[ANN] $XQN Quotient Financial Network | PoW Scrypt, PoS Blake-256 | UPDATE NOW

[ethought]

Abacus allocations and instructions posted:

http://www.blockchainsingularity.com/abacus.htm

Thanks! But I'm not sure if shares are calculated correctly, my balance should be higher. I only used one address, controlled by coin control so I am sure all I had was on that address. Is anyone else balance incorrect ?

I think the snapshot was taken on 2014-12-18 (block 51860)

Are you sure of your balance on that day?

[1715284812]

1715284812

[1715284812]

1715284812

[1715284812]

1715284812

[zeewolf]

I think the snapshot was taken on 2014-12-18 (block 51860)

Are you sure of your balance on that day?

Block explorer at http://explorer.quotientcoin.com/address/Qiqe7jiLYRT26hheGhBhWcrNth8UzN5wbk is somewhat showing wrong balances (before block 51860 showing 10k at one point), hard to know. I've calculated it going backwards basing on wallet and it seems it's OK

[incognitoworker]

How do you guys keep your blocks under 500??
All my blocks autocombine to 1100-1300 each block?
Is there a rpc comand to change wanted block size for staking?
Thnx for free xai, and happy staking!

[myagui]

@incognitoworker:
Mine are also combining. IIRC, this is happening in order to reach a valid stake weight. In other words, the individual/tiny blocks are not carrying enough weight to stake separately. At the current stake cap, I would not be too bothered, it really looks like ~1K is about the block size necessary for frequent staking, at least for now. Yes, you will hit the cap all the time, but so does everyone else (emission is under control).

Happy Staking!

[HunterS]

Abacus allocations and instructions posted:

http://www.blockchainsingularity.com/abacus.htm

Thanks! But I'm not sure if shares are calculated correctly, my balance should be higher. I only used one address, controlled by coin control so I am sure all I had was on that address. Is anyone else balance incorrect ?

Thought the same aswell.I have only one address.And my balance was higher aswell

[0bert]

Abacus allocations and instructions posted:

http://www.blockchainsingularity.com/abacus.htm

Great!
I signed up and requested a ticket for XAI. I give you updates about it.

[SockPuppetAccount]

@incognitoworker:
Mine are also combining. IIRC, this is happening in order to reach a valid stake weight. In other words, the individual/tiny blocks are not carrying enough weight to stake separately. At the current stake cap, I would not be too bothered, it really looks like ~1K is about the block size necessary for frequent staking, at least for now. Yes, you will hit the cap all the time, but so does everyone else (emission is under control).

Happy Staking!

I'm confused as to what conditions are necessary to trigger the auto-recombining of blocks and how it comes up with what it deems is the appropriate number of coins to auto-recombine.

As there is no cap on how long a given block of coins can gain stake weight, it seems as if the ideal staking strategy here would be to have all of your coins broken down into as many small blocks of coins as possible as just about any block of coins is always going to max out the reward possible anyway whether its a block of a few thousand coins that stakes after a day or a block of 5 coins that stakes after 6 months.

Imagine we have 2 addresses each starting off with the same quantity of XQN.  The first address keeps all their coins combined into 1 block at all times, while the second address has all its coins split into 10 blocks of coins at all times.  While each address may contain the same number of coins at the outset, we should expect the second address to end up staking more blocks on average.  Why is that?  Well even though the big block in address 1 stakes more frequently than the individual little blocks in address 2, all the coins in address 1 end up spending a good chunk of their time maturing after staking and waiting to become re-eligible for staking, effectively cutting address 1 out of the running to stake another block for long stretches of time.  Even though the individual blocks 1/10 the size contained in address 2 each take on average 10x as long to stake as the one big block in address 1, address 2 should end up staking more blocks in the end as when address 2 does stake a block, it still leaves most of its coins free to continue competing for more stake blocks and is hence never out of the running.  Since pretty much anything that stakes is going to end up hitting the max reward of 16.18 by the time it stakes anyway, XQN for all intents and purposes has a flat reward such as ORB and CLAMS right now.

To sum up the point I am trying to make, if all of this is logically sound, then the ideal staking strategy for XQN would be to have all of your coins broken down into as many small blocks as possible at all times.  If this is the case, it is a bit frustrating that the auto-recombining of blocks is hampering me from implementing an ideal staking strategy.  Further, encouraging stakers to keep all of their coins broken down into many small blocks increases security for the blockchain as well.  A hoard of stakers obsessively breaking down there coins into smaller and smaller blocks will drive the competition for blocks and the network difficulty sky high.

Cedric, remove the auto-recombination of coins please.  It is counter productive and discouraging active stakers from implementing what is good for themselves and the XQN network.

[anticlimax]

@incognitoworker:
Mine are also combining. IIRC, this is happening in order to reach a valid stake weight. In other words, the individual/tiny blocks are not carrying enough weight to stake separately. At the current stake cap, I would not be too bothered, it really looks like ~1K is about the block size necessary for frequent staking, at least for now. Yes, you will hit the cap all the time, but so does everyone else (emission is under control).

Happy Staking!

I'm confused as to what conditions are necessary to trigger the auto-recombining of blocks and how it comes up with what it deems is the appropriate number of coins to auto-recombine.

As there is no cap on how long a given block of coins can gain stake weight, it seems as if the ideal staking strategy here would be to have all of your coins broken down into as many small blocks of coins as possible as just about any block of coins is always going to max out the reward possible anyway whether its a block of a few thousand coins that stakes after a day or a block of 5 coins that stakes after 6 months.

Imagine we have 2 addresses each starting off with the same quantity of XQN.  The first address keeps all their coins combined into 1 block at all times, while the second address has all its coins split into 10 blocks of coins at all times.  While each address may contain the same number of coins at the outset, we should expect the second address to end up staking more blocks on average.  Why is that?  Well even though the big block in address 1 stakes more frequently than the individual little blocks in address 2, all the coins in address 1 end up spending a good chunk of their time maturing after staking and waiting to become re-eligible for staking, effectively cutting address 1 out of the running to stake another block for long stretches of time.  Even though the individual blocks 1/10 the size contained in address 2 each take on average 10x as long to stake as the one big block in address 1, address 2 should end up staking more blocks in the end as when address 2 does stake a block, it still leaves most of its coins free to continue competing for more stake blocks and is hence never out of the running.  Since pretty much anything that stakes is going to end up hitting the max reward of 16.18 by the time it stakes anyway, XQN for all intents and purposes has a flat reward such as ORB and CLAMS right now.

To sum up the point I am trying to make, if all of this is logically sound, then the ideal staking strategy for XQN would be to have all of your coins broken down into as many small blocks as possible at all times.  If this is the case, it is a bit frustrating that the auto-recombining of blocks is hampering me from implementing an ideal staking strategy.  Further, encouraging stakers to keep all of their coins broken down into many small blocks increases security for the blockchain as well.  A hoard of stakers obsessively breaking down there coins into smaller and smaller blocks will drive the competition for blocks and the network difficulty sky high.

Cedric, remove the auto-recombination of coins please.  It is counter productive and discouraging active stakers from implementing what is good for themselves and the XQN network.

I honestly haven't seen blocks recombine, maybe I am just oblivious to what it's doing.

[anticlimax]

Abacus allocations and instructions posted:

http://www.blockchainsingularity.com/abacus.htm

Thanks! But I'm not sure if shares are calculated correctly, my balance should be higher. I only used one address, controlled by coin control so I am sure all I had was on that address. Is anyone else balance incorrect ?

Thought the same aswell.I have only one address.And my balance was higher aswell

Are you using a stealth address?

[Farndogg]

Mine combined and I'm not using a stealth addy.

Abacus allocations and instructions posted:

http://www.blockchainsingularity.com/abacus.htm

Thanks! But I'm not sure if shares are calculated correctly, my balance should be higher. I only used one address, controlled by coin control so I am sure all I had was on that address. Is anyone else balance incorrect ?

Thought the same aswell.I have only one address.And my balance was higher aswell

Are you using a stealth address?

[HunterS]

Abacus allocations and instructions posted:

http://www.blockchainsingularity.com/abacus.htm

Thanks! But I'm not sure if shares are calculated correctly, my balance should be higher. I only used one address, controlled by coin control so I am sure all I had was on that address. Is anyone else balance incorrect ?

Thought the same aswell.I have only one address.And my balance was higher aswell

Are you using a stealth address?

no

[billotronic]

Mine combined and I'm not using a stealth addy.

Abacus allocations and instructions posted:

http://www.blockchainsingularity.com/abacus.htm

Thanks! But I'm not sure if shares are calculated correctly, my balance should be higher. I only used one address, controlled by coin control so I am sure all I had was on that address. Is anyone else balance incorrect ?

Thought the same aswell.I have only one address.And my balance was higher aswell

Are you using a stealth address?

same here and it completely pissed me right the fuck off.

[SockPuppetAccount]

@incognitoworker:
Mine are also combining. IIRC, this is happening in order to reach a valid stake weight. In other words, the individual/tiny blocks are not carrying enough weight to stake separately. At the current stake cap, I would not be too bothered, it really looks like ~1K is about the block size necessary for frequent staking, at least for now. Yes, you will hit the cap all the time, but so does everyone else (emission is under control).

Happy Staking!

I'm confused as to what conditions are necessary to trigger the auto-recombining of blocks and how it comes up with what it deems is the appropriate number of coins to auto-recombine.

As there is no cap on how long a given block of coins can gain stake weight, it seems as if the ideal staking strategy here would be to have all of your coins broken down into as many small blocks of coins as possible as just about any block of coins is always going to max out the reward possible anyway whether its a block of a few thousand coins that stakes after a day or a block of 5 coins that stakes after 6 months.

Imagine we have 2 addresses each starting off with the same quantity of XQN.  The first address keeps all their coins combined into 1 block at all times, while the second address has all its coins split into 10 blocks of coins at all times.  While each address may contain the same number of coins at the outset, we should expect the second address to end up staking more blocks on average.  Why is that?  Well even though the big block in address 1 stakes more frequently than the individual little blocks in address 2, all the coins in address 1 end up spending a good chunk of their time maturing after staking and waiting to become re-eligible for staking, effectively cutting address 1 out of the running to stake another block for long stretches of time.  Even though the individual blocks 1/10 the size contained in address 2 each take on average 10x as long to stake as the one big block in address 1, address 2 should end up staking more blocks in the end as when address 2 does stake a block, it still leaves most of its coins free to continue competing for more stake blocks and is hence never out of the running.  Since pretty much anything that stakes is going to end up hitting the max reward of 16.18 by the time it stakes anyway, XQN for all intents and purposes has a flat reward such as ORB and CLAMS right now.

To sum up the point I am trying to make, if all of this is logically sound, then the ideal staking strategy for XQN would be to have all of your coins broken down into as many small blocks as possible at all times.  If this is the case, it is a bit frustrating that the auto-recombining of blocks is hampering me from implementing an ideal staking strategy.  Further, encouraging stakers to keep all of their coins broken down into many small blocks increases security for the blockchain as well.  A hoard of stakers obsessively breaking down there coins into smaller and smaller blocks will drive the competition for blocks and the network difficulty sky high.

Cedric, remove the auto-recombination of coins please.  It is counter productive and discouraging active stakers from implementing what is good for themselves and the XQN network.

I honestly haven't seen blocks recombine, maybe I am just oblivious to what it's doing.

To me it looked like it has been sweeping multiple small blocks into larger ones for whatever reason but now that you said something maybe I've got it wrong and all it is doing is not splitting blocks after they stake if they take too long to do so.  Possible I'm seeing something happening that isn't there, I need to pay closer attention I guess.

[myagui]

To me it looked like it has been sweeping multiple small blocks into larger ones for whatever reason but now that you said something maybe I've got it wrong and all it is doing is not splitting blocks after they stake if they take too long to do so.  Possible I'm seeing something happening that isn't there, I need to pay closer attention I guess.

I can positively confirm that tiny blocks are frequently combining when they stake (I have several of size 200~300 that did so, resulting in about 1K~1.3K block size after the stake), but similarly, if such a merged block stakes fast enough next time, it will split (just had one, merged into 1K, and at the next stake, has split into 2x 500).

Based on how slow/fast blocks are staking, they either merge, split, or remain at their original size (plus stake reward). I have all 3 examples in stakes from my last 24 hours, and the wallet seems to be doing a pretty good job. Some more advanced controls over the various thresholds would be really nice though. 

Happy Staking!

[CedricQuotient]

Could you guys provide me with a couple of example transactions where this is occurring, a couple links to the block explorer?  I guess I'm getting caught up semantically with the terminology, but when I think of blocks I'm thinking of....well, blocks in the blockchain.  When you are talking about splitting and auto-recombining of blocks, I think you mean that your UTXO's (unspent tx outputs) are getting combined in the stake transaction, but from quickly clicking through a few blocks in the block explorer I haven't been able to track down a live example of this happening.

I'd like to see it in the block explorer...

[anticlimax]

Could you guys provide me with a couple of example transactions where this is occurring, a couple links to the block explorer?  I guess I'm getting caught up semantically with the terminology, but when I think of blocks I'm thinking of....well, blocks in the blockchain.  When you are talking about splitting and auto-recombining of blocks, I think you mean that your UTXO's (unspent tx outputs) are getting combined in the stake transaction, but from quickly clicking through a few blocks in the block explorer I haven't been able to track down a live example of this happening.

I'd like to see it in the block explorer...

What they mean is that the individual stacks of coins in their wallets are recombining.
I'd think splitting and recombining of blocks will happen more frequently in the next little while as the wallet tries to figure out the optimal size per stack to stake efficiently.

I can say that I have a few stacks over 3000 coins which haven't split. I find stacks of 500-800 work best.

[CedricQuotient]

Could you guys provide me with a couple of example transactions where this is occurring, a couple links to the block explorer?  I guess I'm getting caught up semantically with the terminology, but when I think of blocks I'm thinking of....well, blocks in the blockchain.  When you are talking about splitting and auto-recombining of blocks, I think you mean that your UTXO's (unspent tx outputs) are getting combined in the stake transaction, but from quickly clicking through a few blocks in the block explorer I haven't been able to track down a live example of this happening.

I'd like to see it in the block explorer...

What they mean is that the individual stacks of coins in their wallets are recombining.
I'd think splitting and recombining of blocks will happen more frequently in the next little while as the wallet tries to figure out the optimal size per stack to stake efficiently.

I can say that I have a few blocks over 3000 coins which haven't split. I find stacks of 500-800 seem to work well.

Right...what I'm trying to determine is if it is just a UI/presentation thing in coin control, or if there is something actually happening on a transaction level.

[CedricQuotient]

I got some output back from the graphic designer, so I can roll any tweaks into the next wallet update for the new graphics/icons.

[SockPuppetAccount]

Could you guys provide me with a couple of example transactions where this is occurring, a couple links to the block explorer?  I guess I'm getting caught up semantically with the terminology, but when I think of blocks I'm thinking of....well, blocks in the blockchain.  When you are talking about splitting and auto-recombining of blocks, I think you mean that your UTXO's (unspent tx outputs) are getting combined in the stake transaction, but from quickly clicking through a few blocks in the block explorer I haven't been able to track down a live example of this happening.

I'd like to see it in the block explorer...

Trying to think of a way to explain what we mean.  I guess even thought you are developing 2 coins, you haven't really lived in this world very long.  Have you ever heard that thing people say about learning spanish in a classroom environment?  I've always heard that if you learn spanish in the classroom, then go to Mexico and try to communicate with native spanish speakers, neither of you will understand each other even though you are both technically speaking the same language.  You are like the guy that learned spanish in the classroom and we are like the natives.  This isn't the point of my post, just thought it was an interesting and apt analogy.

When we say blocks of coins we mean all of our chunks of coins that are eligible for staking.  All of our stake eligible inputs you could also say.

This would be what happens in a standard PoS transaction.  Coins stake, the single (chunk, block, input) of coins splits and becomes 2.



In this one, for some reason it was decided that these inputs would be too small if the block of coins were allowed to split into 2, so the coins stake and the earned stake is added but we only end up with 1 block of coins rather than the standard 2.



Now this is the one that really bugs the piss out of me.  Here, for some reason it is decided a whole group of inputs are too damn small, so the client sweeps them all into one during the stake transaction.  I have never seen this happening before.

[maxximm]

hi,

can someone explain me one thing ?

i have a block of 490 xqn from 05-01-2015 and the wallet show me 2 days to stake ?!?!?

is that normal ?
b.r.