âš’[CGA] Cryptographic Anomaly - The Elusive Coinâš’ - page 72.

wzttide

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: s4w3d0ff on February 25, 2014, 10:18:11 PM

I have been trying to read up on scrypt adaptive N-factor and scrypt-jane. Can someone (in layman's terms Cheesy

) compare and contrast the 2 algos for me so that I can make a better decision?

Scrypt adaptive n-factor is only 1 hash function, this means making an ASIC for this is not impossible, just needs enough memory. Remember when LTC got popular, everybody stated that scrypt is ASIC-resistent because of it's "huge" memory consumption.

Scrypt-jane is different, it uses 2 functions, one to hash, one to mix. Because of some nice parameters it is way more configurable than adaptive-n-factor. This could be used to slow down the miners if the hashrate get's too high, e. g. when the diff jumps over 2160 (this is the number of blocks generated in one day), CGA could simply change the n/r/p-factor (take a look here https://github.com/floodyberry/scrypt-jane#scrypt-parameters) and throttle the hashrate, making development of ASICs very hard because of it's variability (ASICs don't like that).

Both options need a lot of testing for sure!

s4w3d0ff

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Spray and Pray

I have been trying to read up on scrypt adaptive N-factor and scrypt-jane. Can someone (in layman's terms Cheesy

) compare and contrast the 2 algos for me so that I can make a better decision?

chickenliver503

full member

Activity: 204

Merit: 100

Quote from: brokedummy on February 25, 2014, 02:27:35 PM

We need to get a new exchange pronto. Our only exchange isn't working it seems. Keep voting at mintpal, but what other exchanges should we talk to?

edit: well at least it's back to normal

we can talk to cryptorush. maybe start donation wallets for the fee to got us on there.

brokedummy

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1004

We need to get a new exchange pronto. Our only exchange isn't working it seems. Keep voting at mintpal, but what other exchanges should we talk to?

edit: well at least it's back to normal

tertius993

hero member

Activity: 1029

Merit: 712

Quote from: brokedummy on February 25, 2014, 12:23:11 PM

Honestly, I don't care about the who is going to mine the worthless blocks. Not everybody is going to be switching pools every other block. If you are worried about mining worthless CGA blocks then don't mine CGA. If some pool thinks they can mine CGA more profitably by 'abusing' the system, go mine at that pool. I still run shell scripts, and when I saw the diff go low I mined CGA and when it went high I mined Mint. I have mined many a worthless CGA block and somebody will continue to mine them. My main concern with CGA is now as an investor. Even if the multipool comes in and gets all the reward and leaves long hard blocks for miners who get nothing. I still profit as an early investor. I want to invest more, but I don't want to be the only one.

I'm not sure there is a good answer to be honest.

The "zero" blocks *have* to be mined as if they are not then no one can mine the blocks that do return an anomaly.

If we make every block give a reward then, in my opinion, that detracts from the coin's premise, that finding a CGA is actually meant to be rather difficult. That is what I mean by it being "like" 42 - 42 isn't hard to mine, its just you only get tiny fractions of a coin each time.

If we increase the transaction fees in order to increase the value of the "zero" reward blocks then that will tend to prevent the coin getting really valuable - if a transaction costs a significant fraction of a valuable coin then no one will transact with it.

I too am like brokedummy, I mined from the very start, I have invested and traded (mainly bought!) on Poloniex and I want it to be a success.

I would like a solution that:

a) maintains as far as possible the original premise - this is what really makes the coin interesting, different and potentially valuable; and
b) addresses the vulnerability that would allow a large pool to, in effect, subvert that premise

Other than that I really don't mind.

brokedummy

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1004

Honestly, I don't care about the who is going to mine the worthless blocks. Not everybody is going to be switching pools every other block. If you are worried about mining worthless CGA blocks then don't mine CGA. If some pool thinks they can mine CGA more profitably by 'abusing' the system, go mine at that pool. I still run shell scripts, and when I saw the diff go low I mined CGA and when it went high I mined Mint. I have mined many a worthless CGA block and somebody will continue to mine them. My main concern with CGA is now as an investor. Even if the multipool comes in and gets all the reward and leaves long hard blocks for miners who get nothing. I still profit as an early investor. I want to invest more, but I don't want to be the only one.

oudekaas

full member

Activity: 350

Merit: 100

Quote from: polmax on February 25, 2014, 09:18:16 AM

Quote from: tertius993 on February 25, 2014, 08:50:30 AM

Quote from: wzttide on February 25, 2014, 08:46:28 AM

Quote from: polmax on February 25, 2014, 08:34:50 AM

I think it's a great option , it would give the coin even more elusive and would raise rates, but you can still leave and zero blocks

and now we have almost 16,000 coins , about 20 + days due to problems with a split chain has lost about 10%, I lost 41 CGA on cga.cryptochomper.com

just my opinion - exclusivity , elitism is not conducive to the description of the coins in the main post, which refers to the fact that we had a problem and we decided to change this and that. those who from the first days in the community knows and appreciates it , you did had very many important changes and do not let the problem kill the coin, but the new people, it may scare away or they think that was pre- mining . It's more marketing, but it is important

Someone said that this would "destroy" the coin's meaning, because with this every coin would be an anomaly.

That is my view, I am afraid. It would make it more like 42.

"destroy" the coin - why?
I talked about Block Reward / diff + algorithm with zero blocks
we are almost unlimited in issue (not 42) and the more network and diff - Reward those tend to zero

I think we have to seriously consider making the zero blocks worth mining and keeping elusiveness, from what I understand is you will otherwise always have people not mining the zero blocks or does jane-scrypt stop this?
It might make it more like 42? What does 42 do is that an elusive coin as well? could someone explain to me?
But as far as I can see this is a really good solution.

polmax

member

Activity: 66

Merit: 10

Quote from: tertius993 on February 25, 2014, 08:50:30 AM

Quote from: wzttide on February 25, 2014, 08:46:28 AM

Quote from: polmax on February 25, 2014, 08:34:50 AM

I think it's a great option , it would give the coin even more elusive and would raise rates, but you can still leave and zero blocks

and now we have almost 16,000 coins , about 20 + days due to problems with a split chain has lost about 10%, I lost 41 CGA on cga.cryptochomper.com

just my opinion - exclusivity , elitism is not conducive to the description of the coins in the main post, which refers to the fact that we had a problem and we decided to change this and that. those who from the first days in the community knows and appreciates it , you did had very many important changes and do not let the problem kill the coin, but the new people, it may scare away or they think that was pre- mining . It's more marketing, but it is important

Someone said that this would "destroy" the coin's meaning, because with this every coin would be an anomaly.

That is my view, I am afraid. It would make it more like 42.

"destroy" the coin - why?
I talked about Block Reward / diff + algorithm with zero blocks
we are almost unlimited in issue (not 42) and the more network and diff - Reward those tend to zero

Alohaboy?!

hero member

Activity: 1050

Merit: 506

Quote from: tertius993 on February 25, 2014, 05:45:51 AM

Quote from: wzttide on February 25, 2014, 05:38:55 AM

Quote from: tertius993 on February 25, 2014, 05:31:54 AM

Quote from: sq on February 25, 2014, 05:10:15 AM

Quote from: Miner538 on February 25, 2014, 05:07:43 AM

I am on this train Grin

Destination > the moon!

Noooooooo!

Anything but that.

What exactly? The smilies? The moon? Or Miner538? Cheesy

The "to the moon" stuff ... it's so BTC-e trollbox.

don´t feed the trolls

wzttide

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: tertius993 on February 25, 2014, 08:50:30 AM

Quote from: wzttide on February 25, 2014, 08:46:28 AM

Quote from: polmax on February 25, 2014, 08:34:50 AM

I think it's a great option , it would give the coin even more elusive and would raise rates, but you can still leave and zero blocks

and now we have almost 16,000 coins , about 20 + days due to problems with a split chain has lost about 10%, I lost 41 CGA on cga.cryptochomper.com

just my opinion - exclusivity , elitism is not conducive to the description of the coins in the main post, which refers to the fact that we had a problem and we decided to change this and that. those who from the first days in the community knows and appreciates it , you did had very many important changes and do not let the problem kill the coin, but the new people, it may scare away or they think that was pre- mining . It's more marketing, but it is important

Someone said that this would "destroy" the coin's meaning, because with this every coin would be an anomaly.

That is my view, I am afraid. It would make it more like 42.

It is a valid point, though.

Nevertheless, I made a reddit post http://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1yw1p9/which_hashing_algorithm_do_you_prefere_will_be/ to determine the "best" alternative to scrypt. Feel free to contribute your opinion.

tertius993

hero member

Activity: 1029

Merit: 712

Quote from: wzttide on February 25, 2014, 08:46:28 AM

Quote from: polmax on February 25, 2014, 08:34:50 AM

I think it's a great option , it would give the coin even more elusive and would raise rates, but you can still leave and zero blocks

and now we have almost 16,000 coins , about 20 + days due to problems with a split chain has lost about 10%, I lost 41 CGA on cga.cryptochomper.com

just my opinion - exclusivity , elitism is not conducive to the description of the coins in the main post, which refers to the fact that we had a problem and we decided to change this and that. those who from the first days in the community knows and appreciates it , you did had very many important changes and do not let the problem kill the coin, but the new people, it may scare away or they think that was pre- mining . It's more marketing, but it is important

Someone said that this would "destroy" the coin's meaning, because with this every coin would be an anomaly.

That is my view, I am afraid. It would make it more like 42.

wzttide

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: polmax on February 25, 2014, 08:34:50 AM

Quote from: wzttide on February 24, 2014, 02:27:03 AM

I'd like to suggest a different block reward system: Instead of reward every x block, reward every block, but devide the reward (1) by the diff. If the diff is less than 3, 3 is taken.

Examples:
Diff = 1

Code:

1/3 = 0.333333333

Block Reward: 0.333333333

Diff = 10

Code:

1/10 = 0.1

Block Reward: 0.100000000

Diff = 200

Code:

1/200 = 0.005

Block Reward: 0.005

I think it's a great option , it would give the coin even more elusive and would raise rates, but you can still leave and zero blocks

and now we have almost 16,000 coins , about 20 + days due to problems with a split chain has lost about 10%, I lost 41 CGA on cga.cryptochomper.com

just my opinion - exclusivity , elitism is not conducive to the description of the coins in the main post, which refers to the fact that we had a problem and we decided to change this and that. those who from the first days in the community knows and appreciates it , you did had very many important changes and do not let the problem kill the coin, but the new people, it may scare away or they think that was pre- mining . It's more marketing, but it is important

Someone said that this would "destroy" the coin's meaning, because with this every coin would be an anomaly.

polmax

member

Activity: 66

Merit: 10

Quote from: wzttide on February 24, 2014, 02:27:03 AM

I'd like to suggest a different block reward system: Instead of reward every x block, reward every block, but devide the reward (1) by the diff. If the diff is less than 3, 3 is taken.

Examples:
Diff = 1

Code:

1/3 = 0.333333333

Block Reward: 0.333333333

Diff = 10

Code:

1/10 = 0.1

Block Reward: 0.100000000

Diff = 200

Code:

1/200 = 0.005

Block Reward: 0.005

I think it's a great option , it would give the coin even more elusive and would raise rates, but you can still leave and zero blocks

and now we have almost 16,000 coins , about 20 + days due to problems with a split chain has lost about 10%, I lost 41 CGA on cga.cryptochomper.com

just my opinion - exclusivity , elitism is not conducive to the description of the coins in the main post, which refers to the fact that we had a problem and we decided to change this and that. those who from the first days in the community knows and appreciates it , you did had very many important changes and do not let the problem kill the coin, but the new people, it may scare away or they think that was pre- mining . It's more marketing, but it is important

wzttide

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100