[ANN] Slimcoin : Proof of Burn NEW BLOCK GEN, Mineable by low power computer!

[a123]

What is the ratio of PoB blocks to PoW blocks?

The ratio is set to target 1 every 3 PoW blocks.

[pantheist]

Now I'm not much of a miner, but my only worry about a asic friendly algorithm would be that especially early on after the switch it'd be easy for one person to get all the blocks. On the flip side, cpu-only means someone with a botnet can do the same thing. Tricky decisions.

True. And there's also the spectre of 51% attack.

Definitely a worrisome thought while the coin is just starting to regain traction.

[a123]

Maybe PoB+PoS is much better! Why waste power for GPU-CPU mining, when even RasPi can be used to complete SlimCoin usage? SlimCoin, SlimWallet & SlimMiner (RasPi )
"Why use expensive and power-hungry hardware, when even Android smartphone can be your e-Wallet & Miner?"

Actually PoS+PoB might be a good idea. I've been thinking a lot about it too! The whole code base is built off Peercoin, and we can't migrate out to a PoW only coin cos of the PoS heritage blocks.

We will have PoB generation and PoS to secure the blockchain.

We may not even have to migrate our PoB. Just tweak PoS to make it generate blocks more frequently (aka undo what slimcoin did before he got busy elsewhere) and I remember the difficulty even reached 1 at some time back then. No one would bother to PoW then!

PoS did cause a lot of trouble for us last time though, in particular it interferes with PoW. But if PoW is meant to be an afterthought this isn't a problem then.

[pantheist]

Maybe PoB+PoS is much better! Why waste power for GPU-CPU mining, when even RasPi can be used to complete SlimCoin usage? SlimCoin, SlimWallet & SlimMiner (RasPi )
"Why use expensive and power-hungry hardware, when even Android smartphone can be your e-Wallet & Miner?"

Actually PoS+PoB might be a good idea. I've been thinking a lot about it too! The whole code base is built off Peercoin, and we can't migrate out to a PoW only coin cos of the PoS heritage blocks.

We will have PoB generation and PoS to secure the blockchain.

We may not even have to migrate our PoB. Just tweak PoS to make it generate blocks more frequently (aka undo what slimcoin did before he got busy elsewhere) and I remember the difficulty even reached 1 at some time back then. No one would bother to PoW then!

PoS did cause a lot of trouble for us last time though, in particular it interferes with PoW. But if PoW is meant to be an afterthought this isn't a problem then.

I like it too if you think you could do it with a stable wallet- it would take the power-saving model one step further

[jonnylatte]

Ouch. Bad news galore On the bright side, we must have quite a bit of volume today on Bter and prices have fallen, so acquisition and mining would hopefully be cheaper. The coins would also hopefully have been bought by people committed to the growth of SLM.

I learnt about the weakness once someone about 4 pages back mentioned about the low scratch space requirements, and the slimcoin.club web miner was experimenting with an iteration limit of 64.

The improvement is actually rather little, around 20% max and you have to tweak for an optimal iteration limit. I haven't checked johnnylatte's hex acceleration routine.

However, once this news gets out (like now) I suspect it would be trivial for experienced GPU coders to accelerate it, if it wasn't already.

POB uses single-SHA256 and not dcrypt, so no iteration-based improvement would help it.

The dump is likely by someone with a GPU miner or a botnet; I've seen single addresses recently hashing with over 5MH.

I'll try to quickly implement the changes into the miner and release it; that should help level the playing field and buy us some time to change the algo, or just go completely GPU friendly.

I'm still for a version of CPU only algorithm though, but we oughta use one that has been well established.

My improvement was 20% as well plus another ~30% for optimizing digest_to_string, feel free to use my code for that in the public miner but I will keep my acceleration to myself as its not an improvement over what you have and it sounds like they have done the exact same thing as me anyway. I also set REALLOC_BASE_SZ to (MAX_COUNT * 64 + SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH) so that the buffer never needs to be expanded since realloc is expensive although they may want to do that in a way that can be adjusted on the command line if the right iteration limit is very different for different computers. You can also make the buffer a global variable and initialize / free it separately so that you are not constantly allocating and freeing it.

Have you considered talking to Sunny King (the developer of Peercoin and Primecoin) for suggestions on PoW. He has helped out other altcoin developers in the past and being able to think of and develop Cunningham chain based PoW shows he knows what he is talking about at least. Now that I think of it he has gone down both paths that we are evaluating without trying to go down both at the same time in the same coin.

[Mr E]

Maybe PoB+PoS is much better! Why waste power for GPU-CPU mining, when even RasPi can be used to complete SlimCoin usage? SlimCoin, SlimWallet & SlimMiner (RasPi )
"Why use expensive and power-hungry hardware, when even Android smartphone can be your e-Wallet & Miner?"

Actually PoS+PoB might be a good idea. I've been thinking a lot about it too! The whole code base is built off Peercoin, and we can't migrate out to a PoW only coin cos of the PoS heritage blocks.

