Author

Topic: [ANN] [QRK] Quark | Core 0.10 upgrade - page 130. (Read 1031025 times)

sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Telling people to keep their wallet open won't work, it's not a fundamental solution. That's why satoshi gave them the incentive to mine and in quark there is no incentive to mine. I don't know how merge mining goes can someone explain, so basically people mine the new coin? but what does it have to do with quarks network security though?


You're keeping your wallet open so that you can VOTE and maintain a distributed power, that was Satoshi's initial idea which has later derailed into only tens of miner power houses to hold Bitcoin security, which at the moment they have the incentives to keep it but what'll happen when a few persons from those companies decide to switch the power upside down. Also what will happen when Bitcoin is no longer viable to mine ?

The point is that Quark has managed to take a step forward and keep the original principle alive and honestly Quark network is pretty much secure(aside from using automatic checkpoints and 9 algos which make it difficult to mine outside of CPU) just because it doesn't offer that extra incentive to mine it. Again, most PC now have 4-8 cores, keeping your wallet open with only 1 cpu core so you can vote its essential for Quark network so please stop discouraging others to do so. I'm sure that with the new improved wallet that is being worked quarkers will have an incentive to leave their wallets open and participate in voting whenever they can.

Because people won't mine for free or pay electricity costs and get nothing back in return, that's just how it is. When Bitcoin is mined out miners will get paid by the fees and Bitcoins price is a lot higher then quark. If Quark was above $1 then people would mine for money, nobody would mine Bitcoin if they couldn't earn money. With Bitcoin there is money to be made while mining and there are enough millionaire with ASICS and huge farms mining. But with quark there is no incentive at the moment. Would the block halving have taken years then quark would be along side Litecoin on top of coin market cap. Wy do you think people left, because they couldn't get money anymore from mining and mining is needed to secure the network. Quark can be attacked pretty easily if some with bad intention really would want to do it. So what are the solutions for securing the network, as far as i know is keeping wallets open which won't help, since we already tried and second merge mining. If everyone cares about securing the network shouldn't we all have to agree on merge mining? Unless there is another option.
Quark was build to prevent being controlled by few specialized mining companies so DO keep Quark wallet open so you can vote, 1 CPU core will not consume alot of energy trust me. The incentive is that you'll protect the network and your funds, although Quark has mechanism to prevent that, the network power is still important.

Protecting your funds and making sure you vote will cost you ~$0.1 extra per month so when you're talking about "people won't mine for free" you're actually talking about specialized miners who only mine for profits not for principles. Its the same with corporations lobbyists which financially support whichever political side so they can obtain whatever laws which in turn will more cash to their business. We're not doing this so its good that mining Quark is not making some miners millionaires like its making those few powerhouse Bitcoin miners, Quark is about equality, if you want to vote you can do so because you're CPU vote counts as 1, unlike Bitcoin where the voting system is rigged in favor of the few rich miners. Hopefully with the new, improved Quark wallet that is being worked on at this moment quarkers will keep their wallets open and make their vote count whenever they have their PCs opened.

"If Quark was above $1" Well Im glad where the price is now because more people can buy them when its very low, the distribution will be even larger than it is now. Im hoping it will stay low for enough time so that many people have the chance to purchase a few at a fair price and be part of something really special like Quark.

"Quark can be attacked pretty easily if some with bad intention really would want to do it" Yes and some could also attack Bitcoin if they really wanted to, of course it will involve alot more money and influence but it doable. Quark has the checkpoints system that prevents the network to be really impacted by whatever attack is planned against, but again if enough energy is put into it anything is doable but we'll deal with that when it comes, lets not worry too much. By the time Quark is worth attacking we'll already have a good secured network with quarkers willing to leave their wallets open as foundation ground of the network security, so instead of spreading "mining is not profitable with Quark" please try to open people and spread some positive info like "keep your Quark wallet opened and use your 1 cpu core to vote".
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
Any news about the shaq fu game?

ShaqFu is coming in 2015, no updates yet, i think it's devs are working on the game. I really can't wait for new updates, very excited about it. I would love to tear shit up with quark power gauntlet.
legendary
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1041
Bitcoin is a bit**
Any news about the shaq fu game?
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
Telling people to keep their wallet open won't work, it's not a fundamental solution. That's why satoshi gave them the incentive to mine and in quark there is no incentive to mine. I don't know how merge mining goes can someone explain, so basically people mine the new coin? but what does it have to do with quarks network security though?


You're keeping your wallet open so that you can VOTE and maintain a distributed power, that was Satoshi's initial idea which has later derailed into only tens of miner power houses to hold Bitcoin security, which at the moment they have the incentives to keep it but what'll happen when a few persons from those companies decide to switch the power upside down. Also what will happen when Bitcoin is no longer viable to mine ?

The point is that Quark has managed to take a step forward and keep the original principle alive and honestly Quark network is pretty much secure(aside from using automatic checkpoints and 9 algos which make it difficult to mine outside of CPU) just because it doesn't offer that extra incentive to mine it. Again, most PC now have 4-8 cores, keeping your wallet open with only 1 cpu core so you can vote its essential for Quark network so please stop discouraging others to do so. I'm sure that with the new improved wallet that is being worked quarkers will have an incentive to leave their wallets open and participate in voting whenever they can.

Because people won't mine for free or pay electricity costs and get nothing back in return, that's just how it is. When Bitcoin is mined out miners will get paid by the fees and Bitcoins price is a lot higher then quark. If Quark was above $1 then people would mine for money, nobody would mine Bitcoin if they couldn't earn money. With Bitcoin there is money to be made while mining and there are enough millionaire with ASICS and huge farms mining. But with quark there is no incentive at the moment. Would the block halving have taken years then quark would be along side Litecoin on top of coin market cap. Wy do you think people left, because they couldn't get money anymore from mining and mining is needed to secure the network. Quark can be attacked pretty easily if some with bad intention really would want to do it. So what are the solutions for securing the network, as far as i know is keeping wallets open which won't help, since we already tried and second merge mining. If everyone cares about securing the network shouldn't we all have to agree on merge mining? Unless there is another option.
hero member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 608
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
Quote
Who is dev of your future Quark clone Core ?

What will be characteristics of the new clone?
You are asking the wrong questions. We are discussing here, not deciding and as long as their are no decisions your questions can´t be answered.

This debate is open and if you have arguments, go ahead and let us hear them. Until now I didn´t hear any substantial contribution to the discussion.


I don't like any ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, promotors and devs call for new clones,  ...

I like ideas about quark exchange, about improving security of quarkcoins, real shops, real use value of coins.

I don't know much about technical problems yet, but this idea and previous discussions looks good to me https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7053189



Btw, if i were know what I know now (last few days) about Quarks, i will not hold most of my current QRKs now.



How would you exactly do it? There isn't really an incentive to mine quarks. That's why the merge mining proposal. I don't know which noob came up with the idea to make fast block halving to 1 quark after 6 months, because that's the cause quark didn't do well after 6 moths was over.

Isn't our first priority securing the network? If yes then isn't the only option merge mining? Forget about people keeping their wallet open voluntarily.


I am not sure, but is there real difference between opening wallet and opening miners. Opening wallet is energy efficient, mining is not.

Maybe solution should be using constant difficulty? Fixed chances (according to total number of opened wallets) to reward opening each wallet?



Telling people to keep their wallet open won't work, it's not a fundamental solution. That's why satoshi gave them the incentive to mine and in quark there is no incentive to mine. I don't know how merge mining goes can someone explain, so basically people mine the new coin? but what does it have to do with quarks network security though?

Again if merge mining is the only solution then it should be done, quark with an insecure network won't go big. Quarks network security and popularity should rise before ShaqFu comes out.

Also merge mine (couple % premine) give us enough funds to work on new techs and add value to quark as well as securing the network. I mean quark hasn't much to lose anyway if you look at the price.

By my experience in mining, problem is in the competition who will mine more. Those with better equipments.

Every wallet is also miner (very weak for competition and current algorithms). If every wallet will have the same chance to mine coins (regardless of power of equipment, computer) people should have interest to open wallet and mine coins using only wallets. I think that will cause to make (algorithmically) difficulty constant (not important) and external miner (program) not needed (except miner embedded with wallet).

Also, today mining is performing in the pools mainly. And pool is only 1 wallet (I suppose). So, poole shoud be eliminated. If we spread mining to all opened wallets only, we get big network of wallets-miners where each wallets control every other wallet/transaction.

Ofc, I don't know to implement that now Smiley I think this is simplification of the current algorithms, and not sure about possible problems with such algorithm simplification.

sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Telling people to keep their wallet open won't work, it's not a fundamental solution. That's why satoshi gave them the incentive to mine and in quark there is no incentive to mine. I don't know how merge mining goes can someone explain, so basically people mine the new coin? but what does it have to do with quarks network security though?


You're keeping your wallet open so that you can VOTE and maintain a distributed power, that was Satoshi's initial idea which has later derailed into only tens of miner power houses to hold Bitcoin security, which at the moment they have the incentives to keep it but what'll happen when a few persons from those companies decide to switch the power upside down. Also what will happen when Bitcoin is no longer viable to mine ?

The point is that Quark has managed to take a step forward and keep the original principle alive and honestly Quark network is pretty much secure(aside from using automatic checkpoints and 9 algos which make it difficult to mine outside of CPU) just because it doesn't offer that extra incentive to mine it. Again, most PC now have 4-8 cores, keeping your wallet open with only 1 cpu core so you can vote its essential for Quark network so please stop discouraging others to do so. I'm sure that with the new improved wallet that is being worked quarkers will have an incentive to leave their wallets open and participate in voting whenever they can.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
Quote
Who is dev of your future Quark clone Core ?

What will be characteristics of the new clone?
You are asking the wrong questions. We are discussing here, not deciding and as long as their are no decisions your questions can´t be answered.

This debate is open and if you have arguments, go ahead and let us hear them. Until now I didn´t hear any substantial contribution to the discussion.


I don't like any ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, promotors and devs call for new clones,  ...

I like ideas about quark exchange, about improving security of quarkcoins, real shops, real use value of coins.

I don't know much about technical problems yet, but this idea and previous discussions looks good to me https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7053189



Btw, if i were know what I know now (last few days) about Quarks, i will not hold most of my current QRKs now.



How would you exactly do it? There isn't really an incentive to mine quarks. That's why the merge mining proposal. I don't know which noob came up with the idea to make fast block halving to 1 quark after 6 months, because that's the cause quark didn't do well after 6 moths was over.

Isn't our first priority securing the network? If yes then isn't the only option merge mining? Forget about people keeping their wallet open voluntarily.


I am not sure, but is there real difference between opening wallet and opening miners. Opening wallet is energy efficient, mining is not.

Maybe solution should be using constant difficulty? Fixed chances (according to total number of opened wallets) to reward opening each wallet?



Telling people to keep their wallet open won't work, it's not a fundamental solution. That's why satoshi gave them the incentive to mine and in quark there is no incentive to mine. I don't know how merge mining goes can someone explain, so basically people mine the new coin? but what does it have to do with quarks network security though?

Again if merge mining is the only solution then it should be done, quark with an insecure network won't go big. Quarks network security and popularity should rise before ShaqFu comes out.

Also merge mine (couple % premine) give us enough funds to work on new techs and add value to quark as well as securing the network. I mean quark hasn't much to lose anyway if you look at the price.
hero member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 608
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
Quote
Who is dev of your future Quark clone Core ?

What will be characteristics of the new clone?
You are asking the wrong questions. We are discussing here, not deciding and as long as their are no decisions your questions can´t be answered.

This debate is open and if you have arguments, go ahead and let us hear them. Until now I didn´t hear any substantial contribution to the discussion.


I don't like any ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, promotors and devs call for new clones,  ...

I like ideas about quark exchange, about improving security of quarkcoins, real shops, real use value of coins.

I don't know much about technical problems yet, but this idea and previous discussions looks good to me https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7053189


Btw, if i were know what I know now (last few days) about Quarks, i will not hold most of my current QRKs now.



How would you exactly do it? There isn't really an incentive to mine quarks. That's why the merge mining proposal. I don't know which noob came up with the idea to make fast block halving to 1 quark after 6 months, because that's the cause quark didn't do well after 6 moths was over.

Isn't our first priority securing the network? If yes then isn't the only option merge mining? Forget about people keeping their wallet open voluntarily.


I am not sure, but is there real difference between opening wallet and opening miners. Opening wallet is energy efficient, mining is not.

Maybe solution should be using constant difficulty? Fixed chances (according to total number of opened wallets and time) to reward opening each wallet?

And for preventing simulations of opening many wallets, it should think about opening 1 wallet  per computer, network card?

hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
Quote
Who is dev of your future Quark clone Core ?

What will be characteristics of the new clone?
You are asking the wrong questions. We are discussing here, not deciding and as long as their are no decisions your questions can´t be answered.

This debate is open and if you have arguments, go ahead and let us hear them. Until now I didn´t hear any substantial contribution to the discussion.


I don't like any ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, promotors and devs call for new clones,  ...

I like ideas about quark exchange, about improving security of quarkcoins, real shops, real use value of coins.

I don't know much about technical problems yet, but this idea and previous discussions looks good to me https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7053189



Btw, if i were know what I know now (last few days) about Quarks, i will not hold most of my current QRKs now.



How would you exactly do it? There isn't really an incentive to mine quarks. That's why the merge mining proposal. I don't know which noob came up with the idea to make fast block halving to 1 quark after 6 months, because that's the cause quark didn't do well after 6 moths was over.

