Bitmark

[coinsolidation]

I have reposted this so it is at the top of a new page

Status
1. the domain bitmark.co has been purchased for the project
2. the dedicated server is purchased and being configured for bitmark
3. the dns seeder is being set up
4. we will be able to launch any time from tomorrow

Funding
Start up funding, required to get the project running has been kindly been donated.
Short term development over the next year is covered by me freely committing my time to the project, and maybe some others.
Long term development after the first year is to be covered by a donation based foundation.

I am not rich, I am not a miner, and my time is spent on Bitmark. Periodically I may have some spare change to rent a mining rig for a few hours, I hope I can get some BTM this way. It is likely that I will have the least BTM out of everybody, especially if the hash rate is high.

IPO.
There is no IPO, there will be no IPO. Bitmarks have zero value, any value they achieve will be earned, any IPO would mean giving a supposed value to each btm before it is even launched, we can not do that.

IPM.
The bitmark foundation will be funded by donations, if any btc donation or 'investment' is given to the bitmark project it will be spent on hired mining rigs, 5% of the btm mined will go to the foundation, 95% to the donor/investor.
There is no IPM period and no call for investment or donations, if somebody gives 0.0001 BTC today or 2 BTC next year it will be used as described above.
BTM donations are more appreciated and will go directly to the foundation.
This is fair to all.
If somebody explicitly wants to donate to the project developers (currently that is me) they can, but there is no requirement or request to do so.

Mining (important)
Maturity and Retarget
Bitmark block rewards take 721 confirmations to mature, the difficulty re-targets every 720 blocks (1 day). You cannot unlock any mined bitmarks until the next day, if you attempt to rape the coin with hashing power before dropping off the network, you won't see a result to your efforts for a long time.

Zero Value
I can not stress enough that Bitmarks have no value, do not expect any financial return on expended hash power for a long time. There is no exchange, there are no plans to be added to any exchange.

No Rush
The block reward reduces in 18 months, and only by a quarter, mining a block in 2014 gives you the same return as mining a block in 2015, and 75% in 2016.

Be fair and mine wisely
As there is no financial benefit to mining early and hard, it is detrimental, wait until you are comfortable and confident in the project before committing resources.
Be fair, if you want to mine some bitmarks early on, spare a mh for a few weeks not 100mh for an hour.
Strengthen the network because you see value in it existing.
If you mine this way you will increase the chance of being rewarded in the future financially.

Ideas and Outreach
Here is an example of a PM I received from macbackfat, who has been a huge asset to the project all ready

So, I was thinking about your POV on Exchanges....

I understand that the focus is not on price speculation and I'm with you there.  It occurred to me that maybe this project should be in talks with a Exchange provider that can help leverage the proliferation factor.

What I mean is that perhaps having a chat with Moolah (https://prelude.io) would be a good start.  Not only does he provide an Exchange service but he also provides a really nice set of API for merchant services.  I guess what I'm saying is that it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a chat with someone that can provide a strong set of API tools (merchant / exchange / mobile) to further establish the project.

I trust you as a community, and I am not an omnipotent leader, if you have a suggestion like this I can do it or you can do it, I have an email address coinsolidation at gmail dot com, cc me in and have these discussions. Refer to me as "Mark Pfennig".
My name is Mark, that is not why I chose Bitmark as a name for the project. Pfennig, no that is a pseudonym.

Discuss amongst yourselves as to what is or is not a good idea, discuss privately or publicly, include me when you feel it would be good for me to be included.
This is what I am doing, I will engage you all here in any discussions I have, you can do the same with each other.

You collectively are wiser than I am alone.

Focus
Over the next two to three days my own focus is the launch of bitmark, I have coding to do and software to release to you all.

Immediately after focus moves to our long term goals, making this easier to use and integrate with, branding and websites, documentation, software development kits, resources for adopters, plans to target adopters, discussions with adopters and users to get their requirements, community engagement. Speak out on any of these things.

If you know of tools which can help us organize ourselves and plan suggest them, perhaps you use something at work that is good for collaboration. Perhaps you specialise in design or marketing, share your ideas and we will make them a reality together.

