Yes, that is it.
But in that process, when does that happen?
Does it only happen when the coins are old enough, which is after the 1 week wait time, or when the coins can create a valid PoS block.
Topic: [ANN] Slimcoin : Proof of Burn NEW BLOCK GEN, Mineable by low power computer! - page 52. (Read 284959 times)
July 08, 2014, 07:40:02 AM
July 08, 2014, 07:35:07 AM
So there is no fix for this yet.
I do not understand what you mean by this.
Quote
The second is the POS calculation of interest multiply the quantity of transaction into the wallet because the processes separate in two part the old transaction creating two new transactions and so on every loop (increasing by 2^n the number of transaction by the time). Also if you connect to the precedent point ......
I do not understand what you mean by this.
I have not looked to the SLIM code but in POS code generally the process to calculates interest is:
if the coin is old enough
then take the transaction and calculates the interest
then take the total of the transaction + interest and
then create two new transaction with the half of the total (creating two new transaction)
then delete the old transaction.
This is the general process for POS, I think it is the same for SLIM, isn't it ?
So if SLIM uses the same schema, the number of transaction into wallet have a tendency to increase by 2^n and the performance dropping in parallel.
July 08, 2014, 07:28:52 AM
So there is no fix for this yet.
I do not understand what you mean by this.
Quote
The second is the POS calculation of interest multiply the quantity of transaction into the wallet because the processes separate in two part the old transaction creating two new transactions and so on every loop (increasing by 2^n the number of transaction by the time). Also if you connect to the precedent point ......
I do not understand what you mean by this.
July 08, 2014, 07:17:39 AM
I have decided not to fork since it is said a LOT easier than done.
I still need some information as to the PoS using CPU. Someone said that blackcoin's worked, I could take a look. What would really help would be some information when it happens. Is it durring the creation of the stake, or afterwards? This is not a bug that I programmed, it probably was around when I forked Slimcoin from Peercoin. If someone knows how it was fixed, please tell.
I still need some information as to the PoS using CPU. Someone said that blackcoin's worked, I could take a look. What would really help would be some information when it happens. Is it durring the creation of the stake, or afterwards? This is not a bug that I programmed, it probably was around when I forked Slimcoin from Peercoin. If someone knows how it was fixed, please tell.
In blackcoin the POS process is not implemented the same way. In some other coin I know, the POS problems exist as well an I do not think they are fixed yet.
As I known first, the performance problem come from the multiplicity of the transaction into the wallet. More you have transaction more it takes CPU for POS......
The second is the POS calculation of interest multiply the quantity of transaction into the wallet because the processes separate in two part the old transaction creating two new transactions and so on every loop (increasing by 2^n the number of transaction by the time). Also if you connect to the precedent point ......
I had this problem on another coin: I have let my wallet open for POS for weeks and by the time I had 40000 transactions and my CPU has jump to the ceiling at 100%
July 08, 2014, 07:12:21 AM
I have decided not to fork since it is said a LOT easier than done.
I still need some information as to the PoS using CPU. Someone said that blackcoin's worked, I could take a look. What would really help would be some information when it happens. Is it durring the creation of the stake, or afterwards? This is not a bug that I programmed, it probably was around when I forked Slimcoin from Peercoin. If someone knows how it was fixed, please tell.
I still need some information as to the PoS using CPU. Someone said that blackcoin's worked, I could take a look. What would really help would be some information when it happens. Is it durring the creation of the stake, or afterwards? This is not a bug that I programmed, it probably was around when I forked Slimcoin from Peercoin. If someone knows how it was fixed, please tell.
July 08, 2014, 07:00:28 AM
For me in the POS process 2 major fix to increase the viability of slim (as other POS coin) :
Performance: POS should not take any power from computer or a very low part.
Multiplicity: POS should not increase the number of transactions. After calculation of the interest, the base + interest should be in a new unique transaction and the old one to be deleted. I think if you address that part It could helps a lot for the precedent part.
If you manage to fix these two issues you will be really close to success (at least technically)
Performance: POS should not take any power from computer or a very low part.
