client to remove the message.
By the way , you have ~ 12 months from the last checkpoint update before that message shows up.

 Cool
Testing Crypto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 497


X__________________________________


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 08:56:41 AM
 #17872

Honestly, you cannot compare Mint to Apex. Apex has bad pos parameters. For example 24 hour min stake time...60 second blocks, that is terrible for security, which is exactly what we are talking about. Mintcoin has less than 30 second confirmations and 20 days min stake time and a max coin weight of 40 days so you cannot save up weight indefinitely to create an attack. It is secure both from too little, and too much staking time. You need a balance and MINT has this balance, for performance, security, and minting fairness, imo.

Yes I can compare mint to apex, Different PoS Parameter do affect security, but PoS is still PoS,
your current parameters will only work well with a PoS 1 style coin, as not everyone can keep a system online 20 days straight, that is why min stake age would have to be lowered with a PoS II coin.

The only point I am stating is if there is a switch to PoS II, it will require a change in min stake time, no way around it. When you get a new dev , he will say the same thing, if you want your users to be able to stake a PoS II style coin. If you don't switch to PoS II , then parameters change is not an issue, only if you do switch.

PoS security is determined by the # of coins staking and their weight.
Currently 3% staking at the time of this post, comes out to 635,5557,506 mintcoins.
51% attack
635,557,506*51%= 324,134,328.06
if someone waited until max weight is achieved 20X
324,134,328.06 /20 = 16,206,716.403

Then for only ~16,206,716.403 mintcoins purchased , someone could doublespend on your network after reaching full weight.

FYI:
Your Max weight is 20 days not 40 days, weight does not begin until 20 days and it stops gaining weight at 40 days. So only 20X the amount per block is the max weight, not 40x.

 Cool



I would agree with this, as one who opened both my Mint & Zeit wallets over 6 months later to stake (I would almost call them twins, if you look close enough at the specs). I only had a very small amount though, still remember Ray's face palm of my post & it should be a must to be able to open any one of these apps up months/years or even decades if there is desire to (otherwise why is this being created, to always trade 100% of holdings & not hand down to future generations or save up for school/car/house/etc..)? I try to look past the flaws, since I know they will be worked out in the future & just hope that future is close enough this realm of time we stand in Undecided

X_________________   X_________________ Everywhere a X_________________
kiklo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
June 10, 2015, 09:20:29 AM
 #17873

I would agree with this, as one who opened both my Mint & Zeit wallets over 6 months later to stake (I would almost call them twins, if you look close enough at the specs). I only had a very small amount though, still remember Ray's face palm of my post & it should be a must to be able to open any one of these apps up months/years or even decades if there is desire to (otherwise why is this being created, to always trade 100% of holdings & not hand down to future generations or save up for school/car/house/etc..)? I try to look past the flaws, since I know they will be worked out in the future & just hope that future is close enough this realm of time we stand in Undecided

PoS 1 coins can be very secure , Mint just needs to follows Zeit's example.
We have the ZeitKnights, that can easily fend off any 51% attacks, it is one of the reasons they were formed. Mint just needs to form its own guardians to protect its coin, and not leave it a job open to everybody that nobody does. If they do that PoS II would be unnecessary, but if they don't, then PoS II is Mint best chance to be safe from such attacks, but at the cost of a great feature.


 Cool
iHashFury
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 141


Add Simplicity


View Profile WWW
June 10, 2015, 10:00:47 AM
 #17874

Start MINTing on arm processors - low power cheep nodes for everyone Smiley

Startup your Raspberry-pi's and CuBox-i's

A bit of a hack needed but it works

https://github.com/MintcoinCommunity/Mintcoin-Desktop-Wallet/issues/11#issuecomment-101760242

Update on Mintcoin on ARM architecture:

3 weeks to download the block chain - stable wallet and no issues
Transferred all my mint so I have another 20 days wait to start low power minting.  Cool

Glad to see the price improve  Wink


I will be securing the network 24/7 soon. Just waiting the 20 days.

