[ANNOUNCE] Tenebrix, a CPU-friendly, GPU-hostile cryptocurrency

[Lolcust]

...
So far, I have proposed donating 1.5m to the faucet, that amount cuts into my laundry without killing it and doesn't affect what I consider realistic potential development expenses, so if the kind folks herein are satisfied with that amount being withdrawn from my direct influence into the care of a project-beneficial automatic service, I will do it without much grief

How about this: You take all the Tenebrix accounts that have more or equal of 25 Tenebrix before block 8473 and you distribute evenly 5 million of your coins and leave 2.7 for the faucet.

I still like this idea as the best

...
So far, I have proposed donating 1.5m to the faucet, that amount cuts into my laundry without killing it and doesn't affect what I consider realistic potential development expenses, so if the kind folks herein are satisfied with that amount being withdrawn from my direct influence into the care of a project-beneficial automatic service, I will do it without much grief

How about this: You take all the Tenebrix accounts that have more or equal of 25 Tenebrix before block 8473 and you distribute evenly 5 million of your coins and leave 2.7 for the faucet.

I still like this idea as the best

+1

Either this, or they should be invalidated by a future optional update, if the new blockchain takes over, the coins are invalid.

Well, aside from technical issues, that will mean not only complete death of the "really solid TBX laundry"



 but also a very very meek and dry faucet and zero dev support budget.

Having said that, how do we go about establishing the dominance of a given approach ?

Should we have a vote with all options submitted ? generic vote a-la "invalidate / move all to Faucet / move part to Faucet" ? For how long should  poll run?

(We could go the shouting match route, but text communication is likely to throw a monkey wrench into those plans )

Also, terrytibs, should the Faucet route be taken, can I still count on your support with organizing the faucet proper ?

[1714201457]

1714201457

[1714201457]

1714201457

[michaelmclees]

I have mined a block.  How long until I can spend it?

Coinbase maturity is 150 blocks, but blocks are 1/2 of bitcoin's value (5 mins), so about 12 hours (currently will be less because blocks are still a bit faster than target value....Some serious CPU-crunchin' going on there)
 

Thanks.  I didn't know that if one double clicks the transaction, all the info is displayed in a popup window.

On that note, the window is incorrect because it says that generated coins need to wait 120 blocks, rather than the correct 150.

It displays the blocks remaining, this means that there have been 30 blocks generated since you generated said block.

No, I mean where it says "Generated coins must wait 120 blocks before they can be spent. When you generated this block, it was broadcast to the network to be added to the block chain. If it fails to get into the chain, it will change to "not accepted" and not be spendable. This may occasionally happen if another node generates a block within a few seconds of yours."

While I'm posting, what to do with the premined coins?  Destroy them, save for what you would have mined in the past couple days with everyone else.  The idea that you're creating a GPU resistant chain with millions premined to yourself tells everyone involved only one thing; you want the blockchain to reflect the sort of result that would occur in a world where only you are allowed to GPU mine.  Figure out what you would have mined since your announcement, add 10,000 for your efforts, and destroy the rest in a public transaction.  Perhaps you can send them to a bad address or something.  Without destroying the vast bulk of those coins, you're sabotaging your own project.

Also, is there a way to explore the blockchain?  You claim to have sent hundreds of coins to some people.  How can we verify this?

[Lolcust]

I have mined a block.  How long until I can spend it?

Coinbase maturity is 150 blocks, but blocks are 1/2 of bitcoin's value (5 mins), so about 12 hours (currently will be less because blocks are still a bit faster than target value....Some serious CPU-crunchin' going on there)
 

Thanks.  I didn't know that if one double clicks the transaction, all the info is displayed in a popup window.

On that note, the window is incorrect because it says that generated coins need to wait 120 blocks, rather than the correct 150.

It displays the blocks remaining, this means that there have been 30 blocks generated since you generated said block.

No, I mean where it says "Generated coins must wait 120 blocks before they can be spent. When you generated this block, it was broadcast to the network to be added to the block chain. If it fails to get into the chain, it will change to "not accepted" and not be spendable. This may occasionally happen if another node generates a block within a few seconds of yours."

While I'm posting, what to do with the premined coins?  Destroy them, save for what you would have mined in the past couple days with everyone else.  The idea that you're creating a GPU resistant chain with millions premined to yourself tells everyone involved only one thing; you want the blockchain to reflect the sort of result that would occur in a world where only you are allowed to GPU mine.  Figure out what you would have mined since your announcement, add 10,000 for your efforts, and destroy the rest in a public transaction.  Perhaps you can send them to a bad address or something.  Without destroying the vast bulk of those coins, you're sabotaging your own project.