We will have PoB generation and PoS to secure the blockchain.

We may not even have to migrate our PoB. Just tweak PoS to make it generate blocks more frequently (aka undo what slimcoin did before he got busy elsewhere) and I remember the difficulty even reached 1 at some time back then. No one would bother to PoW then!

PoS did cause a lot of trouble for us last time though, in particular it interferes with PoW. But if PoW is meant to be an afterthought this isn't a problem then.

I would prefer keeping the PoW, whatever algorithm we end up deciding, because having PoW protects against 51%-of-burned-coins attacks (at least of some types, such as censorship attempts). However, PoW should be tweaked to make it become unprofitable quickly, because one of the main points of Slimcoin is to discourage power-hungry PoW mining. (This would probably then reduce the incentive to develop GPU / ASIC miners because of the limited profits, but no doubt they would still be built eventually. Just thinking about the risk of 'secret' GPU algorithm, if it has a big advantage, possibly leading to 51% attacks? I would support going to a different well-established CPU-based algorithm given how easily dcrypt seems to be optimised. Of course, then there's still the botnet risk...  )

(PS -- I downloaded the 0.3.2.1 Windows build from the Git releases, and it was crashing again like the old wallet did. I've had to go back to 0.3.2.0 for the time being. )

Any idea why? Dya have a debug log of what led to the crashes?

Can't find them in the log any more, so I'm just firing it up again now, and we'll see what happens. It seemed to be the same or similar crash message as the older version was giving before you fixed it, though.

[AizenSou]

what is the minimum payout value? - 5 blocks confirmed and still nothing on wallet side

Yep same here.

Anyone gets payout from pool ?

[ArchitektoR]

Anyone gets payout from pool ?

still no...

[a123]

oops. it appears the rpc command sendmany wasnt implemented.. will work on this! ur shares shd b safe

[rfcdejong]

i'm mining there as well with two azure instances, also no payouts, waiting for the sendmany alternative

1 x A4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.14 kh/s ~= 1.30 kh/s   cost $0,48/hour    (~$357/month)   <- just testing..
1 x D4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.43 kh/s ~= 3.45 kh/s   cost $0,752/hour  (~$559/month)   <- better!

http://azure.microsoft.com/nl-nl/pricing/details/virtual-machines/#Linux

i use my msdn license so got nearly $ 100 free, when it's gone it's gone...

[pantheist]

i'm mining there as well with two azure instances, also no payouts, waiting for the sendmany alternative

1 x A4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.14 kh/s ~= 1.30 kh/s   cost $0,48/hour    (~$357/month)   <- just testing..
1 x D4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.43 kh/s ~= 3.45 kh/s   cost $0,752/hour  (~$559/month)   <- better!

http://azure.microsoft.com/nl-nl/pricing/details/virtual-machines/#Linux

i use my msdn license so got nearly $ 100 free, when it's gone it's gone...

Why bother with the A4 if the D4 is 265% the kh/s for only 157% of the price?

[rfcdejong]

Maybe PoB+PoS is much better! Why waste power for GPU-CPU mining, when even RasPi can be used to complete SlimCoin usage? SlimCoin, SlimWallet & SlimMiner (RasPi )
"Why use expensive and power-hungry hardware, when even Android smartphone can be your e-Wallet & Miner?"

Actually PoS+PoB might be a good idea. I've been thinking a lot about it too! The whole code base is built off Peercoin, and we can't migrate out to a PoW only coin cos of the PoS heritage blocks.

We will have PoB generation and PoS to secure the blockchain.

We may not even have to migrate our PoB. Just tweak PoS to make it generate blocks more frequently (aka undo what slimcoin did before he got busy elsewhere) and I remember the difficulty even reached 1 at some time back then. No one would bother to PoW then!

PoS did cause a lot of trouble for us last time though, in particular it interferes with PoW. But if PoW is meant to be an afterthought this isn't a problem then.

Perhaps a high stake amount, look at how HYP is doing with 750% annualy, a very strong network as well because noone want to miss out staking. Just like burning with slimcoin, the wallet has to be online.

[rfcdejong]

i'm mining there as well with two azure instances, also no payouts, waiting for the sendmany alternative

1 x A4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.14 kh/s ~= 1.30 kh/s   cost $0,48/hour    (~$357/month)   <- just testing..
1 x D4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.43 kh/s ~= 3.45 kh/s   cost $0,752/hour  (~$559/month)   <- better!

http://azure.microsoft.com/nl-nl/pricing/details/virtual-machines/#Linux

i use my msdn license so got nearly $ 100 free, when it's gone it's gone...

Why bother with the A4 if the D4 is 265% the kh/s for only 157% of the price?

testing speeds, now i deleted the A4 and created a C3, it does 4 * 0.43 kh/s haha

[pantheist]

i'm mining there as well with two azure instances, also no payouts, waiting for the sendmany alternative

1 x A4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.14 kh/s ~= 1.30 kh/s   cost $0,48/hour    (~$357/month)   <- just testing..
1 x D4 virtual machine 8 cores does 8 * 0.43 kh/s ~= 3.45 kh/s   cost $0,752/hour  (~$559/month)   <- better!

http://azure.microsoft.com/nl-nl/pricing/details/virtual-machines/#Linux

i use my msdn license so got nearly $ 100 free, when it's gone it's gone...

Why bother with the A4 if the D4 is 265% the kh/s for only 157% of the price?

testing speeds, now i deleted the A4 and created a C3, it does 4 * 0.43 kh/s haha

nice

[rfcdejong]

i ment D3, but oke

btw guy who bought 150K slimcoin didn't burn them (yet), only ~ 371k burned vs ~ 369k 30 hours ago

and i have nearly 8000 effective burnt coins

{
"Net Burnt Coins" : 8685.89359400,
"Effective Burnt Coins" : 7949.13530900,
"Immature Burnt Coins" : 112.00000000,
"Decayed Burnt Coins" : 624.75828500
},
{
"General Info" : "",
"nBurnBits" : "1d00deb5",
"nEffectiveBurnCoins" : "370969111262",
"Formatted nEffectiveBurnCoins" : "370969.111262"
}

[Mr E]

(PS -- I downloaded the 0.3.2.1 Windows build from the Git releases, and it was crashing again like the old wallet did. I've had to go back to 0.3.2.0 for the time being. )

Any idea why? Dya have a debug log of what led to the crashes?

Can't find them in the log any more, so I'm just firing it up again now, and we'll see what happens. It seemed to be the same or similar crash message as the older version was giving before you fixed it, though.

Still running without a crash so far, I'll let it go a while longer and see... maybe it was just random.

[a123]

Ok fixed sendmany! I didn't implement the code to handle sendmany in my RPC batch proxy.

Also um, I set minimum payout to 70SLM. Now set to 0.1SLM. You should be getting your payouts soon! I hope.

1st consolidated payout details: http://www.slimcoin.club/#blkexp?block=139218

Code:

"nomp" {"Sbz8ykVBmBMeFPMBi31pR1pFoGaajWkNEi":65.16429,"SN7xFUArRx9Zv4AV9cWj6dawsFxcXvpr6D":0.38056,"ShfxNcu5NxrLiBxXzZeouJ3tRRzwZQzaea":6.71146,"SPhwVTMMrPCKdJb66DwMRkKe5hf4xxJsXK":1.58863,"SYHJWERaM8XD3qowYxP2cL6ey1iLYf17dD":21.24969,"SRWLQwaLNp1vvdQiUHDeQ9arYsX5mCZsDg":4.71249,"STa3ALZUQT5urYV2Er7N9XJxC5u3EZq32b":2.51616,"ShgXk3k4ss7CFm51kPuXNtV4F1HpbZVPaT":12.75949,"SZpyupfHCfX1X9r5rtknHXZsyhq5qfsce6":9.746}"

2nd normal block payout: www.slimcoin.club/#blkexp?block=139225

Fees - 1% to bounty, 1% to giveaways. For now. If we go PoS/PoB it might not quite matter

I also got 1K SLM and 10K SLM donations for bounties! Any one wants to claim ownership

Any ideas what kind of bounties to offer too?

Still running without a crash so far, I'll let it go a while longer and see... maybe it was just random.

Perhaps a high stake amount, look at how HYP is doing with 750% annualy, a very strong network as well because noone want to miss out staking. Just like burning with slimcoin, the wallet has to be online.

Yea this would be quite in line with the original dev's intentions for everyone to run their own wallet. Think this idea of PoS/PoB has quite a good potential!

[a123]

I've incorporated jonnylatte's code into a slimminer fork: https://github.com/kryptoslab/slimminer. Anyone can contribute a Windows binary?

[a123]

Anyway, herewith a single CPU instance at RunAbove - http://labs.runabove.com/power8/ - Not totally sure on the billing in comparison to other cloud server providers, but those are certainly some powerful core(s).

Just went to try it! 1 thread gives 1.2KH, 2 threads give 1.5KH total, 4 threads give 1.8KH, 8 threads give about 1.5KH.

Power8 works on a 8 thread per core. So I guess this kinda explains the results!

[Mr E]

(PS -- I downloaded the 0.3.2.1 Windows build from the Git releases, and it was crashing again like the old wallet did. I've had to go back to 0.3.2.0 for the time being. )

Any idea why? Dya have a debug log of what led to the crashes?

Can't find them in the log any more, so I'm just firing it up again now, and we'll see what happens. It seemed to be the same or similar crash message as the older version was giving before you fixed it, though.

Still running without a crash so far, I'll let it go a while longer and see... maybe it was just random.

.... aaaand, still good. Well, now I'm confused, but happy enough.