Topic: [ANN] White-Board Coin Development [NoirBits] (Read 2192 times)

Sounds good look forward to seeing some dev on it.

Ill hop on a testnet if you want. We will see how low diff and extremely high latecncy work  I am currently mining on 3g thanks to a power outage and surge frying my modem!

http://cryptocointalk.com/topic/425-storm-took-out-power-modem-fried-mining-on-3g/#entry1143

oh, and has anyone noticed how if a altcoin reaches difficulty 4, it dies?

ok, so in my spare time, i am thinking of raping an existing coin and testing out the features i know how to implement. if anyone would like to try out on testnet let me know. someone mentioned blake512 and keccak is it? we'll see what i can frankenstein.

note: this is a testcoin, not for trading. the final product is months away.

I also thought about integrating a distributed exchange into a coin. It requires the ability to check transactions in another system, say in bitcoin chain. I.e. all nodes must also observe bitcoin and participate in it. This will make the new coin depend on bitcoin and ultimately be slave to it, since bitcoin doesn't care about your coin. This is not a good idea IMHO. The only other way as I see now it is the centralized exchange which clears the transaction with other systems. There can be a 'default' exchange run by the coin authors, but essentially this is no different from existing exchanges.

If we had a member who has done macro finance and economic models, we'd be a foot ahead. The problem of course is that variable market cap would only go higher. Even variable block rewards would not stem it.

Any ideas guys?

Glad to see the pleasant side of you Hydroponica....... Enter gld/wdc fanboys lol

Yes it would be a gigantic task. But hopefully supported by the community. Open source at its best?!

There are obvious flaws with what I put out but nothing a little innovation couldnt solve. The xcoin would have to be decentralized of course. But we would have to differ from ordinary mining to achieve such a stable coin I think. Transaction fees would go to the nodes generating xcoin. Not for themselves but the whole blockchain. The more transactions the more produced and the other way around

But then you run into the problem of market cap. If a sudden demand produces a lot of xcoin it could still cause excessive inflation. When does production stop if ever?

I am really interested in this idea, as a whole, and, impressed, that you are looking into it further, with a think tank sort of approach, rather than just shoving a new coin down our throats. I have no idea, how to code anything, but I sure do look forward to future possibilities a coin like this, with a Dev like you, could bring.

I apologize if i came off critical, my bad.

I think i understand where you guys are going, but i'd appreciate some more info on how that works. Sheesh, i've only been coding for 9 years. Nothing on this scale though, one thing i'd point out is that when i looked into the forked coins, it was awful , some of the changes made the coins lifespan useless or compromised security, all in the hopes of pump and dump.

Either way, an integrated exchange may be an idea, but is it feasible and will it add anything of real world value and use? As for The one coin idea i like it a lot, but that would be a mammoth programming task. Though i've heard of a pool that is testing merged mining for litecoin and it's forks.

 

Programming for 15 years.  C, VB, C#, Java and many script/db languages.

I've ported scrypt into c# and I've built my own cgminer botnet wrapper to keep up on my operations.  I haven't really done a full investigation into building a coin, only reading through the source to see what it does.  Its all very simple code.  I would go into the building in exchanges but its not fleshed out yet.  
I also want to implement a model where the network is a collection of loosely tied networks of various scales.  the networks would then merge and break apart as needed and would process block chains between each other as exchanges.

I agree barwizi you were a little critical.

 As far as the 2 innovations. Diff adjust every block would help with supply vs demand correct? If demand gets huge the diff will adjust immediately and production would not increase much.

 As for as integrating exchanges. I can see the advantage of a central exchange. It could be developed by the community with strong support from it. If done correctly it could potentially take over every other exchange and eliminate fear of trading like we see with the distrust of current exchanges. But this would lead to the exchange being attacked im sure. The trading platform could be integrated into the client and blockchain. That would be innovation. But then again you would run into legal issues if trying to integrate fiat.

You could essentially consolidate all coins into 1. A new coin and client. The new coin would be  as close to stable as a coin can be by undetirmined means We will call it xcoin. Inside the client for xcoin all other coins can be bought and traded with xcoin. If you got enough acceptance you could essentially dominate. all others coins purpose would be to trade for xcoin to be used for services. You could make mining xcoin not profitable but have transaction fees going to nodes to support the "generating" of xcoin. I doesnt even have to be mining. It would take some innovation. Maybe im too tired to be trying to explain this. Anyone get what im saying?

i'll read through your ideas and explanations, are you a coder? That is one issue we always forget to consider, My thoughts on the next gen of alts is to basically start from scratch, writing the entire code myself. It may take half a month or two if i use the main.cpp for references, (the one everyone has raped) to have a fully functional code. And due too the untrustworthy nature of some of the individuals on this forum, it makes it hard to have a large dev team of up to ten members.

you are meddling with money supply issues by producing another coin.  you are meddling with money supply issues when you set a specific block reward.  Don't you think that all the issues surrounding premining, instamining and fair starts is a for of money supply control?

You can't hold yourself to your position when you can't see yourself from everyone else.  I"m not stating that the current economic system is healthy, fair or wrong.  All I can say is that I will not discount thousands of years of monetary policies that have lead to this point int time because I do not like the current one.  Better to investigate money supply control and see what you can learn from it.

for you to trade , you use your wallet, it counts as a node. Also miners will mine for the interest and node fees.

i do not attack ideas, i asked for the reasons why this is viewed as innovation, if you look at the current state of affairs between monetary policies and fiscal policies manipulating exchange rates and inflation you will realize the fallacy in that line of thought (in my opinion). There is a lot of wealth in the world, and if we were to try and create a crypto-currency the factors involved would first lead to hyper-inflation as the market demands more and as they gain more uses, this would continue until we reach a balance, at which time we would reach a balance and then know the actual value of the currency and what it can achieve. What you are talking about is called deterministic monetary collusion, where by setting such parameters we essentially make miners rich yet that defeats the purpose of wide spread adoption. Such thoughts are novel when we have other forms of backing for the currency, but we dont, ergo the market should decide unril we find a crypto that can back it's self. Today if the price of bitcoin fell to ten cents, all the cryptos would fail and it would be essentialy worthless in real world terms. A currency nomatter if it is paper, rocks or zeros in your wallet must have a measure of accepted value worldwide for it to be deemed acceptable, in the old days, paper money represented a share of gold, ergo gold (accepted everywhere) was the backer. We cannot back cryptos with existing currencies of countries because they are susceptible to any changes in that particular economy.

That is how money works, so for us to begin attempting to meddle with money supply issues, we would end up exactly where we are now. The only factor is the total limit of the number of coins, which are then sub0divisible. When you factor these numbers in, you will see what i speak of, if a  large group invested today and decided to make Yacoin their currency, the demand would be high, price would spike and more miners will mine, up till the market is satisfied. See the bitcoin bubble of april.

Correct but it is assumed that miners would keep mining for the network fees.

I'll expound on inflation rate vs exchange rate.  when I mean exchange rate I do not mean price.  I mean rate of exchange.  The rate of transactions.

Why produce more coins going forward if the coins you currently have are not trading well.  You need to measure transaction rates not hashing power to determine if you will generate more rewards.  That will provide more stability in that traders will be more likely to hold something that will not devalue itself over time .

I started a thread here on concepts for coin features to try to balance or offset coin inflation rates.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/exp-aggregated-list-of-coin-reward-features-219568

I respect that you are holding off during the shit storm


Now, its my understanding, that, when it runs out of mineable coins, the network will screech to a halt. No blocks, means no miners. No miners, means no confirmations. No confirmations, no transactions. Coins can't be moved around. Thoughts?