[ANN] [XMG] MAGI | CPU mining | mPoW | mPoS | [MagiPay]

[db6]

@joelao95
How you define "mining involvement"?

Well what I was trying to suggest was that in a theoretical "fair for everyone scenario" participation should be rewarded rather than the payout being based on the ability to generate the largest hash rate (though greater wealth or other means such as botnet).

By "mining involvement" perhaps the act of being connected to the XMG network and mining to a low minimum standard enables more people to gain reward, after all, the excess hashing power people are attempting to achieve in order to get more coins is effectively 'wasted energy'.   
If there was a way to reward a minimum standard of mining e.g. 5kh+ hashespersec, and there would be little extra reward in generating 100kh+ hashespersec then I suggest it would avoid an 'excess' distribution to those who can afford/bot the extremely high hashrates.
In theory this would then leave the coin more in the hands of the community rather than the pump-n-dumpers who just mine to take a quick profit ?

Anyway this is just my speculation I will be very interested to see what Joe's idea is  :-)

How about just take hardware mining out of it entirely.... Let the dev put 100,000 coins on an exchange and sell them for X, then have the remaining distribution of coins be done through proof of stake at a reasonably high % (100% per year at least).  That way people get out of it what they put in financially.  There is no advantage for those who can access free mining resources and everyone gets the same % reward.  Not suggesting that approach for this coin, but it does address the ability for some people to access free mining.  The amount raised fro selling the coins could then be used to buy more, propping up the price, and used as part of the PoS distribution.  Just a thought

I think if a Bank were to move into cryptocurrency (extremely unlikely !!) this is the way they would do it.
Your idea has merit for a coin to have value right off the bat - it is effectively supported by fiat currency and therefore has undisputed 'value'. 
The only problem I see with this is that once again the people with lots of money would snap up the lions share, and then without a large community to support the coin it would probably die like so many before it? 

I was trying to theorize a way that you could get lots of people (the community) involved in the coin process (via mining), but in a non-exclusive way (you don't need to own a server farm to get a decent stake), and would still support the minimum hashing needed to maintain the bitchain.
There is an argument that people who have paid lots of money for ASICs and large server farms deserve to get more coins, well that is fine - there are already loads of other coins out there that work like this (and from what I can see many have died due to pump-n-dump).

I decided to dip my toe into cryptocoin via XMG because I liked the Devs approach, he is definately trying to exclude the huge hash-rate guys grabbing the bulk of the coin and I hope he finds a solution.

[SamWalters]

@joelao95
How you define "mining involvement"?

Well what I was trying to suggest was that in a theoretical "fair for everyone scenario" participation should be rewarded rather than the payout being based on the ability to generate the largest hash rate (though greater wealth or other means such as botnet).

By "mining involvement" perhaps the act of being connected to the XMG network and mining to a low minimum standard enables more people to gain reward, after all, the excess hashing power people are attempting to achieve in order to get more coins is effectively 'wasted energy'.   
If there was a way to reward a minimum standard of mining e.g. 5kh+ hashespersec, and there would be little extra reward in generating 100kh+ hashespersec then I suggest it would avoid an 'excess' distribution to those who can afford/bot the extremely high hashrates.
In theory this would then leave the coin more in the hands of the community rather than the pump-n-dumpers who just mine to take a quick profit ?

Anyway this is just my speculation I will be very interested to see what Joe's idea is  :-)

How about just take hardware mining out of it entirely.... Let the dev put 100,000 coins on an exchange and sell them for X, then have the remaining distribution of coins be done through proof of stake at a reasonably high % (100% per year at least).  That way people get out of it what they put in financially.  There is no advantage for those who can access free mining resources and everyone gets the same % reward.  Not suggesting that approach for this coin, but it does address the ability for some people to access free mining.  The amount raised fro selling the coins could then be used to buy more, propping up the price, and used as part of the PoS distribution.  Just a thought

Paul, that is an interesting concept

So you are saying kick out mining completely?   Make it 100% proof of stake based on distribution of coins provided from dev?