Multiplicity: POS should not increase the number of transactions. After calculation of the interest, the base + interest should be in a new unique transaction and the old one to be deleted. I think if you address that part It could helps a lot for the precedent part.
If you manage to fix these two issues you will be really close to success (at least technically)
July 08, 2014, 06:34:22 AM
Yes, but I looked into forking and have established that adding the PoB again will not be easy. Although I am not implementing it from scratch like before, I am afraid I may miss some little thing which could throw the entire client off again.
July 08, 2014, 06:27:00 AM
Another idea that would be better long term wise:
I could take novacoin's source code, and add the Dcrypt and PoB aspects to it.
That is not a small job since there are a lot of differences. It will probably not be a 1 week project.
It is better for the long run of Slimcoin as all the commands and bugs that were in peercoin are added/fixed.
The new client will be made backwards compatible with this blockchain, so you will not lose any coins at all.
I could take novacoin's source code, and add the Dcrypt and PoB aspects to it.
That is not a small job since there are a lot of differences. It will probably not be a 1 week project.
It is better for the long run of Slimcoin as all the commands and bugs that were in peercoin are added/fixed.
The new client will be made backwards compatible with this blockchain, so you will not lose any coins at all.
Great!!! Very good idea!! At least if you want to keep PoS.. if you choose not to keep PoS fork from bitcoin
Why not Blackcoin instead of novacoin, Blackcoin has a more active dev team on the source code?
PS: Please split up dcrypt and PoB into seperate classes and files for that matter, and made them accessable by methods and functions
I do not know for novacoin, but blackcoin POS works nicely it could be an inspiration.
July 08, 2014, 06:13:06 AM
You can hear the crickets here throughout the day.
Dev, release the fucking PoS fix(increase diff by x10) and let the community decide where to go from there!!
Dev, release the fucking PoS fix(increase diff by x10) and let the community decide where to go from there!!
July 08, 2014, 02:52:35 AM
Primer:
- petty
- myopic
- self-defeating
- greedy
- so very, very alone
Stop sending priv messages.
Stop asking for advice on coins and investments.
Stop bragging about your crypto profits (was it 70k you bragged about?)
Stop pimping your little sister, shes not my type.
July 08, 2014, 01:51:19 AM
Oh my dear God, i don't know whether to laugh or cry.
Instead of addressing the problem at hand (PoS cpu utilization and difficulty,PoW and PoB block reward), you have wondered off into theoretical discussion about forking bitcoin , novacoin or blackcoin...
Instead of addressing the problem at hand (PoS cpu utilization and difficulty,PoW and PoB block reward), you have wondered off into theoretical discussion about forking bitcoin , novacoin or blackcoin...
July 08, 2014, 01:24:19 AM
Another idea that would be better long term wise:
I could take novacoin's source code, and add the Dcrypt and PoB aspects to it.
That is not a small job since there are a lot of differences. It will probably not be a 1 week project.
It is better for the long run of Slimcoin as all the commands and bugs that were in peercoin are added/fixed.
The new client will be made backwards compatible with this blockchain, so you will not lose any coins at all.
I could take novacoin's source code, and add the Dcrypt and PoB aspects to it.
That is not a small job since there are a lot of differences. It will probably not be a 1 week project.
It is better for the long run of Slimcoin as all the commands and bugs that were in peercoin are added/fixed.
The new client will be made backwards compatible with this blockchain, so you will not lose any coins at all.
Great!!! Very good idea!! At least if you want to keep PoS.. if you choose not to keep PoS fork from bitcoin
Why not Blackcoin instead of novacoin, Blackcoin has a more active dev team on the source code?
PS: Please split up dcrypt and PoB into seperate classes and files for that matter, and made them accessable by methods and functions
July 08, 2014, 12:51:04 AM
Another idea that would be better long term wise:
I could take novacoin's source code, and add the Dcrypt and PoB aspects to it.
That is not a small job since there are a lot of differences. It will probably not be a 1 week project.
It is better for the long run of Slimcoin as all the commands and bugs that were in peercoin are added/fixed.
The new client will be made backwards compatible with this blockchain, so you will not lose any coins at all.
I could take novacoin's source code, and add the Dcrypt and PoB aspects to it.
That is not a small job since there are a lot of differences. It will probably not be a 1 week project.
It is better for the long run of Slimcoin as all the commands and bugs that were in peercoin are added/fixed.
The new client will be made backwards compatible with this blockchain, so you will not lose any coins at all.
July 07, 2014, 02:50:17 PM
If removing PoS would help the developing process I can see a point in sacking it. But please lets not increase the volume of new coins created or the maximum supply.
Its inevitable.
Removing PoS will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB.)
Increasing PoS diff. will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB).
Their is no way to keep the current daily coin supply the same unless PoW block creation time is increased.
No way, like reducing-PoW-PoB-block-reward no way?
Reward system is a story on its own. PoW reward was designed for a mediocre difficulty. If this coin ever takes off expect a 3-4SLM block reward. That wont work so a fork will be required. PoB suffers from the same flaw, current PoB reward is 17, once we increase PoW generation rate expect more burned coins. We should have 400k burned coins in a week or two which should drop the reward down to 10 or less.
July 07, 2014, 02:48:33 PM
If removing PoS would help the developing process I can see a point in sacking it. But please lets not increase the volume of new coins created or the maximum supply.
Its inevitable.
Removing PoS will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB.)
Increasing PoS diff. will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB).
Their is no way to keep the current daily coin supply the same unless PoW block creation time is increased.
If we turn off the POS the effect is to go back at the first rate (before block 16k) and if I remember it was not bad. Just not to change anything else.
If we turn PoS off we will have 3 times more PoW and 3 times more PoB blocks than in the last 2 weeks (since block 15.1k). I wonder how the exchange would react to an influx of 3x more coins.
Just fine (hope)... but we need something to burn... and the volume of available coin is not that high, 200k after 2 or 3 months - env 1M / year
Just wondering if it is enough to develop a interesting coin for markets and consumers
July 07, 2014, 02:43:52 PM
If removing PoS would help the developing process I can see a point in sacking it. But please lets not increase the volume of new coins created or the maximum supply.
Its inevitable.
Removing PoS will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB.)
Increasing PoS diff. will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB).
Their is no way to keep the current daily coin supply the same unless PoW block creation time is increased.
No way, like reducing-PoW-PoB-block-reward no way?
July 07, 2014, 02:41:06 PM
If removing PoS would help the developing process I can see a point in sacking it. But please lets not increase the volume of new coins created or the maximum supply.
Its inevitable.
Removing PoS will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB.)
Increasing PoS diff. will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB).
Their is no way to keep the current daily coin supply the same unless PoW block creation time is increased.
If we turn off the POS the effect is to go back at the first rate (before block 16k) and if I remember it was not bad. Just not to change anything else.
If we turn PoS off we will have 3 times more PoW and 3 times more PoB blocks than in the last 2 weeks (since block 15.1k). I wonder how the exchange would react to an influx of 3x more coins.
July 07, 2014, 02:39:28 PM
If removing PoS would help the developing process I can see a point in sacking it. But please lets not increase the volume of new coins created or the maximum supply.
Its inevitable.
Removing PoS will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB.)
Increasing PoS diff. will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB).
Their is no way to keep the current daily coin supply the same unless PoW block creation time is increased.
If we turn off the POS the effect is to go back at the first rate (before block 16k) and if I remember it was not so bad. Just not to change anything else.
July 07, 2014, 02:33:31 PM
If removing PoS would help the developing process I can see a point in sacking it. But please lets not increase the volume of new coins created or the maximum supply.
Its inevitable.
Removing PoS will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB.)
Increasing PoS diff. will increase volume of new coins created (both PoW and PoB).
Their is no way to keep the current daily coin supply the same unless PoW block creation time is increased.
July 07, 2014, 02:19:46 PM
If removing PoS would help the developing process I can see a point in sacking it. But please lets not increase the volume of new coins created or the maximum supply.
Jump to: