[ANN] SpreadCoin | True Decentralization (No Pools) | Testing New Masternodes

[pokeytex]

Thanks George!  Can't think of anything right now personally...

Thanks for your patience...

BTW here's a sneak peak to how the website will look like:



The new ANN thread title will simply be:

[ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything

Georgem - I must say I do like the look of the home page!  Well done!  Also, congratulations to all that have kept this coin going. 

- pokeytex

[1715259646]

1715259646

[1715259646]

1715259646

[e1ghtSpace]

Guys, I totally forgot to say that I figured out a problem that Spreadcoin really does fix.

"Hackers" cant install spreadcoin miners on people's computer because the private key will be leaked.

[chrysophylax]

Guys, I totally forgot to say that I figured out a problem that Spreadcoin really does fix.

"Hackers" cant install spreadcoin miners on people's computer because the private key will be leaked.

well - they CAN install it - but the private key would easily be had ...

...

#crysx

[e1ghtSpace]

Guys, I totally forgot to say that I figured out a problem that Spreadcoin really does fix.

"Hackers" cant install spreadcoin miners on people's computer because the private key will be leaked.

well - they CAN install it - but the private key would easily be had ...

...

#crysx

Yeah, and if one person finds their virus then they can take the coins if they make their fee higher (I think) and withdraw at the same time the hacker does.

[chrysophylax]

Thanks George!  Can't think of anything right now personally...

Thanks for your patience...

BTW here's a sneak peak to how the website will look like:



The new ANN thread title will simply be:

[ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything

nice look georgem ...

its seems to be easy on the eye from this sneak peek - so can we safely assume it will be easily navigated also? ...

good job mate ...

#crysx

[chrysophylax]

Guys, I totally forgot to say that I figured out a problem that Spreadcoin really does fix.

"Hackers" cant install spreadcoin miners on people's computer because the private key will be leaked.

well - they CAN install it - but the private key would easily be had ...

...

#crysx

Yeah, and if one person finds their virus then they can take the coins if they make their fee higher (I think).

if there is a way of 'doing it' - someone will find a way of 'undoing it' ...

eg ... if there is a way of 'no pools' - someone will find a way of 'pools' ...

so its of no consequence - and what you said was spot on about the 'hackers' installing the software ...

such is the crypto space these days ... so many looking for ways of undoing people out of their hard work ...

and then there is spr - doing it the right way ...

#crysx

[entropycoin]

First time in a long time, feeling great about bag holding.

Very nice working everyone,

Likewise, though the month of slow accumulation at .00003 was damn fun, especially in retrospect.  I seriously doubt we'll see those levels again, and honestly believe at current levels it's still a bargain with tremendous potential to rise anywhere from 10-100x once service nodes go live, probably a slight drop off from there followed by exponential growth once implementation of coins101's more advanced service applications are realized.

I picked one of the worst moments to invest in this project- the week prior to Mr. Spread's departure (>.0003), though in the past couple months, cost averaging down has been a breeze as the liquidity has been fantastic.  I think in retrospect this will ultimately be one of the coin's strengths.  As many here likely have drk familiarity, the constant instamine rhetoric (a belief I personally don't subscribe to, but an annoyance none the less) will not be an issue spr will have to face in its lifetime.

[entropycoin]

Thanks George!  Can't think of anything right now personally...

Thanks for your patience...

BTW here's a sneak peak to how the website will look like:



The new ANN thread title will simply be:

[ANN] SpreadCoin | Decentralize Everything

If I have hastily shown a bit of annoyance with the speed of progression in the past, I'd like to offer my apologies.  This looks fantastic. sprtacular even. well done georgem!

[Halofire]

+1 georgem

how many SPR would one want to run per spreadnode?

[entropycoin]

This system of a max of 1440 spreadnodes may very well change by the time they go active, but I would still recommend a couple thousand spr just to be safe.

I want to implement a dynamic amount of max servicenodes that will slowly increase over time.

This is an idea I had 1 month ago (as a response to a discussion I had on spreadcointalk with MyFarm):
(Attention: the numbers mentioned are also 1 month old)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Mr. Spread only wanted to use a max of 1000 MNs.

1440 max MNs was based around an idea I had that this way every MN would on average receive 1 payment a day.

I believe that having twice that (2880) will not solve the problem you describe (the problem of "how will newcomers be able to afford a masternode later in time"),
but only postpone the problem so it will come back and bite us later.

I always advocated for a flexible amount of MNs.

A limit yes, but a flexible one, that increases slowly over time.
This way it gets to act like a limit (that creates competition thru scarcity, and enables price discovery), but it will also have the flexibility to adjust for a large growth of SPR price and what an MN will cost.

I advocate for tying the max amount of MNs to the coinsupply:

Max MN = (total coinsupply)/ 1000.

or maybe divide them even further.

Max MN = (total coinsupply)/ 1440.

or

Max MN = (total coinsupply)/ 2880.

So today (with 1.865 Million coins) this would mean 1865 possible MNs, or 1294, or 647 possible MNs. (total coinsupply divided by 1000, 1440 and 2880)

This is not a fix limit, but a moving target, so let's look how this will change over time:

In 6 Months it will probably be 5000 MNs (or 3472, or 1736 MNs)....

We follow Bitcoins increase in coinsupply curve more or less.

So in about 6 years, we will have 13.85 Million coins.
How many MNs should we have in 6 years?
Based on my three suggestions, it would be 13850, or 9618, or 4809 MNs.

And what does that mean for eternity?
We will have 21000, or 14584 or 7292 MNs.

[entropycoin]

I particularly like Max MN = (total coinsupply)/ 2880.

Because it will allow for only a very limited amount of MN at the moment: around 650... (this will help drive the price of SPR up, now that it is young)
and it will grow to a healthy 1800 when we are as old as darkcoin... (1 Year)
and it will grow to a perfect 5000 MNs when we are as old as bitcoin... (6 years)

And when we reach the 21 Million max coinsupply in a 100 years we will have reached the maximum possible amount of 7292 MNs.

[chrysophylax]

I particularly like Max MN = (total coinsupply)/ 2880.

Because it will allow for only a very limited amount of MN at the moment: around 650... (this will help drive the price of SPR up, now that it is young)
and it will grow to a healthy 1800 when we are as old as darkcoin... (1 Year)
and it will grow to a perfect 5000 MNs when we are as old as bitcoin... (6 years)

And when we reach the 21 Million max coinsupply in a 100 years we will have reached the maximum possible amount of 7292 MNs.

calculations based on the distribution of spr ... that is a wise decision ...

we are in ... ...

#crysx

[e1ghtSpace]

So, will masternode payments still depend on a score, because if so it will defeat the purpose of them being dynamic.

[stonehedge]

So, will masternode payments still depend on a score, because if so it will defeat the purpose of them being dynamic.

I must admit that was something I didn't care for with the original SPR masternode testing.  I didn't understand the benefits of the highest scoring masternodes getting paid.  Am I missing a really obvious benefit?  Surely the network can only be fair if all masternodes get paid roughly the same amount over a period of time?

Why define a max number of masternodes?  Surely the ROI, coin supply and value of SPR will define this organically?  People won't run masternodes at a loss for long...

I also remain to be convinced of the dynamic masternode model other than its brilliant ease of setup.  Once again...am I missing a fundamental advantage?

[gjhiggins]

Surely the network can only be fair if all masternodes get paid roughly the same amount over a period of time?

If you're not posing a merely rhetorical question, what's the definition of “fair” in this instance?

Cheers

Graham

[stonehedge]

Surely the network can only be fair if all masternodes get paid roughly the same amount over a period of time?

If you're not posing a merely rhetorical question, what's the definition of “fair” in this instance?

Cheers

Graham

It wasn't intended as rhetorical.  I guess my roots are deeply set in DRK where the idea was that the entry point for a masternode was fixed and that over a given period of time, all masternodes would receive a similar return on investment. 

In this context, I am using fair to refer to the fact that in order to run a service node, it will cost the owner money to run it.  If the service node owner is not guaranteed roughly the same income as other service node owners is there a chance this will mean that some service nodes will generate less income for doing the same amount of work at the same expense therefore causing an "unfair" situation?

[e1ghtSpace]

Surely the network can only be fair if all masternodes get paid roughly the same amount over a period of time?

If you're not posing a merely rhetorical question, what's the definition of “fair” in this instance?

Cheers

Graham

It wasn't intended as rhetorical.  I guess my roots are deeply set in DRK where the idea was that the entry point for a masternode was fixed and that over a given period of time, all masternodes would receive a similar return on investment. 

In this context, I am using fair to refer to the fact that in order to run a service node, it will cost the owner money to run it.  If the service node owner is not guaranteed roughly the same income as other service node owners is there a chance this will mean that some service nodes will generate less income for doing the same amount of work at the same expense therefore causing an "unfair" situation?

I guess the advantage is that it will drive the price of Spreadcoin up if it succeeds.

[stonehedge]

Surely the network can only be fair if all masternodes get paid roughly the same amount over a period of time?

If you're not posing a merely rhetorical question, what's the definition of “fair” in this instance?

Cheers

Graham

It wasn't intended as rhetorical.  I guess my roots are deeply set in DRK where the idea was that the entry point for a masternode was fixed and that over a given period of time, all masternodes would receive a similar return on investment. 

In this context, I am using fair to refer to the fact that in order to run a service node, it will cost the owner money to run it.  If the service node owner is not guaranteed roughly the same income as other service node owners is there a chance this will mean that some service nodes will generate less income for doing the same amount of work at the same expense therefore causing an "unfair" situation?

I guess the advantage is that it will drive the price of Spreadcoin up if it succeeds.

Nope, I'm not sure if I get that either.  I think I'm probably just half (at best) informed and trying to guess at how the initial proposals will look and I'm missing something fundamental.  I'm sure all will become clear.

[chrysophylax]

Surely the network can only be fair if all masternodes get paid roughly the same amount over a period of time?

If you're not posing a merely rhetorical question, what's the definition of “fair” in this instance?

Cheers

Graham

It wasn't intended as rhetorical.  I guess my roots are deeply set in DRK where the idea was that the entry point for a masternode was fixed and that over a given period of time, all masternodes would receive a similar return on investment. 

In this context, I am using fair to refer to the fact that in order to run a service node, it will cost the owner money to run it.  If the service node owner is not guaranteed roughly the same income as other service node owners is there a chance this will mean that some service nodes will generate less income for doing the same amount of work at the same expense therefore causing an "unfair" situation?

I guess the advantage is that it will drive the price of Spreadcoin up if it succeeds.

Nope, I'm not sure if I get that either.  I think I'm probably just half (at best) informed and trying to guess at how the initial proposals will look and I'm missing something fundamental.  I'm sure all will become clear.

i think that the fact that we dont even know what to call 'them' shows the state of affairs that spreadcoin is in currently ... masternodes - spreadnodes - servicesnodes ...

patience is the key here ... revelations such as what you are asking is simplified by the fact that 'we' as a collective really dont actually KNOW yet ...

its an 'ideafest' at best ... for now ...

#crysx

[stonehedge]

You're right but you can't blame me for being excited