[ANN] Syscoin- FINAL 2.0 LAUNCHED! *ENCRYPTION, MARKETPLACE, BTC INTEGRATION*

[danosphere]

I sold my SYS awhile ago, but will buy back in if wallet functions a working decentralized market place that is user friendly.

Grab the Syscoin Shade Beta3 off Github and give it a whirl for free! Also I'm happy to announce we've restored our slack auto inviter! Click the link, join the discussion.

[sofu]

Hmm 100SAT is a good price to start accumulating some syscoin again

[barabbas]

Hmm 100SAT is a good price to start accumulating some syscoin again

A good and fast way to throw your money away. Whatever the price.

This is DONE. Period.

[sidhujag]

Hmm 100SAT is a good price to start accumulating some syscoin again

A good and fast way to throw your money away. Whatever the price.

This is DONE. Period.

We are just getting started.

[barabbas]

Hmm 100SAT is a good price to start accumulating some syscoin again

A good and fast way to throw your money away. Whatever the price.

This is DONE. Period.

We are just getting started.

And doing "great" already... lolol

[sidhujag]

Hmm 100SAT is a good price to start accumulating some syscoin again

A good and fast way to throw your money away. Whatever the price.

This is DONE. Period.

We are just getting started.

And doing "great" already... lolol

Check urself before u wreck urself. Github is ur friend.

[p3yot33at3r]

I am planning on porting Syscoin over to merge mine SHA256 rather than SCRYPT, would it be possible to add this coin to your list of merge minable coins? I am doing it on latest code base BTC 0.12 core so it is optimized and is basically a decentralized marketplace onchain. If we get a pool I will go ahead and code it up otherwise will stick with LTC merge mining. THanks!

I'm sure p2pool users would add syscoin to their merge mined nodes as well if you decided to port it to SHA256 

[kevinjulio]

I have 30k sys in wallet beta , I want to witdraw her into bittrex but could not , because I have a sys in the wallet has a prefix T , while sys in bittrex have the prefix S , can you help me?

[Piston Honda]

Hmm 100SAT is a good price to start accumulating some syscoin again

A good and fast way to throw your money away. Whatever the price.

This is DONE. Period.

We are just getting started.

you've been "getting started" for about 1.5 years now already LMAO

/facepalm

[donnyespo]

New SYS fundamental review on alt.report http://alt.report/altcoins/item/321-sys-syscoin-business-on-the-blockchain

[sidhujag]

Hmm 100SAT is a good price to start accumulating some syscoin again

A good and fast way to throw your money away. Whatever the price.

This is DONE. Period.

We are just getting started.

you've been "getting started" for about 1.5 years now already LMAO

/facepalm

No check the github

[sidhujag]

I have 30k sys in wallet beta , I want to witdraw her into bittrex but could not , because I have a sys in the wallet has a prefix T , while sys in bittrex have the prefix S , can you help me?

Tsys is for beta only.. Not on exchange

[UnklAdM]

Hey guys, I'm not trying to be a jerk here but we really, really, really REALLY need a blockchain with basic wholesale/retail functionality that we can use out here in the real world and we need it SOON.  I'm hoping you can get this out and running before my boss shit-cans a couple of pet projects I've been mining and purchasing Syscoin for.

Don't worry about features. Worry about basic core long-term functionality, and business will come. Keep changing lanes and SMBs will label blockchain technologies 'another ongoing project' and drop it like a hot potato.

Just my 2 cents. We're still running cobol in the basements of our banks. We're running os/2 in the navy, on atm machines, and at the airports. We're still running DOS in our machine shops and in our factories. I think Syscoin could be one of these technologies if we can just get it out there and working.

Don't get stuck on clearing the brush lot at the bottom of the hill for parking and blazing a trail up the hill, there's plenty of room to land the plane on TOP of the hill. Perhaps a smaller plane and a rougher landing, but ultimately the FIRST plane.

 - UnklAdM

[forzendiablo]

so whats up with SYS? i see so many different options now of where its going.. im now lost

[sidhujag]

so whats up with SYS? i see so many different options now of where its going.. im now lost

Going to the same place, the moon!

[thaaanos]

Moving discusion / removed my posts from other thread if you are wandering

No on my blockchain we can do service txs that are different, for decentralized market, imtegrated aliases certificates, encrypted messages. These txs are what i call service transactions which count toward real work, sending coins doesnt mean work has been done to me.

You keep miners honest by putting the rules in consensus rules so that everyone verifies they are doing what you think. If you make it make it more expensive to game the system then miners wont do it unless they want to waste money.

I see so you try to measure growth by watching services used? All you need then is to determine the multiplier how do you do that?

What multiplier? When you create the service you burn some coins based on amount of data used(services are allowed up to a few kb).. Then i regenerate those burned coins or lesve them burned depending on some arbritrary threshold i said something like 5 services per block would leave them burned (deflation) and when usage picks up such that they get to over 10 a block becomes inflationary. Remember im using 1 min blocktimes and a 100kb max block size.

ok that was my concern that the parameters of expansion or shrink are arbitary, you cant have that. Either you pay the cost to determine the optimal parameters to use in a rule, or you let those parameters to be determined by the users in the long run by trial and error. Else you force the users to "reverse engineer" the service count to get the effect that suits their needs, ie keep mining empty blocks until a certain number of services are in the buffer (burst), or throttle the services to a certain threshold.

The miners cannot change parameters as they are enforced by consensus which is enforced on connectblock on every node. If they mine an empty block they wont get the reward of the service fees so there is no point in doing that because someone else will take it if they dont.

The threshold I put in is just a safegaurd from inflating small supply amount befofe network affect takes the coin over. This gives incentive to hold the coin while network affect comes because it is deflationary until the services really start to be used (10 per block), it really could be anything that makes sense and its just timing really. If network affect never comes it will deflate away to find equilibrium between users holding and users using the coin, so it kind of creates a reenforcing cycle of incentives not only to hold but to start using it.

Lets not clutter this thread any longer is there a thread we can discuss it further?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=757255.0

A. Network effect is primarily achieved by abundant supply, trying to deflate the money supply until network effect kicks is like trying to put the wagon before the horse. When Bootstrapping network your network you shouldnt concern yourself on money supply tightening cause you have not reached saturation. Only after you reach saturation point and establish your market price stability should concern you.

B. Miners eventually aggregate in pools so when I speak about miners policy I actually refer to pool policy. If you look at the state of bitcoin now easily 20 pools could reach a policy consensus on gaming  the service to tweak the supply. In short dont take for granted that binding 2 variables is a one way street. And judging by the requirements of your specs. pools eventually will need to be data centers and thus your pools eventually will be even less than bitcoin

[sidhujag]

Moving discusion / removed my posts from other thread if you are wandering

No on my blockchain we can do service txs that are different, for decentralized market, imtegrated aliases certificates, encrypted messages. These txs are what i call service transactions which count toward real work, sending coins doesnt mean work has been done to me.

You keep miners honest by putting the rules in consensus rules so that everyone verifies they are doing what you think. If you make it make it more expensive to game the system then miners wont do it unless they want to waste money.

I see so you try to measure growth by watching services used? All you need then is to determine the multiplier how do you do that?

What multiplier? When you create the service you burn some coins based on amount of data used(services are allowed up to a few kb).. Then i regenerate those burned coins or lesve them burned depending on some arbritrary threshold i said something like 5 services per block would leave them burned (deflation) and when usage picks up such that they get to over 10 a block becomes inflationary. Remember im using 1 min blocktimes and a 100kb max block size.

ok that was my concern that the parameters of expansion or shrink are arbitary, you cant have that. Either you pay the cost to determine the optimal parameters to use in a rule, or you let those parameters to be determined by the users in the long run by trial and error. Else you force the users to "reverse engineer" the service count to get the effect that suits their needs, ie keep mining empty blocks until a certain number of services are in the buffer (burst), or throttle the services to a certain threshold.

The miners cannot change parameters as they are enforced by consensus which is enforced on connectblock on every node. If they mine an empty block they wont get the reward of the service fees so there is no point in doing that because someone else will take it if they dont.

The threshold I put in is just a safegaurd from inflating small supply amount befofe network affect takes the coin over. This gives incentive to hold the coin while network affect comes because it is deflationary until the services really start to be used (10 per block), it really could be anything that makes sense and its just timing really. If network affect never comes it will deflate away to find equilibrium between users holding and users using the coin, so it kind of creates a reenforcing cycle of incentives not only to hold but to start using it.

Lets not clutter this thread any longer is there a thread we can discuss it further?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=757255.0

A. Network effect is primarily achieved by abundant supply, trying to deflate the money supply until network effect kicks is like trying to put the wagon before the horse. When Bootstrapping network your network you shouldnt concern yourself on money supply tightening cause you have not reached saturation. Only after you reach saturation point and establish your market price stability should concern you.

