Bitcoin Forum
March 30, 2024, 08:58:09 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 [304] 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 ... 501 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"  (Read 1150712 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
clf99
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62
Merit: 10

liberty


View Profile
December 12, 2015, 06:04:26 PM
 #6061


   Crazy Idea Time. 

We're trying to address a few problems.  Notably the vulnerability to large dig's, and the desire to keep digging alive.  Also this would encourage people  to always be on the look out for new clams.  Maybe even get more folks to run the wallet locally. 

What if we could somehow seed new clams onto the chain at some interval (Weekly) and ties them to BTC,LTC, and Doge addresses that have been used recently (last 2 months?)  Then only allow digs from block that are so new (Last 14,400 blocks or 10 Days.). 

   The idea being there are new opportunities every week to claim clams. And if you have an Active BTC, LTC or Doge wallet you may have clams.    But you only have 10 days to claim your clams.  We could decide how many should be distributed, and start off fairly large and shrink the seeding based on how many are actually claimed. 

   Since you can only dig from the last X (14,400) that would lock up the original claims in the first blocks.    Based on the selection of the addresses anyone might get new clams.  The time limit will keep BIG users from accumulating to many free clams. 

   Just throwing it out there,  I'm sure this would not be an easy thing to do technically,  But, before we even look at that, does this even have merit?  Maybe I missed something?   

as a crypto newbie who didn't have any btc back in the 1940's when you guys started clams, i love this idea

Every year the world is getting more peaceful.
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711789089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711789089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711789089
Reply with quote  #2

1711789089
Report to moderator
1711789089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711789089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711789089
Reply with quote  #2

1711789089
Report to moderator
1711789089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711789089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711789089
Reply with quote  #2

1711789089
Report to moderator
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2940
Merit: 1327



View Profile
December 12, 2015, 08:32:14 PM
 #6062

What if we could somehow seed new clams onto the chain at some interval (Weekly) and ties them to BTC,LTC, and Doge addresses that have been used recently (last 2 months?)  Then only allow digs from block that are so new (Last 14,400 blocks or 10 Days.). 

We absolutely could do this, technically speaking.

But I think it's a bad idea.

The original distribution kind of worked, because nobody was expecting it, and so nobody could prepare for it by seeding thousands of BTC addresses with just enough to qualify for free CLAMs. OK, some will say that the devs did exactly that. Maybe they did. That's not the point.

The point is that if you tell people that from now on they can get 4.6 CLAMs for every BTC address that contains more than 0.0001 BTC, there is nothing to stop them making thousands of such addresses. For $40 you can make 1000 of them. Then all you need to do is wait a week and claim your 4600 CLAMs,
worth over 100 times what you spent on BTC to create them.

tldr: Distributing based on the number of addresses you own only works if you don't announce it before you start counting addresses. Otherwise people can (and will) abuse it mercilessly.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2940
Merit: 1327



View Profile
December 12, 2015, 08:33:55 PM
 #6063

Didn't you say that no big digs will happen because big exchanges swipe addresses? That would only make sense when they would swipe addresses that had clams attached to. With a backup they could still claim them.

And i think exchanges would need backups because there are enough users that will send bitcoins to old addresses of them. These bitcoins otherwise would vanish if no backup of the private keys of swiped bitcoin addresses existed anymore.

I think you are misunderstanding still.

First, she is talking about "sweeping" coins from deposit addresses into a single storage address (not "swiping", which means something between "taking" and "stealing").

And second, most big services will regularly tidy their wallets to sweep the dust into a central address. Otherwise you end up with a big ugly wallet full of dust. Since they were regularly doing that, they are unlikely to have had many *funded* addresses at the time of the CLAM snapshot, and so wouldn't have been awarded many sets of free 4.6 CLAMs. It doesn't matter if they've kept all the one dust addresses since, because those were mostly empty at the time of the snapshot.

Do you understand the point now? The initial distribution awards those who didn't keep their wallets tidy - like faucet abusers who collected tens of thousands of dust outputs in tens of thousands of addresses. Those who kept the blockchain's UTXO set tidy received much less. Personally, from all the wallets I control I was able to dig around 30 sets of 4.6 CLAMs. That's from 3 or 4 Just-Dice hot wallets, a few Doge-Doge, cold wallets for both, and a bunch of personal wallets too (core and android). 30 funded addresses in total, because I kept everything clean and tidy.

I am honestly surprised by the number of people who are opposed to doing anything to reduce the impact of future big digs.

Do you need to care at all about the decision? I guess you probably have so many clams that your decision on this will nearly be final when the rest of the community votes 50%-50% isn't it? Smiley Maybe i overestimate the amount of clams you own. Tongue

To be pedantic, anyone's decision is final when the rest of the community is 50/50, assuming >50% is the criterion for deciding it.

I already supported the petitions I support, so there's no last-minute controlling vote coming from me.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
chilly2k
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1007
Merit: 1000


View Profile
December 12, 2015, 09:05:32 PM
 #6064

What if we could somehow seed new clams onto the chain at some interval (Weekly) and ties them to BTC,LTC, and Doge addresses that have been used recently (last 2 months?)  Then only allow digs from block that are so new (Last 14,400 blocks or 10 Days.). 

We absolutely could do this, technically speaking.

But I think it's a bad idea.

The original distribution kind of worked, because nobody was expecting it, and so nobody could prepare for it by seeding thousands of BTC addresses with just enough to qualify for free CLAMs. OK, some will say that the devs did exactly that. Maybe they did. That's not the point.

The point is that if you tell people that from now on they can get 4.6 CLAMs for every BTC address that contains more than 0.0001 BTC, there is nothing to stop them making thousands of such addresses. For $40 you can make 1000 of them. Then all you need to do is wait a week and claim your 4600 CLAMs,
worth over 100 times what you spent on BTC to create them.

tldr: Distributing based on the number of addresses you own only works if you don't announce it before you start counting addresses. Otherwise people can (and will) abuse it mercilessly.

  Ah, that's not exactly how I would envision it.  I would say look at the BTC block chain as an example, and pick x number of addresses that had transactions at random.  Then seed those addresses.  Not all addresses, just a random set.  So it would kind of be like the lottery, with with a time limit for claiming your prize. 

   This would also allow any new people to maybe get clams.  No guarantee.  Just the chance.  Check every Monday for a new chance. or every day, or once a month.  Or seed each block with an address, make it like a BTC block reward, Then throttle it back as it approaches the desired supply.   

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
December 12, 2015, 09:13:11 PM
 #6065

Distributing based on the number of addresses you own only works if you don't announce it before you start counting addresses. Otherwise people can (and will) abuse it mercilessly.

It still doesn't really "work" because insiders can cheat, and there is no way to know they won't (or didn't). Introducing that level of trust into a system that exists in order to be trustless is silly.

It is possible the developers of CLAMs didn't cheat and the motives were good (didn't want to give a lot of coins to Karpeles or whatever), but the idea is just fatally flawed. It should never be repeated, and if it is whoever does it will certainly be a scammer because they won't have the excuse of wanting to try something new.

If you want to pay something based on ownership of existing coins, make it proportional to number of coins owned.
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2940
Merit: 1327



View Profile
December 12, 2015, 09:51:56 PM
 #6066

  Ah, that's not exactly how I would envision it.  I would say look at the BTC block chain as an example, and pick x number of addresses that had transactions at random.  Then seed those addresses.  Not all addresses, just a random set.  So it would kind of be like the lottery, with with a time limit for claiming your prize. 

OK, so it's like a lottery, but the more 'tickets' you buy, the more chance you have of winning. So you are encouraging people to pollute the BTC blockchain with thousands of tiny outputs to increase their chance of winning some CLAM. I don't think that's something we should encourage.

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
dooglus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2940
Merit: 1327



View Profile
December 12, 2015, 09:53:28 PM
 #6067

It still doesn't really "work" because insiders can cheat, and there is no way to know they won't (or didn't). Introducing that level of trust into a system that exists in order to be trustless is silly.

Yeah. I'm not saying CLAM's distribution was a good idea. I'm saying that chilly's is even worse...

Just-Dice                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   Play or Invest                 ██             
          ██████████         
      ██████████████████     
  ██████████████████████████ 
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████
    ██████████████████████   
        ██████████████       
            ██████           
   1% House Edge
webchris
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 142
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
December 12, 2015, 09:54:34 PM
 #6068

  Ah, that's not exactly how I would envision it.  I would say look at the BTC block chain as an example, and pick x number of addresses that had transactions at random.  Then seed those addresses.  Not all addresses, just a random set.  So it would kind of be like the lottery, with with a time limit for claiming your prize. 

   This would also allow any new people to maybe get clams.  No guarantee.  Just the chance.  Check every Monday for a new chance. or every day, or once a month.  Or seed each block with an address, make it like a BTC block reward, Then throttle it back as it approaches the desired supply.   

That may still encourage people to send micro transactions in bulk to attempt to get more CLAMs, and it doesn't seem to encourage new people to CLAM. It seems more likely people would already have to be aware of CLAM and the new distribution system.

I think the initial distribution worked well. I just wish it had a phase-out built in. I definitely think we should consider fixing that.

Join a Safe Shared LUX Masternode -> https://www.luxmasternode.com
clf99
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62
Merit: 10

liberty


View Profile
December 12, 2015, 11:00:13 PM
 #6069

clams r goin crazy on polo

Every year the world is getting more peaceful.
bhokor
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 1000


View Profile
December 12, 2015, 11:59:23 PM
 #6070

Possible technical drawback of bitcoin to 420 zone, lets see it it starts the attacks to the 500 and the clam at end can touch the 0.005

popcorning
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
December 13, 2015, 12:19:02 AM
 #6071

I think the initial distribution worked well. I just wish it had a phase-out built in. I definitely think we should consider fixing that.

It does in the form of staking. If the entire 14 million CLAM distribution actually existed and still exists (which it certainly did not and does not), that would be 3% per year inflation which is isn't trivial. At a more realistic (?) OOMA estimate of 5 million that is 10% inflation which is quite effective in redistributing wealth over time.

Given several years of staking and what has already been dug up, the effect of new digs will be negligible. It may even be already. What are the odds that the recent "dig" is the biggest mass dig that will ever happen in terms of percentage of active supply? Very significant IMO.

webchris
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 142
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
December 13, 2015, 12:30:57 AM
 #6072

It does in the form of staking. If the entire 14 million CLAM distribution actually existed and still exists (which it certainly did not and does not), that would be 3% per year inflation which is isn't trivial. At a more realistic (?) OOMA estimate of 5 million that is 10% inflation which is quite effective in redistributing wealth over time.

Given several years of staking and what has already been dug up, the effect of new digs will be negligible. It may even be already. What are the odds that the recent "dig" is the biggest mass dig that will ever happen in terms of percentage of active supply? Very significant IMO.

There certainly is logic in your argument, and I hope you are pretty accurate. However, the one problem not being factored in is the uncertainty of the undug CLAM. How many people have left CLAM or avoided CLAM after learning of the mega supply that could be unloaded on the market at any time? Sure, there is risk in any currency. But how many people decide the risks with CLAM are just too much? I believe in CLAM, but I think it would be a much easier sell to people if the initial distribution wasn't this huge drag and potential black swan 24/7.

I'm not saying a huge digger will come out tomorrow, or ever again. But the problem is that one can. 10 can. By the end of the day we could see CLAM crash worse than ever before - not because of the CLAM holders who have been supporting the currency, but because of someone discovering a huge cache of undug addresses they had from some experiment they ran, or a web wallet/service. I think the initial distribution added a ton of value to CLAM by being so widespread. But now that distribution is a gun pointed at our head, and nobody knows if its loaded or when it will fire.

Join a Safe Shared LUX Masternode -> https://www.luxmasternode.com
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
December 13, 2015, 01:12:45 AM
 #6073

It does in the form of staking. If the entire 14 million CLAM distribution actually existed and still exists (which it certainly did not and does not), that would be 3% per year inflation which is isn't trivial. At a more realistic (?) OOMA estimate of 5 million that is 10% inflation which is quite effective in redistributing wealth over time.

Given several years of staking and what has already been dug up, the effect of new digs will be negligible. It may even be already. What are the odds that the recent "dig" is the biggest mass dig that will ever happen in terms of percentage of active supply? Very significant IMO.

There certainly is logic in your argument, and I hope you are pretty accurate. However, the one problem not being factored in is the uncertainty of the undug CLAM. How many people have left CLAM or avoided CLAM after learning of the mega supply that could be unloaded on the market at any time? Sure, there is risk in any currency. But how many people decide the risks with CLAM are just too much? I believe in CLAM, but I think it would be a much easier sell to people if the initial distribution wasn't this huge drag and potential black swan 24/7.

I'm not saying a huge digger will come out tomorrow, or ever again. But the problem is that one can. 10 can. By the end of the day we could see CLAM crash worse than ever before - not because of the CLAM holders who have been supporting the currency, but because of someone discovering a huge cache of undug addresses they had from some experiment they ran, or a web wallet/service. I think the initial distribution added a ton of value to CLAM by being so widespread. But now that distribution is a gun pointed at our head, and nobody knows if its loaded or when it will fire.

10 diggers of the same magnitude relative to active supply is mathematically impossible and it isn't even close. That would increase supply by 1.6^10 or around 100x, so 150 million coins. That's >10x more than the number of undug coins that even exist given the highest possible (unrealistic) estimate.

No, we realistically will probably see at most 1-2 more such big digs, or maybe none. It they do happen it will probably be at much higher prices (on the theory that past prices haven't been high enough to be noticed by potential big diggers, or possibly not high enough to motivate action), which is sort of desirable. It makes the supply elastic and the price less volatile.

You want more crazy pumps and dumps? Removing elasticity from the supply is a good way to do that.

thefix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1049
Merit: 1001



View Profile
December 13, 2015, 01:45:52 AM
 #6074

It does in the form of staking. If the entire 14 million CLAM distribution actually existed and still exists (which it certainly did not and does not), that would be 3% per year inflation which is isn't trivial. At a more realistic (?) OOMA estimate of 5 million that is 10% inflation which is quite effective in redistributing wealth over time.

Given several years of staking and what has already been dug up, the effect of new digs will be negligible. It may even be already. What are the odds that the recent "dig" is the biggest mass dig that will ever happen in terms of percentage of active supply? Very significant IMO.

There certainly is logic in your argument, and I hope you are pretty accurate. However, the one problem not being factored in is the uncertainty of the undug CLAM. How many people have left CLAM or avoided CLAM after learning of the mega supply that could be unloaded on the market at any time? Sure, there is risk in any currency. But how many people decide the risks with CLAM are just too much? I believe in CLAM, but I think it would be a much easier sell to people if the initial distribution wasn't this huge drag and potential black swan 24/7.

I'm not saying a huge digger will come out tomorrow, or ever again. But the problem is that one can. 10 can. By the end of the day we could see CLAM crash worse than ever before - not because of the CLAM holders who have been supporting the currency, but because of someone discovering a huge cache of undug addresses they had from some experiment they ran, or a web wallet/service. I think the initial distribution added a ton of value to CLAM by being so widespread. But now that distribution is a gun pointed at our head, and nobody knows if its loaded or when it will fire.

10 diggers of the same magnitude relative to active supply is mathematically impossible and it isn't even close. That would increase supply by 1.6^10 or around 100x, so 150 million coins. That's >10x more than the number of undug coins that even exist given the highest possible (unrealistic) estimate.

No, we realistically will probably see at most 1-2 more such big digs, or maybe none. It they do happen it will probably be at much higher prices (on the theory that past prices haven't been high enough to be noticed by potential big diggers, or possibly not high enough to motivate action), which is sort of desirable. It makes the supply elastic and the price less volatile.

You want more crazy pumps and dumps? Removing elasticity from the supply is a good way to do that.



Its really impossible to know for sure on both sides

I suggest voting for whatever makes the most sense

Kind of like beating a dead horse to argue back and forth without any real way of knowing

Vote and put this topic out of its misery one way or another!
nwfella
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1000


Well hello there!


View Profile
December 13, 2015, 03:08:31 AM
 #6075

Had no idea this was how CLAMs distribution worked (fascinating concept).  I'm relatively sure I had some positive balances across all three coins around that time.  Downloading blockchain now and interested in seeing how I go about proving ownership over the addy's.  I didn't really see any kind of guide in my quick scan but will take a closer look if it doesn't somehow become evident when the blockchain finishes downloading Smiley

¯¯̿̿¯̿̿'̿̿̿̿̿̿̿'̿̿'̿̿̿̿̿'̿̿̿)͇̿̿)̿̿̿̿ '̿̿̿̿̿̿\̵͇̿̿\=(•̪̀●́)=o/̵͇̿̿/'̿̿ ̿ ̿̿

Gimme the crypto!!
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1197



View Profile
December 13, 2015, 03:43:49 AM
 #6076

Had no idea this was how CLAMs distribution worked (fascinating concept).  I'm relatively sure I had some positive balances across all three coins around that time.  Downloading blockchain now and interested in seeing how I go about proving ownership over the addy's.  I didn't really see any kind of guide in my quick scan but will take a closer look if it doesn't somehow become evident when the blockchain finishes downloading Smiley

Here's your answer. I recommend making sure your wallets are empty before importing them.

If you owned, in your private wallet, DOGE, LTC and/or DOGE in May of last year:
1. Download the CLAM client software.
2. Click File->Import Wallet.
3. Browse to the BTC, LTC or DOGE wallet.dat file.
4. If you have CLAM you should see them once you've sync'd to block 10,000.
chilly2k
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1007
Merit: 1000


View Profile
December 13, 2015, 03:46:43 AM
 #6077


   Crazy Idea Time. 

We're trying to address a few problems.  Notably the vulnerability to large dig's, and the desire to keep digging alive.  Also this would encourage people  to always be on the look out for new clams.  Maybe even get more folks to run the wallet locally. 

What if we could somehow seed new clams onto the chain at some interval (Weekly) and ties them to BTC,LTC, and Doge addresses that have been used recently (last 2 months?)  Then only allow digs from block that are so new (Last 14,400 blocks or 10 Days.). 

   The idea being there are new opportunities every week to claim clams. And if you have an Active BTC, LTC or Doge wallet you may have clams.    But you only have 10 days to claim your clams.  We could decide how many should be distributed, and start off fairly large and shrink the seeding based on how many are actually claimed. 

   Since you can only dig from the last X (14,400) that would lock up the original claims in the first blocks.    Based on the selection of the addresses anyone might get new clams.  The time limit will keep BIG users from accumulating to many free clams. 

   Just throwing it out there,  I'm sure this would not be an easy thing to do technically,  But, before we even look at that, does this even have merit?  Maybe I missed something?   

   OK, Maybe I injected to much of my own ideas.  

Would a new digging system, that would eliminate the existing distribution, and include newer crypto folks make any sense?  

If you keep some type of digging that might satisfy the Purists.
If you eliminate the possible Large cache of clams being claimed by one person, that's what some want.    

Faust Roland
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 108
Merit: 10


View Profile
December 13, 2015, 07:48:46 AM
 #6078

Hi!

What about not removing digging, but just spread digging into next few years.
Something like allow digging only for 1/X undug addresses:
I.e. For X=20
year 2016 allows to dig only addresses where sha256hash(UNDUG_CLAM_ADDRESS)%20 == 16
year 2017 allows to dig only addresses where sha256hash(UNDUG_CLAM_ADDRESS)%20 == 17
...
So it takes 20 years to dig them all and then it can start new round.

What do you think?

EDIT:
http://www.opb.org/news/article/new-law-no-more-than-850-gold-mining-dredges-allow/

I think it would be fairer then to lower the amount of clams that are bound to a bitcoin and so on address. That way every address can be claimed though the digging slowly get's less. Similar to block halving. If it would be slow then it would be not a so hard break.

I think with your way all addresses still could be claimed. You only need to wait for the next year to claim the rest, isn't it?

Yes. All addresses still could be claimed, you just need to wait for it.
Faust Roland
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 108
Merit: 10


View Profile
December 13, 2015, 07:59:46 AM
 #6079

Petition Id: e2ef93da
Link: http://txti.es/e2ef93da
Transaction: 5c24c6f636f0ed3a8b0ea792cd65218b2e2f218d52b7a425b42983cbb6023a33

Postpone digging into the future

- At the exact moment of time will be possible to dig only fraction of initial distribution
- All address from the initial distribution is possible to dig, but only in specific time-frame.

- It lowers amount of clam entering the market.
- No one will be harm, everybody will be able to claim their Clams, they should only have to wait.

I.e.
Allow digging only for 1/X undug addresses:  
Code:
Example for X=20  

year 2016 allows to dig only addresses where sha256(ADDRESS)%20 == 16  
year 2017 allows to dig only addresses where sha256(ADDRESS)%20 == 17  
year 2018 allows to dig only addresses where sha256(ADDRESS)%20 == 18  

So it takes 20 years to dig them all and then it can start new round.  
In year 2037 everyone had the chance to claim all their Clams.  

Value of X and exact address hashing algorithm is for future discussion. (May be is not necessary to hash it, as the address itself is just number)

Note: Petition hash is made from the raw txti source.
Bitcoiner2015
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 120
Merit: 100


View Profile
December 13, 2015, 08:32:15 AM
 #6080

Petition Id: e2ef93da
Link: http://txti.es/e2ef93da
Transaction: 5c24c6f636f0ed3a8b0ea792cd65218b2e2f218d52b7a425b42983cbb6023a33

Postpone digging into the future

- At the exact moment of time will be possible to dig only fraction of initial distribution
- All address from the initial distribution is possible to dig, but only in specific time-frame.

- It lowers amount of clam entering the market.
- No one will be harm, everybody will be able to claim their Clams, they should only have to wait.

I.e.
Allow digging only for 1/X undug addresses:  
Code:
Example for X=20  

year 2016 allows to dig only addresses where sha256(ADDRESS)%20 == 16  
year 2017 allows to dig only addresses where sha256(ADDRESS)%20 == 17  
year 2018 allows to dig only addresses where sha256(ADDRESS)%20 == 18  

So it takes 20 years to dig them all and then it can start new round.  
In year 2037 everyone had the chance to claim all their Clams.  

Value of X and exact address hashing algorithm is for future discussion. (May be is not necessary to hash it, as the address itself is just number)

Note: Petition hash is made from the raw txti source.

And when your bank sends you a letter like that what will you think?
Your money is still there, but you can't claim it for the next x years because we are worried about inflation...

There was a big digger, the market crashed, now the market is recovering/recovered (market cap higher than earlier except the bubble peak). The coin works, just leave it be. If you had undug addresses you wouldn't be suggesting we postpone or cancel digging, don't screw over other people just because you got yours.
Pages: « 1 ... 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 [304] 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 ... 501 »
  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!