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

[lionheart78]

2* dual E5 2697 only mined about 180 XMGs per day,less than $3,it is really not worth to mine !

Who knows i have mine mining while doing all my stuff ^^, just freeing 1 core for applications; it's not that big but hey it's like doing some overtime when the truth is i can come home on time XD this is the beauty of cpu only coin

[1714912625]

1714912625

[1714912625]

1714912625

[1714912625]

1714912625

[1714912625]

1714912625

[1714912625]

1714912625

[db6]

[Update: an potential adjustment of block rewards - diff]

Initial design

We have to go back to review the initial design.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735170.msg8755719#msg8755719
http://cryptomagic.com/misc/images/magi-thread/PoW1-21.png

Predicted consequence is fair distribution, avoiding big mining farms and maintaining the network hash under a certain level (unlike BTC network keep increasing). It will frustrate mining farms (if existed) when network hashrate is so high that the mining rewarding is at the decline side. Mining XMG is less profitable compared to mining others; only belivers keeping mining will receive the most out of it. Same frustration applies to GPU miners if they existed.

According the above image, sorry for big miners, my initial thinking is to exclude the (personal) big hash as much as possible. Since we are initially based on M7, GPU mining is allowed at that time. The situation I am trying to avoid is the GPU farm, that is the reason of using diff-dependent rewards. As to M7M, allowing big hash in network means allowing GPU miners too if they exist. I do believe CPU miners (even with farms) would hate to see GPU farms online, same applied to individual CPU miners. This initial direction must be complied.

Issues

Network hash keeps increasing; we haven't see the arrival of rewarding peak yet while we already noticed the coming of big miners;

Current mining status in two pools:

Suprnova Workers: 244
Nonce-Pool Active Workers: 183
total works: 427
Total network hash is about 105 MHps.

It would be conclusive that individual miners have reached saturation, further increase in hash is mostly due to big miners. We haven't got into the 500 XMG/block stage. Provided the general user base won't grow (most likely), what do we expect once net hash hitting a point where gets 500 XMG/block?

Solutions

1) We intend to get 500 XMG/block into the net, but conditional

2) This is the idea; let's say we have three mining groups

Group A - CPU individual miners
Group B - CPU farms
Group C - GPU miners & farms

Though we may expect nonexisting of GPU miners, we can't exclude the possibility (individual). This must be taken care of.  

The most importance of this solution is to maintain the #A:
a. Mining hash of #A must remain the same or above during the lifetime of mining.
b. Moving the optimum diff to a point where the net hash equals to the hash of #A; optimum diff is where we get maximum rewards.

http://cryptomagic.com/misc/images/magi-thread/PoW1-22.png

It will be clear that with the arrival of #B, #A+#B leads to less rewards; Both #A and #B suffers low rewarding. #A is a faith miner and never go way in spite of zero reward or 500 XMG, and what happened to #B. #A is a set of many individual miners; for one who mines with 1 cpu, it won't be much loss if nothing coming out in one or two days (in an extreme case, we can assume at #A+#B rewards is zero). But for #B, since #B is a big farm and running costly, it won't be acceptable for them to mine without any return. We can image the same thing for #A+#B+#C. Obviously, the only way of getting rewards for #B or #C is to lower their hashing power, so that the block rewards are available for mining; it may get them to the same hashing level as #A.

If we can go this way, we will will need to select optimum diff and reward-diff pattern. The standard can rely on the mining history so far.

Any suggestions are appreciated!

Please suggest if this is the way we can go.

Am amazed no one has replied to the DEV yet, a shame to see the thread disintegrate into discussions of how much coins are selling for on exchanges already.  You guys need to take a long term view not look for instant payouts !

Joe, I like your thinking which is enforcing the original design such that a high overall hash cripples the payouts.  There are only two problems I see;

1) This would probably extend your phase 1 POW past the intended 2 months because it will take a while for the CPU farms/botnets to abandon the mining, after all they are doing nicely right now so they don't have much incentive to give up quickly.  This means coin rewards will be disbursed more slowly than intended until the mega-miners abandon it.

2) How do you distinguish between (a) a lot more solo miners joining your network as word spreads, and (b) one high hash-rate farm ?

If you can identify(2) and don't mind the extra mining duration of (1) then go ahead and tighten the block reward for excessive network hash.

I have a few ideas for how to prevent the mega-miners, but unfortunately they would have to be baked into the coin design at the start, your suggestion above is the best I can see at this stage.

[lama82]

2* dual E5 2697 only mined about 180 XMGs per day,less than $3,it is really not worth to mine !

You can try with some vps...

miscalculation.
If you take the cheap price of 0.0002BTC x 180XMG = 0.036BTC = at the moment 13,64$
Thats 416,14$ per month

There are just people who want to sell fast to earn money. That's why they sell cheap. That while XMG also sells with the price of 0.0006 BTC.
So be wise and do not sell cheap.
XMG already has enough attention. The price will have plenty of room to rise.
Maybe to unexpected value.
(Think twice before selling)

[DonQuijote]

now, where we can see the total amount of coins?
Is there a block explorer available?

[peerson51888]

2* dual E5 2697 only mined about 180 XMGs per day,less than $3,it is really not worth to mine !

You can try with some vps...

miscalculation.
If you take the cheap price of 0.0002BTC x 180XMG = 0.036BTC = at the moment 13,64$
Thats 416,14$ per month

There are just people who want to sell fast to earn money. That's why they sell cheap. That while XMG also sells with the price of 0.0006 BTC.
So be wise and do not sell cheap.
XMG already has enough attention. The price will have plenty of room to rise.
Maybe to unexpected value.
(Think twice before selling)

I'd to say ' immature '
The GPU miner do not think so...

[24core]

[Update: an potential adjustment of block rewards - diff]

Initial design

We have to go back to review the initial design.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735170.msg8755719#msg8755719

Predicted consequence is fair distribution, avoiding big mining farms and maintaining the network hash under a certain level (unlike BTC network keep increasing). It will frustrate mining farms (if existed) when network hashrate is so high that the mining rewarding is at the decline side. Mining XMG is less profitable compared to mining others; only belivers keeping mining will receive the most out of it. Same frustration applies to GPU miners if they existed.

According the above image, sorry for big miners, my initial thinking is to exclude the (personal) big hash as much as possible. Since we are initially based on M7, GPU mining is allowed at that time. The situation I am trying to avoid is the GPU farm, that is the reason of using diff-dependent rewards. As to M7M, allowing big hash in network means allowing GPU miners too if they exist. I do believe CPU miners (even with farms) would hate to see GPU farms online, same applied to individual CPU miners. This initial direction must be complied.

Issues

Network hash keeps increasing; we haven't see the arrival of rewarding peak yet while we already noticed the coming of big miners;

Current mining status in two pools:

Suprnova Workers: 244
Nonce-Pool Active Workers: 183
total works: 427
Total network hash is about 105 MHps.

It would be conclusive that individual miners have reached saturation, further increase in hash is mostly due to big miners. We haven't got into the 500 XMG/block stage. Provided the general user base won't grow (most likely), what do we expect once net hash hitting a point where gets 500 XMG/block?

Solutions

1) We intend to get 500 XMG/block into the net, but conditional

2) This is the idea; let's say we have three mining groups

Group A - CPU individual miners
Group B - CPU farms
Group C - GPU miners & farms

Though we may expect nonexisting of GPU miners, we can't exclude the possibility (individual). This must be taken care of.  

The most importance of this solution is to maintain the #A:
a. Mining hash of #A must remain the same or above during the lifetime of mining.
b. Moving the optimum diff to a point where the net hash equals to the hash of #A; optimum diff is where we get maximum rewards.



It will be clear that with the arrival of #B, #A+#B leads to less rewards; Both #A and #B suffers low rewarding. #A is a faith miner and never go way in spite of zero reward or 500 XMG, and what happened to #B. #A is a set of many individual miners; for one who mines with 1 cpu, it won't be much loss if nothing coming out in one or two days (in an extreme case, we can assume at #A+#B rewards is zero). But for #B, since #B is a big farm and running costly, it won't be acceptable for them to mine without any return. We can image the same thing for #A+#B+#C. Obviously, the only way of getting rewards for #B or #C is to lower their hashing power, so that the block rewards are available for mining; it may get them to the same hashing level as #A.

If we can go this way, we will will need to select optimum diff and reward-diff pattern. The standard can rely on the mining history so far.

Any suggestions are appreciated!

Please suggest if this is the way we can go.

Am amazed no one has replied to the DEV yet, a shame to see the thread disintegrate into discussions of how much coins are selling for on exchanges already.  You guys need to take a long term view not look for instant payouts !

Joe, I like your thinking which is enforcing the original design such that a high overall hash cripples the payouts.  There are only two problems I see;

1) This would probably extend your phase 1 POW past the intended 2 months because it will take a while for the CPU farms/botnets to abandon the mining, after all they are doing nicely right now so they don't have much incentive to give up quickly.  This means coin rewards will be disbursed more slowly than intended until the mega-miners abandon it.

2) How do you distinguish between (a) a lot more solo miners joining your network as word spreads, and (b) one high hash-rate farm ?

If you can identify(2) and don't mind the extra mining duration of (1) then go ahead and tighten the block reward for excessive network hash.

I have a few ideas for how to prevent the mega-miners, but unfortunately they would have to be baked into the coin design at the start, your suggestion above is the best I can see at this stage.

I liked this coin because is was going to be CPU only, change and you will become a needle in the hay stack.

You cannot create fair mining coin to suit everyone as the job will be way too big and you will fail on all three areas.

What you have stated is a good end state, but we are live and you need to implement interim steps.

For what it is worth I would recommend the following :-

1. Update algorithm to exclude GPU's - Memory coin could do it so why can't we!!
2. Update algorithm to address large hashing power with some sort of split mining.
3. Introduce GPU mining.

The point is that you do not have an army of programmers and each move, like a game of chess, has to be a careful one.

As you can see people want a CPU coin so work on this!

[joelao95]

OMG, yesterday 60000sat, today someone sell 5100, what a fu**ing idiot!!!

after dev made a new post, then the price go down cause somebody know there's more coin coming, they can make profit even at 5100sat

This was actually stated in the OP as PoW phase I, but looks like most of people ignored reading the OP.

[joelao95]

OMG, yesterday 60000sat, today someone sell 5100, what a fu**ing idiot!!!

where i cant buy !?

https://cryptoine.com/trade/xmg_btc

Dear Dev,
When will you start to swap coins from MAGICOIN I?
What's the way?

Allow me to post info regarding the coin swap; you can read the OP too, swap was delayed to protect new miners.

[hankrules]

OMG, yesterday 60000sat, today someone sell 5100, what a fu**ing idiot!!!

where i cant buy !?

https://cryptoine.com/trade/xmg_btc

Dear Dev,
When will you start to swap coins from MAGICOIN I?
What's the way?

Allow me to post info regarding the coin swap; you can read the OP too, swap was delayed to protect new miners.

Prices are still very low for MAGI I on swisscex.  I'm going to snap some up!

[Bojcha]

can someone upload newer miner 32bit. Link on dropbox expired
https://www.dropbox.com/s/t6k0e5up349efph/m7magi-cpuminer-master.zip?dl=0

[joelao95]

[Update: an potential adjustment of block rewards - diff]

Initial design

We have to go back to review the initial design.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=735170.msg8755719#msg8755719

Predicted consequence is fair distribution, avoiding big mining farms and maintaining the network hash under a certain level (unlike BTC network keep increasing). It will frustrate mining farms (if existed) when network hashrate is so high that the mining rewarding is at the decline side. Mining XMG is less profitable compared to mining others; only belivers keeping mining will receive the most out of it. Same frustration applies to GPU miners if they existed.

According the above image, sorry for big miners, my initial thinking is to exclude the (personal) big hash as much as possible. Since we are initially based on M7, GPU mining is allowed at that time. The situation I am trying to avoid is the GPU farm, that is the reason of using diff-dependent rewards. As to M7M, allowing big hash in network means allowing GPU miners too if they exist. I do believe CPU miners (even with farms) would hate to see GPU farms online, same applied to individual CPU miners. This initial direction must be complied.

Issues

Network hash keeps increasing; we haven't see the arrival of rewarding peak yet while we already noticed the coming of big miners;

Current mining status in two pools:

Suprnova Workers: 244
Nonce-Pool Active Workers: 183
total works: 427
Total network hash is about 105 MHps.

It would be conclusive that individual miners have reached saturation, further increase in hash is mostly due to big miners. We haven't got into the 500 XMG/block stage. Provided the general user base won't grow (most likely), what do we expect once net hash hitting a point where gets 500 XMG/block?

Solutions

1) We intend to get 500 XMG/block into the net, but conditional

2) This is the idea; let's say we have three mining groups

Group A - CPU individual miners
Group B - CPU farms
Group C - GPU miners & farms

Though we may expect nonexisting of GPU miners, we can't exclude the possibility (individual). This must be taken care of.  

The most importance of this solution is to maintain the #A:
a. Mining hash of #A must remain the same or above during the lifetime of mining.
b. Moving the optimum diff to a point where the net hash equals to the hash of #A; optimum diff is where we get maximum rewards.



It will be clear that with the arrival of #B, #A+#B leads to less rewards; Both #A and #B suffers low rewarding. #A is a faith miner and never go way in spite of zero reward or 500 XMG, and what happened to #B. #A is a set of many individual miners; for one who mines with 1 cpu, it won't be much loss if nothing coming out in one or two days (in an extreme case, we can assume at #A+#B rewards is zero). But for #B, since #B is a big farm and running costly, it won't be acceptable for them to mine without any return. We can image the same thing for #A+#B+#C. Obviously, the only way of getting rewards for #B or #C is to lower their hashing power, so that the block rewards are available for mining; it may get them to the same hashing level as #A.

If we can go this way, we will will need to select optimum diff and reward-diff pattern. The standard can rely on the mining history so far.

Any suggestions are appreciated!

Please suggest if this is the way we can go.

Am amazed no one has replied to the DEV yet, a shame to see the thread disintegrate into discussions of how much coins are selling for on exchanges already.  You guys need to take a long term view not look for instant payouts !

Joe, I like your thinking which is enforcing the original design such that a high overall hash cripples the payouts.  There are only two problems I see;

If you can identify(2) and don't mind the extra mining duration of (1) then go ahead and tighten the block reward for excessive network hash.

I have a few ideas for how to prevent the mega-miners, but unfortunately they would have to be baked into the coin design at the start, your suggestion above is the best I can see at this stage.

Thanks for feedback, db6.

1) This would probably extend your phase 1 POW past the intended 2 months because it will take a while for the CPU farms/botnets to abandon the mining, after all they are doing nicely right now so they don't have much incentive to give up quickly.  This means coin rewards will be disbursed more slowly than intended until the mega-miners abandon it.

Change to the decline side in the figure needs to be done (will make another distribution curve), in order to make the decline much faster than what it is now. Let's think about an extreme case, #A+#B gets 0 rewards; I can see #B might quit very quickly as #B can't afford loss when getting 0 return. Situation could be very different as to #A, since #A (many individual miners) can afford the loss somehow (we've seen people in sole mining keeps mining without find a block; we call this "mining involvement" ).

2) How do you distinguish between (a) a lot more solo miners joining your network as word spreads, and (b) one high hash-rate farm ?

This question is very most important in a real case. We can't distinguish #A from #B actually, what we need to know is the hash power #A might have, let's say 50 MH/s. Assuming a CPU yields 50-100 KH/s, that amounts to 500 - 1000 CPUs. So we will pre-target a 500 - 1000 user bases among which XMG will be distributed. Practically one may have few CPU running, so we may consider a tolerance, say targeting 75 MH/s where we get maximum rewards. In this way, we actually don't deny big miners much. For example, #A has 50 MHs, that allows additional 25MHs from #B. That is actually reasonable since one who is able to get more hash power has the right to get more returns. The example is a lot though; some optimization needs to be done in the real case. But the approach does deny many big miners taking over, so does the GPU miners. This is the key.

would like to know if you have additional ideas might consolidate the plan here further.

[joelao95]

I liked this coin because is was going to be CPU only, change and you will become a needle in the hay stack.

You cannot create fair mining coin to suit everyone as the job will be way too big and you will fail on all three areas.

What you have stated is a good end state, but we are live and you need to implement interim steps.

For what it is worth I would recommend the following :-

1. Update algorithm to exclude GPU's - Memory coin could do it so why can't we!!
2. Update algorithm to address large hashing power with some sort of split mining.
3. Introduce GPU mining.

The point is that you do not have an army of programmers and each move, like a game of chess, has to be a careful one.

As you can see people want a CPU coin so work on this!

I am sure your points to keep us to be safe as a CPU coin, while as far as I know, there is no GPU miners. The above approach is a "soft" control as we planned but not well functioned so far since this is a new algo; this approach could also be a solution to botnet problem (at least in part). Thus far, I don't think of need to change the algo.

[joelao95]

OMG, yesterday 60000sat, today someone sell 5100, what a fu**ing idiot!!!

where i cant buy !?

https://cryptoine.com/trade/xmg_btc

Dear Dev,
When will you start to swap coins from MAGICOIN I?
What's the way?

Allow me to post info regarding the coin swap; you can read the OP too, swap was delayed to protect new miners.

Prices are still very low for MAGI I on swisscex.  I'm going to snap some up!

Be cautious we're holding back the swap, no guarantee that way works you out. You may consider months investment in that.

[joelao95]

can someone upload newer miner 32bit. Link on dropbox expired
https://www.dropbox.com/s/t6k0e5up349efph/m7magi-cpuminer-master.zip?dl=0

Check the op under download section, also link here: http://cryptomagic.com/files/magi-minerd/cpuminer-xgm_pool-mining_win32.zip

[5m4ru]

joelao95 im Just say thanks for this coin good work ! 

[111magic]

It seems that there are people (maybe competitors) who want to get the price for XMG down.
Whether it's people who do not understand that you can fit the asking price on Cryptoine.
Take a look for yourself!
If you can sell XMG for something like /0.0005btc 0.0006btc  or even 0.0007btc.
What is the reason that someone sells them for 25% of the price.

[5m4ru]

19 sep. 2014 09:30:35   Sell   0.00002600   1.00000000   0.00002600
19 sep. 2014 09:20:11   Sell   0.00002900   0.50000000   0.00001450
19 sep. 2014 09:16:11   Sell   0.00004500   16.66666667   0.00075000
19 sep. 2014 09:16:11   Sell   0.00004500   56.77546000   0.00255490
19 sep. 2014 09:16:11   Sell   0.00004500   1.55000000   0.00006975
19 sep. 2014 09:15:44   Sell   0.00005000   27.86180715   0.00139309
19 sep. 2014 09:15:21   Sell   0.00005000   102.04019284   0.00510201
19 sep. 2014 09:15:21   Sell   0.00005000   1.20000000   0.00006000
19 sep. 2014 09:15:21   Sell   0.00005100   27.86180715   0.00142095
19 sep. 2014 08:49:52   Sell   0.00005100   17.13819285   0.00087405
19 sep. 2014 08:49:52   Sell   0.00005100   5.00000000   0.00025500
19 sep. 2014 08:49:48   Sell   0.00005200   26.39532408   0.00137256
19 sep. 2014 08:49:43   Sell   0.00005200   273.60467592   0.01422744
19 sep. 2014 08:49:43   Sell   0.00006200   26.39532408   0.00163651
19 sep. 2014 08:49:34   Sell   0.00006200   388.92725656   0.02411349
19 sep. 2014 08:49:34   Sell   0.00006202   23.99532408   0.00148819
19 sep. 2014 08:49:34   Sell   0.00006203   2.40000000   0.00014887
19 sep. 2014 08:49:28   Sell   0.00006203   497.60000000   0.03086613
19 sep. 2014 08:49:28   Sell   0.00008200   2.40000000   0.00019680
19 sep. 2014 08:49:22   Sell   0.00008200   62.84390243   0.00515320
19 sep. 2014 08:49:22   Sell   0.00008300   2.40000000   0.00019920
hehehehehehehehehehehheheh ! hehehehhehhehehhehehhehehe! aaaahhahahhahhahahhahahhahahhahahhaha! bingo !  

[OrientA]

It seems that there are people (maybe competitors) who want to get the price for XMG down.
Whether it's people who do not understand that you can fit the asking price on Cryptoine.
Take a look for yourself!
If you can sell XMG for something like /0.0005btc 0.0006btc  or even 0.0007btc.
What is the reason that someone sells them for 25% of the price.

It depends on the mining cost of those coins.

[RamiroGomare]

It seems that there are people (maybe competitors) who want to get the price for XMG down.
Whether it's people who do not understand that you can fit the asking price on Cryptoine.
Take a look for yourself!
If you can sell XMG for something like /0.0005btc 0.0006btc  or even 0.0007btc.
What is the reason that someone sells them for 25% of the price.

Hello

Can you explain what you mean? We charge 0.1% per transaction.
Anyone can sell at a loss. We do not have anything in common with.

[OrientA]

From the emission curve, the coins per block are very high initially, which means the cost is low. I do not have the exact figure as I do not mine here. That could explain the dump of the coin.