CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[sp_]

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

But if the coin price drops then mining would stop instantly.
I was mining a coin on and off for 1 year with the difficulty adjustment I said making .12 btc once in a while with rented hash too.

No. If the network hashrate is falling, less inflation. The miners get the same amout of coins. The coinprice has nothing to do with it.

[1715479532]

1715479532

[Amph]

you need to make a coin that encourage buying and not dumping, so until you can make a coin that is not only a pump and dump but also used a currency you will not get far here, there is a reason why btcoin isn't dead

because it's used like fiat

[bensam1231]

You know it's a shame some of the bigger old coins are unprofitable to mine now. While they have a pretty healthy trade volume, their blockreward reached a point where it's not longer profitable to mine. Feathercoin for instance has healthy trade volume every day, but easily gets saturated by a handful of miners. Cryptonite is also in this boat.

Conversely, if emission is too high in smaller coins that don't have healthy volume they're easily crapped on by miners dumping minted coins.

I've thought about this over the years I've been mining. Someone really needs to release a adaptive block reward that relies on healthy trade volume. So if the coin is starting to die, the blockreward goes down and reduces emission of coins and keeps supply steady and of course if the coins is flourishing, it increases the emission to a certain extent. Volume is just an example, obviously more factors would have to play into this then just daily volume.

That is a immensely complex problem, but definitely could be done. No one has tackled it yet though.

Literally a idea for a big coin in a nutshell right there. Quote this post when it happens.

elacoin

it's dead though ...died with asic scrypt miners ....

I mined the shit out of this coin back in the scrypt gpu days
was worth mining over ltc, ftc

so yes smart way to issue coins but NOT new  


sp should think about such a distribution system ....

Looked at Elacoin, distribution has nothing to do with market health. It has something similar to a difficulty retargeting system that's more advanced based on difficulty, but still has nothing to do with the market. This doesn't seperate itself from other coins, just assumes there is more 'demand' if the difficulty is higher... That's not what I was proposing.

What they were doing is a good way to get the coin pummeled into the ground.

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

That's Elacoin and also not what I was talking about.


It's amazing how fast you guys try to make ideas your own though. ^^

[bathrobehero]

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

Good idea but it means emission is unpredictable which means less speculative investors will bother.

It would need some real world use or some incentive for people to hold it.

[Nikolaj]

a thing it's client side, like the KlausT skein kernel, another thing it's server side with accepted rates, where the latter it's equal to the "apparently slower" 1.8.3 from Tpruvot (That I use).

Stability first, and pool side accepted shares second. It's pointless to obtain 1GH/s if you've got accepted shares for 0.4, server-side.

About the coin, there needs to be done a complex study about inflation/deflation and coin/btc rates, given the possible optimizations of the code by public or private kernels, if available, and also the admin/operators intention, that could kill the viability of the project immediately, given that we need to count an immense and immediate hashrate (instamining with private kernels at it's finest) of the admins.

Such kind of coin should have an inflation like zcash, but also an immediate exchange to support the mining process (not cryptopia, ccex or youbit, but trex for example, with a planned release - NOT NINJA). Without such mechanics, and with a better inflation curve than zcash, we could avoid the immediate dumping scenario, that could obliterate the initial casual investors. Other than that: FEATURES ! Are we talking about another Instamining Shitcoin dumped to death after a couple of weeks, or something else?

[sp_]

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

Good idea but it means emission is unpredictable which means less speculative investors will bother.

It would need some real world use or some incentive for people to hold it.

But if the emisssion have a roof value and the graph is not linear, could be bether than the slow start of zcash.

[tbearhere]

You know it's a shame some of the bigger old coins are unprofitable to mine now. While they have a pretty healthy trade volume, their blockreward reached a point where it's not longer profitable to mine. Feathercoin for instance has healthy trade volume every day, but easily gets saturated by a handful of miners. Cryptonite is also in this boat.

Conversely, if emission is too high in smaller coins that don't have healthy volume they're easily crapped on by miners dumping minted coins.

I've thought about this over the years I've been mining. Someone really needs to release a adaptive block reward that relies on healthy trade volume. So if the coin is starting to die, the blockreward goes down and reduces emission of coins and keeps supply steady and of course if the coins is flourishing, it increases the emission to a certain extent. Volume is just an example, obviously more factors would have to play into this then just daily volume.

That is a immensely complex problem, but definitely could be done. No one has tackled it yet though.

Literally a idea for a big coin in a nutshell right there. Quote this post when it happens.

elacoin

it's dead though ...died with asic scrypt miners ....

I mined the shit out of this coin back in the scrypt gpu days
was worth mining over ltc, ftc

so yes smart way to issue coins but NOT new  


sp should think about such a distribution system ....

Looked at Elacoin, distribution has nothing to do with market health. It has something similar to a difficulty retargeting system that's more advanced based on difficulty, but still has nothing to do with the market. This doesn't seperate itself from other coins, just assumes there is more 'demand' if the difficulty is higher... That's not what I was proposing.

What they were doing is a good way to get the coin pummeled into the ground.

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

That's Elacoin and also not what I was talking about.


It's amazing how fast you guys try to make ideas your own though. ^^

Its amazing how you think I'm making it my own..... just copy difficulty adjustment of dime coin that's what I was hinting at.

[sp_]

You know it's a shame some of the bigger old coins are unprofitable to mine now. While they have a pretty healthy trade volume, their blockreward reached a point where it's not longer profitable to mine. Feathercoin for instance has healthy trade volume every day, but easily gets saturated by a handful of miners. Cryptonite is also in this boat.

Conversely, if emission is too high in smaller coins that don't have healthy volume they're easily crapped on by miners dumping minted coins.

I've thought about this over the years I've been mining. Someone really needs to release a adaptive block reward that relies on healthy trade volume. So if the coin is starting to die, the blockreward goes down and reduces emission of coins and keeps supply steady and of course if the coins is flourishing, it increases the emission to a certain extent. Volume is just an example, obviously more factors would have to play into this then just daily volume.

That is a immensely complex problem, but definitely could be done. No one has tackled it yet though.

Literally a idea for a big coin in a nutshell right there. Quote this post when it happens.

elacoin

it's dead though ...died with asic scrypt miners ....

I mined the shit out of this coin back in the scrypt gpu days
was worth mining over ltc, ftc

so yes smart way to issue coins but NOT new  


sp should think about such a distribution system ....

Looked at Elacoin, distribution has nothing to do with market health. It has something similar to a difficulty retargeting system that's more advanced based on difficulty, but still has nothing to do with the market. This doesn't seperate itself from other coins, just assumes there is more 'demand' if the difficulty is higher... That's not what I was proposing.

What they were doing is a good way to get the coin pummeled into the ground.

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

That's Elacoin and also not what I was talking about.


It's amazing how fast you guys try to make ideas your own though. ^^

Its amazing how you think I'm making it my own..... just copy difficulty adjustment of dime coin that's what I was hinting at.

I don't copy a low difciculty coin with dickhead support.

[KarinaKasimanova]

Today, I will work on it.

[bathrobehero]

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

Good idea but it means emission is unpredictable which means less speculative investors will bother.

It would need some real world use or some incentive for people to hold it.

But if the emisssion have a roof value and the graph is not linear, could be bether than the slow start of zcash.

True. But anything's better than Zcash's slow start imo.

~34 days from 0 to 12.5 means exactly what we experienced; crazy high initial price followed by a continous slow dump because the slow start is basically nothing but a super high inflation period which makes it a stupid idea to invest into it during that time.

But by the time the slowstart ends, the price is already low.

And then the blockreward staying the same for 4 years is another stupid idea because it's just another super high inflation period.

It made sense for bitcoin because barely any people mined it back then and now that it's established it doesn't matter. I might end up working for ZEC in 4-8 years but by that time it would also very well end up being ancient tech.


I think Zcash should have started with something like 6 ZEC per block and after the slow start the blockreward should have gradually decreased over time. There's no reason not to do a gradual decrease instead of the old school sudden halvings every 4 years.

[antantti]

Guys, you are doing it wrong, as we say here you are climbing to tree ass ahead  Currency that is fair for those who are printing it? Yeah right...

Anonymity, fast transfers, low fees, fair distribution, basically all what banksters hate. Give me that and I am all in.

[bensam1231]

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

Good idea but it means emission is unpredictable which means less speculative investors will bother.

It would need some real world use or some incentive for people to hold it.

But if the emisssion have a roof value and the graph is not linear, could be bether than the slow start of zcash.

True. But anything's better than Zcash's slow start imo.

~34 days from 0 to 12.5 means exactly what we experienced; crazy high initial price followed by a continous slow dump because the slow start is basically nothing but a super high inflation period which makes it a stupid idea to invest into it during that time.

But by the time the slowstart ends, the price is already low.

And then the blockreward staying the same for 4 years is another stupid idea because it's just another super high inflation period.

It made sense for bitcoin because barely any people mined it back then and now that it's established it doesn't matter. I might end up working for ZEC in 4-8 years but by that time it would also very well end up being ancient tech.


I think Zcash should have started with something like 6 ZEC per block and after the slow start the blockreward should have gradually decreased over time. There's no reason not to do a gradual decrease instead of the old school sudden halvings every 4 years.

A slow start is absolutely needed to prevent instamining.

Yes it's a stupid idea to invest from the beginning during slowstart, why do you need to invest immediately? That's not a problem.


SP says a lot of things, I'll believe these things when I see it. It's just as easy to say I'm going to be making a coin and it'll be released in the next decade, fair for everyone, amazing technological innovations, anonymous transactions, and large whale investor support! It's like the tagline for every trash coin released in the last three years.

[bathrobehero]

A slow start is absolutely needed to prevent instamining.

Yes it's a stupid idea to invest from the beginning during slowstart, why do you need to invest immediately? That's not a problem.


SP says a lot of things, I'll believe these things when I see it. It's just as easy to say I'm going to be making a coin and it'll be released in the next decade, fair for everyone, amazing technological innovations, and large whale investor support! It's like the tagline for every trash coin released in the last three years.

Some people has to invest otherwise barely anyone would mine it. But I see what you mean. Unfortunately ZEC was way overhyped and likely heavily manipulated as well.

And the slowstart was so slow that ZEC was essentially instamined in a sense. Not amount wise, of course, that amount is nothing now but the first couple of people made a lot of money even with a fraction of a coin. Miners were virtually ripping pool owners' throats for payment delays. And then there's early private miners which also hurt distribution.

Anyway, my point is that you don't need ~34 days of climbing to avoid instamining, that's ridiculous. Even if there's a new algo waiting with no public miners.

But this day and age newly a released big coin without a windows wallet and some basic GPU miners for both teams is kind of laughable imo and makes it hard to take it seriously. Even Eth got a lot of flack for it and rightfully so.

A coin with linux/mac/windows wallets and basic GPU (not just CPU) miners at launch and some proper marketing way beforehand shouldn't need more than a few days of slow start.

And if you don't have all that, what's even the point of releasing a half-cooked coin - even if it has a killer feature (other than the obvious answer of making money)? It's not like you want as many people as possible to use it... oh wait.

[bensam1231]

A slow start is absolutely needed to prevent instamining.

Yes it's a stupid idea to invest from the beginning during slowstart, why do you need to invest immediately? That's not a problem.


SP says a lot of things, I'll believe these things when I see it. It's just as easy to say I'm going to be making a coin and it'll be released in the next decade, fair for everyone, amazing technological innovations, and large whale investor support! It's like the tagline for every trash coin released in the last three years.

Some people has to invest otherwise barely anyone would mine it. But I see what you mean. Unfortunately ZEC was way overhyped and likely heavily manipulated as well.

And the slowstart was so slow that ZEC was essentially instamined in a sense. Not amount wise, of course, that amount is nothing now but the first couple of people made a lot of money even with a fraction of a coin. Miners were virtually ripping pool owners' throats for payment delays. And then there's early private miners which also hurt distribution.

Anyway, my point is that you don't need ~34 days of climbing to avoid instamining, that's ridiculous. Even if there's a new algo waiting with no public miners.

But this day and age newly a released big coin without a windows wallet and some basic GPU miners for both teams is kind of laughable imo and makes it hard to take it seriously. Even Eth got a lot of flack for it and rightfully so.

A coin with linux/mac/windows wallets and basic GPU (not just CPU) miners at launch and some proper marketing way beforehand shouldn't need more than a few days of slow start.

And if you don't have all that, what's even the point of releasing a half-cooked coin - even if it has a killer feature (other than the obvious answer of making money)? It's not like you want as many people as possible to use it... oh wait.

Every coin gets heavily manipulated. People will invest regardless of there being a slow start, like with ZEC. Considering the market price of ZEC it's still a very healthy coin. Not many coins go 0-100 instantly.

It wasn't instamined. If people overvalue something other people will profit. Remember when the Playstation 3 launched? People paid way too much to get theirs day 1. That has nothing to do with mining and isn't a issue that can be fixed with a coin. Some people simply want to be first and are willing to pay a premium for it.

Coin had nothing to do with pool problems, also had nothing to do with private miners. They had a contest specifically to help aid in miner development (however they botched that a bit).

30 days isn't a bad window, if you consider a coin is going to last years, it's a drop in the bucket. If you want to get the word out and make sure everyone is there, there is nothing wrong with it. People will simply hold off to invest if they're serious. Investors are generally not stupid, they understand how this works better then a rag-tag bunch of miners that barely understand economics. By definition investing is risk-reward behavior.

Consider that we're two months out and only now coming into 'public' miners that hit 300sols on hardware. If you're a private investor with a lot of money and you can hire developers, how much earlier do you think they got theirs? If you had someone working on it from day one it may have even been close to two weeks in. Claymore is pretty much the best case scenario for miner development as he does it full time and he's pretty skilled, even that took him a month and a half to reach those speeds.

I agree there should be a windows wallet available early on, that really didn't have a whole lot to do with anything I was talking about though.

[tbearhere]

You know it's a shame some of the bigger old coins are unprofitable to mine now. While they have a pretty healthy trade volume, their blockreward reached a point where it's not longer profitable to mine. Feathercoin for instance has healthy trade volume every day, but easily gets saturated by a handful of miners. Cryptonite is also in this boat.

Conversely, if emission is too high in smaller coins that don't have healthy volume they're easily crapped on by miners dumping minted coins.

I've thought about this over the years I've been mining. Someone really needs to release a adaptive block reward that relies on healthy trade volume. So if the coin is starting to die, the blockreward goes down and reduces emission of coins and keeps supply steady and of course if the coins is flourishing, it increases the emission to a certain extent. Volume is just an example, obviously more factors would have to play into this then just daily volume.

That is a immensely complex problem, but definitely could be done. No one has tackled it yet though.

Literally a idea for a big coin in a nutshell right there. Quote this post when it happens.

elacoin

it's dead though ...died with asic scrypt miners ....

I mined the shit out of this coin back in the scrypt gpu days
was worth mining over ltc, ftc

so yes smart way to issue coins but NOT new  


sp should think about such a distribution system ....

Looked at Elacoin, distribution has nothing to do with market health. It has something similar to a difficulty retargeting system that's more advanced based on difficulty, but still has nothing to do with the market. This doesn't seperate itself from other coins, just assumes there is more 'demand' if the difficulty is higher... That's not what I was proposing.

What they were doing is a good way to get the coin pummeled into the ground.

Any name for the coin?  
And how about  difficulty goes up 10% per so many blocks high hash but  goes down 50% per same amount of blocks when low hash.
As the coin dies if it does it gives the little guys something to mine.

How about

Reverse payout scheme. Difficulty up ----> more coins for the miners.
So you get the same amount of coins always.  

100MHASH = 1 coin per day.

If the networkhash is 1GHASH, 10 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
If the networkhash is 100GHASH, 1 000 000 coins are given to the miners every day.
....

Expensive, but secure

Good for the miners, and not so good for the investors.

That's Elacoin and also not what I was talking about.


It's amazing how fast you guys try to make ideas your own though. ^^

Its amazing how you think I'm making it my own..... just copy difficulty adjustment of dime coin that's what I was hinting at.

I don't copy a low difciculty coin with dickhead support.

I don't blame you. But it is the way the difficulty works... it can be set to higher difficulties...just up 10% per x and down 50% per x. If hashrate is high then difficulty can go up to 250,000 or more but as it adjusts from lower hash then it drops 50% per.
PS It's not a low difficulty coin.. it's only low because there's no high hash on it because it has no support.

[tbearhere]

Guys, you are doing it wrong, as we say here you are climbing to tree ass ahead  Currency that is fair for those who are printing it? Yeah right...

Anonymity, fast transfers, low fees, fair distribution, basically all what banksters hate. Give me that and I am all in.

I'll say +1 to that antantti. I can't wait for the day we totally bypass corporate banking.
But boa already claimed the BTC block chain. He has a patent on it.

[giagge]

What are you minining all now ?   .

[bensam1231]

What are you minining all now ?   .

Equihash. There isn't anything better until some Nvidia devs tune for other algos. I've mentioned a couple, no bites yet though.

[reflexmk]

What's the expected hashrate of gtx 980 G1 and with what miner for Equihash? Thanks.

[grendel25]

What are you minining all now ?   .

Equihash. There isn't anything better until some Nvidia devs tune for other algos. I've mentioned a couple, no bites yet though.

Ethereum still a no-go on 750ti?  I read something where there was a miner for it and even downloaded something that had posted numbers for 750 ti in ethereum but never had the patience for the dat file or whatever the huge file download is.

I remember a few pages back _sp was talking about skein being good. 

Anything good to mine with the _sp miners lately?  And what qualifies to get them?  I bought some previous versions.. does that make me eligible for new miners?  That's one thing that turns me off is if I have to buy a new miner every few months when there are miners on free and easy or with some low fee on AMD cards. 

I still love this thread but it sure is chaotic.