Bitcoin Forum
May 06, 2021, 04:41:39 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][MRO] Monero - an anonymous coin based on CryptoNote technology  (Read 23403 times)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2660
Merit: 1167



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 04:54:31 AM
 #41

Relaunch with a GPU algorithm unless a Myriadcoin style PoW setup can be achieved.  Name the last successful CPU only coin...it doesn't exist (no, Bitcoin doesn't count).

There no successful coins other than bitcoin. The second largest coin is 5% of bitcoin's market cap. The third largest is 1%.  It gets rapidly worse from there.

If there is ever a successful coin other than bitcoin (unclear, but maybe) it will take new approaches, not anything like any of the current alts.

Personally I don't believe hash algorithm even matters very much. By focusing on that you are getting distracted from anything that does (or at least might) matter.




1620276099
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1620276099

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1620276099
Reply with quote  #2

1620276099
Report to moderator
1620276099
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1620276099

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1620276099
Reply with quote  #2

1620276099
Report to moderator
1620276099
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1620276099

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1620276099
Reply with quote  #2

1620276099
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin network protocol was designed to be extremely flexible. It can be used to create timed transactions, escrow transactions, multi-signature transactions, etc. The current features of the client only hint at what will be possible in the future.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1620276099
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1620276099

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1620276099
Reply with quote  #2

1620276099
Report to moderator
eizh
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 500



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 04:57:52 AM
 #42

I think you guys are being hyper-critical of minor pieces, the name, the emission schedule etc. So many coins released with such less care, I'd hate for this crowd to get stuck on the small stuff.  No exchanges have worked with CryptoNight based coins yet, C-cex was having a hard time... The general crypto community are unfamiliar with what CryptoNote based coins can bring to the table and why it is important.
 (and while im typing) Roach why would we every switch to gpu if you want to mine a gpu coin pick from the hundred available theyre released every day.

Name maybe, but emission schedule is in no way minor. It's one of the defining features of a coin. If you're off, the network becomes unsustainable in the long run. One could argue BTC is successful because it incentivizes miners for at least a decade or two.
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:03:38 AM
 #43

I'm baffled that people are arguing about us making the emission schedule more fair.  I'm an early adopter.  This halves my money, and it's what I want to do.

There's another change that needs to be talked about too: we don't believe that microscopic levels of inflation achieved at 9 or 10 years will secure a proof-of-work network.  In fact, there's a vast amount of evidence from DogeCoin and InfiniteCoin that it will not.  So, we'd like to fix reward when it goes between 0.25 - 1.00 coins.  To do so, we need to further bitshift values to decrease the supply under 2^64-1 atomic units to accommodate this.

Again, this hurts early adopters (like me), but is designed to ensure the correct operation of the chain in the long run.  It's less than a week old, and if we're going to hardfork in economic changes that make sense we should do it now.

We're real devs turning monero into the coin it should have been, and our active commitment should be nothing but good news.  Fuck the pump and dumps, we're here to create something with value that people can use.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
jasemoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1008


Forget-about-it


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:07:36 AM
 #44

eizh I believe as long as theres a reward, if the coins valuable enough it will be worth it to mine.  But aside from that I don't care if the coin changes the number I guess I'm with tacotime.  You all have a better grasp on the scheduling and usability for longevity than I do absolutely.  If i end up with 100 instead of 200 and the coins better off I'm cool with that.  

$MAID & $BTC other than that some short hodls and some long held garbage.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2660
Merit: 1167



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:08:53 AM
 #45

There's another change that needs to be talked about too: we don't believe that microscopic levels of inflation achieved at 9 or 10 years will secure a proof-of-work network.

It's not microscopic at 9 or 10 years, with the revised schedule. Take a look at the graph a few posts back. With the original schedule, that is more the case. With the revised schedule this is more an issue of 20 years out.  

I'm not positive but I think most of the other alts such as doge have much shorter schedules, so the issue is more urgent there.
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:10:45 AM
 #46

There's another change that needs to be talked about too: we don't believe that microscopic levels of inflation achieved at 9 or 10 years will secure a proof-of-work network.

It's not microscopic at 9 or 10 years, with the revised schedule. Take a look at the graph a few posts back. With the original schedule, that is more the case. With the revised schedule this is more an issue of 20 years out.  

I'm not positive but I think most of the other alts such as doge have much shorter schedules, so the issue is more urgent there.


Yeah it's a little less dire now, I will calculate inflation percent soon and we can collectively decide if it's too low after a certain time.

It's a problem with Bitcoin too, so we could also ignore it and wait to see how Bitcoin eventually handles it.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:10:55 AM
 #47

There no successful coins other than bitcoin. The second largest coin is 5% of bitcoin's market cap. The third largest is 1%.  It gets rapidly worse from there.

If there is ever a successful coin other than bitcoin (unclear, but maybe) it will take new approaches, not anything like any of the current alts.

Personally I don't believe hash algorithm even matters very much. By focusing on that you are getting distracted from anything that does (or at least might) matter.

You are the one that does not understand the big picture.  Why was Dogecoin successful at all and has beaten Bitcoin in daily transactions several times?  The answer is market penetration.

A currency is useless without high market penetration.  Guess what algos give the highest market penetration?  GPU.

When people try to CPU mine and earn 1 penny a day due to botnets, most people cease to bother doing so, and the coin dies from lack of interest.

The future of PoW, if GPU only can't be achieved, is Myriadcoin style coins where you can mine with anything and receive some kind of reward.

......ATLANT......
..Real Estate Blockchain Platform..
                    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                    ████████████░
                  ▄██████████████░
                 ▒███████▄████████░
                ▒█████████░████████░
                ▀███████▀█████████
                  ██████████████
           ███████▐██▀████▐██▄████████░
          ▄████▄█████████▒████▌█████████░
         ███████▄█████████▀██████████████░
        █████████▌█████████▐█████▄████████░
        ▀█████████████████▐███████████████
          █████▀████████ ░███████████████
    ██████▐██████████▄████████████████████████░
  ▄████▄████████▐███████████████░▄▄▄▄░████████░
 ▄██████▄█████████▐█████▄█████████▀████▄█████████░
███████████████████▐█████▄█████████▐██████████████░
▀████████▀█████████▒██████████████▐█████▀█████████
  ████████████████ █████▀█████████████████████████
   ▀██▀██████████ ▐█████████████  ▀██▀██████████
    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀██████████

..INVEST  ●  RENT  ●  TRADE..
 ✓Assurance     ✓Price Discovery     ✓Liquidity     ✓Low Fees





███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███

◣Whitepaper ◣ANN ThreadTelegram
◣ Facebook     ◣ Reddit          ◣ Slack


███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███








Hero/Legendary members
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2660
Merit: 1167



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:13:26 AM
 #48

There's another change that needs to be talked about too: we don't believe that microscopic levels of inflation achieved at 9 or 10 years will secure a proof-of-work network.

It's not microscopic at 9 or 10 years, with the revised schedule. Take a look at the graph a few posts back. With the original schedule, that is more the case. With the revised schedule this is more an issue of 20 years out.  

I'm not positive but I think most of the other alts such as doge have much shorter schedules, so the issue is more urgent there.


Yeah it's a little less dire now, I will calculate inflation percent soon and we can collectively decide if it's too low after a certain time.

There will be some time when its still likely to be a problem. Almost everyone agrees with this, although I guess there are a few die hard bitcoin originalists who don't see a need to change ever.

I'm less sure about the solution though. I'd rather some mechanism that provides whatever rewards are necessary rather than trying to guess at that 20 years ahead of time, but I'm not sure at all what mechanism that is. Some small inflation rate is probably better than nothing.



jasemoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610
Merit: 1008


Forget-about-it


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:14:33 AM
 #49

Roach the algo takes 3.5 GB ram to run on the original, Its not a walk in the park for a cpu...

$MAID & $BTC other than that some short hodls and some long held garbage.
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:15:50 AM
 #50

There no successful coins other than bitcoin. The second largest coin is 5% of bitcoin's market cap. The third largest is 1%.  It gets rapidly worse from there.

If there is ever a successful coin other than bitcoin (unclear, but maybe) it will take new approaches, not anything like any of the current alts.

Personally I don't believe hash algorithm even matters very much. By focusing on that you are getting distracted from anything that does (or at least might) matter.

You are the one that does not understand the big picture.  Why was Dogecoin successful at all and has beaten Bitcoin in daily transactions several times?  The answer is market penetration.

A currency is useless without high market penetration.  Guess what algos give the highest market penetration?  GPU.

When people try to CPU mine and earn 1 penny a day due to botnets, most people cease to bother doing so, and the coin dies.

The future of PoW is Myriadcoin style coins where you can mine with anything and receive some kind of reward.

No.  The second biggest cryptocurrency is Liteoin.  I CPU mined Litecoin for months.  It was a CPU coin at generation and was flooded with botnets and large computing clusters early on.  The coin succeeded despite this, because eventually a GPU algo came out.  I'm sure we'll see the same thing for the cryptonote hashing algo.

Myriadcoin introduces vulnerability when miners hop between difficulties and the difficulty of one hashing algo for GPU goes down and another goes up.  It's not a proper solution.  We saw a similar thing with RUCoin (which had SHA256 and scrypt) and the coin failed.

You seem to forget what the function of this is: money.  As long as people find the privacy afforded to be favourable, it will have a usage and monetary value.  This is the whole point.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
the_darkness
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:27:05 AM
 #51

Again, this hurts early adopters (like me), but is designed to ensure the correct operation of the chain in the long run.  It's less than a week old, and if we're going to hardfork in economic changes that make sense we should do it now.

We're real devs turning monero into the coin it should have been, and our active commitment should be nothing but good news.  Fuck the pump and dumps, we're here to create something with value that people can use.

I think this is the right attitude. Like you I stand to "lose" from this decision in having my early mining halved, but I welcome it. Given how scammy the average coin launch is, I think maximizing fairness for everyone is the right move. Combining a fair distribution with the innovation of Cryptonote tech could be what differentiates Monero from other coins.
r0ach
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:32:19 AM
 #52

We saw a similar thing with RUCoin (which had SHA256 and scrypt) and the coin failed.

If you're saying weighting can cause a big disturbance from a minor shift in hashing, that phenomenon seems much less likely to occur with 4 algos instead of 2 if weighted properly.

It's obviously also much more cartel proof.

People like Gmaxwell seem to claim that a group like KNCminer would create ASICs for all four chains.

I don't really see groups like that monopolizing all four chains into eternity, especially if each algo is radically different from one another.

......ATLANT......
..Real Estate Blockchain Platform..
                    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                    ████████████░
                  ▄██████████████░
                 ▒███████▄████████░
                ▒█████████░████████░
                ▀███████▀█████████
                  ██████████████
           ███████▐██▀████▐██▄████████░
          ▄████▄█████████▒████▌█████████░
         ███████▄█████████▀██████████████░
        █████████▌█████████▐█████▄████████░
        ▀█████████████████▐███████████████
          █████▀████████ ░███████████████
    ██████▐██████████▄████████████████████████░
  ▄████▄████████▐███████████████░▄▄▄▄░████████░
 ▄██████▄█████████▐█████▄█████████▀████▄█████████░
███████████████████▐█████▄█████████▐██████████████░
▀████████▀█████████▒██████████████▐█████▀█████████
  ████████████████ █████▀█████████████████████████
   ▀██▀██████████ ▐█████████████  ▀██▀██████████
    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀██████████

..INVEST  ●  RENT  ●  TRADE..
 ✓Assurance     ✓Price Discovery     ✓Liquidity     ✓Low Fees





███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███

◣Whitepaper ◣ANN ThreadTelegram
◣ Facebook     ◣ Reddit          ◣ Slack


███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███








Hero/Legendary members
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1005



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 05:35:22 AM
 #53

We saw a similar thing with RUCoin (which had SHA256 and scrypt) and the coin failed.

If you're saying weighting can cause a big disturbance from a minor shift in hashing, that phenomenon seems much less likely to occur with 4 algos instead of 2 if weighted properly.

It's obviously also much more cartel proof.

People like Gmaxwell seem to claim that a group like KNCminer would create ASICs for all four chains.

I don't really see groups like that monopolizing all four chains into eternity, especially if each algo is radically different from one another.


They aren't radically different.  All you need to implement is an instruction cache that does most of the normal transformations for hashing algorithms (eg bit rotations).  Then you can make an ASIC for any hashing algorithm that can be implemented in 20k-100k circuits.  scrypt was neat in that it required some memory, but then they made ASICs with memory.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
abit2slo
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 08:00:15 AM
 #54

is MRO equal to BMR? what's going on?

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2660
Merit: 1167



View Profile
April 24, 2014, 08:39:37 AM
 #55

is MRO equal to BMR? what's going on?

Rename: Bitmonero -> Monero

BitcoinForumator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1120
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 09:05:17 AM
 #56

When I command "start_mining ..." I get this message:

Error: mining has NOT been started: daemon is busy. Please try later
bengtåke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 309
Merit: 250

confused developer


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 09:08:10 AM
 #57

When I command "start_mining ..." I get this message:

Error: mining has NOT been started: daemon is busy. Please try later


The daemon is likely still synching the blockchain

BTC: 1HoDKDn6Gk7mggAhbRVA1T9UAU8kFAA6sy
abit2slo
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 09:10:49 AM
 #58

will there be any other changes? hard-fork with reduced emission?
do you want to orginize smth like the "core dev team" or the "Secret Monero Community"? why does thankful_for _today as main dev doesn't participate in discussion?
everything i see there is pretty strange. just like bytecoin (BCN)  Grin

thankful_for_today
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 101


View Profile
April 24, 2014, 09:11:23 AM
 #59

Hello!

It is very good that you've created this thread. I'm ok about renaming.

But I can't agree with any protocol changes based only on decisions made by bitcointalk.org people. This is because not all miners are continiously reading forum.

Any decision about protocol changes are to be made by hashpower-based voting. From my side I will agree on such a decision only if more than 50% of miners will agree. Without even such a simple majority from miners such changes are meaningless.

In case of hardfork that isn't supported by majority of miners the network will split into two nets with low-power fork and high-power not-forking branches. I don't think that this will be good for anybody.

Such a voting is easy to be implemented by setting minor_version of blocks to a specific value and counting decisions made after 1000 of blocks. Do you agree with such a procedure?

Vote for BitMonero on Comkort exchange: https://comkort.com/vote
BTC: 1F1Ryrc2gvJQsVNTS5xvCxKugMjvbFRzX4
imready2rock
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2014, 09:20:51 AM
 #60

Hello!

It is very good that you've created this thread. I'm ok about renaming.

But I can't agree with any protocol changes based only on decisions made by bitcointalk.org people. This is because not all miners are continiously reading forum.

Any decision about protocol changes are to be made by hashpower-based voting. From my side I will agree on such a decision only if more than 50% of miners will agree. Without even such a simple majority from miners such changes are meaningless.

Such a voting is easy to be implemented by setting minor_version of blocks to a specific value and counting decisions made after 1000 of blocks. Do you agree with such a procedure?

Seems alright to me. You should create a voting instructions tho, cause it's not looks like an easy process Wink

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!