Also, is there a way to explore the blockchain?  You claim to have sent hundreds of coins to some people.  How can we verify this?

Ahhh, missed that bit of text, will fix

Blockchain explorer will be added soon. Man, it's three days old and methinks that given the limited number of those people pm-ing them is trivial.

I didn't send then "fund" coins tho, only the coins generated as I was building the first 150-something blocks in order to introduce a few blockchain lockins early on ( I hardly needed those few thousand mined TBX given the existence of fund ;-/ )

[terrytibbs]

Also, terrytibs, should the Faucet route be taken, can I still count on your support with organizing the faucet proper ?

By all means - I'll work on getting a daemon up and running on my VPS once I get my personal schedule cleared up.

[Lolcust]

Also, terrytibs, should the Faucet route be taken, can I still count on your support with organizing the faucet proper ?

By all means - I'll work on getting a daemon up and running on my VPS once I get my personal schedule cleared up.

Okay, then we just need to sort out how do we pick a generalized "resolution proposal", meanwhile I need to keep prodding the daemon into submission and get meself a new IRC bouncer (it looks like the old one has died completely)

[michaelmclees]

I have mined a block.  How long until I can spend it?

Coinbase maturity is 150 blocks, but blocks are 1/2 of bitcoin's value (5 mins), so about 12 hours (currently will be less because blocks are still a bit faster than target value....Some serious CPU-crunchin' going on there)
 

Thanks.  I didn't know that if one double clicks the transaction, all the info is displayed in a popup window.

On that note, the window is incorrect because it says that generated coins need to wait 120 blocks, rather than the correct 150.

It displays the blocks remaining, this means that there have been 30 blocks generated since you generated said block.

No, I mean where it says "Generated coins must wait 120 blocks before they can be spent. When you generated this block, it was broadcast to the network to be added to the block chain. If it fails to get into the chain, it will change to "not accepted" and not be spendable. This may occasionally happen if another node generates a block within a few seconds of yours."

While I'm posting, what to do with the premined coins?  Destroy them, save for what you would have mined in the past couple days with everyone else.  The idea that you're creating a GPU resistant chain with millions premined to yourself tells everyone involved only one thing; you want the blockchain to reflect the sort of result that would occur in a world where only you are allowed to GPU mine.  Figure out what you would have mined since your announcement, add 10,000 for your efforts, and destroy the rest in a public transaction.  Perhaps you can send them to a bad address or something.  Without destroying the vast bulk of those coins, you're sabotaging your own project.

Also, is there a way to explore the blockchain?  You claim to have sent hundreds of coins to some people.  How can we verify this?

Ahhh, missed that bit of text, will fix

Blockchain explorer will be added soon. Man, it's three days old and methinks that given the limited number of those people pm-ing them is trivial.

I didn't send then "fund" coins tho, only the coins generated as I was building the first 150-something blocks in order to introduce a few blockchain lockins early on ( I hardly needed those few thousand mined TBX given the existence of fund ;-/ )

I'm sure there will be a blockchain explorer if this takes off at all.  I was only curious if there were one now to use.

In any event, destroy the fund.  It will be the death of your chain.

[Lolcust]

In any event, destroy the fund.  It will be the death of your chain.

With all due respect, I am curious to hear some kind of reasoned economic argument behind such a statement.

To me, the idea seems highly peculiar, especially since none of the LOLPREMINE chains (ixcoin being most notorious,  with a blatant authorial sellof and an attempt to "bribe" Gavin, of all people) show any signs of actually dying in any meaningful way, which sort of serves as an empirical falsification to the "premining kills chains" hypothesis.

I mean I can get why people are upset with it (even despite the fact that there is no upper limit on coinage here so I didn't squat a finite resource), but it seems to me that the claim of lack of viability in premined chains (even as boring ones as ix) is observably inaccurate.

In fact, somewhat sadly, it is the one of the boringcoins that was not premined (i0) that seems to be in some kind of hot water

[michaelmclees]

In any event, destroy the fund.  It will be the death of your chain.

With all due respect, I am curious to hear some kind of reasoned economic argument behind such a statement.

To me, the idea seems highly peculiar, especially since none of the LOLPREMINE chains (ixcoin being most notorious,  with a blatant authorial sellof and an attempt to "bribe" Gavin, of all people) show any signs of actually dying in any meaningful way, which sort of serves as an empirical falsification to the "premining kills chains" hypothesis.

Again, all you've done is create the kind of result that would occur in Bitcoin if only you could GPU mine.  And you did it not by being smarter or faster or more resourceful than everyone else (like everyone else just couldn't figure out GPU mining), you did it by denying the opportunity for everyone to do for real what you did fictitiously (proof of work).

It's like you decided to host a marathon and asked others to join you in the footrace from San Francisco to New York.  By the way, when the gun goes off, you're going to start in New Jersey.  There is the possibility that you'll restart the race at a later time along with everyone else through some means (a faucet or sending coins or something), but honestly, that possibility is the only thing that will keep everyone else in the race.  The more remote that possibility, the fewer people are going to continue running, or mining, as the case is here.

[Lolcust]

It's like you decided to host a marathon and asked others to join you in the footrace from San Francisco to New York.  By the way, when the gun goes off, you're going to start in New Jersey.  There is the possibility that you'll restart the race at a later time along with everyone else through some means (a faucet or sending coins or something), but honestly, that possibility is the only thing that will keep everyone else in the race.  The more remote that possibility, the fewer people are going to continue running, or mining, as the case is here.

1) I find race analogy fallacious - it could be considered somewhat analogous if I intended to directly deploy the fund on the market, which I obviously do not.

You seem to employ some form of competition ethics (hence "marathon" analogies), a field I find peculiar (I generally do not grok "competitive" sports) and quite frankly find inapplicable to the process of creation of mathematic quasi-value abstracts.


2) More importantly, the question, as I posed it, is not about an argument from some competitive-ethical PoV but an economic explanation that would both support the "premining causes chain death" claim and simultaneously explain why we don't see die-offs in pre-mined chains IRL

If some kind of competitive-motive model really was at work in them cryptothingie markets, then ixcoin should have already died, which it obviously did not do.

That leads me to suspect that cryptocoinmarkets are dominated by profit-motivated miners, not "sports-spirit ethics" motivated miners

[michaelmclees]

It's like you decided to host a marathon and asked others to join you in the footrace from San Francisco to New York.  By the way, when the gun goes off, you're going to start in New Jersey.  There is the possibility that you'll restart the race at a later time along with everyone else through some means (a faucet or sending coins or something), but honestly, that possibility is the only thing that will keep everyone else in the race.  The more remote that possibility, the fewer people are going to continue running, or mining, as the case is here.

If some kind of competitive-motive model really was at work in them cryptothingie markets, then ixcoin should have already died, which it obviously did not do.

That leads me to suspect that cryptocoinmarkets are dominated by profit-motivated miners, not "sports-spirit ethics" motivated miners

I predict the failure of Ixcoin in the near future.

Miners are motivated by profit.  The problem is, you've saturated the market with so many coins (whether or not they're used any time soon) that if their use is to be expected, the thousands of potential CPU miners hashing away for 25TBX per month will perpetually be mining at a loss.

[ineededausername]

So when will an exchange go up?

[dishwara]

@Lolcust
Put a poll for premined coins with many options, so that members choose what they want.
Run it for 10 days & then close it. According to result, divide the premined coins.

[terrytibbs]

Lolcust, where do you usually hang on IRC?

[Lolcust]

It's like you decided to host a marathon and asked others to join you in the footrace from San Francisco to New York.  By the way, when the gun goes off, you're going to start in New Jersey.  There is the possibility that you'll restart the race at a later time along with everyone else through some means (a faucet or sending coins or something), but honestly, that possibility is the only thing that will keep everyone else in the race.  The more remote that possibility, the fewer people are going to continue running, or mining, as the case is here.

If some kind of competitive-motive model really was at work in them cryptothingie markets, then ixcoin should have already died, which it obviously did not do.

That leads me to suspect that cryptocoinmarkets are dominated by profit-motivated miners, not "sports-spirit ethics" motivated miners

I predict the failure of Ixcoin in the near future.

When ?

A year ? A month ?

Miners are motivated by profit.  The problem is, you've saturated the market with so many coins (whether or not they're used any time soon) that if their use is to be expected, the thousands of potential CPU miners hashing away for 25TBX per month will perpetually be mining at a loss.

No, if something is not exposed to trade, it is not contributing to market saturation

Markets deal with "is and are" not "maybe could be".

If you were right, the gold market, the diamond market, and many, many Veblen goods markets would have imploded by now due to existence of large-scale hoarders who hypothetically *could* drop an immense amount of those entities (diamonds, gold, etc.) onto the market (DeBeers can single-handedly collapse the diamonds price, so by your logic this *possibility* alone should be driving diamond price down)

Also, fiat currencies should have, by your logic, should have all popped by now because not only do governments have a fuckton, they can create more at a whim, a possibility which should have by your logic caused trader exodus and death.

So when will an exchange go up?

Currently the exchange (and the faucet) need me to finish the daemon.

