Topic: [ANN] [VIA] ★ Viacoin ★ ~ the future of digital currency ~ ★ - page 132. (Read 825875 times)

nah, scrypt miners and cloud mining is so expensive that everybody has to sell allready their mined coins except total hardcore via fans.

Advantage of merged mining: more miners will know and mine viacoin

Disadvantage: higher sell pressure.

Which scrypt coins did the transition to merged mining except of Doge so far? btw, doge had the same discussions on dependence and came in the end to the same conclusion.

I must again object to claims that merged mining makes a coin "less independent". All you are doing is reusing hash power from a parent coin for any number of child coins. I'm not even sure what is meant by "loss of independence". I have explained the technical advantages, disadvantages and risk factors in my previous posts. Proof of work is simply a method of securing the coin and reaching consensus, but the "merged" in merged mining may be misleading because there is no merging of anything, simply a clever reused of hash power to solve the work of any number of child coins (potentially hundreds of different altcoins).

I'm not even sure merged mining creates more sell pressure than normal mining given most miners have to sell to pay their costs, and multipools autosell coins and payout in BTC and they make up a significant portion of hash power already, so not much would change IMO. All the evidence I have seen most miners sell whatever they are mining and do not speculate the market. It doesnt make economic sense for them to speculate given the costs of running and maintaining mining operations. Those who want to speculate would more easily buy coins on the open market. Miners secure the network and get paid.

we are allready one of the most profitable coins on the multipools.

Merged mining makes coins less independent. If people choose to issue their tokens in ClearingHouse because of Litecoin/Doge' hash power, then ClearingHouse' success is somewhat more dependant on Litecoin/Doge' success. 

Just to be clear I'm not saying merged mining is bad. If it's necessary for security reasons then I'm all for it.

With merged mining enabled there will be more viacoins on the open market because more viacoins will be mined by people who don't want them.

So finally it will be merged mining with just LiteCoin only?

I am also for merged mining. VIA has a cost and blocktime advantage over BTC/XCP but also a security disadvantage. Let's try and close that gap and give entrepreneurs one less reason to hesitate deploying with VIA/XCH!

If the above statement is TRUE, and if BTCdrak is favourite of the idea to merge-mine Viacoin, then i'm also in favour of it (without going into the inner mathematics of the concept).

May the force be with it!

I know it is quite a difficult concept for people to get but merged mining does not make a child coin more or less independent. All that is happening is one us effectively reusing the same hash power with some clever mathematics. Scrypt merge mining can be done against any coin, so you can merge mine LTC and VIA or DOGE and VIA, in fact, you can merge mine as many coins as you want together choosing one as the parent. Other than that, there is no particular connection. It simply requires pools to configure full nodes for all coins concerned, then configure the mining pool to merge mine them.

I think so too.

imho, this post gives an interesting point of view on merged mining:

http://blog.melotic.com/2014/09/30/the-scrypt-alliance/

I do not have enough understanding as to the impact of merged mining on a coin.
I can say though that my jut feeling nd limited view is that we are offered/offering the following tradeoff -
1) we help Litecoin hedge its #1 alt position
2) in exchange, we get 'some' security against DDOS

However, i'm into Viacoin because I believe it can overtake in significance and impact most other alts [certainly litecoin], and help disrupt the market in a good way. If merged mining is going to give us 'some' security' but make Viacoin less independent, or less flexible - then i'd vote against merged mining.
If Viacoin has a network hashrate problem, I'm sure some prominent bagholders can each take some rigs and help secure the network, as has already been done by a few on this forum.

From BTCdrak's last post, I understand that he is in favour of merged mining... and i'd love to hear his rational as him and PT are the most authorative people on the matter and their view counts imho more than a 100 community members like me that have limited understanding of the topic.
As I said, i'm still trying to understand the concept.

This coin have a nice distribution, I will buy some. 

Fair enough.

Thanks erik,

Its true that especially with via, alot of important stuff is done in the background. This is really a special flavour here. Look at bitspark coin voting. Who spend 0.8 btc for it (more than all other coins there)? I also like this.

However, the discussion on such an important change on the algo must be of interest for all holders or not? I would expect that some come here to agree, disagree  or discuss it. A vibrant community is also important for adoption. Merchants and other services look at this measure during their considerations if to accept via or not. I will keep on motivating  people to express themselves and to cooperative in some collective actions. Just leave some comments here every now and then. Use our reddit. Thats not too much of an effort.

We kicked out price talk from the thread a long time ago because of price trolls because it just goes on and on and drowns out the rest. Dozens of people complained.
Check the moderation rules at post #2.

Why do you delete my posts ?
I cannot say that I lost so much money on this coin ?!
Why are you afraid of ?
I'm a fan of this coin but I can say what I want about my money !!!

I can certainly appreciate the sentiment, but a lot of people get involved in different ways. You have no idea if some of those holders are building businesses based on via. As someone who is doing that now, I can tell you it will take a while.

But maybe they just don't have any desire to participate, and are just looking to be a passive investor. It takes all kinds to build something big. Everyone who owns, mines, buys a giftcard, or participates actively in this forum is a part of the equation. Your gripe is really with those who dip their toe in/actively ask when something is going to happen/do nothing to advance the coin themselves.

Moral of the story: be patient...this coin and the things being built on it aren't going anywhere

If you believe that premise, it doesn't matter how low it drops, or how little volume there is. It's all just an opportunity to buy more (if you believe in it's success long-term) Just keep doing your thing. Eventually, people will take notice

I guess this post wraps the side chain issue up. Allthough you have to wrap your head around it
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9679090

I really got it wrong in the first place. I mixed up sidechains with merged mining.

for the current state this might be relevant:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9684192

Regarding point 2. This is easy to imagine if you think about Bitcoin and the mining pools diversity (well lack thereof) - https://blockchain.info/pools. Now imagine you bootstrap a coin using merged mining and it has a few solo miners and then one of those large pools. One of those pools will have majority hash power. Merged mining's risk is that you are mining child coins for free, there is no cost. Normally to mine bitcoin you expend energy and you have to chose a block to mine on, and every second you are mining you are expending resources. The merged mining part is free, there is no additional cost. So, if a pool wanted to attack a coin, it can do so without hurting it's bitcoin revenue since it's not switching to mine a separate coin. So the risk is during bootstrapping, if you dont have enough diversity of large pools, AND a pool wanted to attack the coin, then it would be game over. This isnt theory, it happened at least once. That assumes more of a malicious incentive than economic. If you add sidechains into the equation, you give a strong financial incentive to attack and double spend the chain.

For Viacoin I believe it's different because for a start, we're using scrypt PoW and mining diversity is pretty good, meaning there are a lot of scrypt mining pools. It is easy to begin merged mining with the support of several pools to ensure that the hash rate on merged mining would be sufficient as to instantly secure the chain against any potential malicious pool. Since scrypt ASICs are not orders of magnitude more powerful, the transition to higher hash rates would not jump exponentially.

We've seen two examples of successfully merged mined hard forks, Doge and Sys. I have already spoken to some pools out of interest and they would be interested in merged mining. I believe merged mining would give us more benefits than there are risks and in the end increases security. You can see the effect on Doge on this graph (select the ALL timeframe top left) http://www.coinwarz.com/network-hashrate-charts/dogecoin-network-hashrate-chart