Isn't our first priority securing the network? If yes then isn't the only option merge mining? Forget about people keeping their wallet open voluntarily.
hero member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 608
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
Quote
Who is dev of your future Quark clone Core ?

What will be characteristics of the new clone?
You are asking the wrong questions. We are discussing here, not deciding and as long as their are no decisions your questions can´t be answered.

This debate is open and if you have arguments, go ahead and let us hear them. Until now I didn´t hear any substantial contribution to the discussion.


I don't like any ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, promotors and devs call for new clones,  ...

I like ideas about quark exchange, about improving security of quarkcoins, real shops, real use value of coins.

I don't know much about technical problems yet, but this idea and previous discussions looks good to me https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7053189



Btw, if i were know what I know now (last few days) about Quarks, i will not hold most of my current QRKs now.

Another btw, it is better to not show number of visitors who visited http://quarkcoin.orgfree.com/. At least nice number of countries, not number of visitors.


sr. member
Activity: 396
Merit: 250
Quote
Who is dev of your future Quark clone Core ?

What will be characteristics of the new clone?
You are asking the wrong questions. We are discussing here, not deciding and as long as their are no decisions your questions can´t be answered.

This debate is open and if you have arguments, go ahead and let us hear them. Until now I didn´t hear any substantial contribution to the discussion.
hero member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 608
Vave.com - Crypto Casino

Keep brainstorming ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, inviting devs for new clones,  ... Grin

Quarks from bull to shit.  Grin It is market.  Grin  From shit it has chance to grow again. Smiley

Continue and price will be good to buy soon.


Sorry Smiley



Don´t know what your agenda is, you seem repeating points (and smilieys) you already made.


Who is dev of your future Quark clone Core ?

What will be characteristics of the new clone?



Brw, market reacted on the new brainstorming ideas.  Grin

sr. member
Activity: 396
Merit: 250

Keep brainstorming ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, inviting devs for new clones,  ... Grin

Quarks from bull to shit.  Grin It is market.  Grin  From shit it has chance to grow again. Smiley

Continue and price will be good to buy soon.


Sorry Smiley



Don´t know what your agenda is, you seem repeating points (and smilieys) you already made.
sr. member
Activity: 396
Merit: 250
I´ll answer some question that reached me via mail by Quarkcheck (he wrote:I don't mind to post this as well to the bitcointalk thread, if you prefer to answer them publicly)

Quote
Quote
2.The developer create a Quark based coin (working title: core)
What you mean by Quark based coin? A new coin with Quark algo?

Yes, Quark algo but it can have other features.

Quote
Quote
3.We create a Quark only IPO and sell 1 Core = 1 Quark
Do you mean without miner mining? Only IPO with Quark purchases?

I thought about a PoS+PoW system that works on an inflation rate comparable to Quark (~0.5-1% but steady)

You may know this whitepaper, if not: check it out. I really liked it, also because it allows for voting on interest rate by the community. Maybe we could even ask the dev. He has his mail address posted on the thread. Maybe bit too early, but I think we can bookmark him and come back to him in case we are going for something like this.

Quote
Quote
4.10% "community premine"
You mean from the IPO to get 10%?

Well yes, premine (or mint?) because the coins that are distributed need to exist in advance. 10% are discounted and given to the community (administered by a solid Foundation).

Quote
Quote
5. Another 40% is stored via smart contract and paid out to shareholders for the next 36 months.
Do you mean that the 40% of IPO to only pay out the shareholders for the next 36 months?
So far I see 10% + 40% = 50%.... and the renaming 50% for miners??

2 example scenarios:

1. You pay 10.000 QRK
>> 9.000 COR go to you
>> 1.000 COR go to the Foundation

1. You pay 10.000 QRK
>> 5.000 COR go to you
>> 1.000 COR go to the Foundation
>> 4.000 COR are stored and leased back to you monthly in (e.g.) 36 months (no additional profit, just as an insurrance for the launch and development phase that people stay supportive [even if they don´t do anything] and not dump their coins [easily]) I haven´t seen this implemented - only models where developers promised rewards for leaving coins on the wallet.
hero member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 608
Vave.com - Crypto Casino

Keep brainstorming ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, merged mining with new clones, inviting devs for new clones,  ... Grin

Quarks from bull to shit.  Grin It is market.  Grin  From shit it has chance to grow again. Smiley

Continue and price will be good to buy soon.


Sorry Smiley

sr. member
Activity: 396
Merit: 250
@cryptohunter


the problem is here, that we have not acted or reacted to what the market wants for 6 months and the price is falling off of a cliff. Time is a real concern here.

