[ANN][SLR] SolarCoin | PoW to PoS v. 2.0 | Solar Proof of Generation (§1 = 1MWh)

[onsightit]

I may have a way to "void" the high interest payments before they are confirmed and put a 10% cap on interest.  I need to do a quick test.

-Steve

Edit: Test was successful. I am also going to put a cap on coin age of 1 year (365 days).  So, if you have coins older than one year, you can move them to a new address to reset the age and still earn interest on them.

Steve, cap or no cap, all results so far show that the error comes not from the currently defined parameters (constant and/or variable), but from a multiplier which is somewhere in the code and which was never intended to be there. Even if you change the parameters, the error will persist if not identified and removed.

It is the 98 Billion in the Generator Pool. Those coins are included in the Interest calculation. This is the only reason that could possibly even get close to the 1000 percent payouts!

98,000,000,000 divided by 34,000,000 = 2882.352941176471

Since the 98 Billion are dormant the 34 million have a higher payout... They are dormant though so the 98Billion also do not STAKE.

Hi CryptoNick,

The coin supply number used in the interest rate calculation is 34145512, the value returned by GetCurrentCoinSupply().  It grows by 1.35 SLR every block to compensate for 710000 in SLR grants per year.


// get current interest rate by targeting for network stake dependent inflation rate PoST
double GetCurrentInterestRate(CBlockIndex* pindexPrev)
{
double nAverageWeight = GetAverageStakeWeight(pindexPrev);
double inflationRate = GetCurrentInflationRate(nAverageWeight) / 100;
double interestRate = ((inflationRate * GetCurrentCoinSupply()) / nAverageWeight) * 100;

return interestRate;
}

// get current inflation rate using average stake weight ~1.5-2.5% (measure of liquidity) PoST
double GetCurrentInflationRate(double nAverageWeight)
{
double inflationRate = (17*(log(nAverageWeight/20)))/100;

return inflationRate;
}

-Steve

[Epiphany]

Why not have coin age be right after the generator coins were issued, so 18 months instead of a year?

[y_virtual]

I may have a way to "void" the high interest payments before they are confirmed and put a 10% cap on interest.  I need to do a quick test.

-Steve

Edit: Test was successful. I am also going to put a cap on coin age of 1 year (365 days).  So, if you have coins older than one year, you can move them to a new address to reset the age and still earn interest on them.

Steve, cap or no cap, all results so far show that the error comes not from the currently defined parameters (constant and/or variable), but from a multiplier which is somewhere in the code and which was never intended to be there. Even if you change the parameters, the error will persist if not identified and removed.

Hi y_virtual,

No, in testnet, I was able to achieve about 4% interest and 2.2% inflation.  That was a smaller network, but the parameters are all correct, and I had 34M coins staking.

Nick has just agreed (verbally) to a 10% cap and a limit on the coin age of one year.  Note: You can move your "older" coins to a new address if you want them to earn interest.

New wallet coming out soon...

-Steve

"No, in testnet, I was able to achieve about 4% interest and 2.2% inflation.  That was a smaller network, but the parameters are all correct, and I had 34M coins staking."
Exactly! I am saying same thing here - parameters are all correct! The error comes from somewhere else. You change the parameters, put caps, you will continue to have correct results in testnet, and wrong results when live. It's simple - with the current parameters and parameter ranges, you can not get the current results whatever age/interest you use for the calc, so whatever change in the parameters you implement, the error will still persist.

[Epiphany]

So if my coins are older than a year and I move them to a new address, I effectively have brand new coins and get no benefit for having held them all this time? Or do they get to be a year old somehow?

[biodieselchris]

I'd like everyone to consider taking a few minutes of your time and thinking about what's happened:

I got into Solarcoin a little over 2 years ago when it all started. I chose to invest because I like the idea behind this coin very much, AND because for the price it was a very good deal because at the time there were only a few million in circulation. Up untill yesterday there were a little over 34 Million Solarcoins created. That's almost the same amount as litecoin, so I can really see the potential of this coin if demand starts rising.
HOWEVER since yesterdays fork at block 830000 after the implementation of POST a sh*tload of new coins have been created out of thin air effectively making me and many others very rich at current SLR prices. These interest payments wont be confirmed untill 350 more blocks or so, that means we still have time to revert the change and go back to where we were before POST.
I suggest looking into the interest code as y_virtual said and try to find the error. like he said something like /100 sounds about right.

IF we choose to keep everything as it is i'm afraid solarcoin is doomed. Think about it , the orderbook on bittrex (the only exchange at the time being) is so thin, I could wipe out all the buy orders with my first interest payment and still have more SLR than I started off with. At the time being it looks like over 20 Million new SLR coins have been created.
It's basic supply and demand guys, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that the price would collapse and Solarcoin would have a VERY hard time surviving.
Let me finish off by saying if things stay the way they are I no longer want to be part of this community.
Up untill now I have been very happy with the way Solarcoin was headed but this is simply crazy.
I hope the developers will come to their senses and switch back to mining for the time being

yes and no solarcoiner - there's actually ~98.1B SLRs that will come into existence, and in fact, have already been minted just waiting to be distributed. So 34M, or 10X, or even 100X that is really very little compared to the total. What's shifted, and really only slightly so, is the number that will eventually be awarded for solar energy production versus those that miners/stakes have/will be getting. This was important to consider even prior to the fork because it says a lot about trusting the Foundation: they control, at what is priced right now at ~3/4 of a cent, some $750M in coins that are contracted by the Foundation to be distributed in a very certain way. But unlike crypto-trust, this is people-trust, and a lot of things could happen to SLR if say 10X or 100X price appreciation occurred. Examples include theft or loss of one of the premined MWh payment private keys or internal malfeasance at the foundation. I'm not saying whether it's likely or my personal prediction (I too bought coins in the spring of 2014 because I like the concept), but it is obviously possible.

[biodieselchris]

This was exactly what I warned about. Big Wallets and few stakers. I wasn't taken seriously. You guys are forgetting about the 98 Billion that are in the Generator Pool, do the math on that. The Generator Pool is included in PoST I am pretty sure that is why the payouts are so big.

Orphan the blocks before they mature. That way the transactions will stay.

if that's the case keep the stake the way it is and get solar signed up? That's the key success anyways.

Steve - if we send coins to a new address, and then something else goes wrong and there needs to be a rollback again, are those coins lost? (burned essentially?)

[mazzaneo]

how do you determine the age of you coins anyway?
Is it purely based on the last time a transaction was made from that wallet?

[Solaris33]

The generator pool coins are excluded from staking.
The coin supply is the amount in circulation.
The interest rate will be capped at 10% and there will be no coin age restriction.
Hence, no need to move coins to a new address.
Interest can be earned on SLR from launch date.

[onsightit]

This was exactly what I warned about. Big Wallets and few stakers. I wasn't taken seriously. You guys are forgetting about the 98 Billion that are in the Generator Pool, do the math on that. The Generator Pool is included in PoST I am pretty sure that is why the payouts are so big.

Orphan the blocks before they mature. That way the transactions will stay.

if that's the case keep the stake the way it is and get solar signed up? That's the key success anyways.

Steve - if we send coins to a new address, and then something else goes wrong and there needs to be a rollback again, are those coins lost? (burned essentially?)

Just got off the phone with the foundation and they have agreed to not limit the coin age to one year.  So, there will be no need to send coins to another address.

I am wrapping up testing and will issue the new wallet very soon.

-Steve

[Epiphany]

The generator pool coins are excluded from staking.
The coin supply is the amount in circulation.
The interest rate will be capped at 10% and there will be no coin age restriction.
Hence, no need to move coins to a new address.
Interest can be earned on SLR from launch date.

Thank you Joe.

[solarcoiner]

I'd like everyone to consider taking a few minutes of your time and thinking about what's happened:

I got into Solarcoin a little over 2 years ago when it all started. I chose to invest because I like the idea behind this coin very much, AND because for the price it was a very good deal because at the time there were only a few million in circulation. Up untill yesterday there were a little over 34 Million Solarcoins created. That's almost the same amount as litecoin, so I can really see the potential of this coin if demand starts rising.
HOWEVER since yesterdays fork at block 830000 after the implementation of POST a sh*tload of new coins have been created out of thin air effectively making me and many others very rich at current SLR prices. These interest payments wont be confirmed untill 350 more blocks or so, that means we still have time to revert the change and go back to where we were before POST.
I suggest looking into the interest code as y_virtual said and try to find the error. like he said something like /100 sounds about right.

IF we choose to keep everything as it is i'm afraid solarcoin is doomed. Think about it , the orderbook on bittrex (the only exchange at the time being) is so thin, I could wipe out all the buy orders with my first interest payment and still have more SLR than I started off with. At the time being it looks like over 20 Million new SLR coins have been created.
It's basic supply and demand guys, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that the price would collapse and Solarcoin would have a VERY hard time surviving.
Let me finish off by saying if things stay the way they are I no longer want to be part of this community.
Up untill now I have been very happy with the way Solarcoin was headed but this is simply crazy.
I hope the developers will come to their senses and switch back to mining for the time being

yes and no solarcoiner - there's actually ~98.1B SLRs that will come into existence, and in fact, have already been minted just waiting to be distributed. So 34M, or 10X, or even 100X that is really very little compared to the total. What's shifted, and really only slightly so, is the number that will eventually be awarded for solar energy production versus those that miners/stakes have/will be getting. This was important to consider even prior to the fork because it says a lot about trusting the Foundation: they control, at what is priced right now at ~3/4 of a cent, some $750M in coins that are contracted by the Foundation to be distributed in a very certain way. But unlike crypto-trust, this is people-trust, and a lot of things could happen to SLR if say 10X or 100X price appreciation occurred. Examples include theft or loss of one of the premined MWh payment private keys or internal malfeasance at the foundation. I'm not saying whether it's likely or my personal prediction (I too bought coins in the spring of 2014 because I like the concept), but it is obviously possible.

Obviously but since those coins are not moving and we know approximately how many people claim solarcoins at the moment the available supply should be around 34 Million. Since very few people are claiming coins the supply didnt go up by a lot, only through mining. Like I said that's not what was agreed upon in the specifiactions when I invested in this coin. I invested because of the limited supply ( forget about the ones not moving in the reserves) and the potential of this coin.
What you are describing is a very unfair shift in the way Solarcoin are distributed. The market cap will be devalued and the coin will become worthless. I don't understand how some people here cannot understand this. I might aswell go buy myself some paycoin while i'm at it. This is such a joke

edit: the coins are meant to be distributed evenly and slowly over time, not millions at once in several diffrent accounts.
If you want to leave things as they are, go ahead, ill be the first to dump

[y_virtual]

This was exactly what I warned about. Big Wallets and few stakers. I wasn't taken seriously. You guys are forgetting about the 98 Billion that are in the Generator Pool, do the math on that. The Generator Pool is included in PoST I am pretty sure that is why the payouts are so big.

Orphan the blocks before they mature. That way the transactions will stay.

if that's the case keep the stake the way it is and get solar signed up? That's the key success anyways.

Steve - if we send coins to a new address, and then something else goes wrong and there needs to be a rollback again, are those coins lost? (burned essentially?)

Just got off the phone with the foundation and they have agreed to not limit the coin age to one year.  So, there will be no need to send coins to another address.

I am wrapping up testing and will issue the new wallet very soon.

-Steve

Steve, what was the interest rate cap in 2.0.1?

[Solaris33]

There was no interest rate cap in v2.0.1
See page 11 and 13 of link:

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/VeriCoinPoSTWhitePaper10May2015.pdf

[y_virtual]

There was no interest rate cap in v2.0.1
See page 11 and 13 of link:

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/VeriCoinPoSTWhitePaper10May2015.pdf

Of course there was - 100% as it is on the chart, right?

[y_virtual]

There was no interest rate cap in v2.0.1
See page 11 and 13 of link:

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/VeriCoinPoSTWhitePaper10May2015.pdf

Of course there was - 100% as it is on the chart, right?

Please look at these numbers again:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi9ttwef2e5hfvk/Lotto.PNG?dl=0
The ~7,400,000 interest came from an address with ~200,000 in it. What many of us here have been repeating over and over is that this stake can NOT be generated by ANY interest rate <= 100% and ANY coin age <= 18 months.
Now let's say the interest is capped at 10%, and somehow the 7,400,000 were generated at 100%. With a 10% cap, those 200,000 SLR under all other conditions being the same will generate a stake of 740,000. Which will be WRONG again.
There is an error in the code, and it is somewhere else.

[sunny-boy]

Still no new coins received (from interest) in staking since 15h.
"Spendable" at almost 0 and the rest is "staking".
However, I have now almost twice my amount in 'total" (next to "connection")
Think the best would indeed be to "reboot" from pow

[solarcoiner]

Still no new coins received (from interest) in staking since 15h.
"Spendable" at almost 0 and the rest is "staking".
However, I have now almost twice my amount in 'total" (next to "connection")
Think the best would indeed be to "reboot" from pow

yes that's what we need to do while we figure out what went wrong.

[roislecxe]

Still no new coins received (from interest) in staking since 15h.
"Spendable" at almost 0 and the rest is "staking".
However, I have now almost twice my amount in 'total" (next to "connection")
Think the best would indeed be to "reboot" from pow

I have nothing staking, everything spendable and not received one coin in 25 hours.

[y_virtual]

Still no new coins received (from interest) in staking since 15h.
"Spendable" at almost 0 and the rest is "staking".
However, I have now almost twice my amount in 'total" (next to "connection")
Think the best would indeed be to "reboot" from pow

I have nothing staking, everything spendable and not received one coin in 25 hours.

Looks like you are lucky for not wining the lottery 

[Epiphany]

There was no interest rate cap in v2.0.1
See page 11 and 13 of link:

http://www.vericoin.info/downloads/VeriCoinPoSTWhitePaper10May2015.pdf

Of course there was - 100% as it is on the chart, right?

Please look at these numbers again:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gi9ttwef2e5hfvk/Lotto.PNG?dl=0
The ~7,400,000 interest came from an address with ~200,000 in it. What many of us here have been repeating over and over is that this stake can NOT be generated by ANY interest rate <= 100% and ANY coin age <= 18 months.
Now let's say the interest is capped at 10%, and somehow the 7,400,000 were generated at 100%. With a 10% cap, those 200,000 SLR under all other conditions being the same will generate a stake of 740,000. Which will be WRONG again.
There is an error in the code, and it is somewhere else.

The interest rate isn't capped at 100%, that's just written on the chart to show scale. Look on the left, you can see it does not cross at 100%.

The chart at the bottom of page 11 is what you're referring to right?