I know, but how am I gonna tell my mother-in-law (for example..) that she first has to register on mintpal.com, generate a bitcoin deposit address, then register on kraken or bitonic, then buy bitcoins, then send them to mintpal, then exchange then for mintcoins and then install the mintpal wallet and finally withdraw them again to her wallet? That's not simple enough..
With LiteBit she can just skip all the trouble, download the wallet (which is troublesome enough) and simply buy mintcoins w/o having the need of more registration and exchanging.
It should be plain and simple. And that goes with a price. In this case about 18.000 mints.
20 euro / 459 (kraken) = 0,04357298 btc
0,04357298 btc / 0,00000019 current mint price = 229331 mints.
Speaking of the wallet; it's about time it would get an installer and autorun!
[/quote]
I agree
Topic: [ANN] [MINT] Mintcoin (POS / 5%) [NO ICO] [Fair distro, community maintained] - page 605. (Read 1369810 times)
March 15, 2014, 07:06:47 AM
March 15, 2014, 06:25:45 AM
Added here
http://www.mintcointalk.com/index.php?topic=263.msg773#msg773
http://www.mintcointalk.com/index.php?topic=263.msg773#msg773
Alright, that's what I suspected all along.
And that really speaks for
* better documentation please
* a help page inside the wallet explaining it properly
* 'coin control' features - so that I can choose which coin pile to touch
* a warning: "when you send coins, also the change will be reset"
* a ReserveForMinting command and button which actively puts some coin aside which cannot be spent / touched unless I override a warning
* lowering the 20 days (so far there was no real explanation why 20 days)
I could imagine the problem exists not only in MINT, but also in BC, HBN, ... but don't the 20 days make it really bad in case of MINT?
And that really speaks for
* better documentation please
* a help page inside the wallet explaining it properly
* 'coin control' features - so that I can choose which coin pile to touch
* a warning: "when you send coins, also the change will be reset"
* a ReserveForMinting command and button which actively puts some coin aside which cannot be spent / touched unless I override a warning
* lowering the 20 days (so far there was no real explanation why 20 days)
I could imagine the problem exists not only in MINT, but also in BC, HBN, ... but don't the 20 days make it really bad in case of MINT?
March 15, 2014, 06:06:32 AM
Well, multipool has its pros and cons.
Blackcoin will get more spread with multipool. And thats of course a pro.
Cons?
With multipool Blackcoin is now heavily tied to all altcoins. Its value will not rise in long term view.
Why? Simply because miners who get paid in blackcoin will sell their blackcoin later. Its a dead circle until blackcoin gets more independent with added merchants and services.
Yea you are right...Blackcoin will get more spread with multipool. And thats of course a pro.
Cons?
With multipool Blackcoin is now heavily tied to all altcoins. Its value will not rise in long term view.
Why? Simply because miners who get paid in blackcoin will sell their blackcoin later. Its a dead circle until blackcoin gets more independent with added merchants and services.
Maybe have it like an "event". Just open for a short period.
March 15, 2014, 06:04:00 AM
What about a multipool with a 1%-2% donation to a foundation that support green projects?
no thanks... March 15, 2014, 05:57:30 AM
Well, multipool has its pros and cons.
Blackcoin will get more spread with multipool. And thats of course a pro.
Cons?
With multipool Blackcoin is now heavily tied to all altcoins. Its value will not rise in long term view.
Why? Simply because miners who get paid in blackcoin will sell their blackcoin later. Its a dead circle until blackcoin gets more independent with added merchants and services.
Blackcoin will get more spread with multipool. And thats of course a pro.
Cons?
With multipool Blackcoin is now heavily tied to all altcoins. Its value will not rise in long term view.
Why? Simply because miners who get paid in blackcoin will sell their blackcoin later. Its a dead circle until blackcoin gets more independent with added merchants and services.
March 15, 2014, 05:57:24 AM
What about a multipool with a 1%-2% donation to a foundation that support green projects?
not bad.
March 15, 2014, 05:46:47 AM
What about a multipool with a 1%-2% donation to a foundation that support green projects?
March 15, 2014, 05:43:26 AM
maybe a quarter of the existing coins will actually do any substantial minting. When the minting is at 5% and only 25% or so of existing coins are actully doing any substantial minting
Alright, that's what I suspected all along.
