[ANN][CLAM] CLAMs, Proof-Of-Chain, Proof-Of-Working-Stake, a.k.a. "Clamcoin"

[SuperClam]

Brilliant move switching Just-Dice to CLAMs and bringing it back online dooglus. I only wish I'd realized you'd done it sooner so I could have tried to invest in some of the bankroll at an earlier point in time.
I know CLAMs is a decentralized currency, however, in a way it is sort of hanging in the fate of Just-Dice, in my opinion. If for some reason JD was ever shut down and could no longer operate on CLAMs, I think this would deal a heavy blow to the currency. I would think some merchant support starting early and growing could balance out any negative effects in the future if for some reason JD went down. Which, I don't see any reason this would happen, just thinking ahead. Do any merchants accept CLAMs for payment?

Services such as Shapeshift.io allow you to pay invoices with CLAM.
There was talk of adding a feature similar to "veribit"; however, if I remember correctly, there was concern about implementing a centralized service in the core wallet (where it likely does not belong).

Currently, the primary usage of CLAM involves gambling, trading and staking.

Brick-and-mortar good merchants are certainly welcome and needed - and we are happy to help with any implementation details.

[BayAreaCoins]

Brilliant move switching Just-Dice to CLAMs and bringing it back online dooglus. I only wish I'd realized you'd done it sooner so I could have tried to invest in some of the bankroll at an earlier point in time.

I know CLAMs is a decentralized currency, however, in a way it is sort of hanging in the fate of Just-Dice, in my opinion. If for some reason JD was ever shut down and could no longer operate on CLAMs, I think this would deal a heavy blow to the currency. I would think some merchant support starting early and growing could balance out any negative effects in the future if for some reason JD went down. Which, I don't see any reason this would happen, just thinking ahead. Do any merchants accept CLAMs for payment?

It actually isn't decentralized at the moment.

Dooglus has way over 51% of the staking power and I believe it will continue to grow until about 90-95% unless someone makes a service that can compete with the daily returns.

I think Doog having the right to veto at this point is a good thing.

With PoS you kind of elect who you want to trust directly with your wealth & the person elected chooses it by accepting over 51% of the staking network... Kinda cool. 

If CLAMS really wanted to be decentralized so that all this pressure was off Just-dice the service for Clamcoin... I think it would be wise to cap invest at JD and set up a simple code on the site that allows more CLAMS to be invested as the money supply grows.  This would:

A:  Decentralize CLAMS through force rather than hope.  The first few cracks at it where in the hope of people divesting to do the "right" thing (leverage system.)
B:  Takes the keys out of any one mans hand.  Doog has already given plenty of keys back to people and I have faith he will continue.
C:  Unnecessary pressure on Just-Dice. 
D:  Encourage people to get people to dig their CLAMS.  More digs = more room to squeeze into Just-Dice invested.
E:  Dooglus keeps his right to veto, but through consensus.  If he needed the ban hammer Doog could just open up the deposit button.
F:  Encourage chat trade.  This may or may not be a good thing, but I always enjoyed the hustled and it would be funny to see the market determine what it was worth! "You got CLAM CLAMS or JD CLAMS?  JD CLAMS trade 50% over spot."

I really don't think this would result as negatively as I thought once upon a time.  After messing around with PoS a little on my own and what not I believe the average crypto user can handle it.  I really do wish there was one exchange that was doing it "right" as far as holding customers coins.

This could also stimulate the development community because Just-Dice is a fucking whale and a half lol... It's orphaning blocks for the little guys and all types of shit.  I'm all for big business... but I can also see the "being fair" part of the distribution side of it.

[tspacepilot]

Well the why not is that it's an address I was using for cold-storage and since I don't want to keep my savings in an address that I've given away the private key for then I'd have to first move the coins that are there.  I'd do it if CLAM is high, but not worth the trouble if CLAM is low.  But hey, I thought all the addys that were funded were funded at the 4.6 level.  What other level is there?

