First Block: 2/2 2:07
Last Block: 3/7 14:46 (24214)
Elapsed time: 2896740 seconds
On a 64 second block time, we are 15 days behind. We should be at block 45261.
On a 300 second block time, we are at 51 days ahead, we should be at block 9655.
In reality, we have an average block time of 119 seconds. Let's go for it...
I would suggest a fork for block #25000, with a 120 second block time and a weekly readjustment.
2 minute block times would make BEN the fastest on Paysha (considering the current contenders), but is only twice as fast as advertised.
If we wanted to get all the way back to the 64 second block time, you could even implement a mechanism to reduce the block time by 1 second every 5000 blocks (or so), it would take less than a year to get back to the advertised rates.
Topic: [ANN] [BEN] Benjamins ◄ SHA-256 ►◄ BOUNTY AVAILABLE to make BEN merge mineable!! - page 30. (Read 94414 times)
March 07, 2014, 03:30:36 PM
March 07, 2014, 02:51:23 PM
The price has nearly doubled since we said we didn't plan on a fork. Is that a sign that we did the right thing?
Well like you said, the long term hold of coins is the right focus.
Even if Benjamin himself blessed his coin, there would still be pump and dumpers riding the thing up, mercilessly, and they call themselves "the free market". So, at these prices, I would expect huge swings. I mean, I bought a few thousand at cryptsy and sure they've 'doubled' but I am not selling.
Ben you have a better understanding of the blockchain structure than I do. I was a field POS tech and also a stockbroker way long ago, so I know market plays and POS technology, but I am confident you have a good coin and I am happy to mine something that has spine.
March 07, 2014, 02:38:42 PM
The price has nearly doubled since we said we didn't plan on a fork. Is that a sign that we did the right thing?
March 07, 2014, 02:07:20 PM
What you need to do is think outside the box. You need to put a miner at every merchant's register. Cubes are 350 USD or so, there needs to be a way to get at least 30ghs or so onto the network at every node. The solution is getting merchants to mine without their even thinking about it.
You need to think of new ideas and ignore the fools who can only think of coinraping to git more BTC.
You need a coin with better people at its core than BTC, but in the end, most people in finance --and most rich people, are exploitation-oriented. So the critic above is like a merchant buying a side of beef. He sees all coins as the same: profit vectors.
Well, the original pieces of eight, was actually based on the spanish real coin, which, due to debauching the coins, the American silver piece had more merit, in a sea of trashcoins. But yes, miners often do see the trashcoins as just a springboard to "BTC per day" which is not surprising.
Anyway, the solution is to leave all the smart people behind and court merchants, and the 99% of humans who do not mine. Let me know if you people want ideas, I'll join your conference call.
You need to think of new ideas and ignore the fools who can only think of coinraping to git more BTC.
You need a coin with better people at its core than BTC, but in the end, most people in finance --and most rich people, are exploitation-oriented. So the critic above is like a merchant buying a side of beef. He sees all coins as the same: profit vectors.
Well, the original pieces of eight, was actually based on the spanish real coin, which, due to debauching the coins, the American silver piece had more merit, in a sea of trashcoins. But yes, miners often do see the trashcoins as just a springboard to "BTC per day" which is not surprising.
Anyway, the solution is to leave all the smart people behind and court merchants, and the 99% of humans who do not mine. Let me know if you people want ideas, I'll join your conference call.
March 07, 2014, 01:43:36 PM
We are essentially catching up by 5-7 network days, depending on that day's block times, every actual 24 hours. Which means we are only adding about 1/8 of what we are eating up
Even with such a shitty situation, we are still far ahead of many older, more established, higher market cap coins on coinwarz, and I'm not referring to merge mined. Those don't count
Even with such a shitty situation, we are still far ahead of many older, more established, higher market cap coins on coinwarz, and I'm not referring to merge mined. Those don't count
March 07, 2014, 01:38:56 PM
I am useless as a miner anymore, even before this last jump I was getting a couple a day at most so it barely effects my mining results if the blocks take forever, but it will effect me as a holder of the coin if the miners that are useful run from the coin en masse.
I just want what is best for the coin, for both the holders and the miners, since we need both for the coin to thrive etc etc.
Now, I am off to cross my fingers that the lot of you that understand this way better than I do can figure out what is truly best and see to it happening, whatever that may be.
I'll keep buying em of course.
I just want what is best for the coin, for both the holders and the miners, since we need both for the coin to thrive etc etc.
Now, I am off to cross my fingers that the lot of you that understand this way better than I do can figure out what is truly best and see to it happening, whatever that may be.
I'll keep buying em of course.
March 07, 2014, 01:26:27 PM
I think the difference of opinion is because mine and I believe Ben's are geared long term merchant use while the forkers (lol sounds like some revolutionary birther equivalent) are focused on best options for miners
Both are equally important but its convincing one side to cave for the other
Both are equally important but its convincing one side to cave for the other
March 07, 2014, 01:19:15 PM
Those who have ideas for the fork, please post specifics and we will run the numbers. Even throw it up on a testnet for a few days if it sounds good. Like I said, we are always open to ideas. Just because right now we are saying no plans for a fork, that doesn't mean our minds won't be swayed if a mathematically better idea is posted
Numbers don't lie, and every scenario we have run so far has doing nothing as being the best option
Numbers don't lie, and every scenario we have run so far has doing nothing as being the best option
March 07, 2014, 01:05:38 PM
So, cross our fingers and hope?
Works for me.
Works for me.
Well those are what I would do if it were me. Both options have pros and cons
The good news and the real reason we will support BEN is because it hasn't had any stability issues. Difficulty sucks for speed but its not losing any coins or getting forked unintentionally
March 07, 2014, 01:03:13 PM
We are 15k blocks ahead of schedule. This has nothing to do with wanting to hold what we already have. None of us have sold a single Benjamin, and in fact have used most of what we mined for giveaways on Reddit, Twitter, Cryptocointalk, and several other sites
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Sorry to be blunt but you are delusional.
Appealing to miners is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. Without miners transactions cannot be confirmed. No sending coins, no receiving coins, no mining coins.
I'm not saying BEN needs KGW. I'm not saying BEN has to decrease the block time (although, it would be my preference if it did). But the diff adjustment issue has to be addressed. Mark my words, the next diff adjustment will never, ever, ever arrive, BEN will never, ever, ever see anything close to 10-minute block times again if you do not fork this coin.
I can't make it any more clear. If we make difficulty adjust faster, it will go up every block. Every block will get harder than the previous, increasing the time even further than if it jumps every 2000 blocks. The long time in between will let the network catch up. If difficulty is changed more frequently, it will go up more than if we don't fork it before it goes down
You did the math before, so I know you understand how far ahead we are. Surely you realize what I mean?
I do understand what you mean, but I don't think you understand what I mean
Simply changing the diff adjustment to every 1 blocks will not fix the problem. The diff algorithm itself also needs to be changed, and adjusted to take into consideration the current block height.
Current diff algo looks at the current block height, versus the expected block height and adjusts the difficulty up or down based on how close we are to the expected block#.
This algo is no good, BEN will never, ever correct itself using this algorithm (well, maybe eventually, but it will take YEARS).
A new diff adjustment algorithm must be implemented, maybe one that does not look at the expected block height, but looks at the length of time it took to complete the previous X number of blocks and adjusts the diff accordingly (pretty sure this would work, but I'm just shooting from the hip here).
Additionally, the diff adjustment period must also be reduced - otherwise, BEN will simply end up with the same problem again in a couple weeks.
Max time at current hashrate will be 4 months to be where it should be, sped up with more miners that hop on. This problem will never happen once it catches up, because the network will not allow it to get that far ahead. It only happened because ASIC power wasn't accounted for in the initial difficulty
This, once corrected, will NEVER happen again. It's impossible to get 5 times ahead of the network other than with a massive launch
Maybe 4.5 months from now only if you shutdown the network and mined ZERO blocks between now and July. Current block height is 24212, given the coin's 10-minute block times that block height should not have been reached until around July 20.
But BEN is going to mine blocks between now and then (slowly, yes, but it will happen). This will continue to push the date out further.
Current nethash is 1.3TH - what are you going to do when the coin gets "back to normal," 60TH worth of miners hop in and mine the next 2016 blocks in 3 hours? The diff will spike enormously again, because the blockheight is ahead of schedule, miners will hop off, and BEN will be right back where it is now.
Regardless of the above, the next diff adjustment is not going to hit in July anyway. It will be way, way further out than that. Block times are going to continue to increase, unless you've got several TH of personal mining power you're willing to throw at BEN for the next 4 months. Each day, the # of days until the next diff adjustment is going to increase. There's a good chance BEN may never reach it.
Fork the coin. It has to happen.
March 07, 2014, 12:56:01 PM
So, cross our fingers and hope?
Works for me.
Works for me.
March 07, 2014, 12:54:06 PM
What if more miners don't hop on? Seems more would leave in this situation rather than more show up.
That's where they need massive marketing and a nice pump to get the price where it should be. If the price were to skyrocket then the mining profitability would go up and more asic would join in. The name is good and Paysha should bring it more attention.
March 07, 2014, 12:52:45 PM
Thinking about it though...
A fork now would be a bandage on a gunshot. Would help today but not be good overall
Things need time to heal. A gunshot and Benjamins are both in that list
From a business perspective, I would personally pick a coin that chose long term even if short term sucks. We already said we will process BEN either way but if I were seeing this for the first time that would be my inclination
A fork now would be a bandage on a gunshot. Would help today but not be good overall
Things need time to heal. A gunshot and Benjamins are both in that list
From a business perspective, I would personally pick a coin that chose long term even if short term sucks. We already said we will process BEN either way but if I were seeing this for the first time that would be my inclination
March 07, 2014, 12:50:43 PM
What if more miners don't hop on? Seems more would leave in this situation rather than more show up.
March 07, 2014, 12:49:57 PM
I think either option works. Although if you make it adjust based on last few blocks then you are totally fucking up the mining life. All the coins will be mined out a lot faster than planned
March 07, 2014, 12:45:45 PM
We are 15k blocks ahead of schedule. This has nothing to do with wanting to hold what we already have. None of us have sold a single Benjamin, and in fact have used most of what we mined for giveaways on Reddit, Twitter, Cryptocointalk, and several other sites
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Sorry to be blunt but you are delusional.
Appealing to miners is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. Without miners transactions cannot be confirmed. No sending coins, no receiving coins, no mining coins.
I'm not saying BEN needs KGW. I'm not saying BEN has to decrease the block time (although, it would be my preference if it did). But the diff adjustment issue has to be addressed. Mark my words, the next diff adjustment will never, ever, ever arrive, BEN will never, ever, ever see anything close to 10-minute block times again if you do not fork this coin.
I can't make it any more clear. If we make difficulty adjust faster, it will go up every block. Every block will get harder than the previous, increasing the time even further than if it jumps every 2000 blocks. The long time in between will let the network catch up. If difficulty is changed more frequently, it will go up more than if we don't fork it before it goes down
You did the math before, so I know you understand how far ahead we are. Surely you realize what I mean?
I do understand what you mean, but I don't think you understand what I mean
Simply changing the diff adjustment to every 1 blocks will not fix the problem. The diff algorithm itself also needs to be changed, and adjusted to take into consideration the current block height.
Current diff algo looks at the current block height, versus the expected block height and adjusts the difficulty up or down based on how close we are to the expected block#.
This algo is no good, BEN will never, ever correct itself using this algorithm (well, maybe eventually, but it will take YEARS).
A new diff adjustment algorithm must be implemented, maybe one that does not look at the expected block height, but looks at the length of time it took to complete the previous X number of blocks and adjusts the diff accordingly (pretty sure this would work, but I'm just shooting from the hip here).
Additionally, the diff adjustment period must also be reduced - otherwise, BEN will simply end up with the same problem again in a couple weeks.
Max time at current hashrate will be 4 months to be where it should be, sped up with more miners that hop on. This problem will never happen once it catches up, because the network will not allow it to get that far ahead. It only happened because ASIC power wasn't accounted for in the initial difficulty
This, once corrected, will NEVER happen again. It's impossible to get 5 times ahead of the network other than with a massive launch
March 07, 2014, 12:38:26 PM
We are 15k blocks ahead of schedule. This has nothing to do with wanting to hold what we already have. None of us have sold a single Benjamin, and in fact have used most of what we mined for giveaways on Reddit, Twitter, Cryptocointalk, and several other sites
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Sorry to be blunt but you are delusional.
Appealing to miners is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. Without miners transactions cannot be confirmed. No sending coins, no receiving coins, no mining coins.
I'm not saying BEN needs KGW. I'm not saying BEN has to decrease the block time (although, it would be my preference if it did). But the diff adjustment issue has to be addressed. Mark my words, the next diff adjustment will never, ever, ever arrive, BEN will never, ever, ever see anything close to 10-minute block times again if you do not fork this coin.
I can't make it any more clear. If we make difficulty adjust faster, it will go up every block. Every block will get harder than the previous, increasing the time even further than if it jumps every 2000 blocks. The long time in between will let the network catch up. If difficulty is changed more frequently, it will go up more than if we don't fork it before it goes down
You did the math before, so I know you understand how far ahead we are. Surely you realize what I mean?
I do understand what you mean, but I don't think you understand what I mean
Simply changing the diff adjustment to every 1 blocks will not fix the problem. The diff algorithm itself also needs to be changed, and adjusted to take into consideration the current block height.
Current diff algo looks at the current block height, versus the expected block height and adjusts the difficulty up or down based on how close we are to the expected block#.
This algo is no good, BEN will never, ever correct itself using this algorithm (well, maybe eventually, but it will take YEARS).
A new diff adjustment algorithm must be implemented, maybe one that does not look at the expected block height, but looks at the length of time it took to complete the previous X number of blocks and adjusts the diff accordingly (pretty sure this would work, but I'm just shooting from the hip here).
Additionally, the diff adjustment period must also be reduced - otherwise, BEN will simply end up with the same problem again in a couple weeks.
March 07, 2014, 12:35:21 PM
LOL, as if I even know where to start with the math.
You are hilarious.
You are hilarious.
Let me make it simple. I will use round numbers to show it easier. These numbers are made up for the sake of an example
1440 minutes in a day / 10 minute blocks = 144 blocks/day
144 * 30 (a month, to make it easy) = 4320, the block the network believes we should be on a month after release time
We are on block 22k due to ASIC mining before the first adjustment. That means all the blocks between 4320-current are ahead of schedule, so the difficulty goes up to stall
2000 block adjustments will go up 25%
200 block adjustments will go up 25%
I'm using 25%, but what the real % would be is the same for both adjustments since it is limited in how far it can adjust
25% increased 10 times with faster retargets will give you an exponentially higher difficulty than one jump, less often, with the same percentage increase, due to the adjustment limits. You would be going 100 + 25% then (100 + 25%) + 25% and so on for every adjustment
March 07, 2014, 12:24:39 PM
LOL, as if I even know where to start with the math.
You are hilarious.
You are hilarious.
March 07, 2014, 12:19:56 PM
We are 15k blocks ahead of schedule. This has nothing to do with wanting to hold what we already have. None of us have sold a single Benjamin, and in fact have used most of what we mined for giveaways on Reddit, Twitter, Cryptocointalk, and several other sites
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Read what Igotspots quoted above. It explains our decision and gives reasons why a fork would make the situation worse. 10 minute block times are better for security, this is a known issue, as well as the KGW holes recently found, further strengthen our decision not to fork
Coins should not be created to serve the miners, but the consumers who will use them in the end. Benjamins will be one of the most secure blockchains once it has the hashpower to back up the numbers. Security and not losing coins or leaving them vulnerable to attack so vendors, exchanges, or traders don't lose payments is more important to us than making a few coin hopping miners happy. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The ones that have stuck around mining since the beginning will enjoy having rarer-than-planned coins, but that was definitely not our intention
Sorry to be blunt but you are delusional.
Appealing to miners is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. Without miners transactions cannot be confirmed. No sending coins, no receiving coins, no mining coins.
I'm not saying BEN needs KGW. I'm not saying BEN has to decrease the block time (although, it would be my preference if it did). But the diff adjustment issue has to be addressed. Mark my words, the next diff adjustment will never, ever, ever arrive, BEN will never, ever, ever see anything close to 10-minute block times again if you do not fork this coin.
I can't make it any more clear. If we make difficulty adjust faster, it will go up every block. Every block will get harder than the previous, increasing the time even further than if it jumps every 2000 blocks. The long time in between will let the network catch up. If difficulty is changed more frequently, it will go up more than if we don't fork it before it goes down
You did the math before, so I know you understand how far ahead we are. Surely you realize what I mean?
Why is it 2000 blocks or EVERY block? is there no where in the middle?
Let's say it's 200 blocks then. The problem will still get 10 times worse than it is now. Every 200 blocks. Instead of every 2000. If you guys want to do the math, feel free. We have, it won't catch up any faster to the target block RIGHT NOW if we make difficulty adjust more often. It will make it take LONGER to catch up because blocks will be harder and harder. Leaving it like this locks that difficulty in for a period of time, rather than adjusting even higher every day (or week)
Jump to: