Topic: [ANN] Credits(CRDS): CPU-only mining | Argon2d PoW - Masternodes - page 16. (Read 482468 times)

17.54% right now.

can someone tell me what's the ROI of masternode ? i really like this project and think of investing some money into it .

i7-970
was a "2nd gen" i7, for the x58 lga 1366 socket,
Similar to w3670 / x5670 / x5675
Transistor size was smaller and had 6-cores + more Cache vs. i7 1st gen, also new AES instructions.

With external miner & pool = 26Kh/s. SSE42, AVX crashed. ">2.1KH/s per thread."
With internal Wallet miner = 23KH/s.

HyperTheading=On.
3.3GHz.
Watercooled with CoolerMaster liquid Pro 120 has 58~60°C, depends on ambient.
NB 62°C
SB 56°C

Wallet warns when PC time is Wrong, asks to Sync Time & Date. Awesome.!

I apologize about that.  I stated this issue in an earlier post and since there was no response or action I figured it was ignored
due to lack of control of the post.

CRDs is really becoming very successful! The CPU mining capacity of this coin just capture majority of cryptocurrency user and those that would have otherwise buy some mining contract would rather solo mine on their computer saving fund and reducing third party risk

You should be one of the creators of DeepOnion. Do not spam with you ads!

Do not get me wrong. I like the project. But since the end of January it was 3$ per 10 credits - as it was fixed in the official website. Since then we have an exchange. And we were watching "the free falling". It's normal. But we've already reached the point below electricity costs.
There are many factors for this price depression. But 1 thing has never changed. The negative trend of an overestimated value. Like other CPU mining altcoins with minimum market share, this project is just a temporary field for CPU mining power. Till now it hasn't shown any potential to be a global project and usable currency. Of course being so small is the key that CRDS mining was so profitable. I want to thank you for all that! I believe you're far from any scam, or if the project is a scam, it's one of the least arrogant. Most projects' devs are "hungry for money"! This project is something different and still not good enough to make it.
I believe in decentralization. Which is CPU mining. So it's the future of all cryptos. This year and next I think we'll see the end of most altcoins. Some may survive. They'll be big. Highly used. Decentralized. Secure. Tested. Almost no profitable for mining. Small altcoins will just not make it. I would like it to be different, but that's the way it works.

hmm,

I happened to know CRDS in Jan when I was finding coin for CPU mining.
CRDS algo and MN made me very interested. So, I started mining with my home PC and purchase CRDS at Crypto Bridge.

Every week I got some DeepOnion airdrops. about 100 Oninon per week. with this I could purchase 5000 CRDS per week.
Now, I am 7 MN running. I like linux and setting MN is lots of fun.

As I keep buying CRDS for 2 month, price didn't crashed lot more. Even today I bought at 750 sat and I managed to start my 7th MN.
However, I won't buy any more CRDS from now on for MN things. I hope v1.2.0 bring some magic for CRDS.
 

OK. makes sense then

I like the idea of the dev fund, and also that the MN rewards go down again.

Also Matt (& team) please don't listen to the 'we-need-to-rebrand-and-increase-price-NOW' crowd, they want a pump & dump, which CRDS is not. CDRS is strong and the similar sounding competition will be gone in a month or two.

No, my mistake, you're not confused. I have updated it now.

Is that table correct? Or am I confused?

Why 125k blocks with a random 250k in between?

Thanks for your opinion which you've shared in this thread no less than 6 times now. We're all well aware of your thoughts. We are not currently asking for opinions on this, nor engaging the community on it.

You should start a new thread if you wish to continue discussing it. Further re-branding comments in this thread will be marked as spam.

I've in crypto world since late 2013. I saw a lot of birth and death of coins.

The main reason I suggest rebrand is the low price of CRDS.

People are very likely to believe the coin under 1000 sat as useless and hopeless. shitcoin.

The current price of CRDS keeps damaging its brand value.

Even great coin did rebrand in very early stage. As far as I know DASH rebrand from Dark in one year.

Thanks for the heads up, we have obviously missed that. I'll get Loremipsum to update that thread to get all links etc. corrected.

It just seems like a problem when no one even has control over the original post to change the bounty link which points to old websites.  
Stuff like that is just crazy.  If you don't want to re-brand at least try to re-announce the thing when your new wallet is up and toss in some marketing.  
Give the coin a good strong push.

Not going to bother quoting you and give you more airtime, glad you've chosen to move on, and probably a good move since we weren't able to fulfill your expectations in the 1-2 weeks that you gave us. Credits was launched in July of 2017 and has been through quite a bit since then and now has a much larger and stronger community as a result.

Price is currently depressed along with most other altcoins. We also haven't had any new announcements fro a while since we've been focusing on getting the next version ready for release. Once this is done we will focus once again on marketing and future opportunities for Credits.

I do however agree that the price of any cryptocurrency is pure speculation.

Mixing - no! But the problem is people mix the coins. See the price in the exchange.
This was expected to happen as it happened with many other coins.
After all why do somebody need such coins when we have LTC, Monero and so... which are many,many times more reliable?
CPU mining is perfect for me. But the truth is different than what we believe. Every small project is gonna die and it's a matter of time.
This unused coins with small amount are the first. Because somebody must pay for the electricity. With such small usage, it's obvious that "virtual money generated from NOTHING" actually do not exist in the real world. It's not possible that everybody win.
1. We have constant negative trend
2. Before 1-2 weeks we entered the zone where the price/profit is similar to the mining costs.
3. Similar named coins led to less trust in CRDS. Generally I do not see new investors. I don't see buy orders.
4. Investors come here not to pay our electricity, but to make PROFIT. Now we have ex-investors with masternodes. They also generate "zero energy" where somebody should buy our generated coins. Of course that's the root of the negative trend. And of course everything is going as expected, in a very logical way.

Generally I was the guy who made 1-3.March price rise. With the cost of about 100 CRDS. Actually after my buy I sell them on profit, but I initiated the move. Funny but my total profit of this speculation (including my mined CRDS) was only 10$. Movement was followed by a logical correction. Back then I realized how small is this project and how much it's unstable.

So to recap - I think it's the end. Of course some actions can result in new live for CRDS:
1. New exchange
2. Devs or big investors to speculate - to buy all sells and to create new higher dummy buy orders.
3. Change the name of CRDS ("Credits")

I hope I answered to all questions.

p.s. For now I don't have CRDS and I do not mine.

Well, let's say we've made a rebrand. A week later (conditionally) a coin with the same (already new) name appeared. What then? Rebrand again? I believe that we only need a good marketing campaign.

We've already been through one re-brand discussion very early on in Credits' life. For now it does not concern myself or any other team members as far as I am aware. If anything it will help promote us as people stumble across our thread.

I've also created a more accurate draft version of our new rewards structure to be implemented in v1.2.0. The current fork block is set to be 350,000 however we are fast approaching that block height and it is pretty likely that we'll push it back somewhat.

That's why the rebrand would be good option for preventing such confusion.