Altering a coin after deploy | Bitcointalksearch.org

pliznau

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: markm on July 30, 2013, 07:34:40 AM

Maybe more large farms like ASICminer are going to be necessary then: large farms that don't run around chasing the scam of the say but instead have securing a particular chain or family of merged chains as their primary goal or at least their primary focus?

Maybe even ASICminer will end up chasing scams if shareholders get the tulip mania bug and vote for that, so maybe in the long run we need the major industries that depend on a particular currency or family of currencies to maintain massive farms not to rake in profit but just simply to secure the basis of their wealth or the hoarded wealth of their shareholders?

-MarkM-

not chasing scam. The point is a coin that doesn't increase price over time.this way no matter the investment in mining hardware it still pays out. Because i think that in the long run you must have a cheap price for a coin to generaly use.
Or what if the coin's block reward increases in time rather than halving?

CoinBuzz

sr. member

Activity: 490

Merit: 250

i think that's quite possible, each block chain have a version field for this. you can implement the code in client application, then at a certain date, increase the block chain version.

This way the backward compatibility would be remained intact.

markm

legendary

Activity: 2940

Merit: 1090

Maybe more large farms like ASICminer are going to be necessary then: large farms that don't run around chasing the scam of the say but instead have securing a particular chain or family of merged chains as their primary goal or at least their primary focus?

Maybe even ASICminer will end up chasing scams if shareholders get the tulip mania bug and vote for that, so maybe in the long run we need the major industries that depend on a particular currency or family of currencies to maintain massive farms not to rake in profit but just simply to secure the basis of their wealth or the hoarded wealth of their shareholders?

-MarkM-

pliznau

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: barwizi on July 30, 2013, 06:00:52 AM

Quote from: pliznau on July 30, 2013, 05:44:38 AM

Quote from: barwizi on July 30, 2013, 05:31:20 AM

as thorough as we try, it's very difficult to manage that. Most coins are built using the bitcoin base, which was initially cpu mined. The advent of gpu made mining faster but the code did not evolve accordingly. Now that everyone has a gpu the algorithms find it hard to regulate the generation of coins.... and to worsen things we witness wild swings in hash rate, in the excess of +200mh in 20 minutes in some cases.

i tought it's going to be hard that's why i wondered if changing the source itself to be a viable solution. The spikes in hashrate probably will diminish over time as it gets a solid base.

that i'm afraid is wishful thinking, none of the alts have gained a solid miner base save for LTC. Even that is now being affected by coinwarz and coinchoose + cryptoswitcher.
Now there are things like multi-mine. do some research, you'll find that the rapid changes in methods are outpacing code.

that's true. I was just thinking if a coin can be made that maintains it's rate over time so the price can be stable. Because all the coins that i know , i don't know if all, must increase price to justify hash power.

barwizi

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

Quote from: pliznau on July 30, 2013, 05:44:38 AM

Quote from: barwizi on July 30, 2013, 05:31:20 AM

as thorough as we try, it's very difficult to manage that. Most coins are built using the bitcoin base, which was initially cpu mined. The advent of gpu made mining faster but the code did not evolve accordingly. Now that everyone has a gpu the algorithms find it hard to regulate the generation of coins.... and to worsen things we witness wild swings in hash rate, in the excess of +200mh in 20 minutes in some cases.

i tought it's going to be hard that's why i wondered if changing the source itself to be a viable solution. The spikes in hashrate probably will diminish over time as it gets a solid base.

that i'm afraid is wishful thinking, none of the alts have gained a solid miner base save for LTC. Even that is now being affected by coinwarz and coinchoose + cryptoswitcher.
Now there are things like multi-mine. do some research, you'll find that the rapid changes in methods are outpacing code.

pliznau

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: barwizi on July 30, 2013, 05:31:20 AM

as thorough as we try, it's very difficult to manage that. Most coins are built using the bitcoin base, which was initially cpu mined. The advent of gpu made mining faster but the code did not evolve accordingly. Now that everyone has a gpu the algorithms find it hard to regulate the generation of coins.... and to worsen things we witness wild swings in hash rate, in the excess of +200mh in 20 minutes in some cases.

i tought it's going to be hard that's why i wondered if changing the source itself to be a viable solution. The spikes in hashrate probably will diminish over time as it gets a solid base.

barwizi

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

as thorough as we try, it's very difficult to manage that. Most coins are built using the bitcoin base, which was initially cpu mined. The advent of gpu made mining faster but the code did not evolve accordingly. Now that everyone has a gpu the algorithms find it hard to regulate the generation of coins.... and to worsen things we witness wild swings in hash rate, in the excess of +200mh in 20 minutes in some cases.

pliznau

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: vehementchrome on July 30, 2013, 04:55:50 AM

Barwizi might be saying it would be risky because doing so would risk and affect both the integrity and value of the coin. If a coin that had 20 reward blocks suddenly has 40, the value is most likely going to drop. Suddenly changing a coin is also going to affect people's trust in it, provided that wasn't a part of the coin's original design. I am really not sure as to the details of such a process but I'd imagine that would split the chain. You might as well be making an entirely new coin under the face and name of a pre-existing coin.

the idea is not to suddenly generate more coins, but to maintain the same amount of coins per 24 hrs even the difficulty rises.

vehementchrome

member

Activity: 68

Merit: 10

Barwizi might be saying it would be risky because doing so would risk and affect both the integrity and value of the coin. If a coin that had 20 reward blocks suddenly has 40, the value is most likely going to drop. Suddenly changing a coin is also going to affect people's trust in it, provided that wasn't a part of the coin's original design. I am really not sure as to the details of such a process but I'd imagine that would split the chain. You might as well be making an entirely new coin under the face and name of a pre-existing coin.

pliznau

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: barwizi on July 30, 2013, 04:34:56 AM

risky but do-able.

can you explain please ?

barwizi

legendary

Activity: 882

Merit: 1000

risky but do-able.

pliznau

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

I was wondering if the dev of a coin can change block rewards after launch and block rate generation speed. Sorry for my english. Not a native.

Topic: Altering a coin after deploy (Read 801 times)