BTCD is no more

[jeezy]

Can someone write up a quick guide how to set up your BTCD correctly to get the maximum stake? (Let's say for example splitting it to 10 wallets)

To get the maximum stake keep coins in one wallet/address and try to keep all coins together, you can use coin control for that

So what you are saying is to ignore the various guides from members telling us to split into multiple wallets to get maximum stake efficiency?

yes

Care to explain?

Having coins split in many addresses will just lower their minting weight, yes you will get more minted blocks but they will all be like 0.00... and by having 1 address with all coins gathered in one piece you will gain weight faster and get minted block like 0.5(example). Also important is that after your minted block gets all confirmations you use coin control to resend coins back to your address becose after they stake they split in 2 chunks. Depends of your coin size but you can get about 3 blocks in 2 days with 5-6k BTCD which will be about 1.5BTCD in 2 days

After I read jl777 guide on how to maximize staking I had to read a little about POS to understand how it works. I guess a crucial question I need answered is, when a stake finds a block isn't the reward supposed to be independent of the amount of coins inside the stake but instead equal to what ever the reward is for that block? As far as I understand the amount of coins should only influence how fast a block is found, ie. the difficulty for your wallet to find a block is proportional to the amount of coins (relative to total staking on network) multiplied by the time it's been staking, or did I miss something?
Because in that case, if we'd suppose a stake after it has found a block will start staking again right away, without being locked for a period of time, then splitting one big chunk into a multiple would still get you the exact same amount on average after enough time. to prove that you just need to draw x-y axis, x is the time, and from x=0 that's where the staking starts, a line is drawn where it's slope is equal to the amount of coins. let's say on average at y=1 you get a block. then dividing your stake to N stakes, you create N lines with slope S/N, and after N periods of time, your original stake would have earned you N rewards, and your small stakes would each earn you one reward but multiplied by N the number of stakes, so same rewards. But since there is a lock time after a reward is found, the amount of time lost with your funds locked is N times smaller if you spread your coins to N wallets instead of one big wallet blocked N times after each reward. I'm just not sure about the amount rewarded if it's independent of the number of coins or not.

Would be good to get a definite answer from a dev on this. 

[1715415472]

1715415472

[1715415472]

1715415472

[IceColdTommy]

Can someone write up a quick guide how to set up your BTCD correctly to get the maximum stake? (Let's say for example splitting it to 10 wallets)

To get the maximum stake keep coins in one wallet/address and try to keep all coins together, you can use coin control for that

So what you are saying is to ignore the various guides from members telling us to split into multiple wallets to get maximum stake efficiency?

yes

Care to explain?

Having coins split in many addresses will just lower their minting weight, yes you will get more minted blocks but they will all be like 0.00... and by having 1 address with all coins gathered in one piece you will gain weight faster and get minted block like 0.5(example). Also important is that after your minted block gets all confirmations you use coin control to resend coins back to your address becose after they stake they split in 2 chunks. Depends of your coin size but you can get about 3 blocks in 2 days with 5-6k BTCD which will be about 1.5BTCD in 2 days

After I read jl777 guide on how to maximize staking I had to read a little about POS to understand how it works. I guess a crucial question I need answered is, when a stake finds a block isn't the reward supposed to be independent of the amount of coins inside the stake but instead equal to what ever the reward is for that block? As far as I understand the amount of coins should only influence how fast a block is found, ie. the difficulty for your wallet to find a block is proportional to the amount of coins (relative to total staking on network) multiplied by the time it's been staking, or did I miss something?
Because in that case, if we'd suppose a stake after it has found a block will start staking again right away, without being locked for a period of time, then splitting one big chunk into a multiple would still get you the exact same amount on average after enough time. to prove that you just need to draw x-y axis, x is the time, and from x=0 that's where the staking starts, a line is drawn where it's slope is equal to the amount of coins. let's say on average at y=1 you get a block. then dividing your stake to N stakes, you create N lines with slope S/N, and after N periods of time, your original stake would have earned you N rewards, and your small stakes would each earn you one reward but multiplied by N the number of stakes, so same rewards. But since there is a lock time after a reward is found, the amount of time lost with your funds locked is N times smaller if you spread your coins to N wallets instead of one big wallet blocked N times after each reward. I'm just not sure about the amount rewarded if it's independent of the number of coins or not.

Would be good to get a definite answer from a dev on this. 

you can always test it, split all your coins in 2 addresses, leave all coins from address number one, and from number two split them in 10-20 addresses, so you will see which way you get more

[jeezy]

Can someone write up a quick guide how to set up your BTCD correctly to get the maximum stake? (Let's say for example splitting it to 10 wallets)

To get the maximum stake keep coins in one wallet/address and try to keep all coins together, you can use coin control for that

So what you are saying is to ignore the various guides from members telling us to split into multiple wallets to get maximum stake efficiency?

yes

Care to explain?

Having coins split in many addresses will just lower their minting weight, yes you will get more minted blocks but they will all be like 0.00... and by having 1 address with all coins gathered in one piece you will gain weight faster and get minted block like 0.5(example). Also important is that after your minted block gets all confirmations you use coin control to resend coins back to your address becose after they stake they split in 2 chunks. Depends of your coin size but you can get about 3 blocks in 2 days with 5-6k BTCD which will be about 1.5BTCD in 2 days

After I read jl777 guide on how to maximize staking I had to read a little about POS to understand how it works. I guess a crucial question I need answered is, when a stake finds a block isn't the reward supposed to be independent of the amount of coins inside the stake but instead equal to what ever the reward is for that block? As far as I understand the amount of coins should only influence how fast a block is found, ie. the difficulty for your wallet to find a block is proportional to the amount of coins (relative to total staking on network) multiplied by the time it's been staking, or did I miss something?
Because in that case, if we'd suppose a stake after it has found a block will start staking again right away, without being locked for a period of time, then splitting one big chunk into a multiple would still get you the exact same amount on average after enough time. to prove that you just need to draw x-y axis, x is the time, and from x=0 that's where the staking starts, a line is drawn where it's slope is equal to the amount of coins. let's say on average at y=1 you get a block. then dividing your stake to N stakes, you create N lines with slope S/N, and after N periods of time, your original stake would have earned you N rewards, and your small stakes would each earn you one reward but multiplied by N the number of stakes, so same rewards. But since there is a lock time after a reward is found, the amount of time lost with your funds locked is N times smaller if you spread your coins to N wallets instead of one big wallet blocked N times after each reward. I'm just not sure about the amount rewarded if it's independent of the number of coins or not.

Would be good to get a definite answer from a dev on this. 

you can always test it, split all your coins in 2 addresses, leave all coins from address number one, and from number two split them in 10-20 addresses, so you will see which way you get more

You did this and came to this conclusion then?

[IceColdTommy]

Can someone write up a quick guide how to set up your BTCD correctly to get the maximum stake? (Let's say for example splitting it to 10 wallets)

To get the maximum stake keep coins in one wallet/address and try to keep all coins together, you can use coin control for that

So what you are saying is to ignore the various guides from members telling us to split into multiple wallets to get maximum stake efficiency?

yes

Care to explain?

Having coins split in many addresses will just lower their minting weight, yes you will get more minted blocks but they will all be like 0.00... and by having 1 address with all coins gathered in one piece you will gain weight faster and get minted block like 0.5(example). Also important is that after your minted block gets all confirmations you use coin control to resend coins back to your address becose after they stake they split in 2 chunks. Depends of your coin size but you can get about 3 blocks in 2 days with 5-6k BTCD which will be about 1.5BTCD in 2 days

After I read jl777 guide on how to maximize staking I had to read a little about POS to understand how it works. I guess a crucial question I need answered is, when a stake finds a block isn't the reward supposed to be independent of the amount of coins inside the stake but instead equal to what ever the reward is for that block? As far as I understand the amount of coins should only influence how fast a block is found, ie. the difficulty for your wallet to find a block is proportional to the amount of coins (relative to total staking on network) multiplied by the time it's been staking, or did I miss something?
Because in that case, if we'd suppose a stake after it has found a block will start staking again right away, without being locked for a period of time, then splitting one big chunk into a multiple would still get you the exact same amount on average after enough time. to prove that you just need to draw x-y axis, x is the time, and from x=0 that's where the staking starts, a line is drawn where it's slope is equal to the amount of coins. let's say on average at y=1 you get a block. then dividing your stake to N stakes, you create N lines with slope S/N, and after N periods of time, your original stake would have earned you N rewards, and your small stakes would each earn you one reward but multiplied by N the number of stakes, so same rewards. But since there is a lock time after a reward is found, the amount of time lost with your funds locked is N times smaller if you spread your coins to N wallets instead of one big wallet blocked N times after each reward. I'm just not sure about the amount rewarded if it's independent of the number of coins or not.

Would be good to get a definite answer from a dev on this. 

you can always test it, split all your coins in 2 addresses, leave all coins from address number one, and from number two split them in 10-20 addresses, so you will see which way you get more

You did this and came to this conclusion then?

did it with some shitcoin i had and yes i came to conclusion that is better to keep them in one wallet

[visual111]

Will this coin be "truly anonymous?"


And is there a "truly anonymous" coin out right now? I haven't been following alts much as of late. Not sure of DRK's status

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

But what does "more anonymous" mean? It seems to me that something is either anonymous or not.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around anonymity. From my non-technical background, anonymity seems to be the equivalent of teleportation in the physical world. You're making bits disappear and then appear at a non-random location in cyberspace. This is some sort of alchemy of the cyber space-time continuum.....Maybe I'm looking too much into this but there seems to be a major philosophical conundrum here. If you can do this in cyberspace, then that means you can do it in the physical world. What does that mean to make something appear and disappear? Is there an unseen realm its transporting to? It must be going somewhere! Or can I look at this much in the same way a physicist looks at quantum entanglement? jeeze, I think my brain just exploded. pardon the abstractness of this post....it just happens to be how I'm putting this picture together. This is a VERY far out tech if it can be pulled off...from my understanding

[paulthetafy]

Will this coin be "truly anonymous?"


And is there a "truly anonymous" coin out right now? I haven't been following alts much as of late. Not sure of DRK's status

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

But what does "more anonymous" mean? It seems to me that something is either anonymous or not.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around anonymity. From my non-technical background, anonymity seems to be the equivalent of teleportation in the physical world. You're making bits disappear and then appear at a non-random location in cyberspace. This is some sort of alchemy of the cyber space-time continuum.....Maybe I'm looking too much into this but there seems to be a major philosophical conundrum here. If you can do this in cyberspace, then that means you can do it in the physical world. What does that mean to make something appear and disappear? Is there an unseen realm its transporting to? It must be going somewhere! Or can I look at this much in the same way a physicist looks at quantum entanglement? jeeze, I think my brain just exploded. pardon the abstractness of this post....it just happens to be how I'm putting this picture together. This is a VERY far out tech if it can be pulled off

Anonymity, as with security, is a matter of perspective and relativity.  With current computing technology we can employ modern cryptography techniques and have a high degree of certainty that the information we are securing is in fact secure.  But a significant enhancement in computing or cryptography techniques could mean that what we believe is secure today, becomes an open book.  The same is true for anonymity in respect to crypto currency transactions / messaging.  We can implement layers of anonymizing and masking techniques to make it significantly difficult to trace transactions so that we can regard it as anonymous.  But again that is relative to today's technology.  So to consider something "more anonymous" simply means adding more layers or degrees of difficulty required to de-anonymize.   

[jl777]

Will this coin be "truly anonymous?"


And is there a "truly anonymous" coin out right now? I haven't been following alts much as of late. Not sure of DRK's status

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

But what does "more anonymous" mean? It seems to me that something is either anonymous or not.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around anonymity. From my non-technical background, anonymity seems to be the equivalent of teleportation in the physical world. You're making bits disappear and then appear at a non-random location in cyberspace. This is some sort of alchemy of the cyber space-time continuum.....Maybe I'm looking too much into this but there seems to be a major philosophical conundrum here. If you can do this in cyberspace, then that means you can do it in the physical world. What does that mean to make something appear and disappear? Is there an unseen realm its transporting to? It must be going somewhere! Or can I look at this much in the same way a physicist looks at quantum entanglement? jeeze, I think my brain just exploded. pardon the abstractness of this post....it just happens to be how I'm putting this picture together. This is a VERY far out tech if it can be pulled off...from my understanding

My original plan to utilize cryptonote tech was deprecated when I got the Teleport concept.

Teleport is not needing to use Boolberry or any other cryptonote, in fact there is no reason it cant Teleport BBR or XMR, just need to add support for it after BTC and NXT. So Teleport will enhance whatever privacy the thing you are teleporting has. Even if it is none, you still get privacy.

There is no need for quantum entanglement! We are only talking about electronic bits. Using privacyServer network it is possible to send the required bits directly peer to peer. This creates the "teleportation" effect as far as the blockchain is concerned

The rest is just a lot of detailed coding work to handle all the cases.

When the darkpaper comes out, it will all be clear. I will PM it to you.

James

P.S. I am putting the finishing touches on the receive side today and hope to be able to start debugging all the new code tonight/tomorrow.

[jl777]

Will this coin be "truly anonymous?"


And is there a "truly anonymous" coin out right now? I haven't been following alts much as of late. Not sure of DRK's status

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

But what does "more anonymous" mean? It seems to me that something is either anonymous or not.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around anonymity. From my non-technical background, anonymity seems to be the equivalent of teleportation in the physical world. You're making bits disappear and then appear at a non-random location in cyberspace. This is some sort of alchemy of the cyber space-time continuum.....Maybe I'm looking too much into this but there seems to be a major philosophical conundrum here. If you can do this in cyberspace, then that means you can do it in the physical world. What does that mean to make something appear and disappear? Is there an unseen realm its transporting to? It must be going somewhere! Or can I look at this much in the same way a physicist looks at quantum entanglement? jeeze, I think my brain just exploded. pardon the abstractness of this post....it just happens to be how I'm putting this picture together. This is a VERY far out tech if it can be pulled off

Anonymity, as with security, is a matter of perspective and relativity.  With current computing technology we can employ modern cryptography techniques and have a high degree of certainty that the information we are securing is in fact secure.  But a significant enhancement in computing or cryptography techniques could mean that what we believe is secure today, becomes an open book.  The same is true for anonymity in respect to crypto currency transactions / messaging.  We can implement layers of anonymizing and masking techniques to make it significantly difficult to trace transactions so that we can regard it as anonymous.  But again that is relative to today's technology.  So to consider something "more anonymous" simply means adding more layers or degrees of difficulty required to de-anonymize.   

Sort of correct, but what if there is no permanent record on the blockchain for the future computers to analyze?
All of the other proposed solutions appear to rely on the blockchain to record things, so if there is big improvement in algos (or hardware) to crack current day encryption, then all historical tx will become as transparent as bitcoin

I designed Teleport to avoid this weakness of the future. While an entity with nearly infinite resources that can record every packet being sent on the internet could build a database to apply whatever future tech they have, this is probably impractical even for the attackers with the largest resources.

[clovis A.]

Will this coin be "truly anonymous?"


And is there a "truly anonymous" coin out right now? I haven't been following alts much as of late. Not sure of DRK's status

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

But what does "more anonymous" mean? It seems to me that something is either anonymous or not.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around anonymity. From my non-technical background, anonymity seems to be the equivalent of teleportation in the physical world. You're making bits disappear and then appear at a non-random location in cyberspace. This is some sort of alchemy of the cyber space-time continuum.....Maybe I'm looking too much into this but there seems to be a major philosophical conundrum here. If you can do this in cyberspace, then that means you can do it in the physical world. What does that mean to make something appear and disappear? Is there an unseen realm its transporting to? It must be going somewhere! Or can I look at this much in the same way a physicist looks at quantum entanglement? jeeze, I think my brain just exploded. pardon the abstractness of this post....it just happens to be how I'm putting this picture together. This is a VERY far out tech if it can be pulled off...from my understanding

If you haven't before, take a look at the Casimir Effect.  Might help you to solve your conundrum 

[paulthetafy]

Will this coin be "truly anonymous?"


And is there a "truly anonymous" coin out right now? I haven't been following alts much as of late. Not sure of DRK's status

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

But what does "more anonymous" mean? It seems to me that something is either anonymous or not.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around anonymity. From my non-technical background, anonymity seems to be the equivalent of teleportation in the physical world. You're making bits disappear and then appear at a non-random location in cyberspace. This is some sort of alchemy of the cyber space-time continuum.....Maybe I'm looking too much into this but there seems to be a major philosophical conundrum here. If you can do this in cyberspace, then that means you can do it in the physical world. What does that mean to make something appear and disappear? Is there an unseen realm its transporting to? It must be going somewhere! Or can I look at this much in the same way a physicist looks at quantum entanglement? jeeze, I think my brain just exploded. pardon the abstractness of this post....it just happens to be how I'm putting this picture together. This is a VERY far out tech if it can be pulled off

Anonymity, as with security, is a matter of perspective and relativity.  With current computing technology we can employ modern cryptography techniques and have a high degree of certainty that the information we are securing is in fact secure.  But a significant enhancement in computing or cryptography techniques could mean that what we believe is secure today, becomes an open book.  The same is true for anonymity in respect to crypto currency transactions / messaging.  We can implement layers of anonymizing and masking techniques to make it significantly difficult to trace transactions so that we can regard it as anonymous.  But again that is relative to today's technology.  So to consider something "more anonymous" simply means adding more layers or degrees of difficulty required to de-anonymize.   

Sort of correct, but what if there is no permanent record on the blockchain for the future computers to analyze?
All of the other proposed solutions appear to rely on the blockchain to record things, so if there is big improvement in algos (or hardware) to crack current day encryption, then all historical tx will become as transparent as bitcoin

I designed Teleport to avoid this weakness of the future. While an entity with nearly infinite resources that can record every packet being sent on the internet could build a database to apply whatever future tech they have, this is probably impractical even for the attackers with the largest resources.

Well that would certainly be true of legacy transactions, but you can envision a leap in packet sniffing / capturing and decryption leading to the real-time de-anonymization of transactions in the future.  I'm not predicting this happening within the next decade or two though, but you get my point. 

Are you planning to add Teleport to NXT and BTCD simultaneously?

[jl777]

Will this coin be "truly anonymous?"


And is there a "truly anonymous" coin out right now? I haven't been following alts much as of late. Not sure of DRK's status

Have a look at Monero. Currently there is no coin more anonymous.

I believe that BitcoinDark will achieve anonymity via routing transactions through Boolberry, Monero's competitor.

Becareful though, Boolberries creator is currently making very questionable modifications to the CryptoNote code. (CryptoNote powers both Monero and Boolberry) These modifications are debatable and mostly a marketing effort against Monero. Step with care.

But what does "more anonymous" mean? It seems to me that something is either anonymous or not.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around anonymity. From my non-technical background, anonymity seems to be the equivalent of teleportation in the physical world. You're making bits disappear and then appear at a non-random location in cyberspace. This is some sort of alchemy of the cyber space-time continuum.....Maybe I'm looking too much into this but there seems to be a major philosophical conundrum here. If you can do this in cyberspace, then that means you can do it in the physical world. What does that mean to make something appear and disappear? Is there an unseen realm its transporting to? It must be going somewhere! Or can I look at this much in the same way a physicist looks at quantum entanglement? jeeze, I think my brain just exploded. pardon the abstractness of this post....it just happens to be how I'm putting this picture together. This is a VERY far out tech if it can be pulled off

Anonymity, as with security, is a matter of perspective and relativity.  With current computing technology we can employ modern cryptography techniques and have a high degree of certainty that the information we are securing is in fact secure.  But a significant enhancement in computing or cryptography techniques could mean that what we believe is secure today, becomes an open book.  The same is true for anonymity in respect to crypto currency transactions / messaging.  We can implement layers of anonymizing and masking techniques to make it significantly difficult to trace transactions so that we can regard it as anonymous.  But again that is relative to today's technology.  So to consider something "more anonymous" simply means adding more layers or degrees of difficulty required to de-anonymize.   

Sort of correct, but what if there is no permanent record on the blockchain for the future computers to analyze?
All of the other proposed solutions appear to rely on the blockchain to record things, so if there is big improvement in algos (or hardware) to crack current day encryption, then all historical tx will become as transparent as bitcoin

I designed Teleport to avoid this weakness of the future. While an entity with nearly infinite resources that can record every packet being sent on the internet could build a database to apply whatever future tech they have, this is probably impractical even for the attackers with the largest resources.

Well that would certainly be true of legacy transactions, but you can envision a leap in packet sniffing / capturing and decryption leading to the real-time de-anonymization of transactions in the future.  I'm not predicting this happening within the next decade or two though, but you get my point. 

Are you planning to add Teleport to NXT and BTCD simultaneously?

Well by the time such realtime packet capture of entire internet and realtime decryption of onion layers is available, I will have to come up with methods that will exponentially increase the cost to decrypt. I already have some few ideas in this regard, but really no need for some years yet. Making decryption take a lot longer than encryption is not hard to do, so it would come down to the settings of how many layers to have.

Adding NXT requires extra code, so it cant be simultaneous.
BTC support is actually much faster to add as there wont be much difference in code required, but still wont be same time

Teleport will be inside BTCD core, so it gets to teleport around with just normal txfee (I am actually exploring making teleporting BTCD totally costless, but not sure if all tx can be guaranteed completion without any txfee) so getting teleporting with BTCD will be the least complicated to achieve. For adding other coins, it needs to be piggybacked onto the teleport mechanism and appropriate fee charged, so need a bit of time to make this safe. EVERY tx input/output needs to be made sure to be clean or it contaminates all it touches!

James

[jl777]

Can someone write up a quick guide how to set up your BTCD correctly to get the maximum stake? (Let's say for example splitting it to 10 wallets)

To get the maximum stake keep coins in one wallet/address and try to keep all coins together, you can use coin control for that

So what you are saying is to ignore the various guides from members telling us to split into multiple wallets to get maximum stake efficiency?

yes

Care to explain?

Having coins split in many addresses will just lower their minting weight, yes you will get more minted blocks but they will all be like 0.00... and by having 1 address with all coins gathered in one piece you will gain weight faster and get minted block like 0.5(example). Also important is that after your minted block gets all confirmations you use coin control to resend coins back to your address becose after they stake they split in 2 chunks. Depends of your coin size but you can get about 3 blocks in 2 days with 5-6k BTCD which will be about 1.5BTCD in 2 days

After I read jl777 guide on how to maximize staking I had to read a little about POS to understand how it works. I guess a crucial question I need answered is, when a stake finds a block isn't the reward supposed to be independent of the amount of coins inside the stake but instead equal to what ever the reward is for that block? As far as I understand the amount of coins should only influence how fast a block is found, ie. the difficulty for your wallet to find a block is proportional to the amount of coins (relative to total staking on network) multiplied by the time it's been staking, or did I miss something?
Because in that case, if we'd suppose a stake after it has found a block will start staking again right away, without being locked for a period of time, then splitting one big chunk into a multiple would still get you the exact same amount on average after enough time. to prove that you just need to draw x-y axis, x is the time, and from x=0 that's where the staking starts, a line is drawn where it's slope is equal to the amount of coins. let's say on average at y=1 you get a block. then dividing your stake to N stakes, you create N lines with slope S/N, and after N periods of time, your original stake would have earned you N rewards, and your small stakes would each earn you one reward but multiplied by N the number of stakes, so same rewards. But since there is a lock time after a reward is found, the amount of time lost with your funds locked is N times smaller if you spread your coins to N wallets instead of one big wallet blocked N times after each reward. I'm just not sure about the amount rewarded if it's independent of the number of coins or not.

Would be good to get a definite answer from a dev on this. 

you can always test it, split all your coins in 2 addresses, leave all coins from address number one, and from number two split them in 10-20 addresses, so you will see which way you get more

The best strategy is probably dependent on the number of coins you have and for how long.
I think in some cases single acct will be better and in others multiple accts.
All I know is that I am getting around 0.6 BTCD per 5000 BTCD with the split acct approach and there is a steady stream of tx. Before while the amounts I got were bigger, it could go a long time between blocks so I wouldnt know if it was even staking at all.

Maybe I could get 0.75 per day per 5000 BTCD, but I think that requires some extra work each time a block is mined and I dont have time for anything other than initial setup.
If there really is a 20% difference though at some point I will need to research this in depth and come up with some sort of automated way to create a maximum output wallet (if single acct is suboptimal)

For now, Ive got bigger fish to cook

James

[visual111]

Anonymity, as with security, is a matter of perspective and relativity.  With current computing technology we can employ modern cryptography techniques and have a high degree of certainty that the information we are securing is in fact secure.  But a significant enhancement in computing or cryptography techniques could mean that what we believe is secure today, becomes an open book.  The same is true for anonymity in respect to crypto currency transactions / messaging.  We can implement layers of anonymizing and masking techniques to make it significantly difficult to trace transactions so that we can regard it as anonymous.  But again that is relative to today's technology.  So to consider something "more anonymous" simply means adding more layers or degrees of difficulty required to de-anonymize.  

I often rebuke people for using aristotelian logic and here I am, thinking like an on/off switch! I understand now

My original plan to utilize cryptonote tech was deprecated when I got the Teleport concept.

Teleport is not needing to use Boolberry or any other cryptonote, in fact there is no reason it cant Teleport BBR or XMR, just need to add support for it after BTC and NXT. So Teleport will enhance whatever privacy the thing you are teleporting has. Even if it is none, you still get privacy.

There is no need for quantum entanglement! We are only talking about electronic bits. Using privacyServer network it is possible to send the required bits directly peer to peer. This creates the "teleportation" effect as far as the blockchain is concerned

The rest is just a lot of detailed coding work to handle all the cases.

When the darkpaper comes out, it will all be clear. I will PM it to you.

James

P.S. I am putting the finishing touches on the receive side today and hope to be able to start debugging all the new code tonight/tomorrow.

that would be great, this sounds very cool

If you haven't before, take a look at the Casimir Effect.  Might help you to solve your conundrum 

i'll have to look into this

[jl777]

OK, dont get all crazy happy yet.

I am code complete for a basic functionality test of Teleport. But, I am making shortcuts in areas critical to implement before official release. Stuff like randomizing the timing of cloning telepods, accounting tracking, lots of error checking (especially partially completed transport), and of course porting all this into BTCD core.

I am just up to ~2000 lines of new code that is untested and that's too much! So, the next day or two will be to debug all this. Then I can resume adding more code and bugs.

So, this is like when the transporter is still in the lab with the other transporter and all the wires are sticking out and everything has to be done just right. Just seeing if we can teleport the little white rabbit to make sure it survives.

James

[visual111]

 Just seeing if we can teleport the little white rabbit to make sure it survives.

you can do it, furry friend!

[paulthetafy]

OK, dont get all crazy happy yet.

I am code complete for a basic functionality test of Teleport. But, I am making shortcuts in areas critical to implement before official release. Stuff like randomizing the timing of cloning telepods, accounting tracking, lots of error checking (especially partially completed transport), and of course porting all this into BTCD core.

I am just up to ~2000 lines of new code that is untested and that's too much! So, the next day or two will be to debug all this. Then I can resume adding more code and bugs.

So, this is like when the transporter is still in the lab with the other transporter and all the wires are sticking out and everything has to be done just right. Just seeing if we can teleport the little white rabbit to make sure it survives.

James

LOL + awesome work + good luck!

[pissmusic]

i love reading devs posts itt

i set my buy orders im sleeping on them and hoping to wake up to some btcd in my wallet in the next few days

[xPooky]

The anon card fundraiser is going great, so far we have 20323.88820452 BTCD which means on less than 5k to go(25000 BTCD is the goal based on the current BTCD market price) so come on people lets finish this so we can start moving to some other projects.

http://bitcoindark.net/anon-cards

[xPooky]

We need someone that has  nodejs expirience, if someone has it and would like support the project please PM me or join me on skype, my id is theXpooky

[xPooky]

The FundRaiser for the anon cards is now closed, thank to everyone that participiated. We will have more details on how things will proceed soon.