There's only the 4.6 level. I guess he means if it's only one address maybe it's not worth it, but if it's 100 addresses it is...

Alas, it's just 1.  Anyway, thanks for the clarification

You don't have to give away the private key. I recently added a command to Just-Dice that will allow you to 'dig' your CLAM by signing a transaction on an offline machine.

For example, if I type this in the chat box:

/dig 1CrPRwBkwZdEejXusCbh8o35YMN7g7ffKf offline

It tells me:

00:21:40 INFO: run the following on an offline Linux machine, then broadcast the resulting hex value using https://just-dice.com/pushtx
00:21:41 INFO: the addr= part tells it where to send your CLAMs; the default is your Just-Dice deposit address
00:21:41 INFO: when prompted, type your private key:
00:21:41 INFO: echo -n "privkey: "; read privkey; addr=xMYvd61airRrnSUmV2oE1JhEqvzLdFWP7r; val=4.60535574; txid=b45c2a20731f8a88ba980f9cc9ce1d43cd7913d9c26ee3e8002ba1d08676b3de; vout=0; pubkey=76a91482007d41eec3a28b66b1ba726721d95577eb5a7688ac; output='"txid":"'$txid'","vout":'$vout; clamd signrawtransaction $(clamd createrawtransaction '[{'$output'}]' '{"'$addr'":'$val'}') '[{'$output',"scriptPubKey":"'$pubkey'"}]' '["'$privkey'"]'

ie. it gives me a command that I can run on an offline machine that will sign a transaction that (when broadcast) sends the dug up CLAMs to an address of my choosing.

For more information, see this post that I made when I first implemented the command.

That's very cool, Doog.  I'm glad I can grab those 4 clams without broadcasting a private key.  However, this means I have to install clamd.  I'm not complaining (this is a very nice option), but I may not act on this at the moment either (laziness).  I'm surprised no one dropped the current price of a clam in BTC on me.  ha!

[almightyruler]

Still having problems with ORPHAN BLOCK 751

I think I've figured out what has happened this time. The client accepted block 516305, but seems to have completely ignored block 516306... and only that block. Subsequent blocks were received, but have been marked as orphans, since there is the gap between 516305 and 516307.

SetBestChain: new best=8850af0c8791a1b29ffb871852d37e802918fe2115f4a1488a198bb29d71a6ac  height=516304  trust=45728299117685894742  blocktrust=202424519897173  date=06/18/15 03:27:12
ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
SetBestChain: new best=e29741fec7fa3884b76d4afa76fcd3f60ae3ada6ecca43dd8e263f4bd8ad2b9b  height=516305  trust=45728501751223256301  blocktrust=202633537361559  date=06/18/15 03:27:44
ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : VerifySignature failed on coinstake bee2879550e872894ea688f8d02e0069276e9610fd8007e2997e53cedcb66ead
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 5, prev=009d1a341e28bb890481b0fd3381455372134942b748f1905c6d0cf9eb3dc211  <-- this points to block 516306, which hasn't been accepted!!
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 6, prev=0844844a172027d3ec74dc24ab61b87dc8cbb4aea9bbf55bb84aecb01c549f3a
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 7, prev=46b8f1a83e0c918a70325e8ec8f5356e43327bda3874dfba2edf805a141b26ae
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 8, prev=5b2f49ba9d4a618b209b795e0fd2af537a4a130a4cc49269dc507833ec6a9ae1
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 9, prev=e7fce98d440a2e9692236826b30228380251cdd6ccd0733092af3ea9457a0192
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 10, prev=e04ff93bf7348311079e22e6f867eeb0048f1febddfe470498acf22316b576e1
ProcessBlock: ORPHAN BLOCK 11, prev=d5818ffeab30732739d8f9e8a4f30ad683d7b8a7d952da8593591077c4aa5e3f

- Block 516305 is in the chain, but the forward link is broken.
- Block 516306 does not appear to be known about by the client.
- Block 516307 links back to block 516306, and here the reverse link is broken. There's a chain of 700+ blocks extending from 516307, but since it cannot be linked to the main chain, they are all considered orphans.

I've restarted the client several times, including with -rescan, but it's still stuck at 516305. The "ORPHAN BLOCK" count is slowly climbing, and will reach 751 in less than an hour. I guess at that point it will discard any further blocks offered by peers.

Any ideas on how I can force the client to request and properly process that block? This is an ARM CPU so I'd rather not spend another 2 days syncing from scratch.

Hopefully this will also give some hints on what is causing the ORPHAN BLOCK 751 problem.

edit: looks like this may be the cause...

ERROR: CheckProofOfStake() : VerifySignature failed on coinstake bee2879550e872894ea688f8d02e0069276e9610fd8007e2997e53cedcb66ead

I checked on a fully synced client, and this transaction appears in... dun, dun, DUN: block 516306.

edit 2: now stuck in the 751 orphan block loop, where the client repeatedly requests the same set of blocks (perhaps because it's not storing them locally?). No other choice but to close the client right now.

[dooglus]

That's very cool, Doog.  I'm glad I can grab those 4 clams without broadcasting a private key.  However, this means I have to install clamd.  I'm not complaining (this is a very nice option), but I may not act on this at the moment either (laziness).  I'm surprised no one dropped the current price of a clam in BTC on me.  ha!

Note that you only need to install clamd, and don't need to let it sync any of the blockchain. The script provided by Just-Dice contains all the information the offline machine needs to sign a transaction that digs your CLAMs. You can make a virtual machine on the offline machine, install clamd in there, then blow it away after you've signed the message. Or just boot into a Linux LiveCD environment that can't even write to the hdd. There are plenty of ways of safely doing this without needing to worry about a malicious clamd doing any damage.

I guess you still need to trust that a malicious clamd and the pushtx page aren't working together, such that the clamd creates what looks like a signed tx, but actually has your private key appended, and the pushtx page strips off the private key before broadcasting the transaction. That would be a way of stealing your private key - unless you tried decoding the transaction by hand to check that it didn't have anything extra in it.

I guess what it comes down to is that you can't 100% trust software you didn't examine thoroughly.

[dooglus]

With PoS you kind of elect who you want to trust directly with your wealth & the person elected chooses it by accepting over 51% of the staking network... Kinda cool. 

That's OK unless he steals the coins. At that point you can't change your decision on who to trust with your wealth.

B:  Takes the keys out of any one mans hand.  Doog has already given plenty of keys back to people and I have faith he will continue.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. I don't think I ever gave a private key to anyone. I did refund a bunch of Bitcoin to JD investors, but that was done with regular transactions, from my private key to theirs.

E:  Dooglus keeps his right to veto, but through consensus.  If he needed the ban hammer Doog could just open up the deposit button.
F:  Encourage chat trade.  This may or may not be a good thing, but I always enjoyed the hustled and it would be funny to see the market determine what it was worth! "You got CLAM CLAMS or JD CLAMS?  JD CLAMS trade 50% over spot."

Are you talking about a JD fork of CLAMs here? In a hypothetical* scenario where the CLAM developers do something crazy that is broadly disliked (setting the transaction fee to 100 CLAMs per kB for instance) anyone is able to fork the chain. You don't need 75% of the active coins to do that. You can say "I'm not switching to the new version; I'm going to keep running the current version with the low fees". You then make a transaction that the new official expensive version won't accept, wait for it to be staked by your own client, then add a checkpoint for the block that staked it. Distribute your version with the checkpoint to anyone who agrees with you, call it "BayCoin" or whatever, and you've forked the network. It will take a while for the difficulty to adjust downwards if you and your supporters only have a small percentage of the network, but it will happen eventually. So in that sense *everyone* can veto changes. Having 75% of the active coins just means that the difficulty will adjust more quickly.

* It's interesting to think about, but would be horrible to actually do. Like the Bitcoin/Gavincoin thing - we hope consensus is reached without a contentious hard fork.

[chilly2k]

B:  Takes the keys out of any one mans hand.  Doog has already given plenty of keys back to people and I have faith he will continue.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. I don't think I ever gave a private key to anyone. I did refund a bunch of Bitcoin to JD investors, but that was done with regular transactions, from my private key to theirs.

   I think he was using a metaphor.  I believe he was referring to your offering the offsite option to try and encourage more offsite staking.  


edit: and that was a great explanation on forking a coin...

[SuperClam]

Still having problems with ORPHAN BLOCK 751

I think I've figured out what has happened this time. The client accepted block 516305, but seems to have completely ignored block 516306... and only that block. Subsequent blocks were received, but have been marked as orphans, since there is the gap between 516305 and 516307.
...

Please come visit us in IRC #clams.

We could use your currently stuck client to help us debug the issue.

[BayAreaCoins]

With PoS you kind of elect who you want to trust directly with your wealth & the person elected chooses it by accepting over 51% of the staking network... Kinda cool.  

That's OK unless he steals the coins. At that point you can't change your decision on who to trust with your wealth.

Voting can be a very dangerous thing.  Voting is OK until you vote in a bad apple and at that point someone generally gets fucked.

B:  Takes the keys out of any one mans hand.  Doog has already given plenty of keys back to people and I have faith he will continue.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. I don't think I ever gave a private key to anyone. I did refund a bunch of Bitcoin to JD investors, but that was done with regular transactions, from my private key to theirs.

I don't mean you actually giving out private keys.  I think of all these coins like little keys to wealth or power.  When someone sends you their BTC, DOGE or CLAM they are trusting you with a drop box key.

I know you are a fair guy and go to great lengths to make sure games/coins are fair.  At this point would you say CLAM is fair to the average staker outside Just-Dice?  If the game isn't fair why would anyone try to play it?  

I'm scared Just-Dice is actually hurting CLAMS growth by being so strong % wise.  If Bitcoin had all the mining power on one pool in 2010 would Bitcoin be where Bitcoin is today?  I don't believe so.

E:  Dooglus keeps his right to veto, but through consensus.  If he needed the ban hammer Doog could just open up the deposit button.
F:  Encourage chat trade.  This may or may not be a good thing, but I always enjoyed the hustled and it would be funny to see the market determine what it was worth! "You got CLAM CLAMS or JD CLAMS?  JD CLAMS trade 50% over spot."

Are you talking about a JD fork of CLAMs here? In a hypothetical* scenario where the CLAM developers do something crazy that is broadly disliked (setting the transaction fee to 100 CLAMs per kB for instance) anyone is able to fork the chain. You don't need 75% of the active coins to do that. You can say "I'm not switching to the new version; I'm going to keep running the current version with the low fees". You then make a transaction that the new official expensive version won't accept, wait for it to be staked by your own client, then add a checkpoint for the block that staked it. Distribute your version with the checkpoint to anyone who agrees with you, call it "BayCoin" or whatever, and you've forked the network. It will take a while for the difficulty to adjust downwards if you and your supporters only have a small percentage of the network, but it will happen eventually. So in that sense *everyone* can veto changes. Having 75% of the active coins just means that the difficulty will adjust more quickly.

* It's interesting to think about, but would be horrible to actually do. Like the Bitcoin/Gavincoin thing - we hope consensus is reached without a contentious hard fork.

E was concerning to forks.  I'm sure consensus would be reached, but it's comforting to at least know you have a hand in it.

F was in regards to if you did put a cap on investing at Just-Dice.  Traditional mining pools stop miners from joining all the time in order to keep Bitcoin decentralized (or at least the appearance of decentralization.)

Let's say the total OS (outstanding shares) of CLAMS is 1,000,000 CLAMS.  This means the max the JD system would allow invested is 499,999 coins.  I believe this would lead to:

1.  A strong JD account selling market.  If someone has 10k CLAMS invested and the site isn't accepting investments any more due to trying to avoid centralization... I would imagine someone would pay 11k CLAMS for the account.
2.  Decentralization of CLAMS
3.  Encouragement for people to get people to dig more CLAMS (this will drastically increase the market cap of CLAMS)
4.  Encourage people to stake on their own because their blocks they find won't be orphaned by possibly unfair staking
5.  Encourage people to create CLAM services because people can't and won't use their CLAMS for just one thing if they physically can't.  If there was one Bitcoin pool in 2010 with 80% of all the mining power that caused other miners to either join them or get their shit orphaned into the middle of next week... I imagine not many other mining pools would be popping up!  I think that is what we are seeing here as well... I could be wrong.

[tspacepilot]

@BayAreaCoins, I don't mean this to be an insult, but I think that the eventual fate of CLAM is to be basically a Just-Dice coin. I'm really not surprised that JD is basically owning the coin.  FWIW, Clams could have done a lot worse when it comes to the /dev/null of history that most altcoins end up in real fast.

That's very cool, Doog.  I'm glad I can grab those 4 clams without broadcasting a private key.  However, this means I have to install clamd.  I'm not complaining (this is a very nice option), but I may not act on this at the moment either (laziness).  I'm surprised no one dropped the current price of a clam in BTC on me.  ha!

Note that you only need to install clamd, and don't need to let it sync any of the blockchain. The script provided by Just-Dice contains all the information the offline machine needs to sign a transaction that digs your CLAMs. You can make a virtual machine on the offline machine, install clamd in there, then blow it away after you've signed the message. Or just boot into a Linux LiveCD environment that can't even write to the hdd. There are plenty of ways of safely doing this without needing to worry about a malicious clamd doing any damage.

I guess you still need to trust that a malicious clamd and the pushtx page aren't working together, such that the clamd creates what looks like a signed tx, but actually has your private key appended, and the pushtx page strips off the private key before broadcasting the transaction. That would be a way of stealing your private key - unless you tried decoding the transaction by hand to check that it didn't have anything extra in it.

I guess what it comes down to is that you can't 100% trust software you didn't examine thoroughly.

Hehe, I'm going to go ahead and assume that if you were in the business of maliciously stealing everyone's clams left and right that I would have heard something about it by now. Anyway, I do appreciate this functionality, and thanks for pointing out that about not having to wait on a blockchain sync.  I may give this a try this evening.  Take my final 4.6 clams and decide what to do with 'em.

[dooglus]

I know you are a fair guy and go to great lengths to make sure games/coins are fair.  At this point would you say CLAM is fair to the average staker outside Just-Dice?  If the game isn't fair why would anyone try to play it?  

I charge a hefty 10% fee for staking. That leaves lots of room for competition. I keep hearing rumours of competing staking pools opening, but never see anything come of it.

I could continually increase JD's staking fees until it has less than 50% of the CLAMs, but I suspect that would be seen as me trying to grab more CLAMs for myself. How could such a thing work? Maybe the fee goes up 1% each day at midnight if we have >50% of all active CLAMs, and down by 1% if we have less than 40%, and we just leave it to change day by day. Eventually (after less than a month, I guess) we would have less than half the CLAMs - or we would be taking 40% of all stakes. Does that seem more fair? It would be an interesting experiment for sure.

I'm scared Just-Dice is actually hurting CLAMS growth by being so strong % wise.  If Bitcoin had all the mining power on one pool in 2010 would Bitcoin be where Bitcoin is today?  I don't believe so.

You're almost certainly right.

4.  Encourage people to stake on their own because their blocks they find won't be orphaned by possibly unfair staking

I've often wondered how bad it is for others trying to stake so I finally looked around for some data. Checking http://blocktree.io/richlist/CLAM for the biggest address that's staking, I found this guy. The last non-staking transaction was 13 days ago. Since then it has staked 111 times:

111 blocks in 13 days with 4400 balance : 111 / 13.0 / 4400 = 0.00194 blocks per day per clam

JD has 548k clams and stakes 1200 blocks per day : 1200 / 548e3 = 0.00218 blocks per day per clam

So it seems like JD stakes about 10% more efficiently. Or maybe 13 days isn't long enough to reduce the effects of variance.

Here are the day-by-day staking stats for that address. (date, block count, block numbers)

2015-06-18       7      517262 516992 516929 516707 516701 516345 516171
2015-06-17       4      515951 515390 514809 514780
2015-06-16       5      514670 514609 514211 513959 513609
2015-06-15       7      513218 513047 512972 512915 512521 512260 512209
2015-06-14      11      511786 511746 511720 511059 511045 510868 510845 510804 510582 510512 510477
2015-06-13      15      510267 510233 510180 510177 510061 510046 510002 509929 509654 509581 509387 509207 509188 509130 508965
2015-06-12       4      508742 508690 508600 508525
2015-06-11      10      507496 507480 507409 507255 506798 506726 506699 506290 506232 506123
2015-06-10       8      506073 505767 505380 505274 505248 505146 505081 504846
2015-06-09       6      504289 504254 504051 503881 503544 503277
2015-06-08       9      503093 502962 502776 502733 502601 502569 502332 502319 502277
2015-06-07      12      501775 501594 501579 501339 501172 500903 500867 500696 500658 500629 500515 500506
2015-06-06       6      500083 499537 499501 499423 499280 498998
2015-06-05       7      498916 498857 498684 498628 498444 498432 498426
               ---
               111

[dooglus]

Vote for Clams to be added at Coinomat.com

If you want to add CLAMs to your service, just add them. There's no need to ask anyone's permission. And votes are easily manipulated.

[dooglus]

I'm surprised no one dropped the current price of a clam in BTC on me.  ha!

Since December:



The last week:



Right now:

0.00574000 BTC

[BayAreaCoins]

I know you are a fair guy and go to great lengths to make sure games/coins are fair.  At this point would you say CLAM is fair to the average staker outside Just-Dice?  If the game isn't fair why would anyone try to play it?  

I charge a hefty 10% fee for staking. That leaves lots of room for competition. I keep hearing rumours of competing staking pools opening, but never see anything come of it.

I could continually increase JD's staking fees until it has less than 50% of the CLAMs, but I suspect that would be seen as me trying to grab more CLAMs for myself. How could such a thing work? Maybe the fee goes up 1% each day at midnight if we have >50% of all active CLAMs, and down by 1% if we have less than 40%, and we just leave it to change day by day. Eventually (after less than a month, I guess) we would have less than half the CLAMs - or we would be taking 40% of all stakes. Does that seem more fair? It would be an interesting experiment for sure.

Idea... perhaps you could use the increased JD fees in order for you to hold the bounty on a P2Pool style PoS pool.

While bullshitting in the CLAM IRC today that seemed to be the least invasive decentralization option on the plate, but it would be extremely difficult and would need a solid backing from some whale service .  I believe that would solve the orphaning problem as well.

Increasing fees is still another "I hope they decentralize" tactic.  I think it might boil down to forcing her to become decentralized.  I do not think it would hurt CLAM though and I actually believe it might help CLAMS in more way than one. 

[dooglus]

Idea... perhaps you could use the increased JD fees in order for you to hold the bounty on a P2Pool style PoS pool.

While bullshitting in the CLAM IRC today that seemed to be the least invasive decentralization option on the plate, but it would be extremely difficult and would need a solid backing from some whale service .  I believe that would solve the orphaning problem as well.

Increasing fees is still another "I hope they decentralize" tactic.  I think it might boil down to forcing her to become decentralized.  I do not think it would hurt CLAM though and I actually believe it might help CLAMS in more way than one. 

That is a good idea. I guess p2pool could work for PoS just as well as for PoW.

I've not looked at the Bitcoin p2pool stuff for a year or more, but from what I remember it used to give relatively poor returns compared to mining at a centralised pool. I don't remember why, or even if anyone ever figured out why. Did it ever become economically competitive with the centralised pools?

[BayAreaCoins]

This would be a really good service for CLAM to be on.  They said they are about to add some new coins.  If anyone has a few seconds to make a post over there it would be appreciated.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=262082.msg11653533#msg11653533

[BayAreaCoins]

Idea... perhaps you could use the increased JD fees in order for you to hold the bounty on a P2Pool style PoS pool.

While bullshitting in the CLAM IRC today that seemed to be the least invasive decentralization option on the plate, but it would be extremely difficult and would need a solid backing from some whale service .  I believe that would solve the orphaning problem as well.

Increasing fees is still another "I hope they decentralize" tactic.  I think it might boil down to forcing her to become decentralized.  I do not think it would hurt CLAM though and I actually believe it might help CLAMS in more way than one.  

That is a good idea. I guess p2pool could work for PoS just as well as for PoW.

I've not looked at the Bitcoin p2pool stuff for a year or more, but from what I remember it used to give relatively poor returns compared to mining at a centralised pool. I don't remember why, or even if anyone ever figured out why. Did it ever become economically competitive with the centralised pools?

'
I actually have some experience with this from Nix and I's DOGE pool (LocalMiners.com was P2Pool)

The issue with running a P2Pool DOGE pool compared to running a traditional "communist" pool is that people expect to get paid for nothing.  People really like the fact that they get something from the communist pools every block even if their miners aren't really helping the pool.  P2Pool was really good for the miners who have their shit together and they earn more because they aren't paying leaches.

A P2Pool for PoS seems like it would be much easier because there isn't all the other variables in the mining process (miner in China on a USA pool ect.)

It would decentralize CLAM over night.

[SuperClam]

Idea... perhaps you could use the increased JD fees in order for you to hold the bounty on a P2Pool style PoS pool.

While bullshitting in the CLAM IRC today that seemed to be the least invasive decentralization option on the plate, but it would be extremely difficult and would need a solid backing from some whale service .  I believe that would solve the orphaning problem as well.

Increasing fees is still another "I hope they decentralize" tactic.  I think it might boil down to forcing her to become decentralized.  I do not think it would hurt CLAM though and I actually believe it might help CLAMS in more way than one. 

That is a good idea. I guess p2pool could work for PoS just as well as for PoW.

I've not looked at the Bitcoin p2pool stuff for a year or more, but from what I remember it used to give relatively poor returns compared to mining at a centralised pool. I don't remember why, or even if anyone ever figured out why. Did it ever become economically competitive with the centralised pools?

I am pretty sure one of the complaints was that the system was PPLNS - but don't quote me.

[BayAreaCoins]

Idea... perhaps you could use the increased JD fees in order for you to hold the bounty on a P2Pool style PoS pool.

While bullshitting in the CLAM IRC today that seemed to be the least invasive decentralization option on the plate, but it would be extremely difficult and would need a solid backing from some whale service .  I believe that would solve the orphaning problem as well.

Increasing fees is still another "I hope they decentralize" tactic.  I think it might boil down to forcing her to become decentralized.  I do not think it would hurt CLAM though and I actually believe it might help CLAMS in more way than one.  

That is a good idea. I guess p2pool could work for PoS just as well as for PoW.

I've not looked at the Bitcoin p2pool stuff for a year or more, but from what I remember it used to give relatively poor returns compared to mining at a centralised pool. I don't remember why, or even if anyone ever figured out why. Did it ever become economically competitive with the centralised pools?

...- but don't quote me.

"I've been mining for 24 hours and still haven't got anything... what's wrong?!" *Check their stats and their miner is like in Romania, bounced off Mars and then jumps the J train to the mining pool*  Mind you that was with DOGE lol....

We had some issues with the system "eating" our fees.  It was really really strange.

[tspacepilot]

I'm surprised no one dropped the current price of a clam in BTC on me.  ha!

Since December:

[snip]

The last week:

[snip]

Right now:

0.00574000 BTC

Thanks man.  CLAM is surprisingly stable.  I'd say that's a good thing for newish crypto to have been able to establish a price point and hold it.  I don't think I've seen that from many (any?) altcoins other than LTC.