Thank you all for your input and kind words, I am very happy to be working on this project with you.

[Androidicus]

Status
1. the domain bitmark.co has been purchased for the project
2. the dedicated server is purchased and being configured for bitmark
3. the dns seeder is being set up
4. we will be able to launch any time from tomorrow

---8<------SNIP SNIP

Thank you all for your input and kind words, I am very happy to be working on this project with you.

Perfect...

100% agree with Mining comments - on that point - is there any news on mining pool/s? I would like to direct some steady hashrate.

I would seriously suggest that you consider PMing MineP.it (on here) as I know that he works with devs...

Please provide a donation Bitmark address as soon as possible. Have you already posted a BTC donation address? EDIT: Doh, just checked!

Good luck!

[cryptozim]

I have reposted this so it is at the top of a new page

My reply to this is now posted before this post. Like it slipped into a wormhole.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=660544.msg7787199#msg7787199

[Este Nuno]

I would urge you to reconsider this. This is how coins get hash-raped. Something like KGW/DigiShield/DGW would protect from this. There have been coins with lower hashrates that have actually had to fork just to get past a block after being hash-raped.

What happens exactly, someone targets a large amount of hashrate at the coin which solves blocks at a much faster rate than the target? And then it goes until the difficulty adjusts, in this case one day?

[coinsolidation]

is there any news on mining pool/s? I would like to direct some steady hashrate.

I would seriously suggest that you consider PMing MineP.it (on here) as I know that he works with devs...

So far I know miningpool.co has intentions of adding support on release.
I can speak to MineP.it, or you can, or bring him here

4. we will be able to launch any time from tomorrow

I would give at least 48 hours from the official announcement to the time mining starts. You don't want anyone screaming "Ninja Launch," either.

the difficulty re-targets every 720 blocks (1 day)

I would urge you to reconsider this. This is how coins get hash-raped. Something like KGW/DigiShield/DGW would protect from this. There have been coins with lower hashrates that have actually had to fork just to get past a block after being hash-raped.

Considering the coin has a decent starting difficulty, zero value, no exchanges, potentially no pools, and doesn't expect to have any value or exchanges for a long time, do you think these things are still a concern?

My own original rationale was that Bitmark is crafted in such a way that the usual MINE DUMP can not happen, since there is no value, and so no concern.
edit: The next post covers this in more detail.

The first release serves one purpose, to allow early adopters and those contributing to the project to slowly get the network going and prove it is in fact stable and good code, whilst we work on the important things which give value to the coin, once they are happening then we may reasonably expect a natural rise in hashing power, and perhaps some value.

Remember, the first release is just a rebranded bitcoin, fully tested, converted to scrypt, and with a different block chain configuration. That itself has no real value other than as a code base for some other projects to use.

[coinsolidation]

What happens exactly, someone targets a large amount of hashrate at the coin which solves blocks at a much faster rate than the target? And then it goes until the difficulty adjusts, in this case one day?

If this happens, blocks are mined faster until the difficulty increases, if the hashing power is then removed the chain runs slower for a while until another 720 blocks have passed. If the hashing power isn't removed then the chain is just getting stronger.

However, Bitmark is setup so that non of the coins minted are mature until 720 blocks later, after the difficulty has changed again, so somebody who did this wouldn't get the coins for quite some time.

More importantly, the coins and chain has no value, it doesn't matter if it runs slow for a while, nobody has any need to be transferring valueless coins unless they are testing the code. There is no exchange, and even when there is nobody can mine coins today and dump them today, they have to wait another day yet before they can be spent, then wait for them to transfer. If they "rape" the coin, it could be two days before they get the coins to spend, by which time the price could have dropped considerably due to their own actions.

Thus we try to avoid this, and by the time it is of a concern and Bitmarks have any value, we should have a reasonable network hash rate and stable chain such that impact from a multipool or private entity with lots of hash power is mitigated.

[Este Nuno]

What happens exactly, someone targets a large amount of hashrate at the coin which solves blocks at a much faster rate than the target? And then it goes until the difficulty adjusts, in this case one day?

If this happens, blocks are mined faster until the difficulty increases, if the hashing power is then removed the chain runs slower for a while until another 720 blocks have passed. If the hashing power isn't removed then the chain is just getting stronger.

However, Bitmark is setup so that non of the coins minted are mature until 720 blocks later, after the difficulty has changed again, so somebody who did this wouldn't get the coins for quite some time.

More importantly, the coins and chain has no value, it doesn't matter if it runs slow for a while, nobody has any need to be transferring valueless coins unless they are testing the code. There is no exchange, and even when there is nobody can mine coins today and dump them today, they have to wait another day yet before they can be spent, then wait for them to transfer. If they "rape" the coin, it could be two days before they get the coins to spend, by which time the price could have dropped considerably due to their own actions.

Thus we try to avoid this, and by the time it is of a concern and Bitmarks have any value, we should have a reasonable network hash rate and stable chain such that impact from a multipool or private entity with lots of hash power is mitigated.

Oh, yeah. I think I remember this happening a while ago to a SHA256 altcoin when ASICs were first released around a year ago. It was so bad that the time between blocks basically crippled the network.

In that case I think it was a personal vendetta being taken out on the developer or something. (I think it was Lukejr who did the attack, but I'm not 100% sure)

In our case I think(and hope) that something like that is pretty unlikely to happen to us. But it's good that cryptozim brought it up because things like that are definitely something to keep in mind.

[Androidicus]

is there any news on mining pool/s? I would like to direct some steady hashrate.

I would seriously suggest that you consider PMing MineP.it (on here) as I know that he works with devs...

So far I know miningpool.co has intentions of adding support on release.
I can speak to MineP.it, or you can, or bring him here

4. we will be able to launch any time from tomorrow

I would give at least 48 hours from the official announcement to the time mining starts. You don't want anyone screaming "Ninja Launch," either.

the difficulty re-targets every 720 blocks (1 day)

I would urge you to reconsider this. This is how coins get hash-raped. Something like KGW/DigiShield/DGW would protect from this. There have been coins with lower hashrates that have actually had to fork just to get past a block after being hash-raped.

Considering the coin has a decent starting difficulty, zero value, no exchanges, potentially no pools, and doesn't expect to have any value or exchanges for a long time, do you think these things are still a concern?

My own original rationale was that Bitmark is crafted in such a way that the usual MINE DUMP can not happen, since there is no value, and so no concern.
edit: The next post covers this in more detail.

The first release serves one purpose, to allow early adopters and those contributing to the project to slowly get the network going and prove it is in fact stable and good code, whilst we work on the important things which give value to the coin, once they are happening then we may reasonably expect a natural rise in hashing power, and perhaps some value.

Remember, the first release is just a rebranded bitcoin, fully tested, converted to scrypt, and with a different block chain configuration. That itself has no real value other than as a code base for some other projects to use.

1) Miningpool.co - great! EDIT: (that's a sincere Great! - looked a little sarcastic on reading back!)

2) MineP.it - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=298616

I have PMd and emailed the dev at MineP.it - hopefully he will respond.

Whilst you have set out very reasonably the issues of MINE DUMP, and I agree that there will be no value, there is a general trend for miners to jump on a new coin launch just because it may have some value and they want to 'get in on it'... just be aware that your worthy ethics and philosophy are not widespread in the profit hungry shark / whale infested waters that make up the crypto sea...

[Este Nuno]

is there any news on mining pool/s? I would like to direct some steady hashrate.

I would seriously suggest that you consider PMing MineP.it (on here) as I know that he works with devs...

So far I know miningpool.co has intentions of adding support on release.
I can speak to MineP.it, or you can, or bring him here

4. we will be able to launch any time from tomorrow

I would give at least 48 hours from the official announcement to the time mining starts. You don't want anyone screaming "Ninja Launch," either.

the difficulty re-targets every 720 blocks (1 day)

I would urge you to reconsider this. This is how coins get hash-raped. Something like KGW/DigiShield/DGW would protect from this. There have been coins with lower hashrates that have actually had to fork just to get past a block after being hash-raped.

Considering the coin has a decent starting difficulty, zero value, no exchanges, potentially no pools, and doesn't expect to have any value or exchanges for a long time, do you think these things are still a concern?

My own original rationale was that Bitmark is crafted in such a way that the usual MINE DUMP can not happen, since there is no value, and so no concern.
edit: The next post covers this in more detail.

The first release serves one purpose, to allow early adopters and those contributing to the project to slowly get the network going and prove it is in fact stable and good code, whilst we work on the important things which give value to the coin, once they are happening then we may reasonably expect a natural rise in hashing power, and perhaps some value.

Remember, the first release is just a rebranded bitcoin, fully tested, converted to scrypt, and with a different block chain configuration. That itself has no real value other than as a code base for some other projects to use.

1) Miningpool.co - great! EDIT: (that's a sincere Great! - looked a little sarcastic on reading back!)

2) MineP.it - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=298616

I have PMd and emailed the dev at MineP.it - hopefully he will respond.

Whilst you have set out very reasonably the issues of MINE DUMP, and I agree that there will be no value, there is a general trend for miners to jump on a new coin launch just because it may have some value and they want to 'get in on it'... just be aware that your worthy ethics and philosophy are not widespread in the profit hungry shark / whale infested waters that make up the crypto sea...

Well it will be interesting to see what happens. That's for sure.

If someone ends up accumulating a large amount of Bitmark from mining then they now have incentive to see Bitmark succeed. So maybe that will draw in some new supporters who can help out.

[coinsolidation]

Oh, yeah. I think I remember this happening a while ago to a SHA256 altcoin when ASICs were first released around a year ago. It was so bad that the time between blocks basically crippled the network.

In that case I think it was a personal vendetta being taken out on the developer or something. (I think it was Lukejr who did the attack, but I'm not 100% sure)

In our case I think(and hope) that something like that is pretty unlikely to happen to us. But it's good that cryptozim brought it up because things like that are definitely something to keep in mind.

Whilst you have set out very reasonably the issues of MINE DUMP, and I agree that there will be no value, there is a general trend for miners to jump on a new coin launch just because it may have some value and they want to 'get in on it'... just be aware that your worthy ethics and philosophy are not widespread in the profit hungry shark / whale infested waters that make up the crypto sea...

I am also glad it was raised again.

To start there isn't really a need for coins to be moving around other than testing.

Yet we can take some comfort in the fact that a block time even 5x higher than the target 2 minutes is still only 10 minutes, which is reasonable and works for bitcoin, 10x higher is 20 minutes, it is not insufferable.

The network will re-adjust. Those responsible will look bad.

If someone ends up accumulating a large amount of Bitmark from mining then they now have incentive to see Bitmark succeed. So maybe that will draw in some new supporters who can help out.

A fine point

[Allow]

bitmark.co purchased, there is no point having a helpful community if you do not listen to them.

Thank you for the input.

Nice catch!

[cryptozim]

Whilst you have set out very reasonably the issues of MINE DUMP, and I agree that there will be no value, there is a general trend for miners to jump on a new coin launch just because it may have some value and they want to 'get in on it'... just be aware that your worthy ethics and philosophy are not widespread in the profit hungry shark / whale infested waters that make up the crypto sea...

^^This.

Yet we can take some comfort in the fact that a block time even 5x higher than the target 2 minutes is still only 10 minutes, which is reasonable and works for bitcoin, 10x higher is 20 minutes, it is not insufferable.

When you're talking a block at a time, no, 5x longer (10 minutes instead of 2) is not a big deal. But, when you consider that the difficulty won't retarget for 720 blocks, you're looking at 5 days instead of 1. That is a significant difference.

The network will re-adjust. Those responsible will look bad.

Those who do this kind of thing don't care if they look bad.


My history with multipools:
I tend to be sensitive on the hash-rape issue, because I've been mining CasinoCoin off and on Since December, and it has been a huge issue for us. (edit:) And keep in mind, most of this is before scrypt asics were even available to the public.

http://www.coinwarz.com/network-hashrate-charts/casinocoin-network-hashrate-chart

Original coin - Scrypt algo, with 30 second blocks and 720 block retarget:

I think now is the time to start discussing the possibility of altering the difficulty adjustment for CasinoCoin. Currently, the difficulty adjust occurs every 720 blocks. Theoretically, with the 30-second block times, this is adjustment is supposed to occur every 6 hours. But with the multipool effect and swings in hashrates, I've seen it take 15+ hours for the next adjustment to occur. I'm considering cutting down the difficulty adjustment down to 1/6th from 720 blocks to 120 blocks. I will make a separate post in order to propose this change and get others thoughts before proceeding.

After implementing Kimoto Gravity Well:

Argh, didn't find a block for like 34 hours now...

Even with DigiShield:

Difficulty is way off and needs fixing ....

The last 30 days there should have been about: 30 * 24 * 60 * 2 = 86400 blocks. In reallity there where about 48320 from block 488600 to 536920. That is about 60% of what it should be. I get a lot of complaints from miners that they do not get as much coins as the expect to get, not sure what the cause is but this should improve!

[coinsolidation]

Yet we can take some comfort in the fact that a block time even 5x higher than the target 2 minutes is still only 10 minutes, which is reasonable and works for bitcoin, 10x higher is 20 minutes, it is not insufferable.

When you're talking a block at a time, no, 5x longer (10 minutes instead of 2) is not a big deal. But, when you consider that the difficulty won't retarget for 720 blocks, you're looking at 5 days instead of 1. That is a significant difference.

In another thread, somebody has commented:

You want to attract miners that believe in the coin and hold it.

This leads me to the question: if the core miners "believe in the coin and hold it", why would 5 days for a retarget be a big issue?
I hope we never see such a thing and want to avoid it too, but the question is valid.

I tend to be sensitive on the hash-rape issue, because I've been mining CasinoCoin off and on Since December, and it has been a huge issue for us. (edit:) And keep in mind, most of this is before scrypt asics were even available to the public.

http://www.coinwarz.com/network-hashrate-charts/casinocoin-network-hashrate-chart

Original coin - Scrypt algo, with 30 second blocks and 720 block retarget:

I think now is the time to start discussing the possibility of altering the difficulty adjustment for CasinoCoin. Currently, the difficulty adjust occurs every 720 blocks. Theoretically, with the 30-second block times, this is adjustment is supposed to occur every 6 hours. But with the multipool effect and swings in hashrates, I've seen it take 15+ hours for the next adjustment to occur. I'm considering cutting down the difficulty adjustment down to 1/6th from 720 blocks to 120 blocks. I will make a separate post in order to propose this change and get others thoughts before proceeding.

After implementing Kimoto Gravity Well:

Argh, didn't find a block for like 34 hours now...

Even with DigiShield:

Difficulty is way off and needs fixing ....

The last 30 days there should have been about: 30 * 24 * 60 * 2 = 86400 blocks. In reallity there where about 48320 from block 488600 to 536920. That is about 60% of what it should be. I get a lot of complaints from miners that they do not get as much coins as the expect to get, not sure what the cause is but this should improve!

Finding blocks is a random event, due to this randomness a sampling over a longer time period will be more accurate than one over a shorter time period. KGW and DS both show this to be true. Blocks are supposed to be found evenly on average, not one every x minutes. Your examples show the rationale on why I chose not to use either of these for Bitmark. Thank you.

This is similar to a 51% attack, where a bad actor can acquire more hashing power than the network collectively. Only a strong distributed network of hash power can achieve this. In the future I am less concerned as Bitmark is configured to encourage hash power distribution.

In the immediate future, the short term, all we can try to do is disincentive this from happening. The block reward maturity being longer than the difficulty change combined with no inflated value.

If there are any other social or technical things we can do to mitigate the risk of this over the first few months, they would be good to know.

We could always increase the block reward maturity further, to be 2 days, or even 7. That would ensure only those who "believe in the coin and hold it" would mine, but may be detrimental on the crashes. Hoarding will occur, there will be big sells in the future, we do not want to drive away miners when this happens, as that would cause a death spiral.

Balance is hard to achieve.

[coinsolidation]

I tend to be sensitive on the hash-rape issue, because I've been mining CasinoCoin off and on Since December, and it has been a huge issue for us.