How would there be price support?  from selling the coins? Why would people buy?

[joelao95]

Joe, I have been doing some further testing and I now concur with you that the value for netmhashps seems to be accurate.  The networkkhashps is not.

Based on that, and using an Amazon AWS 8-core instance at ~62 khash/s as a reference, this equates to approximately 12500 cores running on the network.  It's likely that the top few miners on suprnova are using AWS instances, between 100-250 instances to give 6-15 MH.  Assuming they are using spot rates of 0.065c per hour, and with a return of approx 500 XMG / MH / day (3000 coins a day for 6MH) ,and a BTC price of $420, the break-even selling price would be approximately 0.00012 XMG/BTC.

With buys on cryptoine significantly below this, and with little volume anyway, this is not even close to being profitable to mine with rented hardware.  This is a positive thing in some respects, but as soon as these miners realise this and drop out, difficulty will drop significantly and so will rewards.  The coin distribution rate overall should not be affected as the diff/reward ratio is linear, but this reinforces my point that I posted yesterday that the diff/reward ratio is too low to support the desired mint rate.  You're not going to get to 500/block because diff wont rise enough because not enough miners will join the network using VPS's as it is not profitable

Anyway, thought you would want some further feedback. 

Paul, thanks for the info. I think the scheduled test may not be necessary; I've been reviewing people's hash rate too and some of my data, all seem to be reasonably consistent. I agree with you about the block rewards too low. Since pool mining is up and running, we now can fulfill the plan increasing mining rewards, while with some smart thinking before simply increasing the rewards.

@miners, should small or big miners be excited about this news? Let's see; however, this is absolutely good news to pool owners.

[paulthetafy]

@joelao95
How you define "mining involvement"?

Well what I was trying to suggest was that in a theoretical "fair for everyone scenario" participation should be rewarded rather than the payout being based on the ability to generate the largest hash rate (though greater wealth or other means such as botnet).

By "mining involvement" perhaps the act of being connected to the XMG network and mining to a low minimum standard enables more people to gain reward, after all, the excess hashing power people are attempting to achieve in order to get more coins is effectively 'wasted energy'.  
If there was a way to reward a minimum standard of mining e.g. 5kh+ hashespersec, and there would be little extra reward in generating 100kh+ hashespersec then I suggest it would avoid an 'excess' distribution to those who can afford/bot the extremely high hashrates.
In theory this would then leave the coin more in the hands of the community rather than the pump-n-dumpers who just mine to take a quick profit ?

Anyway this is just my speculation I will be very interested to see what Joe's idea is  :-)

How about just take hardware mining out of it entirely.... Let the dev put 100,000 coins on an exchange and sell them for X, then have the remaining distribution of coins be done through proof of stake at a reasonably high % (100% per year at least).  That way people get out of it what they put in financially.  There is no advantage for those who can access free mining resources and everyone gets the same % reward.  Not suggesting that approach for this coin, but it does address the ability for some people to access free mining.  The amount raised fro selling the coins could then be used to buy more, propping up the price, and used as part of the PoS distribution.  Just a thought

Paul, that is an interesting concept

So you are saying kick out mining completely?   Make it 100% proof of stake based on distribution of coins provided from dev?

How would there be price support?  from selling the coins? Why would people buy?

Traditional mining would be avoided yes.  Mining (and therefore transaction verification and network security) would be still be done through proof of stake minting.  
The price support would be no different to any other crypto currency - value comes through the related services provided and the perceived value given by investors, so buy support would arise in that way.  But an asset returning 100% return per annum for 5-10 years is a pretty valuable asset, so demand should be there for them.  

Additionally the money the dev receives from the initial distribution sale would be used to place a buy back at the initial NAV.  So if 100,000 were sold at 0.001, he would initially put a buy wall at that price once all 100,000 were sold.  This would create an instant market and provide some liquidity.  Any coins bought-back from this wall would be distributed proportionally to coin holders as part of the proof of stake (maybe spread over 1-2 years).  

What you end up with is a fair distribution and a market kick-started by the liquidity provided from the ICO.

Yes it would mean that those with bigger bankrolls could buy the lions share, but I don't see anything wrong with that.  They also carry a bigger risk.  

EDIT: Sorry Joe this is gone off topic here, I'll avoid going into any more detail in this thread.   Back to MAGI!!

[12coins]

this is an interesting concept,looking forward to this thread.

[restless]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

[joelao95]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

I just login, no issue. You can pm nonce-pool.

[schmelix]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

Same here

[S.Naka]

 Top 25 Blockfinder
Rank    Username    Blocks    Coins Generated
1    anonymous     56    3,062
2    MagiSimpson    32    2,663
3    anonymous     9    879
4    test              8    532
5    szy4483p157    6    156
6    bearishtrader    6    426


Ok i find 2 of this, is from CHINA and they are DEV....

Sam, they go 192.000k, in 12h x10   STOP POW NOW|!!!!!!

[joelao95]

Top 25 Blockfinder
Rank    Username    Blocks    Coins Generated
1    anonymous     56    3,062
2    MagiSimpson    32    2,663
3    anonymous     9    879
4    test              8    532
5    szy4483p157    6    156
6    bearishtrader    6    426


Ok i find 2 of this, is from CHINA and they are DEV....

Sam, they go 192.000k, in 12h x10   STOP POW NOW|!!!!!!

Hi, what do you mean stop PoW?

[schmelix]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

Same here

Edited


 my miners also stoped working

[S.Naka]

sry i mean Make a cap, stop pay block found, i cant belive they use cpu...

if u belive in u coin ofc...

gl.

[joelao95]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

Same here

I smell a rip off... my miners also stoped working

Probably issue with the stratum, don't worry, nonce-pool is very dedicated to their work, they just updated minerd source code with improving performance.

[joelao95]

sry i mean Make a cap, stop pay block found, i cant belive they use cpu...

if u belive in u coin ofc...

gl.

I am about to make a long post about this , take care of that then

[schmelix]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

Same here

I smell a rip off... my miners also stoped working

Probably issue with the stratum, don't worry, nonce-pool is very dedicated to their work, they just updated minerd source code with improving performance.

Yes but a stratum error should not ne the case when the login to the pool page is the main problem, right?

[ocminer]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

Same here

I smell a rip off... my miners also stoped working

Probably issue with the stratum, don't worry, nonce-pool is very dedicated to their work, they just updated minerd source code with improving performance.

Yes but a stratum error should not ne the case when the login to the pool page is the main problem, right?

They are 100 % legit, just give them some time to wake up, its probably a hard disk space error, seems the cookie cannot be set on their side, I had that too earlier with extreme big logfiles sometimes. Shit happens, they'll fix it soon.

[joelao95]

Any news about the bounties for the translators ?

Do you send your address to 111magic? we will issue the translation bounties as we posted sometime ago, the same amount.

[S.Naka]

LOL him dont pay, no1 have no1 got bounty , sam!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ocminer]

LOL him dont pay, no1 have no1 got bounty , sam!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[schmelix]

Someone else who can't login at http://magi.nonce-pool.com
I made account yesterday, mined for 20 hours...
And today I can't login, it simply refuses my login , tried to reset password - says that "  Unable to send mail to your address "

Same here

I smell a rip off... my miners also stoped working

Probably issue with the stratum, don't worry, nonce-pool is very dedicated to their work, they just updated minerd source code with improving performance.

Yes but a stratum error should not ne the case when the login to the pool page is the main problem, right?

They are 100 % legit, just give them some time to wake up, its probably a hard disk space error, seems the cookie cannot be set on their side, I had that too earlier with extreme big logfiles sometimes. Shit happens, they'll fix it soon.

Yes, they have backend issues and yes it looks like a Cookie problem, i am not infront of a pc so i can't check what is happening. I guess you are right because the login loop only works when you enter the right password. And yes i know what you talking about regarding to big logfiles... Devops since ages