★ ZEIT ★ [COMMUNITY & KNIGHTS] [ULTRA LOW INFLATION] [MICRO-PAYMENTS]

[angryacorn]

Something from Greece!!!!!!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NFdnIVOK_M

HEEEEY MALAKA!

[Anonymousg64]

DOGE was once in the range of 10-30 satoshi, all you need is a popular idea, movement or meme that unites people into a community for your coin to succeed.

and DOGE supply growth rate was much higher

It went even below to 7-8 satochi.

Anyhow I want to give some explanation on a fork because some people seem not to understand what it means. The term fork is used a lot in the open source community. A fork is a new version of a piece of software but has the same base as the original software were it is created from. In the open source community, if the community is not happy with the way how the software is improved or handled, usually the community creates a fork and goes a different way (example is open office vs libre office). In that case 2 pieces of software doing almost the same thing exist at that moment. This is in such cases not a problem.

For cryptocoins this is different. The strength of cryptocoin is that the wallet and the cryptocurrency algorithm is distributed. So when a part of the systems using the cryptocoin software disappear, it still works as many systems over the whole world has that piece of software.

There is also a downside. When you need to update the software, all those systems needs to be updated. If that is not done properly, the system has 2 different pieces of software and then the question is which is correct. Normally the latest is always seen as correct, but sometimes it is also the largest distributed that is chosen. A fork is not always bad. A new version that does not alter the algorithm itself, can exist next to the older version, but in a distributed system, it is important to update when needed. However you always have to wait until the developper has officially released the version. It is possible that a developper added a version he still want to test in a real situation, so please wait always on a official release. And this looks what went wrong with CryptoRush. They saw a code change and immediately changed the code and therefor creating a fork themselves. Their system were not capable of handling this and more went wrong in their system.

So a fork is usually only a treat when new software is released. (there are other ways, but less common) What happens when a fork is created: if the fork is seen as the incorrect version, all the coins created by the fork are becoming useless and all the transfers with that fork are turned back to the situation from where the fork is created. If the new fork is the correct one, then the same thing applies to the older version, but only from the moment the fork was created.

So I hope it explains for some people how it works. The treat of having more then 51 percent in a pool has nothing to do with a fork. It has to do with approving your own transactions and create a way to do double spending. The threat doesn't occur that easy, but it has happened ones that an ex-member of a bitcoin pool has tried to do it, but he didn't succeed eventually. Anyhow spreading to different pools is important. A small risk is still a risk.

At your service ...

im gona have to correct you that, a fork in the case of blockchain will only happen if a change in the software pertains to the block validation rules.

[Rikkie7]

DOGE was once in the range of 10-30 satoshi, all you need is a popular idea, movement or meme that unites people into a community for your coin to succeed.

and DOGE supply growth rate was much higher

It went even below to 7-8 satochi.

Anyhow I want to give some explanation on a fork because some people seem not to understand what it means. The term fork is used a lot in the open source community. A fork is a new version of a piece of software but has the same base as the original software were it is created from. In the open source community, if the community is not happy with the way how the software is improved or handled, usually the community creates a fork and goes a different way (example is open office vs libre office). In that case 2 pieces of software doing almost the same thing exist at that moment. This is in such cases not a problem.

For cryptocoins this is different. The strength of cryptocoin is that the wallet and the cryptocurrency algorithm is distributed. So when a part of the systems using the cryptocoin software disappear, it still works as many systems over the whole world has that piece of software.

There is also a downside. When you need to update the software, all those systems needs to be updated. If that is not done properly, the system has 2 different pieces of software and then the question is which is correct. Normally the latest is always seen as correct, but sometimes it is also the largest distributed that is chosen. A fork is not always bad. A new version that does not alter the algorithm itself, can exist next to the older version, but in a distributed system, it is important to update when needed. However you always have to wait until the developper has officially released the version. It is possible that a developper added a version he still want to test in a real situation, so please wait always on a official release. And this looks what went wrong with CryptoRush. They saw a code change and immediately changed the code and therefor creating a fork themselves. Their system were not capable of handling this and more went wrong in their system.

So a fork is usually only a treat when new software is released. (there are other ways, but less common) What happens when a fork is created: if the fork is seen as the incorrect version, all the coins created by the fork are becoming useless and all the transfers with that fork are turned back to the situation from where the fork is created. If the new fork is the correct one, then the same thing applies to the older version, but only from the moment the fork was created.

So I hope it explains for some people how it works. The treat of having more then 51 percent in a pool has nothing to do with a fork. It has to do with approving your own transactions and create a way to do double spending. The threat doesn't occur that easy, but it has happened ones that an ex-member of a bitcoin pool has tried to do it, but he didn't succeed eventually. Anyhow spreading to different pools is important. A small risk is still a risk.

At your service ...

im gona have to correct you that, a fork in the case of blockchain will only happen if a change in the software pertains to the block validation rules.

Correct. Thanks. Didn't explain that part well.

[TuxNut]

DOGE was once in the range of 10-30 satoshi, all you need is a popular idea, movement or meme that unites people into a community for your coin to succeed.

and DOGE supply growth rate was much higher

It went even below to 7-8 satochi.

Anyhow I want to give some explanation on a fork because some people seem not to understand what it means. The term fork is used a lot in the open source community. A fork is a new version of a piece of software but has the same base as the original software were it is created from. In the open source community, if the community is not happy with the way how the software is improved or handled, usually the community creates a fork and goes a different way (example is open office vs libre office). In that case 2 pieces of software doing almost the same thing exist at that moment. This is in such cases not a problem.

For cryptocoins this is different. The strength of cryptocoin is that the wallet and the cryptocurrency algorithm is distributed. So when a part of the systems using the cryptocoin software disappear, it still works as many systems over the whole world has that piece of software.

There is also a downside. When you need to update the software, all those systems needs to be updated. If that is not done properly, the system has 2 different pieces of software and then the question is which is correct. Normally the latest is always seen as correct, but sometimes it is also the largest distributed that is chosen. A fork is not always bad. A new version that does not alter the algorithm itself, can exist next to the older version, but in a distributed system, it is important to update when needed. However you always have to wait until the developper has officially released the version. It is possible that a developper added a version he still want to test in a real situation, so please wait always on a official release. And this looks what went wrong with CryptoRush. They saw a code change and immediately changed the code and therefor creating a fork themselves. Their system were not capable of handling this and more went wrong in their system.

So a fork is usually only a treat when new software is released. (there are other ways, but less common) What happens when a fork is created: if the fork is seen as the incorrect version, all the coins created by the fork are becoming useless and all the transfers with that fork are turned back to the situation from where the fork is created. If the new fork is the correct one, then the same thing applies to the older version, but only from the moment the fork was created.

So I hope it explains for some people how it works. The treat of having more then 51 percent in a pool has nothing to do with a fork. It has to do with approving your own transactions and create a way to do double spending. The threat doesn't occur that easy, but it has happened ones that an ex-member of a bitcoin pool has tried to do it, but he didn't succeed eventually. Anyhow spreading to different pools is important. A small risk is still a risk.

At your service ...

im gona have to correct you that, a fork in the case of blockchain will only happen if a change in the software pertains to the block validation rules.

Correct. Thanks. Didn't explain that part well.

While what you've said is correct, having a pool with ~51% gives that pool the chances to manipulate that chain and thus fork it as all the miners pointing there will back up their change, we're simply trusting that pool not to get up to anything malicious and also trusting that their security is tight enough that a malicious attacker can't take advantage of the powerful pool and fork it for their own gains.
While it's possible to piece things back together, it creates a lot of work and means that folks end up without coins they should have or have a delay in gaining control of their coins so may not be able to trade them when needed and miss paying their electric bill. It's easy to say it's repairable, but when looking back it's easy to forget about the average miner/traders who lose out in the meantime.

Hence, while, as you state, the risk is low, the fact it exists at all and is so easily solved, we shouldn't even need to have these discussions still. It's been a 'thing' for SO long and is widely discussed in MSM that folks who don't even mine/trade have heard of 51% attacks (even if they don't know what it really means usually).

Anyway, this is a hybrid coin, so the problem will be further reduced in 5 days and be pretty much null and void here in a few weeks.

Feel free to correct me where I may be wrong, I'm not 100% of much in life and Cryptos are certainly a way off from 100%

[Rikkie7]

DOGE was once in the range of 10-30 satoshi, all you need is a popular idea, movement or meme that unites people into a community for your coin to succeed.

and DOGE supply growth rate was much higher

It went even below to 7-8 satochi.

Anyhow I want to give some explanation on a fork because some people seem not to understand what it means. The term fork is used a lot in the open source community. A fork is a new version of a piece of software but has the same base as the original software were it is created from. In the open source community, if the community is not happy with the way how the software is improved or handled, usually the community creates a fork and goes a different way (example is open office vs libre office). In that case 2 pieces of software doing almost the same thing exist at that moment. This is in such cases not a problem.

For cryptocoins this is different. The strength of cryptocoin is that the wallet and the cryptocurrency algorithm is distributed. So when a part of the systems using the cryptocoin software disappear, it still works as many systems over the whole world has that piece of software.

There is also a downside. When you need to update the software, all those systems needs to be updated. If that is not done properly, the system has 2 different pieces of software and then the question is which is correct. Normally the latest is always seen as correct, but sometimes it is also the largest distributed that is chosen. A fork is not always bad. A new version that does not alter the algorithm itself, can exist next to the older version, but in a distributed system, it is important to update when needed. However you always have to wait until the developper has officially released the version. It is possible that a developper added a version he still want to test in a real situation, so please wait always on a official release. And this looks what went wrong with CryptoRush. They saw a code change and immediately changed the code and therefor creating a fork themselves. Their system were not capable of handling this and more went wrong in their system.

So a fork is usually only a treat when new software is released. (there are other ways, but less common) What happens when a fork is created: if the fork is seen as the incorrect version, all the coins created by the fork are becoming useless and all the transfers with that fork are turned back to the situation from where the fork is created. If the new fork is the correct one, then the same thing applies to the older version, but only from the moment the fork was created.

So I hope it explains for some people how it works. The treat of having more then 51 percent in a pool has nothing to do with a fork. It has to do with approving your own transactions and create a way to do double spending. The threat doesn't occur that easy, but it has happened ones that an ex-member of a bitcoin pool has tried to do it, but he didn't succeed eventually. Anyhow spreading to different pools is important. A small risk is still a risk.

At your service ...

im gona have to correct you that, a fork in the case of blockchain will only happen if a change in the software pertains to the block validation rules.

Correct. Thanks. Didn't explain that part well.

While what you've said is correct, having a pool with ~51% gives that pool the chances to manipulate that chain and thus fork it as all the miners pointing there will back up their change, we're simply trusting that pool not to get up to anything malicious and also trusting that their security is tight enough that a malicious attacker can't take advantage of the powerful pool and fork it for their own gains.
While it's possible to piece things back together, it creates a lot of work and means that folks end up without coins they should have or have a delay in gaining control of their coins so may not be able to trade them when needed and miss paying their electric bill. It's easy to say it's repairable, but when looking back it's easy to forget about the average miner/traders who lose out in the meantime.

Hence, while, as you state, the risk is low, the fact it exists at all and is so easily solved, we shouldn't even need to have these discussions still. It's been a 'thing' for SO long and is widely discussed in MSM that folks who don't even mine/trade have heard of 51% attacks (even if they don't know what it really means usually).

Anyway, this is a hybrid coin, so the problem will be further reduced in 5 days and be pretty much null and void here in a few weeks.

Feel free to correct me where I may be wrong, I'm not 100% of much in life and Cryptos are certainly a way off from 100%

You're right, but when a pool would deliberately fork a coin, that fork would probably be declared invalid, so little reasons for a pool tot do that. Anyhow my idea was to inform people and you helped by giving your ideas and that's what this coin is and should be all about. Spreading the correct information, no lies.

[TuxNut]

Yep, totally, I'm just one of those that babbles a lot and always has to have the final word.

No me

Stop it, I want it.


grrrr bastage <pokes eye out>

hahaha

[Anonymousg64]

all you can do with >51% is Denial of Service or Double Spend, it does not allow you to fork, that would require a change in the software.

and if you change the software for the pool and cause a fork, your users would find they cant use their minted ZEIT on an exchange or with their own wallet.

so doing a fork with >51% would destroy the >51% you had on the other network and leave you with 100% of network of the fork and useless coins

[BiffyMcBifferstein]

I'll consider another pool for a while.  But... every pool says their the best.  HashStrike is the only one that's lived up to it, in my opinion.  Let's hear it.  What other Zeit pool is good and with 0-1% fees?

[BeholdTheTrueWake]

I'll consider another pool for a while.  But... every pool says their the best.  HashStrike is the only one that's lived up to it, in my opinion.  Let's hear it.  What other Zeit pool is good and with 0-1% fees?

zeit.hash.so
pretty good pool 1%
come on over and add some hashing power.

[Anonymousg64]

I'll consider another pool for a while.  But... every pool says their the best.  HashStrike is the only one that's lived up to it, in my opinion.  Let's hear it.  What other Zeit pool is good and with 0-1% fees?

zeit.hash.so
zeit.dedicatedpool.com

[stormia]

Hey all, I'm a big fan of PoS coins and I think what BC and Mintcoin are doing with their multipools will help them grow a lot and I think ZEIT would benefit greatly if one of these were set up by the time the transition to PoS occurs. Basically, since it wont be profitable to mine ZEIT once PoW reward is down to 1 coin/block, these multipools direct you to mine the most profitable altcoin and then they convert it and pay you out in ZEIT. This provides additional buy support from miners despite there being no more PoW supply for your coin, so addition demand but no additional supply http://mintpool.us/mint/index.php

[nut0.1]

http://zeitgeistmediaproject.com/main/?p=1697

[BiffyMcBifferstein]

Cool.  I'll do the switch in a day or so.  It pains me to leave HashStrike, but I'll do it temporarily for the good of the coin!

[TuxNut]

Unofficial poll

Mentioned this previously but thought I'd create a poll to see what you bunch of Zeiters think.

This is NOT official and would simply be a way of letting the devs know what us lot think of this.

What should happen with transaction fees?

Send to miners as usual to increase the block reward so it's >=1 (from a few weeks from now)

Send to a Zeitcoin address that could be set up as a donation address where folks could voluntarily add more Zeits and those funds could then go to a charity / cause / project whatever that we decide is worthy

Destroy the fees (as happens with some other coins) to negate some of the inflation that will occur due to the high PoS rewards as we COULD hit trillions of coins if everyone just sits on them staking (unlikely, but... hey a little exaggerations always fun)

It's a Straw Poll baby

[TuxNut]

I'll consider another pool for a while.  But... every pool says their the best.  HashStrike is the only one that's lived up to it, in my opinion.  Let's hear it.  What other Zeit pool is good and with 0-1% fees?

I've used Hashfaster and iMine.at
Both were... pools, they did what they were meant to do :|

[Anonymousg64]

Unofficial poll

Mentioned this previously but thought I'd create a poll to see what you bunch of Zeiters think.

This is NOT official and would simply be a way of letting the devs know what us lot think of this.

What should happen with transaction fees?

Send to miners as usual to increase the block reward so it's >=1 (from a few weeks from now)

Send to a Zeitcoin address that could be set up as a donation address where folks could voluntarily add more Zeits and those funds could then go to a charity / cause / project whatever that we decide is worthy

Destroy the fees (as happens with some other coins) to negate some of the inflation that will occur due to the high PoS rewards as we COULD hit trillions of coins if everyone just sits on them staking (unlikely, but... hey a little exaggerations always fun)

It's a Straw Poll baby

there really isnt any point in destroying fees, they are quite small, even in comparison to the PoW after week 6

i dont think many would like forced donations and a centralized donation address for everything charity

[TuxNut]

there really isnt any point in destroying fees, they are quite small, even in comparison to the PoW after week 6

i dont think many would like forced donations and a centralized donation address for everything charity

I put destroy for completeness.

Isn't the point of Zeit to help the world and improve it. To do this, we need funding.
There will be a LOT of people that (hopefully) use Zeit, but don't believe in the cause, getting a little something from them is a good thing surely and will help us to stand apart from most of the other coins.

And what do you think transaction fees are anyway but a forced donation?

[angryacorn]

what if we fund a kickstart company that is trying to use technology for the better and not only for profit? so we identify a few projects and then as a community discuss and choose one we think is best and most promising and start to fund them?

[TuxNut]

In the hopes it doesn't get missed popping this back here (sorry guys, I don't mean to be a dick, but I am, so tough!)!

Unofficial poll

Mentioned this previously but thought I'd create a poll to see what you bunch of Zeiters think.

This is NOT official and would simply be a way of letting the devs know what us lot think of this.

What should happen with transaction fees?

Send to miners as usual to increase the block reward so it's >=1 (from a few weeks from now)

Send to a Zeitcoin address that could be set up as a donation address where folks could voluntarily add more Zeits and those funds could then go to a charity / cause / project whatever that we decide is worthy

Destroy the fees (as happens with some other coins) to negate some of the inflation that will occur due to the high PoS rewards as we COULD hit trillions of coins if everyone just sits on them staking (unlikely, but... hey a little exaggerations always fun)

It's a Straw Poll baby

Anyway:

what if we fund a kickstart company that is trying to use technology for the better and not only for profit? so we identify a few projects and then as a community discuss and choose one we think is best and most promising and start to fund them?

For me personally, that would not be cool. Kickstarter's are almost always for-profit, we'd be helping perpetuate the problem as they'd need to complete in the marketplace so half their revenue would go on advertising and marketing, if the business does well, they'd start looking to increase profits etc....

While I love kickstarter, indiegogo and the like, I don't think it's right for this coin/movement thing.

My 2 satoshis.

[CapSER2.0]

Zeitcoin is preparing to take off for the moon!