I have just realized that the IPM proposal addresses this issue.

As the investors would also be indirectly mining and providing a percentage of the network power. Any such drop off in hashing would be partially mitigated by the percentage of power provided by the investors. As it is variable, calculated daily to be 35%(tbc) of the needed power, not a limited resource like that of the core miners.

This would strengthen the overall value of the coin and it's security, whilst removing the difficulty volatility issue for long term miners.

Since the IPM is always open, people could invest as a vote of confidence and rescue the situation for miners and users, whilst earning btm, and while supporting continued development.

Miners, investors, and developers all working together with their respected assets.

 

[timmyd]

A new coin minus greed = satoshis original plan. Good work and the best of luck

[Este Nuno]

I tend to be sensitive on the hash-rape issue, because I've been mining CasinoCoin off and on Since December, and it has been a huge issue for us.

I have just realized that the IPM proposal addresses this issue.

As the investors would also be indirectly mining and providing a percentage of the network power. Any such drop off in hashing would be partially mitigated by the percentage of power provided by the investors. As it is variable, calculated daily to be 35%(tbc) of the needed power, not a limited resource like that of the core miners.

This would strengthen the overall value of the coin and it's security, whilst removing the difficulty volatility issue for long term miners.

Since the IPM is always open, people could invest as a vote of confidence and rescue the situation for miners and users, whilst earning btm, and while supporting continued development.

Miners, investors, and developers all working together with their respected assets.

 

Yeah, in a way the IPM can act as sort of a defense fund for the coin as well. We already knew that the hashing it provides adds general network security and such. But it can also prevent or mitigate the specific issue of having a someone or some group drive the difficulty up much too high.

[Chronikka]

What happens exactly, someone targets a large amount of hashrate at the coin which solves blocks at a much faster rate than the target? And then it goes until the difficulty adjusts, in this case one day?

If this happens, blocks are mined faster until the difficulty increases, if the hashing power is then removed the chain runs slower for a while until another 720 blocks have passed. If the hashing power isn't removed then the chain is just getting stronger.

However, Bitmark is setup so that non of the coins minted are mature until 720 blocks later, after the difficulty has changed again, so somebody who did this wouldn't get the coins for quite some time.

More importantly, the coins and chain has no value, it doesn't matter if it runs slow for a while, nobody has any need to be transferring valueless coins unless they are testing the code. There is no exchange, and even when there is nobody can mine coins today and dump them today, they have to wait another day yet before they can be spent, then wait for them to transfer. If they "rape" the coin, it could be two days before they get the coins to spend, by which time the price could have dropped considerably due to their own actions.

Thus we try to avoid this, and by the time it is of a concern and Bitmarks have any value, we should have a reasonable network hash rate and stable chain such that impact from a multipool or private entity with lots of hash power is mitigated.

I don't really see how this prevents miners from dumping their coins at the onset.

What stops major hash power from mining at low difficulty, then jumping off when it goes up? Nothing except that they have to wait 720 confirms to get their coins. But when they do that the difficulty goes back down in a day. They mine another coin for that time and when bitmark difficulty drops they hit it again. Accumulating low difficulty coins would be fairly simple, just tedious because they need to switch the miners every difficulty spike.

Especially considering the chosen PoW is scrypt. There will be some big hash numbers out there now that scrypt asic companies are delivering regularly. Its just a matter of waiting for a place/time to sell the coins.

[Este Nuno]

What happens exactly, someone targets a large amount of hashrate at the coin which solves blocks at a much faster rate than the target? And then it goes until the difficulty adjusts, in this case one day?

If this happens, blocks are mined faster until the difficulty increases, if the hashing power is then removed the chain runs slower for a while until another 720 blocks have passed. If the hashing power isn't removed then the chain is just getting stronger.

However, Bitmark is setup so that non of the coins minted are mature until 720 blocks later, after the difficulty has changed again, so somebody who did this wouldn't get the coins for quite some time.

More importantly, the coins and chain has no value, it doesn't matter if it runs slow for a while, nobody has any need to be transferring valueless coins unless they are testing the code. There is no exchange, and even when there is nobody can mine coins today and dump them today, they have to wait another day yet before they can be spent, then wait for them to transfer. If they "rape" the coin, it could be two days before they get the coins to spend, by which time the price could have dropped considerably due to their own actions.

Thus we try to avoid this, and by the time it is of a concern and Bitmarks have any value, we should have a reasonable network hash rate and stable chain such that impact from a multipool or private entity with lots of hash power is mitigated.

I don't really see how this prevents miners from dumping their coins at the onset.

What stops major hash power from mining at low difficulty, then jumping off when it goes up? Nothing except that they have to wait 720 confirms to get their coins. But when they do that the difficulty goes back down in a day. They mine another coin for that time and when bitmark difficulty drops they hit it again. Accumulating low difficulty coins would be fairly simple, just tedious because they need to switch the miners every difficulty spike.

Especially considering the chosen PoW is scrypt. There will be some big hash numbers out there now that scrypt asic companies are delivering regularly. Its just a matter of waiting for a place/time to sell the coins.

It might just be unavoidable no matter what it is done. But I'd hope that any of that happening has little to no effect on the long term health of Bitmark.

[coinsolidation]

A new coin minus greed = satoshis original plan. Good work and the best of luck

Thank you.

What stops major hash power from mining at low difficulty, then jumping off when it goes up? Nothing except that they have to wait 720 confirms to get their coins. But when they do that the difficulty goes back down in a day. They mine another coin for that time and when bitmark difficulty drops they hit it again. Accumulating low difficulty coins would be fairly simple, just tedious because they need to switch the miners every difficulty spike.

It might just be unavoidable no matter what it is done. But I'd hope that any of that happening has little to no effect on the long term health of Bitmark.

That is my thinking also, we can try to limit the risks of particular actions, but we cannot stop or prevent them. Somebody may add and remove 1GH, dump 10k bitmarks, permanently add 1GH, buy 10k bitmarks..

The more we focus on natural growth in every aspect the project, the harder each of these actions will be.

If there are any additional steps we can take, let us discuss them as a community and see if they work.

I feel most solutions are to these potential problems are social.

For now, nobody can mine or dump. Soon people can mine but have no where to dump, later there may be some value, and some dumping may happen. We can frame any future dumping as distribution, and early adopters taking some reward. Only if we are successful in earning value.

I hope those that add a small amount to the project over a long period of time will be rewarded most. Miners included.

[Chronikka]

A new coin minus greed = satoshis original plan. Good work and the best of luck

Thank you.

What stops major hash power from mining at low difficulty, then jumping off when it goes up? Nothing except that they have to wait 720 confirms to get their coins. But when they do that the difficulty goes back down in a day. They mine another coin for that time and when bitmark difficulty drops they hit it again. Accumulating low difficulty coins would be fairly simple, just tedious because they need to switch the miners every difficulty spike.

It might just be unavoidable no matter what it is done. But I'd hope that any of that happening has little to no effect on the long term health of Bitmark.

That is my thinking also, we can try to limit the risks of particular actions, but we cannot stop or prevent them. Somebody may add and remove 1GH, dump 10k bitmarks, permanently add 1GH, buy 10k bitmarks..

The more we focus on natural growth in every aspect the project, the harder each of these actions will be.

If there are any additional steps we can take, let us discuss them as a community and see if they work.

I feel most solutions are to these potential problems are social.

For now, nobody can mine or dump. Soon people can mine but have no where to dump, later there may be some value, and some dumping may happen. We can frame any future dumping as distribution, and early adopters taking some reward. Only if we are successful in earning value.

I hope those that add a small amount to the project over a long period of time will be rewarded most. Miners included.

I think shortly after launch an exchange will add the coin. Smaller exchanges stand to gain a lot by adding new coins because it creates an influx of new users, who may stick around to trade other coins.

Has anybody considered a time based rewards system, where your reward is based on the amount of time you spend mining? Rewards are capped at 24 hours/7 days. So all miners who mine 24/7 receive the same reward regardless of hash rate.

The problem I see here, is there are no incentives for larger hashrates to join the network, which potentially hurts security.