Topic: [ANN] AEON [2019-09-27: Upgrade to version 0.13.0.0 ASAP HF@1146200 Oct 25] - page 200. (Read 625666 times)

Coins have already experimented with High inflation schemes, as well as anti-hoarding schemes like Freicoin. You don't hear much about them these days. I don't think the inflation rate should the part being experimented with. Just come up with something usable and reasonable that will stand the test of time. I also don't think this should be put up for a community vote. My hope is that smooth will weigh all the pro's and cons and make a leadership decision at some point.

Cheers

I argue it's pointless either way. I doubt (without any supporting argument) that anything less than 1% is enough to have any significant effect beyond incentivizing mining. I certainly don't think it's enough to discourage hoarding. If Aeon is really the experimental coin we all pretend it is, then why not actually experiment with it?

Got it; thanks. In the back of my mind is the degenerate case wherein there's only one tx on the whole blockchain, except for coinbase txes....

Yes but it is a manual process for them and may take a week or longer. If you don't receive it for a few days you might want to open a ticket.

Are there any numbers and thoughts on velocity in bitcoin during ascending prices versus descending prices?

I tend to hold on to coins more during descend than ascend.

The more money people have the more money they spend.

Is it still possible to withdraw delisted AEON from Poloniex? I sent some small quantity to my synced AEON wallet, but nothing arrived. Actually withdrawal status is Pending on Poloniex.

Yup. More activity does make everything "more mixed" overall (larger haystack to hide the needle) but it doesn't matter for individual transactions the way it does for coinjoin type techniques or centralized mixers. You are mixing with all transactions that have ever occurred in the past (and even in a slightly different sense ones that will happen in the future), not just the ones happening now. The other techniques only mix between transactions happening at the same time.

You don't need activity on the chain to mix, see -> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ojjkq/can_someone_help_me_understand_the_claims_of/cvxwq10

Also, CT for Monero will hide the amounts in the future -> https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/3pw30d/ringct_for_monero_updated_versions/

But I guess you are somewhat right. That is, with more transaction volume, it will be more difficult for a blockchain observer to spot a certain transaction (although in the future, an observer could not see the amount nor destination).

I did not know that, this is effectively a stealthy premine, I cannot support it, the Boolberry community seems nice but here I'm wishing for a takeover now.

I trust your decision as final with regard the tail emission as it will fall within the inherited social contract, it feels like shooting in the dark regarding the correct tail as the optimal economic output will depend on many external factors that are not constant either! I just agree that it should keep the mining going forever.

Even if the miners vote against the reward, the reward is just deferred. If miners ever vote for the reward in the future, the deferred rewards will be paid out. So it is pretty much a 1% premine, with a lock released slowly (and at an uncertain rate). The only way to get rid of the reward entirely is to hard fork.

Boolberry has no trailing reward at all, it just goes down exponential to zero eventually like Bitcoin.

On the matter of reducing the percentage every year that seems so close to a fixed tail reward amount that it doesn't seem worth pursuing as a distinct option. As I stated on reddit I prefer a fixed reward as it has self-stabilzing properties. In erok's case of burning, the fixed reward becomes a higher percentage. regrowing the money supply more quickly. If none is burned or lost, then the percentage shrinks. This tends toward a constant money supply that is a function of the average long term burn/loss rate.

But I think an small exponential percentage is not bad either. At 1% inflation, at most (assuming no burn/loss) 50% of the share of wealth of a holder who does nothing else to add value to the economy is redistributed over 70 years (sort of a lifetime, though this might be longer in the future). Even in that case the amount of wealth may still increase if the value of the total money supply grows >1%/year. I have no problem with that.

Then like a quantum foam settling on what it wants to become, let's narrow it down to two binary options for inflation, 0.75% or 0.9%? 
 
I'll make an altcoin topic with a poll in a little while with those two options, "fixed block reward", or "none of the above".  If you have an interest in Aeon, please make your voice heard. 

Most currencies are 2-4% I think that a .75% rate would not be earthshattering and could give be the evergreen tree from the rear view mirror fresh smell. The fixed rate idea and deflationary theories are fundamentally flawed for crypto imho in many many ways including accidental and purposeful burning of currencies and network activity. I liked the idea before about having an algo that addresses that which controls a dynamic inflation rate... but yeah most countries are 2-4. Now hyperinflation is an interesting concept but when mixed with POS gives the ponzi feels. I dunno what is right but I think 0.75 wont burn the world to the ground, nor will it create a second earth. Run with it. GJ.

I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, it is vastly superior to any IPO in existence, made even more valid by the fact that with a few additional bytes of code any miner is free to opt out.  
  
I believe that perhaps it is defendable if the collected funds go to a "development account" and not just to one person's wallet.  
  
Also, knowing that Boolberry is deflationary pushes my resolve on this issue farther.  
  
I humbly propose we should move to a fixed inflation rate, and the subject of discussion should be what rate is appropriate.  I feel like anything between 0.75% and 0.9% would be fine (but lean towards a nice crisp 0.9%)

They are deflationary - and the dev gets 1% of all coins per block mined unless the miner bother to add a special flag, I don't have problem with this but it could easily mean trouble in the future (for the dev). They got lucky the emission is considerable slower than Monero and its making up for the lack of development (but it shows signs of not being completely abandoned).

I am not a developer, just a community lead.  The technical insiders have made it pretty clear they will support either a fixed block reward or a fixed rate for Aeon, but not experimental or complex emissions (in order to preserve the social contract of Aeon).  
  
Other ideas are certainly encouraged, and if you look around you can find some easy tools online to generate Cryptonote coins. From there, with the proper coding abilities, you could implement any reward mechanism you like.  
  
But it feels like since a decision needs to be made quickly, that decision must be between two simple choices: fixed blocks or fixed rate.  
  
Also, I need to do some research into Boolberry.  Do they have a trailing block reward or are they pure hard capped deflationary?  If they have a hard cap on coins, then it makes the case for low inflation in Aeon all the stronger - that way there is an original Cryptonote fork with all three economic mechanisms: deflation, disinflation, and inflation.

Arux, yesterday when i was heading to bed found this

i thought could be related about we talk so waited a bit more to confirm if i would get banned.
which i did.

I don't know if you already knew it was this error, but i'm posting here thinking it might help  

Pegasus, what about a "proof of share"?

Where would be only for a amount of shares submitted;
>3day at Arux pool with I5-3331cpu / R7 240 gpu. I got [4,841,899] of shares (didn't mined all the day long) #example

let's say the reward would be from 10kk shares to 30kk shares (every 5k the reward, that would cost a month mining to reach the max?)

that would "invite" new miners (For the amount of coins for the few blocks mining at the start), create new coins for the network and increase it's power.

It looks like you're sending extremely low diff shares. Range 1 to 15. It looks like you're sending every single hash, in fact. That'd mean you get a flood of messages. If you don't, then possibly the CPU part doesn't send what the GPU found...

 
  
If you're going to go into reducing the %'s each year and other complicated mechanisms, you might as well just remain at a fixed block reward.  The "Keep it simple principle" holds true here.  In my mind it's either a low fixed rate (inflationary), or a fixed block reward (disinflationary).  I think we should choose between those two.  
  
I'm fine with the fixed blocks that were planned to be implemented, but if we want to move to 0.75% - 0.9% fixed rate, I'd be OK with that too.

I might have missed this discussed earlier - please forgive me for being wrapped up in something else atm - but money velocity for XMR, AEON & others: doesn't it correlate to the statistical untraceability of transactions? Iow: the more txs, the more mixed-up they are for a given mixin level?