B. Miners eventually aggregate in pools so when I speak about miners policy I actually refer to pool policy. If you look at the state of bitcoin now easily 20 pools could reach a policy consensus on gaming  the service to tweak the supply. In short dont take for granted that binding 2 variables is a one way street. And judging by the requirements of your specs. pools eventually will need to be data centers and thus your pools eventually will be even less than bitcoin

Agreed but the supply deflation is currently negligble, only a few hundred coins per year. It really is there to be a stop limit on any inflation which affects perception. Inflation will be nonnegligible if and only if technology improves in p2p land and we achieve > 100tps, like bip109 tries to claim. At that point if usage picks up supply will scale with growth/usage.

The same reason miners dont game thesystem in bitcoin is the same reason they dont 51% attack the coin in syscoin. You can always hardfork and revert any bad transactions worsedcase. If you have these rulesin the protocol you remove the incentive to even try to game that variable.

Regarding oversupply being a primary prequisite to network effect, please provide facts to back your claim with an example because i dont see anything but bitcoin doing that.

With that in mind you should start to see that the protocol follows your guidelines in A in that supply is really only shifted when network effect happens,

[thaaanos]

The supply deflation is currently negligble, only a few hundred coins per year. It really is there to be a stop limit on any inflation which affects perception. Inflation will be nonnegligible if and only if technology improves in p2p land and we achieve > 100tps, like bip109 tries to claim. At that point if usage picks up supply will scale with growth/usage.

The same reason miners dont game thesystem in bitcoin is the same reason they dont 51% attack the coin in syscoin. You can always hardfork and revert any bad transactions worsedcase. If you have these rulesin the protocol you remove the incentive to even try to game that variable.

Regarding oversupply being a primary prequisite to network effect, please provide facts to back your claim with an example because i dont see anything but bitcoin doing that.

Bitcoin has no degrees of freedom on which the pools can affect money supply, but you can see that people have indeed "burned" coins voluntarily just to feel the freedom of actually doing it. Also pools by establishing policy to affect money supply do not try to game the network for "fun and profit" because they have a stake in the network and dont want to kill it, but merely to adapt it to their perceived needs. It will not be a case of a bad transaction but or a hard fork. It will be a healthy thing for them to do.
If you provide them with a way to effect a change eventually they will do it even if it is costly or requires cooperation, why? because they can!.
Trust in your users to know what's best for them isn't that the liberal axiom?

The link of abundant supply and adoption rate is self evident I think, the other side of abundant supply is low price.
Examples
1. Pirated windows helped Ms establish market share
2. Facebook, google, etc all free services dominate
3. VHS vs BETAMAX
4. Netflix

[sidhujag]

The supply deflation is currently negligble, only a few hundred coins per year. It really is there to be a stop limit on any inflation which affects perception. Inflation will be nonnegligible if and only if technology improves in p2p land and we achieve > 100tps, like bip109 tries to claim. At that point if usage picks up supply will scale with growth/usage.

The same reason miners dont game thesystem in bitcoin is the same reason they dont 51% attack the coin in syscoin. You can always hardfork and revert any bad transactions worsedcase. If you have these rulesin the protocol you remove the incentive to even try to game that variable.

Regarding oversupply being a primary prequisite to network effect, please provide facts to back your claim with an example because i dont see anything but bitcoin doing that.

Bitcoin has no degrees of freedom on which the pools can affect money supply, but you can see that people have indeed "burned" coins voluntarily just to feel the freedom of actually doing it. Also pools by establishing policy to affect money supply do not try to game the network for "fun and profit" because they have a stake in the network and dont want to kill it, but merely to adapt it to their perceived needs. It will not be a case of a bad transaction but or a hard fork. It will be a healthy thing for them to do.
If you provide them with a way to effect a change eventually they will do it even if it is costly or requires cooperation, why? because they can!.
Trust in your users to know what's best for them isn't that the liberal axiom?

The link of abundant supply and adoption rate is self evident I think, the other side of abundant supply is low price.
Examples
1. Pirated windows helped Ms establish market share
2. Facebook, google, etc all free services dominate
3. VHS vs BETAMAX
4. Netflix

I fail to see the self evidence of your claim but nontheless service fees are dust amounts so it qualifies as lowprice hopefully in your mind.

Miners cannt change supply any more than mining more than they should, again its a consensus rule and i have to repeat myself but nodes will all validate the transactions, miners cant do it just for fun.

The only way pools can effect the supply is by creating a fork, its no diffrent than bitcoin. If you want tomread the code checkout my github and you can see whats really happening, it might help in your understanding on how this stuff works.

[AngryDwarf]

So is there a simple summary of what is happening to syscoin anywhere without having to trawl through plenty of threads trying to work out what is FUD?
Is SYS2 a new block chain running on merged SHA256, or is it a hard fork of the existing chain?
Do SYS holders have to convert, and are there any minimum conversion requirements? How will it be done and it what timeframe?
Really could do with an FAQ. Is there one anywhere?