And that really speaks for
* better documentation please
* a help page inside the wallet explaining it properly
* 'coin control' features - so that I can choose which coin pile to touch
* a warning: "when you send coins, also the change will be reset"
* a ReserveForMinting command and button which actively puts some coin aside which cannot be spent / touched unless I override a warning
* lowering the 20 days (so far there was no real explanation why 20 days)
I could imagine the problem exists not only in MINT, but also in BC, HBN, ... but don't the 20 days make it really bad in case of MINT?
Only the coins you send are reset, the other, untouched coins are not affected.
I guess that is half true. Please do some reading on "change adddresses".As far as I understand it ... if I send 1 MINT out of an address with 1000 MINT, there will be two recipient addresses, one receiving 1 MINT, one receiving 999 MINT. Bam. Coin age reset for 1+999=1000 MINT.
I guess there is a way to copy the coin age for the change 999 MINT - but it needs to be implemented.
But, as i understand it, when you send coins they are randomly picked from your holdings so it could be your oldest coins that are sent.
That would be plain stupid for a PoS coin with coin age dependent minting.Could please the programmer come up with definite answers?
Thanks.
What about PoS and change addresses?
I hope you took care of that. I do not want to have my 20 days reset whenever I move a small sum out of my wallet.
Change: If I send, there are usually two target addresses involved. Only one of the two amounts is actually moved out of the wallet to the recipient, the other one is going straight back, into a change address in my wallet. So that 2nd sum has left the wallet yes, but only to end up in it again, within seconds. Imagine there is a 1 mio input from which I spend a 7 MINT output - that results in a second 999,993 MINT output, to my change address, so it ends up back in my wallet.
Still, I fear, the 20 days period is reset for both amounts, right?
As your wallet does not yet support "coin control", I cannot even know which of my existing coin piles are touched. With one tx of 10 MINT, I might destroy 20 days of PoS of 20 billion coins. Am I wrong? If not:
Please hardcode that if outgoing and incoming into change addresses happens, the coin age is preserved. Or it that is not consistent, then:
I suggest, that you (a) lower the 20 days, (b) implement coin control.
I hope you took care of that. I do not want to have my 20 days reset whenever I move a small sum out of my wallet.
Change: If I send, there are usually two target addresses involved. Only one of the two amounts is actually moved out of the wallet to the recipient, the other one is going straight back, into a change address in my wallet. So that 2nd sum has left the wallet yes, but only to end up in it again, within seconds. Imagine there is a 1 mio input from which I spend a 7 MINT output - that results in a second 999,993 MINT output, to my change address, so it ends up back in my wallet.
Still, I fear, the 20 days period is reset for both amounts, right?
As your wallet does not yet support "coin control", I cannot even know which of my existing coin piles are touched. With one tx of 10 MINT, I might destroy 20 days of PoS of 20 billion coins. Am I wrong? If not:
Please hardcode that if outgoing and incoming into change addresses happens, the coin age is preserved. Or it that is not consistent, then:
I suggest, that you (a) lower the 20 days, (b) implement coin control.
Implement coin control. Lowering the 20 days is not a good idea as it is an important aspect of the coin design, security/sustainability.
So basically you want people to hord their mint coins, and not touch them for at least 20 days, to then collect some interest?
You want me to use another currency for my daily usage, and mint just for storing wealth?
I could only trust that concept, if the price of mint-to-other-currencies were not falling too much. But why wouldn't it fall? Apart from storing wealth, mint seems useless - because as soon as I move some of my coins, the 20 days are reset?
I don't see how all that could be a revolutionary new currency.
I want to be able to send and receive money, buy pizza, exchange for other currencies - and while I am not using my money, I want to collect interest for it - immediately- , and in PoS, use it for helping to secure the network.
minting is exactly analogous to mining
do you find this to be a problem with currency that is mined via PoW? If not then why is it a problem when coins are minted via PoS?
It's an advancement because it eliminates a lot of the energy waste associated with PoW mining
I don't find it a problem at all. If PoS works, and is safe, and is properly implemented, it can advance the whole scene.
But it needs to be understood, too. And properly implemented.
My questions are motivated by my wish to understand mint's concept.
From your answer, I deduct, that it is really the case, what I suspected in my posting up there.
So please make that clear, preferably directly in the wallet:
DO NOT TOUCH YOUR MINT COINS!
Otherwise the 20 days are reset; and in the worst case, for ALL of your million coins, even if you only send out 1 MINT.
But, as i understand it, when you send coins they are randomly picked from your holdings so it could be your oldest coins that are sent.
March 15, 2014, 05:17:05 AM
maybe a quarter of the existing coins will actually do any substantial minting. When the minting is at 5% and only 25% or so of existing coins are actully doing any substantial minting
Alright, that's what I suspected all along.
And that really speaks for
* better documentation please
* a help page inside the wallet explaining it properly
* 'coin control' features - so that I can choose which coin pile to touch
* a warning: "when you send coins, also the change will be reset"
* a ReserveForMinting command and button which actively puts some coin aside which cannot be spent / touched unless I override a warning
* lowering the 20 days (so far there was no real explanation why 20 days)
I could imagine the problem exists not only in MINT, but also in BC, HBN, ... but don't the 20 days make it really bad in case of MINT?
Only the coins you send are reset, the other, untouched coins are not affected.
I guess that is half true. Please do some reading on "change adddresses".As far as I understand it ... if I send 1 MINT out of an address with 1000 MINT, there will be two recipient addresses, one receiving 1 MINT, one receiving 999 MINT. Bam. Coin age reset for 1+999=1000 MINT.
I guess there is a way to copy the coin age for the change 999 MINT - but it needs to be implemented.
But, as i understand it, when you send coins they are randomly picked from your holdings so it could be your oldest coins that are sent.
That would be plain stupid for a PoS coin with coin age dependent minting.Could please the programmer come up with definite answers?
Thanks.
What about PoS and change addresses?
I hope you took care of that. I do not want to have my 20 days reset whenever I move a small sum out of my wallet.
Change: If I send, there are usually two target addresses involved. Only one of the two amounts is actually moved out of the wallet to the recipient, the other one is going straight back, into a change address in my wallet. So that 2nd sum has left the wallet yes, but only to end up in it again, within seconds. Imagine there is a 1 mio input from which I spend a 7 MINT output - that results in a second 999,993 MINT output, to my change address, so it ends up back in my wallet.
Still, I fear, the 20 days period is reset for both amounts, right?
As your wallet does not yet support "coin control", I cannot even know which of my existing coin piles are touched. With one tx of 10 MINT, I might destroy 20 days of PoS of 20 billion coins. Am I wrong? If not:
Please hardcode that if outgoing and incoming into change addresses happens, the coin age is preserved. Or it that is not consistent, then:
I suggest, that you (a) lower the 20 days, (b) implement coin control.
I hope you took care of that. I do not want to have my 20 days reset whenever I move a small sum out of my wallet.
Change: If I send, there are usually two target addresses involved. Only one of the two amounts is actually moved out of the wallet to the recipient, the other one is going straight back, into a change address in my wallet. So that 2nd sum has left the wallet yes, but only to end up in it again, within seconds. Imagine there is a 1 mio input from which I spend a 7 MINT output - that results in a second 999,993 MINT output, to my change address, so it ends up back in my wallet.
Still, I fear, the 20 days period is reset for both amounts, right?
As your wallet does not yet support "coin control", I cannot even know which of my existing coin piles are touched. With one tx of 10 MINT, I might destroy 20 days of PoS of 20 billion coins. Am I wrong? If not:
Please hardcode that if outgoing and incoming into change addresses happens, the coin age is preserved. Or it that is not consistent, then:
I suggest, that you (a) lower the 20 days, (b) implement coin control.
Implement coin control. Lowering the 20 days is not a good idea as it is an important aspect of the coin design, security/sustainability.
So basically you want people to hord their mint coins, and not touch them for at least 20 days, to then collect some interest?
You want me to use another currency for my daily usage, and mint just for storing wealth?
I could only trust that concept, if the price of mint-to-other-currencies were not falling too much. But why wouldn't it fall? Apart from storing wealth, mint seems useless - because as soon as I move some of my coins, the 20 days are reset?
I don't see how all that could be a revolutionary new currency.
I want to be able to send and receive money, buy pizza, exchange for other currencies - and while I am not using my money, I want to collect interest for it - immediately- , and in PoS, use it for helping to secure the network.
minting is exactly analogous to mining
do you find this to be a problem with currency that is mined via PoW? If not then why is it a problem when coins are minted via PoS?
It's an advancement because it eliminates a lot of the energy waste associated with PoW mining
I don't find it a problem at all. If PoS works, and is safe, and is properly implemented, it can advance the whole scene.
But it needs to be understood, too. And properly implemented.
My questions are motivated by my wish to understand mint's concept.
From your answer, I deduct, that it is really the case, what I suspected in my posting up there.
So please make that clear, preferably directly in the wallet:
DO NOT TOUCH YOUR MINT COINS!
Otherwise the 20 days are reset; and in the worst case, for ALL of your million coins, even if you only send out 1 MINT.
But, as i understand it, when you send coins they are randomly picked from your holdings so it could be your oldest coins that are sent.
March 15, 2014, 04:54:16 AM
Any luck finding the link from the developer asking for 5 million Mint?
??
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5448984??Response:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5449312
March 15, 2014, 04:49:47 AM
I think that we should make a multipool since thats what MINT is going to need after all.
i am not so sure about that multipool. first of all mintcoin stands for low energy usage. so if we now jump on that multipool stuff it is against the vision of mintcoin. besides that only heavy miner will get more mintcoins. so the price could go up, but just because of miner which are involved int the cryptoworld anyway...
This logic is flawed. You cant stop miners from stripping another coin and converting it to mint on his own. The low energy comes from the fact that further NEW coins need to be made via the minting process.
+1 for the multipool idea. Bitcoin, litecoin and now blackcoin do this. The advantage of POS with multipool means that people will be encouraged to both strip mine to create demand for the product but also save to produce coins to put into that market. I think the results can only be good.
March 15, 2014, 04:49:28 AM
The coin would also be more distrubited with a multipool.
March 15, 2014, 04:47:28 AM
I think that we should make a multipool since thats what MINT is going to need after all.
i am not so sure about that multipool. first of all mintcoin stands for low energy usage. so if we now jump on that multipool stuff it is against the vision of mintcoin. besides that only heavy miner will get more mintcoins. so the price could go up, but just because of miner which are involved int the cryptoworld anyway...
but multipool is goodway for ad and pump volume. Many people have a chance to know about mintcoin.
March 15, 2014, 04:38:48 AM
I think that we should make a multipool since thats what MINT is going to need after all.
i am not so sure about that multipool. first of all mintcoin stands for low energy usage. so if we now jump on that multipool stuff it is against the vision of mintcoin. besides that only heavy miner will get more mintcoins. so the price could go up, but just because of miner which are involved int the cryptoworld anyway...
March 15, 2014, 04:25:16 AM
I think that we should make a multipool since thats what MINT is going to need after all.
How old are you and how many MINT do you have again?
fuck off please, this thread is for serious people only.
hahaha dear oh dear
March 15, 2014, 04:24:03 AM
I think that we should make a multipool since thats what MINT is going to need after all.
How old are you and how many MINT do you have again?
fuck off please, this thread is for serious people only.
March 15, 2014, 04:22:25 AM
I think that we should make a multipool since thats what MINT is going to need after all.
How old are you and how many MINT do you have again?
March 15, 2014, 04:15:51 AM
I think that we should make a multipool since thats what MINT is going to need after all.
March 15, 2014, 04:13:07 AM
Just bought 20 euro's of Mint on LiteBit.eu.
Now let's hope I get 212.000 mints instead of 212 haha
Now let's hope I get 212.000 mints instead of 212 haha
It would be cheaper for you to buy your mint @ mintpal since the prices are way cheaper there.
I know, but how am I gonna tell my mother-in-law (for example..) that she first has to register on mintpal.com, generate a bitcoin deposit address, then register on kraken or bitonic, then buy bitcoins, then send them to mintpal, then exchange then for mintcoins and then install the mintpal wallet and finally withdraw them again to her wallet? That's not simple enough..
With LiteBit she can just skip all the trouble, download the wallet (which is troublesome enough) and simply buy mintcoins w/o having the need of more registration and exchanging.
It should be plain and simple. And that goes with a price. In this case about 18.000 mints.
20 euro / 459 (kraken) = 0,04357298 btc
0,04357298 btc / 0,00000019 current mint price = 229331 mints.
Speaking of the wallet; it's about time it would get an installer and autorun!
March 15, 2014, 03:47:33 AM
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/cryptocurrency-the-alt-ernative-beginners-reference-book-483187
show some support for our coin, this could be important since this could lead to much news about our coin.
show some support for our coin, this could be important since this could lead to much news about our coin.
Jump to: