Bitcoin Forum
July 30, 2015, 04:12:57 PM *
News: New! Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.11.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What should we do with the NYAN algorithm?
Change it to X-11 w/ same distribution
Change it to pure POS w/ same distribution
Change it to pure POS with decreased supply

Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 [56]
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][NYAN] NyanCoin - ★★★V1.2 Released! Now Listed on Cryptsy! ★★★  (Read 47971 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
CoinaDay
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile

Ignore
July 12, 2015, 08:40:16 PM
 #1101


Very well-said. Hope we can see a new wallet soon.  Wink

Honestly speaking, I do suggest you can do it step-by-step. If I were you, I might update the block version and release the new wallet first, and then do gitian build later. Even Litecoin didn't implement all important changes in one single update.


Thanks! My initially stated goal was to have the code available by the end of August, and I still hope to meet that (although the actual time of the hard-fork may still be a month or two after that).

I can totally understand that perspective. But I think of this as being a deliberately "LTS" (long-term support) type of release: we should err on the side of taking longer and making a version we'll be comfortable with people using for a year or more to come rather than just trying to get something out soon. This is both because we don't want to require people to update frequently, but also because it's a hard-fork, so I think we need to have a compelling level of quality to make sure we switch cleanly. [And on that subject, I'm not sure if I'll keep Litecoin's switch at a given block height, or whether I'll try to put in a consensus version-marking change akin to how the block size increase is proposed to happen in Bitcoin; I think the latter is a better, more robust method to make sure a switchover is clean, but it would require a significant functional change from the Litecoin code, which is risky.]

I think that doing the gitian build is reasonably central to the goals of the new release. It helps to improve security via the deterministic build, and it should be a cleaner build process once we have it working properly. We don't want to release without, at the least, a *nix and Windows build (our current Mac build may or not be working, so it might be less essential), and I think this is a reasonably good way to do it. Also, one of our goals it to release an up-to-date, streamlined set of instructions for the gitian build, aimed at someone starting out on a fresh system with reasonable technical knowledge. As far as we (myself and jwflame, a community member on /r/nyancoins who has also attempted this build), there seems to be something missing in the existing published steps, although I still need to reproduce it again (I'd tried on a VPS which didn't work; it was suggested to try on bare metal to make sure that wasn't the issue) (currently downloading Ubuntu 64bit; I accidentally installed 32bit locally instead which of course didn't work).

I think this is the last major hurdle: I've looked at the diffs before and at the new code, and I think it should be relatively straightforward to "reapply" the original changes, although, of course, until I actually have it running I won't truly believe it. So I think it's reasonable to be spending a fair amount of time on this step (although the actual time I've spent on it hasn't been huge; it's just that it's hard to carve out a lot of time and energy for it with my current work. I'm getting better about that I think though; I'm hoping to step up my progress).

If this works out as I hope, we will see a Nyancoins 2.0 which will be capable of carrying us for another year. I expect there will continue to be various vulnerabilities announced upstream, of course, and I hope to have minor releases incorporating the fixes, but I'm hoping and expecting not to need another hard-fork, and that we will have "good enough" security on this new client to not "require" people to upgrade (for instance, the current client is theoretically vulnerable to the heartbleed issues, but it didn't really seem relevant to us, because it attacked QR codes, which we don't have any known reader for currently, and some other aspect I don't recall which didn't seem relevant; similarly, the latest security issues announced were some sort of DoS attack: our biggest threat for DoS has been our own inconsistent hashing power).

Bottom line: I think we're in a reasonably good position on the technical front and will continue to a Nyancoins 2.0 in a timely fashion, and that it will be a security improvement capable of meeting our needs for a year or more to come after that.

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1438272777
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1438272777

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1438272777
Reply with quote  #2

1438272777
Report to moderator
1438272777
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1438272777

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1438272777
Reply with quote  #2

1438272777
Report to moderator
1438272777
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1438272777

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1438272777
Reply with quote  #2

1438272777
Report to moderator
CartmanSPC
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile WWW

Ignore
July 13, 2015, 05:42:02 PM
 #1102

Just noticed... The difficulty algo needs to be looked at/fixed. We have some people playing with the blockchain. I feel this is more important than getting the client code updated to the latest LTC release. Fixing the algo will require a hardfork so it needs to be done carefully with plenty of time (perhaps months) for people to upgrade.

Look at blocks around 769152 to see what im talking about.

CoinaDay
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile

Ignore
July 19, 2015, 01:05:56 AM
 #1103

Just noticed... The difficulty algo needs to be looked at/fixed. We have some people playing with the blockchain. I feel this is more important than getting the client code updated to the latest LTC release. Fixing the algo will require a hardfork so it needs to be done carefully with plenty of time (perhaps months) for people to upgrade.

Look at blocks around 769152 to see what im talking about.

I appreciate you calling attention to this. We've faced problems with this before. I'll note that a handy workaround that I've used before is adding a high (100-300 NYAN) transaction fee to make it profitable for prohashing to solve the next block (the fundamental problem is external hit-and-run pools taking advantage of our low difficulty to get a lot of easy NYAN, then leaving once the difficulty is gone, and not having enough baseline hashing power to make that unprofitable to start and to solve it once it happens; prohashing is smart enough to consider pending transaction fees, and so since the block reward is 168.5, it can be pretty cheap to make the coin profitable enough to mine).

Copying my reply from Reddit before for laziness (for the rest reading this, the whole thread is at: https://www.reddit.com/r/nyancoins/comments/3dnjth/blockchain_being_toyed_with/) :

I appreciate the suggestion, but I am not yet convinced of the necessity.

I am extremely conservative about making hard fork changes. The switch to PoS would have been huge and I would have been willing to try the risks involved. But that developer disappeared, and I think at this point, we need to work with what we've got.

I don't think that our system is unworkable. We just need people, like yourself, who are willing and able to mine Nyancoins for the sake of Nyancoins rather than an immediate market sale (which is unworkable because it means we lose the miners with a difficulty spike).

The difficulty *should* spike when we get a lot of hashing power coming in.

I don't think the alternatives suggested are preferable. AuxPOW: this means that miners who don't have any inherent interest in Nyancoins get the mining rewards. I would much rather have people decide to dedicate hardware in order to mine. AuxPOW allows cost-free attacks: we could face exactly the same situation we're facing now (hit-and-run) and they wouldn't even lose the use of the hardware for mining other coins during the hit. This would allow them to drive up the difficulty far more at no cost. In addition, we lose the incentive to dedicated miners.

This is, to a large extent, a learning coin. We want to provide opportunities to newcomers in all areas. One of the ways to do this, in mining, is to keep what we have: we have a very low barrier to entry for people to be able to get a mining unit which will be able to make a significant impact on our reliability and allow them to earn a significant amount of Nyancoins. If we were on AuxPOW, the barrier to entry would be significantly higher.

I don't know the details of POSv, but as I recall, and from the name, it's a PoS variant. There are a number of issues with this. One of them is that it means abandoning our current major pool, prohashing. I don't want to do this. Although my current plan for Nyancoins 2.0 involves a hardfork, it's one that I believe they will follow (they need an exchange, and that's the more challenging part, but they won't inherently resist it). They are good enough that if we had consensus, they might agree to stop mining the old PoW if we went PoS, but they are a Scrypt PoW based pool and would not be able to help secure our network if we went to PoS.

I do think it's worth considering a PoS Nyancoins in the future. But I believe that Nyancoins PoW must and will continue no matter what. Further, I don't believe we're strong enough for two coins at the present time. What this means to me is: we work with what we've got and we consider fancy new stuff in the future (counting PoS here even though, yes, it's stable and established at this point; but it's shiny and new compared to Nyancoins tech).

I hope I can persuade you, as it sounds like you could be a major miner for us. I would much rather see us have a small, relatively centralized couple of Nekonauts mining rather than AuxPOW. And I don't want the risk (guarantee) of a community split that would come from PoS at this point. If PoS had come when it was first proposed, or even a few months ago, I think it might have had a chance. And, of course, as a major holder, I would have, at least on the surface, stood to benefit quite a bit from eliminating the dependence on mining hardware and changing the rewards to going to the large holders willing to maintain a server. I would have basically taken over the processing at that point.

But, again, with where we are now, I think we need to move forward as best we can. I don't think the difficulty algorithm is fundamentally flawed. Instead, we are simply seeing what happens when we depend on external-to-our-community power which dwarfs our own.
CartmanSPC
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile WWW

Ignore
July 20, 2015, 05:40:22 PM
 #1104

The problem is that the difficulty is not spiking fast enough. I would look at some other implementations of difficulty....not sure which coins have a good difficulty algo...perhaps Globalcoin? Also maybe the current algo from potcoin (they are forking to POSv...but not because of the diff algo).

....and I don't think moving away from mining equipment is a bad thing at all...it's actually preferred...and this is coming from someone with a lot invested in mining equipment!

CoinaDay
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile

Ignore
July 25, 2015, 10:23:56 PM
 #1105

The problem is that the difficulty is not spiking fast enough. I would look at some other implementations of difficulty....not sure which coins have a good difficulty algo...perhaps Globalcoin? Also maybe the current algo from potcoin (they are forking to POSv...but not because of the diff algo).

....and I don't think moving away from mining equipment is a bad thing at all...it's actually preferred...and this is coming from someone with a lot invested in mining equipment!

Ah, I gotcha. Right, if the difficulty spiked faster, then there would be much less incentive for the hit-and-runs. On the other hand, the same thing could be done and we'd still need mining equipment to get it unstuck.

Yeah, in general I wouldn't be opposed to moving away from mining equipment; it's going away from the existing pool (prohashing) more disappointing. I haven't had a chance to be watching the Nyanchain lately; is it running a bit better? I do think "Nyancoins PoW" is going to keep going. Someday I think it would be cool to have a "Nyancoins PoS" forked from it, and perhaps we could even update the difficulty algorithm to work a bit better, but I do think we ultimately just need good baseline mining equipment support to get Nyancoins PoW to work well, no difficulty algorithm can compensate for that.

So I think we'll keep having use for some of that mining equipment if you can spare some. ;-)
Pages: « 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 [56]
  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!