Topic: [ANN] SpreadCoin | True Decentralization (No Pools) | Testing New Masternodes - page 295. (Read 810083 times)

Bingo bingo bingo. Agree 1000% here with George's
points.
 I would just add though that even if the 'weakest link' DM gets kicked out it's not like 'awe poor him' because theoretically if he can't afford to buy back in it's because price of SPR is going up (which he's still getting the benefit from by holding at least one SPR) due to others adding to their stash.
Again though, this board is trying to predict what happens in what will likely be a chaotic environment to start with, and IMO the only way of knowing if this is a better idea than DRK's static mn's is to try this out live.
JL

But SPR is NOT pool minable, and will do everything to stay this way.

Because nobody can possibly know what a good requirement is, and what a reasonable amount of MN cap is.
We need a reliable mechanism that will help us find out the best price, because we are just humans. We are greedy and we are not infallible.

No human has the intellect to outwit the free market. Therefor we need to implement a free market mechanism to decide for us.

This is decentralization SQUARED!


Also, just so you are happy: if you want to run a secure SPR MN that nobody can challenge, then use this formula:

The amount of SPR deposit in your DM should be BIGGER THAN (All Available SPR) / (Max DM count) .

It is possible to run a secure SPR MN anytime, and the necessary amount will be easily predictable.

If SPR is pool minable,the price wont surpass 10K sato.
@georgem,pool minable VS solo minable,which one will go better with MN (or DM)?

Yes, but only if you are the weakest link, which is your own responsibility NOT TO BE, if you want to run a secure MN place.

Also, it's not like you "lose your MN". You keep your SPR, you keep your server. It's just that your MN is temporarily excluded from the "club".

You can try again with +1 SPR sir, or you can monitor the DM Spread and reenter when the MARKET PRICE for a DM is more in your favour.

We haven't even scratched the surface here of what will be possible and how people will react.


Your inaction (running an MN with an irresponsibly low amount of SPR) is met with the action / initiative of a newcomer who is willing to overbid you (he acts MORE responsible than you).
It is always good for the market and any distributed system when the ACTIVE people (who show initiative and responsibility) are REWARDED, and the INACTIVE people are PUNISHED.
It's as simple as that.


You can "pool together" with everybody regardless what the underlying coin is. But is this a decentralized trustless action? No, in the contrary. Many things can go wrong, and the incentive for bad players to abuse any "pool" like agreement is here.

You will not be taken away by a whale. The amount of allowed SPR MNs will be very high, certainly in the thousands.
We will have something between 1000 and 10k Masternodes in Spreadcoin, that's for sure. Not less and probably not more.
A whale can't possibly own all the coins to kick out all the other MN owners.

Sure, he can probably kick out the MNs in the lower 50-100 ranks, but how is he going to kick out the MN owners in the middle or upper part of the spread?
(As an example let's assume a spread of SPR deposits between 500 SPR and 10k SPR per Masternode: yes the whale can kick the owner of a 500-600 SPR MN out, but not all the SPR in the world are going to kick the guy with the 10k SPR out of the club.
YES, he might kick the 10k SPR guy from rank 950 to rank 550, but he will still be safe! That's the point.)

So why not call it a 500 SPR requirement and a 3000 MN cap and leave it at that? What advantage does dynamic pricing bring?

Again i understand that you can be "taken out", but this will only happen to the opportunist's who seek as many MN's as they can with there current holdings.

So at the start someone will be able to make a masternode with 1spr, but someone can knock him off by having 2spr. Is that bad, no.

What about someone with 500spr in a MN? Well to be kicked from the network (at 3000 total slots in the list) there would need to be around 1.5million spr alocated to MN's.

To have 51% of the MN's you would need around 750,000 spr. Say 7 people had 51% of the coin supply between them (100,000spr each) and created MN's with those coins, its still not a monopoly.

Edit: Reason being the group that owns 51% of the currency can only fund 3000 wallets with 501spr. I my self could knock a few of those off and im small fry.

7 heavily financially invested individuals, yes please.

Yes it favours the rich, because my DRK MNs can't be bought out from underneath me.

With dynamic pricing my SPR MNs could be, repeatedly, by anyone with a few SPR more than me, so I may not even bother to begin with.

At least with DRK you can pool together with others and own a MN share. Nobody is going to go to the trouble though with SPR if it can be taken away by the next passing whale (or government agency) with deeper pockets than you and your partners.

Wait wait, your saying dynamic is for the rich but static is not?

Imagine this

Darkcoins MarketCap = $9,000,000,000. The cost of a DRk MN at this marketcap? around $340,000... Hey, poor people see you can just set a DRK MN up with your $340,000.

But you say SPR's method "favers the rich".

Edit: By the way, I'm pulling the dollar figures out my backside, but are not far off.

That was clearer, thank you, but I still think a dynamic requirement is a bad idea and offers no advantages over a fixed requirement, only disadvantages.

There are 5 people that I know for certain have over 100 Darkcoin Masternodes each. That's a minor issue though because of the n-of-m subsetting that Masternodes operate on.

The real problem with dymanic pricing is that a richer party can always drive out a poorer party. However unlikely you think this might be it shouldn't be a possibility at all as it will inevitably lead to centralisation in the hands of a few. The whole of human history shows us that this is what always happens.

With fixed MN price I will always have my MNs. Nobody can buy them out from under me. With dynamic pricing I could lose them at any time to someone with more resources, and I would have to be constantly spending time and money to recover my position.

I can set up a Masternode as quickly as anyone on Earth, I have it all scripted, it's easy, but it takes time. After a while, after having been repeatedly outbid, I'm just not going to bother any more, I'm going to say fuck it and lose interest, while the richer folk proceed to monopolise the whole show.

Dynamic pricing favours the rich few at the expense of everyone else and consequently diminishes decentralisation.

Add in the fact that with dynamic pricing there is going to be hard limit on the allowed number of MNs and it's going to rapidly result in a centralised monopoly.

>> create an economy that uses SPR for everyday business

Exactly... create a thriving marketplace...

Good point.

That's why Spreadcoin must enable instantX first, so that we can start experimenting with our fast and lean DMs.
(Let the anonymization/darksend stay outside for the moment.)

With even faster transactions (already we have 1 min) we could create an economy that uses SPR for everyday business.... so the DMs owners trying to setup a monopoly will have it EVEN HARDER to get to those coins for cheap, since most of the coins should not be in DMs ANYWAY, but in the hands of normal trading people. (buying/selling things, offering services, etc.)

So over the next years, it really depends how many coins will even be available for DM owners.

Also I so wonder how big the spread will be between the DM with the fewest SPR and the DM with the highest SPR... this will be so interesting to watch.

This is another characteristic of this coin that perfectly fits its own NAME, can you believe it.  

I will keep trying.

MrSpread sets the maximum amount of MN's to 3000.

So there are 3000 available slots on the MN network.

Me and 5 other people own 40% of the current supply 600,000SPR.

We try to gain 50% of the MN network with our 600,000SPR and find out we can only fund 1500 MN's with 400SPR.

I understand your points, but you must understand that to gain a monopoly over this system is to own over 50% of the currency, which is ridicules.

EDIT: 50% would not be enough to have a monopoly btw.

Would love to hear MrSpread's opinions on this matter.

So the next questions to ask are:

1) What is the perfect amount of max DM (Decentralized Masternode)?
2) Do we even need a minimum required amount of SPR to run a DM (Decentralized Masternode)?


My noob answers:

1) I have no idea. I understand that data bloat is a problem, but I suppose if we implement something like Darksend then the bloat will obviously be very high. But what if we forget about DarkSend for the moment, and concentrate on InstantX?
So the sole purpose of decentralized masternodes will first only be to serve as instantx facilitators? So those Decentralized Masternodes will earn SPR for enabling instant transcations, right?
That's enough incentive for many investors to buy SPR and setup masternodes (DM), I am sure about that.

2) I don't think so, once people start outbidding each other to catch a valuable DM, you don't need a minimum price. It's like when in ebay you see valuable things with a starting price of 1$. The seller is not stupid, it's not like he will lose out here. In the contrary, the cheap price encourages MANY MANY bidders to bid, MORE than what an initial HIGH price (like 1000 DRK) would ever be able to attract.

So that's the other difference between SPR and DRK, if we leave the min price out, we will attract so many investors it will blow us out of our socks!

But... Yes exactly! lol

Price Discovery will kick in immediately and drive the price of a DM (Decentralized Masternode) to whatever value makes sense for ALL the market participants.
The people will decide what the price should be.

Also, you can't bid the requirement up to the max, since THERE IS NO MAX!

Also, if the price of a DM gets too high, say it gets to 100k SPR, then you could only create 200 DMs with the whole coin supply, so this doesn't even make sense.

All this tells me that we will have a price discovery that will lead to a perfectly balanced price per DM.

Should the price get too high, then those DMs will all take so many SPR out of the coin supply, that the remaining allowed DMs can be setup cheaper!

So, why should a DM owner put too much SPR into his DM? He will not want to put to many SPR in a DM because this will reduce his profitability.
Because, remember, a DM with 100 SPR earns the same amount like a DM with 100k SPR. But the first one has a lifespan of probably 10 seconds.  

It's time to contact cryptsy and bter to add SPR .
Has anybody contacted them recently?

You have to think with a bad actor (with lots of $) that want (for whatever reason) destroy the coin, or make it unusable...
Interesting discution by the way.

Because a comparatively few people will end up running all of them. You'll have a situation as bad as a handful of people controlling other PoW coins' hashrate via their centralised pools.

I still have no idea what your point is here, sorry.   And Mr Spread was talking about a hard limit on the max number anyway.

Uh huh, miners who mine via pools render the whole value proposition of a 'decentralised' cryptocurrency worthless, but it doesn't stop them doing it.

06:06:27

getmininginfo


06:06:27

{
"blocks" : 214682,
"currentblocksize" : 0,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 53.75955703,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"networkhashps" : 3634614791,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"testnet" : false
}
wow,crazy ~ both diff and net hashrate have created new high ,perfect

How can you centralize 3000 MN's? You are right about my calculations but solidify's my argument. With 5 million spr you can only fund 3000 MN's with 1666 SPR, making your monopoly even weaker than i thought.

If the coin become's centralized it will lose value and become less profitable for the "monopoly" rendering it financially nonviable.