Topic: [ANN] AEON [2019-09-27: Upgrade to version 0.13.0.0 ASAP HF@1146200 Oct 25] - page 201. (Read 625666 times)

Nvm im reconnected but it seems now all the shares from my amd card are being rejected. Wonder why

Hey ive been mining on mooos pool since yesterday and i guess a few hours ago i got disconnected. Wont let me connect for some reason. Im using fixed diff. I can connect to arux pool just fine. Any thoughts?

I don't think you are confused. I think I am the one that is confused. 

I tend to agree with what he said here: (Note it's a quote from 2 replies of his). And I put in a disclaimer of "tend to".


In my last sentence I am saying there is a difference between a % inflation rate and a fixed block reward - where the former eventually will grow the money-supply at a rapid pace. There was no suggestion to be honest.

DrkLvr_ makes a sound suggestion with lowering the % each year/period. I assume you would calculate a per block percentage, so the "compounded interest" would not only be per year, but would be from each block reward.

And maybe the percentages are so low compared to the time-line we are looking at.

+1, this or leave as it is. But for practical purposes it should be 0.75% or even 0.5% (0.9%1% is ok too).

0.85% fixed sounds like a fine solution to me.

In my opinion "smart inflation" is introducing complexity and subjectivity where none is needed

Exponential inflation is a thing, but consider:

year 1: 18,000,000 x 0.0085 = 153,000 emitted (419.17 coins per day)
year 2: 18,153,000 x 0.0085 = 154,300.5 emitted (422.74 coins per day)

Hardly unreasonable.. you could add other fixed parameters to control longer term inflation (100+ years..) for example.. reduce the inflation rate by 1.618% every 5 years.. (after year 5 inflation drops from 0.85% to 0.836247% per year)

I'm a little confused.

What did JM say that you agree with?

In your last sentence what are you suggesting?

I'm in much more agreement with Johnny Mnemonic here. I can see the usefulness in "smart inflation" though.

Just remember that you are applying existing (and arguably failed) economics to brand new technology.

Did increased inflation and/or lowered/negative interest rates help anything ever? Was there ever a cause correlation?

Exponential growth is a thing. Fixing the inflation rate at a % of total emission per year vs. 0.3 per block is significantly different.

For those involved in the Aeon debate about enabling actual inflation, smooth has proposed the easiest and most socially acceptable solution would be just to leave in the first year's inflation rate (~0.85%) after the initial issue.  
  
This ensures we grow at a different pace than Monero (for better or worse), gives us unique identity, and solves the issue of having actual inflation without any possible fears of it being too high of a number.  Also, since this amount of inflation was already in the cards to begin with (after forking from Monero) this doesn't really alter the social contract.
  
On a long enough time span, this would result in significantly more Aeon being created each year vs. Monero, but the total values will stay relatively comparative for many years before this happens.  
  
As far as the idea for smart inflation, it sounds like a great idea (as did digital cash initially in the 80's and 90's) but sounds like it might need some new brilliant combination of mathematics plus some vetting on an experimental blockchain before it could be considered to be incorporated into one of the major cryptonotes.

i finished a test of my windows binary (aeon_gpu_miner_149debb.zip) on my pool

miner started: 2015-11-01 00:30:00
last share sent: 2015-11-02 18:30:00
the miner didn't crash and still connect to the pool but the gpu is not hashing anymore (card is cold, no power drain)
total : 43h of hashing.

for unknown reason, i was banned 4 times
dunno if error is on my side.

accepted rate was around ~91%

and check opencl info with clinfo.exe
typically at C:\Program Files (x86)\AMD APP SDK\3.0\bin\x86_64

Uninstall Intel video drivers, disable integrated graphics from bios first, worked for me.

Hi, I have some problem to start the miner aeon_gpu_miner_149debb, I get thise message: Error -1 when calling clGetDeviceIDs for number of device.

Kminer and Claymore miner for cryptonight algo works fine!

Sapphire 280x
Catalyst version 15.8 beta

Please help

I don't think we disagree on anything. I really wanted XMR to be inflationary and argued quite a bit to that end, as I'm not convinced that a fixed block reward (relative to increasing supply) is enough to incentivize miners.

I recommend skimming the old XMR economics thread as a number of interesting arguments were made.

Risto said recently that he thinks wealth concentration in XMR is an issue, but a shrinking circulating supply is always the result in non-inflationary currencies, as money flows into the pockets of the rich and never back out.

However, "moar inflation" does not automatically mean more spending. You need enough to disincentivize hodling vs the opportunity risk of investing in productivity. Beyond that there's little incentive to spend (until you get to hyperinflation territory).

Thus, slowing distribution during low activity does not necessarily result in further reduced spending. It only eliminates the value dilution that we would otherwise experience if we maintained the higher rate of inflation during the slow period.

I think if it's something we want to do, the important part is to agree that we want to do it quickly.  I believe that the exact rate we choose will matter less than the fact that we are choosing to create a permanent percentage based trailing emission.  
  
We can set a target minimum rate that our initial curve will reduce to after the first 18.4 million (perhaps Phi like the other guy said), and later we can perhaps devise a system of "smart inflation".  If no smart-inflation formula can be derived/agreed upon, then we'll use the hard figure we determined previously.  But the important part is to make that community decision very quickly if we will move to an inflationary block reward so that we disrupt the social contract as little as possible.  We want people interested in Aeon to walk into a system of agreed upon rules, not an improv sketch.  
  
It's important for me that the overwhelming majority of the community is on board with the principle of this idea though before we do it (at least 2/3rds; ideally more).
  

i think we hashed out something like this before... do you remember? maybe it was something related.

I guess the question that probably defines which side of the equation needs the pumping is "why is the spending slowing?" I'm no economist, but in our consumer economy, spending arguably slows when there is less disposable income. So what creates this disposable income - an amount of income above what is necessary for standard of living. So that amount necessary for standard of living... generally this increases over time. But is that due to inflation? Or does it actually cost more to live as time goes on?

So, from one angle, the above situation would benefit from distribution slowing during a contraction in velocity, so that the remaining disposable income becomes more valuable.

I think, perhaps, I get this turned around in my head when thinking about cryptocurrencies because the distribution, idyllically, is true distribution. I.e., in our contemporary economy, the "printing money" pumping during contractions, by definition, increases the money supply. As we have witnessed, however, this increase in money supply doesn't necessarily equate to an increase in distribution. This new money just gets jammed up at the highest levels of abstraction in our financial system, in a blatant and miserable reagenesque horse and sparrow. As evidence I submit all the reports of companies sitting on the largest piles of cash ever during the last recession.

In a properly functioning cryptocurrency economy, the distribution of money creation is true. I.e., everyone has a chance at the spigot. So in the case above wherein the disposable income has shrank, all of a sudden your node is spitting out more monero into your account.

and re: Only what is precisely necessary given the current conditions.... what *is* precisely necessary?

My vote is a fixed low amount (Phi 1.618%)

I would disagree with you.  One of the intentions of inflation is to incentivize spending vs. HODLing.   If there is little activity, then people aren't spending. 
 
Never forget: the purpose of money is to enable intelligences to meaningfully transact with each other.. (I don't specify humans because eventually humans will need a way to meaningfully transact with robots).   It is a language of value,  and the equivalent of little transaction volume is a quiet room. 
 
Though sometimes quiet and solemn rooms are useful, the goal of language is not to be quiet.  It is to create valuable noise between each other.  Therefore, the more noise, the better.  When there is lots of 'noise' and activity there is little reason to increase the supply past a certain minimum rate (I feel there should always be a minimum).  When people begin saving too much and not spending enough, this behavior should be encouraged via a gradual debasement of the currency. 
 
Of course, it's just my opinion.  I'm not an Economist and no expert in this matter.  I am just reasoning on my own.  Let's pursue further discussion of this over at the topic on the Economics board.

I'd argue the opposite on all points. Increase in velocity means the economy is growing and so should the money supply. When spending slows, so does distribution.

Also, there would be no maximum or minimum inflation. Only what is precisely necessary given the current conditions.

 
  
Great stuff guys.  I made a topic over on the Economics board to solicit opinions and I'll quote this as well.  Perhaps you guys have even coined a new concept, "smart inflation". 
 
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/what-is-the-ideal-inflation-rate-in-an-inflationary-pow-currency-1234667

yes! This! If money velocity is high (i.e., there are a lot of transactions in a block), that means money is valuable and people are using it, and therefore minimal (to zero) inflation is necessary. If money velocity is low (there are few to little transactions in a block), that means money is \too valuable so people aren't spending it. Of course we're diving headforward into economic theory.... of course here there'd be a maximum inflation rate and a minimum, being 0. Of course the magic number question is then what is the proper velocity of money.