The exchange is wrestling me for a "liquidity boost" btw (not an exuberant one, exactly equal to Solidcoin's "first exchange" boost, but still, every single person wanna bounty, bounty bounty )

Lolcust, where do you usually hang on IRC?

Usually #Tenebrix #Geistgeld #bitcoin-dev #multicoin #namecoin and some others on freenode, but my bouncer server is dead, so it can take some time to get back to IRC

[EskimoBob]

it is really simple:
1) Hold on to the ~7.6 mill for your self and have millions of coins worth absolutely nothing.
2) Divide the premined coins between those brave miners who started out when everyone else was laughing at this project and you will have a strong suporter group who can start putting up their own bounties.  If you keep N coins for good deeds, those coins will have a value and it will be multiple times more valuable.
Take all the Tenebrix accounts that have more or equal of 25 Tenebrix before block 8473 and you distribute evenly 5-6 million of your coins and leave 1.5 for the faucet.
Why block 8473? Because when I had this idea, block count was showing 8474. 

3) You can not pay for development with coin that have no value.
4) Your laundry will be useless if no one needs it (because coin has no value - you own most of them)
5) Faucet is nice idea and can be run on donation from community

[Lolcust]

@Lolcust
Put a poll for premined coins with many options, so that members choose what they want.
Run it for 10 days & then close it. According to result, divide the premined coins.

Well, the number of options is still in dispute, and of course there is going to be the "I will never support TBX and I vote" effect

it is really simple:
1) Hold on to the ~7.6 mill for your self and have millions of coins worth absolutely nothing.
2) Divide the premined coins between those brave miners who started out when everyone else was laughing at this project and you will have a strong suporter group who can start putting up their own bounties.  If you keep N coins for good deeds, those coins will have a value and it will be multiple times more valuable.
Take all the Tenebrix accounts that have more or equal of 25 Tenebrix before block 8473 and you distribute evenly 5-6 million of your coins and leave 1.5 for the faucet.
Why block 8473? Because when I had this idea, block count was showing 8474.  

3) You can not pay for development with coin that have no value.
4) Your laundry will be useless if no one needs it (because coin has no value - you own most of them)
5) Faucet is nice idea and can be run on donation from community

You still seem to run on the assumption that price is determined by coins-in-existence, not coins-on-exchanges.

This is untrue for BTC, untrue for SC, untrue for ixcoin (one can of course claim that they will die reeealllly soon, but given that their author already sold-off and there is unlikely to be any more ixcoin hoarders left, the mechanism of ixcoin death seems questionable), and untrue for any "proper IRL market" I care to recall.

Also, spreading the fund between other accounts would (obviously) drop per-TBX value because then the "extra-TBX" are guaranteed to enter the market


P.S.:

Also, exchanges, being spoiled by SC and ix pretty strongly prefer to get a bounty (usually not an exuberant one, within the number SC1 used, give or take, though Another Exchange (not btc-e) asked me for 500 000+ geists, while btc-e agreed to slightly above six thousands). Pray tell, what should a hypothetical non-premined coin do with that kind of "emergent tradition" ? Suckitup ?

[EskimoBob]

let me make this really simple:
two options:
#1  - One guy with 7.7 million coins who promises in anonymous net forum not to sell the coin and be a really good guy wile rest of the community only has a tiny fraction of total the coins. 
#2  - hundreds of adopters (early miners) with coins who like to see it succeeded and last for a long time because they have invested time and resources. 

Let me see now...
1 guy with 7.7 million coin or strong community with 7.7 million coins... 

[Lolcust]

let me make this really simple:
two options:
#1  - One guy with 7.7 million coins who promises in anonymous net forum not to sell the coin and be a really good guy wile rest of the community only has a tiny fraction of total the coins.  
#2  - hundreds of adopters (early miners) with coins who like to see it succeeded and last for a long time because they have invested time and resources.  

Let me see now...
1 guy with 7.7 million coin or strong community with 7.7 million coins...  

It seems you have completely ignored the "redistribution drops per-coin price" part and have not addressed the simple observation that neither pre-mined chains nor "srs markets" with strong hoarder players (diamonds, gold, you name it) show any sign on collapse.

In fact, DeBeers have more influence on diamonds market than I have on fledgling TBX market and my influence is only gonna shrink.

Should we, by your logic, expect a collapse in the price of diamonds ?

If no, why not ? DeBeers essentially have a "fuckton of diamonds, premined" for all practical intents and purposes.

[Spacy]

Lolcust => startChain => premineMillions => promote => findStupids => Profit 

[Lolcust]

Lolcust => startChain => premineMillions => promote => findStupids => Profit 

Spacy=>searchEvidence=>ifNotFound=>make claim