Keep it simple - if its not broke don't fix it!  Cool

Buy a rpi or Cubox and run it 24/7 - 3 amp per day is very cheep to run

http://j.mp/ALTCAP - http://bit.ly/BitShares-Exchange - https://t.me/BitSharesDEX - http://bit.ly/ihashfury

"If you owe a bank thousands, you have a problem; owe a bank millions, the bank has a problem" Wink
deepcreek
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 11:16:01 AM
 #17875

I would agree with this, as one who opened both my Mint & Zeit wallets over 6 months later to stake (I would almost call them twins, if you look close enough at the specs). I only had a very small amount though, still remember Ray's face palm of my post & it should be a must to be able to open any one of these apps up months/years or even decades if there is desire to (otherwise why is this being created, to always trade 100% of holdings & not hand down to future generations or save up for school/car/house/etc..)? I try to look past the flaws, since I know they will be worked out in the future & just hope that future is close enough this realm of time we stand in Undecided

PoS 1 coins can be very secure , Mint just needs to follows Zeit's example.
We have the ZeitKnights, that can easily fend off any 51% attacks, it is one of the reasons they were formed. Mint just needs to form its own guardians to protect its coin, and not leave it a job open to everybody that nobody does. If they do that PoS II would be unnecessary, but if they don't, then PoS II is Mint best chance to be safe from such attacks, but at the cost of a great feature.


 Cool

The thing is about this is,  relatively small ammount of people got large ammount of coins. Am i right? Also a 51% attack is less likely to happen nowadays because people who are buying large amounts are not keeping them on a exchange since all of the major exchange hacks/frauds. It`s a good thing off course. Treat an exchange as a exchange and not as a bank. Always remember that people. 
cryptomommy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 425


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 03:01:06 PM
 #17876

New Mintcoin Podcast is Out!

Enjoy!
HeavenCoins
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 05:04:50 PM
 #17877

I would agree with this, as one who opened both my Mint & Zeit wallets over 6 months later to stake (I would almost call them twins, if you look close enough at the specs). I only had a very small amount though, still remember Ray's face palm of my post & it should be a must to be able to open any one of these apps up months/years or even decades if there is desire to (otherwise why is this being created, to always trade 100% of holdings & not hand down to future generations or save up for school/car/house/etc..)? I try to look past the flaws, since I know they will be worked out in the future & just hope that future is close enough this realm of time we stand in Undecided

PoS 1 coins can be very secure , Mint just needs to follows Zeit's example.
We have the ZeitKnights, that can easily fend off any 51% attacks, it is one of the reasons they were formed. Mint just needs to form its own guardians to protect its coin, and not leave it a job open to everybody that nobody does. If they do that PoS II would be unnecessary, but if they don't, then PoS II is Mint best chance to be safe from such attacks, but at the cost of a great feature.


 Cool

The thing is about this is,  relatively small ammount of people got large ammount of coins. Am i right? Also a 51% attack is less likely to happen nowadays because people who are buying large amounts are not keeping them on a exchange since all of the major exchange hacks/frauds. It`s a good thing off course. Treat an exchange as a exchange and not as a bank. Always remember that people. 

What is considered a large amount of mints?
DragoStefan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 230


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 05:51:00 PM
 #17878

Hello!
I have a problem with the wallet's syncing with the new wallet. Can I find a blockchain to download so I can get pass 30% of the blockchain?
Thank you!
HeavenCoins
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 06:12:05 PM
 #17879

Hello!
I have a problem with the wallet's syncing with the new wallet. Can I find a blockchain to download so I can get pass 30% of the blockchain?
Thank you!

http://www.mintcoinofficial.com/
Here, go to "download wallet", and then "download bootstrap.dat"
DragoStefan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 230


View Profile
June 10, 2015, 06:52:14 PM
 #17880

Hello!
I have a problem with the wallet's syncing with the new wallet. Can I find a blockchain to download so I can get pass 30% of the blockchain?
Thank you!

http://www.mintcoinofficial.com/
Here, go to "download wallet", and then "download bootstrap.dat"

Got it done! Thanks!
Pages: « 1 ... 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 [894] 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 ... 1013 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!