Bitcoin Forum
December 15, 2017, 08:20:20 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Where would you prefer the VRC/VRM exchange pair be?
Bittrex
Poloniex
Both
Other

Pages: « 1 ... 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 [634] 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 ... 964 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][VRC] VeriCoin Proof of Stake-Time Currency | New Roadmap Released  (Read 1346463 times)
InvestorPerson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 316


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 06:32:16 PM
 #12661

it has to triple in value to reach what it was before in value..
i bet a LOT of guys have lost a LOT of money so far..

it will rebound, don't you worry

why? because

-summertime  Grin
-because TA voodoo tells so  Cheesy
-altcryptos are serious business and not about catching the next pump  Roll Eyes
-because "insert name of coin you baghold" will be the next crypto messiah   Tongue
-other stupid arguments to keep them bagholders bagholding. or buying more (how evil)


 Grin Grin Grin

edit

almost forgot the evil manipulations that are occuring on all coins across the market

...what else. it's not the lack of interest or new money flowing into the market, no it's manipulating bots

whoever sells below 29k now must be a complete retard....
1513369220
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513369220

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513369220
Reply with quote  #2

1513369220
Report to moderator
1513369220
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513369220

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513369220
Reply with quote  #2

1513369220
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Xosihc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 534

Hello


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 06:42:33 PM
 #12662

Noob at trading here - but I am looking o invest more in vrc at this price but need some help. Is it better to put buy orders in in many ranges or would it be better to just assist in creating a bigger buy wall at 11k  ?

You're definitely better putting in limit orders down the books. I'm actually about to head out for a few hours but I'd be happy to give you a little trading 101 if you're interested PM me.  Smiley

Edit: I would suggest right now waiting to see if it can break 10k if it does that then there is a chance it could go a low as 6.5k (which is the previous low)
luisb
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 06:45:28 PM
 #12663

I am not a mathematician, obviously, but my common sense tells me bundles about the potential repercussions of such a huge number of fictitious coins staking at any given moment, but I'll patiently wait for that update in the wallet that allows everyone to actually know the real number of coins that VRC has for the 26.8 mill given by Patrick is obviously an approximation I don't know based on what... 30 (or more) million coins staking can produce a significant number of additional coins by the day.

26.8M coins exist (26,811,507 right now to be exact). http://chainz.cryptoid.info/vrc has a realtime count of coins in the blockchain. There is no discrepency with the total coins in existence-- just that you didn't understand that network stake weight is not exactly the same as total coin count.

Well it isn't just that I "didn't understand...". It is more like we all are finding out that you really don't know what the wallet can do and that Doug, the wallet man, has a "loose" concept, to say the least, of what "too much bigger (a number)" actually is. And since I hope I have demonstrated the staggering nature of the difference in numbers, it is IMPLIED that it has an equally staggering influence in the number of coins being "mined" through staking.

This is very significant since it all seems -and I certainly hope to be 100% wrong in my assumption- to be so ahead of the "limit" of approximately 2.25% yearly maximum total interest that it's not funny at all. There will be time, very soon indeed, to address the repercussions of those hugely bigger numbers staking, so I won't anticipate anything hoping, indeed, to be somewhat as out of touch with the final interest as Dough is regarding the "too big a number" statement.

I think Barrabas you have raised a very valid point (usually you do) by questioning the difference between the network weight and number of actual staking coins. It's quite encouraging that the devs made effort to address the issue by answering here and have listened you, and then EffectsToCasuse said a new function will be in a new release to provide users with the number of actual staking coins.

To go forward I would suggest don't be so harsh with the devs please. I have been also very critical with the devs, but these young guys obviously aren't scammers. I guess under pressure people make unwise moves like moving 200k to bittrex, but the fact that Pnosker disclosed this info himself indicate that it wasn't a malicious action. Pnosker is trying his best to address all rumours about him and he made clear that he didn't buy any BMW M3 from the vericoin money, he is still committed to the project, he is not dumping his coins, he didn't move the 200K to bittrex to dump it. Plus these guys offer a very transparent process for investors by putting their name in the public domain.
In my opinion there is a very positive change in the last 1-2 days, namely that the devs started to talk to the community in this thread and instead of just communicating with their cheerleading brigade they started to interact with the investors, bag holders, potential new investors of this thread as well. I guess we shouldn't alienate the devs from this process, let's keep the momentum going, let them deliver something that hopefully change the down trend.

I don't think I am hard at all simply putting out very obvious concerns of everyone that is invested in this coin. I mean, I have been stating many times during the past weeks how strong this community is in support of the coin, based on those staking numbers and now I have discovered they are absolutely meaningless. Not only that, while not-too-sharp choir boy socal and other fan boys put on the tin foil to "explain" the spiral in price, the apparent growth of staking figures made almost impossible for anyone to have any coins at the exchanges. And a lot of people do. And a lot of people, is, obviously, selling. Much more than buying (that's why the price goes down). So I believe I have been actually quite mild in clearing up a bit -still far from being quite clear, by the way-, the mess of the "fake" numbers (for lack of a better word).

Perspective: A max of 28+ "coins" were staking yesterday at some point. Historical maximum. Now, since the total coins in existence were 26.8 mill, we have found there are somewhat "ghost", "fake", whatever "coins" that appear in that tracking tool that don't really exist (I am still struggling with how those appear and, more worrysome, DO stake). Patrick has kindly try his best at explaining that somehow, even though they are staking, the whole interest to be created, yearly, will not increment to more than 2.5% annually. That's reassuring but certainly it doesn't look even remotely that way from what we now know... which is very little.

This divergence between the real coins and the Phantom coins staking, according to Doug, the wallet man, would not be "too much bigger"... I hope I have demonstrated clearly that the difference can be as significant as to actually DOUBLE the number of the real coins: My contention is that while the Phantom number reached over 28 million yesterday, they real number could be, in fact, half of that. Or even less. And I explained why: The amount of coins currently deposited in the exchanges and NOT STAKING, in my opinion would be at least 6-8 million, probably more. Add to that the "in transit" coins or otherwise not live (staking) coins -they need a minimum of 8 hours to begin staking-, and you can end up with a lot of coins that are not staking and therefore are not part of of those record 28+m.

Finally, additionally, 28+ million coins staking stake quite a bit of coins. Those staked coins are not PHANTOM coins, they are real. So real that, after 8 hours, they stake themselves, thus increasing the total number of coins in existence. Again, Patrick insisted that no more than 2.5% will be staked by any coin in any year. That's, again, reassuring, but the reality of the picture I just put, again, in perspective, makes it quite difficult to really believe.

I believe these are matters of great significance and need to be clear out completely so investors know where they have invested and retain their confidence in the project. Much more important that the spiral of the price that I have pointed out many times already is not VRC's affair but every other similar coin out there.

As for the not-so-sharp, bots are not market manipulators, bots are machine traders programmed to buy and sell minimal amounts for minimal profits. They don't manipulate the price at all. If a bot buys 800 sat below the previous price, 20 VRC, that's not manipulating anything, just following a program. The bot will buy just the same if the price is propped up by a big buyer. And will sell it likewise, regardless of the price. Once again: The price is going down for the simplest and always true of reasons: There are more sellers than buyers.

Also clarifying for the not-so-sharp, volume is quite different from inflows. The former indicates there's trading taken place; the later indicates there's investing occurring. If one or more traders take it to VRC and they buy and sell a lot, not only they do it but the bots also do it -that's what their program does-, thus resulting in very high volume... and not necessarily any real movement in price; on the other hand if a lot of people buys VRC but don't sell it, it is called inflow and means people is investing, buying VRC, bringing new money to it. And the price, mathematically, goes higher. In technical terms, it is called hitting the bid (dumping) or hitting the ask (pumping). Clear now Will?

And you must be the *sharpest* vrc investor in this thread for raising doubts publicly about the total number of coins and the integrity of the devs instead of reassuring yourself asking them kindly IN PRIVATE FIRST to clarify this to you via PM and to everyone else in a public post... so either you are

A) really ''smart'', you dumped your vrc and bought cloak or some else shitcoin, so you have an agenda coming here to spread fear and doubt like bobSLOB and smoothtard

B) seriously retarded, a possibility that I personally doubt but don't exclude, after reviewing your rants and deducing you obviously use at least half your brain

In any case you should be the #1 enemy of vrc in that list, worst than bobSLOB and smoothRETARDATION, but hey on the other hand we really enjoy your trading and english lectures please keep em coming...
barabbas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 06:57:15 PM
 #12664

[...]Perspective: A max of 28+ "coins" were staking yesterday at some point. Historical maximum. Now, since the total coins in existence were 26.8 mill, we have found there are somewhat "ghost", "fake", whatever "coins" that appear in that tracking tool that don't really exist (I am still struggling with how those appear and, more worrysome, DO stake)[...]

You're making a mountain out of a mole hill. There are no fake numbers, unless you count the ones that you fabricated in your post while attempting to make some point. The stake weight number, which factors in both the quantity AND age of the coins in a block, is a valid number and it's a crucial part of the PoS system.

The crux of the matter is the fact that, while the sum total of the stake weight for every block that's staking is useful for getting a relative feel for how many coins are staking, it can obviously be a misleading number. It would make more sense to the end user for the wallet to display the actual number of coins staking, but as pnosker stated and effects elaborated upon, there is currently no function in place to display that number.

So what should we do? Should we ignorantly shout, "THIS IS BULLSHIT!!" and allude to suspicious behavior on the part of the devs? Or should we perhaps try to understand what that number actually represents and/or ask the devs if they can provide us with a different number that is a more accurate representation of the number of coins staking? I vote for the later.

It sounds like this feature can be added and that effects actually intends to add it to a future build. Let's not beat a dead horse.

Well it is not an easy thing to understand... especially if if it not put bin the proper perspective, so there's no beating any dead horse, it is, in fact, a very alive horse no matter how you choose to look at it. And pretending that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill is NOT, definitely, the proper perspective. Whatever this is, is something neither Patrick nor Doug quite understand, which in itself is very worrysome. I think we all agree that it is an immediate need to have a wallet that tells us how many REAL coins are staking at any and all times, that doesn't need repeating and should be implemented as a very top, top priority.

The real worrysome part, though is the "not too much bigger number". Again, it is a hugely bigger number in fact and, so far, we have no idea how such a huge number staking is not going to produce an inflation way superior to 2.5% annually. That is a MAJOR concern, not a mole hill. And, quite frankly, I don't believe the devs actually know how that network weighted stake is going to en up affecting the actual number of coins produced. We, the average investors, certainly do not. You are probably not an average investor and maybe you do know how 28+ million coins staking are going to produce less than 2.5% interest in half that amount of coins. If you do, I'd appreciate enormously that you explain it to me and to all here in layman's terms more or less. To me if 10 million coins stake for a year, the maximum number of new coins produced would be 250k. Now if those same 10 million are indeed REALLY staking, but the phantom figure is 20 million instead, the resulting amount of coin s produced at the end of the year would be 500k instead, thus resulting in a 5% inflation instead of the 2.5%.

I'm sure I'm making my rudimentary calculations erroneously, but I am equally sure you, the devs and other gifted mathematicians can clear fast and easily my error and set me on the right track within seconds. I'll be waiting.
tazmania
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 07:06:13 PM
 #12665

Do people still use http://vrcstake.ticonerd.com/ as an accurate source of information?

24hr high (%105.16)

28,194,512.391

Total Coins

26,812,034.002


    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   
   ████████████████████████████████   
     ▀██████████████████████████▀     
        ▀████████████████████▀       
          ████████████████▀         
            █████████████           
            ▀████████████▀           
             ▀██████████▀             
              ██████████             
               ████████               
               ▀██████▀               
                ██████               
                 
.
trade.io.
██████
██████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
██████
██████

▄██████████████████▄
███       ▀███████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███              ██
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███              ███
███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███
██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
███████████▀ ███████
█████████▀   ███████
███████▀     ██▀ ███
███ ▀▀       █▄▄████
███          █▀▀▀▀██
███ ▄▄       ███████
██████▄     █▄ ▀███
█████████▄   ███▄███
███████████▄ ███████
▀██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
████████████████████
███████████████▀▀ ██
█████████▀▀     ███
████▀▀     ▄█▀   ███
███▄    ▄██      ███
█████████▀      ▄██
█████████▄     ████
█████████████▄ ▄████
████████████████████
▀██████████████████▀
██████
██████
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
██████
██████
.
.Join the Trading Revolution.
pnosker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 07:19:11 PM
 #12666

[...]Perspective: A max of 28+ "coins" were staking yesterday at some point. Historical maximum. Now, since the total coins in existence were 26.8 mill, we have found there are somewhat "ghost", "fake", whatever "coins" that appear in that tracking tool that don't really exist (I am still struggling with how those appear and, more worrysome, DO stake)[...]

You're making a mountain out of a mole hill. There are no fake numbers, unless you count the ones that you fabricated in your post while attempting to make some point. The stake weight number, which factors in both the quantity AND age of the coins in a block, is a valid number and it's a crucial part of the PoS system.

The crux of the matter is the fact that, while the sum total of the stake weight for every block that's staking is useful for getting a relative feel for how many coins are staking, it can obviously be a misleading number. It would make more sense to the end user for the wallet to display the actual number of coins staking, but as pnosker stated and effects elaborated upon, there is currently no function in place to display that number.

So what should we do? Should we ignorantly shout, "THIS IS BULLSHIT!!" and allude to suspicious behavior on the part of the devs? Or should we perhaps try to understand what that number actually represents and/or ask the devs if they can provide us with a different number that is a more accurate representation of the number of coins staking? I vote for the later.

It sounds like this feature can be added and that effects actually intends to add it to a future build. Let's not beat a dead horse.

Well it is not an easy thing to understand... especially if if it not put bin the proper perspective, so there's no beating any dead horse, it is, in fact, a very alive horse no matter how you choose to look at it. And pretending that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill is NOT, definitely, the proper perspective. Whatever this is, is something neither Patrick nor Doug quite understand, which in itself is very worrysome. I think we all agree that it is an immediate need to have a wallet that tells us how many REAL coins are staking at any and all times, that doesn't need repeating and should be implemented as a very top, top priority.

The real worrysome part, though is the "not too much bigger number". Again, it is a hugely bigger number in fact and, so far, we have no idea how such a huge number staking is not going to produce an inflation way superior to 2.5% annually. That is a MAJOR concern, not a mole hill. And, quite frankly, I don't believe the devs actually know how that network weighted stake is going to en up affecting the actual number of coins produced. We, the average investors, certainly do not. You are probably not an average investor and maybe you do know how 28+ million coins staking are going to produce less than 2.5% interest in half that amount of coins. If you do, I'd appreciate enormously that you explain it to me and to all here in layman's terms more or less. To me if 10 million coins stake for a year, the maximum number of new coins produced would be 250k. Now if those same 10 million are indeed REALLY staking, but the phantom figure is 20 million instead, the resulting amount of coin s produced at the end of the year would be 500k instead, thus resulting in a 5% inflation instead of the 2.5%.

I'm sure I'm making my rudimentary calculations erroneously, but I am equally sure you, the devs and other gifted mathematicians can clear fast and easily my error and set me on the right track within seconds. I'll be waiting.

I'm not sure how many times we can say this, but no, there's no "hugely bigger number" of staked coins vs coins. There can never be more than the coin count staked at once. The weight of some of the coins can be slightly higher, say 10% higher, for example. But in no way is this hugely bigger and it's simply how staking works. Every PoS coin has this. I'm not sure where you get your 10M-250k vs 20M number, but that's not possible. The interest rate is the interest rate is the interest rate. There's no fake coins or pseudo coins hovering around. The rate is slightly higher than the real coin count right now because some of those coins weren't staking before and now are so they are gaining the interest from when they were last spent, resetting their coin age.

Imagine this scenario:

You have 1000 VRC, continuously staking. They stake 1095 times a year roughly (365*8 hrs compounded) and earn 1/1095*0.023 (2.3% interest) or 0.0109785203 VRC per stake.
Your friend has 1000 VRC, staking for the first time in 1 month. That means they earn 30*8/1095*0.023 (30 days * 8 hr cycles at 2.3% interest) or 5.04109589 VRC per stake.

For that time when the 1000 VRC staked for the first time in a month is staking, they are earning that month's worth of interest and making the net stake weight slightly higher until their stake is complete.

This is how staking works. This is why the network stake weight is inflated beyond the coin count right now because some coins are staking often due to not having a large coin age. No other PoS coin has ever gone above the total coin count in my memory so nobody has ever noticed this phenomenon before.

But either way, no interest is being earned beyond the ~1.5-2.5% per year. You are full of silliness claiming that there's a "hugely bigger number" of coins staking.

Support the VeriFund Endowment.
VRC: VFEndownxxnHea9mv59kZx8c7TysGbndYx
ScottAllyn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 236


¿ʇɐɥʍ


View Profile WWW
August 10, 2014, 07:24:10 PM
 #12667

[...]And pretending that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill is NOT, definitely, the proper perspective.

But you clearly are making a mountain out of a mole hill, it's just that your own ignorance is preventing you from seeing this.

Whatever this is, is something neither Patrick nor Doug quite understand, which in itself is very worrysome.

What is it that you think they don't understand?

To me if 10 million coins stake for a year, the maximum number of new coins produced would be 250k. Now if those same 10 million are indeed REALLY staking, but the phantom figure is 20 million instead, the resulting amount of coin s produced at the end of the year would be 500k instead, thus resulting in a 5% inflation instead of the 2.5%.

There is no phantom number. If 10 million coins are staking, the interest will be based off of 10 million. The Stake Weight is not factored into the interest rate calculations; it is used to determine WHEN a block of coins will stake. The higher the number, the more likely it is that the block will stake. The Stake Weight of a block starts out equal to the number of coins in the block and grows as the coins age/mature; when a block is done staking, the stake weight is effectively reset. I'd tell you how this happens, but you'll likely go into a panic over it and start a whole new series of text walls.

Ignored User Cleanup Script - Completely hide ignored users!
barabbas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 07:48:01 PM
 #12668

[...]Perspective: A max of 28+ "coins" were staking yesterday at some point. Historical maximum. Now, since the total coins in existence were 26.8 mill, we have found there are somewhat "ghost", "fake", whatever "coins" that appear in that tracking tool that don't really exist (I am still struggling with how those appear and, more worrysome, DO stake)[...]

You're making a mountain out of a mole hill. There are no fake numbers, unless you count the ones that you fabricated in your post while attempting to make some point. The stake weight number, which factors in both the quantity AND age of the coins in a block, is a valid number and it's a crucial part of the PoS system.

The crux of the matter is the fact that, while the sum total of the stake weight for every block that's staking is useful for getting a relative feel for how many coins are staking, it can obviously be a misleading number. It would make more sense to the end user for the wallet to display the actual number of coins staking, but as pnosker stated and effects elaborated upon, there is currently no function in place to display that number.

So what should we do? Should we ignorantly shout, "THIS IS BULLSHIT!!" and allude to suspicious behavior on the part of the devs? Or should we perhaps try to understand what that number actually represents and/or ask the devs if they can provide us with a different number that is a more accurate representation of the number of coins staking? I vote for the later.

It sounds like this feature can be added and that effects actually intends to add it to a future build. Let's not beat a dead horse.

Well it is not an easy thing to understand... especially if if it not put bin the proper perspective, so there's no beating any dead horse, it is, in fact, a very alive horse no matter how you choose to look at it. And pretending that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill is NOT, definitely, the proper perspective. Whatever this is, is something neither Patrick nor Doug quite understand, which in itself is very worrysome. I think we all agree that it is an immediate need to have a wallet that tells us how many REAL coins are staking at any and all times, that doesn't need repeating and should be implemented as a very top, top priority.

The real worrysome part, though is the "not too much bigger number". Again, it is a hugely bigger number in fact and, so far, we have no idea how such a huge number staking is not going to produce an inflation way superior to 2.5% annually. That is a MAJOR concern, not a mole hill. And, quite frankly, I don't believe the devs actually know how that network weighted stake is going to en up affecting the actual number of coins produced. We, the average investors, certainly do not. You are probably not an average investor and maybe you do know how 28+ million coins staking are going to produce less than 2.5% interest in half that amount of coins. If you do, I'd appreciate enormously that you explain it to me and to all here in layman's terms more or less. To me if 10 million coins stake for a year, the maximum number of new coins produced would be 250k. Now if those same 10 million are indeed REALLY staking, but the phantom figure is 20 million instead, the resulting amount of coin s produced at the end of the year would be 500k instead, thus resulting in a 5% inflation instead of the 2.5%.

I'm sure I'm making my rudimentary calculations erroneously, but I am equally sure you, the devs and other gifted mathematicians can clear fast and easily my error and set me on the right track within seconds. I'll be waiting.

I'm not sure how many times we can say this, but no, there's no "hugely bigger number" of staked coins vs coins. There can never be more than the coin count staked at once. The weight of some of the coins can be slightly higher, say 10% higher, for example. But in no way is this hugely bigger and it's simply how staking works. Every PoS coin has this. I'm not sure where you get your 10M-250k vs 20M number, but that's not possible. The interest rate is the interest rate is the interest rate. There's no fake coins or pseudo coins hovering around. The rate is slightly higher than the real coin count right now because some of those coins weren't staking before and now are so they are gaining the interest from when they were last spent, resetting their coin age.

Imagine this scenario:

You have 1000 VRC, continuously staking. They stake 1095 times a year roughly (365*8 hrs compounded) and earn 1/1095*0.023 (2.3% interest) or 0.0109785203 VRC per stake.
Your friend has 1000 VRC, staking for the first time in 1 month. That means they earn 30*8/1095*0.023 (30 days * 8 hr cycles at 2.3% interest) or 5.04109589 VRC per stake.

For that time when the 1000 VRC staked for the first time in a month is staking, they are earning that month's worth of interest and making the net stake weight slightly higher until their stake is complete.

This is how staking works. This is why the network stake weight is inflated beyond the coin count right now because some coins are staking often due to not having a large coin age. No other PoS coin has ever gone above the total coin count in my memory so nobody has ever noticed this phenomenon before.

But either way, no interest is being earned beyond the ~1.5-2.5% per year. You are full of silliness claiming that there's a "hugely bigger number" of coins staking.

No no no Patrick, you simply refuse to acknowledge the reality here. There's no "silliness" in claiming that maybe as much as DOUBLE the real amount of coins staking is actually staking. Thank you for your attempt at explaining this but no, sorry, you are WRONG. The 28+ million figure is the weighted amount staking, right? My claim -far from silly- is that probably only HALF of that amount ion REAL coins is actually sitting in open wallets, while the rest is either in pre-staking situation or, in most major amount, simply sitting in the exchanges, NOT staking at all. So we are not talking a "10% higher". We are talking much, much, MUUUUUCH higher than 10%.

Now, if EVEN 10% is higher indeed, how does that additional staking not influence the inflation level? how is "no interest is being earned beyond the ~1.5-2.5% per year" possible if the staking "coins", in HUGELY BIGGER NUMBERS than the real coins, are staking and therefore producing new coins? Let's provide an scenario where the average number of phantom coins during the year is 30 million, while the real amount of coins is 27 million. If the interest produced is 2.5% we will end up the year with 750k more new VRCs, right? That would be 2.77777% of the TOTAL real coins (those that staked and those that did not). Now, assuming the REAL amount of coins that staked, averaged let's say 18 million, we will find that those coins got 4.17% instead of the maximum of 2.5%. And that is, obviously, not even counting the staking of those coins staked along the way themselves... where's my math wrong in this scenario?

I'll tell you what, right now, you know, positively, the exact number of coins that are in the exchanges, NOT staking. You should have them all at the top of the rich list -very easy to know which ones are bittrex, cryptsy and mintpal, the most significant. How many millions are now there. Those are NOT staking at all. Deduct them from the 28 million and you will see immediately that the figure is far from 10% and most definitely can't be called "not too much bigger". And that doesn't include, of course, those coins waiting to stake in the different wallets that have not reached the 8 hours threshold maturity. What exactly is the "silliness"??

About the "phenomenon" I will investigate if it does happen in other coins. It is not difficult when there are so many coins with much less than 27 million coins total so I'll make sure to bring back some preliminary results of my investigation asap.
Morb
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 27


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:03:56 PM
 #12669

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYabrQrXt4A
pnosker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:05:06 PM
 #12670

[...]Perspective: A max of 28+ "coins" were staking yesterday at some point. Historical maximum. Now, since the total coins in existence were 26.8 mill, we have found there are somewhat "ghost", "fake", whatever "coins" that appear in that tracking tool that don't really exist (I am still struggling with how those appear and, more worrysome, DO stake)[...]

You're making a mountain out of a mole hill. There are no fake numbers, unless you count the ones that you fabricated in your post while attempting to make some point. The stake weight number, which factors in both the quantity AND age of the coins in a block, is a valid number and it's a crucial part of the PoS system.

The crux of the matter is the fact that, while the sum total of the stake weight for every block that's staking is useful for getting a relative feel for how many coins are staking, it can obviously be a misleading number. It would make more sense to the end user for the wallet to display the actual number of coins staking, but as pnosker stated and effects elaborated upon, there is currently no function in place to display that number.

So what should we do? Should we ignorantly shout, "THIS IS BULLSHIT!!" and allude to suspicious behavior on the part of the devs? Or should we perhaps try to understand what that number actually represents and/or ask the devs if they can provide us with a different number that is a more accurate representation of the number of coins staking? I vote for the later.

It sounds like this feature can be added and that effects actually intends to add it to a future build. Let's not beat a dead horse.

Well it is not an easy thing to understand... especially if if it not put bin the proper perspective, so there's no beating any dead horse, it is, in fact, a very alive horse no matter how you choose to look at it. And pretending that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill is NOT, definitely, the proper perspective. Whatever this is, is something neither Patrick nor Doug quite understand, which in itself is very worrysome. I think we all agree that it is an immediate need to have a wallet that tells us how many REAL coins are staking at any and all times, that doesn't need repeating and should be implemented as a very top, top priority.

The real worrysome part, though is the "not too much bigger number". Again, it is a hugely bigger number in fact and, so far, we have no idea how such a huge number staking is not going to produce an inflation way superior to 2.5% annually. That is a MAJOR concern, not a mole hill. And, quite frankly, I don't believe the devs actually know how that network weighted stake is going to en up affecting the actual number of coins produced. We, the average investors, certainly do not. You are probably not an average investor and maybe you do know how 28+ million coins staking are going to produce less than 2.5% interest in half that amount of coins. If you do, I'd appreciate enormously that you explain it to me and to all here in layman's terms more or less. To me if 10 million coins stake for a year, the maximum number of new coins produced would be 250k. Now if those same 10 million are indeed REALLY staking, but the phantom figure is 20 million instead, the resulting amount of coin s produced at the end of the year would be 500k instead, thus resulting in a 5% inflation instead of the 2.5%.

I'm sure I'm making my rudimentary calculations erroneously, but I am equally sure you, the devs and other gifted mathematicians can clear fast and easily my error and set me on the right track within seconds. I'll be waiting.

I'm not sure how many times we can say this, but no, there's no "hugely bigger number" of staked coins vs coins. There can never be more than the coin count staked at once. The weight of some of the coins can be slightly higher, say 10% higher, for example. But in no way is this hugely bigger and it's simply how staking works. Every PoS coin has this. I'm not sure where you get your 10M-250k vs 20M number, but that's not possible. The interest rate is the interest rate is the interest rate. There's no fake coins or pseudo coins hovering around. The rate is slightly higher than the real coin count right now because some of those coins weren't staking before and now are so they are gaining the interest from when they were last spent, resetting their coin age.

Imagine this scenario:

You have 1000 VRC, continuously staking. They stake 1095 times a year roughly (365*8 hrs compounded) and earn 1/1095*0.023 (2.3% interest) or 0.0109785203 VRC per stake.
Your friend has 1000 VRC, staking for the first time in 1 month. That means they earn 30*8/1095*0.023 (30 days * 8 hr cycles at 2.3% interest) or 5.04109589 VRC per stake.

For that time when the 1000 VRC staked for the first time in a month is staking, they are earning that month's worth of interest and making the net stake weight slightly higher until their stake is complete.

This is how staking works. This is why the network stake weight is inflated beyond the coin count right now because some coins are staking often due to not having a large coin age. No other PoS coin has ever gone above the total coin count in my memory so nobody has ever noticed this phenomenon before.

But either way, no interest is being earned beyond the ~1.5-2.5% per year. You are full of silliness claiming that there's a "hugely bigger number" of coins staking.

No no no Patrick, you simply refuse to acknowledge the reality here. There's no "silliness" in claiming that maybe as much as DOUBLE the real amount of coins staking is actually staking. Thank you for your attempt at explaining this but no, sorry, you are WRONG. The 28+ million figure is the weighted amount staking, right? My claim -far from silly- is that probably only HALF of that amount ion REAL coins is actually sitting in open wallets, while the rest is either in pre-staking situation or, in most major amount, simply sitting in the exchanges, NOT staking at all. So we are not talking a "10% higher". We are talking much, much, MUUUUUCH higher than 10%.

Now, if EVEN 10% is higher indeed, how does that additional staking not influence the inflation level? how is "no interest is being earned beyond the ~1.5-2.5% per year" possible if the staking "coins", in HUGELY BIGGER NUMBERS than the real coins, are staking and therefore producing new coins? Let's provide an scenario where the average number of phantom coins during the year is 30 million, while the real amount of coins is 27 million. If the interest produced is 2.5% we will end up the year with 750k more new VRCs, right? That would be 2.77777% of the TOTAL real coins (those that staked and those that did not). Now, assuming the REAL amount of coins that staked, averaged let's say 18 million, we will find that those coins got 4.17% instead of the maximum of 2.5%. And that is, obviously, not even counting the staking of those coins staked along the way themselves... where's my math wrong in this scenario?

I'll tell you what, right now, you know, positively, the exact number of coins that are in the exchanges, NOT staking. You should have them all at the top of the rich list -very easy to know which ones are bittrex, cryptsy and mintpal, the most significant. How many millions are now there. Those are NOT staking at all. Deduct them from the 28 million and you will see immediately that the figure is far from 10% and most definitely can't be called "not too much bigger". And that doesn't include, of course, those coins waiting to stake in the different wallets that have not reached the 8 hours threshold maturity. What exactly is the "silliness"??

About the "phenomenon" I will investigate if it does happen in other coins. It is not difficult when there are so many coins with much less than 27 million coins total so I'll make sure to bring back some preliminary results of my investigation asap.

You are just so wrong. The network stake weight is not the amount of coins * the interest rate. The real coins * interest rate = the inflation. The network stake weight is simply a weight to define how much interest rate is granted.

Support the VeriFund Endowment.
VRC: VFEndownxxnHea9mv59kZx8c7TysGbndYx
MAD945
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:09:19 PM
 #12671


That is exactly how I picture Barabbass typing behind his computer monitor!

lol Grin
MAD945
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:12:22 PM
 #12672

Oh and I retract my previous statement about Barabbas being "Highly intelligent"

He's gone full Retard here...

Sorry Barb, your math doesn't add up! You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how POS coins work. Can someone try and draw out a diagram or something for him because he's struggling here...
lootz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 810


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:24:12 PM
 #12673


That is exactly how I picture Barabbass typing behind his computer monitor!

lol Grin

ROFL oh soooo awesome, VRC FTW
socal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:33:38 PM
 #12674

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

Now everyone is beginning to see the truth, but don't take this "not-to-smart choir boy" with "tin foil's" word just look at the asinine comments....... Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Ryan420
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:36:09 PM
 #12675

What...the...fuck?
The amount of times I've seen "how can the stake amount possibly be above the coin amount" along with the thorough answers to the question, yet people still don't understand? I realize why I never get involved with this forum, too many vacuous people.
socal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 08:39:10 PM
 #12676

What...the...fuck?
The amount of times I've seen "how can the stake amount possibly be above the coin amount" along with the thorough answers to the question, yet people still don't understand? I realize why I never get involved with this forum, too many vacuous people.


+10000

In a related note for a more constructive experience join either the IRC chan or Veritalk.info
snakesoft33
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 67

I AM HERE TO SEE THE NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 09:27:17 PM
 #12677

IT'S TIME FOR A DECENTRALIZED EXCHNAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Huh Huh Huh Huh Huh Huh Huh

MAD945
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546



View Profile
August 10, 2014, 09:29:03 PM
 #12678

I FEEL SO BAD FOR THE DEVS HERE...

Patrick, not ALL Vericoin investors are complete idiots who feel the need to become a victim because they are now bagholding.  Some people here probably can't even see their own dick beneath their belly, let alone 6 months from now and the hard work that will be done.

Zach

These Devs defiantly take a beating from a lot of naysayers and have personal attacks thrown at them...every time they come out with a professional calm response to even the most idiotic statements and accusations.

Professional threw and threw...and that is why I support this coin Cool  
jobnotfound
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 53


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 10:15:28 PM
 #12679

it has to triple in value to reach what it was before in value..
i bet a LOT of guys have lost a LOT of money so far..

it will rebound, don't you worry

why? because

-summertime  Grin
-because TA voodoo tells so  Cheesy
-altcryptos are serious business and not about catching the next pump  Roll Eyes
-because "insert name of coin you baghold" will be the next crypto messiah   Tongue
-other stupid arguments to keep them bagholders bagholding. or buying more (how evil)

I like this guy.

VRC VPJRmAv8oMVRDas1G4LTU6swBpAsWu5x2Y
barabbas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 10:46:43 PM
 #12680

The level of idiocy that purported humans are capable of, in some cases, never ceases to amaze me. And when you put it together with blind greed so prevalent here, we are talking stratospheric idiocy.

And, of course, no answer to the very relevant question. What the hell does it matter when all you care about is the price rebounding... or pretending you are here for the long run no matter what.

And if you are a guy from Valencia somehow astonishingly convinced he is somewhat intelligent, the shit reaches proportions intergalactic, really.

Hey, to each his own. If you don't care that 15 million coins are really staking while credit is given to 28 million instead, the only thing I can do is demand answers, THE REAL KIND. Either way, no one can achieve that total idiots will somehow develop a brain.
Pages: « 1 ... 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 [634] 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 ... 964 »
  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!