I agree that too much time has passed undone (especially since some people simply talked problems away) but this doesn´t change that we need to weigh up advantages and disadvantages in the present and should at no cost rush into any solution in my opinion.

Quote
2. half the qrk holders will not use their qrk to buy coins with POS and anon features. They seem to highly object to them being added to qrk anyway.

On what base do you make this statement?

Quote
3. we could release this coin in batches and control the amount of QRKs that can be used to pay for the new coin.

4. the foundation will control the qrk that was used to buy the new coin they will not dump it on the market like those leaving qrk for other coins.

Even if the foundation would control the Quarks and hold them back from market people will ask themselves if they should rather stick with quark or the other coin and why the hell there is a second coin. From the perspective of an observer this is confusing and as long as there is no obvious good reason why there are two coins it doesn´t sound sustainable to me.

Quote
Are you part of the QRK foundation already?

I received a foundational mail address because I was contacting possible external partners, so I would consider myself to be associated to the foundation. I always rejected to become part of the foundation as long as it has no democratic and transparent structure. However, I am working closely with the people and I can tell you that everyone is working hard to find a solution. I think the problem that makes it take so long is a lack of institutionalization. The foundation needs a real structure and things will become more effective and less time consuming. However, this is tough work and all of us have normal life, work & freetime. This is why I am pushing for public discussions. We should do this together and exchange opinions publicly.

@reRaise

I don´t know to whom DI refers when he says "we". I know he had his own plans - if the Foundation would have agreed on something like this I would know and it is no t the case.
hero member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 608
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
Now we are throwing up solutions, then another one from my side about the merged mining coin.

I read some of the proposals and in my opinion we make it all too complicated...I should have studied maths and economics if I want to follow just a bit of it. How will you explain the final idea? And why would we think the final idea is good for Quark?

Why not start just a simple  coin for fun. Make a game / social site (something like gamepoint or something) where the community comes together, and everybody can earn some coins just by mining. It will have only have virtual value so nobody cares if you loose 10000s of that coin. You can easily mine it back. Nobody get rich with that coin and it helps to get some hashrate. People will not mine it for 100% most probably, but maybe 5-10%? Every little bits help. The game site should be easy accessible via the Quark wallet (extra hashrate for Quark). Also in the chat you can throw each other some coins when he/she has been helpful in the IRC. It will be just a friendly coin, worthless but fun and no competitor for Quark.

The reason why people are not playing games with Quark (at quark universe) for example is that they consider Quark as real money.

Play games with your fellow quarkers and help the hashrate.

Quark wants to be a game coin or not?


Simple coins for fun?   There are more than 600  Grin

Repeat once again? What doge did at its 1st month?


Doge market at all of the main exchanges. Doge made standard what successful coin should do.


Now I read ideas about cloning, raising number of coins, PoS, and other nonsenses for me.


I almost agree with market is perfect in reflecting all available informations.  Grin

And devs should retain monopoly on creating and compiling QuarkCoin Wallet with all newest available libraries.  Grin


Fantastic coins Smiley

hero member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 608
Vave.com - Crypto Casino
"bottom is at 21 sat"

Yep, I still have a couple qrk i bought for 21 satoshi each...

I have mined by electrical costs. I don't know if it is lower. Smiley

hero member
Activity: 487
Merit: 500
Now we are throwing up solutions, then another one from my side about the merged mining coin.

I read some of the proposals and in my opinion we make it all too complicated...I should have studied maths and economics if I want to follow just a bit of it. How will you explain the final idea? And why would we think the final idea is good for Quark?

Why not start just a simple  coin for fun. Make a game / social site (something like gamepoint or something) where the community comes together, and everybody can earn some coins just by mining. It will have only have virtual value so nobody cares if you loose 10000s of that coin. You can easily mine it back. Nobody get rich with that coin and it helps to get some hashrate. People will not mine it for 100% most probably, but maybe 5-10%? Every little bits help. The game site should be easy accessible via the Quark wallet (extra hashrate for Quark). Also in the chat you can throw each other some coins when he/she has been helpful in the IRC. It will be just a friendly coin, worthless but fun and no competitor for Quark.

The reason why people are not playing games with Quark (at quark universe) for example is that they consider Quark as real money.

Play games with your fellow quarkers and help the hashrate.

Quark wants to be a game coin or not?
hero member
Activity: 750
Merit: 500
Someone change the OP, the quark mobile wallet is not in Beta anymore. BTW quarkbar copied quarks mobile app and even the splash screen lol

Hrm the Quark wallet looks oddly similar to the bitcoin wallet which in turn looks oddly similar to the doge wallet and dgb wallet and every other wallet that uses Andreas Schildbachs code as their base.
Jump to: