Vlad, I just saw a rumor that facebook would like to buy the coinbase! It's interesting this situation, just yesterday, they stepped back on the ban on BTC! Things are starting to fit in! Will IXC be in the coinbase soon?
" Appl Appl. No .: 15 / 847,155
Filed: December 19, 2017 "
Have they anticipated? It's incredible that it is not now the warning, the chaos is coming.
Topic: [ANN] IXCoin [IXC] The Original Bitcoin Sidechain - page 55. (Read 42310 times)
Through I0coin I met Ixcoin! If one value, the other will follow the same trend, the intensity is difficult to quantify! So, in the absence of reliable projects, I'll go in what could suddenly be the surprise! I'll download the wallet and I'll create a twitter to spread the word!
Good to have you in our community!
Through I0coin I met Ixcoin! If one value, the other will follow the same trend, the intensity is difficult to quantify! So, in the absence of reliable projects, I'll go in what could suddenly be the surprise! I'll download the wallet and I'll create a twitter to spread the word!
I have emailed all the top exchanges on coinmarketcap with full specs of IXC and its recent developments.Hoping one or two of these take notice of recent develpments.
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
Quote
Sidechains and merge mining have their own intractable problems, and in particular they do not mix together very well (merge mining makes the sidechain problems worse, and vice versa). If freicoin were to be sidechain to another chain, it would have to either (1) be a separate proof of work, or (2) have all full nodes of both chains validate each other, an idea more commonly known as extension blocks. Setting freicoin up as a separately mined chain with a different proof of work (and therefore different hardware distribution) prepares for the first possibility while not excluding the second. But in reality I expect that freicoin will remain different from bitcoin and other coins, and not an active sidechain, except perhaps via strong federations or higher level protocols using cross-chain payment channels.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
I would not describe the issues with merge mining and sidechains intractable - however, they do have tradeoffs. Going by the definition of sidechains/merge mining described in this post - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merged-mining-vs-side-chains-another-kind-of-merged-mining-313347 - both are mechanisms to leverage the hashing power of Bitcoin proof of work. Merge mining allows a coin such as IXC, which is mined out, to attract much more hashing based on fees than it could otherwise. There is an increased risk of centralization as indicated by this recent research - https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/791.pdf - I would argue that this will diminish over time due to increasing compute power and demand for higher volumes and lower fees - see my earlier posts on this thread for more details. Further there may be one instance where a sort of combined approach would be warranted. For a merge mined coin, waiting for a block where consensus is met on both chains would be a way to implement very low risk atomic transfers between chains. This would not require any changes to Bitcoin but would require an additional soft fork on the merge mined coin to support.
The problem with mined sidechains is that the segwit "anyone-can-spend" issue is a reality, not FUD, and miners can steal sidechain funds; the reason why segwit doesn't have that problem is because full nodes prevent the theft, but sidechains have only miner-trusting SPV.A sidechain that has been soft-forked in is no longer a sidechain, it's a blocksize increase, just like segwit.If you can have a trustless sidechain, you've also solved decentralized scaling; none of the sidechains proposed to date solve decentralized scaling.
Agree with your statement - there is a significant tradeoff with sidechains. Sidechains will have some form of centralization - e.g., some greater level of trust in a third party than the main chain. My argument is merge mining can be a solution where some scale can be achieved with modest risk of more centralization - For smaller and higher volume transactions it is a viable solution to what sidechains attempt to solve. There are similarities between sidechains and merge mining but they are not the same thing. Merge mining has been in the wild for years in many different alts and is a proven solution even if the potential has not been realized. Term is a little abused - calling IXC the Original Sidechain is more of a term of marketing as the correct and not so sexy translation is something along the lines of "First Merge Mined Alt Coin intended to work along side Bitcoin and test a fee only reward structure".
I have emailed all the top exchanges on coinmarketcap with full specs of IXC and its recent developments.Hoping one or two of these take notice of recent develpments.
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
Quote
Sidechains and merge mining have their own intractable problems, and in particular they do not mix together very well (merge mining makes the sidechain problems worse, and vice versa). If freicoin were to be sidechain to another chain, it would have to either (1) be a separate proof of work, or (2) have all full nodes of both chains validate each other, an idea more commonly known as extension blocks. Setting freicoin up as a separately mined chain with a different proof of work (and therefore different hardware distribution) prepares for the first possibility while not excluding the second. But in reality I expect that freicoin will remain different from bitcoin and other coins, and not an active sidechain, except perhaps via strong federations or higher level protocols using cross-chain payment channels.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
I would not describe the issues with merge mining and sidechains intractable - however, they do have tradeoffs. Going by the definition of sidechains/merge mining described in this post - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merged-mining-vs-side-chains-another-kind-of-merged-mining-313347 - both are mechanisms to leverage the hashing power of Bitcoin proof of work. Merge mining allows a coin such as IXC, which is mined out, to attract much more hashing based on fees than it could otherwise. There is an increased risk of centralization as indicated by this recent research - https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/791.pdf - I would argue that this will diminish over time due to increasing compute power and demand for higher volumes and lower fees - see my earlier posts on this thread for more details. Further there may be one instance where a sort of combined approach would be warranted. For a merge mined coin, waiting for a block where consensus is met on both chains would be a way to implement very low risk atomic transfers between chains. This would not require any changes to Bitcoin but would require an additional soft fork on the merge mined coin to support.
The problem with mined sidechains is that the segwit "anyone-can-spend" issue is a reality, not FUD, and miners can steal sidechain funds; the reason why segwit doesn't have that problem is because full nodes prevent the theft, but sidechains have only miner-trusting SPV.A sidechain that has been soft-forked in is no longer a sidechain, it's a blocksize increase, just like segwit.If you can have a trustless sidechain, you've also solved decentralized scaling; none of the sidechains proposed to date solve decentralized scaling.
Neat merge mining fact - the idea is usually attributed to Satoshi - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.28696
I have emailed all the top exchanges on coinmarketcap with full specs of IXC and its recent developments.Hoping one or two of these take notice of recent develpments.
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
Quote
Sidechains and merge mining have their own intractable problems, and in particular they do not mix together very well (merge mining makes the sidechain problems worse, and vice versa). If freicoin were to be sidechain to another chain, it would have to either (1) be a separate proof of work, or (2) have all full nodes of both chains validate each other, an idea more commonly known as extension blocks. Setting freicoin up as a separately mined chain with a different proof of work (and therefore different hardware distribution) prepares for the first possibility while not excluding the second. But in reality I expect that freicoin will remain different from bitcoin and other coins, and not an active sidechain, except perhaps via strong federations or higher level protocols using cross-chain payment channels.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
I would not describe the issues with merge mining and sidechains intractable - however, they do have tradeoffs. Going by the definition of sidechains/merge mining described in this post - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merged-mining-vs-side-chains-another-kind-of-merged-mining-313347 - both are mechanisms to leverage the hashing power of Bitcoin proof of work. Merge mining allows a coin such as IXC, which is mined out, to attract much more hashing based on fees than it could otherwise. There is an increased risk of centralization as indicated by this recent research - https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/791.pdf - I would argue that this will diminish over time due to increasing compute power and demand for higher volumes and lower fees - see my earlier posts on this thread for more details. Further there may be one instance where a sort of combined approach would be warranted. For a merge mined coin, waiting for a block where consensus is met on both chains would be a way to implement very low risk atomic transfers between chains. This would not require any changes to Bitcoin but would require an additional soft fork on the merge mined coin to support.
I have emailed all the top exchanges on coinmarketcap with full specs of IXC and its recent developments.Hoping one or two of these take notice of recent develpments.
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
On another note I talked about IXC a while back with peeps about how good IXC was and it being merge mined and suitable as sidechain and one had interesting response but maybe somewhat negative
Quote
Sidechains and merge mining have their own intractable problems, and in particular they do not mix together very well (merge mining makes the sidechain problems worse, and vice versa). If freicoin were to be sidechain to another chain, it would have to either (1) be a separate proof of work, or (2) have all full nodes of both chains validate each other, an idea more commonly known as extension blocks. Setting freicoin up as a separately mined chain with a different proof of work (and therefore different hardware distribution) prepares for the first possibility while not excluding the second. But in reality I expect that freicoin will remain different from bitcoin and other coins, and not an active sidechain, except perhaps via strong federations or higher level protocols using cross-chain payment channels.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
There is at least one person I know who has made a recent ASIC purchase for freicoin mining, and I would hate to invalidate that investment. But the transition period also serves the purpose of having incentive for securing the sha256 portion of the network for some time to come, which helps protect other full nodes. In fact, current full nodes will be able to sync indefinitely into the future, even after the transition is complete, as the difficulty will have transitioned back down to diff-1, and all cuckoo cycle blocks will require a follow-up diff-1 sha256 block in order for the cuckoo cycle miners to actually collect their payment -- the trick which makes the soft-fork deployment possible.
Just cross posting some info from the devcoin community as another old and Merged mined coin that was looking to try get on an exchange.
Number of exchanges want money to list your coin, in general avoid these as they can run off with money and not end up listing your coin... or u list and then they delist shortly after.
This was the best exchange we found as a non decentralised excchange
https://freiexchange.com/
They gave us a free listing and are interested in the older coins.
I would recommend putting out a request to them if not done so already.
Fuzzybear
Number of exchanges want money to list your coin, in general avoid these as they can run off with money and not end up listing your coin... or u list and then they delist shortly after.
This was the best exchange we found as a non decentralised excchange
https://freiexchange.com/
They gave us a free listing and are interested in the older coins.
I would recommend putting out a request to them if not done so already.
Fuzzybear
You call on the miners to cooperate, but there are no working pools. No solo or pplns. PPPs pools are nothing, but they are not even there. Make an official pool from the developer. And the miners will stretch, if there is a profit of course. You know in otsutstvie profit nothing will. And the first month profit should be high, which will attract their attention with other coins.
What do you recommend? solo is super easy and an efficient miner will make money now. There is a p2pool merge mining config which includes IXC and is PPLNS. Although not PPLNS for the merge mined coins - only BTC.
You call on the miners to cooperate, but there are no working pools. No solo or pplns. PPPs pools are nothing, but they are not even there. Make an official pool from the developer. And the miners will stretch, if there is a profit of course. You know in otsutstvie profit nothing will. And the first month profit should be high, which will attract their attention with other coins.
Пyлы вooбщe плaниpyютcя?
Picked up another blockchain explorer - https://prohashing.com/explorer/IXcoin/
IXC core wallet syncing fully now and transactions working without any issues.
Listing IXCoin on a DEX/the best DEXes on the market today is awesome idea. Amongst others I think you should add it to BarterDex asap. IXC is one of the oldest coins. It deserves a lot of respect. And a lot of people will enjoy finding out about it soon.
Can you make it happen?Help and support is always welcome. Thanks!!!!
Most of the DEXs are still really low volume - BISQ and BarterDex only trade in the $1000 to few $10000 in volume total. Cryptobridge trades $1M or so but is still in development and charges 1 BTC for a listing. There are a few others but not all really decentralized. We do plan to list on at least a couple of DEXs.
chain size is a few GB - Coinomi supports IXC in a mobile wallet - https://coinomi.com/
Have any of you doods/ladies managed to sync your wallet yet?
Still working on it. Careful with transferring until exchanges all get it together.
How big is complete chain after the sync is up to date?
Also is this on the link bellow the newest wallet or are there any alternatives?
https://github.com/IXCore/IXCoin/releases
Listing IXCoin on a DEX/the best DEXes on the market today is awesome idea. Amongst others I think you should add it to BarterDex asap. IXC is one of the oldest coins. It deserves a lot of respect. And a lot of people will enjoy finding out about it soon.
The price is very cheap compared to BCH, anyway, there are many possibilities for IXC! I commented on twitter and I'll comment again here, why not take IXC to a DEX? CryptoBridge would be quite interesting... It's just an opinion. I bought some IXC and I want to help spreading the word, people need to know one of the best possibilities, I say this because there are countless tokens and projects without senses with really higher market value, despite the similarity with BTC, it has its differences and incredible that it seems, mass adoption would not be impossible! The person who dismembered IXC is Japanese, the Japanese like initially Japanese designs and coins! It would be very easy to insert IXC into this large and important community, lots of Asian coins suddenly came to have value and applications simply because a strong community was built quickly and most importantly, solidly, anyway, there is time and with calm things will go happen to IXC, no currency survives for more than 7 years and if it's not important, solid and rich of possibilities.
Good idea about the Japanese design =)
Jump to: